The Scientist and the Theologian: On the Origin and End of Creation

With critical clarity and cogency of argument the nine essays in this book take the dialogue between modern science and mainly Christian religion from T.H. Huxley's designer war on religion, illustrated by Bertrand Russell's rather simplistic cosmology in which everything that exists came about as a result of 'omnipotent matter rolling on its relentless way,' to a contemporary scene still somewhat dominated by the almost metaphysical cosmology of string theory. And the whole argument is conducted against the background of contemporary philosophies such as British Empiricism and Postmodernism. Along the way the strategy of the argument of the book consists in challenging for each side of the debate in turn interpretations of widely held positions that would put the other side off, or at the very least prevent the other side from really engaging in constructive dialogue. For example, it is shown to be the case that the Biblical story of creation, often summed up in the idea of creation-out-of-nothing, is not in the least degree inimical to the continual evolution of a universe in the permanent process of coming to be; so that the useless row between creationists and evolutionists is a piece of noisy nonsense engaged in by dogmatists on both sides, and should be ended soon. It is argued that since the founder of the Christian faith regularly rejected the clamour for miracles, such peculiar entities need no longer bother either side. It is further argued that the Bible reveals no sense of a God who acts from some infinite distance, and could be conveniently absent and absolved from moral responsibility when the tsunami struck. And neither does such a creator remove the native moral responsibilities of humans; not even when they act as if their responsibility for man's inhumanity to man did not constitute the highest percentage of the most insufferable suffering that this misfortunate race continues to accumulate. On the side of the scientist too presuppositions that would prevent the dialogue from progressing are placed squarely under the critical microscope. Such as the assumption that the arrival, survival and advancement of life is not in itself sufficient to make the universe purposeful, and sufficient purpose for any creator of the universe that may be detected to be operative within it. That the 'appearance' of intelligent design, as Susskind calls it, cannot be understood as a mere appearance rather than a reality, but rather as an appearance in the sense of something that comes to be manifest; and that this conclusion cannot be evaded by appeal to a multiverse that by accident throws up a universe like ours; since each of these universes, if they are real universes, would appear to be designed also, and therefore multiply the evidence for a designer rather than question it. And all of this amounting to a critique of the crass materialism and a crass dualism of mind and matter of the kind that Russell operated with, and that modern physics increasingly undermines.