The Presbyterian Association on Science, Technology, and the Christian Faith THE JOURNAL h AUGUST 2015 h VOLUME 24, NUMBER 3. Creation Affirming

Transcription

1 SciTech The Presbyterian Association on Science, Technology, and the Christian Faith THE JOURNAL h AUGUST 2015 h VOLUME 24, NUMBER 3 Creation Affirming A Call to the Presbyterian Church (USA) In the beginning God So begins the Bible s story and so, from the start of biblical faith, there are Creator and Creation. Throughout his Institutes of the Christian Religion and in other writings, John Calvin emphasized how the Creation reveals the Creator. He wrote, You cannot in one glance survey this most vast and beautiful system of the universe, in its wide expanse, without being completely overwhelmed by the boundless force of its brightness. He added that the Creation is a sort of mirror in which we can contemplate God, who is otherwise invisible. The prophet Jeremiah wrote, It is [God] who made the earth by his power, who established the world by his wisdom (51.15). Commenting on that verse, Calvin wrote, For when the sun, in its daily course, completes so great and so immense a distance, they who are not amazed at such a miracle must be more than stupid. Charleston-Atlantic Presbytery overtures the 222nd General Assembly (2016) to 1) approve the following Affirmation of Creation; and 2) distribute it electronically to all councils of the Presbyterian Church (USA) (synods, presbyteries, sessions) for their study, reflection and, where possible, their approval. From early in its life the Christian church has affirmed metaphorically that God is the author of two books of revelation: the Book of Scripture (the Old and New Testaments) and the Book of Nature. Because God is the author of both and God neither deceives nor is incoherent, these books cannot in principle be in conflict even though they are expressed through fallible creatures. However, over the centuries some Christians have sought to deny observations of Nature by reference to Scripture. In the 5th century h Affirmation of Creation Of course, in his own time Calvin lived faithfully with a 16th century understanding of the Creator and Creation. Now it is for us to live faithfully in our time with a 21st century understanding of Creator and Creation. To avoid being more than stupid, we are called now to acknowledge the actual Creation that has emerged in response to the Creator s call. Thus, PASTCF calls now for the Presbyterian Church (USA) to be Creation Affirming. We have drafted an Affirmation of Creation to become an overture to the 222nd General Assembly (2016). It is printed below as it will be considered by Charleston-Atlantic Presbytery at an upcoming meeting. We hope that many more presbyteries will also consider it and vote to approve. See Jim Miller s column on page 2 for more information. To download a copy of the overture to promote in your presbytery, go to our website at <www. pastcf.org>. CE Augustine warned that claims about Nature, contrary to human reason and experience but supposedly derived from Scripture, should be avoided, lest they make Christians seem ignorant and the objects of scornful laughter. Yet we recognize that God has called forth in Homo sapiens an exploratory curiosity and a critical intellect. A fruit of these gifts is our capacity for scientific inquiry. The results of this inquiry are provisional because they are open to > Affirmation of Creation continues on page 3

2 FROM THE PRESIDENT by James B. Miller We Affirm Living Faithfully in the Actual Creation Since its inception, PASTCF has been keenly interested in how scientific and technological development foundationally bear on Christian theology and ethics. The issues surrounding these relationships have deep significance for Christian engagement on particular matters of public policy and faithful living. For example, the metaphor of Christian stewardship of creation as a grounding for environmental ethics treats the non-homo sapiens world as commodity. But the evolutionary sciences have revealed how our lives are intimately related to the life-cycle of stars which produced the elements (carbon, oxygen, etc.) with which the language of life was written. Further, these sciences have shown that we are linked by bonds of kinship with all other life forms on Earth including pathogens. Stewardship is an inadequate metaphor, no matter how biblically validated, to describe our responsibilities toward nonhuman creatures. In order to proclaim the Gospel faithfully in the 21st century and to conform our lives individually and corporately to that Gospel, it is minimally necessary that we acknowledge the actual Creation that has emerged in response to God s call. Otherwise we are proclaiming the Gospel and seeking to live it in relation to a world that does not exist. The Affirmation of Creation presented in this issue of SciTech is an initial effort to acknowledge the Creation as best we understand it in our day. The findings of science are always provisional. They are open to revision in the face of new observations in the field and in the laboratory. But those findings that have proved to be reliable in the relation to testing against nature itself are rarely, if ever, completely abandoned, but are transformed in relation to new, more comprehensive understandings of nature. We have drafted this Affirmation in the form of an overture to the 2016 General Assembly. I must thank PASTCF members Byron Bangert, Damaris Christensen, Penne J. Duncan, Charles T. Garten, Bill Gilbert, Sandra Hawley, F. Alan Hills, Marvin R. Maddox, Sara Joan Miles, W. Maynard Pittendreigh, Charlie Reece, Dick Rettig, Margaret Towne, and Bert Veenendaal for their contributions to the drafting of the Affirmation. For an overture to be presented to the GA for consideration it needs to be supported by at least two Presbyteries. So, we urge PASTCF members to present this overture to their Presbyteries for approval. In terms of schedule, such approval probably needs to occur in the winter of 2015/2016. It is important to note first that the Affirmation is not an addition to the Book of Confessions. It is simply an effort in a religious context to affirm facts of Creation. Second, the only two actions it calls for are the approval It is minimally necessary that we acknowledge the actual Creation that has emerged in response to God s call of the Affirmation by the General Assembly and the distribution of the Affirmation to the other councils of the Presbyterian Church (USA) (sessions, presbyteries, synods) for their study, reflection and, where possible, their approval. Also in this issue PASTCF Secretary/Treasurer, Sara Joan Miles, has provided a service to us all by preparing a review of a wide range of resources for those who would like to explore the relationships of science and the Christian faith. For easy linking to the many resources in Sara s article, go to this page on our website: < Jim Miller is an honorably retired teaching elder of the Presbyterian Church (USA) with an M.Div. from Union Theological Seminary (Virginia) and a Ph.D. from Marquette University. Before retiring in 2007 he served as Senior Program Associate for the Program of Dialogue on Science, Ethics, and Religion of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. PASTCF Board member Richard Rettig commented recently that he was rereading Exodus, especially chapters 35 to 39. They describe the work of the design and building of the sanctuary, the ark, the altar, and all the utensils and related linens necessary for worshiping the Lord. Moses charge appears in chapter 35, beginning at verse 10, following instructions about the appropriate materials (gold, silver, and bronze, blue, purple, and crimson yarns, and fine linens). All who are skillful among you shall come and make all that the Lord has commanded: the tabernacle, its tent and covering, its clasps and its frames, its bars, its pillars, and its bases; the ark with its poles, the mercy seat, and the curtain for the screen. It continues in 36:1-2: Bezalel and Oholiab and every skillful one to whom the Lord has given skill and understanding to know how to do any work in the construction of the sanctuary shall work in accordance with all that the Lord has commanded. Moses then called Bezalel and Oholiab and every one to whom the Lord had given skill, everyone whose heart was stirred to come to do the work. And the account goes on. Dick wrote, It is an incredible account, testimony to the careful, very careful, attention to materials, precision in design and construction, and motivation of designers and builders, in short, to the technology supporting worship and the continuing presence of the Lord among the people. Dick s reflections are reminders that from its beginning, the Presbyterian Association on Science, Technology and the Christian Faith has always worked to affirm what the ancient scriptures always affirm. Faithfulness to God requires our minds (the science in our name), our hearts (the faith in our name), and our hands (the technology in our name). Speaking of which, have you ever noticed the tripartite character of our logo? 2 August 2015 SciTech

3 < Affirmation of Creation continued from page 1 new discoveries and revision. Yet these results are also highly reliable because the Creation itself, through observation and experimentation, attests to them. Scientific inquiry to date has provided descriptions and ever more profound understandings of the scope of God s creation in space and time, of the myriad of creatures which inhabit and have inhabited this Earth, and of the means by which the Creation itself has shared in the work of creation. In light of these discoveries, today with confidence we can affirm: That God has been calling this universe into being for at least 13.8 billion years and continues calling upon the Creation to bring forth new creatures; That God s creative call has resulted in virtually countless stars and planetary systems, and new stars and planetary systems are continuing to be created; That, in response to God s creative call, the Earth took form at least 4.6 billion years ago; species over more than 6 million years of hominin development; That, since our line of descent split from the line that resulted in our contemporaries, the chimpanzees and bonobos, we Homo sapiens were preceded by at least eighteen already identified hominin species, all of which are now extinct;* That, in the providence of God, we Homo sapiens have come to exercise extraordinary power over other creatures and their habitats, the Earth s geological structures, and the meteorological systems of the Earth; That, by virtue of the powers of intellect and creativity called forth in us by God, we bear exceptional responsibility for the future of the Earth and all its constitutive creatures. This affirmation provides a framework in which we are called to worship God, are called to proclaim the Gospel of Grace, and are called to live as faithful expressions of God s love for the whole creation. That, in response to God s call, living creatures emerged on the Earth at least 3.6 billion years ago; That God has connected all life on Earth in a network of kinship by virtue of descent with modification from common ancestors; That, in response to God s call, we Homo sapiens emerged as a Rationale *The eighteen identified species are: Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Orrorin tugenensis, Ardipithecus kadabba, Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus garhi, Australopithecus sediba, Australopithecus africanus, Paranthropus aethiopicus, Paranthropus boisei, Paranthropus robustus, Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis. See < The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims God s handiwork. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night declares knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words; their voice is not heard; yet their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. Psalm 19:1-4 With these words the Psalmist declares that the Creation gives witness to its Creator. This theological sense of nature spurred Christians to study nature as a way of honoring God. At the beginning of the western scientific revolution in the 16th century Nicolas Copernicus captured this sense when he wrote, To know the mighty works of God, comprehend His wisdom and majesty and power, to appreciate in degree the wonderful working of His laws, surely all this must be a pleasing and acceptable mode of worship to the Most High to whom ignorance can not be more grateful than knowledge. [1] In the 20th century Albert Einstein expressed the mutuality between inquiries about nature and religious life when he wrote: Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. [2] This is not to say that religion is obligated to tie its theological cart irrevocably to any particular scientific horse. As Presbyterian teaching elder, ethicist, and philosopher Holmes Rolston III notes, The religion that is married to science today will be a widow tomorrow. [3] Yet he goes on to add this caution, But the religion that is divorced from science today will leave no offspring tomorrow. [4] Evidence for this latter effect can be found in the results of the 2011 Barna Group Study that reported that among the reasons given by teens and young adults for their disassociation from churches were that churches are out of step with the scientific world we live in (29%) and Christianity is anti-science (25%). [5] Yet the idea is not new that a Christian faith, uninformed by a credible understanding of nature, is compromised in its ability to faithfully proclaim the Gospel. Augustine of Hippo perhaps most eloquently expressed this concern in the 5th century when he wrote, Often a non-christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances, and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all that we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, which people see as ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn. [6] All Christians affirm that God is Creator. Many, perhaps most Presbyterians value science as a means to gain appreciation of God s creation. Scientific inquiry also makes possible insights into nature that enable more effective service to God through service to neighbor. Yet these same scientific discoveries also challenge traditional ways of thinking about God, God s creation, and God s creative activity. In 1947 the Jesuit paleontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin described this challenge. When we speak of a theology of modern science, it obviously does not mean that by itself science can determine an image of God and a religion. But what it does mean, if I am not mistaken, is that, given a certain development of science, certain representations of God and certain forms of worship are ruled out, as not being homogeneous with the dimensions of the universe known to our experience. (Emphasis in the original.) > Affirmation of Creation continues on page 7 SciTech August

4 Help Answering Those Questions You Know, Those What do we believe? Questions By Sara Joan Miles, Ph.D. PASTCF Secretary-Treasurer Have you ever heard or been involved in a conversation that goes something like this? Person A: My thirteen-year old came home from school all upset because her science teacher introduced a new topic in class Evolution and one of the kids started saying that teaching that subject was against his religion. She wanted to know if it was against our beliefs. Person B: What did you tell her? Person A: I said that I didn t think so, but I really didn t know what to say. It s not always one of our youth who raises the issue for us. Sometimes it is a NONE one of the growing number of people in the US who answer None when asked for their religious affiliation who asks the question. Since you are religious, does that mean you don t accept scientific findings? Or, Don t you believe in evolution? Or, You don t really think Earth is just 10,000 years old do you? Or? After conversing with people in my congregation and giving two workshops on science and religion at our presbytery s Discovery Day (our current term for Leadership Development), I ve concluded that while most of our members are pro-science and do not want Christianity identified with anti-science, they are uncomfortable when asked to answer these questions. I hope this article will provide resources to help all of us develop better ways of thinking about science and religion, so we can feel more comfortable responding to these kinds of questions, and more able to help others find their own answers. These resources deal with science, with our religious beliefs, and with the intersection of these two disciplines. There are undoubtedly resources that are not included, but we hope you find those provided helpful. As was pointed out in an issue of SciTech published in August 2010, we need to have an understanding of both science and our theology if we want to answer the kinds of questions described above. This does not mean that we have to be experts in either field, but it does mean that we must have a basic literacy in both. Moreover, basic literacy means more than understanding the core content of science and religion; it also means being able to understand how vocabulary and methodologies differ and how in each case, they may not be what is understood in general usage. Let s begin with vocabulary. Vocabulary Every discipline has a vocabulary that uses some words in specific ways that don t always correlate with general usage. For instance, it s not unusual to hear someone who is ill say, I have a temperature. While medical personnel know that all humans have a temperature with an average of 98.6 F., the sick person means that they have an above average temperature or a fever. Some of the problems non-scientists have with science are based on not understanding the precise meaning scientists use for words, and the same things can be said about non-christians and non-religiously trained individuals and Christian theology. The first table provides some words used in science in ways that are more precise than when used by the average person on the street. The second table gives meanings for biblical and theological terms that are not always used the same way either by all Christians or by theologians and by the general public. TABLE 1: TERMS USED DIFFERENTLY BY SCIENTISTS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC WORD GENERAL MEANING SCIENTIFIC MEANING Theory An unproved assumption; an opinion used to explain something; a hunch. A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. Law A rule of conduct or action; the collection of rules of conduct or action; laws can be broken and changed. A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances. Fact A piece of information presented as having objective reality. An observation that has been repeatedly confirmed. [1] Endnotes are on page 9. Random Haphazard; without definite aim. Relating to a type of circumstance or event that is described by a probability distribution. [2] Truth (or true) Something that is known; sometimes a synonym for fact; the property of being in accord with fact or reality. A goal of science for describing the structure and functioning of Nature; a tentative understanding of Nature s structure or functioning with a high degree of probability based on multiple, independent experiments and verifications. 4 August 2015 SciTech

5 TABLE 2: TERMS USED DIFFERENTLY BY THEOLOGIANS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC Words in italics under General Meaning also describe a meaning often given by Christians closer to the fundamentalist end of the theological spectrum; those under Biblical/Theological Meaning describe understandings of many Reformed scholars. WORD GENERAL MEANING BIBLICAL/THEOLOGICAL MEANING Inspiration Motivate or be motivated by; producing emotion; dictated by God. The impartation of divine truth that enters the heart of the believer; divine illumination. Literal Inerrant Meaning understood word-for-word; an interpretation that it means what it says; text taken at face value; the way all of Scripture is to be interpreted. No mistakes or errors; every word or proposition is absolutely true. [3] Generally not used in current Reformed (Presbyterian) theology as the only method for interpreting Scripture; the genre determines the exegetical method to be used. Without errors as related to God s intended meaning. [4] Infallible There can be no errors (as opposed to there are no errors inerrant). The unfailing power of Scripture to accomplish what it was intended to accomplish in the reader or hearer. [5] Truth (or true) Something that is known; sometimes a synonym for fact; the property of being in accord with fact or reality; what can be understood from Scripture as it pertains to all subjects. A characteristic of God; God alone is absolutely and wholly True. Myth Fairy tale; an unfounded or false notion; parable or allegory. A form of biblical literature used to convey spiritual or theological truth but not necessarily historical, scientific, or literal truth. Understanding the meaning of these words as they are used in both scientific and religious communication is a first step in understanding the content of science and theology. Methodologies A second step is understanding how scientists and theologians work the methodologies they employ and the goals of their efforts. If you are a scientist, you may find some of the following science resources too simple; if you are a pastor or theologian, you may find some of the following biblical and theological resources too simple. In both cases, remember that they may be just right for someone who asks you a question. Let s begin by saying that there is no such thing as THE scientific method; different disciplines utilize different methods. However, all involve reasoning, observations, questioning, hypothesizing, and testing. Testing may involve experiments, mathematics, and/or computer modeling. Probably the best resource for understanding the nature of science and how scientists work is found in the Benchmarks for Project 2061: Science for All Americans produced by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). These can be found at < online/index.php?chapter=1> and the Benchmarks are described by grade levels. [For quick linking to this and all subsequent links in the article, go to our website at < Project 2061 is described as a long-term initiative of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) to help all Americans become literate in science, mathematics, and technology. By looking at the various chapters in the Benchmarks one gains a good understanding of the fundamental ideas and content of science. This link leads to the Benchmarks: < php?txtref= Old=/tools/benchol/bolframe.html>. Whereas these do not include the frontiers of the various scientific disciplines, they do include what is generally agreed to by almost all the experts [6] and therefore is considered reliable. The benchmarks also provide a guideline for what our children should be learning at various grade levels. A website that deals with more current issues is the National Center for Science Education: <ncse.com>. At present this site deals mostly with evolution and climate change and issues at the state levels. Finally, there are two useful sites developed by the National Academy of Sciences addressing methodologies and content: Understanding Science <undsci.berkeley.edu> and For Teachers and Students <www. nationalacademies.org/education>. To understand how theologians work, we need to begin by knowing the Bible. Reformed theology is grounded on Sola Scriptura (scripture alone). A good 2-volume set by Donald L. Griggs and published by John Knox Press is called The Bible from Scratch < Products/ /the-bible-from-scratch-two-volume-set.aspx>. It s a good place to start for those who want to know scripture better. If you think you know your scripture fairly well but don t know the methods > Answers continues on page 6 SciTech August

6 < Answers continued from page 5 and approaches scholars use in studying the Bible, try J. Alberto Soggin s Introduction to the Old Testament. < aspx>. This book shows how various approaches and disciplines are used to understand more fully the content of the Old Testament. One last resource is a course in the denomination s Being Reformed series: Reading the Bible for Understanding by James E. Davison. Putting It Together With this foundation in both science and theology, we re ready to look at resources that put the two together. We ll begin with materials published by the Presbyterian Church (USA) denomination. In the Being Reformed series, the following mini-courses deal with science and faith/theology. Go to < PCUR!REF/being-reformed-curriculum.aspx> for more information on each of these and other materials: Creation by William P. Brown; Faith and Science by Ronald Cole-Turner Stewardship of Creation by Henry G. Brinton In the We Believe series, there are several rotation Sunday School lessons on Creation for younger children. In the Faith Questions series for youth, there is a four-session study on Faith and Science and another on God s Creation. PASTCF works with three other denominations the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), the Episcopal Church, and the United Church of Christ (UCC) in an organization called the Ecumenical Roundtable (ERT). Each of these groups has websites and resources as well. < < <luthscitech.org/covalence> < CF34E&_z=z> < <episcopalscience.org> < (for those on Facebook) < < <uccstandrew.org/faithscience-blog-introduction> <ecumenicalroundtable.wordpress.com/2014/12/02/welcome-to-thehome-page-of-the-ecumenical-roundtable-for-science-technology-andthe-church> In addition to these denominationally oriented websites, there are a number of other religious organizations both denominational and interdenominational/non-denominational seeking to address faith-science and faith-technology issues. While we may have theological quibbles with some of these groups, the resources they provide and the ideas they promote can be helpful as we seek to develop ways of understanding the relationship of science, technology, and our faith. American Scientific Affiliation: < BioLogos: <biologos.org> The Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences: < Christians in Science: < Faith Alive: < Closer to Truth: < (not for beginners, but serious adult conversations for the educated population) Test of Faith: < Wesley Ministry Network: < ptinfo.html> The Faraday Institute for Science and Religion: < 6 August 2015 SciTech st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk> Metanexus: < The Counterbalance Foundation: < The Zygon Center: <zygoncenter.org> The Institute on Religion in an Age of Science: < Institute for Biblical and Scientific Studies: < com> When you visit these sites, you will find that some have resources to download, some to buy, some on YouTube, and some on Facebook. In some cases the resources are for individual use and sometimes for group use. There are three journals (besides SciTech ) that deal with multidisciplinary science and religion matters: Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith: Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation Theology and Science (Journal of the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences) Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science There are many, many books that discuss science and faith. Some of these are written primarily from the religious perspective and some primarily from the scientific perspective, but all seek to demonstrate that the two realms can be integrated or, at least can be compatible. Moreover, some deal with science in general and some address a particular scientific theory or discipline. The first set of resources are those published by organizations. The National Academy of Sciences produced a book entitled Science, Evolution, and Creationism that can be found at < catalog/11876/science-evolution-and-creationism>. Additional NAS publications dealing with evolution can be researched at <nationalacademies. org/evolution/scienceandreligion.html>. The National Association of Evangelicals has just produced a booklet entitled When God and Science Meet written by a number of well-established scholars. It is described at <nae.net/nae-releases-whengod-and-science-meet-booklet>. Another page on the website, <nae.net/ tag/science>, lists other resources. Some of these resources are free for download from <app.etapestry.com/cart/nationalassociationofevange/ default>, searching within each category. The Smithsonian Institution s Human Origin Initiative (<humanorigins.si.edu/) has some good information and questions about evolution of Homo sapiens. The following books were written by individuals (and not for an organization) and deal primarily with evolution or cosmological origins: Two booklets for group study or an adult Sunday School class are The Evolution Dialogues by Catherine Baker (< Evolution-Dialogues-Catherine-Baker/dp/ ) and Where Did I Come From? by PASTCF President James Miller (forthcoming). William P. Brown, who authored the Being Reformed book Creation, wrote The Seven Pillars of Creation: The Bible, Science, and the Ecology of Wonder. Deborah B. Haarsma and her husband, Loren, who are professors at Calvin College, coauthored Origins: A Reformed Look at Creation, Design, Evolution. It is one of the Faith Alive resources. Coming to Peace with Science: Bridging the Worlds Between Faith and Biology was written by Darrel R. Falk, a professor of Biology at Point Loma Nazarene College. Some resources are better listed by author than by title because the authors have written so many good books that it is more valuable to discuss the writer than individual books. However, a few sample titles will be given with each author. > Answers concludes on page 7

7 < Answers continued from page 6 Ian Barbour, who was featured in the February 2014 issue of SciTech, is viewed as having created the field of science and religion with the publication of his Issues in Science and Religion in Two of his other books are Religion in an Age of Science (based on his Gifford Lectures), published in 1990 and When Science Meets Religion: Enemies, Strangers, or Partners, published in Ronald L. Numbers authored The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism, in He is a member of both the History of Science Society and the American Society of Church History. In this book he examines the ways creationism evolved in response to Darwin s theory. Other books of his worth reading include Darwinism Comes to America (1998), When Science & Christianity Meet (coauthored with David C. Lindberg, 2003) and Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths About Science and Religion (2009). The official website of Alister E. McGrath is <alistermcgrath. weebly.com>. My favorite McGrath book is Science & Religion, 2nd edition (2010), but I also liked Surprised by Meaning: Science, Faith, and How We Make Sense of Things (2011). David N. Livingstone is an Irish historian of science who teaches at Queen s College, Belfast. The first book I read of his was Darwin s Forgotten Defenders: The Encounter Between Evangelical Theology and Evolutionary Thought (1987). In 2008 his book Adam s Ancestors: Race, Religion & the Politics of Human Origins was published. I am currently reading Dealing with Darwin: Place, Politics, and Rhetoric in Religious Engagements with Evolution (2014). This latter book examines how groups that are theologically similar respond differently to a scientific theory because of other issues that are affecting their understanding of the science and their theological priorities. John Polkinghorne is both a theoretical physicist and an Anglican priest and theologian. He is viewed as one of the leading current thinkers in the science/religion field. His books include Science and Christian Belief (1994), Science and Theology: An Introduction (1998), Belief in God in an Age of Science (1998), Faith, Science and Understanding (2001), and Questions of Truth: Fifty-one Responses to Questions about God, Science, and Belief (2009). Owen Gingerich is a retired Harvard professor of astronomy and the history of science. He is from a Mennonite background. Some of his books that relate to our topic include God s Planet (2014) and God s Universe (2006). Remember that only some of the works of these scholars have been listed, so you will want to follow up to see what else they have written (sometimes articles, not books) that may interest you. The last type of resource we re listing here is not specifically science-faith. Rather the resources are commercial films, available on DVD, that lend themselves to theological discussions for adults and older teens. They are prompts for questioning. Why? How? What are the implications of belief? What are the implications of science? Good questioning is often more important than dogmatic or rote answers, and these movies should provoke good questions. existenz (virtual reality/gaming} Avatar (ecology/planet care/indigenous people) Creation (Darwin s publishing of Origins, his relationship with his wife, and the loss of his daughter) Agora (about Hypatia s conflict with Cyril of Alexandria, the intersection of Christianity and classical natural philosophy ) THX-1138 (George Lucas first full-length feature, religious/industrial complex; the DVD includes Lucas student film on which the feature was based). As was said near the beginning, this article has not claimed to include ALL resources related to science and faith matters. We hope, however, that it provides some useful references for our members, our congregations, and those who need to answer questions about what we believe and why. Endnotes 1 It is not unusual to hear someone say, Evolution should be taught as theory, not as a fact. In science, theories do not turn into facts by accumulating more evidence. Instead, theories are the goals or endpoints of scientific understanding. 2 An example of randomness can be seen in flipping a coin. We know that the probability of a coin coming up heads is 50%, but what happens with any single flip of a coin is random we cannot predict it with certainty. 3 The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978) reads as follows in Article XI: We affirm that Scripture, having been given by divine inspiration, is infallible, so that, far from misleading us, it is true and reliable in all the matters it addresses. We deny that it is possible for the Bible to be at the same time infallible and errant in its assertions. Infallibility and inerrancy may be distinguished, but not separated. Article XII states, We affirm that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit. 4 For a scholarly treatment of the changing meanings of inerrancy and infallibility among Reformed theologians, see Infallibility and Inerrancy in the Canadian and American Reformed Churches by Jitse M. van der Meer in Reformed Academic, 3, April See Reforming a Reformed Theology Toward a Global Vision for the Twenty-first Century by Philip C. Holtrop, page 29 at < html?id=xhnzrgeacaaj>. 6 Henry H. Bauer, Scientific Literacy and the Myth of the Scientific Method (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992) 32. < Affirmation of Creation continued from page 3 He went on to expand on the importance of homogeneity for the relationship of science and the Christian faith. This notion of homogeneity is without doubt of central importance in intellectual, moral and mystical life. Even though the various stages of our interior life cannot be expressed strictly in terms of one another, on the other hand they must agree in scale, in nature and tonality. Otherwise it would be impossible to develop a true spiritual unity in ourselves and that is perhaps the most legitimate, the most imperative and most definitive of the demands made by man of today and man of tomorrow. [7] Yet the Christian churches, and specifically Presbyterians, virtually never publicly acknowledge the significance of even the most basic discoveries that humanity has made through science about the history, structure and processes of creation for Christian faith and life, and often speak theologically as though they lived in a pre-copernican cosmos. Over the past 500 years humankind has gained more depth and breadth of understanding of creation than in all the preceding millennia of human history. Even within those five centuries there have been several revolutions in our understanding of creation. Though the findings of the sciences do not determine the Gospel message, as Augustine noted they do influence how that message can be credibly declared and persuasively received. The first task of an effective contemporary evangelism must begin with an assent to the Creation that God has indeed been calling and is calling into existence. It is for this purpose that the affirmation above has been developed. Endnotes [1] Louis E. Van Norman, Poland: The Knight Among Nations, 3rd ed. (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1908) 290. [2] Albert Einstein, Religion and Science New York Times Magazine (9 Nov. 1930). [3] Holmes Rolston, III, Science and Religion: A Critical Survey, 1st ed. (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987) vi (Preface). [4] Rolston, ix (Preface). [5] Barna Group, Six Reasons Young Christians Leave Church. Web. 28 Sep [6] Augustine of Hippo. De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim (The Literal Meaning of Genesis), I, xix, 39. [7] Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Science and Christ (New York: Harper & Row, 1965) 221. SciTech August

8 Presbyterian Association on Science, Technology, and the Christian Faith th Ave S Seattle, WA Return Service Requested NONPROFIT ORG US POSTAGE PAID DUBUQUE, IA PERMIT NO Presbyterian Association on Science, Technology, and the Christian Faith General Purpose: To challenge and assist the Presbyterian Church (USA), at all levels, to study, understand, discuss, and act on the implications of science and technology as they affect the theology, worship, practice, and moral actions of the church; and to challenge and assist Presbyterian scientists, engineers, and other technical professionals to study, understand, discuss, and act on the implications of the Reformed theological tradition for their scientific and technical vocations. President Class of 2016 Rev. James B. Miller, Ph.D. 222 Cameron Street, Summerville, SC (843) jmiller1776@gmail.com Class of 2015 Rev. W. Maynard Pittendreigh, D.Min Little Oak Way, Orlando, FL (407) Maynard@pittendreigh.net Margaret G. Towne, Ed.D W. Charleston Blvd #300A, Las Vegas, NV (702) TowneMG@aol.com SciTech Editor and Publisher Rev. D. William McIvor, D.Min th Ave. S., Seattle, WA (508) bmcivor@mac.com 8 August 2015 SciTech Objectives: (1) To provide for the exchange of ideas and information among the members and to develop programs as appropriate to the interest of the members and the needs of the church. (2) To assist the membership in providing leadership for educational opportunities in congregations and presbyteries and to encourage the formation of groups for study and action. (3) To recognize scientific and technological professions as expressions of Christian vocation. (4) To provide The Executive Board Vice President Class of 2015 Charles E. Reece, Ph.D. 116 Moyock Run, Yorktown, VA (757) dna-srf@verizon.net Class of 2016 Damaris Christensen 916 Second Street, Alexandria, VA (804) damaris@crosslink.net Rev. Stephen Kolderup 1401 Riverplace Blvd, #2804, Jacksonville, FL (404) skolderup@aol.com SciTech is published quarterly. Presbyterian Association on Science, Technology, and the Christian Faith. All rights reserved. a national forum for discussion and exchange of ideas and information in the church. (5) To encourage Presbyterian educational institutions to provide educational opportunities for students and faculty and continuing education for pastors in the area of science, technology, and the Christian faith. (6) To cooperate with other Christian communities and associations with similar purposes. (7) To sponsor national, regional, or local conferences. Secretary-Treasurer Class of 2017 Sara Joan Miles, Ph.D th Street Unit #303, Kenosha, WI (262) SMiles303@wi.rr.com Class of 2017 Sandra Hawley 7724 W. 85th Street Circle, Bloomington MN (952) ssshawley@aol.com Richard A. Rettig, Ph.D Shore Drive, St. Augustine, FL (904) rarettig@bellsouth.net Presbyterian Church (USA) Liaison Rev. Charles A. Wiley, III, Ph.D. 100 Witherspoon Street, Louisville, KY (502) charles.wiley@pcusa.org