Science
in Christian PerspectiveScience
in Christian Perspective
Book Reviews for June 1969
Index
SCIENCE, SECULARIZATION AND GOD by Kenneth Cauthen.
Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1960. 237 pp.
THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN THEOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGY edited by Peter Homans. University
of Chicago, 1968. 295 pp. $7.95.
THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN THEOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGY edited by Peter Homans. University
of Chicago, 1968. 295 pp. $7.95.
ESCAPE FROM REASON and THE GOD WHO
IS THERE by Francis A. Schaeffer. Intervarsity Press, Chicago 1968. 96 pp. 95
cents, and 191 pp. $2.50, respectively.
MECHANICAL MAN by Dean E. Wooldridge.
McGraw-Hill, New York 1968. 212 pp. $8.95.
THE IDENTITY OF MAN by J. Bronowski. Natural History Press, Garden
City, New York
1966.
107 pp. 950 Paperback.
RUNAWAY WORLD by Michael Green. InterVarsity Press, London 1968. 125 pp. 4s
6d.
Paperback.
MAKER OF HEAVEN AND EARTH by Langdon Gilkey. Anchor Books, Doubleday,
Garden City,
New York 1965. 378 pp. $1.45. Paperback.
THE CHRISTIAN STAKE IN SCIENCE by
Robert E. D. Clark. Moody Press, Chicago 1967. 160 pp. $3.50
SCIENCE, SECULARIZATION AND GOD by Kenneth Cauthen.
Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1960. 237 pp.
This book is a welcome contribution to academic pursuits in that it
aims to speak
to man's contemporary situation from a biblical perspective and from
an appreciation
of natural theology and metaphysical philosophy. Cauthen is trying
"to investigate
the relationship of a biblically grounded religion to the science dominated, secularized
culture of our time in pursuit of the thesis that is possible to be
both a serious
Christian and intelligent modem."(p.14). A valid review will evaluate how
well he has accomplished his task.
The book reveals a sensitive, agonizing mind which is trying to find
grounds for
purpose in the structure of the universe and from within biblical revelation.
Having rejected revivalistic pietism, classical Protestant
supernaturalism, ontological
metaphysical Greek philosophical systematizing, and transcendent neo-orthodoxy,
Cauthen reaches out from a naturalistic theism in terms of process philosophy
and its idea of becoming. The scientific revolution has questioned
Christianity's
credibility; the process of secularization is questioning its
relevance; historical
criticism questions its essence. The author wishes to present Christianity as
a moral, but not a necessary, option for modern man. There is a
transparent honesty
in his gropings, a precise and penetrating analysis of the current theological
and philosophical situation, and an appreciation of the necessity of
presuppositional
methods of argumentation. Cauthen is calling for dialogue.
Dialogue for this reviewer is difficult at this point, for Canthen too easily
dismisses the classical Protestant orthodoxy from within which the
reviewer speaks.
The important problems to which Cauthen speaks have been treated by
contemporary
(and older) orthodox theologians. In terms of evolution, Cautheo
argues for purpose
from the life principle within reality which pushes ever forward. He fails to
mention that older evangelicals, such as A.H. Strong and J. Orr recognized that
evolution may be describing how God works and does not exclude
"involution"
in terms of creation ex ni/silo, evolution in terms of progress, and
"devolution"
in terms of decay due to the primal fall. The late evangelical E. J. Carnell
spoke
of "threshold evolution."
Cauthen's view of revelation is not the unveiling of a word in deed
and proposition
from a transcendent God, but the God who is contained within and suffers with
his universe, striving for perfection. The older fundamentalism
certainly veered
away from immanence, deed revelation, and an appreciation of general revelation
of natural theology, but contemporary evangelicals are wrestling with
the relationship
between propositional revelation and other modes of divine disclosure
(B. Ramm, C. F. H. Henry, j. I. Packer). Cauthen, of course,
categorically dismisses
the infallibility of both Scripture and the papacy. This brings us to, perhaps,
the major flaw in his book.
It is Cauthen's inability to rescue himself from the older classical liberalism
in terms of the proper and rational use of language that is most
perplexing. His
love for biblical language is clear; his use of it is puzzling. He continually
speaks of "the symbolic meaning of the cross and resurrection of Jesus of
Nazareth" (pp. 9, 129, 137, 140, 141, 145, et als). He does not
mean by this
the intention of the biblical writer to describe the miraculous,
bodily resurrection
of Jesus from the tomb. Rather Cauthen is trying to describe his concept of a
finite, struggling god in these classical terms. Can meaningful dialogue take
place within this context? The creation of the universe is also
spoken of in terms
of "symbol." Can a valid concept of natural theology or
general revelation
be erected upon such a use of the biblical language?
In the end, Cauthen's view is a reinterpretation of classical liberalism, for
he drives a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of
history, describes
the essence of Christianity as the great love commandment, and denies that the
meaning of the cross and resurrection rests upon an event in the
objective, historical
world. The preaching of neo-orthodoxy is returning to the exhortation
of liberalism.
God is becoming man, and man is pushing beyond his present state to
higher levels:
he is becoming God.
It is one thing to sit back and criticize efforts to be Christian,
relevant, and
credible. It is another thing to speak creatively from a biblical,
orthodox, evangelical
viewpoint to man in his current agony. If the truth lies within evangelicalism,
Cauthen challenges us to produce something better.
Reviewed by Irwin Rein, Associate Professor of Bible and Theology,
Houghton College,
Houghton, New York.
THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN THEOLOGY AND PSYCHOLOGY edited by Peter Homans. University
of Chicago, 1968. 295 pp. $7.95.
Can psychodynamic theory as elaborated by the personality sciences
help to clarify
the nature of faith? This symposium, originating in the 1966
centennial conference
at the University of Chicago Divinity School, offers an answer. Most
of the eleven
authors studied with Seward IIiltner, to whom the volume is dedicated. As the
introduction forecasts, the contributors all reflect in some degree the Chicago
school's position on the psychology of religion and theological liberalism.
The tone of the symposium is set in the editor's essay, "Toward
a Psychology
of Religion: Via Freud and Tillich." Homans notes the demise of
the traditional psychology of religion, attributing its decline to the rise of
psychoanalysis
and Watsonian behaviorism, which removed the conversion experience
from the domain
of psychology. At the same time, theology rejected religious
experience in favor
of an existential approach. The resultant splitting of the psychology
of religion
into theology and psychology produced the pastoral-psychology movement, which
is deeply committed to a psychoanalytic orientation. Pastoral
psychology has substituted
psychotherapy for the conversion experience. Still an applied
discipline, it lacks
adequate theological integration, recalling the similar plight of the
religious-education
movement.
Homans proposes to transcend the traditional view of theological anthropology,
that there is a realm of reality beyond the processes open to
psychological categories
and methods. Seeking to formulate a dynamic psychology of the self
that will include
the subject matter of theology, he points to the propriate striving of Allport,
the self-actualization of Maslow, the fully functioning person of Carl Rogers,
and the identity formation of Erikson, as lying within the proper territory of
theology. He finds in the use of the superego concept by both Freud and Tillich
a common element that he believes is amenable both to psychological
analysis and
religious interpretation.
The dynamic root of sin in the human personality is the subject of an essay by
Fred Berthold, who believes that Protestant discussions of sin have refused to
face the question of why man turns pridefully away from God. He finds an answer
in the psychoanalytic concept of narcissism, which is traced to the
"primal
anxiety" of the nursing period. The child responds to his
awareness of helplessness
and materoal dependency with anxiety and aggression, and seeks to
turn away from
the mother in independence and mastery. The feelings of guilt and unworthiness
that follow evoke inordinate self-love to compensate. The basic sin
of narcissism
is therefore a response to one's feeling of smallness and
unworthiness. Berthold
does not clarify the source of the child's aggression.
For several of the essayists, Erik Erikson's concept of ego-identity
becomes the
medium of synthesis between theology and psychology. Psychotherapy
concerns itself
with insight into identity, and theology concerns itself with revelation. Since
both processes lead to transfiguring knowledge, concludes Charles Stinnettc, they
represent not human achievement and divine gift but one process of
knowing. "Christ
enters man's biographical history as the ultimate answer to man's
quest for identity
and meaning." For Leland Elhard, faith and identity coincide. "Both
point to the self-in-God, where one is fully God's self and fully
one's own self
at the same time."
The chapter by Leroy Aden on pastoral counseling stands out because
of its simple
thesis and its lack of ambiguity. Pastoral psychology has been more concerned
with a psychological than with a theological perspective. A
psychological framework
such as the Freudian or the Rogcrian has displaced the counselor's own faith.
Since Christian faith is the dominant concern in the pastor's
profession, it should
he the distinctive mark of pastoral counseling. The client's basic struggle is
with finitude, alienation, and guilt. These must be met "in the light of
the revelation which is disclosed and embodied in Jesus Christ."
The essayists make a strenuous effort to bring theology and psychology into some kind of synthesis. They succeed in placing the
two disciplines near each other and throwing across a bridge built by
myth, symbol,
and elements of personality theory. But the bridge is hardly solid enough for
traffic and is not likely to satisfy either side. Indeed, no
synthesis is likely
to succeed so long as psychology insists upon being rigidly empirical
and so long
as the Cross remains a scandal.
Reviewed by Orville S. Walters. Professor of Health Science and
Lecturer in Psychiatry,
University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois. Copyright 1968 by Christianity Today;
reprinted by permission.
ESCAPE FROM REASON and THE GOD WHO
IS THERE by Francis A. Schaeffer. Intervarsity Press, Chicago 1968. 96 pp. 95
cents, and 191 pp. $2.50, respectively.
In these two books, Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer, noted Christian
apologist and director
of the L'Abri Fellowship in Switzerland, relentlessly pursues the development
of modern thought to its inevitable conclusions in belief and
practice. He argues
that a change in thinking has occurred in every branch of thought,
starting with
philosophy and proceeding inexorably through art, music, and general culture,
finally to theology itself. This change in thinking is crucial. It deals with
the way we come to knowledge and truth, and its effects are responsible for the
widening generation gap of our day.
Before this change occurred, man thought of knowledge in terms of antithesis,
i.e., if something is A, it is not not-A. Truth had meaning; something that was
not true was false. Starting with Hegel, however, Schaeffer argues
that a subtle
but revolutionary change has occurred in man's attitude toward truth. Realizing
the impossibility of arriving at a unified picture of all of reality
on the basis
of man-centered rationalism and scientific methodology, thinkers have
relativized
truth so that a sharp distinction between truth and falsehood no longer exists.
Instead of antithesis, synthesis i5 offered as the guide to progress; given a
point of view and its opposite, progress is made by seeking a synthesis between
these two apparently conflicting views.
Such a change in thinking represents a surrender of the attempt to
develop a unified
picture of life that will embrace both the rational aspects of life
and the spiritual,
grace-related, or freedom-related aspects of life. By setting up a
complete barrier
between these two spheres of reality, modem man has made it impossible to make
the step from rationality to meaning. Realizing intuitively, however, that the
impersonal models of himself as a machine that he has developed from
rationalism
can never stand the test of actual life experience, he has been
forced into either
complete despair, or into an irrational "leap of faith" that attempts
to claim contact in the realm of faith and the spirit, which he has no reason
to believe even exists. Such a claimed contact has no basis except experience,
cannot be communicated, and ultimately leads to the various modern manifestations of mysticism seen in
"chance"
art, drugs, pornography, and illusion-oriented drama.
As a contrast to this pattern of seeking to establish spiritual reality by an
irrational leap of faith, Dr. Schaeffer presents historic
Christianity as a perspective
on life that makes possible a unified view of all of reality that can be based
upon a rational faith. Rooted in the historic events of the life of the people
of Israel, in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, Christianity
offers the kind of basic answers to the needs of man that can be
found in no other
way. Dr. Schaeffer urges an approach to evangelism that recognizes
that each man
without Christ stands stranded somewhere between his intuitive apprehension of
the external world and himself, and the results of his non-Christian
presuppositions.
The task of the evangelist is to drive home to this man the bankruptcy of his
non-Christian presuppositions and then to apply the Gospel of
Biblical Christianity.
This is all pretty powerful stuff, and well worth integrating into
one's overall
perspective on the interaction of Christian faith with life.
Reviewed by Richard H. Babe, Department of Materials Science,
Stanford University,
Stanford, California.
A second review of The God Who is There
In my office hangs a little motto someone once gave me: "I know that you
believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure that
you realize
that what you heard is not what I meant." This summarizes a major problem
in communicating with others and it reminds me not to take communication with
my colleagues for granted. Dr. Francis Schaeffer, in his book,
"The God Who
is There", also is concerned about the problem of communicating.
His subtitle,
"Speaking Historical Christianity into the Twentieth Century" is the
unifying theme of the book. Every Christian who is concerned to communicate, or
share, his faith with those of the modern world around him, should
read it thoughtfully.
Briefly, Schaeffer's point is that we can get into a position to
communicate only
if (a) we understand the modern world's view correctly, particularly
its presuppositional
base and the logical consequences thereof; and (b) we ourselves have
a consistent
Christian view, or coherent system, whose logical consequences are consistent
with our experience. Without (a), what the world hears of the gospel from us is
not what we meant by it; without (b) we have nothing unique to offer. Schaeffer
has himself well communicated, using diagrams and examples that make these and
many other cogent and challenging points.
The principal flaw of the book is the tendency to oversimplify. When one holds
a comprehensive, or total, view of things, he is able to fit his data into neat
categories in that view. It is then possible to pigeon-bole John Cage's music,
Henry Miller's books, Paul Klee's art, Martin Buber's philosophy, and
Karl Barth's
theology with a few paragraphs each. Unless the reader is convinced of exactly
the same total view of things, he is bound to feel these
oversimplified discussions
inadequate, misleading, or disparaging. This feeling will cause the
unsympathetic
reader to reject the whole book's analysis as shallow, which in spite of brevity it is not. In
defense of Dr. Schaeffer on this point it is true that (a) most
evangelicals would
agree closely enough with him in overall view not to be derailed, and (b) he is
reacting to the gross overcomplications perpetrated by the modern theologians
and philosophers, who confuse simple Christian truths by semantic exercises in
their attempt to inter supernaturalism.
In a brief discussion of the nature of proof there is a pregnant remark for the
scientist who would communicate the gospel and he understood: A
"reason why
modern men reject the Christian answer, or why they often do not even consider
it, is because they have already accepted with an implicit faith the
presupposition
of the uniformity of natural causes in a closed system." (Italics his.) I
do not think that Schaeffer here is rejecting a uniformitarian view of nature,
for that would be dishonestly ignoring the scientific data. Rather,
his emphasis
is on the "closed system", i.e. without God, that most people posit.
People don't see the natural laws as God's laws, so they easily
accept the unwarranted
notion that a scientific explanation for an event excludes God from that event.
Unfortunately, many Christians have fallen into this trap as well.
They are afraid
to allow the possibility, for example, that the creation events of
Genesis could
be described by scientists using natural laws, because they mistakenly see this
scientific description as excluding God. As I, and many others, have maintained
elsewhere, and as Schaeffer says so well, the Christian and only the Christian
has no need to fear the truth. All truth is God's, and it is the
truth that sets
us free.
One other feature of this book that scientists will appreciate is the emphasis
on presuppositions. Of all people, scientists should he most aware of the fact
that all systems of thought-scientific or philosophicalare based on
assumptions.
These assumptions are to be believed. They are not provable, except
in the sense
that the thought system built on them may be both logically
consistent and conform
to observable reality. Schaeffer has done the thinking Christian
community a service
to identify the world's assumptions and contrast them clearly with those of the
Christian.
The Christian life is seen in this book as a living demonstration that there is
a living God in us. The demonstration is existential as well as propositional;
that is, it is true in both experience and logic. The modern world
puts much stock
in experience, and Schaeffer has shown both why, and indicates bow
the evangelical
Christian may use this fact in communicating with the world. We must not ignore
this divine logic or consistency of Christianity, for the gospel is true. But
we must also retain the balance between propositional and existential truth. If
Schaeffer seems to emphasize the propositional aspects in this book,
it is probably
to react against the new theologians' preoccupation with the existential.
The unique contribution of this book is in stressing the need for the Christian
to understand the way the world thinks. The book will he particularly helpful
to evangelical Christians and, I suspect, quite unacceptable to others for the
reasons I have mentioned. The world is not likely to enjoy having the roof torn
off its attempts to cover its logical inconsistencies. I would urge evangelical
scientists to read it as a starting point for further less simplified study in
philosophy, the arts, general culture, and theology of today. It is easy for us to become
narrowly specialized and fail to appreciate the impact of Picasso,
Dylan Thomas,
and others in the world to whom the Great Commission sends us today.
But without
this understanding of how the world hears, the things we say are
bound to he misunderstood.
Reviewed by David L. Dye, Senior Scientist, A. F. Special Weapons
Center, Kin/and
Air Force Rae, New Mexico.
MECHANICAL MAN by Dean E. Wooldridge.
McGraw-Hill, New York 1968. 212 pp. $8.95.
In this book the author of The Machinery of the
Brain and The Machinery of Life, Research Associate in Engineering at
the California
Institute of Technology and a director of TR\V Inc., turns his attention to a
popular exposition of the thesis: "Man is only a complex kind of
machine."
As the jacket states, "Drawing on recent discoveries in the
fields of biophysics,
biochemistry, neurophysiology, eleetrophysiology, and computer
science, Dr. Wooldridge
explores the important factors of intelligence and consciousness, as
well as the
physical and behavioral properties of the human organism. He concludes that all
these properties, as well as the origin of life, are entirely the consequence
of the normal operation of the ordinary laws of physics in inanimate chemical
matter." I expect that there will be several reviews of this book on display
in the journal in the near future dealing with the technical aspects
raised. Here
I will simply give some general reactions to the book as a whole.
Seldom has any book of this type been such an exposition of faith as this one.
At every point the faith of the author, guiding from presupposition
to conclusion,
is clearly in control of the material. In the early chapter on "The Origin
of Living Cells", for example, where it is expected that the
scientific basis
for the more controversial portions of the hook will be carefully laid, there
are 20 examples of personal faithjudgment in the six pages from p. 22 to p. 28
alone, as exemplified by the use of such words as "may," "must
(have happened)," "(such) was inevitable," "could
(happen),"
"likely," "ultimately," and "might (have
happened)."
Finally he concludes the chapter by saying, "No one pretends that such a
sequence as that just outlined is a completely true description of
the past. All
that is claimed is that it is probably 'true to life' in that the events that
it portrays are similar enough in quality to those that actually transpired to
lead to generally vglid conclusions about the nature, although not necessarily
the details, of the prehistory of biology . . . . the principles of evolution,
as we have seen, are accounted for by the laws of physics."
But this exercise of faith by the author is as nothing compared to
the faith that
sustains him in his treatment of the "Social Attitudes" that may be
expected to follow from the understanding that man is only a complex machine.
About religion, he concludes, "There is obviously no room for a personal
God in a world that is rigidly obedient to inexorable physical laws.
This is not to say that complete atheism will be
required . ...There will be no reason why the term
'God' cannot still he used to denote the seemingly inexplicable origin of the
laws and particles of physics." Arguing that there is little if
any correlation
between morality and the Christian faith, he says, "According to our mechanistic
point of view, a tendency toward moral behavior is a genetically
determined, evolutionary
developed physical property of the human animal, just like the number
of fingers
and the size of the brain." Confronted with the record of man's history,
the author remarks, "Of course, men do occasionally lie, steal,
commit murder,
and perform other antisocial acts. . . Our strong innate compulsion
toward moral
behavior combined with the flexibility available to social
institutions can confidently
be expected to prevent such a result (an explosion of crime and
immorality)."
He recognizes that the realization that he is only a machine may have
some adverse
effects on man's drive and ambition, but he shrugs this off with,
"some decrease
in ambition and productivity may result from the general acceptance
of the machinelike
nature of man, but probably not much." Finally he paradoxically concludes
that "the disappearance of the mystical concept of Right and Wrong . . .
may result in significant increase in the logical content of human
thought.
....Thus disappearance of the idea of absolute right and wrong will be a
step in the
right direction. Indeed, it may do much to diminish unreasoning prejudice and
increase the likelihood of practical and peaceful solutions to the
disputes that
constantly arise in today's complex world."
The basic issue, of course, is whether the principle of physical reductionism
can be supported. Granted that the structure of the parts that
compose a man can
be described in principle in terms of physics, does this mean that
man, the whole,
can be completely described in terms of physics as lie engages in interpersonal
relationships? The issue is not whether there are unique human experiences that
have no counterpart in any physical or chemical process; every human experience
-conversion, love, courage-must have some physical land chemical counterpart in
the body, especially the brain. The issue, rather, is whether everything about
man is explained by a physical and chemical description; once these
physical and
chemical processes have been discovered, is there nothing else meaningful that
can be said about the phenomena involved?
The last words of Wooldridge's book are, "Society profits when
its members
behave more intelligently. And men who know they are machines should be able to
bring a higher degree of objectivity to bear on their problems than
machines that
think they are Men." I believe the Marquis de Sade also believed that man
was only a complex machine ...
THE IDENTITY OF MAN by J. Bronowski. Natural History Press, Garden
City, New York
1966.
107 pp. 950 Paperback.
In this little book the author of Science and Human
Values turns his attention to the basic question of our day: "Can man be
both a machine and a self?" He answers the question in the
affirmative.
He builds his case step by step. First he points out that "in order to be
unique, it is not necessary to be horn unique." Then he proceeds to point
out that the self is constantly in a state of dynamic change and enlargement,
that "the self is not something fixed inside my head." The self comes
into being in "the unending process by which I turn new
experience into knowledge."
To compare the self to a machine it is necessary to know how to
define a machine,
Bronowski argues that "a machine has an input, a process, and an output,
and all three of these must be mechanized." In arriving at the conclusion
that the self is something other than a machine, he asserts "that there is
a mode of knowledge which cannot be spelled out formally to direct a
machine."
He calls this mode of knowledge, "knowledge of the self,"
that results
from the recognition of the characteristics of one's own self in other selves,
in a process that enlightens both oneself and the other selves
involved. He considers
knowledge of the self obtained by such a process to be one mode of truth, to be
placed alongside scientific knowledge as another mode of truth.
Bronowski puts a good deal of emphasis on the knowledge of self obtained from
vicarious participation in literature and poetry as this develops
human empathy.
He argues that a profound poem "does not tell us how to act, but
how to be.
A poem tells us how to be human by identifying ourselves with others,
and finding
again their dilemmas in ourselves." This is the crucial difference between
a machine and a man. "Machines do not act in plays, and animals
do not pretend
to be other animals; they do not know how. This is what cannot be mechanized,
even in principle, by any procedure that we can yet foresee."
Finally he argues that the distinction between a sell and a machine is not to
be found by analyzing the activities inside the body, but instead of seeing the
body within its total interacting environment. This is an important
point. Within
any given subset of reality, there is the appearance of "machinery."
The realities that transcend this machinery are to be encountered in
interactions
on the level of the wholes involved, and not on the level of the parts.
There are several turns of phrase memorable enough to be quoted. Consider, for
example, "We know what it is like for a man to be tired, and for
a dog-dog-tired;
but we do not know what it is like for a metal to he fatigued."
With all the positive contribution of this book to a critical issue today, it
is disappointing to find the author finally falling back upon a kind
of scientific
humanism. "And when we look into another man for knowledge of our selves,
we learn a more intimate respect for him as a man. Our pride in man and nature
together, in the nature of man, grows by this junction into a single sense: the
sense of human dignity. The ethics of science and of self are linked
in this value,
clarity with charity, and more than all our partial loyalties it gives a place
and a hope to the universal identity of man." Would that we
might look into
the man Jesus Christ to see there what we might be if our "total
loyalty"
to God our Creator were seen as the source of knowledge of self.
RUNAWAY WORLD by Michael Green. InterVarsity Press, London 1968. 125 pp. 4s
6d.
Paperback.
In this attractively written popular book by the Registrar at the
London College
of Divinity, the charges of escapism so often leveled against the
Christian faith
are met head on and then for good
measure turned back on those who make them. In a style and context reminiscent
of that encountered in Schaeffer's hooks reviewed above, and also found in Set
Forth Your Case by Clark H. Pinnoek (Craig Press, Nutley, N.J. 1967),
the author
examines the areas of history, science, reality, and adventure.
The book is written "in the conviction that the Christian faith itself is
the very antithesis of escapism." Dr. Green faces the charge
that Jesus never
lived with the insistence of the importance of history for Christian faith, He
is willing to base a defense of the Christian position on the
historicity of Jesus
Christ-"a matter not of ideology or mythology but history" and goes on
to enumerate the evidence supporting this position. He challenges
those who would
dismiss Christians as credulous escapists to personally examine the
evidence for
the Christian claims-and see what happens then.
Dr. Green argues the illogicality of the value placed on man by
atheists. "Jesus
set a high value on persons because they were made by a personal Cod;
the atheist
professes high respect for persons despite the fact that they are the products
of a quite impassive and impersonal universe . . . . If man is the outcome of
a fortuitous concourse of atoms, why on earth should you not manipulate him as
you please, provided it is in your power to do so with impunity?"
The perspective on life that finds no room for God because the world is viewed
as a closed mechanistic system is labeled absurd by the author for
three reasons:
(1) it does not answer the ultimate question of why anything exists at all, (2)
it gives no satisfactory explanation of aesthetics, ethics or freedom, and (3)
even if it were true, on what basis could it be believed to he true since the
perspective itself is as meaningless as anything else in such a system. In such
a system morality is dissolved. It is "no longer prescriptive (telling us
what we ought to do)" but is "merely descriptive (telling us what the
majority desire)."
The author faces the challenges of Marx and Freud, as well as those
of protagonists
who view Christianity wholly in terms of the conformity of
church-going. In each
case his treatment is stimulating. Finally he challenges his readers to see if
perhaps it is they who are running away from Christ.
This is a thought-provoking easily read hook that can be recommended
for personal
reading and then for passing on to someone else troubled with these
questions.
MAKER OF HEAVEN AND EARTH by Langdon Gilkey. Anchor Books, Doubleday,
Garden City,
New York 1965. 378 pp. $1.45. Paperback.
Occasionally one reads a book that can he described only in terms of
superlatives.
This hook by Langdon Gilkey, Professor of Theology at the University of Chicago
Divinity School, is one of those books. Deep enough to be satisfying
but readable
enough to be enjoyable, the book abounds with quotable sentences and
even paragraphs.
The subtitle of the book is: The Christian Doctrine of Creation in the Light of
Modern Knowledge. The subjects include a discussion of the idea and meaning of
creation, and the contribution that an understanding of creation can make to an
understanding of the nature of God as Creator, the intelligibility of
our world,
the meaning of life, the nature of evil, the efficacy of the Gospel, the meaning of time, and the language in which we speak about God.
Particularly striking quotations from this hook will be appearing from time to
time in the pages of this journal in the near future. (See p. 49.) Typical of
the author's appreciation for the roles of science and Christian faith is the
following:
"The whole realm of spatiotemporal facts, what can or could be
observed about
the created world through the sense of man, is a fit arena for
scientific investigation,
and in this area, for the Christian as for the secularist, scientific method is
the most
dependable avenue to truth . And let us always remember
that no trolls about God's creation can be antithetical to Christian troth. The
same God who created the world has revealed Himself in Jesus Christ;
thus whatever
is true about the world can be no threat to Christian faith . . . .
On the other
side, Christians believe that this created world, with its system of
complex interrelations
and its spatiotemporal facts, is dependent upon a deeper dimension of reality
and being. The world is not self-sufficient, hot dependent on God as
its Creator
and its continual preserver. Every fact and event, and every system
of facts and
events, conies to be and is upheld by the active, creative power of God, which
continually gives to every creature its power to be to each new moment, and its
power to act and relate itself to other creatures."
Although oriented in a Neo-orthodox perspective, as becomes
particularly evident
in some of the treatment of the Scriptures in the final chapter of
the hook, Dr.
Gilkey brings to bear on the many fundamental problems he treats a perceptive
understanding of the Christian faith and of the disciplines with
which it interacts.
This is a book that should be part of the background of every reader
of this review.
THE CHRISTIAN STAKE IN SCIENCE by
Robert E. D. Clark. Moody Press, Chicago 1967. 160 pp. $3.50
Dr. Clark is a British scientist who served for three years as a
scientific editor
for Paternoster Press and who is the author of several books relating science
and the Christian faith, In this book he has tried to avoid each of
three historic
positions taken in this area: (1) seize upon scientific findings and use them
indiscriminately in defense of Christianity; (2) speculate freely but
never communicate
our conclusions to others; (3) exercise to keep our minds and lives
compartmentalized
with science and religion neatly separated to avoid conflict. Dr. Clark argues
that if the historical record is examined impartially, it will become evident
that most of the time the Christian expectations have been borne out
by the progress
of scientific investigation, whereas the atheistic or secularistic expectations
have not.
To a considerable extent, Dr. Clark is successful in
this undertaking. He points out how the Christian expectation has
proven accurate
in the areas of the limitations on scientific method, the persistence of gaps
in knowledge, the inability of science to solve all of man's
problems, the humanization
of science and its emphases, and the significance of the contingent
in the historical
record. Even in these cases, however, it is not clear how much of the
credit Dr.
Clark bestows upon Christian foresight is not more properly
identified with Christian
hindsight.
In other areas, Dr. Clark's efforts and examples stray somewhat far afield from
what might he considered a moderate viewpoint among Christian men of
science today.
He argues that Christians, contrary to atheists who expected that all kinds of
matter were known, have always held that strange forms of matter exist. He goes
on to identify the concept of the "ether" with that
"half-way"
substance that pernuts interaction between spiritual and material. He
puts fairly
heavy weight on the reality of psychic phenomena, arguing that evidence for the
direct action of mind on space is given by the appearance of ghosts,
poltergeists-and
many of the miraculous biblical appearances. He argues for the
uniqueness of man
partially on the fact that psychical manifestations have never been found among
animals. Mental telepathy to him is so well established that, not only do all
Christian accept it, but all atheists as well!
Among other statements that reflect a somewhat aberrant viewpoint are
the following:
it is quite possible that "the mind is, rather literally, a
'ghost in a machine"';
"the Piltdown forgery was motivated by a desire to spread Darwinism;"
"the suggestions that the (Genesis) revelation was made in a
series of visions
given at night . . . has much in its favor;" "at the
Biblical date (of
creation of man), God gave to man a new nature conferring on him a
god-like quality
of mind and fitting him to take dominion over the earth ... there is no need to
identify the tool-making man of prehistory ... with man in the image
of God;"
the synthesis of certain organic compounds by subjecting a mixture to
ultraviolet
light or electric discharge "arose as a result of atheistic
thinking."
Dr. Clark's book contains many helpful emphases for the Christian,
but it is doubtful
whether the nonChristian scientist in particular will react in the
way that Christian
expositors of this field would desire.
The review of The Christian Stake in Science was originally published
in Eternity,
July, 1968, p. 45. Reprinted by permission.