The True Origin of Species

I still haven't read the entire book, but physicist and biblical scholar Gerald Schroeder's "The Science of God" is quite the eye opener. It was definitely one of the most important steps in my "walk of faith" which is fast becoming a "walk of reason."

He spent some amount of time on the conflict of Science and Religion, and how it need not be so. This, from Gerald Schroeder's website, since I can't find the damn book for some reason:

"If I had to assign chief blame for the ongoing struggle between science and religion and the resulting erosion of biblical credibility, it would be to the leaders of organized religion. Since Nicolaus Copernicus had the audacity to suggest that the Sun, not Earth, was the center of our solar system, their kneejerk reaction to scientific discovery has been to deny its validity. Yet what does the position of the Earth have to do with belief in a creator of the universe or the validity of the Bible?! Nowhere does the text claim that Earth is central to anything."

And some more:

"Similarly, Kepler's discovery of the elliptical orbit of the planets did not sit well with the religious establishment. Circles were perfect geometric shapes, ellipses are defective. An infinitely powerful God would be expected to produce perfect orbits. Of course, the Bible doesn't teach that a circle is better than an ellipse! Yet the Church condemned Kepler's discovery."

And then we come to the king of the science heretics, according to the church, and controversial to this day, Charles Darwin. Here's what Gerald has to say about Chuck:

"Then, Charles Darwin appeared on the scene. The thought that life in general (and humans in particular) had developed from lower life forms was simply unacceptable to the Church. The concept of evolution was condemned as heretical, notwithstanding the fact that Darwin in the closing lines of his book attributed the entire evolutionary flow of life to "its several powers having been originally breathed by the Creator in a few [life] forms or into one." Nonetheless, the gauntlet of heresy had been thrown down."

There is nothing in the Theory of Evolution that conflicts with the idea of a Creator! Gerald Schroeder does go on to make some interesting claims in his book that the creation story of Genesis actually matches the steps of the Big Bang and Evolution theories (and reconciles the days with millions and billions of years using Einstein's theory of relativity), but we won't get into that here - maybe some other time, 'cause it's pretty cool.

In his conclusion, Darwin is referring here to the idea of God as the Prime Mover - or the First Cause. Aristotle coined the term, and Aristotle's proof for the First Cause/Prime Mover/Unmoved Mover was:

1. There exists movement in the world.
2. Things that move were set into motion by something else.
3. If everything that moves was caused to move by something else, there would be an infinite chain of causes. This can't happen.
4. Thus, there must have been something that caused the first movement.
5. From 3, this first cause cannot itself have been moved.
6. From 4, there must be an unmoved mover.

Darwin basically supports this idea in his closing paragraph of Origin of Species - the cherry on the sundae - let's just read the whole paragraph, because it is quite reverent and beautiful (and some might even say, giving praise to God):

"It is interesting to contemplate a tangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent upon each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. These laws, taken in the largest sense, being Growth with reproduction; Inheritance which is almost implied by reproduction; Variability from the indirect and direct action of the conditions of life, and from use and disuse; a Ratio of Increase so high as to lead to a Struggle for Life, and as a consequence to Natural Selection, entailing Divergence of Character and the Extinction of less improved forms. Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone circling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved."

Wow! What Darwin is saying here, really, is that creation is still occuring! God's work is not complete! Whether it be random, or directed, is for you to decide, because it still is just a theory, and the fossil record is full of gaps; as Gerald states: "It is no wonder that Darwin himself, at seven locations in The Origin of Species, urged the reader to ignore the fossil record if he or she wanted to believe his theory."

For full disclosure, after being savaged by the church, and losing his young daughter, whatever faith he held in Christianity and a beneficient God disappeared. I can sympathize with his reasoning. For a good summary biography of Chuck, go here.

But why don't we take a positive spin here: Imagine God, residing in the eternal now, saying "It is not yet accomplished!" His hands still at work, perfecting his creation! Praise Him! When considering the reality of evolution, the reality of the creative process not yet finished - never finished, really, always pushing towards perfection - is that not better evidence for better days yet to come than the strange, apocalyptic images put forth in the Book of Revelation?

On the conflict between science and religion, Schroeder states:

"The medieval philosopher Moses Maimonides wrote that conflicts between science and the Bible arise from either a lack of scientific knowledge or a defective understanding of the Bible. Our (Jewish) Sages always viewed Torah knowledge in light of prevailing scientific theory. In fact, Jewish law states:

"'Only wise and understanding men are to be appointed to the Sanhedrin. They must be experts in Torah law, with a wide breadth of knowledge. They must also know secular subjects like medicine, mathematics, astrology and astronomy.' (Maimonides, Laws of Sanhedrin, chapter 2)"

We're getting back to the importance of interpretation again. Tomorrow, we'll look at an interesting interpretation of "The Yoke" as described by Jesus.