2022/08/20

Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution: Lamoureux, Denis O.

Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution: Lamoureux, Denis O.: 9781556355813: Amazon.com: Books




Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution Paperback – Illustrated, June 15, 2008
by Denis O. Lamoureux (Author)
3.5 out of 5 stars 15 ratings
In this provocative book, evolutionist and evangelical Christian Denis O. Lamoureux proposes an approach to origins that moves beyond the "evolution-versus-creation" debate. Arguing for an intimate relationship between the Book of God's Words and the Book of God's Works, he presents evolutionary creation--a position that asserts that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit created the universe and life through an ordained and sustained evolutionary process. This view of origins affirms intelligent design and the belief that beauty, complexity, and functionality in nature reflect the mind of God. Lamoureux also challenges the popular Christian assumption that the Holy Spirit revealed scientific and historical facts in the opening chapters of the Bible. He contends that Scripture features an ancient understanding of origins that functions as a vessel to deliver inerrant and infallible messages of faith. Lamoureux shares his personal story and his struggle in coming to terms with evolution and Christianity. Like many, he lost his boyhood faith at university in classes on evolutionary biology. After graduation, he experienced a born-again conversion and then embraced belief in a literal six-day creation. Graduate school training at the doctoral level in both theology and biology led him to the conclusion that God created the world through evolution. Lamoureux closes with the two most important issues in the origins controversy--the pastoral and pedagogical implications. How should churches approach this volatile topic? And what should Christians teach their children about origins?


514 pages
June 15, 2008



The Bible & Ancient Science: Principles of Interpretation

Denis O. Lamoureux
4.4 out of 5 stars 25
Paperback
16 offers from $15.53


Editorial Reviews

Review
Having traveled a path himself from atheist to young earth creationist to evolutionary creationist, Denis Lamoureux has thought deeply about the intersection of the truths of the Book of Nature and the Book of the Bible. In this remarkable and courageous analysis, he describes how he has found compelling harmony between these worldviews. Though certain literal interpretations of Genesis are rendered untenable, open-minded believers will emerge with their faith refined in the fire of rigorous but loving intellectual argument.
--Francis Collins, Director, Human Genome Project, author of The Language of God (2006)

Here is a book that takes both science and Scripture seriously. In this fascinating guide to Biblical interpretation, Denis Lamoureux argues that the Bible doesn't lie even if the episodes in the first eleven chapters of Genesis never happened. As with a good detective story, it's no fair here to peek at the end without first considering the clues.
--Owen Gingerich, Professor Emeritus of Astronomy and History of Science, Harvard University, author of God's Universe (2006)

Denis Lamoureux is a person of faith and of intellectual integrity. His holistic and integrated view of science and Christian theology springs from both his broad academic training and his deeply held evangelical faith. This book is notable for the manner in which it forthrightly and unflinchingly addresses difficult issues at the interface of science and theology. In doing so, it remains faithful to the authority of scripture, the historical testimony of the church, and the observed record of Creation's history. Denis Lamoureux joins an increasingly long list of evangelical scholars who have shown the the divisive 'warfare' of evolution and Christian faith to be without justification.
--Keith Miller, Research Assistant Professor of Geology, Kansas State University, editor of Perspectives on an Evolving Creation (2003)

Lamoureux seeks to move the public debate on origins beyond the two simplistic choices of either 'evolution' or 'creation.' His passion for deep Christian faith and commitment to Scripture and integrity in science render his bold and provocative synthesis worthy of consideration.
--Randy Isaac, Executive Director, American Scientific Affiliation

What a magnificent understanding of God's creatively sustaining presence reaching far beyond stereotypical received views on evolution and Christianity! This well-informed case, with teeth, defends the compatible and inclusive relationship between revelation and the findings of natural science while exposing false-choice barriers, albeit sincerely erected, between evolution and religious faith.
--Thaddeus J. Trenn, President, Canadian Science and Christian Affiliation






About the Author
Denis O. Lamoureux is Associate Professor of Science and Religion at St. Joseph's College in the University of Alberta. He is the co-author of Darwinism Defeated? The Johnson-Lamoureux Debate on Biological Origins (1999), and author of Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution (Wipf & Stock, 2008).


Product details
Publisher ‏ : ‎ Wipf and Stock; Illustrated edition (June 15, 2008)
Language ‏ : ‎ English
Paperback ‏ : ‎ 514 pages
3.5 out of 5 stars 15 ratings




Customer reviews
3.5 out of 5 stars
3.5 out of 5
15 global ratings


5 star 42%
4 star 16%
3 star 17%
2 star 0% (0%)
0%
1 star 24%

How customer reviews and ratings work

Review this product
Share your thoughts with other customers
Write a customer review

Sponsored



Read reviews that mention
evolutionary creation young earth christian faith denis lamoureux sin-death problem new testament science and history ordained and sustained earth creationism word of god ancient near messages of faith book had to be written science and religion science and the bible evolutionary science creation also human evolution book lamoureux science and christian

Top reviews

Top reviews from the United States


Anthony Maiolo

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent Contents and IllustrationsReviewed in the United States on April 12, 2009
Verified Purchase
This book by Dr. Lamoureux is well organized with 85 illustrations that really help to understand that God created all things by way of His teleological evolutionary hand, "a design-reflecting natural process that He ordained and continuously sustains." For example, the chart on pages 44-45 covers all of the views regarding the Origin of the Universe and Life. The two on the left include Young Earth Creationism and Progressive Creationism (both clearly wrong as Lamoureux explains throughout the book), and two on the right which include Deistic Evolution and Dysteleological Evolution (both wrong as Lamoureux explains). The truth is in the middle of the chart - Evolutionary Creation, incorporating God's ordained and sustained natural processes. Evolutionary Creation also holds to the truth that God is a personal Designer.

The illustrations are truly outstanding. They relate to both science and Scripture. Like most Christians, I do not have advanced training in science. Lamoureax has a doctorate degree not only in science (Biology) but in Theology as well. This is a big plus for the reader as it is evident throughout the book. The biblical and scientific truths presented in the content of the book are simply profound. The book is 493 pages in total with all of the Appendices, Notes, Glossary, etc. The book is 6 x 9 and has a nice Scripture Index in the back that is very helpful as well.

I have about 40 books on evolution and creation to include commentaries on Genesis and this book is one of my favorites. The points that the author makes really enlightened my eyes to the word of God and helped me with my walk with the Lord. When you actually study the scientific facts and combine them with the correct interpretations in Scripture, you will be really thankful for understanding the truth. Through this book, I was blessed to better know my Creator and His ways. My understanding of the book of Genesis has really been magnified. This book would have been useful when I studied the Pentateuch in seminary. However, this book just came out in 2008.

You will also learn specific details about the Ancient Near Eastern misconception of the earth and the universe, and how this is related to passages of Scripture that speak of the firmament (Genesis, Numbers, Job, Jeremiah, Psalms, II Peter, etc.) and the underworld (Exodus, Isaiah, Psalms, Philippians, Revelation, etc.). For example, Job 37:18 refers to the skies that are as strong as a cast metal mirror. As we study the ancient understanding of the universe, it becomes clear that the writers of Scripture believed that God created a solid structure over the earth. Yet there is no firmament above the earth. The Psalmist also believed in a firmament with a body of water above it. Psalm 148:4 says, "Praise Him, you heavens of heavens, and you waters above the heavens!" Jeremiah 10:12 tells us that when God thunders, the waters in the heavens roar.

Let us not be mistaken about what the writers of Scripture believed. The Hebrew word for firmament is raqiya. If the writers of Scripture wanted to express that what God created above the earth was anything but a firmament, they had the ordinary vocabulary at their disposal. God allowed the writers of Scripture to incorporate their false ideas about the structure, operation, and origin of the universe. They clearly thought there was a solid structure above the earth holding the sun and moon in place. They had an ancient understanding of astronomy.

Many Christians will not study the truths in the word of God and the truths regarding scientific facts enough to ever know the truth about creation. They follow the interpretive errors passed on to them and combine it with their lack of education and false beliefs in science. However, if you are a Christian who does not want to ignore scientific facts, and you see the problems with a literal reading of the creation accounts, then you have come to the right book. You may choose to begin with Lamoureux's book "I Love Jesus & I Believe in Evolution" which is basically is a primer for this book.

Lamoureux explains that Christians should be aware of the origins dichotomy between atheism and evolution. This dichotomy inhibits Christians from seeing the scientific evidence for human evolution, and it puts a stumbling block between non-Christians and an understanding of their true spiritual nature. Evolutionary Creation corrects this unbiblical and unnecessary situation.

4 people found this helpful

HelpfulReport abuse

Andy

5.0 out of 5 stars Amazing BookReviewed in the United States on July 26, 2014
Verified Purchase
Truly an amazing book. Lamoureux does a fantastic job of tackling the origins debate. He's faithful to both Scripture and the natural world. Worth every penny. He defends and outlines the beliefs of evolutionary creation beautifully. The book is laced with helpful graphics or "figures" as the book calls them that helps readers follow along. This is a heavy read. There's a lot of content to wrap your mind around and I found myself re-reading certain sections over and over again in order to fully comprehend what Lamoureux was stating. Be warned that the book can be quite repetitive at times, but this isn't necessarily a bad thing as it helped cement what Lamoreux was saying. The section on the Anthropic Principle was worth the price of the book alone. The Appendix is chock full of helpful sketches and is a great resource to accompany the reading. I now have such an overwhelming peace when it comes to Origins and the Science v. Religion debate. I feel like my belief in Christ is no longer under siege by the discoveries of science.

The package shipped on time, but I have a few minor gripes about the physical book. First, it rarely opens flat, so I had to use a paper weight in order to read it on a desk. I order the paperback. I recommend future buyers spend the extra 10 bucks and get the hardcover. Second, the book had a watermark/smudge at the edge of the pages. But this really didn't bother me too much.

Bottom line: If you've struggled with Religion v. Science get this book.

3 people found this helpful

HelpfulReport abuse

Kevin Short

1.0 out of 5 stars this work is useless to the expert due to the errors committed and ...Reviewed in the United States on April 26, 2016
Verified Purchase
I cannot comment on Lamoureux's credibility as a scientist, but he should be considered to lack credibility as a theologian, though it is written in a style that might be convincing to the non-speicialist. For example, the work bases much on the idea that Paul believed in a three-tiered universe in the Kenosis passage (Philippians 2), but Paul was a man of the first century AD not the tenth century BC, he was familiar enough with the Greek Classical writers to know that they had largely proved the earth was spherical, had traveled enough to have likely confirmed their findings (based on the astronomy of the stars) and Paul's reference to the third heaven (2 Corinthians 2) is not consistent with the cosmology that Lamoureux asserts was Paul's. Similarly one of his major data points used to present his theory is the term Raqia' in Genesis 1:6, yet his discussion on this point is a clear example of the root fallacy, an error in the way semantics are presented.

Lamoureux présents a theological position of infallibility without inerrancy as if it is consistent with an inerrantist position, and in this regard he is either ignorant of a basic point in the discussion of theology, or he is being deceptive to raise favorable views of his work, either way it is an additional mark against his credibility in discussing the theology of the Bible itself. There is no discussion of the major passages on discussions of inerrancy, infallibility or inspiration and one is left wondering, if one holds Lamoureux's view how one can believe the Bible is inspired at all. He presents himself as believing the message of the Bible, but his discussion assumes views about the authorship of theTorah that are inconsistent with Evangelicalism, and his discussion of inspiration is closer to the neo-orthodoxy of Karl Barth than to his professed faith.

On the whole, this work is useless to the expert due to the errors committed and the lack of development in his thoughts, and is worthless to Evangelical laymen.

3 people found this helpful

HelpfulReport abuse

See all reviews


Top reviews from other countries

Victor Ratzlaff
5.0 out of 5 stars It's by far the best book I've read on this subjectReviewed in Canada on November 29, 2014
Verified Purchase

Lamoureux dealt with the issue of organic evolution and his Christian faith in a very thorough and sensitive way. His arguments for God using evolution was very convincing. His views on the first 11 chapters of Genesis were a little shocking at first, but he convinced me he was bang on in his understanding of how God chose to allow these Scriptures to be written. His writing is logical and readily understood. It's by far the best book I've read on this subject.

5 people found this helpfulReport abuse
See all reviews


Profile Image for Paul Bruggink.
Paul Bruggink
120 reviews
14 followers

Follow
November 10, 2016
I naively thought that this book was going to be an expansion of the author's paper "Evolutionary Creation" (available on the Internet), but it turned out to be much more than that.

Denis Lamoureux is Associate Professor of Science and Religion at St. Joseph's College, University of Alberta, has doctoral degrees in dentistry, theology and biology, and is an evangelical Christian.

He has written one of the best (and probably the most provocative) books yet on the compatibility of science and the Bible. He starts by clearly, completely and biblically demolishing scientific and historical concordism as a viable approach to interpreting Genesis 1-11 by making a very strong biblical case for God having accommodated His message to His chosen people in the science of the time (a flat, circular, immovable earth with ends, foundations, an underside, a solid firmament overhead with the sun, moon, and stars set in it, and a sea of water held up by the firmament) and in the approach to history of the time (stylistic). We now know from archaeology, etc. that this was the status of science and history in the Ancient Near East but is not an accurate description of the cosmos and human history as we currently understand it. Therefore, it is clear that the creation story in Genesis should not be taken literally. "In the same way that [God] took on fallible human flesh in the person of Jesus to reveal His love for us, the Creator employed imperfect human ideas about nature to disclose in Scripture that He ordained and sustains the world" (p. 175). Lamoureux summarizes the points he has made in two tables of the failures of scientific and historical concordism (pp. 150 & 242).

He then builds on this foundation to make the case that "most of the events in Genesis 1-11 never literally happened, but that this is not a problem whatsoever to the Christian faith if believers recognize that the attribution of divine and human action is accommodated through ancient categories in order to reveal, as effectively as possible, Holy Spirit messages of faith" (p. 312). "Just as sin was never literally taken away through animal sacrifice, one could argue that sin never literally entered into the world through the first man mentioned in Scripture" (p. 313). "The Church is built upon no one other than Jesus Christ. Adam never died for our sins, but the Lord did. Believers are Christ-ians and not Adam-ites. The Cross should never be conflated with the historicity of Adam, his sin, and judgment" (p. 331).

New Testament references to Adam and Noah are shown to be the same accommodation to the understanding of science and history of the time. In addition, Lamoureux points out that the New Testament references were making theological, not historical, points. Having said that, he clearly defends the historicity of Christ's crucifixion and resurrection. No slippery slope for him!

Lamoureux's approach paves the way for acceptance of biological evolution by evangelical Christians by solving a lot of biblical interpretation problems, but it creates some theological problems. In order for his view of evolutionary creation to become accepted in the Christian churches, theologians and pastors are going to be very busy for a long time.

Throughout the book, Lamoureux compares and contrasts five basic positions on origins: Young Earth Creationism (Creation Science), Progressive (Old Earth, Day-Age) Creationism, Evolutionary Creationism (Theistic Evolution), Deistic Evolution, and Dysteleological (Atheistic) Evolution. He also discusses divine action, intelligent design, and the anthropic principle.

The penultimate chapter is the author's very detailed account of his personal struggle in coming to terms with evolution, from childhood Catholicism to atheism to Young Earth Creationism to Evolutionary Creationism, a struggle which formed the common thread throughout his professional career.

The book has ten appendices, including Sumarian King Lists, Jahwish and Priestly Sources of the Biblical Flood Account (Genesis 6-9), Fossil Pattern Predictions of the Christian Origins Positions, Age of Earth, Carbon-14 Dating and the Archaeological Record, and Human Evolution. It also includes extensive Notes, a brief Glossary, a Subject Index, and a Scripture Index.

I highly recommend this book to any Christian interested in the compatibility of modern science and the Bible, and to any agnostic or atheist interested in an approach to Christianity that does not conflict with modern science.

2 likes

Like

Comment

Steve Douglas
3 reviews
10 followers

Follow
January 10, 2011
I have long maintained that we cannot hope for a broad acceptance of evolution among evangelicals until the heavy theological questions are acknowledged and a plausible approach to the theological quandaries evolution creates are sketched out -- followed by rather than in reaction to an explanation of the science behind it. This is what Denis Lamoureux aspires to do in Evolutionary Creation.

This book bears the name of Lamoureux's recommended term for exclusively non-interventionist "theistic evolution". In discussing scientific strengths of evolutionary theory, I especially appreciated how Lamoureux supplements a respectable treatment of genetic evidence for common descent by lending his unique perspective as a dentist to present the considerable paleontological evidence from analysis of teeth and jawbones. His critique of special creationism and intelligent design was clinical and admirably civil, but fervent nonetheless.

Lamoureux spends considerable space presenting a view of the Bible's authority that doesn't take its scientific or even all of its historical claims as accurate. In his memorable terminology, he rejects scientific and historical concordism, the beliefs that an authoritative Bible demands full agreement between the authors' understanding and scientific/historical reality on those matters. This is a good and necessary start, and I found his candor about theological problems and uncertainties commendable. Yet ultimately I found rather weak his basic assumption that a "message of faith", a divinely guaranteed spiritual message, lay embedded within every passage; I found that he offered no compelling rationale for discarding scientific or historical concordism while retaining what appears to be merely nuanced theological concordism.

One more significant component of the book is its detailed account of Lamoureux's "evolution" of thought on these matters, beginning with creationism, leading to evolution acceptance and atheism, then back to creationism, and finally back to theism and acceptance of evolution. One should not underestimate the potential of testimony for creating empathy and so attracting outsiders.

Due to this book's impressive attempt at being a comprehensive volume giving at least an overview of all areas touched by "evolutionary creation", it is not for the casual reader. For someone who wants to delve deep into the theological and scientific issues swirling around the debate, it seems a great introduction, almost textbook-like (indeed, I can see it being used in Christian college environments). Evolutionary Creation will serve as a useful introduction for those wanting a thorough discussion of all these matters.

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Autumn Kotsiuba.
Autumn Kotsiuba
586 reviews
8 followers

Follow
November 23, 2015
Would we rather be proven right or find the truth?

Many Christians attack evolution--not because it goes against the Bible, but because it goes what THEY THINK the Bible says. In reality, scientific concordism fails every time (and, in many cases, so does historical concordism). A teleological evolutionary creationist view, when paired with a genre- and literarily-accurate reading of Genesis 1-11, best displays the work of God, and best explains the existence of a soul, the part that sets us apart from our animalistic kin.

Having been raised young-earth, then flirting with progressive creation in college before accepting evolutionary creation, I understand that this is a sensitive subject (accepting this view, some would claim that I am no longer evangelical--or even go so far as to say I am not a "true believer." But Lamoureux handles the subject beautifully and tactfully. Many Christians claim that the origins debate is inconsequential; while I agree that other theological points are more central to sound doctrine, I know people who have given up their faith because scientific concordism leave gaps for "biblical errors."

If you know anyone who questions their faith because of science or history, or who is willing to put aside their assumptions and study scripture IN CONTEXT, understanding what it's actually trying to accomplish, I'd recommend this book over any other.
nonfiction
 
religion

Like

Comment

Why Is There Suffering?: A webinar with Bethany Sollereder


Why Is There Suffering?: A webinar with Bethany Sollereder
278 viewsDec 9, 2021


CSLewisFoundation
3.79K subscribers

We invite you to join us for a C.S. Lewis College and C.S. Lewis Foundation webinar featuring Dr. Bethany Sollereder. Bethany will give a short presentation on her newly released book Why Is There Suffering?, which discusses various historical and cultural approaches to the problem of pain. The presentation will be followed by an interview from our moderator, Christopher Howell, along with a Q&A session with questions from our audience.

Bethany Sollereder is a Research Fellow at the Laudato Si’ Research Institute at Campion Hall, at the University of Oxford. She specializes in theology concerning evolution and the problem of suffering and is currently working on the theological aspects of our changing climate. Bethany received her PhD in Theology from the University of Exeter and an MCS in interdisciplinary studies from Regent College, Vancouver. She is the author of God, Evolution, and Animal Suffering: Theodicy Without a Fall (Routledge, 2018). She also works with BioLogos, God and the Big Bang, Learning About Science And Religion (LASAR), and has written for popular publications such as The Christian Century. Bethany also lived at "The Kilns" for several years as a Scholar-In-Residence.

Restoration: A Medieval Understanding of ‘Science’ - By Sea Yun Pius Joung, The Oxford Scientist

Restoration: A Medieval Understanding of ‘Science’ - The Oxford Scientist

Restoration: A Medieval Understanding of ‘Science’
1 YEAR AGO BY EDITOR


By Sea Yun Pius Joung

As one enters the quadrangle of our beloved Bodleian, one can’t help but notice the grandeur of it all – the ancient windows; the scent of old books; the archways leading into mysterious rooms such as the schola moralis philosophiae, the schola astronomiae et rhetoricae, or the schola musicae – and at the centre of it all, the grand archway leading into the Divinity Schools.

The architecture of the Bodleian itself speaks of the fundamental understanding of the medieval worldview – that Theology is the regina scientiarum (queen of the sciences), because its subject matter is God, through Whom the very plain of existence came to exist. 

As the Mathematician John Lennox succinctly puts it, “Men became scientific because they expected law in nature, and they expected law in nature because they believed in a lawgiver.” Such a conviction is what prompts the University’s motto, Dominus illuminatio mea – the Lord is my Light (Ps 27:1). As the theologian Ivan Illich put it, this motto is “suffused by the idea that the world rests in God’s hands, that it is contingent on Him. This means that at every instant everything derives its existence from his continued creative act. Things radiate by virtue of their constant dependence on this creative act. They are alight by the God-derived luminescence of their truth.” Despite the secular attempt to root out the sacred shadows lurking behind ‘science’, and the general indifference towards the questions concerning the medieval theologians, understanding the history of the development of Science is vital to understanding the purpose (τελος) towards which it is directed, and the assumptions that ground and frame our conception of truth. In the following article, I will explore the history of the word ‘science’, how it was used in the ancient and medieval world, and offer some suggestions for what restoring the spirit of the medieval sciences might look like.


A Brief European History of “Scientia“: An Editorial of what the Medieval Understanding of Science can provide for the modern world

The conception of ‘Science’ in antiquity can be summed up by the Aristotelian worldview as a coherent system derived from first principles that can produce propositions of sorts. The Latin scientia is derived from the Latin verb scio (‘I know; understand’), and thus has connotations that do not equate directly to the English word ‘science’. For the ancient, scientific knowledge was not dependent on the empirical reliance on sense perception nor upon the scientific method. It is in this context that Aquinas states that ‘Sacred Doctrine is a science. […] For it proceeds from first principles known by the light of a higher science, viz., the science had by God and the blessed in heaven. So just as music takes on faith the principles handed down to it by arithmetic, so too sacred doctrine takes on faith the principles revealed to it by God’ (Summa Theologiae, I.I.2). Theology or ‘Sacra Doctrina’ is a science because it proceeds from first principles set forth from God, which are the so-called articles of faith, which have been revealed through the Scriptures and the Tradition of the Church. Furthermore, for Aquinas, Theology is the noblest of the sciences, because ‘sacred doctrine has its certitude from the light of God’s knowledge, which cannot be deceived’; ‘this science is principally about things that transcend reason in their loftiness, whereas the other sciences consider only those things that fall under reason’; and ‘the end of sacred doctrine as a practical science is eternal beatitude, and this is the ultimate end to which all the other ends of the practical sciences are ordered’ (I.I.5). Although Aquinas falls short of actually labelling theology regina scientiarum, for all intents and purposes, he considers it such, and looms over the other sciences as the judge of their direction. Thus, in the medieval university, Brink explains that “the goal of academic study was not to specialize in some discipline, but to enhance one’s personal formation in a deeply spiritual context. Even the study of nature was directed at such spiritual formation, shaping one’s mind so as to have it contemplate the divine beauty” (445). Theology once represented the well-ordered direction of the University as a whole, both in individual formation and in the direction of the faculties upon an holistic, unitive view of the whole system.

The Natural Sciences developed in this foundation, and thus they were forged within a religious context. As much as our textbooks seek to show that Copernicus and Galileo were heralds and forerunners to an age of reason alone, the reality is that they were steeped in the religious milieu and assumptions about the Divine underpinned the direction of their study, formation, and research. Mendel, the father of genetics was an Augustinian canon. Copernicus was a canon lawyer and at least took minor orders. Far from an hostility towards the Church, their understanding of science was directed at an ends, and Theology provided the direction of their studies and stood as the judge of their presuppositions.

One might very easily ask what the purpose of going through all this history was, given that we live in a modern, 21st century world. Couldn’t we simply use ‘science’ as we always have been as denoting the natural sciences and the faculties that use the scientific method? At one level, as we have learnt from several of the most current political issues, it is inevitable that words have both an afterlife and an history that grounds their meaning. As such, it is almost impossible to divorce ‘science’ from its historical context. Furthermore, it seems hardly desirable for the natural sciences to be divorced from the arts at any rate. It is difficult to imagine ‘science’ being done with any seriousness without the fundamental assumption that our internal faculties align with the external world. It is difficult to conceive of science without faith as a way of knowing, along with intuition, language, and imagination. The cry of Reason Alone has long been shown to be an empty one, and all of the science need fundamental assumptions – often called ‘axioms’ through which they are grounded. There is still room for metaphysics.

As Brink once noted, “all intellectual enquiry is necessarily informed by an underlying account of the nature and goal of the intellectual life. Remarkably, however, the university does not teach us anything about why the pursuit of intellectual goals is indeed valuable” (452). As Fr Julian Large of the London Oratory recently wrote, “Intriguing and persuasive as it may be, the Big Bang remains a theory. A scientific consensus only holds sway for as long as it remains unchallenged by a more compelling explanation”. There is no question that the Big Bang theory remains the most elegant and most persuasive scientific explanation for how the universe came into existence – but it leaves so many important questions unanswered. The difficulty that faces most scientists today is that there is an inadequate emphasis of the ends to which their discipline is directed – the questions of why their science matters – where their discipline fits in the larger picture – from what their assumptions and fundamental first principles, including their methodologies are derived – and what is to be valued in a society aimed at human flourishing. Restoring these questions to the University is of crucial importance for the future generations of our scientists. As the Oriel Theologian John Henry Newman once wrote, “In a word, Religious Truth is not only a portion, but a condition of general knowledge. To blot it out is nothing short, if I may so speak, of unravelling the web of University Teaching.” Perhaps it is time for the University to restore Theology to her rightful throne of knowledge – and for all scientists to ask the big questions within their university years – for all of the young people to ponder them and seek answers to them, rather than merely being content with lab experiments, reports, and lectures on the most minute and technical matters.

Science and Religion: An Interview with Dr Bethany Sollereder - The Oxford Scientist

Science and Religion: An Interview with Dr Bethany Sollereder - The Oxford Scientist

Science and Religion: An Interview with Dr Bethany Sollereder
2 YEARS AGO BY EDITOR


Sea Yun Pius Joung, Editor for OxSci interviews Dr Bethany Sollereder from the Theology and Religion Faculty

1. What prompted your interest in Science and Religion?

I was drawn to science and religion because I cared about the Bible. I did not know or care much about science itself, to start. I wasn’t a scientist and didn’t care about the arguments that regularly happened surrounding those topics in North America, especially around whether or not evolution happened. But I read Denis Lamoureux’s Evolutionary Creation and it showed how bringing science to the table affected hermeneutics in a dramatic way. I cared about that! So I started to learn more, and when I moved to Vancouver to get a master’s degree, I switched my major from history (my other great love) to an interdisciplinary degree that allowed me to pursue science and religion research.


There are times of great trouble ahead, and this is often when Theology comes into its own.

2. What are some of the avenues for research in Science and Religion in general at present?


The problem with such a broad area as “Science and Religion” is that the scope is nearly limitless. Ideally, it is not “Science and Religion” but “sciences and religions”—neither of those are a homogenous whole, and research could range from the hard sciences like Physics and Chemistry to the more social sciences of Psychology and Sociology.

Similarly, although most work in Science and Religion has really been in relationship to Christianity, the sky is the limit for exploring how various sciences engage with other world religions. Even that is just scratching the surface, because all science and religion depends on some sort of metaphysic, and so philosophy enters the picture. Then, you can add history to the mix as well, since both science and religion are culturally situated within human traditions. So, there are many, many avenues for research.

There has been a trend of moving away from the traditional staples of science and religion, which were mainly about either physics or evolution and Christianity, and toward areas that are not slightly veiled apologetics, but rather are working toward how to live in the world better. An example would be 
  • Matthew Whelan’s work on agriculture and religion, or 
  • Sarah Lane Ritchie’s work on spiritual technologies.

3. Could you introduce your fields of research for us a little?

My doctoral work asked: “How could a good God create through evolution, when that involves suffering, death, and extinction?” Paul writes that death entered the world through sin, but evolution tells a different story where life has always been dependent on death. I ultimately came to the conclusion that spiritual death enters through sin, but physical death and the harms that occur through evolutionary development to creatures and species should not be seen as a result of the fall. Rather, they are part of the risk of creation in love.

My current work is looking at how we can think theologically about climate change, especially if we are “past the tipping point” and there is no going back to the climate “normal” that has held reasonably stable since the last ice age, and upon which our agriculture and trade is largely built. With rapid climate change, we may find ourselves having to rapidly change the way we live—much like the coronavirus has done. Except, with climate change, there is no vaccine and no easy way out. The changes will be permanent, at least, by human timescales.

4. Why is this a theologically interesting topic?

There are times of great trouble ahead, and this is often when Theology comes into its own.

When it comes to conservation, restoration, or land management, the natural sciences can tell us what to do, but not why should we do it, or what end we should head towards. Should we try to geo-engineer the earth to maintain a steady climate? Why should we bother with restoration at all when it is perfectly natural for species to go extinct? Science can only give limited answers to those questions, like “climate change may affect food supply”, but it cannot get to the heart of the human quest, which asks “Why are we here? What purpose do we serve? What responsibilities do we hold in regard to other life?” Science does not have answers to these, and that is where theology comes in.


Theology can talk about meaning, purpose, right and wrong.

Theology can talk about meaning, purpose, right and wrong. Theology can look at different ways to understand our role: this is perhaps most evident in the debates about what it means to be made in the image of God. Are we to have dominion over other creatures? Should we be seeking to subdue the whole world under our rule? Or are other creatures our partners in writing world history, so that we should give them freedom to be themselves without our interference?

The same is true as the climate begins to change. Suffering for the majority of humans is likely. Death, as it always has been, is inevitable. Theology can be our guide through facing those challenges.

5. What are some of the challenges associated with a theology of the environment?

Well, the challenges begin with trying to figure out what relationship Theology and Ecology should have with each other. Are these mutually exclusive pursuits, as someone like Lynn White Jr. would suggest? With theology simply advocating the human suppression of and mastery over the natural world? Or is there a more positive relationship, like that suggested by Loren Wilkinson and Michael Northcott and many others, where theological resources provide the foundation of ecological motivation? Once that has been settled, then there is the challenge of asking “What theology is actually relevant?” Most theology is anthropocentric. It is myopically focussed entirely on human concerns. Although there has been a strong movement away from anthropomonic theology (theologies that think that only humans matter) in recent times, much of the wisdom from the past cannot always provide a great road map for how to proceed. Just as with the challenges of genetic manipulation or modern total war, we are dealing with realities that are novel, that past theologians did not reflect on. That does offer a great deal of creativity and scope to our work, but it is also extremely challenging to build whole new areas of theological inquiry. We are charting new territory, and that is both exhilarating and rather scary!

6. What advice might you give for a natural scientist, as a theologian by training in the field of science and religion? What can religion teach an average scientist?

Well, speaking as a Christian theologian, I feel confident in saying that scientists don’t need to compartmentalise their pursuit of science from the questions they have about religious truth. A great deal of work has been done to show that science and religion are not at war. The idea that they were at war is a myth that is only about 130 years old. But in the early 19th century, when many of the Fellows of the Royal Society were also clergy, that idea would have been laughed out of town. (Indeed, the 1663 charter of the Royal Society states that its scientific activities would be devoted “to the Glory of God the Creator”.)

And, if this hypothetical scientist is a Christian, I would also add “don’t be afraid to ask difficult questions of the Bible.” I became interested in science and religion because bringing science to the table made me ask different questions of the Bible, it helped me read the Bible in new ways and challenged many of the ways I’d been taught to read the text. Yet, for every presupposition I had to put down, I gained immensely in new and richer ways of reading the text. There is no reason to fear that you will lose the Bible or faith if you allow your science and religion to mix. It may be rough for a while, like learning a new language, but you will find a great fluency waiting for you on the other side of some hard work.

7. How should the field of science and religion influence our everyday lives?

I think there are two main ways it could influence our lives. The first is that it teaches us to question the reach and the limitations of different kinds of knowledge. There are some questions that science is extremely good at answering, and others that it has no power at all to answer. The same is true of religious and philosophical knowledge. Science and religion as a discipline helps us analyse and use respect the different kinds of enquiries into knowledge that people make. This is especially important when scientific and religious knowledge overlap, such as in bioethical questions, or asking questions like “what does it mean to be human?”

The second way science and religion can influence our everyday life is by simply helping us to understand what are arguably the two most important shaping factors of our world today. The study of religion (which includes the study of secularity) draws us into history, philosophy, and intercultural studies. The study of science helps us understand the technologies that are infused with our every waking moment. If you want to understand the world today, if you want to understand politics in the United States or the Middle East or South America, then you cannot do without an understanding of religion. If you want to understand the threats of climate change to the whole human species, then you need to understand the power and limitations of science.

I know that every discipline tries to make its case for why it, in particular, is of crucial importance at this moment. Science and Religion, helps us to consider a whole picture view of the world and people in a way that the fragmented approaches of the modern academy rarely allows. We ask the big questions, and are not ashamed of it!

===
Dr Bethany Sollereder
Postdoctoral Fellow in Science and Religion
Faculty of Theology and Religion
University of Oxford

Campion Hall; Regent's Park College
bethany.sollereder@theology.ox.ac.uk
----
Biography:
Bethany Sollereder is a Research Fellow at the Laudato Si’ Research Institute at Campion Hall. She specialises in theology concerning evolution and the problem of suffering and is currently working on the theological aspects of our changing climate. Bethany received her PhD in Theology from the University of Exeter and an MCS in interdisciplinary studies from Regent College, Vancouver.

Research Area(s):
Science and Religion

Historical and Systematic Theology

Research Interests:
Theodicy, Animal Theology, History of Science and Religion, Readings of Genesis, Practical Theology.

Research Centres & Projects:
I am a research fellow with the Laudato Si' Research Institute at Campion Hall as well as with the Ian Ramset Centre for Science & Religion.

Publications & Research Outputs:
Bethany N. Sollereder. Why Is There Suffering?: Pick Your Own Theological Expedition (Zondervan: 2021, forthcoming)

Bethany N. Sollereder, "Compassionate Theodicy: A Suggested Truce Between Intellectual and Practical Theodicy," Modern Theology 37:2 (April 2021): 382-395. https://doi.org/10.1111/moth.12688

Bethany N. Sollereder. God, Evolution and Animal Suffering: Theodicy without a fall (Routledge, 2019): https://www.routledge.com/God-Evolution-and-Animal-Suffering-Theodicy-wi...
 

Select Publications
The list was updated
Beyond Barbour: new ways of teaching the relationship between science and religion
Sollereder B
Edited by: Billingsley, B, Chappell, K, Reiss, MJ
November 2019 | Chapter | Science and Religion in Education
Christopher Southgate on glory and compassion
Sollereder B
March 2019 | Journal article | Theology and Science
Models and Cultures in Science and Theology
SOLLEREDER B
Edited by: Ngien, D
March 2019 | Chapter | The Interface of Science, Theology, and Religion: Essays in Honor of Alister E. McGrath
Models and Cultures in Science and Theology
SOLLEREDER B
Edited by: Ngien, D
March 2019 | Chapter | The Interface of Science, Theology, and Religion: Essays in Honor of Alister E. McGrath
God, Evolution, and Animal Suffering: Theodicy without a Fall
SOLLEREDER BN
October 2018 | Book
EXPLORING OLD AND NEW PATHS IN THEODICY: with Denis Edwards, “Christopher Southgate's Compound Theodicy: Parallel Searchings”; Ted Peters, “Extinction, Natural Evil, and the Cosmic Cross”; Robert John Russell, “...
Sollereder B
September 2018 | Journal article | Zygon
Essays in honor of Christopher Southgate: Introduction
Sollereder B, Robinson A
August 2018 | Journal article | Zygon
Exploring old and new paths in theodicy
Sollereder B
August 2018 | Journal article | Zygon
The evolution of Society for Ecological Restoration's principles and standardscounter-response to Gann et al
Higgs E, Harris J, Murphy S, Bowers K, Hobbs R, Jenkins W, Kidwell J, Lopoukhine N, Sollereder B, Suding K, Thompson A, Whisenant S
May 2018 | Journal article | Restoration Ecology
On principles and standards in ecological restoration
Higgs E, Harris J, Murphy S S, Bowers K, Hobbs R, Jenkins W, Kidwell J, Lopoukhine N, Sollereder B, Suding K, Thompson A, Whisenant S
March 2018 | Journal article | Restoration Ecology


===

Why Is There Suffering?: A webinar with Bethany Sollereder
278 viewsDec 9, 2021

CSLewisFoundation
3.79K subscribers
We invite you to join us for a C.S. Lewis College and C.S. Lewis Foundation webinar featuring Dr. Bethany Sollereder. Bethany will give a short presentation on her newly released book Why Is There Suffering?, which discusses various historical and cultural approaches to the problem of pain. The presentation will be followed by an interview from our moderator, Christopher Howell, along with a Q&A session with questions from our audience.

Bethany Sollereder is a Research Fellow at the Laudato Si’ Research Institute at Campion Hall, at the University of Oxford. She specializes in theology concerning evolution and the problem of suffering and is currently working on the theological aspects of our changing climate. Bethany received her PhD in Theology from the University of Exeter and an MCS in interdisciplinary studies from Regent College, Vancouver. She is the author of God, Evolution, and Animal Suffering: Theodicy Without a Fall (Routledge, 2018). She also works with BioLogos, God and the Big Bang, Learning About Science And Religion (LASAR), and has written for popular publications such as The Christian Century. Bethany also lived at "The Kilns" for several years as a Scholar-In-Residence.
===


===

Triple Success for Sea Yun Pius Joung who Receives Gibbs Prize and Two Harvard Scholarships | Oriel College

Triple Success for Sea Yun Pius Joung who Receives Gibbs Prize and Two Harvard Scholarships | Oriel College



Triple Success for Sea Yun Pius Joung who Receives Gibbs Prize and Two Harvard Scholarships



19 August, 2022


An exceptional triple success for recent graduate Sea Yun Pius Joung who has received the Gibbs Essay Prize in Theology and Religion for highest mark awarded in an FHS dissertation, the prestigious Harvard Presidential Scholarship and Frank Knox Memorial Fellowship.


Sea Yun Pius Joung, a recent graduate in Theology and Religion, has been awarded the Gibbs Prize from the Faculty of Theology and Religion. His mark of 85 for his dissertation on ‘St Cyprian of Carthage’s Ecclesiological Interpretation of the Canticle of Canticles’ was the highest mark awarded in an FHS dissertation in the faculty. Sea Yun’s thesis “involved reading the entire corpus of St Cyprian and translating select passages from the original Latin, then reading the text closely to make an original argument.”

During his time at Oriel, Sea Yun was the JCR International Officer (involved in both the Equalities Subcommittee and JCR Committee), Bible Clerk for the Chapel (working closely with the Rev’d Dr Robert Wainwright), manager of the Oriel Chapel social media pages (@Oriel_chapel) and Editor-In-Chief of The Oxford Scientist for two full terms.

Having graduated and moved to the USA, Sea Yun has since been awarded both the prestigious Harvard Presidential Scholarship (awarded in the name of the President of the University to the top student(s) in each of the Harvard Schools), and the Frank Knox Memorial Fellowship - a travelling fellowship awarding full tuition and a generous living stipend to support his continuing scholarly research.

Sea Yun’s studies at Harvard will focus on the ‘Mediterranean of Late Antiquity’.

He explains:

“I hope to study from 100BCE to 787ACE, especially a vibrant period of Neoplatonism, Christianity, and Second Temple Judaism, all of which I am interested in. My work with Dr Brendan Harris, Professor William Wood, and Professor Hindy Najman among others really raised my interest in this field, and I hope to continue further at Harvard.”

Recently, Sea Yun has been in Pittsburgh writing a paper for the National Institute for Newman Studies and continuing Oriel’s legacy in the USA. When asked about his aims for the future, Sea Yun says:

“I am still discerning my future, and may very well decide to take Holy Orders – at any rate though, I would really like to be able to stay in academia if possible, and will seek to return to Oxford (hopefully Oriel) for a DPhil.”

We wish Sea Yun the best with his career and his time at Harvard.

You can read a more in-depth explanation of Sea Yun’s dissertation topic below in his own words.

The Prize-winning Dissertation

“My dissertation was on the Ecclesiological Interpretation of the Canticle of Canticles by St Cyprian of Carthage. The Canticle of Canticles (Song of Songs) is a book of the Hebrew Bible / Old Testament, which is essentially love poetry with verses alternating between the man and his beloved. The question that concerns both Jews and Christians is that it is Scriptural, yet mentions hardly anything of religious value. Hence, both the Rabbis and the Early Church begin to allegorise the text as being about God’s love for Israel, or about His love for the Church, or even of the individual soul.

My dissertation was about how St Cyprian of Carthage (Bishop of Carthage in North Africa from 248 until his martyrdom in 258) ecclesiological traditions surrounding the Canticle of Canticles to contest the rival “Novatian” and “laxist” communions – rival bishops of Carthage that contested his authority. A Cyprian scholar, Karl Shuve, argues that Cyprian used the Canticle of Canticles to only exclude those of rival communions.
I wanted to show that Cyprian’s ecclesiology is a little more nuanced than portrayed by previous scholars. In short, Cyprian used the Song ingeniously to fulfill the crucial task: including lapsi whilst excluding schismatici – he wanted to say to the Novatians that the Christians that had lapsed during the Decian persecution should be readmitted, but that the schismatics should be firmly excluded from the Communion of the Church.

Revisiting Cyprian’s ecclesiology is important for modern day ecumenical dialogue, in which definitions of Church boundaries matter. Cyprian’s legacy in particular has significance because debates in the Reformation by figures such as Cardinal Pole and Archbishop Cranmer rely often on readings of Cyprian and the Church Fathers.

It is this loving relationship between God and His Church that would endure in significance through Augustine, Leo, and Gregory, to even the modern ecclesiological, sacramental context, to the Dogmatic Constitution of the Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, which declares that “God gathered together as one all those who in faith look upon Jesus as the author of salvation and the source of unity and peace, and established them as the Church that for each and all it may be the visible sacrament of this saving unity (singulis sacramentum visibile huius salutiferae unitatis).”
===


Prophetic Voices: John Henry Newman the Saint, Sage, and Scholar | CCJ

Prophetic Voices: John Henry Newman the Saint, Sage, and Scholar | CCJ

Prophetic Voices: John Henry Newman the Saint, Sage, and ScholarPosted Fri, 11/26/2021 - 09:55 by Avigail
Share on:




This Advent, our blog posts will reflect on ‘prophetic voices’; people who, in the spirit of the prophets, may inspire us to action, challenge our preconceptions, refocus our religious practices, or forge a new path forward for our communities.

Sea Yun Pius Joung begins this series with ‘A Prophet Heralding Moderning: John Henry Newman the Saint, Sage and Scholar’.


A Prophet Heralding Modernity: John Henry Newman the Saint, Sage, and Scholar
Sea Yun Pius Joung


The prophet is frequently characterized as a voice crying out in the wilderness, and in the history of Israel, as an antithesis to the monarchical and priestly authority centred around the hierarchy of Jerusalem and the Temple. The prophets are those that are not necessarily heard, but often make accurate predictions, and in the Christian tradition, prophets are regarded as heralding the hope that comes in the form of Christ. The advent message, that Christ should be born anew in our hearts every day, and that we must be mindful of the final judgement, is reflected in a prophet that is unafraid to challenge even the greatest of our worldly institutions.

The greatest hero for many of the young people is St John Henry Cardinal Newman – the saint that explains the meaning of prophecy in our modern age through championing the conscience. Through his sensitivity and kindness, he sought an holistic, liberal education within a Catholic framework. He was a sage that did not let his academic work slip into the oblivion of abstractness and theory, but followed it to its logical conclusion and taught us that the love of God seeketh not its own. Finally, his legacy, on the development of doctrine, on the conscience, and the logical consequences of these for the interfaith and ecumenical movement, would be enshrined almost a century after his death at the Second Vatican Council, showing that he was a prophet well ahead of his times.

Newman was born in 1801 and matriculated into Trinity College, Oxford in 1816, reading for Classics and Mathematics. It was at this point that he began to be acquainted with the Church Fathers. In 1822, he was elected as a fellow of Oriel College, where he took residence and taught for twenty years. It was here that he led the Oxford Movement with Edward Pusey and John Keble, who were also fellows of the College. 

During his time at Oriel, Newman studied the Church Fathers closely and began to realise the value of tradition, both in interpreting and elucidating the Scriptures. For Newman at this time, the Church of England was one of the three branches of the Church following the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. After an extensive study on the Arian controversy, Newman writes, “should the hand of Satan press us sore, our Athanasius and Basil will be given us in their destined season, to break the bonds of the Oppressor, and let the captives go free”. In other words, Newman had confidence that the Anglican communion would return to a more Catholic direction, the acceptance of tradition and the writings of the Church Fathers being crucial in such an enterprise. 

At this point, Newman was a prophet because he realised that, as the great Hebrew Bible scholar, Hindy Najman would put it, the work of prophecy had not ceased, despite declarations of closure. Despite the canon of Scripture being declared closed, for Newman, doctrine could develop, precisely because the work of inspiration did not necessarily cease with apostolic times, but rather matured. 

At this time, Newman preached at the University Church, on the famous image from the Gospel of Luke: “Mary kept all these things and pondered them in her heart” (2:19) to argue that Mary, as a type for the Church is consistently pondering the meaning of that initial revelation and much like Ezra and the Levites, the Church continues the activity of interpreting, and therefore, perhaps, I might add, the institution of Prophecy.

Yet further, Newman would follow this initial academic spark to its logical conclusion, which for him, was Catholicism. The conscience was a key theme in Newman’s life, such that famously, after having written An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, Newman resolved to become a Catholic.

 Newman is a prophet because he allows for prophecy to be possible and accessible, as the divinity is directly accessible. In his intellectual thought, he termed the conscience the Aboriginal Vicar of Christ, perhaps following St Paul’s notion of following the law of God inscribed within our hearts. However, this notion of conscience was not a mere intellectual exercise for Newman, but a fundamental aspect for his own life, which is why despite the manifold sacrifices he had to make because of the anti-Catholic sentiment present at the time, he followed his conscience to its logical conclusion.

However, for the Council of Christians and Jews, a more relevant aspect of Newman’s life might lay in his influence upon the Second Vatican Council, as Newman’s thought has been instrumental in fostering interfaith and ecumenical dialogue. At one level, the emphasis on conscience was taken directly from Bishop Butler, from the Anglican tradition – and the many treasures that Newman brought into the Catholic tradition from the Anglican should never be underplayed. I would argue that Newman also pivotally influenced Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate, the two documents for Catholics most significant for the possibility of interfaith and ecumenical dialogue in a way perhaps unimaginable before Vatican II.

Parts of Nostra Aetate merit extensive quotation, and display how prophetic Newman indeed was:

Men expect from the various religions answers to the unsolved riddles of the human condition, which today, even as in former times, deeply stir the hearts of men: What is man? What is the meaning, the aim of our life? What is moral good, what is sin? Whence suffering and what purpose does it serve? Which is the road to true happiness? What are death, judgment and retribution after death? What, finally, is that ultimate inexpressible mystery which encompasses our existence: whence do we come, and where are we going? (1)

And again:

The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself. (4)

Newman precedes all of this in a special way because the notion of the conscience is the reason that the Church can declare this. Newman, when read faithfully, is the greatest advocate of interfaith and ecumenical dialogue possible in his generation. He cannot say what is untrue for the Catholic Church or for the wider notion of Christian orthodoxy: the Church can hardly make everyone happy as it were through following the trends of the time – but Newman shows a way for meaningful interfaith dialogue because the conscience is the aboriginal vicar of Christ.

This advent, Newman’s legacy should shine as brightly as ever. His cry in the wilderness was met by the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council – and through dialogue with other traditions in a respectful way that does not merely diminish or belittle differences, but acknowledges them and even discusses them – we can remember Newman the prophet this Advent. We must, like Newman, allow our conscience to guide our will – and refuse the temptation of lawyers to twist the inner, primaeval call of the conscience. Perhaps it is time to recover this beautiful interior call: to contemplate in silence to listen to this primeval call, and God’s cry deep within our souls, exhorting us to be prophets in our age.

Sea Yun Pius Joung is a CCJ Student Leader at the University of Oxford where he is the Christian Chair of the Interfaith Scriptural Reasoning Society and a student at Oriel College.

===



Where Do I Belong? | Sea-Yun Pius Joung | TEDxYouth@TCIS


Where Do I Belong? | Sea-Yun Pius Joung | TEDxYouth@TCIS
1,745 viewsJun 6, 2017

TEDx Talks
36M subscribers

"They've developed their own little rituals – their own way of thinking – and their own accents." Through his experience of having lived in multiple countries, Mr. Sea-Yun Pius Joung relays the importance of our journey in our life.

Having spent most of his life abroad, from Australia, through to Norway, Sea-Yun has been able to learn several life tools. The first is the ability to adapt to a given culture. At the most fundamental level, Sea-Yun has learned how different cultures have different histories (history being derived from “historia”, being also the root word of “history”). The shared memory of the ups and downs of history seems to be what defines a country and its culture. So, you ask, which culture he is from? Well, he loves to eat Kimchi at his meals, but he also enjoys watching AFL (Aussie Rules Footy), while he also loves to admire the beautiful Nidaros Cathedral.

This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at https://www.ted.com/tedx
==


MATHS AND MORALITY - by The Oxford Scientist - Aditya Ghosh and Sea-Yun Pius Joung explore an unlikely source for ethical guidance.

MATHS AND MORALITY - Issuu

MATHS AND MORALITY
from The Oxford Scientist: Frontiers Of Science (#8)
by The Oxford Scientist

Aditya Ghosh and Sea-Yun Pius Joung explore an unlikely source for ethical guidance.

In Ethics, a central problem is what Nietzsche coined as 
the death of God. ‘God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him’. 

Unlike the triumphalist tone that New Atheists have framed this in, the original formulation was one of fear and angst. It was as though the one source of truth, God, had ceased to exist.

The problem is, ‘In a post-God, secular age, what should a consistent ethical system look like?’. 
It seems impossible to guarantee a natural set of rules from which to hang our system of ethics without an absolute starting point like God. 
It is not readily apparent from reason alone, why we should value human rights to begin with.

Could Mathematics help?


Mathematics may not be everyone’s cup of tea but all of us have mathematical intuitions. We understand what “three” means and what straight lines or parallel lines are. Before the 19th century, mathematics was developed mostly from intuitive understandings like these.

As early as 300 BCE, the Greek mathematician Euclid laid down the foundations of geometry. He provided five “axioms”, which were common notions of space, from which all geometry could be derived. Axioms were considered self-evident statements that seemed too intuitive to be questioned. Try and see if the following axioms make sense:

1. A straight line segment may be drawn from any given point to any other.
2. A straight line may be extended to any finite length.
3. A circle may be described with any given point as its centre and any distance as its radius.
4. All right angles are congruent.
5. Given a line and a point not on it, at most one line parallel to the given line can be drawn through the point.

Geometry, as formulated by Euclid, was held in very high regard among mathematicians. To them, it represented an ideal form of the physical universe. Later, other mathematical concepts like Calculus emerged from it.

The use of axioms suffered a blow in the 19th century when Russian Mathematician, Nikolai Lobachevsky ditched Euclid’s Fifth Axiom and developed “Hyperbolic Geometry”, an equally sound alternative to Euclidean Geometry. As Richard Wells writes, ‘The “disaster” to mathematics was the loss of its long-held conviction that mathematical truths were certain and that through them mankind could know the world solely by the raw power of logic and reason’.

A new school of thought emerged among mathematicians called Formalism: that any mathematical system comprises its own set of “axioms” or rules which have no intrinsic truth value just like rules in chess or ludo. As Alan Weir put it, ‘Mathematics is not a body of propositions representing an abstract sector of reality’. Any statement that can be derived by reasoning with axioms is called a theorem.

This was a paradigm shift in the philosophy of maths. The question had become not one of “intuitive absolute truths” but of “truths in context”. Much like the popular belief in morality, absolute truths, which once underpinned Mathematics have been questioned to the point that the relevant question has become whether the Mathematics is useful in a given context, rather than whether it is “true”.

In the 20th century, Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity proved that space is not Euclidean, contrary to our intuitions. Although we no longer have the comfort or the certainty of absolute truths, the systems we create allow us much more freedom to explore the physical and mathematical world.

The problem of choice

Let’s look at an even more controversial example, the Axiom of Choice. What it essentially says is: suppose you have an infinite number of cricket teams, you can make a new team by choosing one player from each of the original teams, thus you have the power to make an infinite number of choices. It is so innate that it forms the key component of many mathematical proofs.

Assuming the Axiom of Choice, however, leads to paradoxes such as the Banach-Tarski paradox which says that it is possible to cut up a ball into a finite number of pieces and reassemble them into two copies of the original. This paradox would have been enough to put off those relying on intuition to establish mathematical axioms. Even the concept of √2 was dubbed “irrational” by Greeks because it had an infinite sequence of digits after the decimal, without any pattern.

After the transition to Formalism, mathematicians like David Hilbert wanted to axiomatize all of mathematics: to find the perfect axioms to explain everything. However, by 1931, Kurt Gödel showed that an axiomatic formal system cannot prove its own completeness or consistency via his Incompleteness Theorem.

Similarly, the vessels that once carried “ethical axioms” have now been shown gears that seem to run modern, popular morality is the right to liberty balanced by the axiom of reciprocity. But these gears run at their own pace and if we press the analogy too far, they may break. This is perhaps why we emphasise tolerance over moral consistency - because if we press the axioms too hard, we start noticing the cracks in our ethical gears.

In mathematics, the Axiom of Choice gives some “contradictions”, but we keep it regardless, as it forms the bedrock of many essential results. One can put this poetically and say we should value choice in a society despite the apparent paradoxes that might arise from it. One such commonly-cited example is the “Paradox of Tolerance”—that tolerant societies must be intolerant to intolerance. 
Similarly, a free society must restrain absolute freedom to prevent basic liberties from degeneration. 
The key to a sound system, whether Ethical or Mathematical, is to minimise, rather than eliminate contradictions.

Back to Ethics: What have we learnt?

In Ethics, although it may seem we are traying too far from familiar notions of morality and order into primeval chaos, there is no need for alarm. Mathematicians have opted for more rigorous treatment of mathematics, but they haven’t diminished the role of intuition. They are guided by it yet resort to Formalism to make arguments more concrete.

In our secular age, there might be lessons from Mathematics, and perhaps it is time for Ethics to become more rigorous in our everyday lives—to use reason to minimise contradictions. 

But rather than dismissing intuition, we should acknowledge the heritage of traditional morality, and rather than base our intuition on reason, base our reason on intuition. We have to venture into the dark chaotic world of relative truths but keep the flickering lamp of intuition for context. 
For millennia, we confided in absolute truth, but 'as the world changeth, so must the Truth'.
====

Aditya Ghosh and Sea-Yun Pius Joung are both Undergraduates at Oriel College, studying Mathematics and Theology and Religion respectively.

Image: All M.C. Escher works © 2020 The M.C. Escher Company - the Netherlands. All rights reserved. Used by permission. www.mcescher.com