God and Biology, Report of a course at the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion, St Edmund’s College, Cambridge. 14-16 September 2007 A personal approach As a school boy, beginning to struggle with all the basic factual scientific knowledge, I became intrigued by the overarching laws of nature which were being explained to us. I am still in awe of them and the way in which they seem to determine everything about how physics, chemistry and biology work. They are profound but often not so difficult to understand. For example, the Second Law of Thermodynamics states that systems tend to move to chaos unless energy is put into them to restore order. Put this in the context of a boy’s bedroom and the principle is easily understood. I was fascinated by the Periodic Table in chemistry lessons. A Russian chemist named Mendeléeff realized that if the known elements were arranged in order of their atomic weights in rows of 8, then chemically similar elements formed columns which represented groups. Using this principle it was possible to predict how an element, yet undiscovered, would react with others. As often in science his conclusions published in 1869 were a development of the ideas of earlier workers. A few years earlier, perhaps the greatest example in all biological discovery was made by the Austrian Monk, Gregor Mendel. He deduced the Laws of Inheritance by carefully studying the colour and confirmation of sweet pea flowers. These laws are still very much at the forefront today through advances in Molecular Biology. Nearly a century later, the discovery by Watson and Crick in 1953 of the structure of the DNA molecule, caused some to think science was on the brink of understanding life itself. Imagine the large molecule like two ladders twisted around each other as a rope with the rungs arranged in different orders to form a code. DNA which carries the genetic code has recently lead to an explosion into research involving all kinds of manipulation of the hereditary material. We all start life as a single cell whose nuclear DNA contains all the information for our growth, physical development and then decline towards inevitable death. In the laboratory, DNA can be cut, spliced, areas switched on or off, and sections injected into the nucleus of another cell thus altering its internal program or genome. The international human genome project began by Watson in 1990 to map the regions of our entire hereditary make-up was largely completed in 2006. It is hoped that this will make a new era of treatments available. Secular arguments The recent publication by the prominent evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins of his book, ‘the God Delusion’ has argued that science advances through the process of rational thinking in which there is no place for a creator or divine process. But is this true? Are there not other factors operating? I remember a lecture at University College London by Dr Benny Chain, son of Ernst Chain who with Sir Alexander Fleming and Howard Florey discovered penicillin in 1928. He suggested mischievously that modern science was advancing under 3 influences: • Serendipity, the happy finding by chance eg the contaminant mould which led to the discovery of penicillin • The prevailing fashionable areas of research • Research finance directed by the needs of industry Thus much of the advancement of science has a subjective component, influenced by human factors such as bias rather than unsullied objectivity. We are told that we live in a secular, post Christian society and I was interested to hear the counter-arguments to the prevailing media talk of Dawkin’s attack from Oxford on religious belief in general and more specifically ideas growing with Christian fundamentalists in the USA: • Intelligent Design Theory which holds that God actively guided each step in evolution • the Creationists who hold an absolutely literal interpretation of Genesis. He argued that in an age of science these positions were no longer tenable and that all religious belief was an affront to any person of reason in the modern world. Scientists were rationalists struggling in the face of a rising tide of mumbo-jumbo. The Course: God and Biology The speakers for this very full weekend course are worth listing: • Dr Francis Colins (Faith and the Human Genome) • Prof Simon Conway Moris FRS (Is Biological Evolution Inevitable@ & The Cambrian Explosion • Revd Dr Ernest Lucas (Genesis & Evolution) • Prof. Ronald Numbers(Why is Creationism so popular in the US?) • Prof Michael Ruse (Can a Christian be a Darwinian?) • Prof. Jef Schlos (Altruism- Biological & Religious, & Does Evolution Have Theological Interpretations?) There were intensive question and answer sessions after each presentation, all of which are available from the Institute at www.faraday-institute.org. At the end of the Sunday afternoon I had made a number of observations and personal conclusions. The paleo-biologists with their fossil discoveries were rapidly filling in the remaining gaps of the evolutionary story and that this was compatible with Genesis if one accepted the day-representing-a-period interpretation. This is easier to appreciate if one recognises that these events would have necessarily been represented to simple nomadic people in a clear way. Millions of years would have had no meaning for them. It follows that understanding the context in which the books of the Bible were written is essential to their interpretation for us today. Further, this new God saw men as stewards of his creation and not his slaves. Thus Christian scientists are able to see the Creator acting through the laws of nature rather than a process of continual intervention (Intelligent Design). Given these Laws of Nature by the Creator, the physical universe and life forms change and develop along closely related options consistent with these laws. Thus Christianity and Darwinism are not incompatible, and a divine process may operate. Thereby good science and Christian theology share humility and wonderment at the Creation. So, in conclusion most scientists recognize that they will never reach the level of knowing absolutely everything about their subject although their depth of understanding will continue to increase. I am reminded of Bronowski’s brilliant TV series in 1973 ‘The Ascent of Man’ where he warns against the ‘itch for absolute knowledge’ and the political dangers which follow from such arrogance. There will always remain a mystery which defies the limitations of man’s scientific enquiries. Recommended reading The Dawkin’s Delusion, atheist fundamentalism and the denial of the divine. Alister McGrath, Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University. Published by SPCK. This is a clear read of only 78 pages by a person who is a molecular biologist turned theologian.. Peter Koder Feb 2008 |