Volume 49, Number 5 Sep/Oct 2007

Sep/Oct 2007 -1-

NEWSLETTERof the

American Scientific Affiliation &

Canadian Scientific & Christian Affiliation

McGrath Offers “Resonance,” Not ProofThe CiS/ASA conference keynotespeaker was Alister McGrath, profes-sor of historical theology at OxfordUniversity. He cited six “New Fron-tiers in Science and Faith”:

1. The growing interest in “anthropic”phenomena, and their importance forthe science-religion dialogue.The term “anthropic principle” meansthe universe appears to have an innatepropensity to encourage the emergenceof life. McGrath said, “This is not about‘proof,’ but about observation of ‘empir-ical fit’ or ‘resonance’ between theoryand observation”—i.e., “inference to thebest explanation.”

2. The recent emergence of a veryaggressive “scientific atheism.”

Dawkins argues that science proveswith certainty anything worth know-ing. Everything else—especially beliefin God—is just delusion, wishful think-ing, or madness.

Dawkins argues that a “God-meme”makes people believe in God. McGrathdisputed that it exists, but says if itdoes, “Isn’t atheism also the result ofa meme?”

3. The increasing importance of thecognitive science of religion, and itsimplications for the science-religiondialogue.Responding to the charge that religiousconcepts are abstract while scientifictheories are intuitively obvious,McGrath quoted Bas van Fraasen: “Dothe concepts of the Trinity, the soul …and potentiality baffle you? They palebeside the unimaginable otherness ofclosed space-times, event-horizons …and bootstrap models.”

4. Attempts to use the natural sciencesas a dialogue partner in scientifictheology.

5. Increasing interest in retrieving thediscipline of “natural theology.”

William Alstondefines naturaltheology as “theenterprise of pro-viding supportfor religious be-liefs by startingfrom premisesthat neither arenor presupposereligious beliefs.”

McGrath added, “Natural theology isnot to be seen as an independentattempt to ‘prove’ God’s existence, orbypass divine revelation. It is theapproach to nature that arises fromwithin the Christian tradition.”

6. How to encourage a new generationto develop interests in the field ofscience and faith.A copy of his overall presentation (asPowerPoint slides) is available on theASA website: www.asa3.org/ASA/meetings/Edinburgh2007/papers/Edinburgh_McGrath.ppt

ASA/CiS MeetingWeb Links

The CiS/ASA Programme and AbstractBook is available at: www.asa3.org/ASA/

meetings/Edinburgh2007/Edinburgh_paperlinks.html

Audio recordings are available at:www.asa3.org/ASA/meetings/

Edinburgh2007/

Alister McGrath

ASA Joins CiS in Edinburgh for Its Annual Meeting“NEW FRONTIERS IN SCIENCE AND FAITH”

The ASA and its UK counterpart,Christians in Science (CiS), blendedtheir intellectual resources for a 3-dayidea-fest at the University of Edinburgh,Scotland, August 2–5, 2007. Under theoverall theme of “New Frontiers in Sci-ence and Faith,” plenary speakers ex-plored frontiers in (1) Planet Care, (2)Genes and Evolution, (3) Neuroscience,(4) Cosmology, and (5) Bioethics.

Defragmenting Our ThinkingOne speaker noted that computers storefiles in available space, often dividing

a given file into dozens or hundreds offragments, which must be “defrag-mented” frequently to enable the com-puter to work optimally. He used thisto illustrate the need for Christians to“defragment” their thinking, integrat-ing scientific knowledge with Christianfaith, “bringing every thought into con-formity to Christ.”

Speakers included five Fellows of theRoyal Society (FRS), the UK’s Acad-emy of Sciences. In addition to the US,Canada, and the UK, speakers and

attendees came from several countriesof Europe and as far away as NewZealand. Overall attendance was 275,including 154 ASAers.

John Bryant, moderator of the closingsession, summarized: “We’ve covereda spectrum of subjects: From the quan-tum to the mind, from the subatomic tothe galactic, from … an event 13.7 bil-lion years ago until the future.”

In these twelve pages, we present“fragments” of the information andinsights that were shared. –The Editors

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

-2- Sep/Oct 2007

The ExecutiveDirector’s CornerRandall D. Isaac

Electronic communication has becomea cornerstone of networking in today’sworld. ASA is a fellowship of Chris-tians in science, and the internet is apowerful enabler. Yet, face-to-facepersonal interaction remains a neces-sary and vital aspect of fellowship.This year’s meeting at Edinburgh wasa powerful reminder of the value ofdirect communication. This issue is de-voted to a summary of our joint meet-ing with our sister organization in theUK, Christians in Science (CiS).

The conference was titled New Fron-tiers in Science and Faith. The messagewas loud and clear. While many issuesare centuries old and continue to bedebated, there are new and stimulatingquestions arising. Many of these newquestions derive from advances in sci-ence and technology. Gareth Jones, forexample, shared a history of medicalethics issues that arose in the 19th cen-tury that now need to be applied tonew capabilities such as embryo geneticdiagnostic and manipulation techniques.Neuroscience gives us amazing newinsight into the nature of our percep-tion and sensory abilities. Cosmologyallows us to peer even further into theintricacies of our vast universe. Ourrapidly changing environment makesus realize that we have an urgent re-sponsibility to heed God’s commissionto care for our planet.

Most visibly, we are also facing anexplicit and hostile attack from theworld of the “new” atheists. The war-fare model invented in the 19th centuryby Draper, White, et. al., seems to be re-discovered with a vengeance as Daw-kins’ books have emboldened a freshwave of antagonism toward religion.Keynote speaker Alister McGrath hasbeen a front-line warrior in respondingto these attacks. We must all recognizethe threat and rise to join the battle.

Personally, I was thankful that I couldeven physically attend. My doctor gaveme clearance to travel only a few daysbefore the meeting. During the last sixmonths, I experienced a subtle mini-stroke that led to a permanent blindspot in the center of my left eye vision.A series of medical sleuthing identifieda patent foramen ovale (a hole in theseptum in the heart, for those of us whodon’t know the lingo) as the culprit.While repairing that defect on June 27,the doctor unexpectedly discovered amajor blockage of the left anteriordescending artery. I woke from anes-thesia to discover I had a drug-elutingstent as well as the occluder that closedthe hole. I don’t understand all the impli-cations, but I’m told this blockage couldhave been fatal in the next few years.

This was quite a wake-up call forme. I was thrust into an insight intomedical ethics that I never expected.The medical services I could accesshere in the Boston area are simply notavailable in many parts of the world.Yet, until we have better statistics, itisn’t wise to deploy new technologytoo rapidly. I could see from my ownexample that it is extremely difficult toobtain good statistical data on which tobase medical decisions. Many decisionsdepend on the intuition of the attend-ing physician based on his or herknowledge of the most current infor-mation. For those of us not trained inmedicine, this means we have to selectour physician carefully.

What does our Christian faith haveto offer in this complex world of tech-nological advances in medicine? Isthere more than setting a barrier be-yond which we feel we should nottread? Is there more than a generic call

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA ispublished bimonthly for its membership bythe American Scientific Affiliation. Send News-letter information to the Editors: David Fisher,285 Cane Garden Cir., Aurora, IL 60504-2064.E-mail: dfisherasa@comcast.net and MargaretTowne, 8505 Copper Mountain Ave., Las Ve-gas, NV 89129. E-mail: TowneMG@aol.com.Both receive e-mail through asan@asa3.org

Please send Canadian matters to: CSCA,P.O. Box 40086, 75 King St. S., Waterloo,ON, Canada N2J 4V1.

Send address changes and other businessitems to the American Scientific Affiliation,P.O. Box 668, 55 Market St., Ipswich, MA01938-0668. Phone: (978) 356-5656; FAX:(978) 356-4375; E-mail: asa@asa3.org; Website: www.asa3.org

©2007 American Scientific Affiliation (exceptpreviously published material). All rightsreserved.

Editors: David Fisher, Margaret TowneManaging Editor: Lyn Berg

to heal and minister to the sick? Towhom have we entrusted to set theguidelines for our decisions? Legisla-tors? Medical researchers? Pharmaceu-tical companies? There seem to be noeasy answers. What seems clear is thatmore of us as Christians need to be-come involved and study the issues.ASA has a long history of addressingmedical ethics, an area that needs con-tinued focus.

Make your plans now to join us nextyear at George Fox University, New-berg, Oregon, on the first weekend ofAugust for another stimulating time offellowship and sharing.

Welcome, New Members!June–July 2007

Bennett, Luke –Harrison, ARBlack, Victoria M. –Newberg, ORBobeck, Melissa J. –Atlanta, GABobeck, Drew R. –Atlanta, GACollins, Sean M. –Dracut, MAColson, Russell O. –Hawley, MNColvard, Stacy –Durham, NCCooper, George A. –San Antonio, TXEichel, Joseph C. –Augusta, GAHayes, James L. –Huntsville, ALHensley, Kate –Wheaton, ILHorbinski, Craig M. –Pittsburgh, PAJohnson, Ryan –Vancouver, WAJones, Samuel –Zanesville, OHKajorinne, Steven D. –Calgary, AB CanadaKnoll, Paul R. –Berrien Springs, MIKoenigsmark, Paula –Mounds View, MNKoning, Aaron –Grandville, MILewis, Paul –O’Fallon, MOLiebe, Sarah –Milbank, SDLilly, Linda A. –Morgantown, WVLong, David L. –Winston-Salem, NCMeyer, Ken –Circle Pines, MNMorris, Tim –Lookout Mountain, GAMulholland, John C. –Chicago, ILO’Rourke, Christine –Houston, TXPapp, Esther M. –Temecula, CAPope, Darrick –Longview, WAReid, Scott A. –Germantown, WIRice, Frank L. –Delmar, NYRiensha, Rachel –Lansdale, PASalter, Alexandra –Portland, ORSigsbury, Elizabeth –Wheaton, ILSleasman, Michael –Deerfield, ILSteele, Derril L. –Park City, UTSwearingen, Carla B. –Siloam Springs, ARSwitzer, Frank L. –Waynesburg, PAThorne, Curtis A. –Nashville, TNTop, Sara M. –Maurice, IAVan Buskirk, Ronald –Sherman, TXVan Hook, Daniel J. –Framingham, MAVastine, Ben –Bryan, TXWalter, Elizabeth –Missoula, MTWarman III, Lawrence K. –Lothian, MDWarren, Whittney A. –Beaverton, ORWeser, Oscar E. –Del Mar, CAWitte, Matthew –St. Louis, MO

Summaries of Plenary SessionsFive Frontiers in Science and Faith

1. Planet CareChallenge of Global WarmingSir John Houghton, FRS, an emeritusprofessor in atmospheric physics at

the University ofOxford, openedthis session with“Global Warming:The Challenge toScientists andChristians.”

Likening Earth toa spaceship withsix billion passen-gers, he stressed

the need for sustainability, defined as

not cheating on our children, … notpassing on to … any future genera-tion, an Earth that is degradedcompared to the one we inherited,and also sharing common resourceswith our neighbours in the rest ofthe world and caring properly forthe nonhuman creation.

Sir John warned that “business asusual” would result in increased clima-tic extremes, including droughts, and“100-year floods” accelerating to 20-year intervals, resulting in hundreds ofmillions of “environmental refugees.”He urged a change from internationalgreed and covetousness to sharing.

Sir John thinks the necessary actionsare achievable because (1) the scientificcommunity is committed to it, (2) thenecessary technology is available and(3) we have a God-given task of beinggood stewards of creation. He invokedEdmund Burke, who said, “No one madea greater mistake than he who didnothing because he could do so little.”

“Global Warming, Climate Changeand Sustainability,” a 16-page paper bySir John Houghton is available online:www.jri.org.uk/brief/Briefing14_print.pdf

Enjoy, Don’t DestroyCiS President Sir Ghillean Prance, FRS,former director of the Royal BotanicalGardens in Kew, currently is scientificdirector of the Eden Project. Asking“Why should a Christian care about

biodiversity?” he provided a multi-faceted answer.

Two utilitarian reasons are: (1) thatforests have provided 50% of the medi-cines we currently use, and additionalplants may have still-undiscovered cura-tive powers, and (2) if mangrove for-ests had not been decimated byhumans, they would have reduced theseverity of recent tsunamis.

Sir Ghillean believes aesthetic factorsand enjoyment are even more importantthan the utilitarian. “And out of theground the Lord God caused to growevery tree that is pleasing to the sightand good for food” (Gen. 2:9a). Headded, “Creation was given to us toenjoy but not destroy.”

The primary reason to care for cre-ation is Christ’s role in it. John 1:1–3and Col. 1:15–16 point out, respec-tively, “All things were made by/through him” and “by him all thingswere created.”

Sir Ghillean noted, “God’s concernis not just for human beings, but for allof his creation.”

Where in the RainbowDo Christians Fit?“Should Christians Be Green?” RobertWhite, FRS, professor of geophysics atCambridge University and associate di-rector of the Faraday Institute, provideda two-part answer:

1. No, not in the sense of being linkedwith New Age and “tree hugging.”“Christians should not be hung up onsingle issues … The most important is-sue of all is getting back into right rela-tionship with God, of turning aroundfrom our self-centered ways to puttingGod’s sovereign rights as our Creatorfirst.”

2. But yes, “the way we treat the world… God has created will be a reflectionof how we honor and worship him …And God’s very first commandmentwas for humankind to care for theworld on his behalf.”

In his presentation, “The BiblicalBasis of Care for the Environment,”

White continued, “Rather, Christiansshould be multi-coloured.” Green is atthe center of the ROYGBIV rainbow.

Genesis 1 is God’s mission state-

ment. It says three things: (1) God cre-

ated the world; (2) God’s material

creation is good; and (3) God sustains

his creation continually.

White said that if we don’t care for

our world, “we are acting rather like

teenagers who with a wild party have

wrecked a family home that has been

lovingly created for them by their par-

ents.” He warned:

Those who suffer from rapid cli-mate change … will be the poor, themarginalised, those already living onthe edge in places like sub-SaharanAfrica. They will suffer the effectsof increased droughts in someplaces, of floods in others, or in-creased susceptibility to disease andto heat waves … One hundred mil-lion mostly poor people live withinone metre of sea level. It is theywho will lose their homes, and theirlivelihoods, maybe even their lives.

What Is Our Response?Cal DeWitt closed the session with“Our Personal Response.” He used19th-century Scottish-American John

Muir as a rolemodel, pointingout that fromchildhood Muir“was fond of ev-erything … wild.”Wandering in thefields and alongthe seashore, hesoon learned that

the “Kirk universal” transcendedchurch buildings and “temples madewith human hands.” In an 1875 articlein Harper’s, Muir reflected on “thescriptures of the ancient glaciers” that“cover every rock, mountain, and val-ley of the range, written in so plain ahand, they have long been recognizedeven by those who were not seekingfor them.”

In Gen. 2:15, various translations ren-

der the verb “abad” as “work,” “till,”

“dress” and “serve.” DeWitt interprets:

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

Sep/Oct 2007 -3-

Sir John Houghton

Cal DeWitt

We know from experience that gar-dens … serve us—with good food,beauty, … nutrient processing, andseed production.

Yet Genesis addresses our serviceto the garden. What is expected ofAdam, and of us, is returning theservice of the garden with serviceof our own: a reciprocal service—a con-service, a con-servancy, acon-servation.

DeWitt described how ludicrous thealternative would be: “Praising God forcreation while at the same time degrad-ing the marvelous works of God ismuch like praising Rembrandt whiledespising his paintings.”

2. Genes and Evolution

Evolution’s StructureThis session began with Simon Con-way Morris, FRS, asking “Does evolu-tion have a deep structure, and if sowhat are the theological implications?”Conway Morris is professor of evolu-tionary paleobiology at the Universityof Cambridge.

He pointed out that “received wis-dom” among evolutionary biologists isthat the outcomes of the process are ef-fectively indeterminate, subject to onlythe broadest constraints, such as thatstones invariably fall and water is al-ways wet. Outside those limits, thereallegedly is no predictability in evolu-tion, exemplified by Gould’s analogyof playing a tape multiple times andgetting different outcomes. If correct,this would indicate that humans arejust another species, an evolutionaryfluke.

However, recent work on evolution-ary convergence seriously questionsthis view, not only because of the par-allel emergence of very similar cogni-tive landscapes in different groups, butalso because many of the principalbuilding blocks needed for the emer-gence of intelligence evolved billionsof years before the first brain.

Conway Morris explored the possi-bility that evolution has inherent direc-tionalities and outcomes, which mayindicate “a deep structure across whichevolution is compelled to navigate.”

He continued, “If, moreover, sentienceis an inevitability then given our failureto understand consciousness on a natu-ralistic basis … it may transpire thatevolution is merely the Universe’s wayof bringing us to the edge of the natu-ral world and beyond.”

Explaining vs. Explaining AwayNext Jeff Schloss, from WestmontCollege’s Center for Faith, Ethics andLife Sciences, presented “EvolutionaryAccounts of Reli-gion and Altruism:Explaining vs. Ex-plaining Away.”Jeff’s talk had threeparts. First, he as-sessed the startingassumptions ofevolutionary workon religion. Beyond the scientific com-mitment to natural explanations, thereis often a conviction that religious be-liefs can be explained solely in termsof causes, not rationales.

Second, Jeff described three majorevolutionary approaches to religion.Adaptationist accounts see it as contrib-uting to human biological flourishing.Cognitive spandrel theories see religionas a non-adaptive by-product of innatecognitive dispositions. The most publi-cized view is that religion is a patho-genic “meme” or mental virus. RichardDawkins famously claims: “Faith is oneof the world’s great evils, comparableto the smallpox but more difficult toeradicate.”

Third, Jeff commented on implica-tions for religious belief itself. Aspectsof all three approaches—cognitive in-nateness, role in human flourishing,and human uniqueness—are consonantwith (though not demonstrative of) bib-lical perspectives. However, such theo-ries also raise challenges. PhilosopherAlex Rosenberg asserts:

The Darwinian explanation becomesthe Darwinian Nihilist’s “explainingaway” when … our best theory ofwhy people believe P does not re-quire that P is true, then there are nogrounds to believe P is true.

Jeff concluded that while it is impor-tant to affirm the credibility of faith,

the best evidence is not argumentalone, but love. His final slide of theGood Samaritan had the caption, “Bythis will the world know that you aremy disciples—that you have love forone another.”

The Mode of Achieving DesignErnest Lucas presented “InterpretingGenesis 1–3.” With PhDs in chemistryand Oriental studies, he is vice-princi-pal of Bristol Baptist College.

Quoting Calvin’s commentary onGenesis, Lucas pointed out that Moseswas using the language of the ordinaryperson: “Moses wrote in popular stylethings which, without instruction, allordinary persons, endued with wisdomand sense, are able to understand.”

Moses also used the language ofappearances: “Nothing is here treated… but the visible form of the world. Hewho would learn astronomy and otherrecondite arts, let him go elsewhere.”

A quarter century after the publica-tion of Origin of Species, FrederickTemple interpreted:

What is touched by this doctrine [ofevolution] is not the evidence ofdesign but the mode in which thedesign was executed … In the onecase the Creator made the animalsat once such as they now are; in theother case he impressed on certainparticles of matter … such inherentpowers that in the ordinary courseof time living creatures such as thepresent were developed …

In either case, “It is he who hasmade us, and not we ourselves.” Lucasadded, “The vitamins declare the gloryof God, and the cell shows hishandiwork.”

One of God’s purposes in inspiringthese chapters was to present a trueunderstanding of himself in contrast topagan ideas—revealing that he is self-existent, rational, providing nature withlaws inherent to it, and making humansin his image, capable of understandingnatural laws. Another purpose was topresent the nature and purpose ofhuman beings. This includes the factthat humans were created, not to beslaves of the gods, but to have fellow-ship with the true and living God.

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

-4- Sep/Oct 2007

Jeff Schloss

The Really Hard QuestionsConcluding the session was DenisAlexander, editor of Science andChristian Belief and director of theFaraday Institute for Science and Reli-gion, St. Edmund’s College, Cam-bridge. Beginning his lecture entitled“Darwinian Evolution: The Really HardQuestions,” he said that two questionsalmost always dominate the question-and-answer period following a talkwith church or student groups:

1. How does the fact that God repeat-edly states that his created order is“good” correlate with a prolonged evo-lutionary process involving pain, deathand extinction? and

2. How do the evolutionary origins ofanatomically modern humans relate tothe Genesis account of Adam and Eve,especially relating to the Fall?

Acknowledging that he didn’t haveultimate answers to these perennial ques-tions, he hoped merely “to flag up somepositions and pointers which … mightbe helpful for further discussion.”

What is “good”? He thinks usable,effective, “fit for the purpose,” is themost apt definition in the early chap-ters of Genesis.

He differentiated three types of deathin the Bible: physical; spiritual death hereand now; and eternal spiritual death,the second death. He summarized:

Physical death is temporary and notto be feared. Spiritual death, separa-tion from God, is to be put right byrepentance and faith in Christ, lead-ing to the assurance of resurrectionto eternal life. The only death to bereally scared of is the second death,but Christ frees us from that fear aswe put our trust in him.

He described five views of whoAdam and Eve were. He thinks thebiblical evidence favors interpretingthe Fall as a historical event.

3. NeuroscienceDeterminism and Free WillPeter Clarke is associate professor inthe Department of Cell Biology andMorphology at the University ofLausanne, Switzerland. Speaking on“Determinism and Free Will,” Clarke

focused on the question, “If our brainswork mechanistically, then our behav-ior must be predetermined, so how canwe be free?”

Of the three most frequently-citedresponses, he rejected “hard determin-ism,” the view that “the past com-pletely determines the future, includingthat of our brains, so free will is anillusion.” He evaluated the respectivemerits of “compatibilism: determinismis compatible with free will and humanresponsibility” and “libertarianism: wedo have free will, and this is incompat-ible with determinism.” He concludedthat compatibilism is the better inter-pretation, since it comports well withthe monistic view that “man does nothave a soul; he is a soul.”

Brain and Mind“Recent Developments in Brain and

Mind” was the topic of Bill Newsome,professor of neuro-biology at Stan-ford University.He has won sev-eral awards for hisresearch, focusingon the neuralmechanisms un-derlying visualperception.

The central dogma of neuroscienceis that “all behavior and mental life—from our perception of the externalworld to our experience of consciousthought—emerges from, and is inextri-cably linked to, the biology of thebrain.”

Some of the first evidence camefrom studies of brain-damaged patients.More recently, Canadian neurologistWilder Penfield showed that stimula-tion of the brain alone is sufficient togenerate conscious experience. RogerSperry and his colleagues at Caltechsplit the corpus collosum, the structurethat links the brain’s two hemispheres.That procedure severs human con-sciousness—causing each hemisphereto have a completely independent con-scious awareness of what it’s doingand how it’s interacting with the world.The two hemispheres are completelyunaware of each other.

Newsome opined that if science fig-ures out how to understand conscious-ness, “That discovery will transcendthe Nobel Prize; it will be like Newtonor Darwin. The Nobel Prize will justbe a pretty bauble on top of it.”

Cognitive Science and theEvolution of ReligionNancey Murphy,professor ofChristian theologyat Fuller Theolog-ical Seminary anda member of theBoard of Directorsof the Center forTheology and theNatural Sciences, spoke on “CognitiveScience and the Evolution of Reli-gion.” She explored the approach thatattempts to explain the origin of reli-gious beliefs as by-products of cogni-tive modules that evolved to solveadaptive problems of our hunter-gath-erer ancestors. Many advocates of thisapproach hypothesize that, after origi-nation, religious concepts then spreadaccording to epidemiological patterns,like Dawkins’ hypothetical meme.

Although Nancey criticized thesetheories as reductionistic, she statedthat they need to be taken seriously byChristian philosophers and theologians.Murphy endorsed Arthur Peacocke’sconcept of a nonreducible hierarchy ofsciences, with theology at the top, asa model for appropriating the cognitivescience of religion. Historically, shepointed out that Catholic modernisttheologian George Tyrrell had alreadyincorporated similar concepts into histhinking about the origin and develop-ment of religion a century ago. She isconvinced that “Religion is a humanphenomenon, while Christianity issomething else entirely.”

4. CosmologySpace, Time and EternitySir John Polkinghorne, FRS, lecturedon “Space, Time and Eternity.” He wasformerly professor of mathematicalphysics at the University of Cambridge,before becoming an Anglican priest in1982. He received the Templeton Prizein 2002.

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

Sep/Oct 2007 -5-

Nancey Murphy

Bill Newsome

Sir John said, “Fundamental physicshas become extraordinarily speculativein the last thirty years,” having previ-ously been primarily driven by experi-ment. For example, regarding thepossibility of multiple universes, hesaid that cosmologists have speculatedabout our universe being “one particu-lar specimen of an immense portfolioof different universes, a vast multiversein which there are all sorts of differentuniverses—different sizes, differentlaws of nature, different strengths offorces, and so on and so on.” He calledit “an idea of quite incredible onto-logical prodigality” that would makeWilliam of Ockham turn in his grave.He concluded that the concept is adodge devised to avoid theism.

A recurring theme throughout hispresentation was that physics con-strains metaphysics, but it does notdetermine it. He stressed that one cantake science absolutely seriously with-out believing the universe is closed andmechanistic.

Undoing EinsteinNewly elected as an ASA Fellow thisyear, Joan Centrella spoke on “BinaryBlack Holes and Gravitational Waves:Opening New Win-dows into the Uni-verse.” As Chief ofthe GravitationalAstrophysics Lab-oratory at NASA’sGoddard SpaceFlight Center, shemade clear herappearance wasn’tan official NASA presentation but herpersonal thoughts and reflections.

When galaxies merge, they may pro-duce massive black hole binaries.These binaries generate potentiallydetectable gravitational waves. Herteam would be able to compare themwith general relativistic predictions anddo a strong test of General Relativity.She explained,

Einstein put space and time togetherin the most beautiful way. If you’regoing to solve these equationsnumerically on the computer, youhave to unfortunately deconstructthat. You take space and time and

split it into space-like slices andcurves of time that thread throughthose slices. You start out withbinary on one of those slices, andthen you evolve in a large computercode accurately.

Such a complex computation repeat-edly crashed computer codes. Aftermany attempts at rewriting the equa-tions, they found the usual equationscontained parasitic modes, causing thecomputer to give right answers pluswrong answers. Joan’s group and theBrownsville, Texas, group simulta-neously discovered ways to solve the“unsolvable” problem.

Embedded in her talk was a candidaccount of her journey away from faithand back to a close relationship withthe Lord. Her struggles were less withissues of science and Christian faiththan with various conflicts within thechurch, such as the role of women. Sheexpressed a love and passion for Godas well as for her scientific career.

5. BioethicsEmerging Technologies andHuman DignityNigel Cameron reminded the audiencethey were “just down the road fromDollyland,” where Dolly the sheep hadbeen cloned. As Director of the Centeron Nanotechnology and Society at theIllinois Institute of Technology andChair of the London-based Centre forBioethics and Public Policy, Cameronspoke on “Emerging Technologies andHuman Dignity.” He said that for ageneration, questions of ethics andtechnology have largely centered onbiological issues such as genetics,cloning, and use or abuse of embryos.Yet the human future will be uplifted ordegraded by the emerging technologiesof nanotechnology, biotechnology, in-formation technology and cognitivescience.

Cameron believes current controver-sies about stem cells and cloning are“just pinpricks in comparison with thekind of assault which we will facewithin our societies when these emerg-ing technologies begin to come onstream and have commercial and pol-icy applications.”

He devoted much of his lecture toTranshumanism, a movement that ad-vocates augmenting human abilities byusing revolutionary new technologies.Transhumanists, including UnabomberTed Kaczynski, have made considerableprogress in propagating their funda-mental assumptions in policy contexts.

The US controls three-quarters of theglobal research and development inmost of these technologies. Cameron ispresently looking to set up the Centerfor Policy on Emerging Technologiesin Washington, DC, and to have aglobal network attached to it with atrans-Atlantic dialogue and some com-ponents in Asia.

Designers of the FutureGareth Jones, professor of anatomyand structural biology at the Universityof Otago, New Zealand, spoke next onthe theme “Designers of the Future.”

Many reports in biomedical sciencerefer to “designer babies” and pros-pects for medically enhanced humanbeings. One gets the impression thatbefore long there will be people whohave been designed with specific char-acteristics, or who will live until someunimaginable age. Topics once onlytreated in science fiction are now partof serious scientific and philosophicaldiscussion. On balance, Jones stated

The design and enhancement thatare integral to actual medical en-deavors are far more restricted intheir capabilities and are, I wouldargue, implicit within the Christianvision of human responsibility andhuman community.

In the 19th century, the average lifespan was 30–31 years. It has been in-creased by a combination of modifyingthe environment (e.g., by improvinghygiene and sanitation) and by modify-ing the individual (e.g., by vaccinationand immunization). Yet the benefits havebeen unevenly distributed throughoutthe world. There are currently 1.8 mil-lion deaths per year due to diarrhealdisease. The average life span is 78.7years in the UK, compared to 32.2 yearsin Swaziland. Much of our effort canadvantageously be directed to “design-ing the present.”

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

-6- Sep/Oct 2007

Joan Centrella

He reminded us of crucial juxtaposi-tions: “our elevated stature alongsideour mortality, our authority over thecreation alongside our own need to besubject to a higher authority, the wayin which we are cared for by God overagainst the care and control we are toexercise over the creation and others inthe human community.”

Biotech CropsJoe Perry has worked for many yearsin pioneering agricultural biotechnologyas a quantitative ecologist in the plantand ecology division of RothamstedResearch. He entitled his talk “BiotechCrops: Where Are the Frontiers?”

He evaluated various risks involvedin genetic modification (GM) of crops:food safety, effects of gene flow, envi-ronmental harm, and socio-economicissues. Perry reported that many resultshave been good. For example, plantshave been modified to be insect-resis-tant, reducing or eliminating the needfor pesticides, thereby producing an80% reduction in human deaths causedby pesticides. But the average GM riskassessment is a 2000-page document,and the European Union has approvedno genetically modified crop, due topolitical considerations. Even PrinceCharles has commented that our guid-ing principle of a duty of stewardshipfor the earth “has become smotheredby … scientific rationalism. If literallynothing is held sacred anymore …what is there to prevent us treating ourworld as some ‘great laboratory of life’with potentially disastrous long termconsequences?”

Perry concluded: (1) there appears noexplicit biblical restriction on the man-ufacture of GM crops; (2) the growingof GM crops does not have conse-quences that must of necessity be out-side God’s will; and (3) the manufactureof GM crops is not immediatelydebarred as an unwarranted usurping ofGod’s function as Creator of life.

He added that the use of wheat inethanol plants is “crazy.” Perry advisedlooking elsewhere than conventionalagriculture, and suggested other plantsthat would be more appropriate for eth-anol production.

Summaries of Parallel SessionsAppropriate TechnologyASA is not only committed to intellec-tual discussion but to using science andtechnology for the good of humanityand the whole world. Three well-attended parallel sessions addressedappropriate technologies. The first ses-sion addressed “Water, Energy, andBridges.”

Ken Touryan spoke of his firsthandexperience in managing projects forwater purification in Middle Easterncountries. He described the growingcrisis of limited fresh water availability,with 26 countries considered “water-scarce,” a number that may double inthe next few decades. Technologiesthat provide fresh water in conflict-tornareas can meet critical needs andenhance reconciliation among tradi-tional adversaries.

“Bioenergy: A Fuel for All Seasons”was presented by Paul M. Means ofPuyallup, WA, and Noelle MeansAllison of Muncie, IN. They main-tained that as Christians we are calledto be stewards of God’s creation andmust be active in reducing energyusage and in finding new, nonfossil,renewable sources of energy. Theyconcentrated on bioenergy (sometimestermed biomass energy) from sourcessuch as wood, corn, sugarcane, rape-seed, switchgrass and sorghum. It’s atransportable, storable and renewablefuel, and its generation promotes jobsfor a wide distribution of people, espe-cially in rural areas.

“Building Bridges to a Better Future:Bridging the Gap—Africa” was thesubject of William Jordan of Waco,TX. We take bridges for granted, butin sub-Saharan Africa there is a needfor them. Pedestrian footbridges canovercome the dangers posed by riversand ravines that threaten safety andlimit people’s access to education andhealthcare. Engineers at Baylor Uni-versity have partnered with Bridgingthe Gap Africa to design pedestriansuspension bridges.

The second session explored ways

of feeding the poor. David Unander, abiologist at Eastern University, showed

how a knowledge of pre-industrialagricultural methods can be valuable toimproving agricultural methods in de-veloping countries. Creative ideas, bothold and new, need to be spread glob-ally to effectively address the geograph-ical demand for food.

John Hodges, from Austria, spoke ofthe need for “bottom-up” technicalknow-how rather than “top-downmagic bullets” in order to empower thepoor to grow their own food. The bib-lical model indicates that we should beusing science to help the poor use theirproximal bio-resources to obtain foodand better quality of life.

Robert Sluka, of the MillenniumRelief & Development Services, exam-ined the effectiveness of tsunami reliefand the need for conserving marineresources. He described how anthropo-genic factors had greatly altered coastalregions and the availability of marineresources. His own work in tsunami-relief in India and in marine conserva-tion in the Caribbean Sea and theIndian Ocean showed the importanceof understanding the basic science andtechnology of marine life. That under-standing is fundamental to deployingtechnology in ensuring sustainability.

Despite being held on a late Saturdayafternoon (5–6:30 pm), over 40 peopleattended the third session. That’s areminder that applied engineering andscientific projects that have socio-eco-nomic impact in the developing world,have finally come of age at the ASAand are attracting many members.

All three papers had to do withengaging faculty and engineering stu-

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

Sep/Oct 2007 -7-

Most of the parallel sessions were held in theopulent rooms of St. Leonard’s Hall (1870s).

dents in appropriate technologies thatcan have great potential in improvingthe quality of life in developing coun-

tries. David Vader covered the activi-ties of faculty and staff from MessiahCollege empowering the poor in Cen-tral Africa, in partnership with otherorganizations such as World Vision.William Oakes covered the same typeof activity in a secular setting, PurdueUniversity. Its emphasis is a locallybased long-term service program called

EPIC. Walter Bradley talked about anew center at Baylor University toaddress the needs of the poor in devel-oping countries. One ongoing projectfocuses on the use of coconuts as asustainable multipurpose source forfood, energy, fibers, etc.; another onthe use of Styrofoam blocks for lowcost, modular construction of residen-tial dwellings.� Ken Touryan

Bioethics IThe underlying theme of this sessionwas cognitive science rather than bio-ethics as the title implied. All threepapers sought to explore the relation-ship between the image of God foundin humans and the biological neuralsubstrate of our cognitive mechanisms.

Neuroscientist Mark Schelhamer ex-plained that we have been designed sothat the choices we make and the envi-ronments to which we expose ourselvescause continual physical changes in ourbrains. The extent of this neural plas-ticity means in essence that we areco-creators of our own selves in an on-going dynamic process, and this maybe one way in which we reflect divinecreativity.

Psychologist David Booth argued forthe interaction of genes, physical envi-ronment, family, and other social fac-tors in shaping who we become. Hisexegesis of Genesis 1 stressed oursocial relationships and responsibilitieswithin the family. Human sociality dif-fers from other creatures in that sharedintentionality is unique to humans. De-veloped during mother/infant interac-tion, this capacity makes human socialrelations possible.

Neurologist William Cheshire showeda slide purporting to be his own brain

on jet lag. This was quite believable asmost ASAers were acutely aware of ourcognitive impairment on jet lag. Numer-ous brain imaging studies that Billbrought to our attention, show thatmany areas of the brain are used duringmoral decision-making, and these nec-essarily involve both emotion and rea-son. Because emotion and reason areboth necessary to solve moral dilem-mas, Bill could echo 1 Cor. 12:21 withthe affirmation “The parietal lobe can-not say to the cingulate gyrus, ‘I have noneed of you.’”� Judith Toronchuk

Bioethics IIKing’s College, London, psychiatristAlun Morinan presented “EngineeringBehaviour through Drugs and Geno-mics.” Prozac is one example of “life-style drugs,” used for nonclinical con-ditions or problems that would be moresuitably addressed by lifestyle change;e.g., taking lovastatin to lower bloodcholesterol rather than adjusting diet.

Morinan asked: (1) Should individu-als who are less intelligent, less happyor more introverted accept their psy-chological make-up, or should we cor-rect genetic and social injustices witha drug or DNA manipulation? (2) Willtheir widespread use lead to homogeni-zation of human traits, or because it islikely to be affordable only by the rich,lead to even greater societal polarization?(3) What implications does this have forbeing created in the image of God?

Dennis Sullivan of Cedarville (OH)College addressed “Embryonic StemCells from Non-Destructive Sources:A Way Out of the Ethical Quagmire?”He suggested three possible ways toproduce pluripotent stem cells withoutdestroying human embryos. Sullivan’spresentation focused on the ethical prosand cons of each. If the scientific com-munity is to proceed in these conten-tious areas of research, then it shouldbe with the widest possible ethicalconsensus.

In “Morality, Disgust and EmotionalSystems,” Trinity Western prof. Judy

Toronchuk discussed the role of dis-gust in moral behavior. In lower verte-brates, disgust is a protective mecha-nism to prevent contact with or inges-tion of disease-producing material.

Apparently evolution by itself cannotunderlie the development of genuinemorality, entailing the power to labelvarious practices “good” or “evil” in aculturally independent way, but it doesprovide an important aspect of itsdevelopment.

Creation, Fall, and SabbathThe focus in this session was on inter-pretation of biblical material and rela-tionships between their theology andscientific knowledge.

A traditional western view aboutearly Genesis saw an initially perfectcreation followed by a ruinous fall. In“Biblical Goodness and the PerfectionMyth: The Importance of the GenesisNarrative in Light of Scientific andPhilosophical Perspectives,” Craig Boydcalled this a “myth in the commonsense of [the] term” which is “detri-mental” to our understanding of cre-ation. He held that the perfection ideaoriginated with Augustine and tracedits historical influence. Boyd arguedfor the goodness but not perfection ofcreation and suggested that this helps usto understand why human care for cre-ation is needed. In addition, it changesthe terms of the perennial problem ofevil and is important in meeting atheistchallenges to Christianity.

Dennis Lamoureux’s “The Fall andNatural Evil: Revisiting the Hermeneu-tics and Historicity of Genesis 3,” chal-lenged the second feature of the tradi-tion, the cosmic fall. Dramatizing histalk with a cast of a saber-toothedtiger’s “saber,” he pointed out that pre-dation and natural evil were in theworld long before humanity appeared.Thus the interpretation that Paul gaveto Genesis 3 cannot be understood asbeing based on actual historical events.

Furthermore, attempts to understandPaul’s arguments as referring to “spiri-tual death” do not respect the intentionof biblical authors. In inspiring the bib-lical texts, the Holy Spirit operatedwithin the framework of an ancientmindset. Lamoureux argued that if werecognize this, we can see how theGenesis texts tell of an “ontologically‘very good’” creation which is at thesame time “phenomenologically ‘sub-

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

-8- Sep/Oct 2007

jected to frustration, groaning andbonded to decay.’”

Moving from specific biblical textsto the interaction of systematic theol-ogy with science, David Watts spokeabout “Absolute and Mediate ‘DivineCreation’ in Cosmological Discussion.”He argued that it is vital to distinguishbetween “absolute creation,” creatio exnihilo, and “mediate creation” which is“divine agency transforming pre-exist-ing matter/energy.” Since the formertakes place from beyond the universe,it cannot be encompassed by scientifictheories. Cosmological theories or thoseof biological evolution may involvecreation in the mediate sense, but itshould be understood that “absolutecreation underpins all existence.”

Finally Hedrick Edwards dealt witha sometimes neglected aspect of cre-ation in “Biblical Sabbath—OriginalParadigm of Bio-History: A ModelCritique of Humanistic Naturalism.”The Sabbath, he suggested, affirmscreation past by denying that the worldis self-created, creation present by wit-nessing to God’s defense of the world,and creation future as a “harbinger ofhope.” The Sabbath, Edwards argued,relieves us of anxiety and discouragesthe “speculative rationalism” of somescientific theories such as “Darwiniannaturalism.”� George L. Murphy

Darwin, Evolution, and GodThe three papers in this session contin-ued the debate on evolution. JimHofmann of Cal State University,Fullerton, titled his talk “The Law ofHiggledy-Piggledy Revisited: Contin-gency and Supernatural Design,” refer-ring to John Herschel’s initial dismiss-ive reaction in 1859 to Darwin’s ideaof natural selection. Jim went on tofocus on the role of “chance” in naturalprocesses. The perception of the mutu-ally exclusive role of “chance” andsupernatural providence is the basis ofmuch controversy today. Careful con-siderations of the nuances of contin-gency and design help to show thatthese concepts are not contradictory.

Mark Kalthoff of the historydepartment at Hillsdale College, spokeon “Optimistic Evolutionists: The Pro-

gressive Science and Religion of JosephLeConte, Henry Ward Beecher, andLyman Abbott.” These three Christianwriters in the 1880s and 1890s consid-ered reformulating traditional Christiandoctrine in the context of evolution,including the fundamental issues of theproblem of evil and the concept ofdesign. These issues are of vital inter-est today. These debates could benefitfrom the valuable perspectives of thesenineteenth century thinkers.

Two additional papers covered otherareas of considerable interest. Edwin

Yamauchi addressed “Africa, Indiaand Russia: Biblical Misinterpreta-tions.” He cited numerous examples ofmisinterpretations of geographical termsin the Bible which in some cases havehad political consequences. Donald

Petcher of the physics department atCovenant College, spoke on thedemarcation problem of science. Muchof the discussion about whether intelli-gent design is science makes senseonly if there is a widely agreed upondefinition of science. He presentedanother perspective, referred to as“Mere Science,” which can shed lighton these controversies by placing sci-ence in its appropriate role.

Designer Genes? Evolution,Genetics and Intelligent DesignDarwin pondered that if the eye couldnot be explained by natural selection,his theory would be declared false.Two views attempt to explain eye evo-lution: (1) a single origin of eye-form-ing genes with subsequent divergenceto form camera-type and compoundeyes, or (2) multiple origins from manygenes providing a framework that al-lowed convergence on a few basic eyetypes.

Calling his talk, “Evolution: Do theEyes Have It?” Stephen Reinbold ofMetropolitan City College, KansasCity, MO, said many animals haveopsin-coding genes and genes capableof forming rudimentary eyes. Genesthat don’t ordinarily build eyes couldbe recruited for that purpose.

Intelligent Design proponents believesuch adaptation hasn’t been demon-strated. Do the “eyes” have it on the

proposition of evolution by natural se-lection? Reinbold concluded, “Surelyon the anatomical level, Darwin hasbeen vindicated, but on the cellularlevel many questions remain and pro-ponents of Intelligent Design can stillbe expected to say nay.”

University of Wisconsin chemistCraig Rusbult agreed that many fea-tures can be interpreted more than oneway. Speaking of “Appropriate Humil-ity about Evolution,” he said, “In sci-ence and theology, our humility shouldbe appropriate—not too little and nottoo much. We can make some claims,but not others, with confidence.”

For example, is the universe’s fine-tuning due to design and/or a multi-verse? Is nature 100% self-assembling,or—if nature cannot have both self-assembly and optimal operation, andGod wants optimal operation—wasmiraculous-appearing divine actionoccasionally required? Currently, wecannot know with confidence.

Does “natural” mean “happeningwithout God”? Although each of us canargue for our favorite view of creation,would it be appropriate to humblyacknowledge that “however God cre-ated, he is worthy of our praise”?Rusbult examines a range of questionsat www.asa3.org/ASA/education/asa2007.htm

Environmental Stewardship:A Robust and DynamicPraxis of Planet CareOur environmental stewardship sessionflowed nicely from the plenary onPlanet Care. It moved forward tofind how, as Spirit-led and biblicallygrounded scientists, we are inspired tobe responsible stewards of God’s cre-ation (Michelle Haynes). We discov-ered that ours must be a robuststewardship applied to all we hold intrust, and also our empowering others,churches, and institutions in their stew-ardship development.

This robust stewardship, motivatedby a Creation Care imperative, movesus with diligence and resolve to safe-guard and restore the dynamic integrityof whole ecosystems. It not only mustbe applied to obvious and immediate

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

Sep/Oct 2007 -9-

parts of our world, but with equal vigorand resolve to whole ecosystems torestore and sustain their capacity torespond to dynamic regional andglobal change (Les Batty). And, as ourstewardship includes our homes, fami-lies, communities, and local environ-ments, it also must be stewardship ofthe entire biosphere; not just the partswe find most convenient or attractive(David Campbell).

As we listened and discussed ourfindings, we discovered the need fora refreshed and renewed dynamicstewardship—a renewed vision of eco-logical restoration and protection, and“a renewed vision of agriculture” (Uko

Zylstra).

In our time, all must be engaged in arobust stewardship of creation—this isthe new frontier of our living outGod’s will.� Cal DeWitt

Religion and the Rise ofModern ScienceLydia Jaeger came from France topresent “The Creation of Matter andthe Modern Sciences.” She pointed outthat the Christian doctrine of creationex nihilo led the Church fathers to re-ject the idea of a demiurge impartingform to pre-existing matter. Belief increation implied that contingency isnot the result of an imperfect formationprocess, but of the free will of the om-nipotent Creator.

Consequences of this changed visionwere (a) the importance of experi-ments, (b) the integration of historicalprocesses, (c) the possibility of exactmathematical science, and (d) as thematerial world is created by God, it isopen to exact scientific enquiry.

Wheaton physics prof. Joe Spradley

picked up the thread in “Christian Rootsof the Scientific Revolution.” Conceptsinherited from ancient Greece—deifi-cation of the heavens, a dichotomy be-tween the heavens and the earth, andlack of empirical emphasis—hinderedscientific progress. Christian contribu-tions include ideas related to inertia,gravity, the physical nature of theheavens, and the importance of empiri-cal evidence—all influencing Galileoand others in establishing the scientific

revolution. An emphasis on Christ’shumanity contributed to a new appreci-ation of the reality and importance ofthe material world.

Newly elected ASA Fellow and UnionUniversity prof. Harry Lee Poe con-cluded the session with “The Reforma-tion and the Rise of Modern Science.”Alfred North Whitehead recognized thatthe Christian worldview contributedgreatly to modern science emergingin the West, but thought Protestantismplayed no significant part. Poe arguedthat the reformers’ rejecting traditionin favor of examining the biblical textwas precisely the method adapted byFrancis Bacon to examine creation, togo to the primary data of the physicalworld.

Science and Religion in theSeventeenth CenturyAustralian Larissa Johnson took afresh look at historical traditions ofnatural theology. Many Christians areskeptical of natural theology as a failedattempt to find God without revelation,leading some to reject Scripture. Takinga different angle, she demonstratedwith examples of John Wilkins andJohn Ray that natural theology wasalso used as an apologetic for doctrinesderived from revelation.

David Tyler of Whitegates Cottagein the UK, discussed the historical con-cept of complementarity in the contextof the two-book model. Francis Bacon,he argued, derived his views fromAquinas where the sacred could bedistinguished from the secular. With-out a complementary perspective, thiscompartmentalization of knowledgemay have led to secularism enteringChristian theology.

Jason Rampelt of the Faraday Insti-tute explored the life of John Wallis.He showed how Wallis was able to me-diate the competing views of Aristotlewith the newest experimental methodsand mechanical views of the world.Wallis’s success in bridging opposingsides in science and theology is amodel for Christians to emulate today.

Theology and Modern ScienceJohn Baldwin discussed LangdonGilkey’s hermeneutical response tothe natural sciences. To encapsulateGilkey’s approach, Baldwin coins theterm “category translation,” which isshorthand for Gilkey’s acceptance ofthe non-historicity of early biblical nar-rative in view of modern science.

Arie Leegwater brought us into theinteresting life of Charles Coulson, a20th-century English chemist andevangelical Christian. Coulson clearlyheld to a unity in his faith, his science,and his life in general.

George Murphy dwelt on the im-portant theme that (in my words) cre-ation and redemption (“the theology ofthe cross”) are all of a piece, a themefrom his recent book, The Cosmos inthe Light of the Cross. As Murphypoints out, this is actually an ancientidea, citing Athanasius’s referral to theWord both in creation and in redemp-tion. Indeed, the saving work of Christis the heart of the Christian message,but it has come under attack recently inthe face of science. In order to under-stand the robustness of the connectionwith creation, we need to understand allthe ancient themes of creation in rela-tion to their redemptive counterparts.� Donald N. Petcher

Poster SessionPoster sessions are growing in popular-ity at ASA meetings, due to the greaterdegree of interaction. A dozen postersat this meeting covered topics frombeauty in science and spirit to a scien-tific study of character development toimplications of human uniqueness andmany others. Abstracts of the postersare published in the program (see boxon p. 1 for web address).

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

-10- Sep/Oct 2007

Visit www.asa3.org to viewthis issue with color

photographs.

ASAer on MissionTed Davis has been invited to teach atwo-week course on “Religion and theRise of Modern Science” in late Octo-ber and early November, at Wuhan Uni-versity in central China. This is part ofan initiative sponsored by the Societyof Christian Philosophers and fundedby the John Templeton Foundation.

Coming EventsSept. 22–23. Intelligent Design/Evolution

Seminar, Grace Bible Church, CanalWinchester, OH. 9:50–3:30 Saturdayand 10–12 Sunday. Speakers: C. S.Lewis Society director Tom Woodwardand Normandy Woodward. Also featur-ing “The Case for a Creator,” a videowith Lee Strobel. Information atwww.gracebiblecw.com orBOBGARBE@aol.com orinfo@apologetics.org.

Oct. 1. “Philosophy and Science: ContemporaryExplorations,” Duke U., Durham, NC.

Oct. 3. ASA Chicago area group, CressCreek, 1215 Royal St. George Dr.,Naperville, IL. Meal & meeting 6:30.Speaker: Ray Brand, reviewingFrancis Collins’ book, The Languageof God, followed by a round-table dis-cussion of Frank Tipler’s provocativenew book, The Physics of Christianity.A light meal will be served at a nominalcharge of $10 (chicken or salad with acash bar). RSVP James Baird atDrjamesdbaird@aol.com.

Oct. 11. “Poison or Cure? Religious Beliefs inthe Modern World,” Ethics & PublicPolicy Center, Georgetown U., Wash-ington, DC, 5:30–7:00. Speakers:Alister McGrath debates ChristopherHitchens over the future of religion.Information and registration atwww.eppc.org/conferences.

Oct. 13. Reasons to Believe, Chicago chap-ter, 2:00–3:30. Speaker: Jim Virkler,topic: Naturalism. Revised locationinformation available fromChicago@reasons.org.

Oct. 31–Nov. 3. Geological Society of Amer-ica meeting in Denver. The Affiliationof Christian Geologists will be having aget together sometime during that time.

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

Sep/Oct 2007 -11-

Congratulations,Long-time ASAers!

Celebrating 45 years of membershipDaniel Andersen

Ronald L. Barndt

C. Henry Bradley

George Giacumakis, Jr.

Kenneth B. Hoover

Martin M. LaBar

John M. Miller

Donald W. Munro

Eduard H. Schludermann

Jack N. Sparks

William H. Venable

C. Richard Terman

Kenneth J. Van Dellen

Merville O. Vincent

Leland H. Williams

In the John McIntyre refectory, breakfast included a choice from all the usual fare,as well as blood pudding, kippers, and traditional or vegetarian haggis.

Some attendees enjoyed the beautiful Scotland weather as they conversed with otherswhile sipping their tea or coffee and eating their biscuits.

ASAers and CiSers enjoy a Ceilidh, Scottish dances and reelsto the music of guitars, fiddle, and drums, led by a kilted master of ceremonies.

On Sunday morning, two talented local musicians accompanied us at a worship serviceled by Paul Wraight. Rev. Colin Sinclair from Palmerston Place Church preached.

Photo AcknowledgmentsWe thank Wikipedia (page 1, McGrath); Paul Carr (page 3, Houghton and page 10,

poster); and Dave Fisher (all of the other photos).

The Newsletter of the ASA and CSCA

American Scientific AffiliationPO Box 668Ipswich, MA 01938-0668

Address Service Requested

NONPROFITORGANIZATIONU.S. POSTAGE

PAIDIpswich, MA

Permit No. 46

In This Issue

ASA Joins CiS in Edinburgh for Its Annual Meeting.......1McGrath Offers “Resonance,” Not Proof..........................1The Executive Director’s Corner ......................................2Welcome, New Members! June–July 2007......................2Summaries of Plenary SessionsFive Frontiers in Science and Faith.................................3

1. Planet Care................................................................ 32. Genes and Evolution .................................................43. Neuroscience .............................................................54. Cosmology ................................................................. 55. Bioethics..................................................................... 6

Summaries of Parallel Sessions.......................................7Poster Session................................................................ 10ASAer on Mission ...........................................................11Coming Events................................................................ 11Congratulations, Long-time ASAers!...............................11A Pastor Provides Perspective.......................................12

A Pastor Provides PerspectiveEdinburgh pastor Colin Sinclair spokeSunday morning on Philippians 1. Not-ing that it was written while Paul wasin prison, he emphasized Paul’s con-structive attitude: “What has happenedto me has really served to advance thegospel.”

Some facets of Paul’s experience arecomparable to our experiences. He hadbeen the victim of a mob riot, … asnake bite and house arrest. Rev. Sin-clair speculated that perhaps the Philip-pians had expected Paul to say, “Myfriends, do you know what it’s like tohave a chain on your wrists the wholetime—having a guard with you everymoment?”

Initiating a Chain ReactionBut if Christ is Lord, it reverses ourthinking. Instead of looking at thechain that held his wrists and saying,“Poor me, I’m chained,” perhaps hesaid, “Poor Roman soldier, he’s chainedto me.” He got what every preacherwants: a captive audience.

The Roman guardwas changed everytwo hours, and Paulhad these guards fortwo years. Do themath, and “evenfor a Presbyterianthat’s quite a con-gregation. Whilehe was in chains,he set off a chainreaction. … Whenall the temptation would be to despairand to self-pity, he continued to wit-ness for Christ. And those who werefree were challenged.”

Rev. Sinclair continued, “I wouldsuspect that in your work and in yourlife … you have chains … that frustrateyou—financial chains, relationshipstrains, personal chains. You think, ‘Ifonly I were free of these, what I woulddo for Christ!’ … And when we startsaying, ‘It’s not fair,’ we’re effectivelysaying, ‘Jesus Christ is not Lord.’ …

We can’t control our circumstances, butwe can control our response to them …to look for the opportunities they pres-ent, rather than add up the liabilities.”

Filling the Blank“What calls us on that journey is whatfundamentally at the end we believe in.… Question one is ‘For me to live is____’ Question two is, ‘What happensto the answer to question one whenyou die?’ For me to live is money; todie is to leave it behind. For me to liveis fame; to die is to be a footnote in anobscure scientific research article thatno one reads …”

“For me, to live is Christ.”

He concluded, “Dealing with the hugeissues of our world today…, ethicalissues, medical issues, scientific issues… don’t forget that Jesus Christ is overall your life. For if he is not, it willtouch and taint every part of your life.… Paul said let Christ be Lord of yourattitudes, and then take your agendaand your ambitions and consecratethem to Christ—for his glory and for aneedy world. Amen.”

Rev. Colin Sinclair