Jeremy Thompson Catholic PhD in Biblical Languages, Programmer, Runner

The whole recent uproar about evolution has gotten me thinking about the subject once again as it has been a while since I’ve thought much about it.  It dawned on me that many Christians would like to learn more about evolutionary theory, even if they don’t accept it.  The only books they may be aware of are apologetic type texts on the topic.  So, I thought I’d give a recommendation and open up the comments section here for others to do so as well.

My favorite book on evolution has to be without question Jonathan Weiner’s The Beak of the Finch.  The reason that I like it so much is that it is in a narrative format (though I think it strays from this a little) and free from a lot of jargon.  So, it’s great for people who may not enjoy reading science texts.  It chronicles a team of scientists and their research in the Galapagos Islands.  It makes for interesting reading regardless of one’s predilections.

Do any of you have other recommendations?

I agree with Darrel Falk here (of course I accept an evolutionary understanding of the origins of human beings, so I guess I would agree).  Kudos to Bruce Waltke for being open and honest.  I particularly like the final assessment (though I’m no longer an evangelical, I was one), also cited in the Inside Higher Ed piece about Waltke’s resignation:

Decades from now, when the Evangelical Church has come to terms with the reality of evolution, we hope she will look back at those who were the pioneers on its journey toward a fuller understanding of the manner by which God has created. I could list other pioneers, a number of whom are good friends and colleagues. Right there alongside them will be Dr. Bruce Waltke who, in the latter phase of an extremely distinguished career, had the courage to tell the Church what it needed to hear. The fact that he did so with a remarkably gentle spirit of love will be a reminder to all that the real battles are won when we simply live the reality of the Gospel. To do this—in the face of adversity—is the ultimate in courage.

How many of us compromise in this type of situation and try to squeeze our beliefs into a confessional statement rationalizing the whole time: “I believe what that statement says, I just use different words.”

Here’s a quote of the day from Paul Tillich from his Theology of Culture:

A God about whose existence or non-existence you can argue is a thing beside others within the universe of existing things.  And the question is quite justified whether such a thing does exist, and the answer is equally justified that it does not exist.  It is regrettable that scientists believe that they have refuted religion when they rightly have shown that there is no evidence whatsoever for the assumption that such a being exists.  Actually, they have not only refuted religion, but they have done it a considerable service.  They have forced it to reconsider and restate the meaning of the tremendous word God….

Related:

Interesting Thought on Faith and Skepticism

Chris Heard on Atheism and the Legitimacy of Change in Religion

James McGrath on Atheism

James has just posted about a show on PBS called the “Human Spark.” It sounds very interesting.  Here is one of James’ comments:

The irony is that young-earth creationists adopt an anti-evolutionary stance for the most part because they feel that evolution threatens human uniqueness and dignity. And yet this show was all about human distinctiveness – but not simply affirming it but also trying to understand when and how we developed some of our unique characteristics.

James has links to the show and to some clips as well.

Posts on Genesis:

Free Bible Experience Audio of the Creation Story

Chris Brady on The Character of God in Genesis 1

Genesis 1.1 and the Importance of Comparing Translations

I picked up a copy of Scientific American this month (though I normally prefer Scientific American Mind).  The cover said “Pills to Make you Smart: What Should you Know about Cognitive Enhancers,” so I couldn’t resist.  The article talks about, among other things, how some would like to make drugs like methylphenidate (Ritalin and Concerta), amphetamines (Adderall), modanfinil (Provigil), and donepezil (Aricept) available to the general public, namely to those whose cognitive function is what one might consider “normal.”  It does a fairly balanced job of listing out pros and cons, but quite frankly this kind of thing scares me.

I don’t think it is going to take legalization for these types of medication to make their way into the general public.  The temptation to take them may become like that to take performance enhancing drugs for athletics.  When scholarships are on the line that are worth a lot of money and play a significant role in a students future, are they going to be able to resist the temptation to take these medications when studying for and taking tests like the GRE?  Would this be considered an unfair advantage over students who did not take the medications? Are students going to be placed between a rock and a hard place of choosing between potential side effects of these drugs and the possibility of someone else performing better on a standardized test and potentially getting a scholarship that could have been theirs?

I highly recommend checking out the article, though you’ll either have to pick up a hard copy or subscribe online.  The articles are not free.  You can check it out HERE.