Deuteronomy and the Meaning of `Monotheism' Book

Polkinghorne is that rare figure who has successfully bridged the worlds of Christianity and science. He's an Anglican priest; past president of Queens' College, Cambridge University; and a former professor of mathematical physics. He's most known for his writings on the relationship and compatibility between Christianity and science, and he even won the Templeton Prize in 2002.

I found his book surprisingly easy to read. Given Polkinghorne's mastery of the subjects, he's able to pack a lot of sophisticated theological analysis into this little book (only 125 pages). It's well worth your time to read, discuss, ponder, agree and disagree, and read again.

Polkinghorne's overall thinking seems to agree with other prominent Christian theologians like Peter van Inwagen (another Anglican) and Richard Swinburne (Eastern Orthodox). Without affirming Polkinghorne's arguments, I found his approach to be a coherent worldview that tries to make sense of the biblical, theological, and scientific data. I marveled and enjoyed reading his take on questions such as: "Do miracles happen? Can prayer change anything? Why does evil exist? Why does God allow suffering? Why does God need us to ask him?" (taken from the book's description).

To understand a little of Polkinghorne's views, I'll quote from a book review by Catherine Crouch (a physicist and Christian) entitled "Not Too Simply Christian." She's reviewing Francis Collins's recent book _The Language of God_ with some insightful comments on Polkinghorne's alternative way of thinking:

"Most important, in arguing for theistic evolution, Collins must explain how evolution, which biologists understand to be driven by probabilistic events, is compatible with the Christian understanding of God's sovereignty. (This problem is not unique to evolution: quantum mechanics, which appears to govern all physical processes, including the biochemical reactions that are thought to drive evolution, is fundamentally probabilistic as well.) Collins takes the classical position that as God the Father is outside space and time, events which appear random and unpredictable to humans can actually be foreknown and specified by the Father. Although it is certainly possible that the Creator controls the creation in this fashion, it is not the only way to understand the sovereignty of God in the presence of chance.

Scientist-theologians such as John Polkinghorne, for example, have explained the role of chance in quantum mechanics and evolution as giving freedom to the Creation. Such freedom can be understood as a loving gift, made possible by the Creator's voluntary self-limitation, in a manner analogous to the kenosis of the eternal Son in the Incarnation. The parallels between such an understanding of chance in the natural world and the Incarnation provide a more uniquely Christian as well as'to this scientist at least' more fruitful understanding of the Creation. The critical role played by chance in the natural world is not just a colossal misunderstanding due to our finite human perspective, but actually a sign of the Father's love for the Creation!"

[Collins' approach is the one largely embraced by classical Christian theology going back to thinkers such as Boethius and Augustine and continued on into our time by C.S. Lewis et al. Another variation is William Lane Craig's Molinist (middle knowledge) perspective.:]

I wonder if Polkinghorne's views truly capture the Bible's teaching of how God works all things together for good to those who love Him (Rom 8:28). Or Scriptures like "The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD" (Proverbs 16:33). They would seem to teach some form of determinism. But a form that's not incompatible with human freedom and human responsibility.

I admit that there's room for peaceful disagreement on these issues among thoughtful Christians. Richard Baxter captures my own thinking well when he wrote that we should have "Unity in the essentials; liberty in the nonessentials; but in all things, love."