|
The Beginning of All Things: Science and Religion | 
 enlarge | Author: Hans Kung
Creator: John Bowden
Publisher: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company
Category: Book
List Price: $16.00
Buy New: $9.96
You Save: $6.04 (38%)
New (22) Used (7) from $9.96
Avg. Customer Rating:  10 reviews
Sales Rank: 31088
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 220
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.6
Dimensions (in): 8.8 x 5.9 x 0.7
ISBN: 0802863590
Dewey Decimal Number: 291
EAN: 9780802863591
ASIN: 0802863590
Publication Date: June 6, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand New, Perfect Condition, Please allow 4-14 business days for delivery. 100% Money Back Guarantee, Over 1,000,000 customers served.
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
In an age when faith and science seem constantly to clash, can theologians and scientists come to a meeting of minds? Yes, maintains the intrepid Hans Kueng, as he brilliantly argues here that religion and science are not mutually exclusive but complementary. Focusing on beginnings -- beginnings of time, of the world, of man, of human will -- Kueng deals with an array of scientific precepts and teachings. From a unified field theory to quantum physics to the Big Bang to the theory of relativity -- even superstring and chaos theories -- he examines all of the theories regarding the beginning of the univererse and life (of all kinds) in that universe. Kueng seeks to reconcile theology with the latest scientific insights, holding that "a confrontational model for the relationship between science and theology is out of date, whether put forward by fundamentalist believers and theologians or by rationalistic scientists and philosophers." While accepting evolution as scientists generally describe it, he still maintains a role for God in founding the laws of nature by which life evolved and in facilitating the adventure of creation. Exhibiting little patience for scientists who do not see beyond the limits of their discipline or for believers who try to tell experts how things must have been, Kueng challenges readers to think more deeply about the beginnings in order to facilitate a new beginning in dialogue and understanding.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 5 more reviews...
 Scientists not seeing beyond the limits of their discipline November 5, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
"Now one of Catholicism's leading liberals, theologian Hans Kueng, has come out with a book that accepts evolution as scientists generally describe it but still maintains a role for God... Kueng has little patience either for scientists who do not see beyond the limits of their discipline or for believers who try to tell the experts how things must have been." Tom Heneghan
Common Grounds of Science & Theology:
At no time, for almost fifteen centuries, has the opportunity for genuine theology been greater, since the ground has been cleared in the remarkable way of the old dualist and atomistic modes of thought that have plagued theology for centuries. It is, therefore, up to theologians like hans Kung and Thomas Torrance to develop theology on its own proper ground in this scientific context, because this is the kind of life and culture, and theology that can support the true message of the Gospel to mankind. Being in touch with the advances of natural science, theology comes close to an enlightened conception of the creation as an act of inspired 'Intelligent Design'.
Beginnings of time, Cosmos & Man:
Focusing on beginnings, beginnings of time, of the world, of man, of human will, Kung deals with an array of scientific precepts and teachings. From a unified field theory to quantum physics to the Big Bang to the theory of relativity, even superstring and chaos theories, he examines all of the theories regarding the beginning of the universe and life (of all kinds) in that universe. Kung seeks to reconcile theology with the latest scientific insights, holding that "a confrontational model for the relationship between science and theology is out of date, whether put forward by fundamentalist believers and theologians or by rationalistic scientists and philosophers." While accepting evolution as scientists generally describe it, he still maintains a role for God in founding the laws of nature by which life evolved and in facilitating the adventure of creation.
Kung Theology & Kuhn's Paradigms:
Kuhn's paradigm theory is widely known and used. Its origins are in the history and philosophy of science, but its more recent applications have been in numerous fields including theology. The view that there are multiple realities, viewpoints, or paradigms, has been a dominant one since the demise of empiricism. The paradigms view asserts that theories are comprehensive interpretative frameworks that structure human experience and understanding of self and world. Like a language, each theory is said to provide a framework, incommensurable to others, through which its adherents interpret experience.
"If normal science is rigid and uncritical, then revolutionary science is even more so, although for different reasons. Kuhn describes the debate during crises as being at best "partial" and at "cross purposes," for in a world of incommensurable paradigm contenders persuasion and a subsequent 'gestalt switch' or conversion are the only means of deciding for or against a paradigm candidate ... In adopting Thomas Kuhn's paradigm theory, Hans Kung also engages its wider implications. Yet, these produce some uncomfortable dilemmas for his theology and at times even conflict with his wider thought. ... to identify some of the controversies and explores some of the issues that arise, in particular those associated with the conflict presented between the educational theory advocated by Kuhn and that contained in Kung's wider thinking. The dilemma cannot be easily resolved, and paradigm theory does not offer an appropriate solution. Indeed, it presents some major ironies for Kung that he must somehow resolve." Erich von Dietze
Book Review:
Kung, whose intellect could only be compared to Barth and Hans von Balthasar, never referred to the Anglican master of this book domain, Thomas Torrance, par excellence the dean of the school of scientific Theology. Great Kung has thus missed the one who initiated such genius approach, John Philoponus, seventh century dean of the Alexandrine academy, and the Emperor's arbiter, who dismantled Aristotelian physics, was guide to Galileo and Thomas Aquinas, who studied his philosophical commentaries and used his notes!
Eminent Hans Kueng:
A prolific author, now 78, was out of favor for decades with Roman Curia. The Swiss-born priest, was stripped of his license to teach Catholic theology in 1979 since he challenged the doctrine of papal infallibility. But when Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Kueng's former colleague in Tuebingen University theology faculty in Germany, was elected Pope Benedict XVI the mood changed, even if slightly, due partly to this Kung's Gem.
"I have put my stake on God" November 3, 2008
Hans Kueng's THE BEGINNING OF ALL THINGS is a superb essay on the reasonableness of the concept of God in the face of modern scientific discovery. It was not, apparently, written as a response to any of the seemingly proliferating neo-atheist books that have dominated the market of late, though it would be a smart rejoinder.
Kueng is a brilliant thinker, gifted with the ability not only to absorb but also to explain often exceedingly difficult philosophical, scientific and mathematical concepts. This present book largely focuses on scientific and theological beginnings, running the gamut to include the Big Bang, Genesis, the origin of life, evolution, the emergence of humans, and the existence (or not) of free will. Kueng freely accepts the scientifically and rationally proven, and is open to grappling with scientific hypotheses that attempt to explain other problems or phenomena. A scientifically enlightened man, if also a religious one, he accepts the Big Bang and evolution, and after presenting the opposing views on free will, ultimately rejects as unproven theories that suggest free will is an illusion. He demands, in return, that one look upon the problem of the existence of God from an equally rational stance.
Kueng goes beyond Blaise Pascal's "wager," which stated, essentially, that if one cannot know whether or not God exists one might as well accept God's existence because it can't hurt. Kueng wholly embraces God because God, for Kueng, gives meaning to what's otherwise void and nothingness, to a universe that inexplicably burst into being, expands, gives impetus to life and consciousness and which will then, eventually, either collapse into itself or continue to expand and eventually flicker out. Kueng asserts that he believes in God "not on the basis of a calculation of probability or mathematical logic but out of a rational trust" (p. 205).
With respect to being a Christian, Kueng, a Catholic priest and controversial theologian, notes that he does not believe in the "later legendary elaborations" of the Resurrection, but that "Jesus of Nazareth did not die into nothingness, but into God" (p. 205). (This is a clearer articulation of his views on the Resurrection than what I found in ON BEING A CHRISTIAN, in which his views seemed calculatedly more opaque.) His final hope is that he, too, like Jesus, will "die into the ultimate reality, into God" (p. 205).
Kueng's insistence on holding the light of reason up to every aspect of science and religion will not be a comfort to many Christians. Kueng rejects a literal embracing of those aspects of the Judeo-Christian tradition that appear to defy the physical laws of the universe, e.g., the many miracle stories, which he reads--under the light of literary criticism--as explaining the working of God in the world through people. He also casts aside a *merely* anthropomorphic view of God, explaining that God is *more* than a person--but not less than one, either (pp. 107-108). On the other hand, Kueng does not see God as simply the Unmoved Mover; rather, God both transcends the world, and is immanent is in it (p. 106), God can be addressed (p. 117), and God creates, sustains and works on the world from within (pp. 124, 156).
Those who may have been intimidated by Kueng's tomes, ON BEING A CHRISTIAN and DOES GOD EXIST? should be reassured that, despite the occasionally difficult scientific concept, THE BEGINNING OF ALL THINGS is very accessible and, moreover, comes in at fewer than 210 pages. It is probably the most important book I've read in some time, and I found much to be edified by in it.
Kung attempts to reject the concept of Divine intervention against the laws of nature September 29, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
"The reason of natural science can enter into a discussion with faith. Faith, as Pascal said, has its reasons that reason doesn't know. God is not a category for science, but there is room for faith in divine creation. Let us Not Preach to the Scientists. A theologian should not cast doubt on a scientific consensus, but should see how he can deal with it." Hans Kueng.
Evolution vs intelligent design:
Conservative voices have dominated the theologian's defense of God's active role in evolution and/or creation of the species, in debates over evolution versus intelligent design. Last year, the eminent Hans Kueng, one of the Roman Catholics leading theologian has published a study that tolerates evolution, as scientists would describe it, while still maintaining a role for God, describing God's activity not on the side of intelligent design supporters, as the designer of complex forms of life, but as the founder of the laws of nature by which life evolved, (e.g. beyond Samuel Alexander's 'Space, Time and Deity). Kueng has little patience either for scientists who are myopic beyond the limits of their disciplines, or for theologians who try to tell the scientists how things must have come to be, in elaborating the adventure of creation. He masterfully concludes, "I understand the views of the agnostics and atheists. But I also see the questions that agnosticism can't and doesn't want to answer. I can fully understand those who want to have a basis in faith but think that a fundamentalism that takes the Bible literally does justice neither to the Bible nor to today's people. We can reach what I would call a reasonable middle position. ... These court cases over evolution are counterproductive. They damage religion and don't help at all."
Has God intervened in Crevolution?
An intervention is usually something violent or aggressive, 'though' religion can interpret evolution as creation"
What Kung attempted to reject is the concept of Divine intervention against the laws of nature, whom he has perfected. "I would even go further and say that for science, God is not a category because God by definition is a reality beyond time and space, and therefore does not belong in the world of our scientific experience. But there are questions that science cannot answer. The fundamental question of philosophy, according to Leibnitz, is "why is there anything at all and not simply nothing?" Science can't answer that," articulates Hans Kung in a recent telephone interview.
Eminent Cardinal Schoenborn has entered the evolution debate to counter what the Pope regards as the growing influence of materialist thinking. Kung agrees that materialism is a primitive world view, even if it is presented in a scientific way. But, even though, it's not viable to try to prove religious doctrines to scientists. "It is a gigantic achievement of humanity that, at the end of a process of 13.7 billion years, there are small beings who are the first, as far as we know, who try to understand all this. If I am a believer, science can explain the process of creation in a completely different and magnificent way than the Genesis interpretation that it all happened in six days. And yet the scientist can get a different picture of reality when he admits, "There is more between heaven and earth than is dreamt of in your philosophy," as Shakespeare put it. You can't reduce music just to physics and mathematics, says Kung."
What is man?
That is the big question of the anthropic principle. The latest research shows, as far as we can see, there is no life elsewhere in the universe. We are probably alone. How curious that we are on a completely secondary star of a Milky Way that is one of hundred thousand galaxies!
A religious person can say that creation obviously has a goal. But that is a religious statement. We shouldn't talk of intelligent design. That we have emerged is a product of necessity and chance. Creation is a concept that explains the beginning of things but is also the continuing process of life. So we can interpret evolution as creation, but I do that as a believer, not as a scientist.
Religion classes in Europpean schools are much more sophisticated. Biology classes are also better here. Another thing we don't have in Europe is, as in America, teachers who are afraid to teach these biological facts because some parents could make a big fuss.
The personal image of God:
Kung does not want to get away from it, but rephrasing the question scientifically, he can't ask about God the Father. "In scientific terms, that is absurd. The symbol of the father certainly has a function and when I read the Bible, I have no20problems with that. The fundamental cause of the world is God. But I can also say Our Father.
So when he was asked, Why do you say in your book that man is not the crown of creation? He explained," 'Crown' sounds too much like self-coronation, as if we were the final product. What will we be in a few billion years? It's enough to say we are the preliminary final product."
Kung, Nature & Constants:
Kung prefers to speak about the constants in nature, "Take the speed of light. Why has it been there from the start? You have to ask: where did it come from? How did matter develop and not just stay as gas? Astrophysicists can only go back to just after the Big Bang. I have to go beyond time and space, and there we can say, "I don't know." We should not speak too quickly of God in an anthropomorphic sense.
Matter needs constants in the beginning, confirms Kung, it needs some mass and an initial energy! "Where does it get that from? This initial energy works according to certain cosmic natural constants and they are givens. They were not newly invented or introduced at any time. No biologist would say there is a need of an intervention or organizer so that life emerges from non-life. But what holds it all together and makes it work? Where does it all come from? Why doesn't it all fall apart? Those are the big questions that a scientist can't answer. As soon as one tries to intellectually force scientists to recognize God, one is on the wrong track.
Hans Kung:
A prolific author, and bold thinker who fell out of favor of the Vatican curia for the last four decades. The Swiss-born Roman Catholic theologian, license to teach Catholic theology was revoked in 1979 having challenged the doctrine of papal infallibility. But when Joseph Ratzinger, Kueng's former colleague from the Tuebingen University theology faculty in Germany, was elected Pope Benedict XVI last April, the mood changed. Even though the pope is unmistakably conservative, he invited his rebellious old colleague to a friendly dinner. Among the topics they discussed was Kueng's new book on evolution, "The Beginning of All Things".
 Deeper Reflection September 5, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
As an ex-seminarian, philosophy, science and God were and are a focus of thinking that always enhances an ordinary life. This Hans Kung book is a forthright examination of scientific principles and the meaning of religion written in laymenlike language. It enlightens our basic ideas on those most fundamental questions all of us want answers for. It is simple, without being simplified. In its depth of understanding, it is a joyful read. I have even recommended it to my friend, Mr. Einstein. Hans Kung allows you, guides you to a connection and conversation with yourself and the Other, an immanent and transcendent dialogue.
Good, but... June 9, 2008
12 out of 12 found this review helpful
This was the first Hans Kung book that I have read, and I must say, I am rather impressed with his level of scholarship, clarity of thought, and vast scope of learning. His treatment of the interaction of science and theology was not bad, though I must confess that I did not think he was quite as good at it as Polkinghorne. However, I found that I was very dissapointed with many of the conclusions that Kung reached. In the majority of issues he discusses, he ends up reconsiling science and Christianity by having Christianity give up any claims it has in any area that science touches. Now, I am not advocating a literal six-day creation, or suggesting that we believe that the earth is flat, but I do think he has gone a bit far in denying that miracles happen. Whenever he perceives that Christianity and science can even potentially come into conflict, he always decides that (what he understands to be) science wins.
For example, Scripture claims that Jesus performed miracles. Science tells us (according to Kung) that miracles cannot happen. What should we conclude? Well, according to Kung, we should conclude that the miracles did not happen. You would think that this would effectively undermine Christianity, but Kung tries to defend this position by making the absurd claim that the miracle stories in both the Old and New Testaments were not meant by the authors to be taken literally. It may be that Kung does not take them literally, but it is absolutely absurd to claim that the persons who wrote them, and the persons who originally recieved them, did not think they were to be taken literally. I found his section on miracles (pg. 151ff.) to be absolutely appalling, not because of his denial of miracles (though I do disagree with that), but because he actually tried to claim that this denial was in line with the thinking of the ancient people's who wrote and received the Scriptures. He could at least be honest and face up to the fact that his understanding of the historicity of Scripture is not the same as that of the authors of Scripture.
Further, in his effort to avoid conflict, he banishes Christianity to the sphere of personal preference. He explicitly says that "no religion can dispute with others their way to salvation. Rather it is important in recognition of human freedom, especially the real freedom of faith, for each to respect its own path of faith" (p. 197). Christian teaching is no longer objectively true, but is instead a subjective understanding of the "other," which can neither come into conflict with science and history nor even competing (and logically incompatible) religions. I think his approach to the topic is well summed up in his conclusions about the resurrection, which is central to Christianity. He says that "I do not believe in the later legendary elaborations of the New Testament message of the resurrection but in its original core: that this Jesus of Nazareth did not die into nothingness, but into God" (p. 205).
In short, Kung has a lot of good things to say about the compatibility of science and theism in general. He does a very good job of showing that science has not been, nor can ever be, the cause of the death of God. However, his sections of the relationship of science and Christianity are relatively useless for someone who holds to orthodox Christianity, as he promotes harmony by demolishing the claims of Christianity so that they cannot oppose what he understands to be science. I am emphaticly NOT saying that we should use Scripture as a science textbook, but I think denying both miracles and the historicity of the gospels amounts to denying the truthfulness of anything resembling historical Christianity.
It may seem that I have had little good to say about a book I gave four stars. Let me emphasize that a good portion of this book is actually quite helpful. Those parts have already been written about in the previous reviews here. I simply wished to focus on the parts which previous reviewers have not. This is not a terrible book, as long as you understand what understanding of Christianity Kung is bringing to the table with him. If you disagree (as I do) with his liberal Christianity, then parts of it (the parts which I have mentioned) will be relatively useless and probably aggrivating to you, but there is still a significant amount of good, well thought out work to be had in it.
Overall grade: B.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
