What do you think?
Rate this book
Creation: From Nothing Until Now
Where do we come from? Where are we going? These are fundamental questions, which the human race has asked itself for centuries.
Presenting a brief and accessible overview of contemporary scientific thought, Creation is an imaginative and poetic exploration of the origins of the universe. WIllem Drees assesses the religious and philosophical impact of scientific theories of evolution and the natural world, and examines the changing relationship between us and our planet.
Presenting a brief and accessible overview of contemporary scientific thought, Creation is an imaginative and poetic exploration of the origins of the universe. WIllem Drees assesses the religious and philosophical impact of scientific theories of evolution and the natural world, and examines the changing relationship between us and our planet.
122 pages, Paperback
First published September 20, 2001
10 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 23, 2024
DREES PRESENTS A "JUSTIFIED CREATION STORY"
Willem Bernard Drees (born 1954) is a Dutch philosopher/theologian who is the editor-in-chief of Zygon, Journal of Religion & Science.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 2002 book, "There is a great story to be told: the development of our world from the very first beginning up to our time, a history `from nothing until now.' Through the sciences we have learned a lot about the natural history of our universe... Hence, we have to take such scientific insights into account when we articulate and explicate our convictions. What does it mean for our view of humans, or human habits and culture, to know that we have come to be what we are via a long evolutionary process?... This book is an expression of `faith in the natural history of the universe,' of confidence in our current view of the natural history of the universe---the history of stars and of life on Earth." (Pg. 1)
He continues, "This book seeks to offer a justified creation story... We will reflect on our place and task in the light of the sciences... the story goes beyond the realm of science; it expresses a spirituality, a way of being in the world... As I see it, the critical attitude of modern culture is a great gift. Thus, the larger part of this book is an explication and justification of this creation story." (Pg. 2)
He observes, "Scientists... do not have to make a choice. They have to live with the insecurity of unanswered questions... Religious people do not have to cut this Gordian know either. They ought to be willing to recognize at our explanatory quest is open ended... Perhaps we will never come to a final explanation. We always work within the limitations of our concepts and ideas and within the limits of our existence. We never see the universe `from outside,' from the perspective of eternity, but always from within. That is also a problem when we speak of God; we are within the universe while we attempt to speak about something more encompassing. Our language about a `beyond' need not be meaningless, but our theology does require agnostic restraint if we are not to fall into an arrogant and unwarranted religious certainty." (Pg. 18-19)
He suggests, "The universe develops itself; it has integrity. Responses to this integrity of reality are different. Some see it as a basis for atheism... [but] The integrity of the universe does not imply... that everything is understood; it is something other than self-sufficiency... God can be thought of as the creator of the first moment... we can and should distance ourselves from the image of God as an engineer who started the whole business... I prefer to think of God as the sustaining Ground of Being who is also the ground of the natural order and its integrity... God sustains our existence, god would be considered as a sense of potentiality, of non-existing, a `Dimension' in and by which all other dimensions exist." (Pg. 25)
He points out, "Dinosaurs may have been very well adapted to their environment, and the evolutionary design may have been flexible enough to accommodate small changes in the course of generations. However, they were not prepared for the impact of a comet and the consequences of that impact for the climate on Earth. Evolution shows no foresight... Neither perfection nor anticipation of changing circumstances is a direct fruit of evolutionary processes... Evolution generates purpose, but does so through a long sequence of chance events." (Pg. 31-32)
He states, "the contingent, accidental nature of our existence does not diminish its value. Rather... the contingency of our existence makes it something special, not easily reproduced. Humans arose in the course of biological evolution. Consciousness, playing with ideas and reflecting upon our own activities, has risen to a level not present on Earth before. That life and consciousness arose in material beings through a long historical process does not diminish their value; rather, such amazing consequences should raise our esteem for the potential of matter... [it] is also a basis for freedom and responsibility, for it affirms the role of small
He asserts, "Let me begin by describing a position I reject, theology as the science of God... A problematic issue is how we acquire such knowledge. On the basis of personal experiences? Miracles? Science? A holy book? Personal experiences do not form, in my opinion, a good basis for knowledge of God. Human experiences do not reach that far... Miracles, extraordinary events, are in my opinion not a good basis for theology as a science. It is, in my opinion, a very good thing for faith if we do not give miracles a place in our view of natural reality... Rather than building upon miracles and personal experiences one might seek a firm basis in a book such as the Bible. But why not the Koran or another ancient text? ... We cannot trust blindly books or people. We always have to face the question, `And why do you consider this wisdom?'" (Pg. 54-55)
He also says, "Religious believers, and especially New Age authors, often seem to prefer marginal science, as if that would be more open to spiritual insights than mainstream science. However, inventing or picking one's own science does not contribute at all to the reflection on religion and human concerns in relation to the really existing sciences. It is dishonest to one's audience." (Pg. 67)
He notes, "Human culture, including human technology, may also be appreciated as taking up the work God entrusted to us to work for the good. Human creativity does not diminish God. On the contrary, the more one develops one's creativity, the more one surpasses current limitations, the more God becomes God." (Pg. 88)
He proposes, "in my view the best way to renew religious language and models is to consider how those images functioned for humans in earlier periods, and to find out as far as possible what the underlying concerns and experiences were... Rather than focusing on the truth claims embodied in metaphors and models, I prefer to give primacy to the relevance these images had in the context of the period." (Pg. 93)
This book will primarily interest those who are concerned with the interaction between religion and spirituality (of the more "progressive" sort) and science.
Willem Bernard Drees (born 1954) is a Dutch philosopher/theologian who is the editor-in-chief of Zygon, Journal of Religion & Science.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 2002 book, "There is a great story to be told: the development of our world from the very first beginning up to our time, a history `from nothing until now.' Through the sciences we have learned a lot about the natural history of our universe... Hence, we have to take such scientific insights into account when we articulate and explicate our convictions. What does it mean for our view of humans, or human habits and culture, to know that we have come to be what we are via a long evolutionary process?... This book is an expression of `faith in the natural history of the universe,' of confidence in our current view of the natural history of the universe---the history of stars and of life on Earth." (Pg. 1)
He continues, "This book seeks to offer a justified creation story... We will reflect on our place and task in the light of the sciences... the story goes beyond the realm of science; it expresses a spirituality, a way of being in the world... As I see it, the critical attitude of modern culture is a great gift. Thus, the larger part of this book is an explication and justification of this creation story." (Pg. 2)
He observes, "Scientists... do not have to make a choice. They have to live with the insecurity of unanswered questions... Religious people do not have to cut this Gordian know either. They ought to be willing to recognize at our explanatory quest is open ended... Perhaps we will never come to a final explanation. We always work within the limitations of our concepts and ideas and within the limits of our existence. We never see the universe `from outside,' from the perspective of eternity, but always from within. That is also a problem when we speak of God; we are within the universe while we attempt to speak about something more encompassing. Our language about a `beyond' need not be meaningless, but our theology does require agnostic restraint if we are not to fall into an arrogant and unwarranted religious certainty." (Pg. 18-19)
He suggests, "The universe develops itself; it has integrity. Responses to this integrity of reality are different. Some see it as a basis for atheism... [but] The integrity of the universe does not imply... that everything is understood; it is something other than self-sufficiency... God can be thought of as the creator of the first moment... we can and should distance ourselves from the image of God as an engineer who started the whole business... I prefer to think of God as the sustaining Ground of Being who is also the ground of the natural order and its integrity... God sustains our existence, god would be considered as a sense of potentiality, of non-existing, a `Dimension' in and by which all other dimensions exist." (Pg. 25)
He points out, "Dinosaurs may have been very well adapted to their environment, and the evolutionary design may have been flexible enough to accommodate small changes in the course of generations. However, they were not prepared for the impact of a comet and the consequences of that impact for the climate on Earth. Evolution shows no foresight... Neither perfection nor anticipation of changing circumstances is a direct fruit of evolutionary processes... Evolution generates purpose, but does so through a long sequence of chance events." (Pg. 31-32)
He states, "the contingent, accidental nature of our existence does not diminish its value. Rather... the contingency of our existence makes it something special, not easily reproduced. Humans arose in the course of biological evolution. Consciousness, playing with ideas and reflecting upon our own activities, has risen to a level not present on Earth before. That life and consciousness arose in material beings through a long historical process does not diminish their value; rather, such amazing consequences should raise our esteem for the potential of matter... [it] is also a basis for freedom and responsibility, for it affirms the role of small
He asserts, "Let me begin by describing a position I reject, theology as the science of God... A problematic issue is how we acquire such knowledge. On the basis of personal experiences? Miracles? Science? A holy book? Personal experiences do not form, in my opinion, a good basis for knowledge of God. Human experiences do not reach that far... Miracles, extraordinary events, are in my opinion not a good basis for theology as a science. It is, in my opinion, a very good thing for faith if we do not give miracles a place in our view of natural reality... Rather than building upon miracles and personal experiences one might seek a firm basis in a book such as the Bible. But why not the Koran or another ancient text? ... We cannot trust blindly books or people. We always have to face the question, `And why do you consider this wisdom?'" (Pg. 54-55)
He also says, "Religious believers, and especially New Age authors, often seem to prefer marginal science, as if that would be more open to spiritual insights than mainstream science. However, inventing or picking one's own science does not contribute at all to the reflection on religion and human concerns in relation to the really existing sciences. It is dishonest to one's audience." (Pg. 67)
He notes, "Human culture, including human technology, may also be appreciated as taking up the work God entrusted to us to work for the good. Human creativity does not diminish God. On the contrary, the more one develops one's creativity, the more one surpasses current limitations, the more God becomes God." (Pg. 88)
He proposes, "in my view the best way to renew religious language and models is to consider how those images functioned for humans in earlier periods, and to find out as far as possible what the underlying concerns and experiences were... Rather than focusing on the truth claims embodied in metaphors and models, I prefer to give primacy to the relevance these images had in the context of the period." (Pg. 93)
This book will primarily interest those who are concerned with the interaction between religion and spirituality (of the more "progressive" sort) and science.
Displaying 1 of 1 review