Quarks, Chaos & Christianity: Questions to Science and Religion

by John C. Polkinghorne

In a crystal clear discussion of science and religion and their logical friendship in the search for truth and understanding, Polkinghorne draws on discoveries made in atomic physics to make credible the claims of Christianity, and helps refine Christian perceptions through the knowledge that the new science brings. He discusses belief in God, chaos, evolution, miracles, and prayer, and gives an answer to the Can a scientist believe?

Genres: Science, Religion, Theology, Christianity, Christian, Philosophy, Physics

102 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1994

About the author

John Charlton Polkinghorne is an English theoretical physicist, theologian, writer and Anglican priest. A prominent and leading voice explaining the relationship between science and religion, he was professor of Mathematical physics at the University of Cambridge from 1968 to 1979, when he resigned his chair to study for the priesthood, becoming an ordained Anglican priest in 1982. He served as the president of Queens' College, Cambridge from 1988 until 1996.

Reviews

[Justas Žukauskas · Rating 5 out of 5]

Trumpa knyga apie religijos, šiuo atveju krikščionybės ir mokslo santykį. Įdomi buvo mintis, jog mokslas galbūt net geriau paaiškina Dievo egzistavimą per fizikinius reiškinius nei, kad religija.

Nors daugybę metų religija ir mokslas yra priešinami, panašu jog kuo toliau žmonija bei technologijos vystosi ir tobulėja, tuo labiau ši priešprieša nyksta ir šios dvi sritys artėja.

[Isabelle Woodcock · Rating 3 out of 5]

A little derivative but a worthwhile read to understand the journey of of ideas this man has had!

[Steve Croft · Rating 5 out of 5]

Awesome book. John Polkinghorne was a theoretical physicist turned Anglican priest. He won awards for his work and was highly respected in both fields. This book is short, but a good taste test of some super interesting science which has sent me down a rabbit hole. It's interesting to me, that the deeper science takes us, the more absurd and the less mechanical it looks, hense the more obvious Gods handywork becomes.

Some of my fav quotes I wrote down:

"The created order looks like a package deal. Exactly the same biochemical processes that enable cells to mutate, making evolution possible, are those that enable cells to become cancerous and generate tumors. You can’t have one without the other. In other words, the possibility of disease is not gratuitous, it’s the necessary cost of life."

"A world in which God perpetually intervened in this magical way would also not be a creation that was allowed freely to be itself. An Oxford theologian, Austin Farrer, once asked himself what was God’s will in the Lisbon earthquake? This terrible disaster took place on All Saints’ Day in 1755. The churches were full and they all collapsed, killing fifty thousand people. It was a most bitter example of natural evil. Farrer’s answer was hard, but true. God’s will was that the elements of the Earth’s crust should behave in accordance with their nature. In other words, they are allowed to be in their own way, just as we are allowed to be in ours.
I have called this insight "the free process defense."

"God didnt make a ready-made world, he did something cleverer. He made a world able to make itself."

'I see the history of the universe, not as the performance of a score, that God wrote in eternity, but as an unfolding improvisation."

"God knows things as they really are. In a world of true becoming, therefore, will God not know them in their be-comingness, that is, in their temporal succession? In other words, if the future is truly open, not just a rearrangement
of the past, will not God have to know the world in time, as it develops? If this is the case, even God does not yet know the unformed future. This is not an imperfection in God, for the future is not yet there to be known. If this is right, then there must be an experience of time within God, in addition to the divine eternal nature."

I was very surprised (in a good way) to discover in this book that John was an open theist. Highly recommend this book to anyone on a Christian science journey of discovery.

[Diana · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was looking for a clear overview of the links between a Creator and Science, that religious scientists have 'uncovered' in their lives and work; this is it.

John Polkinghorne's book is infinitely accessible to those of us who like science explained in concise lay-man terms, with reachable examples and not too much condescension. This is completely readable and as it is barely 98 pages long, divided into chapters that fearlessly tackle both the old chestnut of 'a God of the gaps', to how it is that a scientist can pray or indeed, where a loving Creator God might intervene, (somewhere between letting the whole thing run on it's own, to interrupting at every turn,) the author sets out a clear and usable argument against the question on the book's jacket: 'Is science just fact and religion just opinion?'
As he taught mathematical physics at Cambridge, before becoming an Anglican priest, this man should be heard.

He explains the extraordinary balances of 'coincidence ' that must have happened at every turn: The ideal speed of The Big Bang; which was not so fast that all was diluted before anything important could happen, but not so slow as 'to recollapse before anything interesting happens.' It had to be smooth, but not so smooth that the lucky irregularities that formed the stars, in the heart of whom all the elements of which we are made, were forged either. If a 'resonance' is not present in just the right place, the three helium nuclei needed will not stick together, yet the strong nuclear force that holds nuclei together must not be changed even a little, as you lose the resonance and then you cannot progress on to forming the elements beyond iron, which can only form in an exploding supernovae.... These extraordinarily 'fine tunings', that are requirements for life, happen one after another, after another. Every time, there were so many other outcomes that could have meant no life as we know it.
That is a bad precis of the type of journey he takes us on in every area, but with fabulous imagery so we can follow the train of his argument. I was uplifted, amazed and moved by this book; and I learned a lot.

[Houdini NFO · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is not my first book on the subject of quantum physics and Christianity that I have read, but it is the first book on this subject that I have read by this author. Mr. Polkinghorne is more philosophical in this book than he is trying to answer any questions as to how science and religion can both be true. Perhaps his later books have more of this type of information. This is more a book aimed at explaining to other scientists why he became a Anglican priest, and why he doesn’t see issues with being both.

Where I have difficulty with this book, and so far with him, is that he’s not really looking at the scriptures as being inerrant. In other books that I have read on quantum physics and Christianity, the authors were explaining how both could be true. They did not give up in errancy to find their religion. My concern with Mr. Polkinghorne is that I’m not sure he’s actually found the Christ. He has found religion, but the two are not the same.

If you’re looking to answer the questions that I am, a better book would be: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....

[Josiah Richardson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've only given a handful of books 5 stars and this one got it right from the beginning. Absolutely stunning writing and argumentation from polkinghorne. The scientific information is given in such a way that you don't have to be knowledge of particle physics, quarks, electron spin, or binding energy to see his points.

There's something to be said of a philosophical position that regulates the deity that created all things into a necessarily deistic position. That is, by avoiding the pothole naturalistic Darwinism (which we should), we run into the tree of naturalism itself. Or said theologically, literal six-day creationism still needs a seventh day of rest. If it's a materialistic rest, we are left with deism. If it's a spiritualistic rest, we are left with naturalism. Charting a course between these positions seems to me to be most diligent to the text of scripture and most cognisant of the scientific information we now possess.

[Shu · Rating 4 out of 5]

An enlightening and enjoyable book for the intersection of pop science and lay Christian readers. Its mere 8 chapters belie the fact that it’s a great book for slow digestion and deep contemplation. It took me 4 months to mull over the bits I found unique to the thinking of Rev. Dr. John Polkinghorne. I plan to pick up his last book this Christmas.

“I believe that science and religion are intellectual cousins under the skin. Both are searching for motivated belief. Neither can claim absolutely certain knowledge, for each must base its conclusion on an interplay between interpretation and experience. In consequence, both must be open to the possibility of correction. Neither deals simply with pure fact or with mere opinion. They are both part of the great human endeavor to understand.”

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book attempts to reconcile the relationship between science and religion. Two points I'll include that I found interesting:
-The Bible is like a library, with history, poetry, prophecies, etc. To read Genesis 1 and 2 like a "divinely guaranteed scientific textbook" is a great mistake. Instead, it should be read as saying that the world was created because God willed it to happen, like through the Big Bang and biological evolution.
-A belief Polkinghorne acknowledges is controversial: God didn't lay out all time at the beginning, or else "free choice" would be hard to understand. It would also mean everything that unfolds is just being uncovered or revealed. This is controversial because it would mean that God doesn't know everything that will happen in the future.

[David Bueche · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great overview of the debate between theology and science which highlights a lot of the similarities in the two schools of thought and moves past the binary presentation, (i.e., I'm scientific/I'm religious), so popular in contemporary culture. The writer is a British particle physicist who is also an ordained Anglican Minister. There's a lot of interesting explanations of current theory in physics and a great tour of the major theological thinkers and classic arguments for the existence of God as well. I'd recommend this to a believer, an atheist and an agnostic alike. Great read - good stretch of preconceived, (or simplistically conceived), views of God, Science and the foundations of the universe as we understand it today.

[Jess M · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book presents the friendship of science and Christian theology. The book is designed to argue that a scientist can believe in God. If you are looking for a book to convince a Christian to belive in science this isn't the right book but would provide some helpful parallels between God and science. This book is a complex read that may challenge the depth of your scientific comprehension but push through and the author will get to a point that makes sense. You do not need to know understand science to get the main points but the mid chapter it may go over your head! Polkinghorn admits this whole book is his own opinion but he has some persuasive arguments and great points.

[Josh Long · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent contribution to the dialogue between science and religion. It's easy to think you've read there is everything worth reading in the seemingly exhausted field of science vs religion, but you'd be surprised what unique thoughts mindful individuals have to offer. Polkinghorne has earned his stripes of scientific (and intellectual) authority through and through, and here ties in wonderfully themes of freedom, creativity, and the realistic possibility of a creator in the light of scientific enquiry.

[Bob Collins · Rating 5 out of 5]

A relatively short treatise on science and religion, and how they inter-relate. Polkingham has a somewhat unique (in these days of scientism) background, in that he was a physicist for many years and, after a full career, in the sciences, became an Anglican priest.
Polkingham has thought carefully about the implications of how he views science and religion - both with the objective of discovering truth. The book is well-written and thoughtful in its approach. Highly recommend.

[Corey · Rating 4 out of 5]

A thoughtful and valuable book from someone who has been in both fields of science and religion. He oversimplifies both, but I think that's part of the purpose of this book - to give a simple overview of the issues and how to think about them. A very readable book with some profound thoughts that will challenge both believers and non.

[John Stevenson · Rating 2 out of 5]

the guy claims to be a Christian. But he writes nonstop bs about evolution, as though that proven fake theory that was debunked 150 years ago, is somehow true. This bias changes his views so drastically that he cannot write truth, it's too speckled with lies. I read first chapter, then started second chapter, and the evolution nonsense was too strong.

[Steve · Rating 3 out of 5]

Polkinghorne tries to make the case that science and religion are complementary and not mutually exclusive. He is a physicist who became a clergyman in his later years. Firmly believes in God as the Creator and Manager(?) of the universe. Interesting arguments, many of which went over my head. But, as LaPlace said to Napoleon, "(God?) I have no need of that hypothesis."

[Sorin · Rating 4 out of 5]

H • R18

John Polkinghorne se foloseste de descoperirile fizicii atomice pentru a justifica tezele crestine si contribuie la rafinarea perceptiei crestine prin intermediul cunoasterii aduse de stiinta. El pune in discutie credinta in Dumnezeu, haos, evolutie, miracole si rugaciuni, si ofera un raspuns intrebarii daca oamenii de stiinta pot fi credinciosi.

[Berth · Rating 2 out of 5]

Disappointed in this. Polkinghorne is clearly clever and a decent writer. Though he makes some actual argumentation for his case, it remains superficial and quickly desolves into preachy assertions. I doubt many nontheists will find this challenging.

[Raymond C Odom · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fair Logical Succinct Hope-filled

The balance of personal stories and scientific discussion makes Christ as real as the cosmos. This book was a powerful, brief and easy to understand and for that I am thankful.

[Aleah Litterell-Sa'id · Rating 3 out of 5]

Always love a good tackle on science & religion. Some well put thoughts. I preferred listening to him lecturing on this subject. I found a great talk on YouTube & I would say it was more up to date, engaging, and cohesive. Still, an interesting, quick read.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this in 1995: from a few notes I made at the time, I'm not convinced that Polkinghorne's thoughts on prayer were particularly helpful.

[Choxley0 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thought probably, difficult read in places

[Mark Matzeder · Rating 3 out of 5]

A cogent description by a scientist who became an Anglican priest of how the physical universe has room for a deity. Those convinced will find confirmation, those not won't.

[Courtenay · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is well-written and extremely compelling. However, Polkinghorne loses a lot of credibility with his unsound/inconsistent theology.

[Johnny · Rating 5 out of 5]

I can't say that I have read many books by someone who is both a theoretical physicist and a church leader. I was pleasantly surprised by this book and found his views on science and faith refreshing and honest. I appreciated that he clearly articulated the questions that faith and science are trying to answer while also not pretending the two did not have a profound impact on one another. While I am still trying to fully wrap my head around the concept of information and "data" in physics I found his explanation compelling. The implications for this in creation, as well as the new creation, are profound and I have much to continue thinking about.

[Amber · Rating 4 out of 5]

Religions can have a bad reputation with the scientific community, as the opposite can also be true. Voices such as Richard Dawkins and Pat Buchanan leave people polarized on the topic of deities and universal knowledge. Fortunately, educated women and men such as John Polkinghorne have devoted their efforts to helping find answers to difficult questions regarding science and religion.
The Rev Dr John Polkinghorne dedicated his initial education to mathematics and physics, earning his degrees from Cambridge and continuing on to teach there. After twenty-five years in the field, he took up education again. This time, he became an ordained priest of the Church of England. While serving as a priest, Polkinghorne continued to stay abreast of the scientific community, and went on to write several books on the relationship between science and spirituality. His books have covered a range of specific topics, but he wrote Quarks, Chaos & Christianity to be “an overview that surveyed the whole scene” (9).
Each chapter of Polkinghorne’s book is laid out to answer a basic question that he is often asked during or after giving lectures. His first chapter, “Fact or Opinion?” involves the misconception of science involving strictly fact and religion involving “mere opinion” (12). He is concerned that people do not understand that even in the scientific process, one must infer from the data that is received which involves theoretical interpretation. For a scientist to understand what they are studying they must already know some science and to do that, the scientist must chose to look at the world from a particular point of view. An educated opinion is needed to make decisions in science.
The other side is the idea that religion is blind. Polkinghorne argues religion and science are “intellectual cousins” (22). He writes “neither can claim absolute certain knowledge, for each must base its conclusions on an interplay between interpretation and experience.” For those who argue that science can be tested and religion cannot, Polkinghorne agrees that some science can be tested, but others rely on theory alone such as Cosmology and evolutionary biology. It comes down to science asking the question “How?” and religion asking the question “Why?” (26).
After this introductory chapter on the basics of why the conversation should not be “Science versus Religion,” Polkinghorne writes seven more small chapters answering seven questions on the concept of a deity, creation, the place of humanity, prayer, miracles, the end of time, and – finally – can a person who is invested in science really believe all of things he has just written. After making his conclusion that, yes, a scientist truly can believe with integrity, he gives a list of further readings two pages long for those interested in the conversation of science and religion. Polkinghorne’s chapters are brief. Each question he answers can be its own book or lecture.
The brevity of does not mean it lacks substance. Polkinghorne’s writing style is personable and warm. He writes with personal conviction, being passionate about both the place of science and faith in society. As someone who is interested in science, but has a difficult time comprehending the large equations and industry jargon, I found the writing to manageable and exiling to follow. He explains bubble chambers (14), the Anthropic Principle (43), and the EPR experiment (71) in ways that a humanities focused person such as me can understand enough of the basics for Polkinghorne to make his arguments.
The chapter entitled “How Will it End” came to some resolutions difficult to hold. Polkinghorne attempts to answer the question, “If the new creation is going to be so wonderful, why did God bother with the old?” An excellent question for those who believe, as Polkinghorne does, in a completely new heaven and new earth made of the transformed matter of the universe, much like the transformed body of Christ. He responds that it is not a “second attempt by the Creator to do rather better what God had already done the first time around in the old creation” (113). Instead he reiterates that death is a necessary part of the free-will of creation. The problem with this is that he does believe that the new heaven and the new earth will be eternal, and thus no death. Because nothing will die, one can argue that the Creator could have done that in the first place.
Dialogue between the scientific community and the theological community is crucial during this period of fast-pace globalism. The scientific discovery in Moscow eventually affects the religious views in Brazil while the pastor in Boston can write a critique on a scientific statement made in Germany. Meanwhile, the whole world can watch it all. Both are vital for bringing humanity closer to God and should work together to do so.

[GGiorgio · Rating 3 out of 5]

«Il caso è un segno di libertà, non di cieca insensatezza, di mancanza di uno scopo.»

Un libro scorrevole, fornisce un punto di vista differente rispetto al comune sulla realtà e il modo di vedere la scienza e la religione. A tratti un po' ripetitivo.

[Brett Williams · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good, though Polkinghorne has better

Polkinghorne (an Anglican priest and Oxford physicist) writes a book with remarkable ideas though not without questionable conclusions. He doesn’t view religion as our internal response to an external world, but considers science and religion as intellectual cousins, each providing answers. He goes some distance in showing the malleability of scientific practice – an act of “intellectual daring” when viewing fact and interpretation, experiment and theory as independent, while they are actually mixed up in perspectives we bring to nature. Which is more about scientists as humans than science as flawed. though not the end point as open publication, debate and test are employed. Science is refutable. He also touches upon absurdities proffered by “modern philosophers” who state we invent theories of nature, we do not discover them. As Polkinghorne notes, our theories wouldn’t work if they didn’t represent part of the truth. Nature continues to impose itself as final judge, regardless of fashionable politics.

Given that “unpictureable” electrons provide surprises, Polkinghorne is not surprised to find an unpictureable God to do the same. He accepts the oddness of quantum mechanics like he accepts the oddness of Jesus as simultaneously man and God. We’re not sure how the oddness of say, astrology, with a longer history, many texts and practitioners may fit this view. To Polkinghorne the issue is not fact vs. opinion but interpreting our experience of the way the world really is. He views God as “faithful” to man and nature. The natural gift of a faithful God being reliability of his creation’s operation. Ignoring tribal aspects of the Hebrew God, God is also loving, thus granting independence, which alone by itself would be disarray, so both order and independence in the universe. “Chance is a sign of freedom, not blind purposelessness,” writes Polkinghorne. (A message to, Creationists.) “Shuffling explorations of chance lead to both deterioration and fruitful novelty.”

Does a world with concentration camps look like the creation of a powerful, loving God? With this we meet the “free will defense” – the potential for moral evil is the penalty for the greater good of human freedom. And what about natural disasters like quake fallen churches killing 50000 in 1755 Lisbon, or cancer? Polkinghorne provides the “free process defense” – God faithfully letting nature follow nature’s laws. The same biochemical rules allowing evolution also enables cancer. It’s a package deal. Natural disasters are not gratuitous, but a necessary cost of life. Disregarding what need an all knowing God would have for experiential suffering, Polkinghorne supplies the relieving Christian view - God is not simply a pitying, compassionate spectator, but a fellow participant in the world’s suffering, known through the experience of Jesus.

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book in a day (a bank holiday).

I really enjoyed it. I find quantum physics and spooky mathematics fascinating...but as a layman I appreciate the simple explanations (I'm no physicist and certainly no mathematician).

I felt he defended the intersection of faith and science (from a Christian perspective) very well.

I also appreciated his discussion of 'free process', something I've not come across before. "A world in which God perpetually intervened in this magical way would also not be a creation that he would be allowing freely to be itself" and "I do not believe that God directly wills either the act of a murderer, or the incidence of a cancer. I believe he allows both to happen in a creation to which he has given the gift of being itself...they are the inescapable cost of a creation allowed to be other than God, released from tight divine control, and permitted to be itself."

The only chapter that fell a little short for me was the chapter on miracles, which felt rushed.

But overall it's a book I'd like to read again, a little more slowly so I can digest the ideas.

[Chet Duke · Rating 3 out of 5]

An engaging book. Polkinghorne's reputation is distinct for a reason. I enjoy his perspective.
However, I was discouraged at his chapter on miracles. I was particularly startled by Polkinghorne's suggestion that Jesus' healing power was associated with psychosomatic condition, though to a level more advanced than that of other humans.
Regarding Jesus' healing:

"These events are miracles in the sense of provoking astonishment and gratitude, but not in the sense of being something totally contrary to nature." (Pg 98)

On stilling the sea:
"I believe we are right to take them (the miracles) seriously, but they do not necessarily imply that the curse of nature has been violently interrupted to bring them about." (Pg 99)

I'm hoping that I've simply misread Polkinghorne in this regard. Otherwise, I have to take some of his theological convictions lightly. For this reason, I recommend it with qualification.

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

I learned about this book from a podcast of "Speaking of Faith" in which Krista Tippett interviewed the author, John Polkinghorne. John is doubly qualified to speak on his topic. The first part of his career he was a physicist of enough stature that he won the Templeton Prize. He eventually decided he had accomplished what he wanted to do in physics and left physics to become an Anglican priest.

This book is very short and an easy read. It is a summary rather than a treatise. Polkinghorne summarized many of his views and refers the reader to other sources for more detail.

The first part of the book was much of what I had heard in other places. The latter part of the book, especially when he describes why to believes that God continues to interact with creation, gave me new valuable insights.