What do you think?
Rate this book
Enriching our Vision of Reality: Theology And The Natural Sciences In Dialogue
In this exceptional volume, Alister McGrath writes for scientists with an interest in theology, and Christians and theologians who are aware of the importance of the natural sciences. A scene-setting chapter explores the importance of the human quest for intelligibility. The focus then moves to three leading figures who have stimulated discussion about the relationship between science and theology[LC1] in recent Charles Coulson, an Oxford professor of theoretical chemistry who was also a prominent Methodist lay preacher; Thomas F. Torrance, perhaps the finest British theologian of the twentieth century; and John Polkinghorne, a theoretical physicist, theologian and Anglican priest.
The latter part of the book features six parallel ‘conversations’ between science and theology, which lay the groundwork for the kind of enriched vision of reality the author hopes to encourage. Here, we are inspired to enjoy individual aspects of nature while seeking to interpret them in the light of deeper revelations about our gloriously strange universe.
‘Enriching our Vision of Reality is elegant, erudite, and animated by a constant enthusiasm for its subject. There is everything here – science, theology, philosophy, biography, even some poetry – all enlisted to help us to see the world as it is, both more clearly and with greater delight.’The Revd Dr Andrew Davison, Starbridge Lecturer in Theology and Natural Sciences, University of Cambridge, and Fellow in Theology at Corpus Christi College
The latter part of the book features six parallel ‘conversations’ between science and theology, which lay the groundwork for the kind of enriched vision of reality the author hopes to encourage. Here, we are inspired to enjoy individual aspects of nature while seeking to interpret them in the light of deeper revelations about our gloriously strange universe.
‘Enriching our Vision of Reality is elegant, erudite, and animated by a constant enthusiasm for its subject. There is everything here – science, theology, philosophy, biography, even some poetry – all enlisted to help us to see the world as it is, both more clearly and with greater delight.’The Revd Dr Andrew Davison, Starbridge Lecturer in Theology and Natural Sciences, University of Cambridge, and Fellow in Theology at Corpus Christi College
229 pages, Kindle Edition
Published October 20, 2016
19 people are currently reading
80 people want to read
About the author
Alister E. McGrath
451 books498 followersAlister Edgar McGrath is a Northern Irish theologian, priest, intellectual historian, scientist, and Christian apologist. He currently holds the Andreas Idreos Professorship in Science and Religion in the Faculty of Theology and Religion at the University of Oxford, and is Professor of Divinity at Gresham College. He was previously Professor of Theology, Ministry, and Education at King's College London and Head of the Centre for Theology, Religion and Culture, Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, and was principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, until 2005. He is an Anglican priest and is ordained within the Church of England.
Aside from being a faculty member at Oxford, McGrath has also taught at Cambridge University and is a Teaching Fellow at Regent College. McGrath holds three doctorates from the University of Oxford, a DPhil in Molecular Biophysics, a Doctor of Divinity in Theology and a Doctor of Letters in Intellectual History.
McGrath is noted for his work in historical theology, systematic theology, and the relationship between science and religion, as well as his writings on apologetics. He is also known for his opposition to New Atheism and antireligionism and his advocacy of theological critical realism. Among his best-known books are The Twilight of Atheism, The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine, Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life, and A Scientific Theology. He is also the author of a number of popular textbooks on theology.
Aside from being a faculty member at Oxford, McGrath has also taught at Cambridge University and is a Teaching Fellow at Regent College. McGrath holds three doctorates from the University of Oxford, a DPhil in Molecular Biophysics, a Doctor of Divinity in Theology and a Doctor of Letters in Intellectual History.
McGrath is noted for his work in historical theology, systematic theology, and the relationship between science and religion, as well as his writings on apologetics. He is also known for his opposition to New Atheism and antireligionism and his advocacy of theological critical realism. Among his best-known books are The Twilight of Atheism, The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine, Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life, and A Scientific Theology. He is also the author of a number of popular textbooks on theology.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
August 10, 2024
I really like Alister McGrath. A formidable intellect, Evangelical in stripe but/and nuanced, honest and open. One of the few apologists (the only, probably) I've come across who will admit the weaknesses he sees in his own arguments.
I'm not a big fan of apologetics in general - especially in the sense that it often seems to be based on the premise that it's possible to present an objective intellectual argument or 'proof' so watertight that a person will be compelled to faith. Personally I don't think such an argument exists (and I think McGrath agrees, which is one of the reasons I like him so much - see above).
But also I don't think that it's the intellect that is the decisive factor in coming to faith. It is much more likely to be an emotion or subjective experience, an answer to a felt need - something personal, existential - that is the catalyst for that shift. Not to mention the necessity of some kind of leap of faith - even if, in the moment, that leap is propelled by the strength of the felt 'rightness' of the experience.
One instance that is often held up as an example of an intellectual conversion is C.S. Lewis (by the by, McGrath is a big fan of Lewis). In that mythos, Lewis thinks his way into Christianity. That's all very well. But it's no coincidence that his autobiography is called Surprised by Joy. Further, I would argue that in an intellectual pathway to conversion it is the feeling of intellectual satisfaction, a sort of homecoming, a realisation, a feeling of coherence and discovery, that is the decisive thing. I also think it is no coincidence that Lewis persists in the popular memory as a whimsical storyteller more than as an intellectual (though he certainly was impressive in that latter regard).
Intellectual apologetics, or pathways to faith, are only 'effective' in as much as a person arrives at a subjective personal experience.
Though, that said, I loath apologetic approaches that seek to manipulate people into that space. I'll never forget how sick I felt when I read in The God Who is There that, by his own admission, Francis Schaeffer was prepared to risk the possibility someone might commit suicide due to the way his apologetic approach sought to deliberately bring people into a state of despair, as a precursor to offering them an 'antidote'. Repulsive.
I digress! But all that to say, as far as apologetics go, McGrath is pretty well as sound as they come, I reckon.
His scope is incredible. I suppose the book of his that I was most impacted by was his introduction to Christian theology, which gives space to multiple streams of thought. I also have on my shelf (purchased in Cambridge, actually, over 20 years ago) his anthology of Christian literature. And his Bible commentary. For all that 'humanities' stuff, he began his career by gaining a doctorate in molecular biophysics at Oxford, while also gaining a theology degree.
In this book, those threads of his life thoroughly intertwine: theology and the natural sciences in dialogue. Accessible but with a wealth of footnotes to spark further investigation if the reader is so inspired. It's excellent.
When he gets on to possible conversations between science and theology, his chapter on Theories and Doctrines, and particularly his treatment of the role of the imagination, is absolutely storming.
Good stuff.
So many great quotes, like this one:
"The first great enemy of science is not religion but a dogmatic rationalism, which limits reality to what reason determines to be acceptable. This simply locks us into the very narrow world of what reason is able to prove. And the universe seems to have a rationality that we can investigate, describe and represent – even though it sometimes seems to bear little relation to what human common sense is inclined to believe."
Or this,
"Looking back on my own exploration of my faith, I can see a worrying trend towards an overintellectualization of faith in my own early thinking. Yet as I grew in faith I began to appreciate the imaginative and aesthetic dimensions of Christianity, without losing sight of the importance of its intellectual capaciousness."
Or this, with its salutary message for all 'sides',
"The epistemic dilemma of humanity is such that we cannot prove the things that matter most to us – at best, we can prove shallow truths. It’s not a comfortable situation but we have to get used to it, and not seek refuge in the illusory utopian world of the New Atheism [or Fundamentalism?], which holds that we can prove all our valid core beliefs."
That honesty:
"I don’t regard the beauty or order of the world as proving there is a God. Rather, I see my Christian belief as chiming in with the beauty and order of nature. The theory fits or accommodates our strange world – not perfectly but in an intellectually and aesthetically satisfying way."
I'm not a big fan of apologetics in general - especially in the sense that it often seems to be based on the premise that it's possible to present an objective intellectual argument or 'proof' so watertight that a person will be compelled to faith. Personally I don't think such an argument exists (and I think McGrath agrees, which is one of the reasons I like him so much - see above).
But also I don't think that it's the intellect that is the decisive factor in coming to faith. It is much more likely to be an emotion or subjective experience, an answer to a felt need - something personal, existential - that is the catalyst for that shift. Not to mention the necessity of some kind of leap of faith - even if, in the moment, that leap is propelled by the strength of the felt 'rightness' of the experience.
One instance that is often held up as an example of an intellectual conversion is C.S. Lewis (by the by, McGrath is a big fan of Lewis). In that mythos, Lewis thinks his way into Christianity. That's all very well. But it's no coincidence that his autobiography is called Surprised by Joy. Further, I would argue that in an intellectual pathway to conversion it is the feeling of intellectual satisfaction, a sort of homecoming, a realisation, a feeling of coherence and discovery, that is the decisive thing. I also think it is no coincidence that Lewis persists in the popular memory as a whimsical storyteller more than as an intellectual (though he certainly was impressive in that latter regard).
Intellectual apologetics, or pathways to faith, are only 'effective' in as much as a person arrives at a subjective personal experience.
Though, that said, I loath apologetic approaches that seek to manipulate people into that space. I'll never forget how sick I felt when I read in The God Who is There that, by his own admission, Francis Schaeffer was prepared to risk the possibility someone might commit suicide due to the way his apologetic approach sought to deliberately bring people into a state of despair, as a precursor to offering them an 'antidote'. Repulsive.
I digress! But all that to say, as far as apologetics go, McGrath is pretty well as sound as they come, I reckon.
His scope is incredible. I suppose the book of his that I was most impacted by was his introduction to Christian theology, which gives space to multiple streams of thought. I also have on my shelf (purchased in Cambridge, actually, over 20 years ago) his anthology of Christian literature. And his Bible commentary. For all that 'humanities' stuff, he began his career by gaining a doctorate in molecular biophysics at Oxford, while also gaining a theology degree.
In this book, those threads of his life thoroughly intertwine: theology and the natural sciences in dialogue. Accessible but with a wealth of footnotes to spark further investigation if the reader is so inspired. It's excellent.
When he gets on to possible conversations between science and theology, his chapter on Theories and Doctrines, and particularly his treatment of the role of the imagination, is absolutely storming.
Good stuff.
So many great quotes, like this one:
"The first great enemy of science is not religion but a dogmatic rationalism, which limits reality to what reason determines to be acceptable. This simply locks us into the very narrow world of what reason is able to prove. And the universe seems to have a rationality that we can investigate, describe and represent – even though it sometimes seems to bear little relation to what human common sense is inclined to believe."
Or this,
"Looking back on my own exploration of my faith, I can see a worrying trend towards an overintellectualization of faith in my own early thinking. Yet as I grew in faith I began to appreciate the imaginative and aesthetic dimensions of Christianity, without losing sight of the importance of its intellectual capaciousness."
Or this, with its salutary message for all 'sides',
"The epistemic dilemma of humanity is such that we cannot prove the things that matter most to us – at best, we can prove shallow truths. It’s not a comfortable situation but we have to get used to it, and not seek refuge in the illusory utopian world of the New Atheism [or Fundamentalism?], which holds that we can prove all our valid core beliefs."
That honesty:
"I don’t regard the beauty or order of the world as proving there is a God. Rather, I see my Christian belief as chiming in with the beauty and order of nature. The theory fits or accommodates our strange world – not perfectly but in an intellectually and aesthetically satisfying way."
March 12, 2021
An excellent read on the relationship between science and faith. Rather than being at loggerheads - as some would have us believe - Alister McGrath shows that science and theology rightly combine to enrich our understanding of the world. There is more that needs and deserves to be said than either of these disciplines can say by themselves.
The first half of the book tells the stories of three individuals - Charles Coulson, Thomas Torrance and John Polkinghorne - and examines their contributions to a positive conversation between the pursuits of science and theology. This was interesting but, for me, the main contribution of this volume was where McGrath began to outline six areas where science and theology might be in deeper conversation.
McGrath's thesis is that, whilst distinct and having different foci, science and theology have much more in common than many might think. Both are concerned with putting together big pictures of reality. Both require imagination, especially as they seek to represent complex realities. Both are concerned with finding models that make sense of the data we have, and which further illuminate the world we experience.
Scientists and theologians are frequently tempted to talk over each other: McGrath offers a model not just for mutual respect and dignity, but also opens new pathways for genuine dialogue and conversation which can honour God as Creator and Redeemer.
The first half of the book tells the stories of three individuals - Charles Coulson, Thomas Torrance and John Polkinghorne - and examines their contributions to a positive conversation between the pursuits of science and theology. This was interesting but, for me, the main contribution of this volume was where McGrath began to outline six areas where science and theology might be in deeper conversation.
McGrath's thesis is that, whilst distinct and having different foci, science and theology have much more in common than many might think. Both are concerned with putting together big pictures of reality. Both require imagination, especially as they seek to represent complex realities. Both are concerned with finding models that make sense of the data we have, and which further illuminate the world we experience.
Scientists and theologians are frequently tempted to talk over each other: McGrath offers a model not just for mutual respect and dignity, but also opens new pathways for genuine dialogue and conversation which can honour God as Creator and Redeemer.
October 20, 2017
The fundamental theme of Alister McGrath’s book is that “the natural sciences and Christian theology can enrich each other’s understanding of reality and help us better understand this strange world in which we find ourselves.” (p. 77)
His intended audience is “scientists with an interest in theology and theologians aware of the importance of the natural sciences” (p. viii), of which I happen to be neither.
McGrath suggests that “insisting that we use only scientific methods, forms and categories confines us to a narrow world that excludes meaning and value, not because these are absent but because this research method prevents them being seen.” (p. 16)
McGrath discusses the shortcomings of Ian Barbour’s four general approaches (conflict, independence, dialogue and integration) to the relation of science and religion, then goes on to favorably describe John Polkinghorne’s four approaches (deistic, theistic, revisionary, and developmental). The developmental approach is described as a continuously unfolding exploration wherein Christian doctrine is revised in the light of new insights.
He points out the numerous ways in which scientific and theological thinking are similar, particularly regarding Darwin’s theory and Christian theology, in that “both scientific and religious theories find themselves confronted with mysteries, puzzles and anomalies that may give rise to intellectual or existential tensions but do not require their abandonment. . . . In each case, there is a common structure of an explanation with anomalies, which are not regarded as endangering the theory by its proponents but are seen as puzzles that will be resolved at a later stage.” (pp. 147-8)
And it wouldn’t be an Alister McGrath book without a discussion of natural theology, which he describes as “an attempt to demonstrate the existence or character of God by an appeal to the order or beauty of the natural world, without presupposing or relying on any religious assumptions or beliefs.” (p. 165) McGrath suggests that “Christianity offers a framework that makes sense of what is otherwise a happy cosmic coincidence.” (p. 11)
In summary, McGrath provides an exploration of the relation of the natural sciences and theology and how they can complement each other. Along the way, McGrath responds to the views of some of the New Atheists, particularly Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.
The book includes a two-page “For Further Reading” but no Index. The only fault I can find with this book is that the publisher chose to go with end notes (28 pages of them) instead of footnotes, thus requiring constant page-flipping.
His intended audience is “scientists with an interest in theology and theologians aware of the importance of the natural sciences” (p. viii), of which I happen to be neither.
McGrath suggests that “insisting that we use only scientific methods, forms and categories confines us to a narrow world that excludes meaning and value, not because these are absent but because this research method prevents them being seen.” (p. 16)
McGrath discusses the shortcomings of Ian Barbour’s four general approaches (conflict, independence, dialogue and integration) to the relation of science and religion, then goes on to favorably describe John Polkinghorne’s four approaches (deistic, theistic, revisionary, and developmental). The developmental approach is described as a continuously unfolding exploration wherein Christian doctrine is revised in the light of new insights.
He points out the numerous ways in which scientific and theological thinking are similar, particularly regarding Darwin’s theory and Christian theology, in that “both scientific and religious theories find themselves confronted with mysteries, puzzles and anomalies that may give rise to intellectual or existential tensions but do not require their abandonment. . . . In each case, there is a common structure of an explanation with anomalies, which are not regarded as endangering the theory by its proponents but are seen as puzzles that will be resolved at a later stage.” (pp. 147-8)
And it wouldn’t be an Alister McGrath book without a discussion of natural theology, which he describes as “an attempt to demonstrate the existence or character of God by an appeal to the order or beauty of the natural world, without presupposing or relying on any religious assumptions or beliefs.” (p. 165) McGrath suggests that “Christianity offers a framework that makes sense of what is otherwise a happy cosmic coincidence.” (p. 11)
In summary, McGrath provides an exploration of the relation of the natural sciences and theology and how they can complement each other. Along the way, McGrath responds to the views of some of the New Atheists, particularly Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.
The book includes a two-page “For Further Reading” but no Index. The only fault I can find with this book is that the publisher chose to go with end notes (28 pages of them) instead of footnotes, thus requiring constant page-flipping.
May 10, 2023
A book describing how science and religion are not at war with each other, but rather beneficial. You cannot measure everything on one scale meaning that you cannot test everything by one theory. Human beings are the only species on the planet that spend time worrying about who they are. Everything else is focused on surviving. However, human beings want to do more than that they want to understand the world and their own place within it. Metabolism can be thought of as a sum of all the biochemical processes in a living organism, that either producer or consumer energy. If we can’t metabolize, we don’t live and so don’t reproduce. Yet for most of us metabolism has no bearing on the great question of human identity. It only becomes a problem when it goes wrong and requires medical intervention. It’s not a defining characteristic of humanity and can’t be treated as such. We are much more than a.m. metabolic system. It’s just one aspect of our identity it’s not totality. A Christian natural theology allows us both to be attentive to individual components or aspects of nature. Well, at the same time, grasping the bigger picture that allows us to appreciate them properly and fully. { This book was very difficult to read at times, and was a book that was assigned to me while in college. This would not be something that I would pick off the shelf and read if given the option}
November 21, 2017
"We all need some sort of theoretical framework--however modest, provisional and correctable--for making sense of nature, history and life. Whether consciously or unconsciously, we see all life through theoretical spectacles that shape what we see and--perhaps more importantly--what we fail to see." (Loc 179)
"Insisting that we use only scientific methods, forms and categories confines us to a narrow world that excludes meaning and value, not because these are absent but because this research method prevents them being seen. (Loc 361)
"Both theology and the natural sciences can be understood as an attempt to develop human ideas so that they provide the best possible account of a reality that is ultimately outside the human mind." (Loc 928)
'The first great enemy of science is not religion but a dogmatic rationalism, which limits reality to what reason determines to be acceptable." (Loc 1679)
If the validity of calculus or quantum theory are "not thought to be discredited because they are accidents or by-products of evolution," why should "one of the most significant and deeply imprinted human instincts: an intuition that the natural world points beyond itself to God" be thought discredited? (Loc 2800)
"Insisting that we use only scientific methods, forms and categories confines us to a narrow world that excludes meaning and value, not because these are absent but because this research method prevents them being seen. (Loc 361)
"Both theology and the natural sciences can be understood as an attempt to develop human ideas so that they provide the best possible account of a reality that is ultimately outside the human mind." (Loc 928)
'The first great enemy of science is not religion but a dogmatic rationalism, which limits reality to what reason determines to be acceptable." (Loc 1679)
If the validity of calculus or quantum theory are "not thought to be discredited because they are accidents or by-products of evolution," why should "one of the most significant and deeply imprinted human instincts: an intuition that the natural world points beyond itself to God" be thought discredited? (Loc 2800)
February 10, 2019
Took me a while to get into it. Then it picked up. Really don't have anything else meaningful to say about the book. Except that I am still amazed that, with a science background, he turned to theology. That is not a usual combination.
July 10, 2023
Likely McGrath's most readable & engaging introduction to this topic. Highly recommended.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews