Saturday, March 31, 2007

Top 5 Female Vocalists

My favourite female singers and my current favourite song by each:

1. KT Tunstall - Black Horse and the Cherry Tree


2. Sarah Blasko - Always on this Line


3. Dido - Hunter


4. Kasey Chambers - The Rain (or Surrender - both great songs!)


5. Missy Higgins - The Cactus that Found the Beat


(Brooke Fraser was a very close contender for the list)

Friday, March 30, 2007

1. Indescribable

I'm sure you have all been waiting with bated breath to find out what our number 1 song was this year. Well, for the second year in a row, it was Indescribable by Laura Story and Jesse Reeves.

From the highest of heights to the depths of the sea
Creation's revealing Your majesty
From the colours of autumn to the fragrance of spring
Every creature unique in the song that it sings
All exclaiming

Indescribable, uncontainable,
You placed the stars in the sky and You know them by name.
You are amazing God
All powerful, untamable,
Awestruck we fall to our knees as we humbly proclaim
You are amazing God

Who has told every lightning bolt where it should go
Or seen heavenly storehouses laden with snow
Who imagined the sun and gives source to its light
Yet conceals it to bring us the coolness of night
None can fathom

Indescribable, uncontainable,
You placed the stars in the sky and You know them by name
You are amazing God
All powerful, untamable,
Awestruck we fall to our knees as we humbly proclaim
You are amazing God

Incomparable, unchangeable
You see the depths of my heart and You love me the same
You are amazing God


Another song that I like - probably again for the natural theological aspects! If I recall correctly, I did vote for this song last year, but this year it was bumped out of my top 5 by some other great songs.

Indescribable is one of those songs that needs to be played by a great band. I sometimes play it on the piano by myself, and it doesn't sound that exciting. However, with the whole band going, it's quite moving and uplifting. Narwee is blessed in having many extremely talented musicians. I wonder if that's why we tend to have more songs in each service than many other churches?

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Does God exist?

Craig has set up a forum (well, a post with comments) for the purpose of discussing this question. I like his rules for the forum:

1. Anyone can contribute
2. You must stay on topic
3. You must use an alias
4. You may play "devil's advocate" if you wish
5. You may use several identities, each arguing a different point if you wish
6. You must not use bad language
7. You must not get annoyed at anyone
10 points for whoever can guess which two comments are mine...

I also like the mathematical proof quoted over at Confessing Evangelical. Reminds me of philosophy of science classes with UNSW's famous atheist philosopher...

2. In Christ Alone

In Christ alone my hope is found
He is my Light, my strength, my song
This cornerstone, this solid ground
Firm through the fiercest draughts and storm
What heights of love, what depths of peace
When fears are stilled, when strifings cease
My comforter, my all in all
Here in the love of Christ I stand

In Christ alone, who took on flesh
Fullness of God in helpless babe
This gift of love, and righteousness
Scorned by the ones he came to save
Till on that cross as Jesus died
The wrath of God was satisfied;
For every sin on Him was laid—
Here in the death of Christ I live.

There in the ground His body lay,
Light of the world by darkness slain;
Then bursting forth in glorious day,
Up from the grave He rose again!
And as He stands in victory,
Sin's curse has lost its grip on me;
For I am His and He is mine—
Bought with the precious blood of Christ.

No guilt in life, no fear in death—
This is the power of Christ in me;
From life's first cry to final breath,
Jesus commands my destiny.
No power of hell, no scheme of man,
Can ever pluck me from His hand;
Till He returns or calls me home—
Here in the power of Christ I'll stand.


This song, by Keith Getty and Stuart Townend, is one of the greatest modern, hymn-like worship songs. It's one of my favourite Christian songs of all time, but I didn't vote for it this year (though I did last year). Why not? I think I'd heard it way too many times. Not just in church - also in my head. A couple of years ago, while I was going through a particularly tough time with anxiety and depression, I adopted it as my calming down song. I'd sing it to myself when I was being kept awake at night by palpitation, and to distract myself from vicious cycles of thought running around in my head. This song is perfect for that purpose - fantastic words, and a slow, steady rhythm.

Even though I've heard it a bit too often lately, I still love this song. If I ever got married, this song would have to be sung during the service. I told that to my mother once, after a wedding featuring rather uninspiring music. She thought it sounded a bit morbid - the part about "from life's first cry to final breath." To me, it's such a beautiful expression of the Christian life - it's all about Christ - and that's exactly what marriage is about too.

(Yes, some girls dream about what their wedding dress might be like if they ever get married. I do that too, from time to time (I'm such a girl), but I also like to plan out all the music for the whole service!)

3. Blessed be the Name

Blessed be your name
In the land that is plentiful
Where your streams of abundance flow
Blessed be your name

Blessed be your name
When I'm found in the desert place
Though I walk through the wilderness
Blessed be your name

Blessed be your name
When the sun's shining down on me
When the world's all as it should be
Blessed be your name

Blessed be your name
On the road marked with suffering
Though there's pain in the offering
Blessed be your name

Every blessing you pour out
I'll turn back to praise
When the darkness closes in, Lord
Still I will say

Blessed be the name of the Lord
Blessed be your name
Blessed be the name of the Lord
Blessed be your glorious name

You give and take away
You give and take away
My heart will choose to say
Lord, blessed be your name


I think I first heard/sang this song by Matt Redman at a mission night I went to with Donna (at Turramurra, perhaps? On your birthday one year??) Maybe somewhere else as well, around the same time. The music was available as a free download on a worship music website I used to visit, so I did play it a fair bit before we started singing it at Narwee.

I remember one of the first times we sang this song at church. The man leading the service, Colin, was talking about his wife who had passed away recently, and what this song meant to him in light of that event. It was extremely touching, particularly as I've known Colin and his wife for most of my life. His wife, Vicki, was an amazing woman. Even as she knew she was about to die, she was thinking of other people - writing letters to her children and her Sunday School kids, and planning her funeral so that the people who came would hear the gospel.

This is quite a simple song, really, but I think it has a beautiful message. It's easy to praise God when everything in life is going well, but much harder to continue praising God in the midst of suffering. It's easy to pray that God will give us things, but much harder to pray that he'll take them away, even though that might be better for us in the long run.

To me, this song expresses a great faith in God's promises. No matter what happens to us in this life, God is in control and ultimately his purpose will be fulfilled. And the ideas are reminiscent of some of the most wonderful passages from the Bible, including the following from Romans (my favourite book of the Bible!):

Romans 5:1-5 - Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through out Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.


Romans 8:18, 28-30 - For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us... And we know hat for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.


Romans 8:31-39 - What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died--more than that, who was raised--who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? As it is written, "For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered." No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.


Amen!

4. Amazing Grace (My Chains Are Gone)

Amazing grace, how sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me
I once was lost, but now am found
Was blind but now I see

'Twas Grace that taught my heart to fear
And Grace my fears relieved
How precious did that Grace appear
The hour I first believed

My chains are gone, I've been set free
My God, my Saviour has ransomed me
And like a flood his mercy reigns
Unending love, Amazing Grace

The Lord has promised good to me
His word my hope secures
He will my shield and portion be
As long as life endures

The earth shall soon dissolve like snow
The sun forbear to shine
But God who called me here below
Will be forever mine


Over on Donna's blog, Matt wonders why everyone is so keen on Amazing Grace. It's ok, he says, but not the best song ever. Maybe not, but it's still a classic, and it comes with a pretty amazing story (see this site for more details). This version that we now sing at church is a new arrangement by Chris Tomlin - some new lyrics (the "my chains are gone" bit) and a slight more swinging beat. And a different selection of verses to that which is typically sung. I was intrigued to find out that the verse that is usually sung at the end was not written by John Newton:

When we've been there ten thousand years,
Bright shining as the sun,
We've no less days to sing God's praise
Than when we'd first begun.

More reading, less books?

What a horrible thought!

I've just read a review of the Sony Reader - a handheld device for reading e-books. The author of the review suggests that while the Reader is no more portable than the average paperback,

The Sony Reader has other selling points; above all, its potential to reduce the clutter of books. For me, the perfect advertisement for this device would be a picture of my bedstand without its ever-present leaning tower of literature. More reading, the tagline would say, fewer books.


Further down, he writes

If, today, I threw out all the books in my house that could be uploaded for free onto a Sony Reader, at least one of my bookcases (out of five or six) could be retired. What I'd really like is to keep only as many books as could be squeezed into one or two bookcases.


What on earth for? I love books! I've been thinking about selling some of my novels because I'm running out of space, but I wouldn't want to get rid of many of my books. I have 4 tall Ikea bookshelves stuffed full of books, as well as a smaller bookshelf under my window. I love lying in bed looking at my books, thinking about what I'll read next, or remembering what I enjoyed in each book (the ones that I've read, anyway...) I love the feel of books. I love to run my hands over the covers, particularly if the book has a groovy cover with embossed lettering or the like. Why would anyone want to give that up? And sure, my bookshelves take up nearly all the wallspace in my bedroom, but what would I put there instead? I dream of having a dedicated library in my home, with high ceilings, floor-to-ceiling bookshelves and a sliding ladder!

I love this quote from Matthew Barker's Natural Theology (1674):

I have always thought that good Books are the best part of a man's Furniture in his House, and the best Ornaments for Ladies Closets.


Amen, brother!

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Thesis violence

I'm glad I have a good relationship with my PhD supervisor. And I'm sure he is glad too. I just hope it all ends well, after reading this article...

5. God of Wonders

Lord of all creation
Of water, earth and sky
The heavens are your tabernacle
Glory to the Lord on high

Early in the morning
I will celebrate the light
When I stumble in the darkness
I will call your name by night

God of wonders beyond our galaxy
You are holy, holy
The universe declares your majesty
You are holy, holy
Lord of heaven and earth

Hallelujah to the Lord of heaven and earth


Third Day and Caedmon's Call do a particularly nice version of this song, and I think we do it pretty well at Narwee too. I do like this song a lot. Maybe it's the whole science-y, natural theology, Psalm 19, Romans 1 kind of vibe. Whatever it is, I like it. I didn't vote for it, but I'm glad it got into the top 10!

6. How Great is our God

The splendour of the King, clothed in majesty
Let all the earth rejoice, let all the earth rejoice
He wraps himself in light and darkness tries to hide
Trembles at his voice, trembles at his voice

And age to age he stands and time is in his hands
Beginning and the end, beginning and the end
The Godhead, three in one, Father, Spirit Son
The Lion and the Lamb, the Lion and the Lamb

How great is our God
Sing with me, how great is our God!
And all will see how great, how great is our God!

You're the name above all names
You are worthy of all praise
My heart will sing, how great is our God!


Chris Tomlin, Jesse Reeves and Ed Cash

I'm fairly indifferent to this song. There's nothing wrong with it, but I'm not all that enthusiastic about it. To me, it doesn't really say much.

We usually sing it with an a capella bit of "How Great Thou Art" at the end, though on Sunday this was left out: allegedly due to time constraints, though I don't think Tim is too keen on having any hymns in church! I'm surprised we're allowed to sing it at all - two "thees", four "thous" and four "arts". It's a wonder people don't run screaming from the church!

7. Rock of Ages

Rock of Ages cleft for me
Hide me now, my refuge be
Let the water and the blood
From your wounded side which flowed
Be for sin the double cure
Cleanse me from its guilt and power

Not the labours of my hands
Can fulfil your law's demands
Could my zeal no respite know
Could my tears forever flow
All for sin could not atone
You must save, and You alone

Nothing in my hand I bring
Simply to your cross I cling
Naked come to you for dress
Helpless look to you for grace
Stained by sin to You I cry
Wash me, Saviour, or I die

While I draw this fleeting breath
When my eyelids close in death
When I soar through realms unknown
Bow before the judgment throne
Hide me then, my refuge be
Rock of ages, cleft for me


Words: A.M. Toplady
Music: Ruth Buchanan

This is the only one of the 5 songs I voted for that made it into the top 10. I love it. I think the words are beautiful, and combined with the music - it gives me goosebumps. According to Tim Mac, though, this song got in by virtue of a bunch of older members of the congregation. Hmm. I was quite happy when we started singing this at church recently, but apparently it only made it on to the song list because a few people had asked for it and the music team were indifferent. Tim says that the melody breaks some musical rules. Surely they're just guidelines, though...

8. You Are God Alone

Hmm. I don't really have much to say about this song either...

You are not a God created by human hands
You are not a God dependent on any mortal man
You are not a God in need of anything we can give
And by your plan that's just the way it is

You're the only God whose power none can contend
You're the only God whose name and praise will never end
You're the only God who's worthy of everything we can give
And by your plan that's just the way it is

Unchangeable, unshakeable
Unstoppable, that's what you are

And you are God alone from before time began
And you are on your throne, and you are God alone
And right now in the good times and bad
You are on your throne and you are God alone


Phillips, Craig and Dean

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

9. Everyday

What to say, Lord?
It's you who gave me life and
I can't explain just how much you mean to me now
That you have saved me Lord
I give all that I am to you
That everyday I can be a light that shines your name

Everyday Lord, I'll learn to stand upon your word
And I pray that I may come to know you more
That you would guide me in every single step I take
That everyday I can be your light unto the world

Everyday, it's you I'll live for
Everyday, I'll follow after you
Everyday, I'll walk with you my Lord

It's you I'll live for everyday


Typical Hillsong by Joel Houston (related to Brian and Bobbie?). Not much else to say, really...

Monday, March 26, 2007

10. To Live is Christ

When I leave this earth there's nothing I'll take with me
Except for Jesus Christ: the pardon that he bought me
All that is my gain for him I'll count it my loss
And if I ever boast it will be only in the cross

Whether I'm in need or whether I have plenty
Whether I have food or whether I go hungry
If I stand with friends or all around desert me
I have learned to be content in every circumstance

In God and God alone I find my joy and satisfaction
For God and God alone I live or die

For me to live is Christ, to die is gain
Another day upon the earth: one more to shout his name
And if I die, my death won't be in vain
For whether by my life or death, I'll glorify his name.


This song was written by Tim MacBride, the incredibly brilliant and multi-talented associate pastor at Narwee. To be honest, it's not one of my favourite songs by Tim, and I'm a little surprised it made it into the top 10. I think he's got some much better songs. I voted for his song "Faithful and True", which I also blogged about recently.

This song, "To Live is Christ", is based on some passages from Philippians:

1:18-21 - Yes, and I will rejoice, for I know that through your prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ this will turn out for my deliverance, as it is my eager expectation and hope that I will not be at all ashamed, but that with full courage now as always Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.

3:7-11 - But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith-- that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead.

4:10-13 - I rejoiced in the Lord greatly that now at length you have revived your concern for me. You were indeed concerned for me, but you had no opportunity. Not that I am speaking of being in need, for I have learned in whatever situation I am to be content. I know how to be brought low, and I know how to abound. In any and every circumstance, I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger, abundance and need. I can do all things through him who strengthens me.


Great words to live by, but how tough to actually live that way!

I feel as though I'm betraying Tim and my church to say this... but at my brother's church in Canberra, they sing another song based on Philippians, with basically the same ideas as Tim's song, and I like it better...

Narwee's Top 10 Worship Songs

Last night at church we counted down the Top 10 worship songs, as voted for by the congregation. I was rostered on to play piano - lucky me. 10 songs in one service was pretty exhausting, but it was fun, and it went well. We did shortened versions of 5 songs, and full versions of the top 5. And we still managed to finish at a reasonable time (7:15pm, I think), even with a half-hour sermon!

Only one of the songs I voted for made it into the top 10. Oh well.

Oops, I did it again...

It's always good to spread out celebrations. My birthday was three weeks ago, and I was still receiving presents last night. My dear friends Donna and Liz gave me a $50 iTunes Gift Card, along with a very stylish Diana Ferrari handbag. And the very lovely Sue bought me some perfume - Curious, by Britney Spears.

It's a very nice perfume, very cute bottle, and I've always been a bit of a Britney fan. Well, back when she was innocent anyway. Though she never was that innocent...

Sunday, March 25, 2007

Oops

Wagons are overrated.

But I'm going to try again. Starting tomorrow.

Saturday, March 24, 2007

In the beginning, God created Australia...

...And surf lifesavers. This video is rather amusing!

Friday, March 23, 2007

Piled High and Deeper


I haven't been keeping up with the PhD comics lately, but I'm reminded of them from time to time when Meredith posts them on her blog. Ah, it's always been so good to know that I'm not the only one who feels this way!

A woman's worth

You don't need a man by your side to validate you as a woman. You already are loved and valued. You're good enough exactly as you are. Do you believe this? Because it's true. You have limitless worth and value. If you embrace this truth, it will affect every area of life, especially your relationship with men.

You are worth dying for.

Your worth does not come from your body, your mind, your work, what you produce, what you put out, how much money you make. Your worth does not come from whether or not you have a man. Your worth does not come from whether or not men notice you. You have inestimable worth that comes from your creator.

You will continue to be tempted in a thousand different ways not to believe this. The temptation will be to go searching for your worth and validity from places other than your creator.

Especially from men.

But you don't have to give yourself away to earn a man's love. You're better than that. You're already loved.


I also like what this article has to say about submission (for a change!) Read the whole article here.

Thursday, March 22, 2007

Who wears a kilt?!

An amusing article from Vanity Fair about British expats in New York.

Who moves to America and brings a kilt? Did his mother say, "Farewell, son. Make something of yourself in the New World. Have you packed your native costume, just in case?" Just in case of what? Just in case we decide to re-invade Canada? Just in case he finds a girl with a thing for men in frocks with no knickers? Just in case there's an England-versus-Scotland match on the satellite television in some fake pub?

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Entering Jane Austen's World


A review of The Annotated Pride and Prejudice - an edition of Austen's great novel, being published this month, which contains more than 2,300 explanatory notes on every possible aspect of Jane Austen's world. Sounds fantastic to me!

But is it necessary? William Grimes writes:
The reader who does not know a farthing from a guinea, it’s safe to say, will nonetheless grasp the great drama of attraction and repulsion that plays out between Darcy and Elizabeth. The cut and thrust of their conversation is timeless. Generations of young women who do not know the first thing about an entailed estate or a quadrille will recognize in Austen’s heroine a kindred spirit, a contemporary, a valued ally in the eternal war between the sexes.
Grimes also writes:
Certain writers create worlds that readers do not want to leave, ever. Extreme devotees of Austen do not simply enjoy the novels, they want to sit in the living room at Longbourn with the Bennet sisters, drinking tea and analyzing Darcy’s behavior.


For me, I think I'd prefer to hang out with Lizzie and Jane, walking the grounds or cutting and drying flowers. After all, Lydia, Kitty, Mary and Mrs Bennet would all be in the living room...

Evaluating Socrates

Hemlock Available in the Faculty Lounge - what Socrates' students might have said about him in teaching evaluation surveys.

That reminds me... I haven't yet received my teaching evaluations from last session. I wonder if I'll get anyone commenting on my "wondrous eyes" this time?

Monday, March 19, 2007

Faithful & True, but what's the theology?

I've been confused lately about all the different labels being tossed around for "types" of Christian theology; e.g. Reformed, dispensationalist, covenant theology... And then there's a lot of terms that are more familiar, but the definitions are always changing, e.g. evangelical and fundamentalist.

This is one of the more recent songs by Tim MacBride (associate pastor of Narwee Baptist Church, musician extraordinaire and all-round genius). I'm trying to remember the jargon for what kind of theology it's meant to be...

The king has come: the blind can see,
The strong man is bound and the captives go free!
Tell all who have ears that the kingdom is here
And nothing will stand in its way!

To him is given all authority
For he has risen! And the stone rolled away
Became a great mountain, now it fills the earth,
And nothing can stand in its way!

Now Satan is bound from deceiving the nations,
The gospel resounds and the earth hears its song.
And the kingdom rule of the Faithful and True
Has come in each one
Who will bow before the King of Kings.

And when there are people from every nation
And every tongue who join in the song,
Then the kingdom rule of the Faithful and True
Will come and each one
Wll bow before the King of Kings.

You reign over all through the people you've called
You reign over all through the people you've called.


I get the "now, but not yet" idea about the kingom, but that's about it. Is it covenant theology? Amillenial eschatology? I think I need to do more study at Moore College. Much more.

Click here to sample more music from the inimitable Tim Mac.

Third Annual European Adventure

About a month ago I posted about the frustration of waiting to hear whether my conference abstract had been accepted. I probably should have posted earlier about the outcome, but I'm reluctant to blow my own trumpet. Ah, what the heck. Toot, toot!

I'll be heading over to the UK at the end of June for 6 weeks - the third year in a row that I have migrated north for the winter. The main reason for the trip is that I'll be presenting papers at three conferences:

  1. The Annual Conference of the British Society for the History of Science, University of Manchester (program available here).
  2. Science and Religion: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives, Lancaster University, a conference in honour of John Hedley Brooke (program available here).
  3. New Frontiers in Science and Faith, joint meeting of Christians in Science and the American Scientific Affiliation, University of Edinburgh.

It's all very exciting. Of course, I still have to write the three papers...

Falling off the wagon...

Two weeks ago I decided to give up alcohol and chocolate for a month.

With the alcohol, I lasted nine days until my dad convinced me that a glass of red wine was medicinal (although I was recovering from a migraine and actually didn't feel well enough to drink more than a few sips). The following day, a glass of red just seemed so appealing after dealing with the idiot in my tutorial.

With the chocolate I lasted about 12 days, with the small exception of a mini Mars Bar after donating blood (as Donna said, who can fault me for taking sustenance from chocolate after saving someone's life??)

Today I am going to climb back on the wagon. I wonder how long I'll manage to stay on this time...

AARRGGHHH!!!

It's only 10am, and I'm already exhausted. It's only week 4, and I'm already sick of my science and religion tutorials.

I had aimed to do all my tutoring work from home, so that while I'm at uni I can concentrate on PhD work. This weekend, however, I didn't manage to get any work done - recovering from a migraine on Saturday and various social engagements (including Church) on Sunday. The last week has been quite hectic as well, so I've been a bit behind in my tutoring.

I logged on this morning to read about 200 new posts. In the thread for last week's discussion on the historical relations between science and religion I found an argument about testimony as evidence in court, tattoos on bottoms and third nipples, accusations of offending God by mentioning said tattoos and third nipples, tirades back and forth about attacking people, being stubborn and Jesus being a nut-case. Hmm. I think I should keep a closer eye on this group.

I have written several posts exhorting the students to be mindful of other people's opinions, to avoid being dogmatic in simply asserting an existing belief and to make an effort to understand the opposing point of view. I wonder if it has all been in vain...

Perhaps I don't want to move to England after all...

Here's an Aussie-bashing article by Patrick West. Apparently Australia is nothing like Neighbours (thank goodness!) but it's more like Kath and Kim (hmm).

And here's a response from Aussie journalist Guy Rundle.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Friday, March 16, 2007

January 2007

This was a bad month in terms of self-control around book stores. I feel compelled to point out, however, that many of these books were bought at bargain prices at one of Canberra's fantastic second-hand or seconds book stores! It's such a long list that I also felt compelled to divide it up into categories:

Vaguely PhD-related books:
  • Jason Bardi, The Calculus Wars: Newton, Leibniz and the Greatest Mathematical Clash of All Time
  • Antonia Fraser, Cromwell: Our Chief of Men
  • Justin S. Holcomb (ed.), Christian Theologies of Scripture
  • Margaret J. Osler (ed.), Rethinking the Scientific Revolution
  • Simon Schama, A History of Britain 2: 1603-1776, The British Wars
  • Margo Todd (ed.), Reformation to Revolution: Politics and Religion in Early Modern England
  • David Tylden-Wright, John Aubrey: A Life

For somewhat scholarly interest:
  • Amir D. Azcel, Descartes' Secret Notebook
  • Veronica Buckley, Christina, Queen of Sweden
  • Norman F. Cantor, In the Wake of the Plague
  • Peter Dear, The Intelligibility of Nature: How Science Makes Sense of the World
  • Michael Ruse, Darwinism and Its Discontents

Just for fun:
  • Matthew Pearl, The Poe Shadow
  • Alan Wall, The Lightning Cage
  • Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest And Other Plays
  • Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

Books read:
  • Susanna Gregory, A Masterly Murder
  • Amir D. Azcel, Descartes' Secret Notebook
  • Most of Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion - I haven't managed to finish it yet because I keep wanting to throw it across the room...
Most likely there were more books I read in January, but I've forgotten them now...

Ouch!

I was unwell on Monday night (a migraine sparked, I think, by donating blood) so I missed my Moore College lecture on Romans. The lecturer was kind enough to return my assignment by mail, and I received it yesterday. The assignment was to write 500 words on "What is Romans about?" I posted the essay on my blog a little while back. Sure, it's not the best essay I've ever written, and I guess I didn't cover absolutely everything, but I didn't realise it was bad enough to warrant a mark of 10... out of 20! That's the worst mark I've ever received on an essay. Ouch.

A big black horse and a cherry tree









Absolutely loving this album!

2007 Templeton Prize


This year's Templeton Prize for Progress Toward Research or Discoveries about Spiritual Realities has been awarded to the Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor. It's a nice change - the last 8 recipients of the prize have been scientists.

The Templeton Prize is the world's largest monetary prize awarded to an individual, valued at £800,000. Given the area I work in, it's an aim (or rather, a dream) of mine to win this prize some day. Although, I was more keen when it was called the Templeton Prize for Progress in Science and Religion.

Charles Taylor has also achieved one of my other aims - he presented the Gifford Lectures in 1999.

You can read Professor Taylor's statement upon receiving the prize here.

Friday, March 09, 2007

A new superhero and a new calling

Inspired by an email conversation with Matt, and reading a couple of articles with titles* that reminded me of Harry Potter books, I have decided that I should write a series of books about a new superhero called Henry More. I've already dreamt about looking for action figures of the Cambridge Platonists, so this is only a small step further!

Here are my titles so far:

  • Henry More and the Spirit of Nature
  • Henry More and the Judaic Cabbala
  • Henry More and the Antidote Against Atheism
  • Henry More and the Materialist Hobbists
  • Henry More and the Theistic Pagans

I think I've found my new calling!

---
Update: I've just come up with another title! "Henry More and the Latitude-Men." Maybe the Latitude-Men can be his faithful sidekicks...

I think my PhD is starting to have an effect on my sanity. Starting to? Maybe not...

* "Henry More and the limits of mechanism" by Alan Gabbey, and "Henry More and the Scientific Revolution" by A. Rupert Hall, both in Sarah Hutton (ed.), Henry More (1614-1687): Tercentenary Studies, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1990.

Thursday, March 08, 2007

Celebrating International Women's Day


My mother's cousin, Valya, called from the Ukraine this evening to with Mum and I a happy International Women's Day. I was a little surprised until my mother explained to me that it's a big deal in Russia - it's a national holiday, women are honoured and receive gifts... Russia was one of the earliest countries to celebrate International Women's Day, and it was a strike by Russian women leading to the abdication the Czar and women receiving the right to vote that led to March 8 being declared International Women's Day. What a wonderful country!


Some highlights of the history of International Women's Day:

The idea of an international women's day was proposed at a Socialist convention in Geneva in 1910. In 1911, International Women's Day (IWD) was honoured the first time in Austria, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland on 19 March. More than one million women and men attended IWD rallies campaigning for women's rights to work, vote, be trained, to hold public office and end discrimination.


On the eve of World War I campaigning for peace, Russian women observed their first International Women's Day on the last Sunday in February 1913. In 1914 further women across Europe held rallies to campaign against the war and to express women's solidarity.

On the last Sunday of February 1917, Russian women began a strike for "bread and peace" in response to the death over 2 million Russian soldiers in war. Opposed by political leaders the women continued to strike until four days later the Czar was forced to abdicate and the provisional Government granted women the right to vote. The date the women's strike commenced was Sunday 23 February on the Julian calendar then in use in Russia. This day on the Gregorian calendar in use elsewhere was 8 March.



IWD is now an official holiday in Armenia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. The tradition sees men honouring their mothers, wives, girlfriends, colleagues, etc with flowers and small gifts. In some countries IWD has the equivalent status of Mother's Day where children give small presents to their mothers and grandmothers.


The new millennium has witnessed a significant change and attitudinal shift in both women's and society's thoughts about women's equality and emancipation. Many from a younger generation feel that 'all the battles have been won for women' while many feminists from the 1970's know only too well the longevity and ingrained complexity of patriarchy. With more women in the boardroom, greater equality in legislative rights, and an increased critical mass of women's visibility as impressive role models in every aspect of life, one could think that women have gained true equality. The unfortunate fact is that women are still not paid equally to that of their male counterparts, women still are not present in equal numbers in business or politics, and globally women's education, health and the violence against them is worse than that of men.


However, great improvements have been made. We do have female astronauts and prime ministers, school girls are welcomed into university, women can work and have a family, women have real choices. And so the tone and nature of IWD has, for the past few years, moved from being a reminder about the negatives to a celebration of the positives.

International Women's Day


What a fantastic opportunity for a few posts on one of my favourite soapbox topics - feminism.

Women's rights are human rights

Ainsley Hayes (from the West Wing) on why she opposes the Equal Rights Amendment:

Because it's humiliating. A new amendment we vote on declaring that I am equal under the law to a man? I'm mortified to discover there's reason to believe I wasn't before. I am a citizen of this country. I am not a special subset in need of your protection. I do not have to have my rights handed down to me by a bunch of old, white men. The same Article 14 that protects you protects me, and I went to law school just to make sure.



Jo March (from Little Women) on why women should vote:

I find it poor logic to say that women should vote because they are good. Men do not vote because they are good; they vote because they are male, and women should vote, not because we are angels and men are animals, but because we are human beings and citizens of this country.

Is feminism dead?

Craig has a post titled "The Death of Feminism" with the text "It's the left's fault, of course" and a link to an opinion piece from today's Australian. I know that Craig is generally not complimentary to either feminism or the left, but I thought this article raised some good points.

Pamela Bone writes "Let it be recorded that in the last decade of the 20th century the brave and great movement of Western feminism ended, not with a bang but with a whimper" and asks "On International Women's Day, where are the protests in our cities against stonings, honour killings or any other persecutions to which women are still subjected?"

Good question. Here are some more choice excerpts:

While a US administration that refused to fund programs against AIDS unless they taught about chastity instead of condoms could rightly be criticised, the mullahs whose abuses of women's rights were very many degrees worse could not.

Was it before or after September 11 that thinkers of the Left - for feminism was a movement of the Left - decided that racism was a far more serious crime than sexism? When did cultural sensitivity trump women's rights?
I don't hold much hope on this International Women's Day of seeing big protests in Australian cities against female genital mutilation; or against honour killings, stonings, child marriages, forced seclusion or any of the other persecutions to which women are still subjected. The fire of Western feminism has quietly died away, first as a victim of its success, lately as a victim of cultural relativism, of anti-Americanism and reluctance to be seen to be condemning the enemies of the enemy.

Yet as Western women take their rights for granted, other women are just beginning to demand theirs. There will be marches in Europe this International Women's Day, organised by Muslim (or ex-Muslim) women reformers. They will march through Germany and France to present a grievance to the European Parliament in Brussels, saying that the veil is "a manifestation of political Islam and a symbol of the oppression of women".

In Pakistan, the Prevention of Anti-Women Practices Bill, which would ban forced marriages and give women rights over property, is before the national assembly. In Syria, the murder of a 16-year-old girl by her brother, at her family's request, has prompted a national debate about the leniency shown to perpetrators of honour killings.

In Saudi Arabia, Bill Gates, addressing a recent business seminar, told the segregated audience - women, their faces and bodies shrouded in black, behind a large partition - that the country would not achieve its ambition to become an economic power while it failed to use the talents of half the population. "One side of the audience loved it," he quipped later.
Maybe my report on the death of Western feminism is greatly exaggerated. I hope so. "Don't be so polite, girls!" the old feminists used to sing. "Show a little fight, girls, show a little fight!" ...Human rights are universal. And women's rights are human rights.

I don't agree with everything Pamela Bone writes, particularly on "sexual rights" and a woman's "right" to control her own body, but I think she has some good points. It seems to me that many young women of my generation do take their rights for granted, and forget that women had to fight to work outside the home, to vote, and to own property. While maybe these aren't all necessarily rights but privileges, men (white men, anyway) did not have to fight in the same way. Many opportunities were denied to women simply because they were women.

I remember an email debate with some uni friends about whether feminism was still necessary. I think I was the only person arguing that it was. The general argument from the other girls seemed to be that since there were more women than men in their workplace (medical science), feminism was no longer needed. OK, so perhaps you are not suffering from any discrimination or limitation of opportunities, but what about other women?

I started to become much more interested in feminism (and, I guess, more passionate about the issue) at the end of my honours year. As I was leaving for uni to hand in my thesis, I grabbed a book off the shelf to read on the train. It was a book called DIY Feminism that my mother had given me a few years earlier, but I hadn't had a chance (or perhaps hadn't been motivated enough) to read it. I can't remember now exactly what was in it, except for the general idea that there is no "Feminism" - it's what women make of it - and the fact that many women were struggling with gender discrimination. This alerted me to the fact that while my life had been all fine so far, not every woman is so lucky.

And this was just in Australia. When you start thinking about things that happen to women all around the world, the situation is more desperate. And Pamela Bone mentions some of these things - honour killings, genital mutilation and stonings for adultery. This last one is particularly unfair for women. In some countries, when a woman is raped it is considered adultery, unless more than one reputable male witness will come forward to say that it is rape. The woman is punished for the adultery, but what happens to the man?

I suppose that's enough of a rant for the time being. I'm not sure what the point of this rant is anyway. I guess it would just be nice to see more women getting angry and upset about the treatment of other women around the world.

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Donna's new nickname

I have decided that Donna's new nickname shall be "Chipper."

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

What is Romans about?

An essay I wrote for the Moore College External Studies unit on Romans:

Paul’s Letter to the Romans concerns two main questions: how salvation can be achieved and how a person can be part of the people of God. In the course of the letter, Paul argues that both Jew and Gentile need to be justified by faith in order to be saved from God’s wrath and to belong to the people of God.

In Romans 1:16-17, Paul states that the gospel is the power of salvation for both the Jew and the Greek, and in the following section he explains why salvation is needed. 1:18-32 describes the sinfulness of the Gentile world, and 2:1-3:20 shows that the Jews are in just as dire a state. All have sinned and are therefore facing God’s wrath. However, in 3:21, Paul begins to explain the hope of the gospel. God’s righteousness is being revealed in the world – not through the law, which no one has been able to keep, but through faith in Jesus Christ (3:22).

Paul brings this point home to the Jews by using the example of Abraham, the great patriarch of Israel, showing how his righteousness before God was based on faith, not works. For this reason, Gentiles can also take part in the promises God made to Israel through Abraham, if they have faith in God. Paul makes this crystal clear in 10:9: “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your hear that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” There is no distinction between Jew and Greek, he states, “for everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (10:13).

One may ask whether salvation is the same thing as belonging to the people of God, or whether something else is needed. Paul makes it clear that this is not the case. “God shows no partiality,” he declares in 2:11. Even the Jews’ privilege of being “entrusted with the oracles of God” (3:2) does not save them, since they have still broken God’s Law. However, Paul goes beyond the issue of salvation to show that both Jew and Gentile can belong to God. There is only one God, Paul states in 3:29-30, and he is God of the Jews and of the Gentiles. Even more dramatically, Paul argues that the promises made to Abraham apply to all who are his descendents by faith – he is the “father of all who believe without being circumcised” (4:11). It is not enough for a Jew simply to be circumcised (2:28-29), and a Gentile can become one of God’s people without being circumcised. The necessary step is justification by faith.

In addition, the Spirit of God, received after justification by faith, marks people out as belonging to God. “Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him” (8:9), but “all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God” (8:14). This, then, applies to both Jew and Gentile. Although the Jews were chosen by God to be a light to the nations, the salvation of the Gentiles was always part of God’s plan (11:11-12). Even as Paul mourns Israel’s unbelief, he acknowledges that it is the “children of the promise” who are counted as children of God. Finally, the change in a person’s life that happens after salvation – the way to live that Paul sets out in chapters 12-15 – also marks that person out as belonging to God.

Thus, the answers to the two main questions of Romans – how salvation is to be achieved and how entry into God’s people is to be obtained – are determined by the one act of righteousness on the part of Jesus, which allows all people who believe to be justified by faith.

Saturday, February 17, 2007

Beautiful

One of my favourite songs by the Christian singer-songwriter Bethany Dillon:
I was so unique
Now I feel skin deep
Count on the makeup to cover it all
Crying myself to sleep
Because I cannot keep their attention
Thought I could be strong
But it’s killing me

Does someone hear my cry
I’m dying for new life

I want to be beautiful
And make you stand in awe
Look inside my heart
And be amazed
I want to hear you say
Who I am is quite enough
Just want to be worthy of love
And beautiful

Sometimes I wish I was someone other than me
Fighting to make the mirror happy
Trying to find whatever is missing
Won’t you help me back to glory

You make me beautiful
You make me stand in awe
You step inside my heart
And I am amazed
I love to hear You say
Who I am is quite enough
You make me worthy of love
And beautiful

And this is what Bethany Dillon has to say about why she wrote the song:

I wrote this song following a series of talks with my youth group about what it is to be a woman—how we reflect God’s glory and what our hearts desire most. “Beautiful” was both easy and tough to write. Easy because I fight those battles almost every second—“Am I enough? Do they think I’m beautiful?” – tough because it was almost shameful to admit those are often my thoughts and fears. Though it’s not something neatly packaged that I can cure, my heart is deeply burdened to just be in the struggle alongside women… to feel vulnerable together… to win the battles together… to finally come to understand that we are intensely pursued by the Strong and Rescuing Jesus—what we have wanted all along.

Judgment and Mercy

People sometimes suppose that judgment is an "Old Testament" idea, whereas in the New Testament you find only mercy. This isn't even a caricature; it's simple fiction.

Tom Wright, Romans for Everyone, Part 1, p. 29.

I hate wait

Before Christmas, I submitted an abstract for a Science and Religion conference being held in the UK in July. It would be a great conference to go to - it's my area of research; it's being held in honour of one of the foremost science and religion scholars in the world, whose work has been important in the development of my own ideas; there will be lots of other top-class scholars there, whose work I have also used extensively; it will be a great opportunity to network and share my research just before finalising my PhD thesis; and it's in England. I love England!

It's been nearly 7 weeks since the abstracts were due, and I still haven't heard whether mine has been accepted or rejected. I received an email from the organiser in early January, saying that he's received my abstract and that decisions should be made by the beginning of February. I waited until more than a week of February had passed, and sent a very nice email inquiring about when I might hear something. He said Monday. It's now Saturday. Well, in the UK, it's nearly Saturday. And I still haven't heard anything.

I'm not a very patient person, and I'm getting quite frustrated!

Maybe I could give him my word as a Spaniard? No good, he's probably known too many Spaniards...

I hate wait.

The Great Debate?


Chaser headline on the back of today's Herald:

Even worm refuses to watch Debnam-Iemma debate


I was watching it with my dad, and there wasn't even enough interest to have us making fun of the politicians (not for long, anyway). I resorted to tossing grapes at my dad.

Can I vote for Quentin Dempster?

Friday, February 16, 2007

Looking at the moon, thinking of the universe


About this time I started to read an article in a magazine, on the subject of the basic difference between the male and female habits of thought, relating chiefly to their experience of sex (the title of the article made you think it would tell a great deal more about sex than it actually did). The author was a famous New York psychiatrist, a disciple of Freud. He said that the difference between the male and female modes of through were easily illustrated by the thoughts of a boy and girl, sitting on a park bench, looking at the full moon. The boy thinks of the universe, its immensity and mystery; the girl thinks, "I must wash my hair." When I read this I was frantically upset; I had to put the magazine down. It was clear to me at once that I was not thinking as the girl thought; the full moon would never as long as I lived remind me to wash my hair... I wanted men to love me, and I wanted to think of the universe when I looked at the moon.

Alice Munro, Lives of Girls and Woman

Baptism

He pushed me down again but this time I was expecting it. I held my breath and fought him. I fought strongly and naturally, as anybody does, held down in the water, and without thinking much about who was holding me. But when he let me come up just long enough to hear him say, "Now say you'll do it," I saw his face streaming with water I had splashed over him and I felt amazement, not that I was fighting with Garnet but that anybody could have made such a mistake, to think he had real power over me. I was too amazed to be angry, I forgot to be frightened, it seemed to me impossible that he should not understand that all the powers I granted him were in play.

Alice Munro, Lives of Girls and Women

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Happy Birthday Galileo!

On this day in 1564, Galileo Galilei was born at Pisa.

Galileo and the so-called "Galileo Affair" have been favourite soap-boxes of mine for quite some time. People who know me well generally know not to get me started. People who don't know me well and make the mistake of commenting on how badly the Church treated Galileo generally regret it. I'm not exactly sure when this interest of mine began, however. The earliest exposure I had to the name of Galileo, as far as I can remember, would have been a song by the Christian pop singer Amy Grant. This would have been back when I was in primary school, when I was about 10 years old. I remember going to a concert of hers - she was touring after the release of her album Heart in Motion. One of my favourite songs on the album (I still enjoy it!) is called "Galileo." It has cute lyrics:

In the year of fourteen ninety-two
When Columbus sailed the ocean blue
Had he landed on India's shore
You might never have come to knock on my door.

Who needs a rhyme or a reason?
Some dreams were made to find
So I know that I must follow

Ask me just how much I love you
You are starlight, I'm Galileo
Even on the darkest night oh
I will find the shining light of our love.

I'm not sure if I found out much more about Galileo during primary school. The next time I encountered his story, as far as I can remember, was in my first year at university. I was enrolled in a Bachelor of Medical Science, but I decided to take some Science and Technology Studies subjects as electives. (It sounded more interesting than physics, psychology or computer science, and it turned out to be one of the best decisions I've ever made!) The first subject I took was called Cosmos and Culture, and it was an overview of the history of science from the ancient Greeks to the 20th century. It was all very new to me, but I was loving it. We got to the Copernican Revolution and Galileo the week before our major essay was due, but I was fascinated enough to abandon my research on Aristotle in order to write about whether the Copernican Revolution was indeed a revolution. I'm still amused that I relied heavily on Thomas Kuhn's 1957 classic The Copernican Revolution without knowing anything of its significance or that of the follow-up, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. But that's another story.

The main thing I remember hearing about Galileo is this class was how the Church had condemned him as a heretic on the basis of just one short passage from Scripture:

Joshua 10:12-14 - At that time Joshua spoke to the LORD in the day when the LORD gave the Amorites over to the sons of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, "Sun, stand still at Gibeon, and moon, in the Valley of Aijalon." And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day. There has been no day like it before or since, when the LORD obeyed the voice of a man, for the LORD fought for Israel.

The message I received from this class was the Galileo was condemned as a heretic because the Church insisted on a literal interpretation of this passage. Of course the sun moves! Joshua wouldn't have told the sun to stop moving if it had actually been the earth that was moving - he would have told the earth to stop spinning! And because of this, science and religion became mortal enemies, as they still are. I remember thinking how stupid the Church was, and how it was responsible for the conflict between science and religion, just because they insisted on a literal interpretation of a verse that was obviously not meant to be taken as a scientific statement.

Such was my initial understanding of the "Galileo Affair." I was 18 years old, a first-year university student who had not yet even embarked on my career as an aspiring historian of science. I was still planning to study medicine to become an anaesthesiologist at that stage! But just as my continuing studies convinced me that I should head down a different path, so they also showed me that the "Galileo Affair" was not as straightforward as it first seemed.

While Galileo is often referred to as the "father of modern science," it is difficult to classify him as a scientist, or even a natural philosopher, as the people who studied the natural world were known at that time. Galileo was primarily a mathematician, although he sought the title of "philosopher" as they were more highly paid.

Galileo excelled at cultivating favour with the aristocracy, through his performances in debates, dedications of important works, and gifts of instruments such as the telescope. Contrary to popular belief, Galileo did not invent the telescope, nor was he the first person to use it in looking at the heavens - just perhaps the most outspoken! However good Galileo was at increasing his public profile, he was also very good at making enemies. His performances in debates often left his opponents looking stupid - a good thing for his patrons, but not when he needed crucial support from the academic community.

In his short book, Galileo, Stillman Drake argued that Galileo's condemnation by the Inquisition in 1633 was not a result of his defiance of the Church, but was rather caused by the hostility of contemporary philosophers. We are so conditioned to view the "Galileo Affair" as the result of an inevitable conflict between science and religion that this may come as a shock, but this is not a new perspective. Drake's book was first released in 1980, though the 2001 "Very Short Introduction" edition still labelled this as "a startling reinterpretation of the evidence."

If I go into too much detail here, this post will become far too long. I suspect that many people have already stopped reading! But here's a few points, just to whet your appetite.

We need to remember that this was a troubled time for the Church. The Reformation had challenged the authority of the Catholic Church, particularly with regard to the interpretation of Scripture. However, Pope Urban VIII, the one who eventually unleashed the Inquisition on to Galileo, was initially a huge fan. He even wrote a poem about Galileo, and gave him permission to write the Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems which eventually landed Galileo in hot water. Galileo made the mistake of putting the Pope's favourite argument into the mouth of Simplicio - the character in the dialogue who is indeed shown to be a simpleton. Urged on by Galileo's philosophical enemies, the Pope was not pleased. Even Cardinal Bellarmine - arch-Counter-Reformationist - who was intimately involved in the early years of the "Galileo Affair" but who had passed away before the 1633 trial, was prepared to at least consider reinterpreting certain passages of the Bible, so long as there was good reason... but Galileo had no real evidence.

Wait a minute! No evidence? Didn't Galileo have his telescope? Common sense? The scientific method?? Well... that's going to take too long to explain thoroughly. Stay tuned for details on where you can find out more!

So there was a context of religious upheaval, and the Church was anxious to retain its authority. But what is "the Church"? There was no such monolithic institution. For starters, there were the Protestant and Catholic churches (emphasis on the plural), and even within each of these, there were differing viewpoints. And the idea of "the Church" suppressing science? What is this "science" you speak of? There was "natural philosophy" - a mode of natural inquiry much broader than what we view science as - and there were many varieties of this as well. And there were the mechanical sciences (again, emphasis on the plural) which weren't considered to be on the same explanatory level as natural philosophy. A conflict between science and religion? Which science? Which religion? You can see how it gets complicated.

It's probably more accurate to view the Galileo Affair as a conflict between "old science" and "new science" than between "science" and "religion." The academic establishment of the day, which happened to be closely aligned with the Catholic Church, but by no means homogeneous theologically, resisted Galileo's attempts to change the accepted view of how the universe worked. And since Galileo's evidence was rather less than compelling, perhaps they were the really "scientific" or "rational" ones after all.

But still, Galileo was a great thinker, and I am a big fan. I particularly like his way of looking at nature as the work of God, and seeking to understand it better in this context. And the "Galileo Affair" and his work and ideas are important for striving to understand how religious belief and scientific understanding of the natural world relate to each other.

Some key quotes:

Take note, theologians, that in your desire to makes matters of faith out of propositions relating to the fixity of the sun and earth you run the risk of eventually having to condemn as heretics those who would declare the earth to stand still and the sun to change position - eventually, I say, at such a time as it might be physically or logically proved that the earth moves and the sun stands still.
- Note added by Galileo in the preliminary leaves of his copy of Dialogue on the Great World Systems (1632)

Philosophy is written in this grand book, the universe, which stands continually open to our gaze. But the book cannot be understood unless one first learns to comprehend the language and read the letters in which it is composed. It is written in the language of mathematics, and its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometric figures without which it is humanly impossible to understand a single word of it; without these, one wanders about in a dark labyrinth.
- The Assayer (1623)

But I do not feel obliged to believe that that same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them
- Letter to Madame Christina of Lorraine, Grand Duchess of Tuscany (1615)


That's all for now, folks, but if you should wish to hear more, I will be "Revisiting the Galileo Affair" on Tuesday, April 17, as part of the CASE Christianity and Contemporary Thought lecture series. I hope to see you all there (although those who live in a different hemisphere will, of course, be excused).

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Lame Science, Blind Religion

Separate but equal? Faith versus evidence? Not convinced.

Click here.

Does Dawkins exist?

A parable.

Sunday, February 11, 2007

If I had a hammer...

My dad just walked through the house holding a hammer and some nails.

Ah, you've got a hammer! Are you going to hammer in the morning?

Well, no, it's the afternoon now.

Are you going to hammer in the evening?

I hope to be finished before then.

Are you going to hammer all over this land?

No, just the back step.

Is it a hammer of justice?

No, it's a claw hammer.

Are you going to hammer out justice?

No.

Are you going to hammer out warning?

No.

Love between your brothers and your sisters all over this land?

Nope, I'm just going to fix the step.


He's now finished hammering...

Saturday, February 03, 2007

Sargeant Pepper

A stylish way to defend oneself from attackers. Too bad it's illegal here!

Thursday, February 01, 2007

Loving it

Michael Jensen on blogging

Click here.

Putting 9/11 into perspective

Imagine that on 9/11, six hours after the assault on the twin towers and the Pentagon, terrorists had carried out a second wave of attacks on the United States, taking an additional 3,000 lives. Imagine that six hours after that, there had been yet another wave. Now imagine that the attacks had continued, every six hours, for another four years, until nearly 20 million Americans were dead. This is roughly what the Soviet Union suffered during World War II, and contemplating these numbers may help put in perspective what the United States has so far experienced during the war against terrorism.

Continue reading here.

Education or Indoctrination?

Nick has written a post about a movie called Jesus Camp. I thought my comment was going to get too long, so I'm posting it here instead.

Where do you draw the line between education and indoctrination? Can you give children a choice without educating them about religion anyway? I was a Christian from a young age, but I don't think I was indoctrinated. Do you? I didn't have a full understanding of what it meant to be a Christian. I "asked Jesus into my heart" when I was about 3 or 4 (maybe older, I can't remember), but I didn't really know what it meant. I did it just after my bath - I thought he'd be able to get in more easily if I wasn't wearing any clothes! But just because I only had a child's understanding doesn't mean I was indoctrinated. It wasn't something I was forced to do. I wanted to do it, and my parents weren't even in the room at the time.

My understanding of Christianity grew gradually as I got older. I don't know exactly when I understood different things, but I remember trying to evangelise my friends when I was about 6 or 7 (I was a very cute little girl back then, by the way). I organised a group of my friends at school into a little singing group and we performed some Sunday School songs for the rest of the class (and we were invited next door to sing to the other class as well). I used to invite friends to Sunday School. No one told me to. I just wanted my friends to know what I knew about Jesus. Does this sound like indoctrination?

When I was 12 (only 2 years older than your cut-off of 10), at Easter time, it really hit me just how significant and important it was that Jesus died for me. I count this as the time that I made a real commitment to Christ, and took my parents' faith on for myself. But that doesn't mean that I didn't believe it before, or that I just believed because my parents did. If that was the case, I might not have stayed a Christian. No one would have forced me to. My parents might not have been happy, but I'm sure they would have respected my decision.

Yes, my parents "forced" me to go to Sunday School when I was a kid. Mostly I enjoyed it, but sometimes I wanted to sleep in on Sunday mornings. But they forced me to do a lot of other things too - eat vegetables, go to school, practise piano - I'm grateful for all of it. Except for the brussels sprouts.

I'm a Christian, and I consider that I have been one pretty much my whole life. Although my understanding has changed, there was never a time that I didn't believe in God or what he has done. But I've always had a choice. I've had plenty of chances to change my mind. I've had my faith and beliefs challenged. I haven't shied away from such challenges - I read books by authors such as Dawkins, and I get into debates with people like Peter Slezak. I am not a Christian out of ignorance. The more I read and the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. This, I think, is what Dawkins just doesn't get. He seems to think that the only Christians who aren't ignorant, indoctrinated and blind are the ones whose beliefs hardly resemble Christianity any more. He's wrong.

Art and Science


Title: In Saturn's Shadow
2006, NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute

With giant Saturn hanging in the blackness and sheltering Cassini from the sun's blinding glare, the spacecraft viewed the rings as never before, revealing previously unknown faint rings and even glimpsing its home world.

Read more here.