The need to position Christianity in relation to other religions notably Judaism and Islam, has brought about renewed interest in the theme of creation, which has been off the theological agenda for much of this century. Environmentalists, biologists feminists and process theologians have all registered concerns from their particular standpoints, about the way the traditional doctrine of creation characterises the relationship between the cosmos and its creator. The holism of the New Age and its resonance with eastern patterns of thought seems to offer something radically different from the Judaeo-Christian understanding of creation. In the light of these concerns the author argues for the doctrine of creation as a distinctively Christian article of faith. In recognising at the the same time that criticisms made of its traditional formulations must be properly acknowledged and accommodated, the author is able to use the best insights from secular disclipines to construct a theology of creation which is truly responsible.
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
0 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Book Review,
By
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Cosmos and the Creator (Paperback)
In his small but dense book, The Cosmos and the Creator: An Introduction to the Theology of Creation [Not to be confused with Hugh Ross's The Creator and the Cosmos: How the Latest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God, first published in 1993, rev eds. 1995, 2001], David A. S. Fergusson seeks to satisfy two ambitions; first, to argue that "the doctrine of creation must remain a distinctively Christian article of faith." "However," he continues with the second, "it must also recognize and accommodate some of the criticisms that have been laid at the door of its traditional formulations together with the best insights from other disciplines" (3).Fergusson opens his book by looking at the doctrine of creation in the context of the Old Testament, including the Genesis account as it relates to alternative Ancient Near-Eastern creation myths. He writes, "Scholarship in the history of religions has shown that stories of creation are found throughout the world in the oldest cultures," but advises against "the temptation to search frantically for distinctive elements within the ancient Hebrew account of Creation" (5). Although Fergusson does go on to observe some differences (7-8), it needs to be pointed out that the History of Religions school, from which these alleged parallels are frantically produced, is not a credible source [He's clearly referencing the 19th century German think-tank religionsgeschichtliche Schule. Chief among their aims was to identify and collect such parallels in an attempt to explain the evolutionary origins of contemporary religions. Characteristic of the History of Religions school was what Samuel Sandmel has called "parallelomania," or "that extravagance among scholars which first overdoes the supposed similarity in passages and then proceeds to describe source and derivation as if implying literary connection flowing in an inevitable or predetermined direction." See his "Parallelomania," Journal of Biblical Literature 81 (1962), 1]. And, moreover, the distinctions need not be searched for `frantically'. They couldn't be more stark [See Copan and Craig, Creation out of Nothing: A Biblical, Philosophical, and Scientific Exploration (Baker, 2004), ch. 1]. Fergusson moves on and briefly considers the issue of modern science and the literal reading of the days in Genesis, finding it wanting. Following this is a somewhat tangential discussion on our "current educational scene" (11). He closes the section by noting and endorsing the claim that Gen 1:1 does not provide support for the notion of creation out of nothing (12-13) and even says of Gen 1:2 that "the presence of primeval chaos seems to precede and menace the creative activity of God" (7). These remarks are dark. Scholarship and tradition are not in his favor [Again see Copan and Craig (ibid.), as well as Genesis 1-11: A Continental Commentary (Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1994); Sailhammer, Kaiser, et al., Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers: Expositor's Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 1990); Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 1: Genesis 1-15 (Thomas Nelson, 1987)]. Next Fergusson shifts focus to the concept of the image of God and the problem of domination (13), concluding that the former should be understood "not substantively in terms of the possession of an immortal soul, but relationally in terms of the role that human beings play before God and before the rest of creation" (14), and the latter in terms of responsible stewardship. He closes the chapter by situating the doctrine of creation in the theological context of redemption, concluding that "creation and incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection are intimately connected" (22). Fergusson begins the second chapter, "Creation and Cosmology," with a statement already found unsubstantiated: "The doctrine of creation out of nothing us not explicitly taught in Scripture. The opening chapter of the Bible seems to presuppose a formless waste out of which the heaven and the earth are created" (23). Ferguson thus proceeds to consider what historic factors explain the quick and sudden acceptance of the doctrine of creation out of nothing (24-25), traditional interpretations of it (25-28), and its confession in all three Abrahamic faiths (28-29). Regarding the lattermost, Ferguson points out "strong Trinitarian reasons within Christian theology for affirming the doctrine," and, in the end, affirms its Biblical basis (29-31). Next, Ferguson considers a range of criticisms the doctrine encounters today, arguing that while "not cogent" they do "point to some puzzling aspects of the doctrine" (32). Much of these criticisms stem from process theology and God's freedom to create (32-36). As Ferguson addresses these criticisms, I found it ironic that he says "There is much at stake in the way in which we conceive of the relationship between God and the world" (34-35), when, in the previous chapter, he dismissed translational issues of Gen 1:1, on which hangs the difference between creation ex nihilo and ex materia, "for theologically it makes little difference" (12). Fergusson then turns to the cosmological argument for the existence of God. It is this section Fergusson is perhaps most dismissive. He writes the kalam cosmological argument, perhaps the most widely-discussed cosmological argument in contemporary natural theology [See the various works of William Lane Craig. E.g., The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Wipf and Stock, ed. 2000), Craig and Smith, Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology (Clarendon Paperbacks) (Oxford, 2003). See also Mark Nowacki, The Kalam Cosmological Argument for God (Studies in Analytic Philosophy) (Prometheus, 2007)] off in two sentences: "The difficulty with this argument as a proof is that it is hard logically to exclude an everlasting temporal series of causes stretching endlessly backwards. It is also difficult conclusively to refute the hypothesis that the world may have no efficient cause, i.e. it sprang into being uncaused" (36). Having demolished the most widely defended cosmological argument to date, Fergusson next looks at the Leibnizian cosmological argument. His dismissal of this argument, also defended at length today [See the various works of Alexander Pruss. E.g., The Principle of Sufficient Reason: A Reassessment (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy) (Cambridge, 2006) and his "Leibnizian Cosmological Arguments" in The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology (Wiley-Blackwell, 2009), 24-100], is with a single question: "Can it refute the tough-minded opponent, like David Hume, who simply denies that the universe itself must have a sufficient explanation?" (37). Ultimately Ferguson finds sympathy with Swinburne's inductive cosmological argument, but even then claims it rests on an intuition non-theists aren't likely to have (39). Unimpressed by cosmological arguments in philosophy, Ferguson then surveys recent advances in Big Bang cosmology. In this context, I found his remarks on how the steady-state model is compatible with the Christian doctrine of creation quite fascinating (43), although his comment that "there is no relationship of necessary entailment between big bang cosmology and the doctrine of creation out of nothing" is, unfortunately, confused [Consider astrophysicists John Barrow and Frank Tipler's description of the standard big bang model: "At this singularity, space and time came into existence; literally nothing existed before the singularity, so, if the Universe originated at such a singularity, we would truly have a creation ex nihilo." The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford Paperbacks) (Oxford, 1986), 442]. In light of recent cosmological findings, he concludes that "there is some convergence between theology and modern science..." (43). Ferguson closes the chapter looking forward to the next, the subject of which is possible scientific support for the doctrine of creation in other areas, such as design. The strength of the book is found in its chapter "Creation and Evolution." Fergusson opens with a brief description of evolutionary theory as proposed by Darwin and its contemporary variants (46-49) in order to set the stage for his section on what he calls "the creationist controversy" (49). He prefaces the discussion by reviewing the Creationism's historical roots, finding particularly relevant in this regard Protestant convictions about the inerrancy and character of scripture (50-51). By `creationism,' it is clear that Fergusson has in mind the view advocated by, say, the Answers in Genesis folk. Fergusson pulls no punches. So understood, "creationism is at odds with current scientific orthodoxy" (52), is "scientifically untenable and theologically misguided" (53), and is "an impossible position to adopt, and in any case it is religiously unnecessary (55). Fergusson naturally follows this with a favorable "dialogue with evolutionary theory" (56), in which the explanations of chance and design are analyzed and compared (56-61). Here Fergusson claims that the so-called anthropic principle raises the likelihood of design. But the likelihood of design does not eliminate chance from playing a significant role, fergusson says. Fergusson considers how chance can find a home in theistic worldview as "part of God's design and oversight rather than in conflict... Read more ›
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
