(2^nd Edition, Enlarged)

Thomas S. Kuhn.

University of Chicago Press. 1962,1970.

The history science has seen some radically transform our concepts of space, time and matter. How are we to make sense of such earth-shaking changes in belief?

One book that sheds considerable light on these questions, and helps to keep them in perspective, is “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”, by historian and philosopher of science, Thomas S. Kuhn

It would be hard to overstate the intellectual stir this book has caused.

Prior to the publication of this work, it was almost universally believed that science progressed steadily as a process of accretion. By improving and refining their models, scientists were gradually adding new knowledge to the existing knowledge – the existing knowledge remained true, but it was just stated more accurately.

Kuhn argued that the history of science showed that this was simply not the case.

There were times when science progressed in this manner. However, these peaceful problem solving periods were interspersed with revolutions (some violent, some so subtle as to almost go unnoticed), in which accepted truths were rejected and fundamental assumptions had to be revised. Kuhn coined the term paradigm to describe the underlying assumptions of a science, and the term “paradigm shift” to describe the change in assumptions that occurs during a scientific revolution.

Kuhn’s book reveals the way in which assumptions implicitly underlie all science and the difficulties inherent in communicating revolutionary ideas. More controversially, it also challenges the idea that the sciences are uncovering objective truth.

However, in our search for Truth we need to discover how we can get beyond changeable mortal belief, to a certainty that is based on spiritual understanding rather than simply dogma. As Mary Baker Eddy explained: “ Belief is changeable, but spiritual understanding is changeless.”

As I explore some of these ideas in my lecture “Moving Faith Beyond Belief”;

“When Jesus became God” is the title of a very interesting book by Richard E Rubenstein, that I just finished reading. Given my interest in God, Christ Jesus and moving religious conviction beyond belief and dogma, you’ll understand why I found this book such a gripping read. I thoroughly recommend it.

The book is subtitled “The controversy that split Christianity during the last days of Rome”. And I have to say it was quite an eye-opener!

For some time, I have know that the doctrine that Jesus is God – ( God the Son, rather than the Son of God ) – was something that arose at ecumenical councils of the church in the 4^th Century – I had heard of the council of Nicaea in 325 and the Nicaean Creed that came out of this council, and that the decision making process, included excommunications from the church and might not have been entirely fair. However, I had no idea of the politics, skulduggery and brutality that accompanied the establishment of the Trinitarian doctrine. The fact that people calling themselves Christians (often bishops even!) could have behaved in this way is as shocking as the underlying theological questions are important and interesting.

Rubenstein’s book is very insightful in bringing out the motivations for this conflict. Given that this is an issue which rested on so little evidence, it is very sobering to read how this debate about the nature of Christ’s divinity could become so divisive and lead to so much bloodshed. And there are lessons for today.

Read Richard A Nenneman’s review from the Christian Science Monitor.

Join a discussion on ChristianScience.com that explores the divinity of Jesus.

Or share your thoughts here by leaving a comment…

God keeps making the news! There was a topical debate this morning on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, following a talk yesterday by Roman Catholic Archbishop, Cormac Murphy O’Connor, in which he asked “Is public life in Britain becoming a God free zone?” This is actually part of a series of lectures that kick off on April 3rd with Tony Blair. They can found at www.rcdow.org.uk/lectures/

Anyway the Today reported that talk as a plea for greater understanding between Christians and Atheists, and that bizarrly we could be united in our doubts about God. I haven’t been able to listen to the lecture myself yet, but suspect there was a little more to his argument than that. Cormac Murphy O’Conner was interviewed around 8:10, and these interviews can be heard again (during the next 7 days) on the Radio 4 website www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ or downloaded as a podcast.

Richard Dawkins was interviewed prior to this (at around 7:17am) and he made a very valid point that we should require evidence when it comes to faith, and not just settle for belief. Something I am always keen to point out in my lectures!

Please share your thoughts, what evidence do you have for your religious convictions?

(To comment click on the comment link below and add your own comment)