Academic literature on the topic 'Arthur Peacocke'

The work of Arthur Peacocke may be considered to be a good example of the effort to link the findings and theories of new cosmology to the world of theology and religious thinking in a consistent and credible way. Highlights of Peacocke's theology pertaining to this venture are discussed. Some of the issues that are dealt with include his anti-reductionist approach, his critical realist stand, and his use of metaphor. Attention is also given to God's interaction with the world, the interaction of law and chance, God's self-limited omnipotence and omniscience, God and time, the suffering of creation and kenosis. The article concludes with some critical questions posed to Peacocke.

AbstractAgainst a background of increasing concern over climate change and other instances of ecological degradation, this paper aims to explore two ideas in the thought of Anglican theologian and biochemist Arthur Peacocke in relation to their ecotheological promise. First, Peacocke’s understanding of ‘emergence’ affirms the diversity of the created world and makes possible the understanding of Jesus Christ as the emergence of a new reality; these concepts resonate with the value given to biodiversity in ecological thought. Second, the idea that God expresses Godself through the material world in the process of creation, together with an emphasis on the biophysical composition of Jesus Christ, allows a high claim to be made for matter which resonates with an ecological affirmation of the value of the natural world. By asserting the prevalence of diversity and the value of matter, Peacocke’s thought provides a theological framework which coheres with an ecological ethos.

Both Jürgen Moltmann and Arthur Peacocke have sought to address environmental concerns in their theologies. Moltmann espouses the traditional Western theology of history articulated by Augustine, which hinders him in using scientific information with credibility and respect. Peacocke, as a scientist, writes from a theology of history more akin to that of the ancient Greek and Roman history writers, and this makes it difficult for him to accommodate the unique and revelatory content of the Christian faith. This impasse may be resolved by loosening the theology-history nexus, and by allowing the cosmos a limited autonomy in its relationship to God.

This thesis explores the work of three theologians, Arthur Peacocke, John Haught and Denis Edwards, each of whom has made a significant contribution to the dialogue between contemporary evolutionary biology and the Christian understanding of God. The thesis explores and analyses how evolutionary theory throws light on key theological themes such as the nature of God's providence, especially in relation to pain, suffering and evil, and the meaning of Jesus Christ. The thesis involves a critical reading of the selected theologians' works, with their respective emphases on classical, process and kenotic types of theological thinking, and also draws on resources from the classical theological tradition, primarily St. Thomas Aquinas. The study gives a positive assessment of the contributions of the three chosen authors. It highlights the critical importance that theological methodology plays in formulating insights into the relationship of God to evolutionary processes. Peacocke emphasises the use of critical realism as the most credible methodology for theology, consistent with its use by science. Haught agrees with this approach stressing, however, that the data of theology is not the same as that for science. Consequently, he argues that theology ought to constitute the deepest layer of explanation for understanding reality and for understanding God as the ultimate explanation for evolution. Edwards argues that we must find a way of talking about God that is consonant with the reality of the world but that this God always remains ultimately Mystery. Peacocke, Haught and Edwards explore the usefulness of kenotic theology for explaining how belief in an omnipotent and supremely loving God can be reconciled with the existence of pain, suffering and evil in the creation. Although a kenotic approach can account for the scientific evidence of a “self-creative” and emergent cosmos along with the presence of suffering and evil, a more comprehensive theological viewpoint must include an understanding of how God is active in creation, sustaining it in existence and drawing it towards its divinely ordained end. Haught's argument for the presence of genuine contingency in the cosmos as evidence of God's on-going creativity is critically examined. Genuinely new possibilities, in evolutionary terms, new species, cannot be explained by material causation alone. In his “metaphysics of the future”, Haught argues that, despite the enormity of pain and suffering evidenced in evolution, God continues to lovingly draw the creation towards a hopeful and promised future in God. This thesis appreciates the value of Edwards’ trinitarian “God of evolution” for it combines a more classical theological approach with evolutionary theory. For Edwards, biological evolution is seen as a process within an ontologically relational creation that reflects the divine relations of the Trinity. The creation of being-in-relation flows out of, and reflects, the divine trinitarian relations of mutual love. Edwards’ insights into the nature of original sin and grace within an evolutionary context are also positively assessed. Both Peacocke and Edwards propose a Wisdom Christology as the most fruitful link between the biblical Sophia tradition and a creation theology, holding together insights on the divine Being, Wisdom and the Christ-event itself. Aspects of process and kenotic theologies can be usefully combined with Aquinas' expansive notion of God as ultimate Being. Through this synthesis, the drama of evolution is more intimately related with the ultimate reality, the Mystery of God. Throughout this thesis, gender-neutral language has been maintained except in some quotations of St. Thomas Aquinas.

Arthur Peacocke (1924-2006), a physical biochemist turned theologian, is a leading figure deeply engaged in science-religion dialogue. In the course of his career, Peacocke struggles with the question of divine action. He advocates an “Emergentist- Naturalistic-Panenthesitic” (ENP) framework for his divine action project which offers a new paradigm for the divine action discussion. A comprehensive review and critical evaluation of Peacocke’s project will be provided in this thesis. Furthermore, as the impressive work of Peacocke has been reviewed by many scholars, an analytical and critical survey of these responses will be included in this research.
亞瑟克．皮卡克Arthur Peacocke(1924–2006)是一名物理生物化學家及神學家，是當代宗教與科學對話的主導人物之一。在他的科學生涯中，皮氏已經開始反覆思考有關神聖行動(Divine Action)的問題。其後，皮氏融合有神論自然主義(Theistic Naturalism)、冒現一元論(Emergentist Monism)和萬有在神論(Panentheism)等三個不同的進路來建構他神聖行動理論的神學框架。皮氏這創新的框架為討論整個神聖行動提供了一個新的範式。皮氏的理論得到了其他活躍於宗教與科學對話的學者的注意，更有不少學者曾撰文回應皮氏的理論。本研究的重點有二，分別為：對皮氏的神聖行動理論提供一個全面的闡析和評論，以及回應不同學者對皮氏的批評。
Kung, Wai Han.
Thesis M.Phil. Chinese University of Hong Kong 2013.
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 330-349).
Abstracts also in Chinese.
Title from PDF title page (viewed on 18, October, 2016).
Kung, Wai Han.
Detailed summary in vernacular field only.

AbstractIf the microphysical domain is deterministic, this would seem to leave God with only two ways of influencing events: setting initial conditions or law-breaking intervention. Arthur Peacocke and Philip Clayton argue there is a third possibility, if there is strong emergence. We will examine four candidates for emergence: of intentionality from computational animal behavior, of sentience from biology, of biology from chemistry, and of chemistry from finite quantum mechanics. In all four cases, a kind of finite-to-infinite transition in modeling is required, and in each case a kind of randomness is involved, potentially opening up a third avenue for divine action.