Transcript
Speaker: Well, hello and welcome to Pep Talk, the persuasive evangelism podcast brought to you by Solas, a podcast that I'm sure you know releases every second week. Well, I hope you know if you've been listening regularly. But I am very, very excited to be with you again today. My name is Steve Osmond, and I'm ah joined by my colleague, who you should know, Gavin Matthews. Gavin, are you doing today?
Speaker: I'm doing really well, Steve. How are you? Very good. Thank you. Very good. Keeping warm. Well, trying anyway. ah Well, today we are joined by a very, very interesting guest all the way ah from down in London, Alistair McKittrick-Adastair. How are you doing?
Speaker: Really well. Great to be with you. Yes. Thank you so much for taking the time to speak to us. um i'm ah I'm personally very excited to chat to you because just last year we spent just on three weeks, was it, together down in Cambridge for a Very exciting faith and science conference, which ah you can hopefully tell us a little bit about.
Speaker: um it was yeah the the podcast It was epic. It was it was it was grueling, but glorious. um Three weeks of science and faith. Well, yeah, it's very niche, I suppose, but but I loved it because that's ah my background. And so, um yeah, maybe to to kick things off, Alistair, do you want to just tell us a little bit more about yourself? You know, where where it is that you currently work, and some of your your background, family, maybe some of the church involvement, ah just for our listeners to get to know you very briefly.
Speaker: Thanks. Yeah, I'd love to. Well, I was born in Scotland, up where you guys are, so that's important to know. But I've lived most of my ah so working life down in England, and um I'm currently teaching at the London School of Theology, where I have the privilege of leading the program in practical theology and ministry, which is a master's course. and ah But I also get to do some other cool teaching like apologetics and hermeneutics and and various other things like that. So I'm really loving my job down here.
Speaker: and Grew up in Edinburgh. ah um I ah studied physics, first of all, at Manchester University and ah had the great joy of going off and being a maths and science teacher over in Zimbabwe for a year ah which was great. But it was during that time that I really felt the Lord was calling me to study theology. So came back and actually studied ah here and where I'm teaching now. It was called London Bible College at the time.
Speaker: um and And then from there on in taught at to now, this is my third Bible college where I've been able to teach theology, biblical theology and practical theology. And of course, um some apologetics along the way as well.
Speaker: Very good. I thought in the introduction I could hear a bit of a Scottish lilt to your accent. You've held on to your accent. That's great. Well, but not not according to anybody normally in Scotland.
Speaker: When I'm down here, I'm sounding Scottish. When I'm up there, I'm sounding English. ah You can never really win. I can still hear that. That's marvellous. So what took you to Zimbabwe? what What were you doing in Africa? What influence did that have on you?
Speaker: It had a big influence. Well, having finished my physics degree, I thought that I would be terribly generous and give God a year of my life. I thought it was the least I could do. And um so I wrote off to several missionary agencies. and and And as it happened, I grew up in an Elam ah church. At least my formative years, teenage years, were in an Elam church.
Speaker: I got baptized as an Elam Pentecostal person. And they wrote back and said, yeah, we can send you off to ah Zimbabwe. We can set you up with this eminent missionary bloke. You can help him out and just learn something on the job.
Speaker: Of course, ah Christian organizations are not always that great. And when I got out there, the eminent missionary bloke had left. And so, in fact, I took over his job. And I became head of the department of mathematics and housemaster. And I lived in his house. I even ah even looked after his dog.
Speaker: So... I just sort took over the role. It was, I think it was a fantastic experience. it was God just throwing me in at the deep end, and um which is something I quite enjoy, to be honest.
Speaker: And it was it was during that time that I really felt ah that ah God called me to sort of study theology because the kind of teaching that was going on in some of the local churches was pretty weird.
Speaker: And I had a strong sense that ah what um what I could really commit my life to was teaching ah faithfully the Word of God. So ah how long were you in ah Zimbabwe before that sort of calling started finding its feet, I suppose? And then how what did that transition look like for you? Was that going back to studies? or It was fairly early on. I mean, I was there for a year and um I just found myself sitting on my lovely veranda, looking out on some fantastic views out in the sticks, ah but studying some doctrine or biblical text when I was supposed to be preparing for some math lessons. So, you know, my...
Speaker: My interest in theology had always been quite high. i was quite active in the Christian Union at Manchester University. And so I had always ah that sort of strong sense of mission. um And ah as I say, that that sort of my eyes were opened when I when i started to see what what was being taught. I started to hear what was being taught in some of the churches. I thought this is um this is a real need. And probably God didn't need another maths teacher.
Speaker: ah Probably God could do with ah ah somebody to so teach faithfully the Word of God. and the The science and faith discussion has obviously been a huge conversation going on in our culture, um but a shifting conversation, i suspect. I think um we've certainly seen the neo-atheists rise and and start to dissipate a bit over the last few years.
Speaker: Where do you see the conversation, at not so much in the church, but in in the world, and in amongst people that we're trying to share the gospel with um and in wider culture or maybe in universities or schools?
Speaker: Where's the conversation at today? Is it different than 10 years ago? What sort of things are we going to come up against as if you identify as a Christian? from people who've got some engagement with this conversation. Where do you see the conversation being at today? Yeah, I think it's different from where it was 20 years ago. I think in the last 10 years, actually, and there's been ah ah quite an interesting shift.
Speaker: um So just under 10 years ago, 2016, there was a ah really impressive ah three-day conference at the Royal Society. it was joint with the the British and Academy.
Speaker: and it was led And it was organized by a fellow called Dennis Noble, who's a fellow there, and he's an Oxford professor of physiology. And the opening ah the opening talk was by an Austrian a geneticist called Gert Muller.
Speaker: And he basically started off this ah three-day conference saying, Darwinism as we know it doesn't work. It doesn't explain the complexity of anatomy. It doesn't explain how we got changes.
Speaker: And it doesn't explain explain anything about how rapidly things have arrived. And so he he may as well have been giving an intelligent design talk. He wasn't, and he's not committed to the movement at all.
Speaker: But ah the the whole three-day conference was generated because when he said, we need a new theory. Neodarwinism just doesn't work. And Dennis Noble, who had organized the conference, ah also says, look, we have been wedded to a neo-Darwinian sort of worldview and explanation, and it doesn't work, and we need to get rid of it. And the problem, he says, is that it's been presented as truth.
Speaker: Now, these are not Christians. Neither of them is a Christian supporter. Dennis Noble doesn't have believe God at all. But ah the the point is that the yeah it's within the highest echelons of the scientific academy that the ah the sort of the the scientific worldview that says we just don't need God.
Speaker: We've got all the explanation for how we appeared here in the universe, how we became alive. ah We've got that all buttoned up. it's It's a material explanation. You just don't need God.
Speaker: And what we're finding is in the in the last 10 years or so, the top people are saying, yeah, but this is not working. we We need another explanation and we haven't got one. And is that filtered out to the schools, though, or are science teachers in schools ah sometimes 20 years behind the curve on that? More than 20 years. That was what Francis Schaeffer used to say, wasn't it? That there's a sort of generational lag between what's going on in the in the top ah research and before it filters down.
Speaker: so you know, ah a very interesting, a lovely example. 2009, there was a ah Texas Board of Education and somebody called David Hillis, who was a and ah biologist from the University of Texas, was presenting there and saying the the tree of life, you know the Darwinian tree of life that all animals, ah and all life has evolved from one common ancestor is is nailed on. It's dead cert. you know There's not a single bit of evidence. It's guaranteed.
Speaker: ah you know, this is this is why we should teach at Darwinism within the schools. Well, on the very day that he gave that ah testimony to the Board of Education, New Scientist magazine, its front cover was Darwin was wrong, why the tree of life is no longer working.
Speaker: And so these, ah they you know, this is a really great example where the The education board is being told one thing, but the top scientists are saying this is not working.
Speaker: And do you do you think that's linked to, you know, the shift that Gavin was mentioning that we we're kind of seeing almost, um I think you see it in a lot of these these people who are maybe very vocal, um sort of anti-faith, anti-religion people like your your Richard Dawkins, for people who might be familiar with that name,
Speaker: um they're yeah are very vocal. And it seems in recent times, it may be softened a little or just got a little bit more more quiet, that kind of um Neo, or that new atheism, sorry, um seems to have sort of waned a little bit. Do you think that's because of guys seeing that maybe that the science is actually starting to point somewhere else um as as part of it being the influence?
Speaker: Presumably, it's a really complex answer. um I think that there are real challenges, as I say, from within. and to the the neo-Darwinian model, and questions like consciousness and information, you know, these are questions that the neo-Darwinian explanation has absolutely foundered on.
Speaker: But i also think that culturally and socially, dharmonism is problematic because it has real social consequences in terms of ethics and in terms of sense of meaning and purpose.
Speaker: And ah young people are are are discovering this. So there's ah ah there's a real rise in sort of nihilism or sometimes called sunny nihilism or happy nihilism.
Speaker: Where, okay, so I really don't matter. So this is all random. So at the end of the day, no there's no purpose to it all. So great, let's just chill out and relax, you know. and and And yet people are, young people are finding that that is just not an answer.
Speaker: That's not ah as ah something that you can really live by. um So I think that there are ah challenges from the the sort of the loss of purpose um and as well as challenges from the actual practice of science itself.
Speaker: So when we meet people who are very sort of wedded to this kind of high conflict model between any kind of concept of faith and concept of science, how should we approach the conversation? How should we gently push back upon What resources should we draw on? How should we try and open up a conversation which actually says,
Speaker: There's more to think about here than there's so that just the general dismissal of faith as illogical or anti-science. Yeah, that's a really great question. And the way I try to approach it is to recognize that the conflict is often being presented at school.
Speaker: Schools are really part of the problem. They have been um sort of shoehorned into a ah paradigm of of thinking that you can talk about facts and science within a science lesson, but don't dare bring God into the science lesson.
Speaker: God is to be restricted to the sort of the RE class, and and there... You can have just your opinions and your views and your hunches because there's no real fact to the matter. That's just all personal, private, subjective, you know experiential.
Speaker: Whereas in the science classroom, that is fact and truth and reason and logic and evidence and objectivity and and public knowledge. Now, that kind of dichotomizing of separating and realms of knowledge really spills out into and young people then thinking,
Speaker: Well, you know, I want to be a reasonable, rational, evidential kind of person, which means I need to be a scientist and not one of those believers. So I think that we we do need to recognize where this has come from.
Speaker: The second step, I think, would probably be just to go back in history and say, let's have a think about where science actually came from. Science only came from a Christian context.
Speaker: it As C.S. Lewis so famously said, um you know scientists expected laws in nature because they believed in the divine legislator, the divine lawgiver. And um so the rise of science was entirely if done within, and curiously done, within a Western Christian context so because scientists believed that God would have ah would have ah provided regularities that they could investigate.
Speaker: So you know Isaac Newton and the way in which he ah portrayed gravity as a principle that could be formulated, the the way that Boyle and Babbage and ah Michael Faraday and ah Pascal and Louis Pasteur and Lord Kelvin. And all these people were, these were Bible-believing Christians who were the founding fathers of science. So it's it's really ah worthwhile reminding people that science has an absolutely Christian heritage at at its base.
Speaker: and And then the the third thing I'd say is that um ah science is not monolithic. you This is why these examples of of ah the play the way that top scientists are challenging the current narrative, and it helps people to see that there really is a conversation worthwhile.
Speaker: And then finally, it is worthwhile saying that some of these top scientists today are still Christians and ah that the integration of faith and ah science, they're The integration of of Christian understanding or a Christian worldview ah and science is is a really positive thing now.
Speaker: And in fact, let's push it back. Let's just say that the those without a yeah ah theistic worldview... They're the ones that are really struggling in science now. They're the ones that are running out of runway in terms of the the sufficiency of their explanations for life, for the origin of life, for the change for for the information in the cell.
Speaker: And, of course, for our our subjective experience, the fact that we are conscious. You know the materialists are out of luck. ah You know, they they just simply don't have a sufficient explanation and they know it. And that's the fun thing.
Speaker: that's brilliant. Just on that term the last couple of minutes that we have, um this integration of the faith that we have have as Bible-believing Christians and then the sciences. um So you've written a book titled Faithful Science, and you explore this idea of intelligent design as a framework of understanding things, um and then how potentially that actually gives people more ah courage, I suppose, in sharing their faith, more motivation for that. Could you very briefly paint the picture of, okay what is what do you mean when you say intelligent design and how do you find that ah something helpful to people that gives them confidence in sharing their faith?
Speaker: Thanks. Yeah, well, the the motivation for this study was that, um so I was teaching some really great biblical theology, some really great practical theology, and um and students would often come back and say, you know, this is really great, it's working well in terms of um ah my ministry But in terms of reaching some people, there there' are some that are just untouchable.
Speaker: ah They're just not interested. they that You can't get a bridge across to them. And so often, the reason for that is science. ah The reason that they are just not interested in pursuing that, so they say.
Speaker: is um ah is their scientific worldview. And so and intelligent design is, ah the the use of intelligent design arguments is a way of of meeting people where they're at. I suppose you could say it's a sort of incarnational approach and to come and sort of meet people on their turf and um and to show that their own worldview is insufficient and and problematic.
Speaker: And To some extent, that's often ah an uncomfortable conversation because many people, well, we all find security in our worldview. We need we need our worldview to be fairly stable.
Speaker: It's got to explain who we are and why we're here and what we're about. And if you start to sort of um ah ask questions and and poke some holes in somebody else's worldview, can become a little bit tricky.
Speaker: But I think it's necessary for um these kinds of conversations. And what the students found is as we were learning, scientific ah facts and details about um life and origins and things like that, those conversations would flow. They they would be able to start to to have meaningful conversations about origins, about purpose, about how we got here with people who are otherwise and ah cut off from that. And so ah in teaching teaching intelligent design to people is an empowering thing.
Speaker: It equips people and because those folk, their self-perception was of marginalization. They felt minimalized. They felt sort of excluded or or they were made to feel dumb because they didn't have the kind of scientific language.
Speaker: that these other people had. And so there's there's an empowering as well as an equipping that goes on when you teach young people. And I think that the church desperately needs this because the church in so many instances that when when I was researching,
Speaker: is perceived as being anti-science. And the reason for that is because really good men and women who are leaders in the church and youth leaders in the church, they just don't know very much about science. And so when young people who will ask these questions, they're asking these questions all the time,
Speaker: ah the the response is, well, you've just got to believe. You've just got to trust and have faith. And that's being perceived as being, you don't have any answers for my difficult questions, and so therefore you're anti-science.
Speaker: and And I think that that teaching intelligent design to Christians ah it ah means means that the church becomes much more relevant and much more engaged with the real questions that our young people are having.
Speaker: We've got time for one more question, Steve. Can we sneak another one in before we finish? okay One more quick one, the The conflict thesis within the world has a kind of a parallel of the conflict thesis within the church, I suppose. ah and And some people will push back against the work we do at Solus and sometimes say, I don't believe in any kind of argument or apologetics. That just creates arguments. It's all about the work of the Spirit.
Speaker: I want take a kind of a pietistic view. How do you integrate as ah as someone who wants to share their faith the role of the Holy Spirit in evangelism, and the role of the mind in argument. how How can we hold on to all those things faithfully?
Speaker: it's It's horses for courses. as you know you probably know much better than I do, but you know there are different styles of doing apologetics. There's that fideic approach of just telling your story and and sharing your testimony.
Speaker: and And there's this rationalist approach of of saying, look, we can think logically and reason towards God. There's the evidential approach where we provide historical evidence, and in this case, scientific evidence.
Speaker: And, you know, so it's horses for courses. And if some people, if their gifting is in sharing their testimony, that's great. But it's not meeting the needs of so many young people who really need to see, show me the evidence, show me the evidence.
Speaker: And that what's brilliant and now in this in this time is that we have the best evidence. We have evidence that really is world-class evidence. ah supported by the highest levels of of academic integrity, well published and convincing, and a real challenge to the yeah the materialist hopelessness that Darwinism represents.
Speaker: Yeah, that's brilliant. Thank you so much, Alistair. And um we have run out of time. It goes so quickly. um But yeah thank you so much for taking the time to chat to us. It's been illuminating. and I really feel like people are going to have the desire to go and read up more.
Speaker: um So in the in the section below in the comments, we will put a couple of links for people to be able to get hold of you. um and to to follow your work and and maybe read up further on these really interesting topics.
Speaker: But again, thank you so much for ah joining us. um And until next time, we hope that you are all very well. God bless. And will chat to you again soon.
Speaker: Cheerio.
