(p. 321 ) Index
Notes:
(2) . For example, see the collection of extrabiblical texts, in The Context of Scripture, vol. 1, Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World, ed. William W. Hallo et al. (Leiden: Brill, 2003).
(7) . Rainer Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003), 88.
(62) . First coined by Wolfram von Soden in his study of Sumerian and Akkadian lists, which include matters of philology, deities, kings, geography, zoology, and botany, in “Leistung und Grenze sumerischer und babylonischer Wissenschaft,” in Benno Landsberger and Wolfram von Soden, Die Eigenbegrifflichkeit der babylonischen Welt. Leistung und Grenze sumerischer und babylonischer Wissenschaft (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1965 [1936]), esp. 29–74. The theory was developed in biblical studies by Albrecht Alt in “Die Weisheit Salomos,” ThLZ 76 (1951), cols. 139–44 (translated as “The Wisdom of Solomon,” in Studies in Ancient Israelite Wisdom, ed. James L. Crenshaw [New York: Ktav, 1976], 102–12). See the critique by Michael V. Fox, “Egyptian Onomastica and Biblical Wisdom,” VT 36 (1986): 302–10.
(79) . Aristotle, On the Heavens I, 3 (270b20–25).
(29) . From fides quaerens intellectum, the original title to Anselm’s Proslogion as referenced in his preface. See Anselm of Canterbury: The Major Works, ed. Brian Davies and G. R. Evans, Oxford World’s Classics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 83, 87.
(78) . Anthropic principles, for example, do not bear predictive value from a scientific standpoint.
(219) . The story of Samuel being brought up from Sheol is about the prophet’s resuscitation, not about his “soul” (1 Sam 28). See Bill T. Arnold, “Soul-Searching Questions about 1 Samuel 28: Samuel’s Appearance at Endor and Christian Anthropology,” in What about the Soul? Neuroscience and Christian Anthropology, ed. Joel B. Green (Nashville: Abingdon, 2004), 75–84.
(29) . The measurement refers to the experiment conducted by Alain Aspect in the early 1980s in which two photons emitted by a calcium atom are perfectly correlated. See Ibid., 102–15.
(61) . Such as the Babylonian “astronomical diaries,” reflecting a primitive science that is “empirical, predictive, and theoretical,” according to the Assyriologist Francesca Rochberg, The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), xv (see also 28, 96). Rochberg makes a convincing case that the roots of science can be traced prior to the rise of Greek cultural dominance in antiquity and that the sacred and the scientific in the ancient world comfortably coexisted (ibid., 12, 244). For Babylonian astronomy, see James Evans, The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), esp. 5–17. For examples of how Mesopotamian science impacted biblical tradition, see Baruch Halpern, “Assyrian and Pre-Socratic Astronomies and the Location of the Book of Job,” in Kein Land für sich allein: Studien zum Kulturkontakt in Kanaan, Israel/Palästina und Ebirnâri für Manfred Weippert zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Ulrich Hübner and Ernst Axel Knauf (OBO 186; Fribourg: Universitätsverlag Freiburg, 2002), 255–64; and Halpern, “The Assyrian Astronomy of Genesis 1 and the Birth of Milesian Philosophy,” Eretz-Israel 27 (2003): 74*–83*.
(7) . See Stephanie Dalley’s translation, “Atrahasis,” in Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others, World’s Classics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 9–38. The story was also adapted and incorporated into the Standard Babylonian Version of the Epic of Gilgamesh, in which the Noah figure was renamed Utnapishtim (“He Who Found Life”).
(205) . Augustine, Confessions, 11.10–14.
(34) . Or “wild ox.” The Septuagint, as a rule, translates “unicorn,” and the Vulgate, “rhinoceros.” For a description of the now extinct auroch, see Julius Caesar’s Gallic War, 6.28.
(49) . See also Delwin Brown’s helpful distinction between authority as “binding” in Roman law and the kind of authority found in the New Testament (exousia), which is more generative than limiting (Boundaries of Our Habitations, 144).
(93) . Coined by Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan, “autopoiesis” refers to life’s capacity to generate itself in evolution. See What Is Life? (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995), 17.
(174) . So Francisco J. Ayala, “The Concept of Biological Progress,” in Studies in the Philosophy of Biology: Reduction and Related Problems, ed. Francisco Jose Ayala and Theodosius Dobzhansky (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974), 347, who draws from the work of G. G. Simpson.
(23) . Dawkins, God Delusion, 134. See also, in more graphic detail, Francisco J. Ayala, Darwin’s Gift to Science and Religion (Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press, 2007), 154–59.
(131) . The combined study of evolutionary development and developmental biology or “evo-devo” examines how evolution occurs through the inherited changes in genes that regulate the development of an individual organism. See Catherine Baker, The Evolution Dialogues: Science, Christianity, and the Quest for Understanding (Washington, D.C.: AAAS, 2006), 134.
(4) . Both Uz and Eden are located vaguely in the east. There is disagreement among the biblical traditions as to whether Uz refers to a place south of Israel in Edom (Jer 2:20; Lam 4:21; Gen 36:28) or to someplace northeast (Gen 10:23; 22:21). In light of its uncertain location, see Samuel Balentine’s suggestive comparison between Uz (p. 275 ) and Eden in Job, Smith & Helwys Commentary (Macon, GA: Smith & Helwys, 2006), 41–44.
(80) . Cf. Samuel Balentine’s use of journey language in his summary of God’s answer in Job, 645–46.
(93) . For Leviathan, see chaps. 2 and 6. Behemoth as a proper name is attested only in Job; otherwise it is a generic term for cattle or domestic animals. The plural form designates intensity or majesty; Behemoth is a “superbeast” (Balentine, Job, 83). In Egyptian religion, moreover, the hippopotamus is associated with the god of chaos, Seth, the enemy of Horus.
(36) . Ian G. Barbour has helpfully classified four models by which science and religion have been set in relation: conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration (Barbour, When Science Meets Religion: Enemies, Strangers, or Partners? [New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 2000], 2–4). As a biblical theologian, I confess that my approach is not beholden to any one model. The complexities of biblical interpretation are far too messy to be confined to one or another model within a set typology. Nevertheless, I take as my point of departure “dialogue,” regardless of where it may lead.
(53) . Ian Barbour, Myths, Models, and Paradigms: A Comparative Study in Science and Religion (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1974), 29–70. Take, for example, the various models used to describe the atom (from “plum pudding” to planetary system to cloud) and God (from “father” to “ground of being”).
(49) . See Jon D. Levenson, Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel: The Ultimate Victory of the God of Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), 32; James Barr, The Garden of Eden and the Hope of Immortality (London: SCM, 1992), 5–6.
(40) . As detailed by John Barrow and Frank Tipler in their now classic study, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986).
(73) . To borrow from John Barrow and Frank Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), 166.
(12) . For a survey of the conflict between Christian fundamentalists and the modern, including scientific, champions of atheism, see Tina Beattie, The New Atheists: The Twilight of Reason and the War on Religion (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 2007). John F. Haught argues that critics of religion such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens succumb to a fundamentalism comparable to that which afflicts the creationists. Haught, God and the New Atheism: A Critical Response to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2008).
(79) . For a short list of the various ways humans are destroying habits and diminishing biodiversity, see Eric Chivian and Aaron Bernstein, “How Is Biodiversity Threatened by Human Activity?,” in Sustaining Life: How Human Health Depends on Biodiversity, ed. Erich Chivian and Aaron Bernstein (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 29–74.
(5) . See Eric Chivian and Aaron Bernstein, eds., Sustaining Life: How Human Health Depends on Biodiversity (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), which explores from a variety of contexts how biodiversity and human livelihood are deeply intertwined. Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich offer the alarming analogy of Earth as a spaceship whose rivets are popping. The rivets are those species on the brink of extinction (Extinction: The Causes and Consequences of the Disappearance of Species [New York: Random House, 1981], xi–xiv).
(26) . See Eric Chivian and Aaron Bernstein, “How Is Biodiversity Threatened by Human Activity?,” in Sustaining Life, 29–74.
(31) . Good examples of “natural” development come from the field of medicine. See David J. Newman et al., “Medicines from Nature,” in Sustaining Life, 117–62; Eric Chivian, Aaron Bernstein, and Joshua P. Rosenthal, “Biodiversity and Biomedical Research,” in Sustaining Life, 163–202; and Eric Chivian and Aaron Bernstein, “Threatened Groups of Organisms Valuable to Medicine,” in Sustaining Life, 203–86.
(35) . Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Creation and Fall: A Theological Interpretation of Genesis 1–3: Temptation, trans. John C. Fletcher (London: SCM Press, 1959), 69.
(2) . Bertolt Brecht, Galileo, ed. Eric Bentley, trans. Charles Laughton (New York: Grove Press, 1966), 32.
(8) . The voice of the mother is likely found in chap. 7 of Proverbs. See Athalya Brenner, “Proverbs 1–9: An F Voice?” in On Gendering Texts: Female and Male Voices in (p. 286 ) the Hebrew Bible, ed. Athalya Brenner and Fokkelien Dijk-Hemmes (Leiden: Brill, 1993), 113–30.
(46) . Delwin Brown, Boundaries of Our Habitations: Tradition and Theological Construction, SUNY Series in Religious Studies (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994), 79.
(43) . See Warren Brown, “Resonance,” 113–15. Brown’s discussion is cast on a more general level than mine, one that incorporates the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, with the addition of science, into his resonance model.
(208) . See the full discussion by Murphy, Bodies and Souls, or Spirited Bodies?, 56–70. See also Warren S. Brown, “Cognitive Contributions to the Soul,” in Whatever Happened to the Soul? Scientific and Theological Portraits of Human Nature, ed. Warren S. Brown, Nancey Murphy, and H. Newton Maloney, Theology and the Sciences (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998), 99–126.
(44) . Warren S. Brown, “Wisdom and Human Neurocognitive Systems: Perceiving and Practicing the Laws of Life,” in Understanding Wisdom, 200.
(47) . Ibid., 204–10. Warren Brown bases his conclusions on the work of Antonio Damasio in Descartes’s Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1994).
(21) . For a brief overview of some of the various perspectives of creation in the Hebrew Bible in their ancient Near Eastern context, see Richard J. Clifford, SJ, “Creation in the Hebrew Bible,” in Physics, Philosophy, and Theology: A Common Quest for Understanding, ed. Robert J. Russell, William R. Stoeger, SJ, G. V. Coyne (Vatican: Vatican Observatory, 1988), 151–70; Gene M. Tucker, “Rain on a Land Where No One Lives: The Hebrew Bible on the Environment,” JBL 116 (1997): 3–17. More extensive treatments include Richard J. Clifford, SJ, Creation Accounts in the Ancient Near East (p. 247 ) and in the Bible (CBQMS 26; Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1994); William P. Brown, The Ethos of the Cosmos (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999); Terence E. Fretheim, God and World in the Old Testament: A Relational Theology of Creation (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2005).
(47) . The following discussion is drawn from my “Introduction,” in Engaging Biblical Authority: Perspectives on the Bible as Scripture, ed. William P. Brown (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007), xi–xiv.
(6) . Literally, “In the beginning of God creating the heavens and the earth….” The Hebrew syntax conflicts with that of the KJV (“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”), whose precedent is found in the Septuagint (LXX or Old Greek) translation. But as pointed out by the Jewish commentator Rashi (d. 1105), the Hebrew of v. 1 is a dependent clause, not a complete sentence, because the first word bĕrēšît is likely in construct with the verbal clause that follows. Hence, an absolute beginning is not assumed in the first verse. For detailed discussion, see William P. Brown, Structure, Role, and Ideology in the Hebrew and Greek Texts of (p. 253 ) Genesis 1:1–2:3, SBLDS 132 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), 62–72. But see also the alternative proposal in Robert D. Holmstedt, “The Restrictive Syntax of Genesis i 1,” VT 58 (2008): 56–67, which amounts to a comparable sense of a non-absolute beginning.
(40) . For example, the transition formula “and it was so” is found at the end of 1:7 rather than at the end of v. 6, which is more typical (cf. 1:9, 11). Also, the fulfillment report is entirely lacking in 1:9–10. No approbation is given in Day 2. Indeed, LXX reflects a more consistent text, reflecting either a harmonizing Tendenz or an older textual tradition that the Masoretes saw fit to alter. See Brown, Structure, Role, and Ideology , which argues for the latter. For a listing of textual anomalies, see the table in Middleton, Liberating Image, 281.
(214) . Some of God’s commands, for example, are rhetorically distinguished by the cognate accusative construction in Hebrew, which bears phonetic similarities between the verb and its object (1:11, 15, 20). See William P. Brown, “Divine Act and the Art of Persuasion in Genesis 1,” in History and Interpretation: Essays in Honour of John H. Hayes, ed. M. Patrick Graham, William P. Brown, and Jeffrey K. Kuan, JSOTSS 173 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 19–32.
(53) . For detailed discussion, see William P. Brown, The Ethos of the Cosmos: The Genesis of Moral Imagination in the Bible (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 152–57.
(31) . See Walter Brueggemann, “Of the Same Flesh and Bone [Gen 2,23a],” CBQ 32 (1970): 532–42.
(101) . Coined by Walter Brueggemann, Abiding Astonishment: Psalms, Modernity, and the Making of History (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991).
(52) . For the “spectacles” analogy, see John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion: Library of Christian Classics, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, ed. J. T. McNeill (Philadelphia: Westminster, l960), 1.6.1. (70).
(98) . See Albert Camus, “The Myth of Sisyphus,” in The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays by Albert Camus (New York: Vintage Books [Alfred A. Knopf and Random House], 1955), 88–90.
(29) . The heptadic numerology of Gen 1:1–2:3 is most vigorously championed by Umberto Cassuto in his Commentary on Genesis. Part I, From Adam to Noah: Genesis I–VI 8 (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1961), 14–15. See also Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil, 67–68.
(20) . These cedars have been protected for more than 1,500 years by the monks of the monastery in the Kadishar Valley. In 1998 the remnants were declared a UN Natural Heritage site. See Michael S. Northcott, A Moral Climate: The Ethics of Global Warming, (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2007), 107.
(22) . Seeking coherence between the Bible and nature, sometimes referred to as God’s “two books,” has deep roots in Christian tradition, beginning most clearly with John Chrysostom (ca. 347–407) and extending to Galileo and John Calvin. For a concise historical survey, see Peter J. Hess, “‘God’s Two Books’: Revelation, Theology, and Natural Science in the Christian West,” in Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Cosmology and Biological Evolution, Australian Theological Forum Science and Theology Series 2 (Hindmarsh, Australia: Australian Theological Forum, 2002), 19–51.
(231) . Francesca D. Ciccarelli et al., “Toward Automatic Reconstruction of a Highly Resolved Tree of Life,” Science 311 (3 March 2006): 1286.
(202) . William Sloane Coffin, Letters to a Young Doubter (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005), 64.
(22) . The best recent defense of evolution is Jerry A. Coyne, Why Evolution is True (New York: Viking Penguin, 2009).
(89) . Physicists also speak of “dark energy,” a repulsive force that drives the expansion of space. Researchers estimate that dark energy constitutes 73 percent of the universe.
(98) . Ellen F. Davis, Getting Involved with God: Rediscovering the Old Testament (Cambridge, MA: Cowley, 2001), 139.
(32) . Thanks to my colleague Kathy Dawson for this suggestive analogy.
(91) . Christopher De Pree, personal communication.
(27) . See HALOT 374; Edouard Dhorme, A Commentary on the Book of Job, trans. H. Knight (London: Nelson, 1967), 593; Robert Gordis, The Book of Job: Commentary, New Translation, and Special Studies (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1978), 452–53.
(28) . See HALOT 1327; Dhorme, Commentary, 593; Gordis, Book of Job, 453.
(87) . Michael B. Dick, “The Neo-Assyrian Royal Lion Hunt and Yahweh’s Answer to Job,” JBL 2 (2006): 255.
(88) . Ibid., 244–45. For an exhaustive survey of leonine imagery in the Old Testament, see Brent A. Strawn, What is Stronger than a Lion? Leonine Image and Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East, OBO 212 (Fribourg, Academic Press/Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005).
(24) . See Seow’s discussion of the eschatological tenor of this section in Ecclesiastes, 372–82.; idem, “Qohelet’s Eschatological Poem,” JBL 118 (1999): 209–34.
(68) . Niles Eldredge and Stephen J. Gould, “Punctuated Equilibria: An Alternative to Phyletic Gradualism,” in Models in Paleobiology, ed. T. J. M. Schopf (San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper, 1972), 82–115. See Edward O. Wilson’s mediating discussion of their thesis in The Diversity of Life (New York: W. W. Norton, 1999), 88–89.
(71) . Greene, Fabric of the Cosmos, 173, 478. For the difference between “gravitational entropy” and “nongravitational entropy,” see William R. Stoeger, SJ, “Entropy, Emergence, and the Physical Roots of Natural Evil,” in Physics and Cosmology: Scientific Perspectives on the Problem of Natural Evil, vol. 1, ed. Nancey Murphy, Robert John Russell, William R. Stoeger, SJ (Vatican City State: Vatican Observatory Publications/Berkeley: Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences, 2007), 99.
(3) . For an alternative dating, see Tzvi Abusch, “Marduk,” in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst, 2nd ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 547. Abusch proposes that Enūma Elish was composed later during a period of Babylonian weakness, not strength: sometime during the first millennium. Little evidence, however, is given for support.
(4) . The “canonical” status of Enūma elish is demonstrated in an Assyrian version of the Babylonian epic in which the patron deity Aššur replaces Marduk as the narrative’s protagonist. For an English translation, see Stephanie Dalley, “The Epic of Creation,” in Dalley, Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others (World’s Classics; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 228–77, from which portions are featured below, unless otherwise noted. See also Benjamin R. Foster, “Epic of Creation (1.111),” in Hallo, Context of Scripture, 391–402.
(37) . The gods in Enūma elish wear their own clothing, “mantles of radiance.”
(16) . So Allen’s translation of Coffin Texts Spell 714 (1.2). “Evolution,” of course, is used differently from the Darwinian sense of “descent with modification.” In the Egyptian texts, it connotes the process of differentiation.
(5) . A play on Darwin’s oft-quoted definition of evolution: “descent with modification.” The text’s recurring cadences also suggest ancient liturgical usage. See Moshe Weinfeld, “Sabbath, Temple and the Enthronement of the Lord—The Problem of Sitz im Leben of Genesis 1:1–2:3,” in Mélanges bibliques et orientaux en l’honneur de M. Henri Cazelles, ed. A Caquot and M. Delcor, AOAT 212 (Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker, 1981), 501–12.
(67) . Evidence comes from a variety of extrabiblical sources. Numerous tablets from the sixth century bce refer to the location āl-Yāhūdu (“the city of Judah” or better “Judahville”), a settlement of exiles likely somewhere in southeastern Babylonia by 572 bce, fifteen years after the 587 deportation. The tablets indicate business transactions among Judeans and Babylonians. For a preliminary account of these yet-to-be published documents, see Laurie E. Pearce, “New Evidence for Judeans in Babylonia,” in Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period, ed. Oded Lipschits and Manfred Oeming (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 399–411. In addition, a collection of business documents from a prominent Jewish family in the fifth and fourth centuries bce, the “Murashu Documents,” reflects a thriving agricultural business in Babylonia among some Jews. (See Middlemas, Templeless Age, 23.)
(14) . For lexical comparison, see Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 325; Benjamin D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 40–66 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998), 143.
(15) . See Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 326; Sommer, Prophet Reads Scripture, 144.
(9) . For a technical discussion of the inner connections among various traditions of the Hebrew Bible, see Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1985).
(16) . Many thanks to George W. Fisher for this discussion of “mystery.”
(26) . Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 38a. For a brief summary of other possibilities explored by the early rabbis, see Michael V. Fox, Proverbs 1–9 (AB 18A; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 297–98.
(223) . It is precisely “conscience” that best captures the ethical dimension of “wisdom” (ḥokmāh) as profiled in the book of Proverbs. See Michael V. Fox, Proverbs 1–9, AB 18A (New York: Doubleday, 2000), 29–38.
(158) . Research in this area began with the study of brain-damaged individuals. The most publicized case was that of railway worker Phineas Gage, who on September 13, 1848, was pierced in the head by a metal rod, causing severe frontal lobe damage. Although he miraculously survived, Gage’s personality changed drastically, and he was unable to make rational decisions. See the discussion in Ehrlich, Human Natures, 114–15.
(56) . Julie Galambush, “’adam from ’adama, ’issa from ’is: Derivation and Subordination in Genesis 2.4b–3.24,” in History and Interpretation: Essays in Honour of John H. (p. 267 ) Hayes, ed. M. Patrick Graham, William P. Brown, and Jeffrey K. Kuan, JSOTSup 173 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 43.
(50) . Schüle, “Made in the ‘Image of God,’” 8. An important extrabiblical parallel to this “essentialist link” comes from the Tell-Fekheriyeh statue of King Had-yiṯî of the ninth or eighth century bce, on whose skirt is engraved an Akkadian text translated into Aramaic. The inscription refers to the king’s “likeness” (dmwt’) and “image” (ṣlm’), namely, the statue the king had fashioned to serve as his stand-in before Hadad, his patron deity. See the study in W. Randall Garr, “‘Image’ and ‘Likeness’ in the Inscription from Tell Fakhariyeh,” IEJ 50 (2000): 231–34. See also Ali Abou-Assaf, Pierre Bordreuil, and Alan R. Millard, La statue de Tell Fekherye et son inscription bilingue assyro-araméene, Etudes Assyriologiques (Paris: Editions Recherche sur les (p. 256 ) civilisationes, 1982); A. R. Millard and P. Bordreuil, “A Statue from Syria with Assyrian and Aramaic Inscriptions,” BA 45 (1982): 135–41.
(52) . The following discussion is prompted by W. Randall Garr’s discussion in In His Own Image and Likeness: Humanity, Divinity, and Monotheism, Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 15 (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 202–40.
(113) . See Michael S. Gazzaniga, Human: The Science Behind What Makes Us Unique (New York: HarperCollins, 2008), 128.
(79) . Stephen A. Geller, “The God of the Covenant,” in One God or Many? Concepts of Divinity in the Ancient World, ed. Barbara Nevling Porter (Transactions of the Casco Bay Assyriological Institute 1; Casco Bay Assyriological Institute, 2000), 275.
(81) . Isaiah, specifically “Second Isaiah,” is not the only corpus in the Hebrew Scriptures that develops a monotheistic conception of divinity. Geller argues that monotheism is also presupposed in the Shema (Deut 6:4–5), to which one could also add Deut 4:35, 39; 2 Sam 7:22; and Ps 86:10, among others (“The God of the Covenant,” 290–302). For more texts and discussion on monotheism, see Smith, Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 151–54.
(82) . Geller, “The God of the Covenant,” 280.
(24) . Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, and Lamentations, FOTL 15 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001), 225.
(8) . A nonviolent but comparable version of human “clay” creation is found in the Epic of Gilgamesh, in which the same mother goddess (here called “Aruru”) pinches off clay and shapes it into a man, specifically a man of the wild, Enkidu (Tablet I).
(18) . See chap. 2. Another parallel is found in the Epic of Gilgamesh, in which the mother goddess (“Aruru”) pinches off clay and shapes into the quintessential man of the wild, Enkidu, in Tablet I.
(52) . Cf. the plant of rejuvenation featured in the Epic of Gilgamesh, Tablet XI.
(144) . Enkidu was the intimate companion and former rival of the Sumerian ruler Gilgamesh, who grew up in the wild and became acculturated. See Stephanie Dalley, “Gilgamesh,” in Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, The Flood, Gilgamesh, and Others (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), esp. 52–59.
(207) . This analogy was aptly suggested to me by a twelve-year-old, Alden Daniel Glass.
(17) . The science of climate change or global warming will not be rehearsed here. For accessible resources, see The National Academies, Understanding and Responding to Climate Change: Highlights of National Academies Reports, 2008 Edition, (The National Academy of Sciences, 2008) at http://nationalacademies.org/climatechange; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report at http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf; Tim Flannery, The Weather Makers: How We Are Changing the Climate and What It Means for Life on Earth (New York: HarperCollins, 2005).
(54) . John Goldingay, Models for Interpretation of Scripture (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995). 262.
(6) . Ursula Goodenough, The Sacred Depths of Nature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998).
(157) . Ursula Goodenough, The Sacred Depths of Nature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 78.
(74) . Gerhard von Rad, “Job XXXVII and Ancient Egyptian Wisdom,” in The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays, trans. E. W. Truemann Dicken (London: SCM Press, 1985 [1960]), 281–91. See also John Gray, “The Book of Job in Context of N. E. Literature,” ZAW (1970): 251–69; Yair Hoffman, A Blemished Perfection: The Book of Job in Context, JSOTSup 213 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 84–114.
(30) . As Lynn T. White Jr. has pointed out more than thirty years ago in “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,” Science 144 (10 March 1967): 1203–07. See, more recently, Norman Habel, “Playing God or Playing Earth? An Ecological Reading of Genesis 1:26–28,” in “And God Saw That It Was Good”: Essays on Creation and God in Honor of Terence E. Fretheim, ed. Frederick J. Gaiser and Mark A. Throntveit, Word & World Supplement Series 5 (Saint Paul, MN: Luther Seminary, 2006), 33–41.
(58) . As one finds in Babylonian “astronomical diaries.” For a masterful treatment of Babylonian astronomy as both ancient science and religious study, see Francesca Rochberg, The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). For the ancient “scientific” background of the priestly account of the creation of celestial bodies, see Baruch Halpern, “Assyrian and pre-Socratic Astronomies and the Location of the Book of Job,” in Kein Land für sich allein: Studien zum Kulturkontakt in Kanaan, Israel/Palästina und Ebirnâri für Manfred Weippert zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Ulrich Hübner and Ernst Axel Knauf, OBO 186 (Fribourg: Universitätsverlag Freiburg, 2002), esp. 255–56; Halpern, “The Assyrian Astronomy of Genesis 1 and the Birth of Milesian Philosophy,” Eretz-Israel 27 (2003): 74*–83*.
(133) . Coles, Cosmology, 34. The theory of quantum gravity proposed by James Hartle and Stephen Hawking attempts to remedy the problematic nature of cosmic singularity by regarding time itself as “finite but unbounded.” Instead of a discrete, infinitesimally small point at t=0, there is curved, three-dimensional space stripped of time, hence no singular point of creation (James B. Hartle and Stephen W. Hawking, “Wave Function of the Universe,” Physics Review D28 [1983]: 2960–75). See the discussion by Robert John Russell of the “Hartle/Hawking model” of cosmic emergence in “Finite Creation without a Beginning: The Doctrine of Creation in Relation to Big Bang and Quantum Cosmologies,” in Russell, Cosmology From Alpha to Omega: The Creative Mutual Interaction of Theology and Science, Theology and the Sciences (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2008), 90–103.
(30) . A notable exception is Paul Davies, whose numerous works include The Mind of God: The Scientific Basis for a Rational World (New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2005 [1992]) and God and the New Physics (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1983). See also the concluding chapter in Stephen Hawking with Leonard Mlodinow, A Briefer History of Time (New York: Bantam Dell, 2005), 138–42. Such scientific ruminations about God go back to Johannes Kepler (1571–1630), to whom is attributed the oft-quoted phrase regarding the purpose of science: “to think God’s thoughts after him.”
(131) . This is challenged by others, including Stephen Hawking and Lee Smolin, who argue that quantum dynamics prevent the formation of singularities (Hawking with Leonard Mlodinow, A Briefer History of Time [New York: Bantam Book, 2005], 102–3; Smolin, Life of the Cosmos, 115). See n. 130.
(81) . Robert M. Hazen, Gen·e·sis: The Scientific Quest for Life’s Origins (Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry, 2005), 122.
(164) . Hazen, Gen·e·sis, 155.
(226) . Hazen, Gen·e·sis, 144–48.
(8) . See the translation given by Theodore Hiebert, The Yahwist’s Landscape: Nature and Religion in Early Israel (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 32.
(17) . See Hiebert, Yahwist’s Landscape, 33–36.
(20) . Hiebert, Yahwist’s Landscape, 67.
(22) . Because the garden is planted by YHWH, the ’ādām does not share in plowing and planting. See Hiebert, Yahwist’s Landscape, 65. Thus, his vocation in the garden is not the same as his work outside it (contra ibid., 59). In the garden the ’ādām is to tend the trees, which are watered by irrigation. Outside the garden he must cultivate the ground itself, facing all the special risks and rigors involved in dry land farming (Gen 2:5; 3:17–19).
(137) . Otherwise known as a “nonzero Higgs field vacuum,” named after the Scottish physicist Peter Higgs (Greene, Fabric of the Cosmos, 257).
(139) . Cf. Brian Greene’s description of the formation of the so-called Higgs field as a “frog” perched on a higher-energy plateau ready to jump to a lower one (Fabric of the Cosmos, 256–63, 282–85).
(65) . See Daniel Hillel, The Natural History of the Bible: An Environmental Exploration of the Hebrew Scriptures (New York: Columbia University Press, 2006), 150. For a survey of agricultural practices and techniques, see Oded Borowski, Agriculture in Iron Age Israel (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1987).
(42) . See Daniel Hillel, The Natural History of the Bible: An Environmental Exploration of the Hebrew Scriptures (New York: Columbia University Press, 2006), 36, 48.
(59) . Lawrence M. Hinman, “Seeing Wisely—Learning to Become Wise,” in Understanding Wisdom, 414.
(117) . Stearns and Hoekstra, Evolution, 218.
(125) . As posited by M. E. Boraas et al. in 1998 and discussed in Stearns and Hoekstra, Evolution, 284.
(126) . Beginning with the end of the Ordovician geological period 440 million years ago and concluding with the end of the Cretaceous era, 65 million years ago. The catastrophe marking the end of the Permian era 280 million years ago came close to total destruction with an 80 percent percent reduction of marine invertebrate genera brought about from an intense cycle of global cooling and warming until Pangaea split up into separate, drifting continents (Stearns and Hoekstra, Evolution, 271–72).
(28) . The phrase is more apt than the tepid labels “global warming” and, worse, “climate change.” My thanks to the American historian Jon Houghton, who introduced me to the term.
(15) . The expression was coined by the Dutch historian Johan Huizinga in his book Homo Ludens; A Study of the Play-Element in Culture (Boston: Beacon Press, 1955).
(41) . Discerning “virtual parallels” across disciplines is an instance of what J. Wentzel van Huyssteen calls “transversal reasoning” or “performance,” which “facilitates different but equally legitimate ways of viewing, or interpreting, issues, problems, traditions, or disciplines” van Huyssteen, Alone in the World? Human Uniqueness in Science and Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), 19.
(49) . These four ways are nicely laid out by Andreas Schüle in “Made in the ‘Image of God’: The Concepts of Divine Images in Gen 1–3,” ZAW 117 (2005): 5–7, from which the following discussion is drawn. Note also J. Wentzel van Huyssteen’s summary of the history of interpretation of the imago Dei as a three-phased development: from substantial to functional to relational (Alone in the World? Human Uniqueness in Science and Theology [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006], 124).
(185) . This would include the painted caves of Lascaux in the Périgord region of France and those of Altamira in the Cantabrian region of the Basque Country in northern Spain about 20,000 years ago. Also noteworthy are the recent discoveries of figurines at the cave site of Hohle Fels in southwestern Germany (Swabia), the oldest known examples of figurative art in the world (see van Huyssteen, Alone in the World?, 170–71).
(195) . Van Huyssteen, Are We Alone?, 106.
(198) . Van Huyssteen, “Are We Alone?, 256–68.
(18) . Cf. Grace Jantzen, God’s World, God’s Body (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984); Sallie McFague, The Body of God: An Ecological Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993).
(73) . Contra Michael V. Fox, “Job 38 and God’s Rhetoric,” Semeia 19 (1981): 58–60. See J. Gerald Janzen, Job, Interpretation Bible Commentary (Atlanta, John Knox, 1985), 225–28.
(225) . So Robert W. Jenson, Systematic Theology, vol. 2 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 59–60. Cf. Gen 5:26.
(159) . Jones, Darwin’s Ghost, 92.
(161) . Jones, Darwin’s Ghost, 92.
(165) . Jones, Darwin’s Ghost, 229.
(93) . But only to an extent. The planet Jupiter, owing to its strong gravitational field, also acts as a protective shield for the earth.
(83) . Michio Kaku, Parallel Worlds: A Journey through Creation, Higher Dimensions, and the Future of the Cosmos (New York: Anchor Books, 2005), 70.
(99) . Kaku, Parallel Worlds, 84.
(100) . For further discussion of “spontaneous symmetry breaking,” see Smolin, Life of the Cosmos, 61–68; Kaku, Parallel Worlds, 95–98.
(76) . Falkowski and Isozaki, “The Story of O2,” 541. See also James F. Kasting, “The Rise of Atmospheric Oxygen,” in Science 293 (3 August 2001): 819–20.
(117) . Barbara King, an anthropologist at the College of William and Mary, takes the continuity argument one step further by discerning even the precursors to religion among the great apes, evidenced in the need for “belongingness” in primate behavior. See Barbara J. King, Evolving God: A Provocative View of the Origins of Religion (New York: Doubleday, 2007), 5–7.
(106) . My translation, in contrast to the NRSV and most other translations (e.g., Schifferdecker, Out of the Whirlwind, 184, 186–87). This verse in Hebrew is the most disputed in all the book of Job. For various options and accompanying bibliography, see Newsom, “Job,” 628–29; William Morrow, “Consolation, Rejection, and Repentance in Job 42:6,” JBL 105 (1986): 211–25. The most convincing proposal is given by Thomas Krüger, “Did Job Repent?” in Das Buch Hiob und Seine Interpretationen, ATANT 88 (Zürich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 2007), 217–29, whose translation is adapted here.
(48) . See Jacqueline E. Lapsley, Whispering the Word: Hearing Women’s Stories in the Old Testament (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005), 13–19.
(13) . To be preferred over “good and evil,” which suggests Greek dualistic thinking. See Jacqueline E. Lapsley, Whispering the Word: Hearing Women’s Stories in the Old Testament (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 15, 112n.41. The “knowledge of good and bad” includes the knowledge of culture and moral discernment. See Deut 1:39; 2 Sam 19:35; Isa 7:15. According to these texts, young children do not yet have such knowledge, and the aged can lose it. In the Yahwist account, such knowledge is reserved for the gods (Gen 3:22).
(220) . The following discussion is drawn from Lapsley’s perceptive analysis in Whispering the Word, 14–17.
(59) . For fuller discussion, see Norbert Lohfink, Great Themes from the Old Testament, trans. Ronald Walls (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1982), 214–15.
(10) . The English cleric Thomas Malthus (1766–1834) contended that God ordained the population in America to increase faster than what the land could sustain and, thereby, provided means of restraining such growth.
(28) . For connection between the divine commands in Genesis 1 and the Decalogue, see McBride, “Divine Protocol,” 10, n.16.
(35) . The following discussion builds on the insightful observations given in McBride, “Divine Protocol,” 12–15. For further background, see J. Richard Middleton, The Liberating Image: The Imago Dei in Genesis 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos, 2005), 74–76.
(21) . Cf. Gen 18:12; Ps 36:8; Neh 9:25; Jer 31:12; 51:34; Ezek 36:35; Joel 2:3. Many thanks to P. Kyle McCarter Jr. for this important insight.
(38) . Mary Midgley, “Science in the World,” Science Studies 9, no. 2 (1996): 57. The term “consonance” is most fully discussed in Ernan McMullin, “How Should Cosmology Relate to Theology?” in The Sciences and Theology in the Twentieth Century, ed. Arthur Peacocke (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981), 17–57, esp. 47–52.
(42) . Similarly, McMullin regarded the consonance between science and theology as “a tentative relation, constantly under scrutiny, in constant slight shift” (“How Should Cosmology Relate to Theology?” 52).
(3) . For the pedagogy of wisdom in Proverbs, see Charles F. Melchert, Wise Teaching: Biblical Wisdom and Educational Ministry (Harrisonburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998), 47–73.
(45) . For a sampling of the scholarly discussion and the ambiguity of the evidence, see Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, No Graven Image? Israelite Aniconism in its Ancient Near Eastern Context (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1995).
(4) . For an accessible discussion of the literary, sociological, and theological issues that helped to shape this corpus, see Jill Middlemas, The Templeless Age: An Introduction to the History, Literature, and Theology of the “Exile” (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007), 93–111.
(38) . Middleton, Liberating Image, 278.
(41) . See Middleton, Liberating Image, 75–76.
(47) . E.g., Num 33:52; 2 Kgs 11:18; 2 Chron 23:17; Ezek 7:20; Amos 5:20. For more detailed discussion of the semantic range of this term, see Middleton, Liberating Image, 45–46.
(27) . Mary Midgley, Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature, 2nd ed. (London: Routledge, 1995), 362. For a picture of the world without human beings, see Alan Wiesman, The World Without Us. (New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2007).
(19) . For an in depth study of the various nuances of “vapor” in Ecclesiastes, see Douglas B. Miller, Symbol and Rhetoric in Ecclesiastes: The Place of Hebel in Qohelet’s Work (Academia Biblica 2; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002).
(21) . See, e.g., Patrick D. Miller, “The Poetry of Creation: Psalm 104,” in God Who Creates: Essays in Honor of W. Sibley Towner, ed. William P. Brown and S. Dean McBride Jr. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 87–103; James Limburg, “Down to (p. 283 ) Earth Theology: Psalm 104 and the Environment,” Currents in Theology and Mission 21 (1994): 340–46.
(168) . For full discussion, see Harold J. Morowitz, The Emergence of Everything: How the World Became Complex (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).
(4) . Quoted in Laura Diamond, “Teachers Say Covering Evolution Can Be a Trial,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution (27 October 2008): B6; or at www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/stories/2008/10/27/evolution.html.
(55) . See Nancey Murphy, “Introduction: A Hierarchical Framework for Understanding Wisdom,” in Understanding Wisdom: Sources, Science, and Society, ed. Warren S. Brown (Philadelphia and London: Templeton Foundation Press, 2000), 7. For detailed discussion of feedback loops and systems on the methodological level, see Nancey Murphy and George F. R. Ellis, On the Moral Nature of the Universe: Theology, Cosmology, and Ethics (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1996), 74–84.
(160) . Nancey Murphy, Bodies and Souls, or Spirited Bodies?, Current Issues in Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 99.
(38) . See Nancey Murphy, “Reductionism: How Did We Fall Into It and Can We Emerge From It?” in Evolution and Emergence: Systems, Organisms, Persons, ed. Nancey Murphy and William R. Stoeger, SJ (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 19–39; and more generally Stuart A. Kauffman, Reinventing the Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason, and Religion (New York: Basic Books, 2008), esp. 1–43.
(41) . Murphy, “Reductionism,” 27.
(25) . For argumentation, see, e.g., Nancey Murphy, “Science and the Problem of Evil: Suffering as a By-product of a Finely Tuned Cosmos,” in Physics and Cosmology, 131–54; and Stoeger, “Entropy, Emergence, and the Physical Roots of Natural Evil,” 93–108. The best recent theodicy that takes account of evolution is Christopher Southgate, The Groaning of Creation: God, Evolution, and the Problem of Evil (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2008).
(138) . Mithen, Singing Neanderthals, 228. Mithen argues that due to the lack of symbolic artifacts, coupled with “immense stability” in Neanderthal culture, syntactic language was not a possession of Homo neanderthalensis. What Neanderthals did possess was a form of verbal communication that was “holistic, multi-modal, manipulative, and musical,” as opposed to segmented, compositional, referential, and syntactical.
(48) . Literally, “can bring near his sword.” For the difficulties of this verse, see Carol A. Newsom, “The Book of Job: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,” in The New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 4 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996), 619. She recommends revocalizing the MT’s active participle (“maker”) to a passive participle (“made”; cf. 41:25) to render: “made to dominate his companions.” She fails to note, however, a consonantal emendation made necessary by her translation: the transposition of two letters in the last word (from ḥrbw to ḥbrw). The MT is clear as it stands.
(72) . See Newsom, “Job,” 595.
(14) . The prime example of conjoining both kingship and kinship is found in the biblical figure of Noah, the new man “of the ground” (Gen 5:29), who in obedience to God’s instructions implements the first endangered species act.
(153) . This and the following descriptions of deep sea creatures are adapted from Claire Nouvian, The Deep: The Extraordinary Creatures of the Abyss (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007), 156, 159.
(56) . The interactive side of the interpreter is increasingly acknowledged even in science. The notion of objectivity, for example, has shifted significantly from nineteenth to twenty-first century science, from one that regards the observer as merely a machine, much like a camera, to one that acknowledges (and exploits) the observer’s interactive, formative role in relation to the object of study. See the perceptive historical survey and discussion of scientific atlases in Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison, Objectivity (New York: Zone, 2007), esp. 55–190, 309–62.
(95) . For an exploration of this last theme, see Kathleen O’Connor, “Wild, Raging Creativity: Job in the Whirlwind,” in Earth, Wind, and Fire: Biblical and Theological Perspectives on Creation, ed. Carol J. Dempsey and Mary Margaret Pazdan (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2004), 48–56.
(104) . For more detail on this point, see William P. Brown, The Ethos of the Cosmos: The Genesis of Moral Imagination in the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999), 370–75; John G. Gammie, “Behemoth and Leviathan: On the Didactic and Theological Significance of Job 40:15–41:26,” in Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, ed. John G. Gammie et al. (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978), 217–31; and O’Connor, “Wild, Raging Creativity,” 52.
(33) . Onagers or wild asses were used in Sumer to pull wagons and chariots in the third and second millennia bce.
(104) . According to biologist Leslie Orgel, as quoted in Impey, Living Cosmos, 79.
(106) . Lawrence Osborn, “Theology and the New Physics,” in God, Humanity and the Cosmos, ed. Christopher Southgate, 2nd ed. (London / New York: T&T Clark, 2005), 149.
(118) . Osborn, “Theology and the New Physics,” 151.
(24) . For a critical discussion of the “anthropic principle,” see Lawrence Osborn, “Theology and the New Physics,” in God, Humanity and the Cosmos, ed. Christopher Southgate (New York/London: T&T Clark, 2005), 142–48; John Polkinghorne, “Beyond the Big Bang,” in Science Meets Faith, ed. Fraser Watts (London: SPCK, 1998), 19–22.
(32) . Douglas F. Ottati, “Theology among the Arts and Sciences,” The Bulletin of the Institute for Reformed Theology 7, no. 1 (Spring/Summer 2007): 6. Indeed, James M. Gustafson makes it a “moral imperative” to do so. Gustafson, Intersections: Science, Theology, and Ethics (Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press, 1996), xvi.
(65) . Arthur Peacocke develops the notion of improvisation as divine activity by analogy with music in his Theology for a Scientific Age: Being and Becoming—Natural, Divine, and Human (Theology and the Sciences; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 152–57, 168–77. Peacocke draws from examples of classical music (e.g., Bach and Beethoven), although jazz would have been equally, if not more, apt.
(40) . Philo, De opificio mundi, §§17–20, 24, 143. For translation and commentary, see Philo of Alexandria, On the Creation of the Cosmos According to Moses, trans. and ed. David T. Runia, PACS 1 (Brill: Leiden, 2001), 50–51, 84–85.
(215) . John Polkinghorne, Reason and Reality (Philadelphia: Trinity International Press, 1991), 45–47; Polkinghorne, The Faith of a Physicist (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 77–78.
(150) . Stuart L. Pimm et al., “What Is Biodiversity?,” in Sustaining Life: How Human Health Depends on Biodiversity, ed. Erich Chivian and Aaron Bernstein (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 17–18. See also Ehrlich, Human Natures, 171–72.
(112) . As summarized by Ian G. Barbour, When Science and Religion Meet: Enemies, Strangers, or Partners? (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 2000), 104. See Ilya Prigogine and Isabelle Stengers, Order out of Chaos (New York: Bantam Books, 1984).
(84) . Mark William Worthing, God, Creation, and Contemporary Physics, Theology and the Sciences (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 152, who draws from the work of Ilya Prigogine,
(35) . By distinguishing between what the biblical text “says” and what it “means,” I am drawing from the exegetical insights of the great Jewish exegete Rashi (Rabbi Shelomo Ben Isaac, 1040–1105 ce). For Rashi, the peshuto shel mikra (“literal meaning of Scripture” or sensus litteralis) is distinguishable from aggadic or traditional interpretations of the text for the Jewish community. For convenience, I refer to the “literal meaning” of a text in its ancient context as what the text “says” (or “said”). What the text “means” explicitly engages the world of the interpreter, which includes the world of science.
(50) . As evidenced in the phenomenon of “redshift,” the stretching of light’s wavelength.
(34) . Martin Rees, “Pondering Astronomy in 2009,” Science 323 (16 January 2009): 309.
(25) . The enigmatic term ṣēlā‘ is most commonly used to designate the part of a building or hill: from “side” and “ridge” (Exod 25:12; 2 Sam 16:13) to the “planks” of a wall (1 Kgs 6:15) to the “leaves” of a door (1 Kgs 6:34). Only in Genesis 2 is the term used anatomically, designating either “side” or, less likely, “rib.” The Greek translation of the Hebrew, pleura, is equally ambiguous. Early and medieval Jewish exegesis, such as found in the commentary work of Philo, Rashi, and Kimchi, interprets ṣēlā as “side.” (The clearest exception is found in the Pseudo-Jonathan Targum, which identifies the man’s “thirteenth rib on the left” for the woman’s creation.) The midrash on Genesis Bereshit Rabah presents a discussion of the first human being cut in two to create the woman. In the context of Genesis 2, the common translation of “rib” is overly specific. I am indebted to the careful work of Naama Zahavi-Ely in her unpublished paper “The Better Half or a Spare Rib? A Linguistic Study of Eve’s Creation” (paper given at the Society of Biblical Literature meeting in Toronto on November 26, 2002).
(77) . Marilynne Robinson, The Death of Adam: Essays on Modern Thought (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1998), 39.
(40) . Gustafson, Intersections, xi–xii. Note also the logo of the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences in Berkeley: the Golden Gate Bridge. See Robert John Russell, “Bridging Theology and Science: The CTNS Logo,” Theology and Science 1 (June 2003), 1–3.
(59) . For greater detail on the distinction, see Robert John Russell, “Finite Creation without a Beginning: The Doctrine of Creation in Relation to Big Bang and Quantum Cosmologies,” in Russell, Cosmology From Alpha to Omega: The Creative Mutual Interaction of Theology and Science, Theology and the Sciences (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2008), 92.
(69) . So Robert John Russell, “Entropy and Evil: The Role of Thermodynamics in the Ambiguity of Good and Evil in Nature,” in Cosmology, 227. Russell also refers to the “talons of time” (ibid. )
(85) . Robert John Russell, “Entropy and Evil: The Role of Thermodynamics in the Ambiguity of Good and Evil in Nature,” in Russell, Cosmology From Alpha to Omega: The Creative Mutual Interaction of Theology and Science, Theology and the Sciences (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2008), 240.
(11) . Robert John Russell helpfully distinguishes between “negative entropy” and “dynamic entropy” in his “Entropy and Evil: The Role of Thermodynamics in the Ambiguity of Good and Evil in Nature,” in Russell, Cosmology from Alpha to Omega: The Creative Mutual Interaction of Theology and Science, Theology and the Sciences (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2008), 239–40.
(4) . Many thanks to my colleague Stan Saunders for casting human identity in this way vis-à-vis the psalms of praise (see, e.g., Ps 148).
(7) . See, most recently, Kathryn Schifferdecker, Out of the Whirlwind: Creation Theology in the Book of Job, HTR 61 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008), 13–21.
(37) . Hebrew has hăsîdāh (“stork” or “heron”), but makes no sense syntactically. Possible emendation is hāsĕrāh (“it lacks”). For an alternative rendering, see Schifferdecker, Out of the Whirlwind, 153.
(53) . Or “Is he not cruel when one arouses him?” (so Schifferdecker, Out of the Whirlwind, 177–78), which requires one to read it as a question, which is not at all clear from the Hebrew. In any case, read yĕ‘îrenû for MT yĕ‘ûrenû.
(54) . MT has “me” against most other Hebrew manuscripts and LXX. The emendation to “it” is not so “extensive” as claimed by Schifferdecker (Out of the Whirlwind, 178), and it preserves the parallelism of the verse.
(58) . Hebrew bad; cf. Job 11:3; Jer 48:30. My translation of v. 4a (despite the difficulties of the second line) is the most straightforward. Schifferdecker, by contrast, turns the verse into a preterite question (“Did I not silence …?”), claiming the opposite meaning (ibid., 174, 178–79).
(66) . See Schifferdecker, Out of the Whirlwind, 176.
(86) . See Schifferdecker, Out of the Whirlwind, 77. Cf. comparable language in Prov 30:4.
(5) . Andreas Schüle, “Made in the ‘Image of God’: The Concepts of Divine Images in Gen 1–3,” ZAW 117 (2005): 15.
(48) . Jeffrey P. Schloss, “Wisdom Traditions as Mechanisms for Organismal Integration: Evolutionary Perspectives on Homeostatic ‘Laws of Life,’” in Understanding Wisdom, 164.
(51) . Schloss, “Wisdom Traditions,” 163–64.
(55) . Schloss, “Wisdom Traditions,” 168.
(3) . R. B. Y. Scott, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes (AB 18; Garden City: Doubleday, 1965), 191.
(10) . See C. L. Seow’s arguments for dating Job in the late sixth or early fifth century based on literary parallels with Second Isaiah and Zechariah 3:1–2, as well as the historical reference to the Chaldeans in 1:17. See Seow, Job: A Commentary, Eerdmans Critical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, forthcoming).
(11) . For detailed discussion of Qoheleth’s economic context, see Choon-Leong Seow, “The Socioeconomic Context of ‘The Preacher’s’ Hermeneutic,” PSB 17 (1996): 168–95.
(14) . Literally, “what is left over” (yitrôn), which can mean gain or advantage in the sense of surplus (3:9; 5:16; cf. 5:9–10). See Choon-Leong Seow, Ecclesiastes (AB 18C; New York: Doubleday, 1997), 103–4. But contra Seow, the term in this context does seem to take on the nuance of commercial value.
(20) . The distinction between the “light” and the celestial bodies recalls the comparable distinction made in Gen 1:3, 14–16. See Seow, Ecclesiastes, 353.
(21) . Unlikely “wheel.” See Seow, Ecclesiastes, 367.
(25) . Difficult form in Hebrew. Perhaps, as Seow suggests, the lamed is asseverative (“surely”), as in 9:4, and the verb is finite rather than infinitival (Ecclesiastes, 167). (p. 290 ) Another possibility is that the verbal root is not brr at all (“choose” or “test”) but br’ with an elided final aleph: “God has created them” in such as a way as “to show them….”
(29) . It is critical to note that Qoheleth’s most famous passage is entirely descriptive, as opposed to prescriptive. The infinitives that populate the poem can just as easily be translated as gerunds: “a time of bearing and a time of dying….” See Seow, Ecclesiastes, 158–62.
(31) . Hebrew hā‘ōlām more conventionally means “eternity.” The disputed meaning has prompted some commentators to emend the word. However, I have chosen to make sense of the Masoretic rendering. See also Seow, Ecclesiastes, 163.
(125) . So Maxine Sheets-Johnstone, The Roots of Thinking (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990), 92.
(128) . So Sheets-Johnstone, Roots of Thinking, 90–92.
(191) . The Yahwist narrative continues in Genesis 4 with the murder of Abel by his brother Cain, the first time the word “sin” is used in the biblical narrative (Gen 4:7). Violence escalates with Lamech (4:23–24) and culminates with the flood story (see 6:5–8).
(69) . Mark S. Smith, God in Translation: Deities in Cross-Cultural Discourse in the Biblical World, FAT 57 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 143. For extended discussion of this passage in relation to the various versions, see ibid., 195–212.
(73) . For detailed discussion, see Mark S. Smith, The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel (2nd ed; Grand Rapids. MI: Eerdmans: Dove Booksellers, 2002), 32–43; Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 142–45.
(74) . See Smith’s discussion of Gen 49:24–26 in Early History of God, 49, which draws from Bruce Vawter, “The Canaanite Background of Genesis 49,” CBQ 17 (1955): 12–17.
(75) . E.g., Deut 33:26–27; Psalm 18:13–15 (Hebrew vv. 14–16). See Smith, Early History of God, 55–56.
(78) . A particularly dramatic take on this development toward monotheism is found in Psalm 82, in which God (’ĕlōhîm in the singular) sentences the other deities (’ĕlōhîm in the plural) to death for having failed to rule justly. Here, theodicy becomes the expressed impetus and rationale for God’s takeover of the divine realm. See Smith, God in Translation, 130–39.
(80) . Smith, Early History of God, 189–90, 196.
(75) . For a full discussion of the social and theological trauma of exile, see Daniel L. Smith-Christopher, A Biblical Theology of Exile, Overtures to Biblical Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002).
(115) . For a general overview and assessment, see Christopher Southgate, Michael Robert Negus, and Andrew Robinson, “Theology and Evolutionary Biology,” in God, Humanity and the Cosmos, 173; Edward O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (New York: Vintage, 1998), 96–97.
(194) . Christopher Southgate, The Groaning of Creation: God, Evolution, and the Problem of Evil (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2008), 137 n. 22.
(58) . 2 Kgs 25:4; Jer 39:4; 52:7. For archaeological evidence and insights, see Lawrence E. Stager, “Jerusalem and the Garden of Eden,” Eretz-Israel 26 (1999): 184–94.
(203) . Paul Steinhardt, “A Cyclic Universe,” Seed 11 (August 2007): 33–34.
(51) . See Krister Stendahl, “Biblical Theology, Contemporary,” IDB, 1.418–32; reprinted in Stendahl, Meanings: The Bible as Document and as Guide (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 11–44. Although Stendahl’s distinction between what the text “meant” and what it “means” has been criticized for being too rigid and objectified, and rightly so, I still find it helpful as a point of departure for discussing the complexity of biblical hermeneutics.
(232) . So William R. Stoeger, “Entropy, Emergence, and the Physical Roots of Natural Evil,” in Physics and Cosmology: Scientific Perspectives on the Problem of Natural Evil, vol. 1, ed. Nancey Murphy, Robert John Russell, William R. Stoeger, SJ (Vatican: Vatican Observatory Publications/Berkeley: Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences, 2007), 94.
(44) . Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Death by Black Hole and Other Cosmic Quandaries (New York: W. W. Norton, 2007), 247. See also William R. Stoeger, SJ, “Scientific Accounts of Ultimate Catastrophes in our Life-Bearing Universe,” in The End of the World and the Ends of God, ed. John Polkinghorne and Michael Welker (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2000), 19–28.
(10) . William R. Stoeger, SJ, “Entropy, Emergence, and the Physical Roots of Natural Evil,” in Physics and Cosmology: Scientific Perspectives on the Problem of Natural Evil, vol. 1, ed. Nancey Murphy, Robert John Russell, William R. Stoeger, SJ (Vatican City State: Vatican Observatory/Berkeley: Center for Theology and Natural Sciences, 2007), 93.
(19) . See William R. Stoeger, SJ, “Cultural Cosmology and the Impact of the Natural Sciences on Philosophy and Culture,” in The End of the World and the Ends of God, ed. John Polkinghorne and Michael Welker (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2000), 75.
(18) . Despite the best efforts of the Templeton Foundation and the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences in Berkeley, as well as interdisciplinary journals such as Zygon and Theology and Science.
(193) . The quote is from Alfred Lord Tennyson, “In Memoriam A. H. H.” LVI; 13–16, in Tennyson: A Selected Edition, ed. Christopher Ricks (1969; repr., Harlow: Longman, 1989), 399.
(158) . For an account of the discovery and its implications, see Neil Shubin, Your Inner Fish: A Journey into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body (New York: Pantheon Books, 2008), 17–27. Titktaalik remains the best preserved transitional fossil between fish and early land-living animals: it has a shoulder, elbow, and wrist all inside a fin (23). Its specialized anatomy allowed it do “push-ups” and thereby move on land (39).
(57) . Drawing from Russian theologian Nicholas Berdyaev, W. Sibley Towner rightly suggests that freedom is woven into the very process of creation (Towner, Genesis, Westminster Bible Companion [Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001], 18–19).
(41) . This is true even in the case of the ice ages, by which much of the earth’s water supply becomes locked up in ice caps, thereby decreasing the level of water in the oceans. The opposite effect is now evident from global warming. See James Trefil, The Nature of Science: An A–Z Guide to the Laws and Principles Governing Our Universe (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2003), 416.
(7) . I am indebted to Mark S. Smith for this rendering of tōhû wābōhû, which matches something of the alliterative quality of the Hebrew. As with the French Le tohu-bohu, meaning “hubbub,” the conjunction of these two similar-sounding words in Hebrew suggests a state that lacks both form and substance, something of a hodgepodge. Tōhû refers most generally to what is uninhabitable or empty of life, the opposite of creation (see Isa 45:18–19; Deut 32:10; Job 6:18; 12:24; Ps 107:40). Always paired with its partner in biblical Hebrew, bōhû is semantically wedded to tōhû (see Isa 34:11; Jer 4:23). See the careful linguistic study by David Tsumura, Creation and Destruction: A Reappraisal of the Chaoskampf Theory in the Old Testament (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2005), 9–35.
(8) . Frequently translated “spirit” (rûaḥ), even though both the Septuagint and Targum Onkelos understand rûaḥ materially as “wind.” See the parallel in Gen 8:1. In view of the divine commands that follow (1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26), rûaḥ is perhaps best translated as “breath,” specifically breath associated with the utterance of divine speech. See also Tsumura, Creation and Destruction, 74–76.
(25) . See chap. 1. For a trenchant critique of the conventional claim that biblical tĕhôm is linked, whether figuratively or etymologically, to Tiamat of Mesopotamian lore, see Tsumura, Creation and Destruction, 36–41. See also the broader study of “chaos” in the Hebrew Bible in Rebecca S. Watson, Chaos Uncreated: A Reassessment of the Theme of “Chaos” in the Hebrew Bible, BZAW 341 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005), esp. 269–72.
(37) . See, also, Tsumura, Creation and Destruction, 34.
(22) . Gene M. Tucker, “Rain on a Land Where No One Lives: The Hebrew Bible on the Environment,” JBL 116 (1997): 15.
(182) . J. Craig Venter et al., “The Sequence of the Human Genome,” Science 291 (16 February 2001): 1347–48.
(64) . Frans de Waal, “Morally Evolved: Primate Social Instincts, Human Morality, and the Rise and Fall of ‘Veneer Theory,’” in Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved, ed. Stephen Macedo and Josiah Ober (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006), 24.
(106) . For a thorough survey of de Waal’s observations and analysis, see his Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1996). His most recent engagement on the philosophical and moral issues can be found in his discussion with a panel of critics (Robert Wright, Christine M. Korsgaard, Philip Kitcher, and Peter Singer) in Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved, ed. Stephen Macedo and Josiah Ober (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006).
(112) . De Waal, “Morally Evolved,” 56. More recent studies support this: see Kwame Anthony Appiah, Experiments in Ethics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008); Dan Ariely, Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions (New York: HarperCollins, 2008).
(115) . De Waal, “Appendix A: Anthropomorphism and Anthropodenial,” in Primates and Philosophers, 65.
(116) . De Waal, “The Tower of Morality,” in Primates and Philosophers, 161.
(228) . The tree of life was also proposed independently by Alfred Russel Wallace in a paper published in 1855. Peter J. Bowler, “Darwin’s Originality,” Science 323 (9 January 2009): 224.
(48) . Keith Ward, Divine Action: Examining God’s Role in an Open and Emergent Universe (West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton Foundation Press, 2007 [1990]), 63.
(89) . Ward, Divine Action, 100.
(105) . For a history of how a term from Greek cosmology came to be applied to Hebrew biblical literature, see Watson, Chaos Uncreated, 13–19.
(76) . Or as Steven Weinberg tells of a “joke” circulated among scientists in Moscow about how the anthropic principle explains the misery of life: “There are many more ways for life to be miserable than happy; the anthropic principle only requires that the laws of nature should allow the existence of intelligent beings, not that these beings should enjoy themselves” ( Dreams of a Final Theory [New York: Pantheon Books, 1992], 221–22).
(94) . Steven Weinberg, The First Three Minutes: A Modern View of the Origin of the Universe (New York: Basic Books, 1977), 154.
(39) . See Steven Weinberg, Dreams of a Final Theory: The Scientist’s Search for the Ultimate Laws of Nature (New York: Random House, 1994), esp. 19–64. Cf. Kauffman’s critique in Reinventing the Sacred, 31–43.
(33) . Michael Welker, Creation and Reality (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1999), 4.
(56) . To borrow from Michael Welker, Creation and Reality, trans. John F. Hoffmeyer (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1999), 40, 42, who focuses only on the productive agency of the earth.
(70) . Welker, Creation and Reality, 71.
(140) . Michael Welker, God the Spirit, trans John F. Hoffmeyer (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994), 161 n. 67.
(235) . So Welker, Creation and Reality, 9.
(6) . Michael Welker, Creation and Reality, trans. John F. Hoffmeyer (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1999), 10.
(8) . So Michael Welker (personal communication).
(31) . Julius Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel (Gloucester: Peter Smith, 1983 [1885]), 361.
(48) . Claus Westermann, Genesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987), 25.
(15) . See Eugene Wigner, “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences,” Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 13, no. 1 (February 1960): 1–14.
(24) . Likely Ursa Major. For an alternative interpretation of the astronomical references, see A. de Wilde, Das Buch Hiob, OTS 22 (Leiden: Brill, 1981), 142–47.
(24) . Edward O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (New York: Vintage Books, 1998), 294.
(58) . Wilson, Consilience, 230.
(68) . Edward O. Wilson, The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth (New York: W. W. Norton, 2006).
(158) . Wilson, Consilience, 52.
(200) . Wilson, Consilience, 303.
(243) . Wilson, Consilience, 124.
(248) . Wilson, Consilience, 142.
(19) . Edward O. Wilson, “General Introduction,” in Charles Darwin, From So Simple a Beginning: The Four Great Books of Charles Darwin, ed. Edward O. Wilson (New York: W. W. Norton, 2004), 12.
(97) . Edward O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (New York: Vintage Books, 1998), 107.
(91) . The phrase is borrowed from Edward O. Wilson, The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth (New York: W. W. Norton, 2006), 13, 163.
(99) . Edward O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (New York: Vintage, 1998), 231. See his full treatment in Biophilia (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984); cf. Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson, eds., The Biophilia Hypothesis (Washington, D.C.: Island Press/Shearwater Books, 1993).
(111) . Edward O. Wilson, “Introduction to The Voyage of the Beagle,” in From So Simple A Beginning, 18.
(113) . Wilson, Creation, 123.
(116) . Wilson, Diversity of Life, 38.
(121) . Wilson, Diversity of Life, 156 (correction: in the universe galaxies, not “stars,” are moving apart).
(127) . Wilson, Diversity of Life, 15.
(145) . See Wilson’s expressed awe over the wolverine in Creation, 56–58.
(44) . Edward O. Wilson, The Diversity of Life (New York: W. W. Norton, 1999), xvi.
(68) . Edward O. Wilson, “Afterward,” in From So Simple a Beginning: The Four Great Books of Charles Darwin, ed. Edward O. Wilson (New York: W. W. Norton, 2006), 1480.
(3) . Edward O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (New York: Vintage Books, 1998), 325.
(7) . Edward O. Wilson, The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth (New York: W. W. Norton, 2006), 36.
(31) . A fact confirmed by British pediatrician and psychoanalyst D. W. Winnicott. See his Playing and Reality (London/New York: Tavistock, 1982).
(198) . Edward O. Wilson, The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth (New York: W. W. Norton, 2006), 117.
(21) . Elsewhere in Proverbs 1–9, wisdom is cast as an object of understanding, teaching, possession, and even love (e.g., 2:2–4; 3:18; 4:5–8, 11; 5:1).
(223) . See Graeme Wistow, “Lens Crystallins: Gene Recruitment and Evolutionary Dynamism,” Trends in Biochemical Sciences 18 (1993): 301–6. Cited in Rolston, Science and Religion, xxi.
(141) . See, e.g., Milford H. Wolpoff et al., “Modern Human Ancestry at the Peripheries: A Test of the Replacement Theory,” Science 291 (12 January 2001): 293–97; Milford H. Wolpoff and Rachel Caspari, Race and Human Evolution (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997).
(217) . Hans Walter Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974), 20. For a more detailed discussion, see Levenson, Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel, 110–12.
(69) . Bernard Wood, Human Evolution: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 45.
(137) . Wood, Human Evolution, 98.
(140) . As posited by Rebecca Cann, Mark Stoneking, and Allan Wilson. See Wood, Human Evolution, 105–6.
(142) . Wood, Human Evolution, 108.
(167) . Wood, Human Evolution, 107.
(73) . Erich Zenger, Gottes Bogen in den Wolken: Untersuchungen zu Komposition und Theologie der priesterschriftlichen Urgeschichte, 2nd ed, Stuttgarter Bibelstudien 112 (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1987), 90.
(217) . Carl Zimmer, “In Games, An Insight into the Rules of Evolution,” New York Times, 31 July 2007, at www.nytimes.com/2007/07/31/science/31prof.html?scp=1&sq=Carl%20Zimmer%20%22Rules%20of%20Evolution%22&st=cse.
(219) . For a highly readable account, see Carl Zimmer, Microcosm: E. coli and the New Science of Life (New York: Pantheon, 2008), esp 54–58.
(82) . Latest research suggests that certain chemical reactions presumed necessary for producing RNA likely took place at “temperatures and pH levels found in ponds” that occasionally dried up. Carl Zimmer, “On the Origin of Life on Earth,” Science 323 (9 January 2009): 199.
(21) . Specifically, the Aleppo Pine. See Michael Zohary, Plants of the Bible (London: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 114.
(116) . Gary Zukav, The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics (New York: William Morrow and Company, 1979), 213.