Sir: Mr Kenneth Alison, in his article 'Double- think about
God' (21 June), imagines historians of the far future asking 'How were St Thomas Aquinas's five proofs of Jehovah's existence re- conciled with, say, the anti-matter theory of Klein and Alfren?' (I think he means Alfven.) Sir, one sincerely hopes that historians of the far future will be sufficiently educated not to ask such nonsensical questions! One might just as well ask 'How do we reconcile our estima- tion of Bach and his music with the modern physics of sound and the modern physiology of hearing?: or, 'How do we reconcile our estima- tion of Michelangelo and his art with the modern chemistry of paint, the modern physics of colour and the latest theory of visual per- ception?' Has our admiration for Bach and Michelangelo as creators of sublime art and our appreciation thereof, been in any way signi- ficantly affected by the advances in our under- standing of sound, colour, hearing and vision? Why should our faith in, and worship of, God as the creator and sustainer of the universe, be affected by the latest theories about matter and the universe?
Mr Allsop seems to think that once one has understood the mechanics of a typewriter and the properties of paper, it no longer makes sense to ask what is the message on the paper. As for asking who wrote it and what kind of a person he is, well, that is just being primitive and superstitious!
A. Danielian Halliday Hall, South Side, Clapham Common, London SW4
Previous page
