Some stuff to ponder. A quantum physicist turned Anglican priest he figures science can prove and explain God.

This is a great article in part because of it's embedded links and audio which can be found at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2009/apr/09/religion-controversiesinscience

Earlier this year, a former Cambridge physicist, John Polkinghorne, published a book called Questions of Truth: God, science and belief. I interviewed John shortly after it came out, and as Easter is now upon us, it seemed as good a time as any to post the whole interview.

Polkinghorne ditched science many moons ago to be ordained into the Anglican ministry. His book is essentially a paper incarnation of a website run by Polkinghorne's former pupil, Nicholas Beale, where the two post answers to questions sent in by readers.

I was interested in talking to John because I wanted to try and understand how he could believe extraordinary things for which there is no evidence. This is what fascinates me about people with religious beliefs. What is going on in someone's brain that allows them to believe there is an invisible, all-knowing, omnipresent superbeing out there? By what process does someone come to the conclusion that there is a God? Of course it might be true, but it's a major thing to sign up to, so surely one would want some pretty hefty evidence before even considering it?

John believes that something called God literally became man. He believes that a chap called Jesus was literally raised from the dead. He believes that after his own death, he will be re-embodied by God in a form of matter that is not of this world.

There are plenty of people out there bashing religion, and many of the awful things that are done in its name. I had no interest in attacking Polkinghorne's beliefs, as baffling as I find them, but I did want to know why he holds the beliefs he does.

Annoyingly, I didn't end up with the kind of insight I was hoping for. Apparently it takes a long time to explain why such beliefs are held, and it's all very complicated. I felt John re-asserted his beliefs more than explained why he held them.

There was plenty in Polkinghorne's book I found offensive. In one passage, he says that God hides from us because if we ever clapped eyes on an infinite being, we'd be unable to carry on as we are. We'd be overwhelmed to the point of hopelessness. As John says in the interview: "We'd sort of shrivel up."

It's extraordinary stuff. And surely a bit patronising. My reaction to superbeings in comics has always been excitement and mild envy (great powers, but not sure I could go with the outfits). If I was to see the ultimate superbeing, I'd be very excited for a long time. I might even get a poster and go around praising them. But I think I could carry on a life of human mediocrity.

John finishes on a positive note about the teaching of Creationism and Intelligent Design in classrooms.
I wonder if religious belief can be considered a neuropathology, albeit a sometimes benign one? The universe is extraordinary, nature is beautiful and complex; consciousness is baffling. But why conjure up a superbeing to make sense of it all?