Whitehead reacted strongly against the idea of God as a cosmic tyrant, one who brings about everything.

The remarkable insights that science affords us into the intelligible workings of the world cry out for an explanation more profound than that which itself can provide. Religion, if it is to take seriously its claim that the world is the creation of god, must be humble enough to learn from science what that world is actually like. The dialogue between them can only be mutually enriching.

Whitehead reacted strongly against the idea of God as a cosmic tyrant, one who brings about everything.

So Whitehead's metaphysics doesn't fit very well on to physics as we understand the process of the world.

After all, the universe required ten billion years of evolution before life was even possible; the evolution of the stars and the evolving of new chemical elements in the nuclear furnaces of the stars were indispensable prerequisites for the generation of life.

Those theologians who are beginning to take the doctrine of creation very seriously should pay some attention to science's story.

The test of a theory is its ability to cope with all the relevant phenomena, not its a priori 'reasonableness'. The latter would have proved a poor guide in the development of science, which often makes progress by its encounter with the totally unexpected and initially extremely puzzling.