Customer Reviews

Decoding the Language of God: Can a Scientist Really Be a Believer?

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I truly enjoyed this book. Dr. Cunningham is a sharp thinker and an excellent writer. Although written as a rebuttal to Francis Collins' book "The Language of God", this book serves as a great survey of common arguments used by Christians to defend their faith. Dr. Cunningham is respectful, yet blunt when it is called for. He goes to great lengths to not construct a straw man, but rather it is clear that he truly wants to understand, and to articulate sincerely and accurately the positions which he argues against. This intellectual honesty, for those of us who find such things very edifying, is refreshing. Highly Recommended.

I have to admit that at some points while reading this book, I felt so much sympathy for Collins that I didn't want to read on. Cunningham absolutely eviscerates him. Normally, I don't mind if someone's arguments get hammered because we need to vigorously challenge ideas in order to move forward; however, I do have a lot of respect for Collins' scientific achievements (it should be noted that Cunningham is an esteemed scientist as well). Collins is quite deservedly held in high regard and this book takes nothing away from those achievements, nor should we lose sight of the fact that Collins operates well above the ignorance of the creationist/fundamentalist community.

Although this is a serious book, Cunningham has an excellent sense of humor. He points out the absurdities in Collins' views, though it's almost unfair given how easy it is to attack faith-based claims. As many authors in the freethought community have noted, supernatural ideas don't answer any questions, all they do is create more absurd and irrelevant questions (consider the issue of theodicy, for example).

Finally, I think we can perhaps speculate on the author's motivations here. That is, why write a book like this, particularly since presumably Collins' intentions are good - that is, he's aiming for some sort of reconcilation between science and religion. Having spent a lot of time in the freethought community (in addition to the faith community), and having the pleasure of meeting Dr. Cunningham personally, it's clear to me that Collins' book is offensive for largely the same reasons that televangelists and imans are offensive. They make claims with no evidence; claims that represent an implicit attack on the foundation of human knowledge, and do nothing but divide humanity along schisms of "faith". Collins' case is particularly egregious because I think he "enables" the supernatural worldview (and its consequences), and his book implies (erroneously) that supernatural/faith-based thinking is prevalent in the scientific community.

I'm the author of a novel, Kaleidoscope, in which I explore many of these themes.

In this book, fellow geneticist George Cunningham takes on the major points former head of the Human Genome Project Francis Collins makes in his best-seller The Language of God. Collins attempts to demonstrate that belief in evangelical Christianity is compatible with a scientific worldview. Cunningham strongly disagrees with this premise and devastatingly refutes all of Collins' arguments one by one. For anyone who has read The Language of God, believers and skeptics alike should read Cunningham's book as well. I have read both books and I definitely feel Cunningham comes out on top.

Definitely worth it. Cunningham takes a thorough and logical approach to rebutting Collins book, as well as general topics in the existence of god discussions. I have not read Collins book but had no problem following (in most cases Cunningham pastes verbatim and adds context).

Whether your a believer and want to challenge yourself, a non-believer and want to discover others viewpoints, this will serve both!

Avoiding scientific jargon (or explaining when he does) its suitable for teens and above.

Would very much enjoy reading a rebuttal to this book!

Thanks Dr. Cunningham

Decoding the Language of God: Can a Scientist Be a Believer? by George C. Cunningham

"Decoding the Language of God..." is a wonderful, well-written book by geneticist George C. Cunningham who rebuts Francis Collins' best-selling book, "The Language of God..." It's a book that cogently, and with lucid logic effectively destroys all of Mr. Collin's main points. The book is composed of the following nine chapters: 1. From Belief to Atheism, 2. Evidence and Rules of Engagement, 3. The War of Worldviews, 4. What's Wrong with The Moral Argument?, 5. Cosmology Origins of the Universe, 6. The Bible, 7. Naturalism (Atheism and Agnosticism), 8. Supernaturalism (Ethical, Monotheism, Spirituality) and 9.A Personal God?

Positives:

1. A gem of a book! Well written, researched, and reasoned book that was a treat to read.
2. Elegant conversational prose that uses a direct yet respectful tone in destroying Mr. Collin's main points.
3. This book is critical thinking at its best. Profound without being unintelligible.
4. More wisdom for your buck! I've learned so much from this book.
5. Great explanations for knowledge...worth the price of the book!
6. Great defense of science.
7. Reason versus faith, a one-sided battle.
8. Mr. Cunningham obliterates Mr. Collins' main defense of his religious beliefs. No contest!
9. How religious dogma do more harm than good.
10. Omnipotence and free will discussed.
11. The inconsistency of hell with "God's" infinite power of forgiveness. Compelling arguments throughout.
12. The problem of evil.
13. Unreliable biblical accounts and related matters. No evidence for the great Flood, the exodus or the existence of Abraham, Job, and Moses.
14. Miracles debunked...
15. Great arguments concerning morality.
16. How brain injuries impact humans.
17. The imperfect universe.
18. Biblical immorality.
19. Great quotes, "Science deal with reality, and religion with supernatural unreality".
20. Compelling arguments throughout made by Mr. Cunningham are a staple of this great book.
21. Great conclusion section.


Negatives:

1. No formal bibliography.
2. Having to wait for Mr. Cunningham's next book.

In summary, I loved the "Decoding the Language of God..."! This book was pure brain candy.
I can't recommend this book enough!

Further recommendations: "50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God" by Guy P. Harrison, "Godless..." by Dan Barker, "Christian No More..." by Jeffrey Mark,"Atheism Explained..." by David Ramsay Steele, and "Why I became an Atheist" by John Loftus.

This thorough and thoughtful rebuttal of Collins' book is an outstanding piece of work. As I pointed out in my review of the Collins book (q. v.), Collins' basic premise is that there exists an absolute "moral law" which must be attributable to a deity (and specifically the Judaeo-Christian one). But Collins is doubly wrong here: firstly, there is no such thing as an absolute moral law: moral codes differ among societies and over time, and there is nothing absolute about any of them. Secondly, it would not be evidence of the existence of any sort of deity (Christian or otherwise)if there were, any more than the law of gravity does. It is unfortunate indeed that Collins' theological reasoning is not up to the quality of his science.

See also: Sam Harris, The Moral Landscape (p. 160-174) for more on this.

DECODING THE LANGUAGE OF GOD: CAN A SCIENTIST REALLY BE A BELIEVER? A GENETICIST RESPONDS TO FRANCIS COLLINS comes a geneticist who presents a point-by-point rebuttal of THE LANGUAGE OF GOD by Francis Collins, and is a pick for any library where Francis Collins' work is studied. Here Cunningham argues that there is no scientifically acceptable evidence to support a belief in a personal god - and much that discredits it. This inspirational survey offers plenty for debate and dialogue.

This is virtually two books in one - Francis Collins' "The Language of God" and Cunningham's - as the author here cites verbatim the key points made by Collins and proceeded to refute the claims he (Collins) made. The language of Cunningham was clear, precise, and devoid of emotional terminolgy. The reader is thus able to compare the two conflicting views in a rational manner. It is the sort of book a scientist would write. Cunningham was once a Christian (Roman Catholic) and he explained in his introduction what led him to the path where he is today, an atheist so far as the Christian god was concerned. He then set out how a scientist would proceed to examine the evidence and basis for the study of whether a god of the Christian variety can exist. The choices are between reason and evidence on the one hand, and unproven, subjective beliefs in the supernatural, on the other. His main attacks against the Christian criteria of an all knowing, all powerful, and all good god were based on the problem of evil and the scientific improbability of the creation of the human race in just 10,000 years. He questioned the idea of an intelligent supernatural being creating a flawed universe for the sake of human companionship. Why, he asked would such a being feel such loneliness that he would crave the fellowship of man? He challenges the assumption that the desire for moral behaviour points to the existence of a super moral being. His analysis and study of the sole basis of Christian beliefs - the Bible - is worth the price of the book alone. The greatest Christian miracle, the Resurrection of Jesus, was described in the four Gospels (all written by unknown writers) and in complete contradiction to each other. Mark's version said that when the three women appeared at the tomb, it was already opened. Matthew embellished it by describing how the stone was rolled open in front of them. Luke made no mention of the women, and John had only Mary Magdalene visiting the tomb. All other details were also at variance with each other. According to Cunningham Biblical scholars found between 200,000 to 400,000 textual versions of the Bible existed before the present (still varied) version churches use today. He made the point that the inerrant word of God inexplicably led to so many different Christian versions even today Greek Orthodox has 50 books in the Old Testament, the Hebrews have 39 and the Christians have 39 plus 27 New Testaments, and the Catholics have 46 in their Bible. Cunningham's clear and detailed account refuted the idea of a "free will" defence for God. Either God knows everything in advance or he does not. Either free will is truly free or it is not. One cannot have it both ways. This is just a short synopsis of Cunningham's arguments. It is worth reading them in full. Finally, he pointed out that Christian fundamentalists among many other divergent Christian groups do not accept Collins' idea of the Christian God.

Written by a medical geneticist with a high-school and undergraduate education by the Jesuits, this book aims to "decode" the recent classic by Francis Collins but misses both the big picture and the little picture. The Big Picture: Consider Dr. Cunningham's problem. He cannot impugn Dr. Collins's scientific credentials. So he must step outside science while pulling under the mantle of science his argument that the believing scientist is a fraud, a magical thinker, or (in a closing attempt at graciousness) suffers from "cognitive dissonance." How can such an argument be made to work? The technique here is to state the conclusion magisterially and repeat it relentlessly, harmonizing the motif with variations taken from the chapters of Dr. Collins's book. The bare bones of the argument? A scientist cannot be a believer. Why not? Why, because a scientist cannot be a believer. Yes, that is Dr. Cunningham's conclusion and his premise. Aristotle and the medieval logicians and the Jesuits, although of course we have moved way beyond these people, called this the fallacy of "begging the question."

Where does this kind of thinking get us? Is a mathematician or a violinist allowed to say he loves his wife without equations or a sonata, or would this be cognitive dissonance? What about the poor truck driver who loves Bach and a beer but doesn't know the code of the musician or the brewer? God help him if he loves poetry too. Is he not allowed to talk? The chilly imperialism of the biologist or physicist who says "there's no talk outside my talk" is arrogant and self-contradictory. Someone--Thomas Kuhn? Niels Bohr?--famously said, "Don't listen to what the physicist says, just watch what they do." That is to say, weigh differently what the scientist does and what the scientist says it all means. I am sure that Dr Cunningham's own courtship was not conducted in code about occipital cortex and hippocampus and synapses, nor did he even tell himself that by not talking in neural code he was just talking symbolically. But a world divided between science talk and myth-making is a small and crabbed world. So, poets and scientists alike, we can take religion and faith seriously; more, we must confront its claims to truth, right norms of behavior, and the inviolacy of human dignity. To the scientist who puts on his high hat as Spokesman of Science and accuses us, "That is not science," we answer, "Of course it is not science. Nor is most of life. Nor, incidentally, is your accusation science."

And he gets the Little Pictures wrong, usually wrong in a big way. Start with prayer. Dr Cunningham talks of measuring the efficacy of prayer by counting number of wishes granted, cures, miracle, etc. But the real measure of prayer is Jesus in Gethsemane: "Take this cup from me, but not my will but Thine be done." That was intercessory prayer. "Take up your cross and follow me." "Thy kingdom come, thy will be done." Perhaps you can ask "scientific" questions about certain kinds of "prayer", like the *prayer* of the quarterback or of the battlefield general, but it is ludicrous to think such an exercise sheds any light on the prayer of Jesus in Gethsemane, Theresa of Avila, or Mother Theresa of Calcutta, to which believers aspire. This is the fallacy of equivocation, calling different things by the same name, deconstructing *prayer* then claiming prayer is superstitious.

The problem of evil, why do terrible things happen to innocent people? is for Dr Cunningham the nail in the coffin of God. There are questions for which any conceivable verbal answer is inadequate. This is one of them. Another is when your true love asks, "Why do you love me?" These words are questions. Are the answers words too? Are words even expected? Would words be tolerated? The answer of the believer to the Problem of Evil is not words but a person, Jesus on Calvary. God loved the world so much he took on a human body and suffered like one of us. The challenge to believers is to keep this always in front of them.

Consider apparitions and mystical experiences. Leave alone the skepticism which the official Catholic Church treats any of these claims before accepting them. Dr. Cunningham claims they don't happen because--are you ready for this?--they can't happen. If someone could have tested Bernadette at Lourdes or Lucia at Fatima with an EEG or a PET scan during an apparition, a believer-scientist would expect to find occipital brain activity without a retinal image. How else would a human visionary experience the apparition but through her brain? But Dr. Cunningham, using the fallacy of the undistributed middle, concludes that this proves the apparition is a seizure or a hallucination, because these too stimulate occipital brain activity without the eye participating.

Consider Dr. Cunningham's notion of person, carefully constructed so as not to forbid abortion and euthanasia. It is an amalgam of notions, a monster of body parts cobbled together. It is a function of the brain (so, you see, God cannot be a person because, having no body, he has no brain). Being a person means one is conscious of "his or herself", "capable of interacting with other humans and the environment in a meaningful, rational, and empathetic way," "capable of assigning values and meaning to people, objects, and events in his or her experience." Although there is more of this, the definition fails when the person falls asleep or gets a rap on the head, and moreover it would be a stretch for the definition to cover a baby or even a 6 year old boy. But, don't worry, Dr. Cunningham can amplify the definition in his next edition. Another lump or suture line on the face of this Frankenstein monster wouldn't even be noticed.

A few other notions invite comments. In his closing pep talk to scientists, Dr. Cunningham says, "The compensation for accepting the truth of a scientific worldview is the joy of the physical pleasures of the body and the intellectual pleasures of an active mind." What self-inflated nonsense. The joys are available to you whether you are a scientist or not, and whether you have hobbled your mind with his narrow worldview or not. Then we get this: "For science, the ultimate value is truth; for religion, the ultimate value is unquestioning faith." Again, what nonsense. There are certain experiments we would not conduct on humans despite the truths of physiology or molecular biology or psychology or pharmacology they might give us. Yes, we want truth, but not truth at any price, and not just truth that comes from a spectrometer or Petri dish. And unquestioning faith? That is a betrayal of his Jesuit teachers, whom earlier he credited for their promotion of "critical thinking." Perhaps he is confusing Christians for the soldiers of the Light Brigade: "Their's not to reason why." Or maybe dogs, I don't know.

In summary, Dr Cunningham's book fails as an intellectual enterprise. He disagrees with Dr. Collins because Dr. Collins has got it wrong, because, you see, Dr. Collins can live with cognitive dissonance but a true scientist like Dr. Cunningham cannot. The book fails even to get the target right, as in this howler: "According to most Christians, Jesus is not just one person but three persons in one divine person interacting with his self." Of course, no Christian believes that. At first I thought it was a typo, but, no, Dr. Cunningham goes on to call it (accurately) a logical impossibility. But he actually thinks that's what Christians believe. Even Wikipedia gets the Trinity right, for Pete's sake, why can't Dr. Cunningham or Prometheus Books? The book is full of this kind of gabble. If you must read it, borrow a copy.

MORE ATHEIST LIES, LIES, LIES!
I've read all of the pages displayed here on Amazon, and within the first few pages, I found MANY untruths, purposefully bashing
ALL faiths, and a look into this man and his weak, blind reasons for loosing his faith in God. He gave up so easily. Did he ever consider the fact that maybe Catholicism may not be the ONLY interpretation of God's word??? OR that the leaders made a lot of bad mistakes misrepresenting Gods words??? THIS IS NOT God's fault. ;(. I feel sorry for Atheists who
VERY LITTLE RESEARCH on all things regarding religious beliefs; like TRUELY understanding what the Bible REALLY says, by
READING it on their own along with a very accurate Concordance bible- which give the most pure Hebrew, Greek, and Latin word
meanings. I think it's extremely foolish for this author to write books, but not be able to spend time making certain what the bible TRULY teaches. He is either simply uneducated about it, OR PURPOSEFULLY DECEIVING PEOPLE.
I am a non-denominational Christian, because I, and many other Christians feel that it is the most accurate of all Christian faiths. It is very careful to be accurate with every word in God's word, as it originally was meant to be.
Next, the author states that very few scientists believe in God - which is completely FALSE! Due to the latest discoveries in
science, especially new findings in DNA, genes, and micro-organisms- several atheist scientists now believe in a Creator beyond
all doubt! THEIR views are everywhere on the Internet ; Articles, Several excellent books, and even videos on YouTube!
Then he writes that God is a horrible God, because God sends all unsaved babies and children to a hell of torment. The bible NEVER says this, and I've never heard of a church teaching this horrible lie. REAL Christians know that ALL children enter the kingdom of God. And ALL people who've died without knowing God will be given a chance to accept God. He also feels that we k
are all being punished for Adam and Eve's sin. But When they ate from the tree of the KNOWLEDGE of Good and Evil, they gained a sinful nature- It's really about Satan falling from Heaven, and wanting to ruin man, whether Adam and Eve or several generations later, Satan would have ruined God's pure creation, and caused the same cursed outcome. God gave even the angels free will, and since 1/3 chose to follow Satan, Everything changed. Somehow the power of evil has to be played out before God can completely end it's power. This will be when He puts Satan, and all demons into hell,
And then he'll will be burned up and exist no more. Which means that he'll is Not eternal, and not meant for man.
feelings, and even their being. We most likely would have done the same. REMEMBER Satan was Deceiving them, and they did
NOT KNOW EVIL - so they were pure, innocent, and even naive, but they also knew what was good, and they were told to follow God's instruction, to NOT eat from that tree. God gives us free will, so part of that trust is to let us make our
own decisions, and ACTIONS, so He wasn't there to stop them. I don't believe he chooses to know what we do, UNTIL we've
completed the thought or action..... God IS a God of Love, people who DON'T KNOW the scriptures inside and out, really have a right to claim WHO God IS, nor what TRUE Christianity is about. It's not Gods fault when misguided, or false Christians make Him look bad.
I feel saddened that there are so MANY HATEFUL atheists out there- I feel that they haven't ever TRUELY given all of their time, heart, and soul into learning about God, scripture, and the historical proofs, scientific, and all the 500+ extremely specific prophesies that have been fulfilled, and the ones that are OBVIOUSLY being fulfilled right NOW, like the new world order- the bible
uses the same title, and tells of it's same purpose. I've KNOWN that God exists since I was three years old. I SAW, and Felt His Creations, and power in everything...... At THREE years old! I now believe that some people just cannot see, or refuse to see the wonderful, intricate proofs of Gods infinite power and beauty all around us. I think that many atheists are very arrogant, blind, and ungrateful for ALL things designed for us by God. I'm also convinced after hundreds of hours of research, that a large majority of atheists do not want to live a moral life, they LOVE being sinful, doing wrong things - so they despise religion's values and beliefs!
Many atheists will say exactly that, and others write about why they are atheist, and within their story, in unspoken words - this truth is told. I wish they would reevaluate if what they believe is really the ONE TRUTH, OR is it just a belief that fits in their value system??? They are missing out on so much REAL happiness, and true meaning.... I could give a resounding answer to every comment in this book, but I have to get to sleep.
DO NOT BE DECEIVED! DISCOVER WHAT YOU BELIEVE - AFTER RESEARCHING FOR YOUR SELF!!!