Customer Reviews

The Language of Science and Faith: Straight Answers to Genuine Questions

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This book is written for "Christian readers who would like to have a position[on creation and evolution] that is both biblically based and scientifically sound." The broadest and most general question the authors are addressing is "how to understand evolution as the way that God created life." The authors strongly refute the notions that "many scientists are rejecting evolution" and "a large number of scientists have publically repudiated evolution," stating that "these claims are simply false. They also strongly refute the "scientific" arguments for a young earth, the "appearance of age," and changes in the speed of light as explanations for a young earth. The authors propose that the question of whether the uncontroversial fact of microevolution provides evidence for the complex and controversial claims of macroevolution is at the heart of the entire controversy over evolution.

Chapters 1-8 are each organized around groups of questions, covering a total of 71 questions. In their discussion of relating science and religion (Chapter 3), they discuss Stephen Jay Gould's non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA), how Galileo removed a misunderstanding about what the Bible was teaching, and present a helpful lesson on relevant aspects of biblical hermeneutics. Chapter 5 (Science and the Existence of God) is probably the weakest chapter, in which the authors (a physicist and a geneticist) attempt to discuss philosophical issues like relating evolution to the problem of evil and the existence of God. Chapter 8 (Evolution and Human Beings) contains possibly the best summary discussion I have yet seen on Simon Conway Morris' concept of convergence in evolution, which the authors propose as one way of looking at how God might have guided evolution. Throughout the book, the authors are careful to point out that they don't have "final" answers, only answers that might be right. The book finishes up (Chapter 9) with a "Modern Creation Story," how the creation story might have been written by someone with an understanding of modern science.

The book includes 15 pages of Notes, a Name Index, a Subject Index, an Index of Questions, and a brief but well-organized Annotated Bibliography which unfortunately does not include a section covering books that focus on the theological issues affected by biological evolution.

I frequently found myself wishing that the authors had included more back-up material, but they cited space limitations. Nevertheless, the book is an excellent introduction to the subject and does include good suggestions for further reading. I recommend it as a very good starting point for anyone struggling with how to integrate the findings of science with the message of the Bible.

In this book, the authors, Francis S. Collins and Karl W. Giberson, lay the foundation for Biologos and the scientific worldview based in Scripture while remaining well within the scientific community. This book is, at times, a little professorial, but for the most part, it is an easy read for either the lay-scientist or the lay-theologian. Frankly, it is one which should be examined as a middle ground in the current `war' between science and a faith of a few, which is built upon an extremely literal reading (usually of a translation) of Genesis 1.

They begin chapter one by discussing the views (often erroneous) of Darwin. This view of Darwin and Darwinism is something which they must change, mainly due to our normal appetites of taking in only what is spoon fed to us, regardless of historical accuracy. Their goal in the introduction is not to make Darwin likable, but to explain first and foremost that the terminology most often applied, Darwinism, is outdated at best, and a purposed distortion at worst. Indeed, both YEC and Evolutionists use Darwin and it's cognates to describe what is best seen as evolution. What is interesting is the way in which evolution has changed since Darwin. While Chick (Jack T.) would have us believe that Darwin is not only the basis, but the sole source of evolutionary thought, the authors are able to briefly, and with lay terminology, show how science has advanced far past Darwin, evolving you might say, to where we are today. So much so, that to continue to label evolution as Darwinism is patently false. Part of this advancement is due to Christian scientists, such as Mendel, who have furthered science while holding on to their faith in God. On this note, let me add that in this brief introduction they mention the word most often feared by scientists, atheists and Mainliners - GOD. (For scientists, they use `God talk' an awfully lot.) It is not forced, and neither is the use of God as second hand thought. With the ground laid, they move on in the first chapter to discussing key terms.

In the second chapter of this book, Can We Really Know the Earth is Billions of Years Old?, the authors explore the process by which the scientific community has come to date not only the age of the universe, but so too the planet earth. And, for my benefit, they use simplistic laymen's terms, while for your benefit, they do not blatantly attack or engage in name calling the YEC. They simply show that through various independent methods, the age of the universe, that of 13 billion years old, is proved time and time again. You'll have to read the book to find out about measuring light, reversals and the such, as they are able to break down the mountain called science into pebbles for our understanding. And their question on page 68 is correct - unless God has spent time creating false facts, lies (my word), then we can only assume that the universe and the earth is as old as science has revealed. The last part of the chapter deals with ancient Christian interpreters and how they suggested dealing with the bible and science. They use Origen, Augustine, and as they do in subsequent chapters, Aquinas. This is important, especially in their assertion that neither the bible nor Christian Tradition requires us believe in a 6000 year old earth. Further,in their time line, they note that hardcore Young Earth Creationism comes to us in present form from the 1960s. Interesting enough, they even quote from The Fundamentals as examples of conservative Christians not requiring a detain interpretation if Genesis 1.

In the third chapter, How Do We Relate Science and Religion, they try to correct the myth that Science and Religion are at war with one another! Wait, you mean that they aren't? They quote Augustine and Aquinas - who, in my opinion, is a central figure in exploring the role of science and theology - to show that Christian theologians have valued science. This is true, whether or not fundamentalists - believers or non-believers - want to be historical about the whole thing. One of the issues which we have today is the lack of historical context. How many of us actually study history, quantifying data, examining and exploring the field? Instead, we simply settle for one book on the subject. If we do the latter, which more often than not is the preferred choice, then we are going to fall into the same trap that science and religion are perpetual enemies where only one can survive.

The fourth chapter, Can Scientific and Scriptural Truth Be Reconciled, may be a difficult one for some to grasp. You have to get what they are saying, what they are calling you, the reader, to grasp about truth and Truth. There are truths which are subjective, moral and ethical truths, and the such are difficult to prove but nevertheless are easily assumed by people, groups, without question. They give several examples, but I am not going to copy and paste. You'll just have to buy the book. The fact is, is that truth in our known universe is under attack, especially by forces of postmodernity, and yet these scientists, and indeed according to the authors, most scientists, reject the idea that truth is localize or somehow only for momentary purposes. Now, I know that this will trouble some of you, in that we are taught to believe that scientists see truth as relative. But such an approach is opposite of what a scientist has to do. This very belief in truth, in order, is what underlies both religion and science. This is important as they go on to explore the orderliness of the universe (109).

They move on to discuss the (mis)use of the Bible as a scientific text. They note that we are violent to the text, my words here, when we assume that the ancient writers are abiding by our modern rules. They write, `We must allow them to be authentic members of their own time and then make the effort to understand what that means.' (107) This bit of insight is invaluable when we examine storytelling in Scripture, or the use of other sources as Luke did. As a matter of fact, it is an invaluable lesson when we examine much of history, even of the secular variety.

The fifth chapter tackles the theology of the `image of God' and in a way which might threaten several atonement dogmas. Tough, I know, but so is the fact that many of us have created the image of God which we desire to see instead of finding ourselves being transformed by God. We are hesitant, when something might prove us wrong, to accept that the new fact, even to accept it as plausible, because for us, that disproves God - when in fact, all it proves if we were to accept this new information is that we remain humble enough to accept the fact that we simply do not have the mental capacity to always, and in every way, fully explain God. This is a tough chapter because it will force you - it should, you know - to come to terms with how evil is presented by your own personal doctrine of the Creation. What these authors have done is to unite theology and science, to allow science to answer the difficult question which plagues us - Why Does God Allow Evil? - and in such a way in which free will and God's sovereignty is maintained. Unlike some, these authors do not see God as abandoning Creation, but instead actively maintaining, guiding it, and following the same natural laws which He forces us too - and yet, even in these natural laws, we find freedom to control. So - how do you explain the presence of evil, the origin and allowance thereof, in your theistic response to the natural world?

Some of these arguments are difficult - not to difficult to understand even if you read it - read it a few times, as it is called reading for a reason - but I am not about to try to write them down, merely regurgitating their thoughts. You'll have to buy the book, but let me turn briefly to page 138. In it, they mention that nature has freedom, a freedom God allows but maintains natural laws. We can understand this politically, right? Freedom comes when laws are maintained. Here, to explain the great evils of humanity, such as the holocaust, the authors turn to those same laws, these dancing electrons (read the book as this portion of it is extremely fascinating) which is the epitome of free will, to explain how nature has developed evil - how we use our Life to develop evil. It is about choice, mostly. For me, I have to wonder then - maybe they will, maybe they won't get to it - but to the extent at which God has foreseen the future, such as the future in which Christ would be needed to begin the New Creation. Even at this point, they offer some solid statements, but if free will is so easily allowed, what about the needed events which bring about certain events in the history of the Divine and its creation, humanity? For the issue of God and time - something I would like to see explored more is the issue of God as a quantum observer in a sort of quantum superposition with humanity - see p144-149, and especially 145.

Chapter 6 deals with the controversy which surrounded and still surrounds Darwin's theories while chapter 7 deals with something which I find uniquely interesting - the ability for this universe to support life. What is interesting is the history of the reaction to science, especially in this country. It wasn't really until the 1960's that we found the extreme reaction to evolution that we see today. As the authors show, even the pioneers of Fundamentalism (this is something that I struggle with - separating fundamentalists from the early Fundamentalism, especially on this topic). The authors, though, know their history - and they are able to show that like other events in American history, the rise of YE-Creationism needs to be examined as a-historically as possible. You see, even before Darwin, there were extreme scientific introspections, even among Christians, as to the dating of the earth and thus the interpretation of Genesis 1. There was also freedom in this arena, unlike what we see now. The response to Darwin's theory was over all, muted. There were religious leaders which support Darwin's theory, even against the theology of the Fall. As the authors explain it, evolution presents a bottom up picture of life, where as some Christian theology presents a steady rate of decay. (p152) Here, I have to wonder how entropy might play into theological speculations. Also, I have to wonder how evolution might play into the theology of progression... We see this progression of God's interaction with humanity throughout the Text until Christ. The relationship grows, matures, and is renewed. Further, we are told that we are progressing towards the realized New Creation.

Again, let me stress that the authors are not riding down hard on Young Earth Creationism. They are mindful to present the sides factually correct. But, they are also hard pressed not to call YE-Creationists (and later IDs) out on their inconsistencies, pitfalls, and problems. They are also not shy about their history, as I stated early. See the documented reaction to Darwin on 156-157 as well as their interpolation into our story of another fruit from 7th Day Adventism. For those who remember, it was the Adventists who gave the world King James Onlyism. They have also given the world much of the theological support behind the `science' of YE-Creationism (compare Warfield, the Baptist, and White's reactions to science (158 - 160)).

After much of this history, they move on to tackle several of the pseudo-scientific claims against evolution, such as the often misapplied second law of thermodynamics. They end this chapter by discussing the scientific origins of Life, to which they admit that no one can provide an insightful answer to just yet. I think we need to understand, in this debate, first what life is and second how unusual it is, how fragile it is.

It is chapter seven in which they discuss with exciting detail just how unique the conditions of life are in this universe. I say this universe because as those who have read Dawkins knows that he advocates a multi-verse. What is important is that, as the authors show, each theory against the uniqueness of this universe needs more evidences to support it. Further, as our authors state, rather explicitly, a scientist needs objective data. The multi-verse does not meet these requirements (p189).

These natural laws which make it possible to support life supports the idea of a fine tuning of these laws, and thus a fine tuner. It is important that you take this chapter as equally theological. They note how unsettling these laws are to naturalists and the such - and I can see that - especially with the detail which they provide. There is no reason why Life should exist, why the planets should exist, why anything should exist as it does in this universe of ours - except that it does.Everything has to be magnificently perfect.

What are we to make of Life itself? Our authors, and others, call it the grand narrative (p198) and truly it is. It is the tale of how evolution points us towards life, and the unique characteristics which all life shares. It is about consciousness, and indeed conscience, but it is about the fact that from the very `in the beginning' to the last `and it was good', Life has been the focus of the universe. In the previous chapter, the issue of fine tuning was dealt with; in this chapter, the authors examine Gould's (201-202) and Conway Morris' (202-204)theories on the role in which Life occupies. The former sees it as a random chance, while the latter sees Life - our life - as the predetermined course which the universe had to follow. To provide a reason for this is the theologian and the philosopher's task, but to provide the systematic examination and order of this process is the scientists' task. As they note, once you stand outside the process, their is a certain trajectory which is inexplicably noticeable (p199). They give the example of the eye, which has developed at last seven noticeable times. They take this example and use it as a `full frontal assault on the standard picture of evolution as a random and meandering path to nowhere.' (p204). This `favored pathway' of Morris' thought should be explored by scientists, and they are being explored, but understood by the theologian as the telos of the universe. If there is a telos (purpose) and a logos (the foundational order) to the universe, then to the open mind, we have pointers to a very plausible God.

The telos of this book is indeed to bring the logos to a believer's understanding of the role of Science and Faith, and that indeed, they are no archenemies, and neither should they be so separate that they are only joined in opposition. What are we to make of a book which doesn't disparage believers but takes its time to develop an overall natural theology in which God is not merely the God of the gaps, but is actually very present in our world, and in the continued operation thereof? The authors has provided - even if you don't exactly accept every point of evolutionary science - as great source book in dealing with various claims of those who deny science in the role of Creation and those who deny the role of a Creator in our universe.

In 2006, Francis Collins rolled a snowball called The Language of God and tossed it down a hill. It picked up steam, it grew, and it is now an avalanche fast approaching both the scientific and Christian landscape. From the book grew the BioLogos Foundation. Then an appointment of Collins to Director of the Nation Institutes of Health. And finally, BioLogos birthed a second book, The Language of Science and Faith, which was gathered and written by Karl Giberson.

At the risk of being too simplistic, Francis Collins and BioLogos represent the most visible apologists of theistic evolution. While The Language of God was their defense to the naturalistic and atheistic camps, The Language of Science and Faith is their entreaty to the Christian and theistic circles. I honestly don't know which is the more difficult task.

There is much here that I applaud. I believe that all truth is God's truth, and science is one of the ways that we discover truth about our universe. Thus anything that science proves to be true, we should celebrate as part of God's good creation. The chapter on the age of the earth was fascinating and awe-inspiring, and even more so the chapter entitled "What Is the Fine-Tuning of the Universe, and How Does It Serve as a Pointer to God?"

However, there is also much here that I question. The authors seem dismissive of Intelligent Design, brushing it off as a mere creationism in disguise. They state (without citing sources) that a majority of evangelicals still hold to young earth creationism and verge on condescension in the process. They suggest that evolution offers a better explanation to the "evil" we see in nature (wasps planting their eggs inside a live caterpillar which serves as food when the eggs hatch, etc.) but such examples, while rhetorically powerful, are really non-moral problems that can't honestly be considered a problem of evil. At times, they even seem to be committing a sort of "science of the gaps" error in suggesting future science is a better answer than considering the involvement of God.

In the end, this is an important conversation for Christians to have, and Giberson and Collins have played a huge role in advancing that discussion. While this book will be controversial to most people at one point or another, they state their case clearly and compellingly.

The book is a very interesting perspective. It is good to see some Christian literature on being both a Christian and someone who understands science. Some of the science it outlines in the book is fairly simple, but it pulls in a lot of Biblical references and other references to scholars. All in all, this is a great read for those of us who have a firm understanding in science and want to link that even further with our faith.

I'm a committed Christian and a mathematician with a serious interest in science, so this book had to catch my eye. Francis Collins is famous for his work on the Human Genome Project and his book The Language of God. Karl Giberson works with him in the BioLogos foundation which followed that work. And this book explains very clearly why there's really no reason to deny faith or science in understanding the world. The writing makes an easy read with arguments well laid out, nicely relevant questions, clearly described science, well researched history, and easily understandable examples from everyday life.

The history of Christianity's response to Darwin is fascinating, as is the story of Christian interpretations of Genesis--nothing like so clear-cut or one-dimensional as some would have us believe. Chapter headings such as Do I have to believe in evolution? And Why is Darwin's Theory so controversial? make it clear where the text will go. But, in between, readers learn about astronomy, cosmology, physics and chemistry as well as biology, plus a lot of history. Where does the law of entropy fit into evolution?--the answer might surprise even those who think they understand. The science is very clearly explained and the conclusions easily understood.

Near the end, a chapter on Fine-Tuning of the universe treads close to the old God of the gaps theories, but includes a wise reminder that fine-tuning, however it comes about, is "just as necessary to produce cockroaches as humans." Finally a nicely written Modern creation story gives a pleasing narrative uniting faith and science--a wise gift to a world where all too many of us go round with one eye shut.



Disclosure: I'd been wanting to read this for a while and I'm glad I finally found a copy.

The Language of Science and Faith is another valuable addition to the Science/Faith conversation. It is written in a cordial fashion and identifies most of the major issues/questions that arise among Christians who seek to reconcile scientific understanding with their faith. The book does a good job of explaining the science and how this understanding might be reconciled with faith - allowing the reader to determine for themselves which explanation(s) might best fit their own views of the faith and the world. I was pleasantly surprised by the gentleness of the tone.

Evolution is often pitted as the anti-thesis to Christianity. This book would serve as a great starting point for young people and also for Christian pastors to help them understand the major issues and point them in directions that actually affirm God's existence. As a trained biologist, I found the evolution conversation, while accurate, rather surface. However, I recognize that a broadly accessible book of this nature must be this way. I liked the discussion regarding the "finely tuned universe" very much. It was one the most readable descriptions I had ever encountered regarding the origin of the fundamental forces of nature, and the pivotal role of these forces and the unique chemical elements in the origin and development of life. I also liked that the authors readily acknowledge that while the fundamental evidence/mechanisms of evolution are no longer in doubt, that in no way eliminates the element of the mystery and wonder of life. For example, how/where did the first life originate on earth? The truth is that science has no clear understanding regarding this question, but as the authors plainly point out, this is a completely different question the question of how existing life develops through the process of evolution.

The book offers scant theological discussion regarding how evolution might be reconciled with the most conservative, literal, or traditional theological interpretations the Bible, but I suppose that is reasonable since neither author is a theologian. Perhaps someday, some well-known and respected theological scholars will have the courage to tackle these questions. Until that day arrives when Christian theologians are willing to partner with Christian scientists, engage the realities of evolution, and articulate a theology consistent with God's entire created order, the confusion and hostility between science and faith will likely continue unabated. Will the theologians rise to the challenge? To date, such courage appears virtually non-existent. But we can always hope...

Collins and Giberson have written a book that sounds like it integrates the aspects of faith and science but the book reads much more like a polemic for evolution than an attempt to wrestle with significant issues of reason and faith. There are a number of other reviews that can be read so I will only add a few thoughts. The authors are writing to convince Christians that evolution is fully compatible with the biblical position on creation, especially Genesis. And while they address a variety of audiences their primary target is people who believe that God created humans in their present form and that Genesis has something to say about how God did that. They do interface with intelligent design (although not with the statistical calculations of ID) and other views but the former is their target audience.

The book is full of challenging questions for any believer and deals with significant issues in light of evolution, which are both good reasons to read the book. I would, however, suggest that anyone who wants a quick view of the book and BioLogos should read chapter 8 "Evolution and Human Beings" first. Note, for example, their position that "neither science nor the Bible" can answer the question of how God created us but that their scientific world view can quickly tell us how it did not happen, "None of these `explanations' (biblical statements) can possibly be actual descriptions," 206. Another key point for the authors is the freedom of choice (and the free way evolution appears to move forward through random mutations), (e.g. 122, 135-136) but when considering the fine tuning of the universe or the evolution of humans they suggest that God may have created natural laws in such a way as to result in humans rather than an alternative outcome, 206. I did learn from the book but was, in the end, disappointed by its strong polemic on the one hand and weak emphasis on the integration of significant theological issues on the other.

Finally a book about how God creates and sustains the Universe. The language of science and faith is really the same language as the authors seek to illustrate how the Bible is not in conflict with science.

With its easy style and many colorful images, this book reads like a conversation you might have with two smart and affable scientists. And indeed, that's what it is. In the preface and on the final page, Giberson and Collins invite readers to join the conversation with a growing community of Christians at biologos.org, home of The BioLogos Foundation. The very format of the book--short, readable answers to a series of meandering questions--adds to the sense of dialogue.

This book is perfect for someone wanting the 30,000-foot view on a wide range of important science/faith issues, including evidence for common descent and natural selection, how we know the age of the earth, the history behind why evolution is so controversial, questions one should ask when interpreting the Bible, modes of divine action, fine-tuning arguments and their relation to Intelligent Design, and many more besides.

Since the book contains responses to over 70 frequently asked questions, one might be tempted to read it encyclopedia-style, picking and choosing which parts to read based on the need for quick information. But to do so would be to miss out on the interconnections between apparently unrelated questions. I often found myself picking up a new idea or fact that illuminated something I'd read 20 pages earlier. A cynic might argue this suggests disorganization, but I think it simply reflects that reality that the science/faith conversation is gloriously multi-faceted and can't be approached in a strictly linear fashion.

Some will be bothered at times by what they perceive to be elitism; at several points in the book the authors stress the need to accept the conclusions of scientists and biblical scholars in their areas of expertise. Conservative Christians are often wary of both groups, but we more than anyone ought to celebrate their search for an accurate understanding of God's world. Most of us haven't plunged into the overwhelming body of primary scientific literature or learned the original languages of the Bible. We can be thankful, then, that God has gifted the church with those who lead us in interpreting the "Two Books" of His revelation--the book of Scripture and the book of Creation.

Others will wish "The Language of Science and Faith" entertained more theological questions or that it presented a broader survey of theological positions on a given topic. As to the first critique, it is a great credit to the authors that they for the most part stick to what they know best--science. As to the second, the authors do acknowledge that their (Wesleyan) emphasis on nature's freedom will be unsatisfying for those deeply rooted in the Reformed tradition (p. 138). Still, the authors frequently point out they are only giving *possible* answers, not the *only* answer, and even when I found myself disagreeing with something, I was provoked to stop and think about why. This is the sign of a good book.

Beyond those minor critiques, "The Language of Science and Faith" is a praiseworthy work indeed. Covering such a broad range of questions is no easy feat, but Giberson and Collins do so skillfully without getting bogged down in minutia. They know when to point the reader to other sources, but they nevertheless take time to make some often-intimidating scientific topics--like quantum uncertainty and thermodynamics--crystal clear.

For those interested in the compelling genetic evidence for human evolution (as well as a powerful, deeply personal conversion story from atheism to faith in Christ), readers should pick up Francis Collins' 2006 bestseller, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. For those more interested in the history of the controversy between creationism, evolution, and intelligent design (as well as the story of one liberated from the shackles of religious fundamentalism), Karl Giberson's Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution is the book to read. These two books, along with Darrel Falk's Coming to Peace with Science: Bridging the Worlds Between Faith and Biology (a gentler, more pastoral introduction to evolutionary creation) and "The Language of Science and Faith", should be on the bookshelf of everyone interested in finding harmony between science and Christian faith.

As a Christian and non-scientist, I am often at a loss for words when science and religion conversations emerge at school. While reading this book, there were many "Aha!" moments. Instead of feeling bogged down with terms and confusing concepts, I have a new appreciation for the beauty of God's creativity and the scientific process.