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

by Karl W. Giberson, Francis S. Collins

Christians affirm that everything exists because of God--from subatomic quarks to black holes. Science often claims to explain nature without including God at all. And thinking Christians often feel forced to choose between the two. But the good news is that we don't have to make a choice. Science does not overthrow the Bible. Faith does not require rejecting science. World-renowned scientist Francis Collins, author of The Language of God, along with fellow scientist Karl Giberson show how we can embrace both. Their fascinating treatment explains how God cares for and interacts with his creation while science offers a reliable way to understand the world he made. Together they clearly answer dozens of the most common questions people ask about Darwin, evolution, the age of the earth, the Bible, the existence of God and our finely tuned universe. They also consider how their views stack up against the new atheists as well as against creationists and adherents of intelligent design. The authors disentangle the false conclusions of Christians and atheists alike about science and evolution from the actual results of research in astronomy, physics, geology and genetics. In its place they find a story of the grandeur and beauty of a world made by a supremely creative God.

Genres: Science, Christian, Religion, Nonfiction, Faith, Philosophy, Theology

251 pages, Hardcover

First published January 28, 2011

Reviews

[C · Rating 2 out of 5]

An engaging but theologically unfulfilling attempt to convince Christians to adopt theistic evolution. The authors accept as fact essentially all current theories of biological and cosmological origins, and interpret the Bible as non-literally as necessary to fit. They seem more concerned with interpreting the Bible in as broad and symbolic a way as necessary for their purposes than with studying creation-related topics in a biblically sound and theologically consistent way.

The book discusses the other major views: young earth creationism (YEC), old earth creationism (OEC), and intelligent design (ID). The authors, members of BioLogos, are respectful of other views, but make it clear that they believe theistic evolution is the only true view.

It seems that the authors are determined to have a scientific explanation for everything, and rarely wish to say that biblical events can’t be explained with modern science. However, a central part of Christianity is belief in God’s supernatural interaction with the universe and miracles, such as the many resurrections in the Old and New Testaments, Jesus’ conception and resurrection, and many more (see lists here and here).

Much of the book tells the history of Christian opinion about evolutionary theory. I found this somewhat interesting, but largely irrelevant to the discussion.

Below are my notes from the book, without any commentary from me. Below that are some of my comments, and questions this book raised for me.

Notes
• Selective breeding can’t produce new species because new species require new genetic info, which requires genetic mutation. Selective breeding doesn’t accelerate the rate of mutation, so it doesn’t speed up macroevolution.
• That Genesis that everything reproduces “after its kind” is compatible with evolution; although creatures evolve over time, each generation produces offspring of its same “kind”
• “God could have created a universe with the appearance of age...While God is certainly capable of creating the appearance of age, we suggest this does not align with his character or a clear reading of Genesis.”

• Radioactive clocks based on different isotopes give slightly different results, but they are insignificant. Most yield ages for Earth around 5 billion years. There is no evidence that radioactive decay rates were faster in the past ,and radioactive decay has been observed to be basically impervious to change, even at extreme pressures and temperatures.
• The problem of evil arises from freedom God gave humans and all creation. Humans do evil with their freedom, and nature creates unpleasant things with its evolutionary freedom.
• The concept of the freedom of nature is unpalatable to traditions that emphasize God’s sovereignty, including the Reformed tradition.

• “Any time an apologetic argument is framed and presented as an alternative to faith as a foundation for belief, there is a danger that further advances in knowledge will undermine this argument.”
• God doesn’t have a body, so humans being made in the “image” of God doesn’t refer to physical similarity.

Commentary
The authors claim that the lifespans of many patriarchs are symbolic, not historical. Couldn’t they be both? Couldn’t God have allowed them to live to a certain age that had symbolic significance, as He also controlled other symbolic numbers? See, for just one example, how the number 40 is used throughout the Bible (see also The Significance of Numbers in Scripture).

The authors say, “Human beings are mainly water, not dust, and there is no process by which an adult person can be made quickly from a rib.” As elsewhere in the book, the authors show an aversion to miraculous explanations. There is no process by which Jesus could have been conceived or resurrected, yet Christians believe that it occurred. The same goes for the many other miracles recorded in the Bible, yet the Christian faith requires that we believe them anyway.

Questions
These are questions I thought of while reading, with links to possible explanations from young earth creationists. I don't claim that young earth creationists have all the answers (and neither do they), but of the alternative views, I find their explanations to be the most theologically tenable yet scientifically plausible. I’ll note that I don’t find all the explanations below entirely satisfactory.

Q: What are the theological implications of origins theories?
• How do beliefs about creation impact the rest of theology?
• Systematic Theology Texts and the Age of the Earth
• Why Does the Universe Look So Old?
• The Bible and the Age of the Earth [Part I]

Q: What did Jesus believe about cosmological and biological origins?
• Did Jesus Say He Created in Six Literal Days?
• Did Jesus Believe in Creation?
• What Did Jesus Say About Evolution?
• Jesus and the Doctrine of Creation
• What does the New Testament say about Creation?

Q: Did any creatures die before the Fall?
• Biblically, Could Death Have Existed before Sin?
• The Fall, the Curse, and Evolution
• The Fall and the Problem of Millions of Years of Natural Evil
• Did Death of any Kind Exist Before the Fall?

Q: Does Genesis present two different creation stories?
• Why are there two different Creation accounts in Genesis chapters 1-2?
• Are There Two Creation Accounts in Genesis?
• Contradictions: Two Creation Accounts?

Q: What about the age indicated by distant starlight?
• Starlight and the Age of the Universe
• Does Distant Starlight Prove the Universe Is Old?
• A New Creationist Cosmology: In No Time at All Part 1

Q: What about ages measured by dendrochronology (the tree ring record)?
Tree Rings and Biblical Chronology

Q: What about the age indicated by layers in lake beds?
• Are There Half a Million Years in the Sediments of Lake Van?
• Aren’t Millions of Years Required for Geological Processes?

Q: What about the age indicated by ice cores?
• Do Ice Cores Show Many Tens of Thousands of Years?
• Ice Cores and the Age of the Earth
• Are Polar Ice Sheets Only 4500 Years Old?

Q: What about the age indicated by Milankovitch cycles?
• Does a Recycled Climate Model Explain Evolutionary Ice Ages?
• The Ice Age
• A Faulty Climate Trigger

Q: What about the age indicated by Earth’s magnetic field?
• The Earth’s Magnetic Field and the Age of the Earth
• The Earth's Magnetic Field Is Young
• The Mystery of Earth's Magnetic Field

Q: What about the age indicated by radioactive dating?
• Does Radiometric Dating Prove the Earth Is Old?
• Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth
• Feedback: Radiometric Dating and Proof
• Myths Regarding Radiocarbon Dating
• Doesn’t Carbon-14 Dating Disprove the Bible?
• Radiometric Dating 101 (parts 2 & 3)

Q: Can radioactive decay rates change?
• Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth
• Radiometric Dating: Problems with the Assumptions
• Billion-Fold Acceleration of Radioactivity Demonstrated in Laboratory
• Defense—“Scientific” Arguments
• Fluctuations Show Radioisotope Decay Is Unreliable

Q: What about the genetic comparisons that indicate a single tree of life?
• Differences in Gene Expression Distinguish Humans from Other Primates
• Common DNA Sequences: Evidence of Evolution or Efficient Design?
• Shared Genes Undercut Evolutionary Tree
• Why Is 'Pseudogene' the Same in Chimps and Humans?

Q: Why aren’t there mammal fossils below a certain point in the fossil record?
• Feedback: Where Are All the Bunny Fossils?
• Doesn’t the Order of Fossils in the Rock Record Favor Long Ages?
• Does The Geologic Column Prove Evolution?

[Jared Totten · Rating 3 out of 5]

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.

[Darcy Russell · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have owned this book for a long time and I am glad that I read it this year. As a biologist and a person of faith in the Christian tradition, I have been challenged by many people in ways that have been painful. Reading this book brought me peace. I am grateful for it.

[Steve Penner · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was in intriguing but less than satisfying book. The benefit was for me to catch up on the issues and debates within the scientific community between evolutionists and creationists. I have been ignoring much of this interaction. The question that the authors raise is not whether Christians should understand evolution and its place in modern western science but whether they should adopt it as part of their worldview and belief system. They believe that God created the universe and biological life through processes that have lasted billions of years which He established from the beginning. As they admit, their belief system logically leads to deism, but they try to demonstrate that it doesn't have to. They posit that God does not just stand outside of time but is involved within time, making them theistic in their estimation. They allow that God may have involved Himself in the creative process, most especially in putting His image into mankind, but also in "tilting the playing field" toward life and human life through evolutionary processes.

While they complain that the "God of the gaps" theory is not the way to explain the unexplainable aspects of the creation process because science may/will one day fill in those gaps, they seem to use their own version of the gap theory to explain the emergence of humans. So within the broadest umbrella of naturalistic explanations of creation, they leave a bit of room for supernaturalistic intervention. It seems rather capricious and I am sure thoroughgoing naturalist would object.

As for me, I would posit much more involvement by God, and believe that we are the product of special creation not the product of blind chance over time. I don't believe that any amount of time could have produced the complexity of the human brain and nervous system. And I am accountable to a Creator God in an ultimate way that I am not accountable to modern science. I'll take my chances with faith in God and not human science.

[Mad · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredible book, followed Collins’ first book nicely. This one is more in depth and more dense, so probably best for those interested in deeper dives into geology, astronomy, physics, chemistry, and biology. Also structured differently, each chapter is devoted to a major question about evolution and Christianity. There were a few points that completely blew my mind and flipped some of my prior beliefs on their head - loved how it makes you think and truly consider our origins and how God chose to create. I left this book feeling that prior questions I have always had about creation were no longer relevant, but left with a whole new set of questions that were never a concern before! I also left feeling that I am in the same exact spot in terms of what really matters and what is core to all Christians - God is creator and we all need Jesus desperately.

[Michelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sometimes the science explanations were over my head, but much of the time the authors took complex things and made them much clearer. They present many strong cases that challenge some of my own long-held beliefs. I appreciated the mental exercise and found their approach smart and respectful even if it didn't completely convince me to change my mind. A good book for skeptics to see faith and science as compatible, and a good choice for long time believers trying to reconcile conflicting ideas about the origin of things or the origin of heated Christian debates🤓

[Preston · Rating 4 out of 5]

I always appreciate having my beliefs challenged and reinforced. The authors of this book, carefully challenge the reader to consider their beliefs while having them take into account the overwhelming scientific evidence that challenges the notion that science & faith are irreconcilable. I don't agree with many of their arguments, nevertheless I do appreciate how well constructed their arguments are and how they are willing to call out people on both sides of the debate for fallacies committed.

[Cari · Rating 4 out of 5]

Finally a scientific book that tries to show how science and religion can dovetail. It's not anti-science and it's not anti-religion. Coauthored by Francis Collins of the Human Genome Project and Karl Giberson a physicist and theologian, The Language of Science and Faith asks us to explore our questions and come up with answers that satisfy a logical mind. No longer do we have to keep science and faith in separate corners. They can actually work together. Will def read more by these authors!

[Grace Chamberlain (Tegerdine) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Super compelling and relatively easy to read. I enjoyed this book a lot, especially as a Christian with a love and respect for science. I felt like the authors did a great job of simplifying complex material (both of a religious and scientific nature). Overall, I would highly recommend to any Christians who are interested in synthesizing their religious beliefs with scientific knowledge.

[David · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book presents the position of what is commonly called theistic evolution. The authors attempt to both argue that Darwinian evolution correctly explains how modern species came to be and that this in no way negates the existence of God. They cover a lot of ground, with each section beginning with a question (thus it almost reads like a 200 page FAQ).

I enjoyed the book. They succeeded in strongly presenting the truth that Christians can believe in evolution. Further, they succeed in answering a lot of questions more traditional questions will face in coming to terms with evolution. While on one hand accepting evolution does not negate God, a world in which God creates through evolution does lead to different philosophical and theological conclusions about who that God is, then one in which God creates in a literal seven days.

There are a few minor problems with the book. In the introduction they discuss Social Darwinism, the movement in the early 1900s to take the science of evolution and turning it into a social mandate. Basically, if the fittest survive in nature, efforts should be made to only allow the fittest to survive, which led to the discrimination of weak members of society. Social Darwinism is often trumped up by Christians as a reason to reject the science of evolution. Giberson and Collins correctly differentiate the two, concluding bad sociology does not nullify good science. But then they make a statement: "Evolution does not provide an argument for atheism, and it cannot be used to justify mistreatment of the weak." I noted, "unless you are a social Darwinist". My issue is that "cannot" appears to be a strong word. They just spent a few pages showing historically, some have made just that argument.

They attack statements made about how many in the academic community question Darwinian evolution. Their argument is that most who sign these statements are not biologists, and most of the biologists who do sign them are retired and thus did most of their study before the strongest evidence in support of Darwinism came to light. What they are saying is to beware of experts in one area acting like experts in another. Yet they kind of do the same thing in their analysis of Social Darwinism. They dismiss a book called From Darwin to Hitler by Richard Weikert. Weikert shows how social Darwinists picked up on the science and used it to influence Germany, helping set the path for the Holocasut. I actually read that book a few years ago and recall him arguing that he was NOT saying anything about the science of evolution. He was saying that, as a historian, there is a line of people who were Social Darwinists who influenced Hitler. If I recall correctly, he made a point to say he was not blaming Darwin for the Holocaust as there were clearly other factors in play also.

Their dismissal of a historian's argument, besides contradicting their point to not trust experts in fields outside the expert's own field, seems shallow.

This same...sloppiness...makes an appearance elsewhere in the book. They write, "Virtually all leading evangelical biblical scholars reject the claim that the age of the earth can be determined from the Bible" (54). But if you follow the footnote they give ONE example. How does one = virtually all? Even if they are right, and I think they are, imagine a young earth creationist comes to this book thinking the Bible does give the age of the earth. The authors claim otherwise but only give one example. I doubt the creationist would find that compelling. They do this quite often, vaguely saying "many" Christian theologians believe something, but offering no footnote. Or saying that the early church leaders, including "Origen, Augustine and Aquinas" did not hold to a literalist reading. Again, put yourself in the foot of the young earth creationist (YEC). YECs tend to be on the more fundamentalist side and Origen has a questionable place in church history for some of his ideas, so his name may not carry weight. Aquinas was a Catholic monk who lived in the 1200s, not exactly early church. So if the authors can only come up with those three they probably will not convince many. More citations and sources for the curious reader would help.

They make similar moves on a philosophical level. "Free will" is thrown around a lot without much of a definition. What about scientific arguments questioning free will? What about more nuance, saying we have free will but it may be constrained. I am not a philosopher, but I recognize there are more options than either free will or determinism. They say, "Theological traditions that do not place the same emphasis on God's sovereignty find these explorations less threatening." I thought all Christians believe in God's sovereignty, the question is how you define it. Again, this seems sloppy.

Overall this is a helpful book. Perhaps my issues are unfair in not taking into consideration that this book is a sort of introduction. Other books, which they have in the bibliography, may offer more nuance. That said, I still think a few more extensive footnotes and sharper definitions would have made this book a must-read, rather than just a helpful read.

[Jared · Rating 4 out of 5]

Marvelous book with straightforward and clear discussion of topics related to science and religion. The authors openly discuss the science and share their religious sentiments. A book like this certainly is worth a read amongst all the anti-science and anti-religious books out there.

[Elisamatt · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting book that takes on the supposed conflict between science and religion/spirituality. Very reassuring if be you need that. The author is the past director
of the NIH. Some minor knowledge abut how DNA works would be helpful but not necessary.

[Anna Hanson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesting blend of science and biblical teaching, examining the evidence, strengths and weaknesses of each, helping the curious to reach their own conclusions.

[Angus Mcfarlane · Rating 4 out of 5]

Is evolution, Darwin's version, compatible with conservative, protestant interpretation of the bible? This has been a question I've wrestled with sine I was a teenager and despite having read many books since then which tackle this question (including some from an atheistic or materialistic perspective), this one had some fresh perspectives to offer.

In the first instance, it is forthrightly supportive of evolution through natural selection and seeks to agree with the modern scientific establishment regarding the course and physical causes of evolution. They do not offer wriggle room for interventionist perspectives, whether young or old earth in flavour, pitting them against the majority of 'evangelical' Christians and firmly in the 'why bother?' camp ridiculed by non theists. The strength of this approach is that both theology and science are required to be proven by appropriate evidence with acknowledgement of uncertainty, rather than using speculation to prop up a position of 'certainty'. Theist or not, we all take a grain of faith in conceptualising where how we got here, so speculation is misplaced at best but more often damaging to constructive discussion.

Secondly, the truth of scripture is presumed rather than proven. This is usually seen as a weakness, and rightly so, since many arguments are circular, appearing objective but in fact strongly dependent on the conclusion they're seeking to prove. There is also a tendency to avoid 'giving ground' to the other side by admitting uncertainty, instead defending everything despite evidence. Stating a clear position at the outset allows the authors to steer a middle road that seeks truth or encourages dialogue.

I did have some questions as I read through the book. Originally written in response to questions to Collins' earlier book (), so some of the segments did not flow easily at times lacking depth and at others over-doing it, despite what is probably the best intents of the authors. The perspective of post modernism worked well in discussing bible interpretation, but this seemed to lose focus when applied to science (despite the idea being one I've thought about agreeably before reading the book). From a technical perspective, some of the details provoked my curiosity (are protons and neutrons consistently arranged in the same geometric pattern from atom to atom?) whilst others provoked complaint about inadequate information (how is the regularity of magnetic reversals known? What are the implications of dark matter and dark energy on estimates of the universe's age?)

Overall, this book is to the point, up to date with contemporary science and theology, and true to its intention to develop a language that speaks to both science and faith. Their views are close to those I've come to hold, so I am inclined to agree with most of their arguments, however, the authors are gracious toward opposing viewpoints but forthright in identifying points of disagreement. Certainly recommended for those with a Christian faith, and probably tolerable for those without it also.

[Paul Bruggink · Rating 4 out of 5]

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.

[Seth Heasley · Rating 4 out of 5]

As I mentioned in my book review for Kenneth Miller's Only a Theory, I've read quite a few books on the topic of origins and have gradually migrated from creationism toward something like theistic evolution. It's still not a subject I'm a big fan of fighting over, so I generally just keep my opinions to myself. But I do keep reading. It's how I roll.

My migration, though, has had more to do with science than theology. When I watch something like Dennis Venema's excellent YouTube videos on the genetic evidence for common ancestry between apes and humans, I don't have any particular issue with the science.

But then if I read something like Karl Giberson's worthwhile Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution, I can recognize the science as excellent but the theology as lacking (in my mini-review of Saving Darwin, I noted that it failed to live up to its subtitle). Because regardless of what anyone might think, my views on the science of origins have implications for my theology of origins. And that's where I've been stuck for a while.

Well, I'm a bit further along now, thanks to Karl Giberson and Francis S. Collins's The Language of Science and Faith: Straight Answers to Genuine Questions. Approached like a Frequently Asked Questions for the whole topic of theistic evolution/BioLogos, it's everything I hoped it would be. I'm not saying that all my questions have been definitively answered or anything, but I at least have some confidence that the answers exist.

Full review on my blog.

[Sheila · Rating 5 out of 5]

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.

[Leon Barbee · Rating 1 out of 5]

I had hopes of an intelligent dialogue, but within a few pages, I realized this book is a "cover" for evolution and has nothing to do with belief in God's Word. Their word "faith" means something a child might believe in, but certainly not an intelligent being. First, they discount the book of Genesis as a source of God's Word, but rather a chapter of make believe characters. The Bible says Adam and Eve existed, the Bible says God created all the animals, and the Bible says that God had Adam name all of the animals. Now, how in the world would evolution explain that all these animals existed at the beginning of God's creation and were named by Adam, and then turn around and state that all these animals didn't exist then, but grew out of the ooze over vast expanses of time. Naw... Adam named all those animals at the very beginning. The theory of evolution has been losing ground for quite a while now, and all the things Darwin (and others) theorized have been proved false by real examples.
I was very disappointed by these two writers in trying to equate the word "faith" with believing in the Bible. No wonder our college kids are so confused today, when so-called "experts" spin a wild tale in a book like this and try to make it believable. There are no straight answers, only "ring around the rosy" and if you get dizzy enough, you might believe this tripe. By the way, you should read Archbishop James Ussher's Annals of the World and Dr Floyd Nolen Jones The Chronology of the Old Testament as fore runners of the Early Creation with dates matched with events leading back to Creation. Both of these men are solid in their research, unlike these current two who wrote this book.

[Larissa · Rating 3 out of 5]

These fellas are Christian scientists who believe in evolutionary creation. Pretty interesting stuff to add to the ole temporal lobe.

Favorite passage (pgs. 107-108):

"The first step in addressing apparent conflicts between science and religion is the recognition that they are different enterprises. These differences are often highlighted by noting that science and religion answer different questions or answer the same question in different ways.

John Polkinghorne, the world's leading scholar of the science-religion interface, has developed a winsome analogy to illustrate this point. He asks, "Why is the water in the tea kettle boiling?" And he notes that there is more than one answer to that question. The scientific answer might be because the burning gas under the kettle heats the water. Another acceptable though very different and nonscientific answer could be that the water is boiling because I want to make a cup of tea. Both of these answers are true, of course, and both accurately describe the reason for the boiling water, although from different perspectives. The latter addresses the question of purpose that, for most people, is the most important part of an explanation.

The kind of answers found in the Scriptures are generally nonscientific, but not because the Bible is teaching an ancient science that has been overturned. They are nonscientific because the Bible is not even trying to teach science. Nowhere in the entire Bible do we read anything that even hints that the writer is trying to teach science. What we encounter instead is a consistent discussion of the purposes and reasons for why things are the way they are."

[Paul, · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book offers scientific answers to questions provoked by Francis Collins' earlier book, The Language of God. This is a good book, with a few important exceptions.

First, the best part of this book is its explanation why Intelligent Design is not helpful, either to believers or to scientists. Second, Collins does a nice job of documenting the (recent) rise of young earth creationism as the dominant conservative Christian paradigm. I did not realize that Christians had, by and large, adopted some form of old-earth belief long before Darwin. I found their documentation of the reasons for the rise in this belief and its development over time really helpful.

There were a few negative points. Sometimes the author(s) made deeply stupid statements because of their lack of belief in divine miracles. Not that they don't believe in miracles, they just don't believe miracles happen very often, so it feels like they forget about them sometimes. Another issue that I found deeply problematic is the author's position on the problem of pain and God's role. Finally, I feel like Collins has not fully grasped the implications of Pinker's work in neuroscience and really wrestled with what "free will" means. These three factors make the middle of the book less worthwhile than the beginning and the end.

But all in all, worth reading especially for those who hold to young earth creationism or intelligent design.

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

Intriguing book - makes you think seriously about broad and huge topics. Challenged me to confirm why I believe what I believe and really encouraged me to study more in-depth the issue of evolution vs. creationism and how it really plays out in modern society.

At times, the authors seem to dive off into tangents un-related to the concepts being explored, and this can make it difficult to follow. Also, overall this book is highly technical and so unless you have a fair amount of interest in - or knowledge of - concepts of science (from physics to astronomy to chemistry) you will probably find it a very difficult read and hard to keep your attention.

Finally, I was a bit disappointed in many of the authors conclusions regarding their beliefs of science vs. faith (i.e. evolution paired against creationism). Having said that, often I found it quite difficult to unpack their conclusions and really distill their bottom-line thesis. But, as mentioned, reading this did encourage me to consider my own ideas and beliefs about these huge topics...especially with my science background and left-brained thinking combined with my serious Christian faith.

[Janet Zehr]

This book develops the relationship of evolution to Christianity

Both of the authors of this book are biologists and committed Christians. Their purpose in writing this book is to show that it is possible to hold a belief in a scientific theory that explains the history of the Earth in evolutionary terms and also to believe in a Creator who used this system to create the universe and all the life forms we observe today.
They develop their ideas systematically in a series of very readable chapters that lead from early scientists and theologians to some of the modern theories that link science and religion. The chapters take the form of a dialogue consisting of common questions and answers that explain why evolution is true and consistent with Christian belief. I liked the fact that the authors did not ridicule creationists but produced logical answers to the objections raised by fundamentalists and atheists alike.
I have a scientific background and so am familiar with their arguments, but I still enjoyed their presentation. One can read this book and feel comfortable with one's faith and one's acceptance of the fact of evolution.

[Isaiah the Ox · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book. I am researching Genesis 1 and Creation for a school report, and this was the perfect book for my report. Having grown up in a Christian, homeschooled home, this was the first science book I have ever read that actually accepts evolution. That might be the reason I found it so interesting. Many of the problems most Young Earth Creationists claim are flaws in evolution where discussed and proven wrong in this book. I am finding Biologos to be a very good explanation of evolution, Genesis, and creation itself.
The first half of this book was very interesting, however, when the book went into finding proof for God, I began to get bored. I appreciated the explanation of each of the many views on Creation and Genesis, which will be helpful in my report. I also like the bibliography in the back of the book, which may prove to be useful. I would definitely recommend this book to someone who is struggling, or just interested, with the topic of creation and evolution.

[Matt Hill · Rating 5 out of 5]

at this point in my whole foray into evolution/theology/etc., this book was more of a survey and not really about what i'm specifically interested in anymore, but it's really well written--esp. the whole format by questions people might ask, which are timed perfectly, btw--the guys writing it are authorities (obviously) and know what they're talking about and how to cite other authorities, and it just does a great job of covering the issue overall . .

for me, i'm now more interested in reconciling Genesis specifically re: Paul, original sin, the fall and what it meant re: death, etc. . . i think i still need to get peter enns' new one on this topic next . .

[J. · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a very good read, everything from theological discussions to science behind the things that fundamentalist can't defend themselves from. After reading this book, anyone who believes in a more allegorical interpretation of the Bible will be more confident and thank God for Evolution, The Big Bang as well. This book is perfect for everyone who wants to merge their scientific minds to the theological mind. The BioLogos Foundation is indeed a much more intelligent Christian foundation that I would recommend to anyone to investigate their website.

[Tom · Rating 3 out of 5]

From Francis Collin's BioLogos foundation, this presents "scientific creationism." It seems to be addressed to evangelicals, but I think many people would find the discussion helpful. I think they offer a generous position for people who want to take both their Bible and their science seriously, specifically in terms of incorporating evolutionary biology and quantum physics into a Christ-centered faith.
This would be an accessible book to give to someone and say, "It doesn't have to be one or the other, you can be a Christian and a scientist."

[Readnponder · Rating 2 out of 5]

I picked this up because I loved Francis Collins' first book "The Language of God." This follow up was a disappointment to me; however, others may love it. It is arranged in a Q & A format regarding different topics where science and faith seem to clash. E.g. age of the earth; origin of first human species, etc.

I had a harder time understanding the science in this book, particularly when it got into quantum physics. They problem is probably with me.

[Joe Caplinger · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a good read for anyone who finds themselves wondering if science and the story of the Bible can work together. I myself have always wondered if believing the Biblical story meant the scientific story could not be true. This book does a good job of linking the two together and showing how the two work together.

[James Smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

Though theologically "thin" (and perhaps just a tad philosophically naive), this is nonetheless a clear presentation of the issues. The FAQ questions format is helpful. I'll be passing this on to my son, who is a senior in high school and interested in science. It's a helpful volume for just that sort of purpose.

[Shawn Tickle · Rating 5 out of 5]

Even better than The Language of God. Powerful, effective argument, artfully written. A pleasure to read. Even those who disagree with them will have to admit that the book is well written, well organized, and well argued. Just like The Language of God, this is one of the best books of its kind ever written.