Science and Faith: Friends or Foes?

There is perhaps no other subject more divisive and misunderstood than the intersection of science and religion. For as long as I can remember, I have labored under the suspicion that the long standing assumption of our culture, that science and religion are incompatible mortal enemies, is completely wrong. That frustration reached its highest expression when I started pursuing a master’s degree from Biola on this very subject.Trying to find effective ways to communicate the truth about science and religion, in either a secular or religious context, is a perpetual challenge. In addition to tracking the current state of various disciplines (scientific and theological), one must also learn how to communicate on topics ranging from philosophy to hermeneutics, all the while trying to make these things relevant and accessible to a lay audience.Which brings me to my review of the latest addition to my library, Science and Faith: Friends or Foes. I was interested in this book for two reasons. First, I was already familiar with C. John Collins work from reading Did Adam and Eve Really Exist? Second, the title promised to be a comprehensive look at the entire context of the science vs. religion debate. I knew from Dr. Collins treatment of Adam and Eve that he is thoughtful scholar and a gifted communicator.In this book, the Christian who is not familiar with any aspect of the modern debate between science and religion will experience a comprehensive treatment of the subject. His goal is to not only help Christians overcome the fear that the study of science can undermine faith; he believes Christians should embrace the natural sciences:“… in fact, if we have a proper hold on Christian belief we will love the natural world and respect the study of it; and by it we will also come to these studies with full mental vigor, confident that God’s truth can hold up under any challenge—and not only that, but also that his truth will both illuminate and enrich those studies.”Collins’ book is divided into three sections. In the first, “Philosophical Issues” lays a foundation outlining the significance of critical thinking, sound argumentation, and the philosophical issues that swirl beneath the surface of this topic. I was impressed with how clearly the fundamental issues were communicated without resorting to the technical jargon that usually accompanies this topic.The second section, “Theological Issues” is where this book is truly valuable. For many Christians, the biggest impediment to science is the Bible itself. That is to say, certain interpretations of the Bible create a necessary conflict between science and Christianity. Several chapters in this section address passages associated with the age of the earth, animal death prior to the Fall, and the idea that creation itself was altered by the rebellion of Adam and Eve. Collins’ arguments are based on sound hermeneutics based on his extensive experience teaching Greek, Hebrew and Old Testament at Covenant Theological Seminary.There are also wonderful discussions on the nature of God’s providence, the nature of man (before and after the Fall), natural revelation, and the biblical mandate to care for creation. All these topics offer the Christian a deeper connection to God through a biblical understanding of creation and the role God intended for humanity as caretakers of this world.We also learn how our capacity to understand the natural world, via science, plays an essential role in understanding how God interacts with creation. In brief, everything in creation while being sustained by God, behaves according to the properties or nature it was given.“…[T]he Bible supports the idea that created things actually have natures, or properties that make them distinct from other things. It is the nature of wheat plants to produce more wheat plants, of fig trees to bear figs and not olives, and of salt ponds to yield salt water and not fresh. The reason is that each thing is the way God made it to be.” (165).The more complete our knowledge of the properties or “laws” of nature, the more equipped we are to know a natural event from a supernatural one.“… this gives us a way of thinking about how we can tell whether a supernatural event has taken place: not because we don’t know how it happened, but because we do know the properties of the things involved, and we know they couldn’t have produced the event on their own.” (169).Finally, in the third section, “Science and Faith Interact” Collins gets into the practical and significant discussions that make this book so valuable. Consider just a sampling of the questions addressed: How does one reconcile science and miracles? How old is creation according to geology and cosmology? What is Darwinism? What is intelligent design?Collins does an admirable job of explaining the distinctions between what the various sciences can actually establish versus the anti-theistic worldviews that attempt to coopt various scientific fields. Collins gives the reader a thorough understanding of several issues within the philosophy of science, the intrinsic weaknesses within neo-Darwinian theory, and how intelligent design offers an alternative to the failed scientific dogmas being taught today.As I bring this to a close, I want to offer some practical opinions as to who should read this book and why. For the engineer, scientist, or merely scientifically literate Christian who has never studied the topic of science and religion, this book is the perfect introduction. When I first read this book over 10 years ago, it would be fair to say I was as concerned about this topic as I was confused and uninformed. It is quite readable and devoid of footnotes. This makes the first 347 pages go rather quickly. If your interest is piqued by any topic, there are 67 pages of notes and bibliography organized by chapter.For the apologist who is well read in this area or one who wants to start learning about it, I believe this book has a lot to offer in terms of how to communicate the seemingly complex topics of science, philosophy and theology. Christianity and science are not just compatible they are necessarily linked. Science cannot exist without the Christian worldview. Christianity is terribly impoverished if it ignores the glory of God found in creation.

I must confess I have an affinity to works of this nature - they wonder why we wonder - and for this I admire the author's work. I get the impression Professor Collins is a really nice guy and so it's situations like this where I have to remind myself that really nice people can hold an absolutely incorrect view of reality. When a group makes a truth claim about reality then society has an obligation to hold them accountable, least their beliefs turn into negative actions that affect us all, AND therefore the burden of proof is on the group making the claim. It would take an entire volume to rebut all of the author's worldview claims so I can only leave a few points highlighting the substantial lack of evidence supporting his worldview and his claims about the True nature of reality."Christians claim that their doctrines describe the way things are in the real world." (Science & Faith, Chapter 4). Yet, we must ask where exactly is the evidence supporting the Christian worldview? As the saying goes, "that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"."...we must acknowledge that mankind has gone bad because our first parents fell into sin and brought us with them." (Science & Faith, Chapter 10). One wonders what test Professor Collins would propose in order to conclusively prove the world is in a fallen state? In the distant future if humankind were to discover an alien civilization that experiences the same pain and suffering that humans experience, would it prove that the aliens are also fallen & cursed creatures (that they also sinned?) OR would it simply demonstrate how the Cosmos naturally operates? That is, would it demonstrate that all creatures share the same circumstance regardless of the actions of their elders? How does Professor Collins know for sure that Sin is the cause of human pain and suffering? The author has spent a lifetime studying ancient Hebrew texts, for which we don't even have the original manuscripts, so one must ask by what means does his worldview have access to information about the true nature of reality that the rest of us do not also have? One would hope that after a lifetime of study he could produce some concrete evidence to support his worldview claims, yet we are given no such convincing evidence..."If he then tells us that he is working all things for the good of those who love him (as in Rom. 8:28), then we take him at his word" (Science & Faith, Chapter 14). Is there then no test that can falsify Professor Collin's worldview? Given this claim we must ask then why did the Holocaust occur? In his worldview it ultimately must be for some good purpose. It's all part of the ultimate plan and no matter what pain and suffering humans experience it is for our own good, right?"I'm inclined to take the 'dust' of Genesis 2:7 in its ordinary sense of 'loose soil,' that is, it wasn't a living animal when God started to form it into the first man. I think this makes the best sense in view of the way 'the man became a living creature' after the operation - that is, he wasn't a modified living creature. So: this alternate view does justice to the supernatural origin of man; but, taking one thing with another, I find it easier to believe that Adam was a fresh creation rather than an upgrade of an existing model." (Science & Faith, Chapter 16). Here we see the belief that humans are separately supernaturally created. Yet one must ask what exactly the evidence for the supernatural claim is? If man is supernaturally created then why is it that we can use our knowledge of evolution to insert the human gene for insulin into E. coli bacteria so that they produce an insulin that is chemically identical to the naturally produced human counterpart (and therefore is not rejected by human diabetic patients)? That is to say, using our special knowledge of evolution we can now use the bacteria as factories to make a biological product useful for human survival. Are we expected to believe it is just a coincidence that we can transfer human genes into other life forms for human benefit? If man is supernaturally created then why do humans and mammals share common non-coding DNA sequences in parallel positions across genomes (did the gods put these non-coding sequences in the same positions across genomes to confuse us)? If man is supernaturally created why then is it that human chromosome 2, which is unique to the human lineage of evolution, emerged as a result of the head-to-head fusion of two ancestral chromosomes that remain separate in other primates (human chromosome 2 is the fusion of two chromosome in the common ancestor of us and chimps)?Is the best explanation of the facts that man evolved along with all the other life forms OR is the best explanation that man happens to be a one-off special supernatural creation? If man is a one-off special creation of the gods, then where exactly is the evidence for the supposed supernatural creation event? Is there a test that can be proposed to support a supernatural creation claim? Given the preponderance of natural evidence supporting human placement in the evolutionary tree, what facts specifically tell for humans as a supernatural "fresh creation"?One wonders if Professor Collins believes the Neanderthals were evolved creatures OR perhaps they were also supernaturally created. Based on evidence we know that they lived in complex social groups, they hunted, they controlled fire, constructed complex shelters, skinned animals, cared for their loved ones, buried their dead, etc - we find that they were sentient creatures. Were the Neanderthal's also fallen creatures because of inherited Sin? Or did their gods not care for them as our gods care for us? Perhaps they were just a practice prototype?I conclude with the observation that we certainly live in interesting times. In our era most people are intellectually committed to physicalism [Atomic Theory of Matter, Cell Theory of Life, Germ Theory of Disease, Gene Theory of Inheritance, Evolution by Natural Selection] and at the same time most people reject reductionism notwithstanding their commitment to physicalism. It is convenient that nearly all of the author's arguments work for his worldview AND they also work for all other theistic worldviews as well.To the wonder...

Excellent.