Customer Reviews

The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

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

 

 

When I purchased this book I took it somewhat at face value and imagined that it would be a strong treatise on the Human Genome from the man whose efforts primarily coordinated the accomplishment of cataloguing the entire human genome. Further I was hoping for some clear evidence for belief, just as the cover states.

My expectations weren't entirely met in that regard and I have to confess to a certain disappointment and sense that perhaps Dr. Collins or his publisher, decided to make that claim to sell books, rather than accurately represent what this book is.

What this book is, in my opinion, is still a very valuable thing. This is an apologetics book that gives the autobiography of a very intelligent and successful scientist and explains very well, why science as a discipline and faith in the existence of God as revealed through Christianity, need not result in cognative dissonance.

It is engagingly written. It addresses many of the main points needful in such a discussion today. It is a statement of faith from a man in a community often resistant to the idea of faith and from which it seems more statements of attack on faith come than support.

The average reader will find the discussions on DNA and the genome educational and catch some of the awe and wonder of a scientist who is prepared to accept both the existence of God as well as deal properly with science and working with the evidence it provides.

The advanced science reader already familiar with the basics of the field will not find a great deal of new material. The appendices address more in this realm than the main text itself.

Francis Collins is a Theistic Evolutionist. This is not a new position. Collins personal story tells of how he moved from atheism through the writings of C.S. Lewis, who himself was effectively a theistic evolutionist, although for some different reasons perhaps than Dr. Collins. He gives a very good and reasonable defense for his position which helps, I believe to counteract the Young Earth Creationist movement's hijacking of the framing of the discussion and demonstrates that faith need not equate to intellectual suicide.

That's a far cry however, from Evidence for his Belief.

In that regard, Theistic Evolution is not about evidence so much as how one understands and interprets evidence. Important, but not what is claimed.

It's still a worthwhile read and very thought provoking. I just wish it was presented more accurately as to what it is.

4 Stars.

Bart Breen

XXXXX

The title of this book comes from the words used in a speech by former U.S. President Bill Clinton after the entire human genome (pronounced GEE-nohm) had been sequenced or "read." ("The human genome consists of all the DNA of our species, the hereditary code of life.")

The book itself was written by geneticist Francis S. Collins, the longtime head of the Human Genome Project (HGP), the project responsible for the incredible scientific accomplishment mentioned above. The HGP was the ambitious international scientific effort that began in 1998 and the first draft of the human genome was completed in June 2000.

Here are the aims or goals of this book as Collins states them:

(i) "This book aims to...[argue] that [a] belief in God can be an entirely rational choice, and that the principles of faith are, in fact, complimentary with the principles of science."
(ii) "[H]ere is the central question of this book: In this modern era of cosmology, evolution, and the human genome, is there still the possibility of a richly satisfying harmony between the scientific and spiritual worldviews?...The goal of this book is to explore a pathway toward a sober and intellectually honest integration of these views."
(iii) "I will argue that these perspectives [or views] not only can coexist within one person, but can do so in a fashion that enriches and enlightens the human experience."

This book is divided into three parts. Below I will give the names of all three parts (in uppercase) and what each part generally discusses:

(1) THE CHASM BETWEEN SCIENCE AND FAITH. (2 chapters.) Discusses the author's journey from agnosticism, through atheism, to belief and looks into the philosophical issues (examples: "Isn't the idea of God just wish fulfillment?" and "Why would a loving God allow suffering in the world?") that believers have to contend with. Believers should enjoy these chapters as Collins makes numerous arguments based on his experiences, observations, beliefs, and the writings & stories of others. He mentions such things as faith, God, miracles, and the supernatural. Non-believers will be disappointed as no hard evidence of Collins' belief (as suggested in the book's subtitle) is presented.
(2) THE GREAT QUESTIONS OF HUMAN EXISTENCE. (3 chapters.) In this part, the origins of the universe, life on Earth, and lessons from the human genome are presented. Excellent science is presented that's easy to follow. Collins presents some interesting arguments and presents his beliefs and inferences, but there is no hard evidence of God's existence presented.
(3) FAITH IN SCIENCE, FAITH IN GOD (6 chapters.) In my opinion, this part is the best part. There is good discussion and excellent science evidence presented on topics of atheism, agnosticism, creationism, intelligent design (including "God in the gaps"). The penultimate chapter is on "Biologos" where science and faith are in harmony. This chapter especially is interesting because it presents the little known concept of "Theistic Evolution." Believers' eyes will probably be opened by this part and non-believers will probably learn much also. Again, actual hard evidence on God's existence is absent.

There are ten illustrations in the book that show some science concepts. I would have liked to have seen more illustrations but these ten are, in my opinion, both excellent and interesting.

There were a few problems I found:

(1) As can be deduced from my brief summary above, there is really no hard "evidence for belief." However, there is much hard scientific evidence presented. The phrase "evidence for belief" is found in the book's subtitle and was why I was attracted to this book in the first place. Thus, I was disappointed when none was really presented (even though there's a lot of inferential evidence).
(2) At many points in the book, Collins talks about his belief in a "supernatural Creator." He wants the reader to believe this also. However, a belief is not evidence.
(3) Collins says the existence of the "Moral Law" or knowledge of right and wrong is evidence of God's existence. (He states this a few times.) Implied here is that you halve to be religious to be moral. This is untrue.
(4) Collins tells us that science cannot answer all questions and strongly implies that this is one of its faults. Actually, this is not a fault. Science never claimed and is not designed to answer all questions.
(5) There are some factual errors in this book. While these don't affect its readability, I found them to be annoyances.

In conclusion, this book presents some excellent scientific evidence but no "evidence for belief." I think this book will not be satisfying to all believers (except perhaps for those who have read only the first two chapters) or convincing to non-believers (but they should find the scientific material presented that is found after the first two chapters interesting).

(first published 2006; introduction; 11 chapters or 3 parts; main narrative 235 pages; appendix on Bioethics; notes; acknowledgements; index; about the author)

<<Stephen Pletko, London, Ontario, Canada>>

XXXXX

In "The Language of God," Collins explains how he, as a scientist, is able to reconcile his Christian faith, and current scientific thought. He does so in a respectful tone, whilst explaining scientific and theological concepts in a way that anyone could understand. This book is also deeply personal: Collins is extremely open about his life journey, the hardships along the way, and how he finds hope in his faith.

I think this book will be deeply engaging for anyone that has questions about how science and faith relate.

I greatly enjoyed reading this book, it is a positive perspective on such an important topic.
Strongly recomend this for anyone looking for an easier read in trying to understand our faith with reason, modernity, and science.

In Collins' opinion the opposition to evolution, whether the biblical literalism of creationists or intelligent design arguments, undermines the credibility of faith. He finds the first fundamentally flawed and warns that the second builds upon gaps in evidence that scientists are very likely to fill in the future, among other objections. Francis S. Collins responds that his views stem from his belief in a personal God. Humans have an innate sense of right and wrong that doesn't arise particularly well from evolutionary theory, he argues. And Collins admits his own inability, scientifically, to be able to perceive a precise moment at which life begins other than the moment of conception. Together these ideas lead to his having some concerns about whether genetic testing and abortion will be used to prevent conditions that are less than disastrous, such as a predisposition to obesity. Despite the general approbation, Collins is not entirely without critics. John C. Fletcher, former director of the Center for Biomedical Ethics of the University of Virginia and an Episcopalian minister before he left the church, faults Collins for not pushing to remove the current ban on using federal funds for human embryo research. Research on early embryos could lead to better treatments for pediatric cancers, Fletcher argues. Regardless, researchers and academics familiar with Collins's work agree that he has separated his private religious views from his professional life.

Amazon was prompt to inform me that the normal means they use to import books from this dealer was unable to send. Still waiting for Amazon to inform me if they found someone else who could send it.

I really enjoyed Dr.Collins book and the way he did not bash other views on creation. He is confident in his own understanding of the subject.My mind was opened further as a Christian by Dr.Collins.Evangelical christians will benefit from the questions at the end of the book!

As an analytic type of person, you may ask yourself whether faith in something you have never seen, heard, touched or tasted makes any sense whatsoever. The way that the author has reconciled scientific thinking with faith challenged my own thoughts and opinions on the subject and actually made me more confident about explaining what I believe, and don't, to others. Definitely buy this if you have ever felt that faith and science were inherently opposed to each other.

After reading The Language of God by Dr. Francis S. Collins. He was the fellow who headed the Human Genome Project. In his book he attempts to stop the "fight" between the believers and the scientists over the issue of Gods existence , and prove to his readers that God does actually exist. Well, I must say that I was utterly disappointed in his attempt at that. Actually I would go as far as stating that he disproof's arguments for both camps, and makes an outlandish claim of the real unity of the two camps. Even if we, for a brief moment, assume that this two opposites are indeed united any inquisitive person a believer or not would deduce from the examination of the evidence presented in this the book, that the support of the claims stated is just not there. The reasons given by Dr. Collins are his view, his personal experience of God and they stop at that, offering no appealing proof worth mentioning. At best this book is a praise of the work of C.S. Lewis, who is heavily quoted, at worst it is the poor attempt at answering the question of God in our society today by using personal examples, and not taking the fight to the next level.

I agreed with much of The Language of God except for the Intelligent Design chapter. This chapter is irresponsible, especially in that the author is a medical doctor. I could cite many examples but will discuss only four. The first example I will examine is the claim that the eye is poorly designed because the rods and cones face away from the light. Over a dozen excellent reasons exist for the existing inverted eye design. One major reason for the retina reversal is because it allows both the rods and cones to closely associate with retinal pigment epithelial cells which provide the retina with its nutrients, recycles photopigments, and provides an opaque layer to absorb excess light. This design is superior to other designs because it allows intimate association of the rods and cones with the pigmented epithelium required to maintain the photoreceptors. Rods and cones require an enormous amount of energy and nutrients to maintain their very high metabolic rate that is required for them to function, and for maintenance and repair. In addition, because of phototoxicity damage, the rods and cones must be completely replaced approximately every seven days or so. It is true that photons have to travel through the cornea, lens, aqueous fluid, blood vessels, ganglion cells, amacrine cells, horizontal cells, and bipolar cells, before reaching the light-sensitive rods and cones that transduce the light signal into neural impulses, but most all of these structures are highly transparent. This is shown by the fact that the sensitivity of the existing human inverted design is so great that only a single photon is able to elicit an electrical response.

The second claim, that the cause of back problems in humans is because our back is poorly designed for the reason that we evolved from animals that walk on all fours, as Collins claims, is also erroneous. I know from personnel experience that this once common belief has caused much unnecessary suffering in back pain patients. This belief was behind the once common treatment of most common back problems with strong pain medicine, bed rest, or even surgery. Now the common solution is, the back is designed properly, and for this reason must be used properly. The problem is not that we evolved from some primate ancestor that walked on all fours, but because the back was not designed for modern sedentary 8 or more hours of sitting life. The solution is to use the back as it was designed for, namely by walking, exercise, and physical activity and avoid sitting for hours at a time with poor posture. As is often said, use it or lose it. Some animals that walk on all fours, as some dogs, often have back problems. The common examples are dachshunds and German Shepards.

The third claim, that the appendix is useless, is also irresponsible. I reviewed two dozen anatomy books and not one single text I consulted has claimed this. Every text correctly noted the appendix's important immunological and other functions. The last example is the wisdom teeth. Studies of other cultures have found that diet is critical in proper jaw development and in these societies problems with wisdom teeth are rare. The Western soft diet does not encourage jaw development, and as a result we often have problems with wisdom teeth. I worked as an auto mechanic to put myself through graduate school and consumers would often blame their car problems on the car design when the problem was the driver. One guy could only get 15,000 miles out of a set of brakes and claimed we used inferior brake shoes when the problem was he rode the brakes. Of course they will only last 15,000 miles when you drive this way! If we abuse our body, what can we expect? We must use it according to how it was designed. If Dr Collins was a practicing physician I would report him to the medical licensing board for these appalling mistakes. A good friend of mine is a urologist and even he was appalled at these mistakes.