Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

Science and Christianity: Conflict or Coherence? Paperback – Jan 2004

4.3 out of 5 stars 19 customer reviews

See all formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price
New from Used from
Paperback, Jan 2004
"Please retry"
CDN$ 50.40 CDN$ 27.55

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child
click to open popover

No Kindle device required. Download one of the Free Kindle apps to start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, and computer.
Getting the download link through email is temporarily not available. Please check back later.

  • Apple
  • Android
  • Windows Phone
  • Android

To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.

Product Details

  • Paperback: 204 pages
  • Publisher: Apollos Trust (January 2004)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 097429750X
  • ISBN-13: 978-0974297507
  • Product Dimensions: 22.6 x 15.4 x 1.4 cm
  • Shipping Weight: 862 g
  • Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars 19 customer reviews
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #1,750,182 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
  •  Would you like to update product info, give feedback on images, or tell us about a lower price?

Customer Reviews

Top Customer Reviews

By A Customer on July 6 2004
The review by "Old Set" shows that this person knows little about science and religion. For science, let me cite some works from much greater minds:
Vincent Cheung:
...the scientific method itself precludes the knowledge of truth, so that even with the correct presuppositions, science is completely incompetent as a way to discover the nature of reality. Ronald W. Clark comments, "Contemplation of first principles progressively occupied Einstein's attention," and in such a context, he quotes Einstein as saying, "We know nothing about it at all. All our knowledge is but the knowledge of schoolchildren....the real nature of things, that we shall never know, never." The typical college student would disagree, but the typical college student is not Einstein. Of course, he could only speak as a representative of science and not revelation.
Karl Popper:
Although in science we do our best to find the truth, we are conscious of the fact that we can never be sure whether we have got it....In science there is no "knowledge," in the sense in which Plato and Aristotle understood the word, in the sense which implies finality; in science, we never have sufficient reason for the belief that we have attained the truth....Einstein declared that his theory was false - he said that it would be a better approximation to the truth than Newton's, but he gave reasons why he would not, even if all predictions came out right, regard it as a true theory.
W. Gary Crampton:
In the laboratory the scientist seeks to determine the boiling point of water. Since water hardly boils at the same temperature, the scientist conducts a number of tests and the slightly differing results are noted. He then must average them.
Read more ›
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Report abuse
Dr. Schaefer appears here as a shining example of the fundamentalist Christian and the dichotomy they embrace. On the one hand, Christianity is based on unending love and mercy; and science is good because it is skeptical and objective. On the other hand, the Christian God will cast you into Hell (I challenge the reader to come up with a more horrific and barbaric punishment)if you don't believe in him and any skepticism regarding religion is totally intolerable!
As far as the conflict between science and religion goes, the truth of the matter is that there really isn't much of one. They seek to answer completely different questions. Science tries to explain how things work while religion tries to give meaning to life. The only conflict comes when religion tries to make statements of fact about history or the workings of the universe. The reasonable solution in this case, which the Vatican has adopted, is to regard any mistakes in religion in regard to the physical world as metaphors and really irrelevant in regard to religion's true purpose.
A conflict does come in the underpinnings of science and fundamentalism. Science is skeptical and inquisitive. An idea must be tested and varified by multiple observations to be accepted. Conversely, fundamentalists believe that no one should ever question their particular religion, and if one does it's because they are evil and licentious and want to do a lot of "sinning" without having to worry about a future judgement. Dr. Schaefer tries to adhere to both though. He attempts to dispell the conflict by saying science supports his religion. This idea is completely silly because modern science is composed almost entirely of mathematical equations and dry secular explanations.
Read more ›
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Report abuse
Physical Scientist, Henry Schaefer, has written a book, largerly based of his lectures at Universities, about the true nature of science in its relation to reason, Christianity and truth. The main aim of this book, is not to trench through all the technological and scientific detials that have been tred elsewhere, but instead demonstrate through history and science that one can, and often many are, highly intellectual scientist who are also faithful, practicing Christians.
He uses history to show that the founding scientist who have laid the foundation of scientific discovery and thought were in fact Christians and pursued their vocations because they believed that God created a wold in which they could invetiagte according to rational governing laws. He also mentions the many Christian-scientists today who are among the elite in their professions, therefore discounting the often spread myth that those who espouse a creation model of any sort are fundamentalists Christians and not "really" scientists.
He does mention certian scientific discoveries that lead one to conclude that their is a God and easily shows the folly and highjacking of science terminology but many atheists such as Dawkins and Huxley. At times, his words overlap (due to it being based of the lectures) and he could have spent more time on certian scientific data and concepts that are widely distorted or misunderstood by both evolutionists and young earth creationists. I wish he had of went into more detials why he was not a young earth creationists because this is a point of contention within the non-evolutionists camp. All in all, a good book.
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Report abuse

Most recent customer reviews