Three Views on Christianity and Science

by Zondervan, Michael Ruse (Contributor), Alister E. McGrath (Contributor)

When it comes to relating Christianity to modern Western culture, perhaps no topic is more controversial than the relationship between Christianity and science. Outside the church, the myth of a backwards, anti-science Christianity is very common in popular culture and can poison the well before a fruitful dialogue can begin. Within the church, opposing viewpoints on the relation between Christianity and science often lead to division. Three Views on Christianity and Science addresses both types of conflict. Featuring leading evangelical scholars, this book presents three primary options for the compatibility of Christianity and science and models constructive dialogue on the surrounding controversial issues. The highlighted contributors and their views By engaging with the viewpoints of the contributors, readers will come away with a deeper understanding of the compatibility of science and Christianity, as well as of the positions of those who disagree with them. Scholars, students, pastors, and interested laypeople will be able to make use of this material in research, assignments, sermons and lessons, evangelism, and apologetics. The Counterpoints series presents a comparison and critique of scholarly views on topics important to Christians that are both fair-minded and respectful of the biblical text. Each volume is a one-stop reference that allows readers to evaluate the different positions on a specific issue and form their own, educated opinion.

Genres: Philosophy, Religion, Science, Theology

224 pages, Paperback

Published January 12, 2021

About the author

Zondervan is an international Christian media and publishing company. Zondervan is a founding member of the Evangelical Christian Publishers Association (ECPA). They are a part of HarperCollins Christian Publishing, Inc. and has multiple imprints including Zondervan Academic, Zonderkidz, Blink, and Editorial Vida. Zondervan is the commercial rights holder for the New International Version (NIV) Bible in North America.

Reviews

[Gareth Clark · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a good volume, but it should be noted that sections of the work are technical though not necessary for understanding a stronger understanding of philosophy, theology, and science would be beneficial.
my only critique is that the editor's conclusion (Paul Copan) was a little heavy handed with his own personal standpoint that could have been better stated.

[Matt Hession · Rating 2 out of 5]

While I did enjoy reading the book and I'm glad that there was an agnostic viewpoint. I feel as tho it was missing a number of critical elements that could be present in a book like this. I would have much more enjoyed an attempt at reconciling a young earth view with say the distant light problem, or on the flip side the overwhelming literary evidence of a historical global flood with modern geology. Instead this book was much more concerned with philosophical proof of the existence of God, or the proof of no God. Sure there was some talk on how Christianity and Science interact, more often the presentation from all views were that they acted separately. Overall, it was a rather disappointing pointing book.

[Josiah Richardson · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was hoping for a lot more than this book delivered. I guess it makes sense that for a subject like this that essentially asks "Can Christianity and Science co-exist?" one would have a contributer that answers no, it cannot. But you have to realize that the vast majorities of readers of this book would be those within the Christian faith. After reading this book, I don't think that Ruse added anything meaningful to the conversation, not merely because he was wrong, but because good chunks of all of his contributions were unhelpful to the conversation and he was pretty regularly misunderstanding the context of the dialogues between the authors. This wasn't even his fault or an error on his part, but he was speaking with two theologians about theological things using theological presuppositions and he was lost. I would have much rather read another viewpoint from within the Christian camp to stimulate the conversations between McGrath and Gordon.

McGrath was good, as usual, and always being the gentleman. Even when he is wrong on things (which is rare), you can't help but just let it go because of the kindness that he always exhibits. McGrath's best contributions were those in response to Ruse where he easily dismantled probably close to 100% of all of Ruse's arguments. This is another reason I wish Ruse was replaced with someone in the Christian camp because I felt like much of McGrath's contributions were wasted chasing the issues that Ruse brought up and could have been much better used to further the conversation.

Gordon was my surprise author here. I haven't read anything by Gordon, but I have definitely heard of his work. I didn't expect him to have much to say in a conversation between an agnostic and a man with dual Ph.D's in science and theology. But Gordon was in fact the best contributer of the three in my opinion. He answered the question well, shut down Ruse early and often, and was able to critique McGrath on a few points taboot. He had a firm grasp of the theological and scientific issues that make this conversation needed. In short, Gordon saved the book, and not because I agree with him, because I found myself on the other side of the fence on many issues. But he was like the anti or bizzaro Ken Ham, in which he is focused, detailed, kind, generally accurate, and overall a pleasant man.

This wouldn't make my top 25 of these counterpoint book series, but if you do end up reading it, I would suggest skipping Ruse, scanning McGrath, and paying attention to Gordon.

[Chandler Collins · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent selection of authors who present compelling approaches to the science-faith relationship. I was especially intrigued that one of the contributors, Michael Ruse, is actually an agnostic who is deeply invested in arguments for the existence of God and the contentious science-faith relationship. While I disagreed with his approach the most, I found his writing style to be the most engaging. I am an unabashed Alister McGrath fanboy, so it is no surprise to me that Alister’s “two books” approach—an approach that he draws from the church fathers and Renaissance period—is the approach I most appreciate to the science-faith relationship. God is the author/creator of Scripture and the universe, so these two things shall never conflict when the Christian interprets them properly. According to McGrath, science explains the “how” of the universe and its functions, but it does not answer the “why” questions (why is there something rather than nothing). McGrath is not convinced that a unified knowledge of the universe is possible, but the Christian faith answers questions that scientific methods cannot answer.

I also appreciated Bruce Gordon’s knowledge of both science and biblical theology/hermeneutics. Specifically, I enjoyed reading his summary of Old Testament cosmologies, the distinction between world pictures and worldview in the Old Testament, and his critique of methodological naturalism as he views faith as a fundamental aspect of investigating our intelligently designed universe. I will definitely return to this book in future research papers/projects!

[Kaine Ransby · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a pretty good introduction to the prevailing views on how Religion and Science can interact from a predominantly Judeo-Christian perspective. While an excellent introduction to the concepts, this most book is most certainly written with the Christian audience in mind.

To me, the targeted nature of the content is not a draw back: this book is published by Zondervan and the introduction makes it very clear this is intended for a Christian audience. It amazes me the reviews of this book which I have seen which criticise the apparent lack of different perspectives contained within. If you are outside of the believing community, do not be surprised by the nature of the content.

This work provides an excellent introduction to many concepts in science and the philosophy of science. The interaction between science and Christianity is old and complex. To try and address all issues would make this book far longer and complex.

This work seeks to address the curiosities of those who are asking the questions and acts as a good starting point for those who do not have a rich scientific background.

[Roy · Rating 5 out of 5]

The well thought out topics and questions framed at the outset of this Counterpoints volume, by editors Paul Copan and Christopher Reese, ensured that the contributors fully articulated, enumerated and reduced the opaqueness of their positions in relation to key issues. Two views (Independence and Integration) are well represented and defended by Michael Ruse and Bruce Gordon, respectively, whereas Alister McGrath who seemingly leans towards Independence himself, encourages optimism about finding the elusive middle ground, by proposing the creation of conceptual space for the Dialogue between Christianity and Science. Overall, this is an intellectually stimulating work leaving readers with lots to ponder.

[David Blankenship · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having read a number of books in this series, it seems that the main problem is that the authors sometimes feel content to throw out insults at the other contributors rather than really discuss the merits of their own position. This volume, thankfully, doesn't make those mistakes, though the dialogue between Ruse and Gordon contains a few jibes that are more playful than hurtful. But it can be difficult reading, as all three articles (and the comments by the others on them) are very philosophical on the one hand but also filled with scientific theory on the other. In other words, while this is a short book, it's definitely slow reading. But I did learn a few things along the way, so 4*.

[Samuel Inbaraja · Rating 5 out of 5]

One good book which is short but covers a lot of important responses to attacks on Christianity. Michael Ruse does not make arguments against the arguments for God's existence but casually dismisses them. That is regrettable. Alister McGrath and Michael Bolton have given the best respones I ve read and therefore this book contains more than what I expected. The final chapter by Michael Bolton really dismantles Ruse's position in way we wish every Christian apologist does. For these reasons this book looks like one of the best books I ve read n the topic of Christianity and Science.

[Bob Collins · Rating 4 out of 5]

even with a minor in Philosophy. . .

I rarely say this about a book, but this was a difficult read. My minor in Philosophy was insufficient preparation for some of the arguments made here. I’m glad I had the kindle version because it is quicker and easier to look up words or phrases I don’t understand in the first read-through.

[Jayson Sanders · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good introduction to the discussion of Christianity's relationship with science. In fact, there are some philosophers, historians, and books mentioned here that I've been dying to do some research on.

[Aaron Blumer · Rating 3 out of 5]

This one is a bit lopsided. The agnostic author--who is at times pretty religious and at other times a solid atheist--seemed like a weak representative of his view. I was hoping for something more challenging from that neck of the woods.
So the book was lopsided on the science: 1 weak writer and two strong ones. Also lopsided of course in worldview: 1 agnostic/atheist (he claims "agnostic" but is sometimes emphatic that there is no God, and sometimes emphatic that he doesn't know. The guy is interesting, but his thought lacks internal consistency).

Best part, to my surprise, wasn't Alister McGrath, though he was good. For me, the best part was Bruce Gordon who showed a conspicuous passion for Scripture and an equal passion for quantum physics.
Confession: I didn't understand all of that part. He did try to pack too much into his section. Bruce, prioritize! But then again, it's worth reading the three or four times it might take to understand half of it. (I haven't gotten around to that yet though).

I enjoyed the book. It's not definitive or anything, but interesting for sure if Christain faith and science and their relationship interests you.