Science and Religion

The Beginning of All Things: Science and Religion

by Hans Kung

Average Rating:

"Kung is one of the clearest theologians thinkers writing today. There are a glut of books out there promising to weigh in on some pressing issue that concerns the science/ religion controversy. I personally believe that it is a bogus issue largely fed by the publishing industry. That said, I think Kung's book is one of the few on the subject worth reading. I have read Dawkins and Hitchens and am generally sympathetic with their views. But Kung points out that while science (and history) may have much to say about human beings and perhaps what drives religious movements, it has absolutely nothing to say about God. Kung reminds us of the often forgotten distinction between religious experience and religious organizations. This book lays out the fundamental issue more clearly than any I have encountered."

Publisher: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company | More reviews: amazon.com

Mind and Life: Discussions with the Dalai Lama on the Nature of Reality (Columbia Series in Science and Religion)

by Pier Luigi Luisi

For over a decade, a small group of scientists and philosophers-members of the Mind and Life Institute-have met regularly to explore the intersection between science and the spirit. At one of these meetings, the themes discussed were both fundamental and profound: can physics, chemistry, and biology explain the mystery of life? How do our philosophical assumptions influence science and the ethics we bring to biotechnology? And how does an ancient spiritual tradition throw new light on these questions?Pier Luigi Luisi not only reproduces this dramatic, cross-cultural dialogue, in which world-class scientists, philosophers, and Buddhist scholars develop a holistic approach to the scientific exploration of reality, but also adds scientific background to their presentations, as well as supplementary discussions with prominent participants and attendees. Interviews with His Holiness the Karmapa, the Buddhist monk Matthieu Ricard, and the actor and longtime human rights advocate Richard Gere take the proceedings into new directions, enriching the material with personal viewpoints and lively conversation about such topics as the origin of matter, the properties of cells, the nature of evolution, and the ethics of genetic manipulation. A keen study of character, Luisi incorporates his own amusing observations into this fascinating dialogue, painting a very human portrait of some of our greatest-and most intimidating-thinkers. Deeply textured and cleverly crafted, Mind and Life is an excellent opportunity for any reader to join in the debate surrounding this cutting-edge field of inquiry.

Publisher: Columbia University Press | More reviews: amazon.com

Understanding Intelligent Design: Everything You Need to Know in Plain Language (ConversantLife.com®)

by William A. Dembski

Average Rating:

""Understanding Intelligent Design" is intellectual child abuse aimed at the hearts and minds of children who lack ample appreciation and understanding as to what constitutes valid mainstream science; nothing more and nothing less. It is a well-written polemic co-written by Discovery Institute mendacious intellectual pornographer Bill Dembski and a "Christian" educator, Sean McDowell, who claim that Intelligent Design is truly a valid scientific alternative not only to contemporary evolutionary theory, but indeed, all of mainstream science, period. This is the rare occasion where I am reviewing a book here at Amazon.com that I have not yet read, but their publisher, Mr. David Bartlett, has reneged on his promise to send me gratis a review copy. So I am writing this review not only to demonstrate that I - as someone trained in paleobiology and evolutionary ecology, can review at least part of it without actually reading it - but more importantly, to advise potential purchasers that they would be making a serious mistake by acquiring this book for their adolescent children, thinking that it was presenting a "valid scientific alternative" to contemporary evolutionary theory.

In Chapter Four of "Understanding Intelligent Design", Dembski and McDowell contend that there is a serious problem with the so-called "Cambrian Explosion", since hard part skeletonized multicellular life seems to have appeared "suddenly" in the Cambrian Period, more than 530 million years ago. However, their inane assertion flies in the face of excellent paleontological and stratigraphic research done by paleobiologists and biostratigraphers for generations, especially those in the former Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China (Since both countries possess the best exposures of late Precambrian through Cambrian sedimentary sequences.). As eminent American vertebrate paleobiologist Donald Prothero has stated in his recent book, "Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters", the "Cambrian Explosion" should be regarded instead as a "Cambrian Slow Fuse", since the appearance of hard part skeletonized multicellular organisms occurred gradually over a period of eighty million years, from the late Precambrian through the early Ordovician. Moreover, overall taxonomic diversity was relatively low, with at most, 60 genera recognized from the middle Cambrian "Burgess Shale Fauna".

Dembski and McDowell have made the same breathtakingly inane observations about the "Cambrian Explosion" uttered by fellow 20th Century Fundamentalist Protestant Christian creationists like Henry Morris and Duane Gish. Indeed, their published remarks merely offer more evidence that they should be regarded as creationists, period; an astute observation which Prothero has noted for Michael Behe, whom he refers to as an "Intelligent Design creationist" in his book. If you want a realistic depiction of the fossil record as important evidence for the fact of evolution, then you will be much better off acquiring Donald Prothero's "Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters".

Much to my amazement, Chapter Four of Dembski and McDowell's latest published example of intellectual pornography, lacks any discussion about mass extinctions. Such a discussion is truly important given the facts that mass extinctions have altered fundamentally the structure and diversity of Earth's biosphere not just once, but at least 7 times. Moreover, each of these instances saw a sudden drop in marine biodiversity of at least 40 to nearly 90 percent (The terminal Permian mass extinction that occurred 245 million years ago, involved a loss of more than 80 percent of Earth's marine biodiversity.). Instead, they are, like other creationists, fixated on the Cambrian "explosion" as though that was the most important event in the history of life on Planet Earth.

From a purely philosophical perspective, one must ask how efficient an "Intelligent Designer" would be in "designing" life, especially after realizing that this new "creation" would be decimated by mass extinctions not just once, but indeed, more than 7 times throughout the history of life on Earth in the past 600 million years. Indeed, this would be a rather illogical means of having an "Intelligent Designer" devote so much time in "designing" this life.

The University of California, Berkeley's evolution website has this fascinating portrait of University of Chicago marine invertebrate paleobiologist David Jablonski and the important research he has done in trying to understand mass extinctions:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/jablonski_01

Jablonski's work is quite important simply because he was among the first - if not the first - to recognize a fundamental distinction between "background" (normal) extinctions and mass extinctions.

"Understanding Intelligent Design" also lacks any credible discussion of the significance of the discovery of paleontological "missing links" in order to understand the evolutionary history of lineages as diverse as avian dinosaurs, whales, horses and fishes, for example. Recently fellow Amazon.com customer Tim Beazley has noted succinctly:

"This just in: Apparently scientists have discovered yet another fossil in the fish-tetrapod sequence.

See: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7199/abs/nature06991.html

This raises the question: If evolution is as useless as the ID-iots keep telling us, then why is it that evos are making all the discoveries like the above, not ID-iots?"

Alas, I could not have said it better myself.

For nearly two decades Intelligent Design advocates like Bill Dembski and his scientifically-trained Discovery Institute colleagues Mike Behe and Jonathan Wells have had ample opportunity to present their Intelligent Design ideas in the rational marketplace known as mainstream science by submitting their work for publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals, demonstrating how they have developed hypotheses, tested and refined them, and yielding publishable results in support of their ideas. They have not yet done so, but rather, instead, have engaged in substantial public relations work via lectures, media appearances, and the publication of books like this one in support of what eminent Columbia University philosopher of science Philip Kitcher has referred charitably as "dead science" while yours truly has noted repeated here at Amazon.com and elsewhere that Intelligent Design is merely mendacious intellectual pornography. So should you, the potential purchaser, acquire this book for your school-age children? Sadly, the answer ought to be all too obvious: NO.

"

Publisher: Harvest House Publishers | More reviews: amazon.com

Billions of Missing Links: A Rational Look at the Mysteries Evolution Can't Explain

by Geoffrey Simmons

Average Rating:

"NOTE TO READERS: This review was subjected to a negative vote campaign beginning December 29, 2007. There is a small cadre of Amazon reviewers and cohorts who vote down any review that is not a uniform attack on a book advocating intelligent design. Their express purpose is to try to dissuade people from reading the book. This is a juvenile tactic which undermines Amazon's whole voting system. Please keep in mind that the huge number of negative votes given to the bulk of reviews on this page do not reflect upon either the author or the book. Review follows.


Despite living a century before Karl Popper, the great philosopher of Science, Darwin understood that any genuine scientific theory had to include the possibility of falsification. He therefore suggested in 1872 that if any complex organ (or organism) existed which could not have evolved from successive small steps or "modifications" that his theory would "ultimately break down." The bulk of this book by Geoffrey Simmons is an attempt to do just that. In it he quickly surveys the plant and animal kindoms and finds numerous instances of living organisms with traits so unique and highly adapted that, he argues, they could not have evolved in short successive steps.

Repeating the many examples Simmons offers would be beyond the scope of this review, but in general Simmons suggests two versions of his critique to Darwin's theory. The first is the lack of fossil antecedents. In his discussion of bats, for example, Simmons notes that bat fossils can be found over a period of 50 million years but each fossil shows clearly defined bat characteristics, including echolocation abilities and unique tendons that allow bats to easily hang upside down. There are, he notes, no obvious predecessors which perhaps occasionally fell (darn those unevolved tendons) or flew into cave walls (better sonar next time...). Similar points are made about the dragonfly.

Simmons's second critique, far more common than the first, is that it is impossible to imagine successful intermediate steps for some plant and animal traits. He notes that many species are so highly adapted that they have symbiotic relationships with other plants or animals. Since these behaviors and accompanying physical characteristics are so closely bound together, one has a hard time imagining just how these relationships could have evolved independently. One example of this is the Mojave Yucca and the Yucca Moth. Although it is not mentioned in this book, the relationship between the two is characterized in popular literature as a "mystery" of the desert. But this is only a mystery if one assumes Darwin's hypothesis of slight modifications. Other examples Simmons offers include resident bacteria within humans that allow us to utilize vitamin K.

As I read through the book, I found myself wondering, "How would a biologist who accepted the theory of evolution respond to all this?" Having read some of the popular literature from this perspective, I can imagine 3 quick responses with varying degrees of effectiveness. As to the fossil record, at least a few Darwinists will respond that only a small portion of fossils are preserved. We could easily find a bat predecessor tomorrow and pointing to the lack of fossil predecessors in some species is simply a "Designer [not God] in the Gaps" hypothesis. (Simmons correctly notes there is nothing specifically Christian in the design argument, though many Darwinists will disagree--their views on this matter reflect more their ignorance of theology than their knowledge of biology.) This is a fair point, but it must be noted that they are placing their faith in a "Darwin in the gaps" hypothesis. More to the point, however, if Darwin is correct, we should expect to find mostly intermediate fossils since successive slight modifications would leave more intermediate than modern fossils, even if only a small portion of all fossils are preserved. We emphatically do not find this, and that point suggests the weakness of this argument. But other arguments raised by Darwinists could be more effective. It should be noted, for example, that natural selection as understood by Darwin and his followers is supposed to explain adaptation. Simmons, they might argue, is vindicating their own thesis in pointing to several dramatic adaptations. Moreover, Simmons does not "deny" natural selection as such. He merely suggests it is not fully sufficient to account for all the variation and uniqueness we find in the natural world. Readers can decide for themselves how effective Simmons's examples are in his chapter on adaptation. I personally found them persuasive, but am willing to consider alternative interpretations.

But perhaps the most powerful argument a defender of Darwin could offer would be to take the opposite approach to Simmons altogether. Where Simmons has pointed to hundreds of examples of uniqueness among plants and animals in the natural world, a Darwinist (not a term they like, but much nicer and more accurate than the descriptions they make of ID theorists) might point to similarities in the animal kingdom. The human genome, they note, is very similar to that of a chimp (90-98%, depending on which source you read). Indeed, our genome shares about half the DNA sequences of a banana. Positive proof, they might argue, for a single tree of life. But then again, it could be DNA sequencing is not a very useful measure. Here again, readers will have to decide for themselves how persuasive the argument from similarity is against the evidence marshalled by Simmons.

In the end, however, I enjoyed the book. Written for a popular audience, this book offers a whirlwind tour through the natural world and its many wonders. Whether or not you find evolution convincing as an explanation for all, or merely some, of what Simmons describes, this is a fun read. So if you want a popular introduction to one aspect of intelligent design, or if you are simply curious about the amazing diversity to be found in life on this planet, this book is a worth your time in reading it."

Publisher: Harvest House Publishers | More reviews: amazon.com

The G.O.D. Experiments: How Science Is Discovering God In Everything, Including Us

by Gary E. Schwartz

Average Rating:

"I believe in God. I believe in Science. I do not believe in this book.

I very much appreciated Dr. Gary E. Schwartz's 2002 book, "The Afterlife Experiments." Schwartz's warm and sparkly personality came through. My reader's affection for him makes this review all the harder to write.

The first paragraph of "The G.O.D. Experiments" is a keeper. Schwartz asks, "Imagine that there had been no Abraham, no Moses, no Jesus . . ." would, in such a world, science come to describe something like God?

Unfortunately, the rest of the book does not live up to the depth and elegance of that first paragraph. Further, I fear that books like this do more to hurt scientific research into metaphysical phenomena than help it.

"The G.O.D. Experiments" reads more like a series of disjointed and mildly self-indulgent blog entries than a book. It proves no central point. The title is only tangentially reflective of the contents.

Disjointed: the book contains bar graphs recording a computer's attempts to choose random numbers, a poem by the author, an annotated bibliography of books, some he likes, some he doesn't, highly personal anecdotes, and the tale of a "Kabbalah corgi."

The book is also repetitive to the point of driving this reader to search for a projectile that might reach the author's home in Arizona. In an attempt to prove that the universe's order defies theories of random generation, Schwartz shook up the grains of sand in a sand painting. No matter how hard or how often he shook up those grains of sand, he reports, they never again reformed as a sand painting.

Needless to say, scientific proponents of an atheist worldview would heap scorn upon this experiment, insisting that it falsely represented their arguments for how order arises out of god-free nothingness. I'm not one of those people, and their protest is not mine. I just got profoundly irritated, as a reader, having to read Schwartz's multitudinous references to his shaking a sand painting.

Schwartz says his book is meant to be "popular," but he speaks casually of difficult material - the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, for example - in a way that would certainly lose readers without previous knowledge.

Schwartz reports that he used to be a secular agnostic. He recounts, with wide-eyed amazement, experiences that lead him to faith. The problem lies therein. In the same way that a powerfully psychic person, who had never studied the hard sciences, would probably not write a very good book about the hard sciences if he tried to do so after sticking his toe in the world of hard science, Dr. Schwartz, who built his career on academic science, and then stuck his toe into metaphysics, has not written a very good book about that.

There are people who have dealt with their own psychic abilities, their own contact with the dead, and their own religious faith all of their lives. They have a more mature appreciation of what these phenomena are.

Someone with a more mature appreciation of metaphysics would never write, as Schwartz does, in a way that feels both grandiose and innocent, in a few brief, sketchy pages, of revolutionizing education, medicine, and law, and "globally resolv[ing] our conflicts" merely because he, a Yale and Harvard affiliated professional scientist, has had an epiphany.

Um, Gary. News flash. Many of those unwashed of us who are not affiliated with Yale and Harvard have realized for a long time that God exists, that psychic abilities are real, and that synchronicity happens. And, funny thing. You know what? We still pull our pants on one leg at a time. And we have yet to revolutionize the legal system, or resolve global conflicts.

Too, like a tyro, Schwartz doesn't ask himself hard enough questions. In one anecdote, he reports praying for information, and a word popping into his head - "Sam" - that turns out to be the information he was seeking. In his attempt to interrogate this incident, Schwartz asks himself eleven questions. But he never asks this one: "How often have I prayed to receive a correct answer, and had a word pop into my had, and it was the *incorrect* word?" Someone long in the field of such research would ask that.

Self-identified "skeptics" have been unfair and unkind to Schwartz. That does not excuse, though, Schwartz's dismissal of them. Schwartz mentions Michael Shermer's "How We Believe," and identifies it as "incorrect," without clearly detailing how and why. He theorizes that people like Shermer do what they do for financial gain (268). Similarly, "skeptics" insist that psychics do what they do for money. This mutual mud slinging illuminates nothing, and degrades debate. Does anyone really believe that a young man interested only in money, and choosing a career, would chose skeptic *or* psychic ahead of, say, stock broker, or lawyer? Is it not possible that both Shermer and Schwartz are driven by beliefs they find genuinely worthy?

Finally, any book that, as "The G.O.D Experiments" does, introduces Wernher von Braun as a source of spiritual enlightenment and fails to mention von Braun's career as a Nazi and exploiter of slave labor . . . fails.

To one seeking a popular account of science and God, I recommend Lee Strobel's "Case for a Creator." For readers seeking more demanding material, there are books by John Polkinghorne and William Dembski. There is, of course, the Bible.

There are worse books you could read than "The G.O.D. Experiments." But I did expect more from the man who gave us "The Afterlife Experiments," a much better book. "

Publisher: Atria | More reviews: amazon.com

God, Freedom, and Evil

by Alvin Plantinga

Average Rating:

"Alvin Plantinga, O'Brien Philosophy Professor at Notre Dame, shook the philosophy of religion world with this book when it was first published in 1978. His debunking of the atheistic evidential argument from evil is strictly a DEFENSE, not a THEODICY. A defense is merely a logical way out. A theodicy would attempt to give the specific reasons God allows evil. Plantinga does not claim to know the thoughts of God, so by offering a defense, he modestly shows that it is logically compatible for God to coexist with evil. His argument is NOT one by analogy (contra another reviewer), rather it is a strict application of the rules of logic.Even though the book is more accessible to the public than most of his others, I imagine that someone without any basic training in philosophy may struggle with the read (but a struggle is not a good excuse not to read a good book!). In addition to the defense against evil, his exposition of the Ontological argument is very interesting, and worthwhile for anyone who intends to properly understand that argument. Those in the field of philosophy have almost universally accepted it as the theistic solution to the problem of evil. If you are an atheist, I challenge you to study his arguments to understand the rational case he is making. This will definitely be an exciting and fun read for the philosopher, as well as to the thinking and outspoken theist and atheist.(By the way, if you are looking for a good THEODICY - try MAKING SENSE OUT OF SUFFERING by Peter Kreeft, philosophy professor at Boston College.)"

Publisher: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company | More reviews: amazon.com

The Answer Book for Kids: 22 Questions on Dinosaurs and the Flood of Noah (Answers Book for Kids)

by Ken Ham

The Answers Book for Kids is a two-volume set, broken down by topic and written for children ages 7-11. The volumes answer 50 questions and are written and the Fall, Dinosaurs and the Flood, and Sin, Salvation, and the Christian Life. The book is also indexed so children can quickly find the answers they are looking for.

Publisher: Master Books | More reviews: amazon.com

Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design

by Michael Shermer

Average Rating:

"Every now and then, a student or scientist comes to me and wants to express dislike for the theory of evolution, or to argue in favor of intelligent design. These people are often exceptionally bright, and they've often thought carefully about their positions. I've come to really appreciate their presence in my scientific and academic world, even though I don't agree with them. I've learned quite a bit from these people about science, spirituality, and life.

And so, because of these people, I really enjoyed this book. The author takes a strong position, and I happen to agree with him, mostly. I didn't learn much that I don't already know because I have studied evolution and I'm already on his side. But I get the sense that I could share this with book with those who don't agree, and have an intelligent discussion about it. I really don't know how this book will fare in the hands of religious people who emphatically dismiss and ridicule Darwin and favor intelligent design, but I appreciate the fact that the author doesn't indulge in insults. He simply teaches the reader about the facts of evolution and the scientific enterprise. "Intelligent Design" simply crumbles away because there's no science to support it. Shermer is attempting to blast unscientific ideas out of your belief system, but more than that, he's painting a flattering picture of the scientific enterprise, and evolutionary theory in particular. If you fall in love with the scientific enterprise, and see that Darwin played by the rules, you'll be in good shape.

Shermer's strategy is interesting. He'll probably never persuade many advocates to abandon their positions on intelligent design. The fundamentalists simply use ID as a vehicle for their entrenched religious beliefs. But if you believe in ID and are a rational scientist at heart, you'll be able put your beliefs under the microscope, while learning facts about evolutionary science.

Much is made about the fact that the author was a born again evangelical Christian who argued against evolution, and then changed his views. The autobiographical content throughout the book is really interesting, and worthy of discussion. My sense is that Shermer does a good job of describing what many fundamentalists believe. He then goes on to explain how he changed his own views, offering his experience to the reader.

Shermer has a background in psychology, and it shows. In places. He thinks a lot about WHY people believe what they do, and he refers various biases and heuristics that define our beliefs. He and the late, great Steven J. Gould wrote a book about these things previously.

Compare WDM to the books that simply preach to the choir, and ridicule the anti-evolutionists. Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and others blast religion for various reasons. If you get a kick out of people who don't suffer fools easily, then these authors have what you are looking for. Dawkins' newest book, "The God Delusion" will blast away at Intelligent Design. It will probably be another great book by Dawkins. But my guess is that his diatribe will offer nothing to people who are on the fence.

Michael Shermer's "Why Darwin Matters" is a gift to the devotee, skeptic, or scientist who isn't sure about what he believes. Perhaps that is why Shermer matters.

UPDATE, March, 2007: There is a free online video presentation called "Beyond Belief: Science, Religion, Reason and Survival" (Edge: Third Culture). This presentation features Shermer, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and approximatelly 10 other authors/scientists. It is hosted and produced by Roger Bingham (Salk Institute and Science Network). MUST SEE! "

Publisher: Holt Paperbacks | More reviews: amazon.com

The Big Questions in Science and Religion

by Keith Ward

Average Rating:

"Questions? Yes! Answers? No! The author does not "confront" these questions. It is a compendium of opinions from many sources that ends in a stalemate. The author keeps a very low profile and is careful to offend no one. Perhaps that was his goal. While it is a good source of history, I had expected more from a Professor of Divinity.
Gerry"

Publisher: Templeton Foundation Press | More reviews: amazon.com

Is Belief in God Good, Bad or Irrelevant?: A Professor And a Punk Rocker Discuss Science, Religion, Naturalism & Christianity

Average Rating:

"What do you get when put a conservative university professor who happens to be a Christian in the same room with a punk rocker who happens to be an atheist? Trouble, you would expect.

Well the two may not have shared the same room, but thy have shared in a lot of correspondence, debating and discussing their worldviews. And trouble was not the outcome, but a spirited, intelligent and no-holds-barred exchange of ideas and beliefs.

Preston Jones, a history professor and committed Christian, had long enjoyed the music of Bad Religion, especially its lyrics. He eventually wrote to the band's front man and song writer, Greg Graffin. A lively correspondence ensued, and that exchange is the subject of this book.

The letters written by these two are frank, forthright and forceful. Their discussions are lively and vigorous, sometimes heated but always irenic. The respectful debate encountered here covers a wide range of topics, music included.

Graffin is not your run of the mill punk rocker. He has written a PhD in evolutionary biology, and his lyrics drip with deep reflections and careful thoughts. They express, of course, the mind of a sceptic. Graffin does not believe in God, and he is willing to face a world without God head on, with all that entails.

Yet despite his commitment to philosophical naturalism and his unbridled faith in science, he has questions, he is searching, and he is aware of his own limits. His songs are filled with thoughts about religion, life, meaning and purpose.

Jones, on the other hand, is a believer who offers many insights and explanations from his own Christian faith, but can appeal to other sources as well. Thus they discuss not just biblical matters, but literature, music, science, art and many other topics. The two square off on numerous hot potato issues, such as the problem of suffering, the meaning of personhood, the theory of evolution, and the search for significance. No topic is too sacred to cover, and no avenue is too off limits to explore.

This informed, entertaining and valuable collection of letters shows that people from two quite differing worldviews can still treat each other with respect as they passionately share their own beliefs and challenge those of the other person.

Because this book is published by a Christian publisher, and the editor is a Chrisian, it of course takes on an apologetic approach. But it is not preachy nor moralistic. It simply lays out the honest thoughts of two deep and committed thinkers. Jones includes study questions, quotations and other bits of information throughout the book to help the reader go further with these discussions.

By the end of the book Graffin has not yet "seen the light" but he shows an interest in, an appreciation of, the Christian worldview, and the case Jones seeks to make for it.

And Jones sees in Graffin an intelligent and thoughtful proponent of atheism. The fact that Graffin is willing to dig deep in his reflections and probe thoroughly the big questions of life makes him superior to many believers with their easy believe-ism and shallow, uninformed faith. Indeed, Jones says he is more "at ease with thoughtful atheists than with Christians" who refuse to acknowledge the many challenges and mysteries of life.

At least Graffin is asking the right questions - and the hard, probing questions. Too many believers settle for a simplistic faith that does not grapple with the serious issues of life, be it suffering, doubt or mystery.

Thus Jones is more than happy to enter the intellectual arena with Graffin, and exchange blows. Iron sharpen iron, and believers need the challenge of non-believers to keep them on their theological toes and to keep themselves spiritually fresh and focused.

Many people - believers and nonbelievers alike - are simply not thinking about, and agonising over, the difficult questions of life. But many are. And it is to this later group that a book like this has so much to offer.

Non-believers will find here a case for Christianity that is free of clichés and biblical proof-texting, and one that is based one serious reflection, personal struggle, and solid answers. And believers will find here the thoughts, questions and feelings that many nonbelievers are grappling with. This will challenge them to take their faith more seriously, and remind them that honest questions deserve honest answers.

It is hoped that by reading this book many more such dialogues will begin. We have a lot to learn from each other, and really hearing what people are saying - on both sides of the debate - is an important means by which believers can share their faith and seekers can get some welcome feedback. Let the debate continue."

Publisher: IVP Books | More reviews: amazon.com