The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

Regarding his book, "The Language of God" by Francis S. Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, and considered one of the world's leading scientists. The main thrust of the book is that you can reconcile a faith in God and still believe in Darwinian evolution. I really liked this book because it gave me exactly what I was looking for. Collins was once an atheist but after a long journey now believes in theistic evolution or old earth creationism. The book is well written although I felt that both the science bits and the Bible bits are too superficial for such important topics. He also often exaggerated scientific claims and used the words, "overwhelming evidence" way too often without backing up these claims. He quotes C.S. Lewis a lot. The "Unexpected Impression" is that he has greatly strengthened my view that the Bible is true and biological evolution is hopelessly flawed and entirely false. I often wondered how so many Christians who claim to believe in God and the Bible could also believe in Darwinism. Well, I think this book settles it: unfortunately, they're all just as confused as Collins is. His main argument is the similarities found in the genome among the species. Why is this surprising? Wouldn't you expect to see similar sections of blueprints of bathrooms among different architectural plans? I think Collins' next best evidence for Darwinism is the rock dating data (pure circular logic in the form of "begging the question" in my view). There is just as much, and better, scientific evidence for creation and the flood. As far as the Bible goes, I think Collins threw the baby out with the bathwater and places his trust in man's word above that of God's word. He says he trusts in the Bible, but he rationalizes that the parts that interfere with Darwinism are mere poetic allegory. He gives the usual examples that clearly give the word "day" a different meaning than when it is modified by a number and meant to express a calendar, day/night, 24 hour period. But honestly, you have to ask yourself: why did Genesis bother to define the solar period of a day? Why in the book of Exodus, did God go out of his way to clarify, in a clear-cut manner, the six days of creation week in the Fourth Commandment (to honor the Sabbath Day) given to Moses on Mount Sinai? Why did Jesus Christ himself refer to it several times? The apostles? How could there have been no sin, pain or dying (due to survival of the fittest, etc.) prior to the Fall in the Garden of Eden? How does salvation work without the account of the original sin? The whole purpose of Jesus Christ dying on the cross for our sins would be left meaningless in his scenario. It would simply be impossible to assume long epochs of time while keeping the correct order of the creation days due to the co-dependent, symbiotic relationships found in nature, for example, between flowering plants and insects. Creation is the foundation for the whole Bible and of the whole story of salvation. If one insists on believing in Darwinian evolution as Collins does, the whole Bible and all of scripture is left disjointed and becomes totally unraveled. When Jesus performed the miracle of turning water into wine, he didn't have to wait for the grapes to grow or ferment or the wine to age, it was ready to drink immediately, and they all said it was the best. Similarly, when God created Adam, he was a fully grown man who probably didn't have a belly button. When God created trees that provided food for Adam and Eve, the fruit was delicious and ready to eat right away. But Collins does not believe this. He thinks that man evolved from a single cell billions of years ago, which does nothing but cause total chaos and mischief to all of Holy Scripture. It's interesting that he hints at believing in some other really big miracles but can't come to grips with a literal Genesis interpretation of special creation. Of course, Collins just says things like, "Some people would say that...." I think he's come a long way but still has not arrived at the truth like so many other people. There presently is extreme pressure in the "serious halls of science" (sarcasm intended) to strictly adhere to the standard Darwinistic dogma. If he were to admit that he believes in special creation the way God said - that would surely mean intellectual and professional suicide, wouldn't it? At least he admits the fossil record is weak. I did very much appreciate this book because it gave me a peak inside the mind of a believer who is also a hard-core Darwinist; or to put it in his own words, a Bio-Logo-ist, who believes in a God that created the universe but then for some reason stopped at some point billions of years ago to wait, until his main creation, man, was now in His image (which could have just as easily wound up as a possum or a gopher I suppose) and all ready for Him to breath spirit, soul, and mind into him at the allotted time. (And would'nt the Earth have to be fully populated along with Adam and Eve by then - another huge Bible contradiction by the way) And then God made it a point to lie in his Word and deceive everybody all throughout the Bible while he was at it. No, I do not believe that's the way it happened. After reading this book, I am more certain than ever that it happened the way God said it happened. It's Darwinism vs. Creationism. The battle for the beginning continues!

Excellent book, it opens the debate and leads us to the solution of the dilemma. The Language of God is one of those books that leads to reflection without entering into contradiction with the higher spiritual feelings. I liked a lot reading this book and I can say unequivocally that readers will feel the harmony in every chapter, in every paragraph. Well written and easy to read, full of examples which support the arguments of the author. Illustrated on some pages and with a magnificent glossary that helps readers to find what they need quickly. I learned a lot on their pages and my arguments are strengthened by the realization that religion and science are the two sides of the same coin. The religious and scientific thinkings are changing, adjusting to these new times and through documents like this book, that is happening. Readers can learn a lot about history, science history, biology, genetics, astronomy, and other topics. Enjoyment in reading. Excelente libro, abre el debate y nos conduce a la solución del dilema. El Lenguaje de Dios es uno de esos libros que nos conduce a la reflexión sin entrar en contradicción con los sentimientos espirituales mas elevados. Me ha gustado muchísimo la lectura de este libro y puedo decir sin temor a equivocarme que los lectores sentirán la armonía en cada capitulo, en cada párrafo. Bien redactado y de fácil lectura, lleno de ejemplos, los cuales sustentan los argumentos de su autor. Ilustrado en algunas paginas y con un magnifico glosario que ayuda al lector a localizar lo que le interesa rápidamente. He aprendido mucho en sus paginas y mis argumentos se fortalecen al darme cuenta que la religión y la ciencia son las dos caras de una misma moneda. El pensamiento religioso y científico esta cambiando y se esta ajustando en estos nuevos tiempos y por medio de documentos como estos que esta realidad esta sucediendo. Provecho en su lectura.

Most people now probably know about Francis Collins from his media appearances during the COVID pandemic, however he's been a renowned scientist for a long time (going back to the 90s one could argue) and was the Director of NIH for quite a while before COVID as well. In short he's a very well-educated, experienced scientist who has operated at the highest levels for a long time. This is a good book for people who are on the fence about God and Science, and how to manage beliefs in each in a consistent way, as well as for those open-minded types looking for a well-educated counter-point to typical works by Dawkins and other hard-core Evolutionaries (new word?). I actually bought it for that purpose. I am squarely in the camp of Science in most respects and find Dawkins' more famous works mostly instructive if a bit over-zealous. I have always tended to see things like the amazing machinery in molecular biology / cell biology, evolution, big bang / cosmology not as "either or" propositions WRT to God, but as amazingly complex, awe-inspiring, and very plausibly the kind of things that fall under: if God wanted to make a natural laws blueprint to create a world like ours with beings like us, it would make perfect sense that we end up with things like evolution and quantum mechanics and all the rest, to study and try to understand, even though we may never fully get there. Because to fully get there, as Stephen Hawking once noted would be... "to know the mind of God." Whether any person believes or not, I think we can all agree that would be a pretty tall order. Not being a God myself I would never presume to fully understand some of these things, even if I spent a lifetime studying them. And not understanding them would not be cause to not believe, it would simply be expected. On the religious text side I tend to believe most of what's in the Big 3 texts, are a collection of allegories, metaphors and other stories, not meant to be taken literally but to be generally instructive on one's moral code. So I looked to Collins as a person more scientifically knowledgeable than myself, who might have beliefs along these lines and then discuss them in detail here, the whys of "the answer is not either or, but 'both'". And in that light I think it's a pretty good book. Certainly doesn't answer every question and probably won't change the minds of hard-core Evolutionaries or hard-core religious types, but for the rest of us, maybe some good food for thought. While elements of the book do meander through biblical territory at times, which might make some a little uneasy, I think we need more people like Collins in the world and in these kinds of debates, simply because he is both an avowed believer in science and also softly spoken in his devout religious beliefs. Unlike many who believe in God or biblical world-views he does not shove it in your face or get "verbally beligerent" about it. He's a very thoughtful dude, intent on producing more light than heat, and America could use a heck of a lot more of that right now, from abortion to climate change and everything between. I hope he uses his time away from NIH to write in more detail on these subjects, as they relate to both science and God.

This is a great book. I hope Richard Dawkins reads this review. Shame Chris Hitchens can no longer be with us. Bottom line is, you have to be a mental midget to be so stubborn when it comes to God. Open your mind. If you say you are intelligent, trained at the great institutions of higher learning, have an open mind. Here we have an author a guy who was in the trenches in the Oncology clinics, the wards where folks were dying. Here is a guy who studied medicine and molecular biology and used all he learned to make an incredible contribution to society. The manner in which Francis Collins lays out this book is wonderful. I am a scientist myself, and I am a believer. The two in my opinion go hand in hand. The wonders of the universe, the multiverse, quarks, cats in boxes. electrons through slits, on and on and on. Who says it is a bearded man in a chair with angels bringing him ice tea and jelly doughnuts? Just open your mind, try to grasp the complexities of the math on one hand, but the simplicity of it all on the other. This is a perfect universe, we happen to live in a tiny tiny speck of it. Who knows what is out there? As Jackson Browne so beautifully sang, "It is a dance we'll do alone" when we die. Yes indeed. What in the world is the harm in believing in a higher power? Whatever it is, something somewhere helps to guide, helps to maintain. Im not saying God is winding the clock, putting in fresh batteries, but I am not discounting anything. Quantum physics has certainly taught us one thing, this world ain't what it appears to be. At any one time, the cat is alive, and the cat is dead. Amazing. Read this book, gain an appreciation of how a very bright scientist can live with himself and publicly proclaim that he believes in God. Wonderful summer read. Come on Richard Dawkins, come on and lets fight:). I am tired of listening to your same old same old story. You and the astrophysicist Kraus drive me nuts on your little tour. People applaud, they just don't have an appreciation for the grandeur of this creation.

This is a wonderful book. I wish the concepts in this book could be taught in public school. Is there a way to make them more acceptable to the scientific community? In his book The Selfish Gene biologist and scientist Richard Dawkins argues convincingly that he is not being anthropomorphic when he describes genes as acting in a "selfish" way, he is simply trying to help us understand how genes work if we imagined how we would act if we were genes. He says the actions of genes can be predicted if we imagined tham to be selfish. In a similar way, let us use words which are commonly associated with human emotion - but which also have the qualities of inanimate objects. Let us use the following definitions to help understand the actions of the universe and the inanimate objects that surround us: An act of caring or an act of love: an act or condition that is necessary for life, or sustains life, or enhances life. An act of generosity - an act of love. Lord: In old England, a Lord was someone who established laws. We will use the word "Lord" and "God" to mean those invisible forces or those unseen spirits that make the laws of physics and the force of gravity what they are. Using these definitions also make it unnecessary to make the "leap of faith" described in The Language of God (though believers in a traditional God would prefer God to have knowledge of the future.) With these definitions we can see acts of love and caring beginning a fraction of a second after the Big Bang. If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 1000 million million, the universe would have collapesed before it ever reached its present size (perhaps after 1 million years according to Brian Swimme in the Journey of the Universe.) If the rate of expansion had been greater by even one part in a million, all matter would have spread out so fast that no protons or atoms could have formed - all would have been dust. If we define a miracle as an event with extremely low probability, it is a miracle that our universe formed, and that we are here today. (page 73 - the Language of God). These acts of love began seconds after the Big Bang, and they continue today. Consider your heart cells caring for all your other cells, pumping oxygen rich blood near all your other cells. Consider your red cells, always ready to deliver oxygen to all your other cells. Think of your lymphocytes, always looking for bacteria and viruses that might harm you. Think of the FBI in Boston looking for the men who hurt so many, and might have hurt more people if they had not risked their lives trying to preserve ours (Thank you all who try to keep us safe and healthy, including the author Francis Collins who works to keep us safe and free of disease, figuring out our genetic code - helping our cells take better care of us.) If we could truly feel all the acts of love going on within us and around us every second of the day, we might feel like singing Maria's song "I Feel Pretty" in West Side Story, only the last line might read "For I'm loved by an incredibly wonderful Lord." With these definitions one might come closer to uniting believers and non believers. To discover a "true believer" one would have to ask "Do you believe in a God who knows everything and has everything planned out?" Lesson from The Language of God would also ease the divide between religions. In these definitions and understanding the acts of love performed by your cells, there are the following core values important to all religions: Hard work (as in the "Protestant work ethic") - though there is no human who works as hard as the cels of your heart, beating non-stop 100,000 times a day, every day of your life. Fullfilling the responsibilities of your job just as your cells fulfill the responsibiities of their jobs. Honesty - the cells of your ancestors had to be thoroughly honest with each other, in essence "loving thy neighbor as thyself", doing all they could to help one another, or your ancestors would not have survived. Cleanliness - your cells keep the inside of themselves and the inside of your body in near perfect order, or your cerls and your body would not be healthy and able to do all that they do. We like the idea that we are safe in this world. When something happens like the Boston bombing we are quick to say "It was the terrorists", "it was the Muslims," "the White Supremecists", "the Checknyans". [...] Might we teach in public schools a code of ethics based on how well our cells (a gift from God) take care of each other, and how we might hope to evolve into a society that is as healthy and as loving as the society of our cells when we are healthy? May the Language of God be a book that might be taught in public school and help unite us.

Very happy with the book

Written in a logical, engaging, accessible way by one of the greatest scientists of our age, this book clearly lays out that science and faith in God are not, in any way, mutually exclusive but, rather, quite complementary. Dr. Collins, a founder of Biologos, an association of scientists who also believe in God, takes the reader through his own conversion from atheist to Christian without proselytizing or admonishing, inviting the reader to follow his logical, thoughtful, evolution from a non-believer to a thoroughly-convinced evangelical, in every good sense of the latter term. This book is filled with relevant observations of scholars throughout history that, along with the pithy writings of the author, provide a wealth of ideas and information about the limitations and appropriate application of science and faith to inform humans about the natural laws of the universe, in the case of the former, and the Creator of those rules, in the case of the latter. The undeniable conclusion is that scientific methods cannot answer the existential questions posed by faith and a belief in God doesn’t belittle, negate, or conflict with rigorous science that serves to better our understanding of the universe He created and put into motion.

I honestly highly recommend this book. I have been reading books on atheism lately by Dawson and Harris, among others, and I must admit I find the arguments by atheists convincing and strong. It is a relief to read Collins' book. The author was first an atheist, having been convinced during his scientific education that there is no place for God in this world. However, he soon realized that science cannot replace God. In fact, science re-enforced his belief in God. Collins explains that as a Christian believer, "the experience of sequencing the human genome, and uncovering this most remarkable of all texts, was both a stunning scientific achievement and an occasion of worship." The author spends quite a long time on evolution, explaining how evolution re-enforces the existence of God. Atheists always use evolution as a major proof that there is no God. Collins believes in evolution, but concludes that there must have been a force to put evolution in motion. In other words, there must have been a creator. "In my view," Collins goes on to say, "DNA sequence alone, even if accompanied by a vast trove of data on biological function, will never explain certain special human attributes, such as the knowledge of the Moral Law and the universal search for God." Collins insists that "science is not threatened by God; it is enhanced" and "God is most certainly not threatened by science; He made it all possible." According to the author, pain and suffering, so ever present in the world, does not mean that there is no God. Many atheist authors have argued that if God really existed, He would not have allowed suffering. But the author explains that this is not necessary true. In fact, the author's daughter was raped when she was a teen, but this in no way convinced him that there is no God. Why God permits the suffering of innocents is a puzzle Collins does not pretend to solve, although he speculates, following C.S. Lewis, that we may need to suffer in order to learn. I found his arguments very convincing. Reason persuaded the author that the universe could not have created itself. C.S. Lewis was influential to the author, and like Collins, Lewis was atheist before embracing God. After reading this book, I am encouraged to read C.S. Lewis' books. Indeed there is wisdom in the written word. But take care; words are mightier than the sword! Choose your side carefully.