1 INTRODUCTION TO BIBLIOGRAPHY My reading in history and philosophy of science is somewhat limited so I have made use (with their permission) of the resources of a couple of evangelical and reformed scholars, who are more knowledgeable in this area than me. The original core of the bibliography was written by David Wilcox and the annotations are his unless they are in courier font (print). Subsequently, I have added a number of the more recent references that I or some of my colleagues thought significant. Many annotations are by Russ Maatman who knows more about these guys than I do. I initialed the annotations based on his ideas as RM. Dr. Maatman is definitely opposed to theistic evolution, but believes there were long days and an old age for earth. Dr. Wilcox is also a creationist, but would probably allow for more process in creation than I might. He is definitely opposed to the deism and dualism found quite frequently in the way many evangelicals tries to harmonize their science and beliefs. Since, even with annotation, the list may be intimidating, I highlighted (in bold) and marked with ** a few critical references that I judge to be more significant and at an appropriate level for the Dordt student. However, since this is not the form I would use if I published it, I retain rights to it and would appreciate being asked before it is linked to a web page or disseminated publicly. James F. Mahaffy, Biology Department, Dordt College Reference * = in Dordt Library You can check under the find -> books on the library page to see which are not checked out

BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the Nature and History of Science and Ideas

Barbour, Ian, 1990. RELIGION IN AN AGE OF SCIENCE: THE GIFFORD LECTURES VOLUME ONE.* I include one of Barbour's books (the library has others) because he is an important Christian thinker in the area of religion and science. He probably has not had as much impact in the secular philosophy of science world. He reads well and would be very good for getting current on who the important people are in the area. I disagree with his liberal theological position that places ultimate authority in personal experience and also fails to see the exclusiveness of the God of Scriptures, although I have no question about his own genuine faith. His critique of science is generally quite good. He is someone you should be aware of. Ian has recently written a more popular summary of his thinking in WHEN SCIENCE MEETS RELIGION, Enemies, Strangers or Partners? 2000 A favorable review and short summary of the book was written by John Burgeson and can be found at: http://www.burgy.50megs.com/barbour.htm this book is in the library too. JFM

Bavinck, Herman In the Beginning c1900, translated by John Vriend, Baker Books, 1999.* Bavinck (1854- 1921) is one of the great Dutch theologians in the Neo-Calvinist movement who has written a book on science and Christianity. This book, which is a translation of part of his magisterial Reformed Dogmatics, deals with his views on Creation. The science may at times be outdated or wrong but many of his ideas are well worth looking at. In this Bavinck shows that he was not only well versed in the past few centuries of Reformed thought, but was also able to critically analyze other theological traditions like Roman Catholics and the liberal Protestantism. TJ (Tony Jelsma)

Brooke, John H., 1991 SCIENCE AND RELIGION: SOME HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES.* This book rapidly became a classic in the study of the history of religion-science interactions. The main thesis of this book is to illustrate the complexity of these interactions, in that not only has science affected religious views, but the converse is also true. Using many examples from the scientific revolution to the twentieth century, Brooke strives (successfully) to remain objective in his survey. The consequences of this book are that one realizes that there are no “simple answers” to the questions on religion-science interactions and that we should always be aware of our own religious/philosophical biases when doing or surveying science. Tony Jelsma a biology prof at Dordt College. Bowler, Peter, 1984 (rev. ed. 1989) EVOLUTION: THE HISTORY OF AN IDEA.* U. of Calif. Press I am not sure how important this book is but Dr. Maatman thought it was probably a significant work about this history. He thinks the author writes from an evolutionary perspective. RM Collins, C.J., 2000. THE GOD OF MIRACLES: AN EXEGETICAL EXAMINATION OF GOD’S ACTION IN THE WORLD.* Crossway Books, Wheaton, IL (ISBN =1-58134-141-5) 192 pages. I have not read this book completely but did read the early chapters carefully and skimmed much of the rest of the book. The author is a professor of Old Testament at Covenant Seminary (solid seminary of reformed bent). The book has a very readable style and the author appears to be well read and someone who has researched and carefully thought out his positions. In the early part of the book Collins spends some time categorizing the positions taken (especially by Christians) vis a vis God and creation. While not the Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update only way of defining positions, I found his categories easier to follow than some others and on the whole reasonably reflective of the different positions I have seen Christians take. I think the reader will find these summaries of the positions helpful. He defines his own position as a supernaturalist who is someone who sees God working in his normal activity through causes and yet strongly affirming God sometimes working in a different fashion (miracles). I wonder a bit if his science background of engineering might not tend to make what to see “nature” very ordered and more ordered than it is in say the biotic. I do appreciate his defense of miracles as real and think he is especially good at answering those theologians that would have every miracles have an explanation that fits the known laws of creation (sometimes even liberal theologians that need a natural cause for a virgin birth or resurrection) Even though he still has a high view of God’s providence in everyday activity, I don’t like this “distance” of God from his providence. By his definition I would be more of an occassionalist who sees the miraculous as God simply upholding his creation in a different fashion than he has in the past. The author also has sympathy for the Intelligent Design movement and brings a respected theological voice to that camp. One should however see my comments on that movement in my annotations of Phil Johnson, Mike Behe, and Bill Dembski elsewhere in this bibliography. JFM. Clouser, Roy A. 2005. THE MYTH OF RELIGIOUS NEUTRALITY REVISED EDITION. University of Notre Dame Press. The following is my annotation of the first 1991 edition.* Having read about a quarter of this book carefully and skimmed more of it, I think I have a good feel for what Roy is doing. This book is excellent for introducing you to the reformational (Dooyeweerdian) philosophy and demonstrating from that perspective that science is not religiously neutral. This book makes a careful and logical case for its position, but if you are not too philosophically inclined (and not everyone has to be), I would suggest starting instead with A. Plantinga or D. Wilcox's articles also referred to in this bibliography. Two weaknesses, I saw in this book, were an oversimplification and too little demonstration of knowledge of what is occurring in the philosophy of science and in the empirical sciences. I was disappointed that the examples used in science were mainly classical ones from physics or mathematics and not from the more empirical biology or chemistry. He also tends, even with the examples he uses, to oversimplify by limiting his examples to only a couple of key figures. That may be valid and effective in an introduction and perhaps even necessary in popularizing a position so it can be understood by the layman, but there should still be more appreciation of the complexities of theory in the areas he is talking about. In that regard Barbour (referred to in this bibliography elsewhere and whose theological liberalism I would take strong exception to) does a much better job of showing the variety of contemporary Christian and non-Christian thought and also effectively shows the non-neutrality of current materialistic science. Clouser also tends to define his way out of trouble. I noticed this where he was making a legitimate argument about the religious nature of everyone, but almost left one with the impression that there is no difference between folks who self-consciously look to a personal being or idol outside themselves for a reference point and the atheists who are not consciously looking there. I might note that there are others that have found Clouser more helpful than I have. For instance a philosopher of science, whom I really respect, Kerry Magruder writes: "I found Clouser to be a very helpful philosophical overview with illuminating case-studies." JFM **Clouser, Roy 1999. Knowing with the Heart: Religious Experience and Belief in God. * Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press 204 pp. I haven’t read this but put this book in because I thought it might be worth reading. If one of you decides to read it, I would like them to also write short paragraph that I could include in the annotation. I would also like them to read his article “prospectus for theistic science” and the responses to it found at URL: http://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/clouser.htm See also my comments on his 2009 convocation speech at the end of this bibliography and his 20005 book above. JFM Fischer, Robert B., 1981. GOD DID IT, BUT HOW? Academic Books. A survey of the philosophical basics in science, re. creation. Gillespie, Neal C., 1979. CHARLES DARWIN AND THE PROBLEM OF CREATION.* University of Chicago Press. An unbiased account of the religious roots of Darwin's thought, and how the creation debate shaped him. Gillespie is an important current philosopher of science in the secular world that claims Darwin was important in changing biology into a positivistic science (insisting on no Deism), but note that this view is opposite that of James R. Moore who sees Christianity and science getting along well with Darwin. RM **Gonzalez, Guillerno and Richards, Jay 2004. The Privileged Planet.* Regnery Publishing Co. Washington, DC 444 p. Gonzalez does a good job of showing that earth is uniquely fit to support life. I never realized how many things (including a moon of a certain size) are needed to give one conditions that can support life. He also demonstrates that earth is unusually situated to be able to discover information about the galaxies. He makes a good case for showing that we are 3

not simply an average planet (Copernicus principle) but unique enough that it looks like earth was designed to support life. Both of the authors are proponents of the ID movement and Gonzalez brings to his arguments the standing of a good research scientist (a published astronomer then at Iowa State University). He, Behe, and Dembski bring the power of accredited scientists using arguments from their research areas to support the concept of intelligent design. I also have a video based on this book. JFM Hodge, Charles, 1874. What is Darwinism? New York: Scribner, Armstrong, and Company. E-text available from open Directory project at URL: http://dmoz.org/Society/Religion_and_Spirituality/Christianity/Denominations/Presbyterian/Theology/Princeton_ School/Hodge,_Charles/Works/ (accessed on February 2, 2012) or at http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/19192 (Accessed on February 2, 2012) also available in What is Darwinism? And Other Writings on Science and Religion Charles Hodge, Edited and with an introduction by Mark A. Knoll & David N. Livingstone Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1994. 182 pp.* Charles Hodge was one of the foremost theologians of his age (Princeton Seminary) and fifteen years after Darwin published his theory he wrote this book. In the words of Ted Davis, “Hodge contended that this denial of design in nature ‘is virtually the denial of God.’ Hodge noted that although Darwin might personally believe in a creator who had in the distant past ‘called matter and a living germ into existence,’ Darwinism implied that God had ‘then abandoned the universe to itself to be controlled by chance and necessity, without any purpose on his part as to the result, or any intervention or guidance.’ Such a God was ‘virtually consigned, so far as we are concerned, to nonexistence.' Thus Darwinism was "virtually atheistical.’” From Ted Davis’s article (July 15, 1988) in Christian Century Accessed online on February 2, 2012 from http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=83. JFM

Hooykaas, R., 1972. RELIGION AND THE RISE OF MODERN SCIENCE.* Eerdmans. Carefully documented case: the reformation's role in the origin of science. Claims that modern science is largely due to the reformation. RM Howell, Kenneth J. 2002. GOD'S TWO BOOKS: Copernican Cosmology and Biblical Interpretation in Early Modern Science. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN 319. This book should probably be read by serious students of the history of science who would like to better understand how both Lutheran and Reformed theologians dealt with science and Christianity in the early modern period especially in regard to the impact of the new ideas in science resulting from the Copernican cosmology. The author clearly shows that, “the reading of the heavens and Scripture in the early modern period turns out to be far more complicated than many discussions of this period infer.” and “cogently dissects beliefs and behaviors of key players in this drama.”!)1 In the words of Ted Davis, a historian of science whose judgment I respect, Howell is “a very clear thinker” and thinks this an original and important work. Howell is a clear and cogent thinker, but a bit of background reading in or about the major players would be helpful in reading this book. Howell clearly understands both protestant reformed and Roman Catholic thought which adds strength to his analysis. He is a recent convert to Catholicism from a Reformed commitment. However, his theological position does affect his analysis. In a response to inquiry I made to the ASA list, George Murphy, a theologian, points out that Howell's two book position is consistent with his Roman Catholicism, since that tradition has maintained the possibility of a natural knowledge of God independent of God's historical revelation. This of course differs from the reformed position of primacy of the inscripturated word (sola scriptura). JFM (1)(From Dennis W. Cheek’s review in the September 2002 ASA Journal (Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith) 54(3):199 also available on line at URL: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/BookReviews2000-present/9-02.html) Hummel, Charles E., 1986. THE GALILEO CONNECTION. InterVarsity. Traces the growth of science, and of controversy with religion, and points the way to an adequately biblical point of resolution. Probably more or less a theistic evolutionist. RM Jeeves, M. A., 1969. THE SCIENTIFIC ENTERPRISE & CHRISTIAN FAITH.* InterVarsity Press. A good over-all survey of the relationship, including a good historical perspective. Russ suggests he takes basically a theistic evolutionistic position. This book was criticized by Dr. C. Van Til. RM Johnson, P. E., 1994. Reason in the Balance: The case against NATURALISM in Science Law and Education. * InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois p.245. This book is bound to have a powerful impact on the evangelical and especially college age student. The author, a Berkeley law professor, gained earlier notice with his book Darwin Retried, in which he challenged some of the dogmatism of the neo-Darwinian theory that is the accepted framework of most science in academia. Johnson clearly sees the fundamental clash between evangelical Christian beliefs and the world and life view that undergirds a lot of the intellectual and science establishment. In his own words, "The Christian Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

story is one of human beings who are created by God, but who are separated from God by their own sin and must be saved from that sin to become what they were meant to be. The Enlightenment rationalist story is one of human beings who escape from superstition by mastering scientific knowledge and eventually realize that their ancestors created God rather than the other way around." Johnson writes lucidly and increases the punch of his story with real live examples from academia. Speaking in and from the perspective of the major University professor (he was a law professor at Berkeley), Johnson makes a strong case for rejecting this establishment naturalism and seeing Christianity as a legitimate alternative. Johnson sees the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution as a cornerstone of this naturalism and a philosophy which will naturally exclude any real Christianity. Like Alvin Plantinga, Johnson is also (and I think rightly) critical of many evangelical scientists, who by trying too hard to fit in with establishment science. He really does not see their Christian theism making any different in their science. This book does a good job of exposing the world view climates of academia and its weaknesses, and presents Christianity as a reasonable alternative. While Johnson lacks the scholarly historical depth of Marsden’s analysis of the University in the Soul of the American University, it is still on target and written in a style that is as easily readable by the average college student. There are still some weaknesses to Johnson's position. I would like to have seen him deal more with the influence of our postmodern culture. In this postmodern age, the University and especially its scientists have lost some of their former status as the rational and scientific gods, with all the answers. I think Phil Johnson's own life within a major University, may blind him a bit into attributing too much power to the influence of the University and its world view on culture. I also see him using too rationalistic an approach in the book. Even though he is good at criticizing some of the young earth folks for being too rational, it is almost as though reason has not been affected by the Fall. JFM **Kerkut, G.A., 1960. IMPLICATIONS OF EVOLUTION. Pergamon Press.* This is a classic book by a British scientist, who questions the dogmatism and almost unquestioning acceptance on the part of many of his colleagues of all parts of the evolutionary theory. He is especially good at questioning the strength of the evidence for spontaneous germination, monophyletic origins of everything and the unquestioned progenitor position of some of the groups that have weak evidence for that position. He shows for instance that you could make good cases for the metazoa being derived from groups other than the protozoa, which was the dogma of his time. It is interesting to note that his criticism of deriving all organisms from each other in one straight phylogenetic tree, although radical for his day is pretty much accepted nowadays. Although he is a bit dated, some of his arguments are still strong and he is well worth reading simply because he shows so clearly that scientists often make assumptions they are little aware of and accept all parts of a theory as equally strong without knowing its weak points. I know Kerkut just from this book, but he appears to have been a respected scientist in the Department of Physiology and Biochemistry University of Southampton. (I have never heard his science credentials questioned and I am sure they would have been if he were sloppy in that area.) I would recommend your reading this book. It helped me learn to question scientific dogmatism during my formative undergraduate years at Dordt College. JFM Klaaren, Eugene M., 1977. RELIGIOUS ORIGINS OF MODERN SCIENCE.* Eerdmans. A thorough analysis of the role that the concept of God's sovereignty played in the origin and early conflicts of modern science. An interesting historical note is that he spent some of his boyhood years in Sioux Center, where his Dad was a pastor (? 1st RCA). RM **Kuhn, Thomas S., 1962. THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS.* University of Chicago Press. A "classic" book describing the role of paradigms (underlying assumptions) in the scientific process. I think everyone in the sciences should read this. JFM

Larson, E.J., 1997. Summer for the Gods: the Scopes Trial and America’s continuing debate over science and religion.* Harvard University Press 318 pages. This book was recommended to me by one of my colleagues, Hubert Krygsman. The book is well written and is very easy to read (not true of all history books - Sorry Hubert). The author who knows both his history and law has done a good job as Ron Numbers says on the cover, “this book is, quite simply, the best book ever written on the Scopes trial and its place in American history and myth. The tone is balanced; the research, meticulous, the prose, sparkling.” The Scopes trial has been vastly oversimplified especially by those that use it as a symbol of the ridiculousness of any Creationist position. Reading this book will give one a much better understanding of both the trial and climate and history of the times in which it occurred. JFM Lindberg, David C., & Ronald Numbers (eds.) 1986. GOD AND NATURE: HISTORICAL ESSAYS ON THE ENCOUNTER BETWEEN CHRISTIANITY AND SCIENCE.* University of California Press. (Up to date historical scholarship presented for non-specialists.) Includes articles 5

on the mechanistic conception of life, geology and Genesis, Darwin and evolution and Creationism. This reference was suggested and annotated by Cal Jongsma JFM See 1992 book by R. Numbers. **Mackay, Donald M., THE CLOCKWORK IMAGE.* InterVarsity Press, 1974. Mackay, Donald M., SCIENCE AND THE QUEST FOR MEANING.* Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1982. Two little books describing the importance of determinism, mechanism, chance, miracle, and the scientific enterprise for the Christian. I think Mackay is one of those good original Christian thinkers that everyone should read. I have tapes of three powerful lectures he gave to the ASA meetings in 1976. These lectures had a profound effect on me and I would encourage you to listen to them. You may buy them at the reasonable price of $5 from Saunders Christian Foundation, P.O. Box 2094, South Hamilton, MA 01982-0094 Marsden, George M., 1980. FUNDAMENTALISM AND AMERICAN CULTURE.* Oxford U. Press. How we got to where we are in the evolution/creation controversy. You must read this book to understand WHY 'evolution' has become the fundamentalist shibboleth. **Marsden, George M., 1994. THE SOUL OF THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY.* Oxford University Press. This is a scholarly and well written history of the American University by one of the leading evangelical and reformed scholars. I found the book both impressive and depressive showing in the words of the subtitle the university's journey "From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief. The influence of scientific methodology, the effect of a liberal Christianity, the results of disestablishment of religion and the failure to keep the moral trappings without the religious commitment are all etched powerfully in my mind after reading this book. The book is very scholarly, yet written in a very readable style. This should be a must reading for every Dordt student, especially if they move on to the University. JFM. Moore, James R., 1979. THE POST-DARWINIAN CONTROVERSIES. Cambridge University Press. An extensive/expensive book discussing responses of Christian (and not) thinkers of the late 1800's to Darwin. The book was summarized and evaluated in a 4 part book review by Richard Aulie in J.A.S.A., in 1982. Also in June 1983 issue by D. Gareth Jones. His contention, unlike that of Gillespie is that many of the Christians in Darwin's day interacted with Darwin and had less conflict with the evolutionary theory than we think. RM Davis Young definitely takes this position. JFM **Moreland, J. P., (editor), 1994 THE CREATION HYPOTHESIS: SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR AN INTELLIGENT DESIGNER.* Although my philosophical stance differs in some fundamental ways, this book edited by a Christian philosopher, J.P. Moreland is still must reading for Dordt students. It contains some of the most forceful arguments I have seen by leading evangelical scholars with excellent credentials, for design in this world. In this age, where science tries to impose its view that God has or had nothing to do with origins, it is good for students to see clearly demonstrated that there are thoughtful Christian scientists who have not had to leave their reason behind to hold to their Christian views to be good scientists. Both Moreland's introductory chapter and Steven Meyer's chapter give helpful background on the nature of science in a very readable fashion. Another important chapter is the Kurt Wise's on "Origin of Life's Major Groups." Kurt is probably one of the best geologists in the young earth camp, with a PhD in geology under Steve Gould at Harvard. He understands the power of some of the arguments used by evolutionists and deals with them head on. I think this would be one of the best places to learn about the fossil record, by someone who is not committed to evolutionary theory. This book represents what is called the intelligent design position (see Phillip Johnson) and shows some of its strengths and weakness. Some of these folks have been in the forefront of fighting for design (and theism) within the scientific world. In many ways I think they are having more of an effect among evangelicals than some of the reformed scholars. Part of their strength is in seeing that science has a commitment to world and life view of “methodological materialism." Yet at the same time, I think they fail to see the persuasive nature of the Fall on reasoning and science. They think that design will be accepted on reasonable scientific evidence. One of the things that Cornelius Van Til, Herman Dooyeweerd and others have clearly shown is that the Fall has affected all aspects and that man will not be convinced of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob on the basis of rational arguments. Another interesting footnote is the positive influence that Redeemer's Pascal Centre and Jitse Ver Meer have had on the thinking of some of these folks. For a more negative evaluation of this book see H. Van Till's, "Special Creationism in Designer Clothing: A Response to the Creation Hypothesis", in Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith of June 1995 (47:123-131) JFM Noll, Mark A., 1994. THE SCANDAL OF THE EVANGELICAL MIND.* Eerdman's & IVPress (U.K) -online under Google books. As the title implies, Mark thinks it is scandalous that evangelicals, who once were the driving force in academia, have largely left and Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

surrendered the intellectual world to the secularized University. With good insight into the evangelical mind, Mark explains why this has occurred and leaves us with a clarion call to again be known as Christian scholars. I thought the chapter on the effect of science and the influence of Creation Science in American culture were insightful and something biology students should read. Mark has written this book in a style that makes it easy for the college student to read and follow. He writes with a real love for the very group (evangelical) that he is criticizing. This is a book that every college student should read. Still Mark sometimes overgeneralizes a bit. I suspect the University community still has a lot more solid evangelicals, whose scholarship is driven by their Christianity, than Mark thinks. Still in broad terms his critique is often right and he will make you think in an area where we should be thinking. JFM (One of my colleagues, who probably has more insight into Noll, will perhaps write annotation, that will then replace this one.) **Numbers, Ronald, 1992. THE CREATIONISTS: THE EVOLUTION OF SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISM.* Knopf, New York. This readable and scholarly history of the Creationists is the BEST I have ever seen. Dr. Numbers understands the evangelical mind and the reader can easily understand the positions they took and their motives. This is must reading for any scholar (that is ALL Dordt students too) in biology or in other areas of the sciences. JFM **Numbers, Ronald, 2006. THE CREATIONISTS: FROM SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISM TO INTELLIGENT DESIGN. Expanded Edition. Harvard University Press. 606 pages. This is basically the same book as his 1992 edition with an added chapter on Intelligent Design and one on the global nature of Creationism. As he says in his introduction, “except for making a few minor changes, I have left the text of the first edition unrevised. (p.4 and 5). When I read the earlier edition of the book, I was really impressed that Dr Numbers was someone who understood what motivated the creationists and hasn’t “gone out of my way to attack or ridicule critics of evolution. I know some of the people I've written about. They're good people” (Interview with Steve Paulson found on Salon at URL: http://www.salon.com/books/int/2007/01/02/numbers/index.html

**Pearcey, Nancy R. 2004. TOTAL TRUTH.* Crossway Books. Nancy, an accomplished writer, produced this book about the world views of our contemporary culture in straightforward Schaefferian style. Nancy writes from a reformed perspective with a strong commitment to Intelligent Design as a movement that cuts away from the dualism of our culture and sees God working in it. She writes using examples that show the dualism of a culture that puts faith in one realm and facts or science in another. Like her mentor, Schaeffer, she finds and illustrates the heart of the problem of the world view of our contemporary culture. While the style is lucid and will easily be read by a college student, the extensive notes show that she has done her homework. I found her explanation analysis of evangelicals very useful. She also enabled me to understand for the first time the importance of common sense realism. She sees part of the problem with our culture as the neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory, which sees as a failed paradigm. However at times she may oversimplify the culture. For instance, I think she too easily dismisses the evolutionary theory without dealing with some of the areas where its explanatory power is strongest. While this is a weakness, I largely agree with her criticism of that theory. I just ran across this review of her book by a philosopher, Douglas Groothuis, which has some good things to say about this book.

Nancy Pearcey, an independent writer and editor who formally co-wrote material with Charles Colson, answers these questions and others in a conversational, anecdote-rich, yet intellectually meaty fashion. As a student of Francis Schaeffer (and the Reformed tradition in general), she explains the meaning of a "worldview," develops the concept of a Christian worldview, explains why evangelicals have lost a biblical worldview (with its necessary themes of creation, fall, and redemption) and how their thinking tends to be wrongly divided into a spurious secular and sacred dichotomy. Pearcey explains that Christ is Lord over the entire creation and over the intellect as well (see Matthew 22:37-39; 28:18-20; Romans 12:1-2; Colossians 1-2). Thinking well is a necessary (if often neglected) part of divine worship.

Pearcey's treatment of Darwinism and Intelligent Design is the best introduction to this vital topic I have seen. She has been researching, writing, and teaching in this area for many years. She, unlike many evangelicals, realizes that Darwinism is incompatible with Christianity because Darwinism is rooted in and fueled by philosophical materialism, not by the empirical facts of science. If a wedge can be inserted between philosophical materialism and the empirical facts of nature, Intelligent Design will receive a proper hearing in American culture. Pearcey does not discuss this in detail, but a strong case can be made that Intelligent Design, as a legitimate scientific theory, should be taught in public schools as a critique of, and (eventually) as alternative to, Darwinism. (For resources on the controversies surrounding this issue, see The Discovery Institute web page: www.discovery.org.) This is because it is not a full-fledged theological doctrine of creation, but a means of detecting design in empirical objects and systems through proven rational principles. For more on this, see William Dembski, The Design Revolution (InterVarsity Press, 2004). Denver Journal 2005 Volume 8 found online at http://www.denverseminary.edu/article/total-truth-liberating- christianity-from-its-cultural-captivity/ Accessed on February 2, 2012JFM

**Pearcey, Nancy R., & Thaxton, Charles B., 1994. THE SOUL OF SCIENCE: CHRISTIAN FAITH AND NATURAL PHILOSOPHY.* Wheaton, Ill... Crossway Books, 298 pp... This is a 7

refreshing, clear, and informative discussion of the history of science and how the threads of that history play a role in modern scientific thinking. The authors' thesis is that for the most part there have been three main approaches to science-- the Aristotelian, the neo-Platonic, and the mechanistic. While they admit that this list is only a rough grouping and that often individual scientists straddle more than one tradition, this book's exposition enables readers to understand scientific history, why scientists acted and thought as they did. Pearcey and Thaxton take up mathematics, physics, biology, and chemistry. One of the strengths of the book is the large number of extremely good explanations of ideas--both old and modern-- associated with scientific history. Here is a sample of the difficult modern concepts they clarify for the average reader: debates concerning the foundations of mathematics, special and general relativity, time dilation, curved space, wave- particle theory, the uncertainty principle, "Schrodinger's cat," the many-worlds hypothesis, the crisis in causality theory, the origin of the chemical code, and the relation of this code to life's irreducible structure. *Soul* is an easily-readable but scholarly challenge to the naturalistic philosophy that characterizes much of modern scientific thinking. RM Polkinghorne, John C., 1987. ONE WORLD: THE INTERACTION OF SCIENCE AND THEOLOGY.* Princeton University Press. & 1989, SCIENCE AND PROVIDENCE: GOD’S INTERACTION WITH THE WORLD.* Shambhala Pubns. & 1988 SCIENCE AND CREATION THE SEARCH FOR UNDERSTANDING.* Abdingdon Press. John Polkinghorne is, I think, an important figure that you should know about. I have not yet read his works, but feedback from colleagues on the ASA list lead me to believe that he is one of the more important and respected folks in the area of Christianity and science. He is a British chap, who is respected for his science (a physicist who is president of Queen's college at Cambridge). In addition to his science, he has trained in theology and is an Anglican priest respected for his pious faith. Theologically he is probably generally orthodox but sometimes a bit more on the liberal side, but that does not prevent him from making important contributions. Paul Wason says, "I would say that he is not only an important reference, but someone who would be helpful to students. It may be that introductory students would not find him easy to read, but the effort would be rewarding. (His books tend to be short and packed with ideas, so even just getting through a few pages is of value. I rarely get through more than a page or two without having to stop to think about something.)" He would recommend starting with his Trilogy, entitled One World, Science and Creation, and Science and Providence. He says, "One World is thus a good place to start for those unfamiliar with science and theology, while Science and Providence may be more stimulating in its approaches to God's action in the world, prayer." I have a copy of his The Way The World Is and have ordered a set of his tapes, which you can borrow from me. For another recommendation, one of the better evangelical Historian of Science, and a friend, Ted Davis would recommend the following three as good books to get a feel for Polkinghorne Exploring Reality: The Intertwining of Science and Religion*, The Faith of a Physicist, and Belief in God in an Age of Science JFM

Ramm, Bernard, 1955. THE CHRISTIAN VIEW OF SCIENCE AND SCRIPTURE.* Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids MI. One of the best known evangelical works of scholarship on the subject. He could be categorized as being a progressive creationist. JFM

Ratzsch, Del 1986. PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE: THE NATURAL SCIENCES IN CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVE*. InterVarsity Press. I have only glanced at this book, but include it because it was recommended by a number of prominent evangelical scholars. In the words of one of his then Chemistry colleagues, Terry Gray: "He does a nice job with a brief historical overview, discussing the positivists, Kuhn, and then the debate between realists and anti-realists in science. He seems to come down on the side of a moderate realist. He finishes up with three of chapters on religion/Christianity and science." In my quick look at it, I found it to be one of the more readable and easy to follow books I have seen. Because of how easy it is to follow, this book might be a good starting place to start before going to someone like Kuhn, Numbers or Barbour (cited elsewhere in this bibliography). Although he does a good job in explaining Kuhn and a couple of other figures, I would have liked to have seen some of the other important figures and more of an appreciation of the current post- modern age. His last chapters were also very clear in showing and being quite fair to the various positions Christians have taken in regards to science, but I would have appreciated a bit more of his personal evaluation of the positions. JFM with a quote from TG (used with permission). **Rushdoony, Rousas J., 1967, THE MYTHOLOGY OF SCIENCE.* Craig Press Although the science is dated, Rushdoony does a very good job of, as the title implies, exposing the religious nature of the framework that scientists use and showing that much of it is secular. He also does it in a very readable and incisive manner. Some of the same thing is done by Schaeffer and Clouser, all of whom write for the layman, but Rushdoony, shows a much broader reading in sciences and contemporary culture than either of the above and I would recommend the biology student to start with this Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

book. Schaeffer might be a bit better starting place for the humanities student. Part of my appreciation for this book is that it is the one that most clearly showed to me, as an undergraduate at Dordt College, the Myth and religious nature of science. Although the author latter moved to become one of the founders of the theonomist movement, which has some troubling tendencies, none of that position is reflected in this book. JFM Schaeffer, Francis A. 1972. GENESIS IN SPACE AND TIME.* InterVarsity Press. Downers Grove, IL. Points out the importance of considering the first part of Genesis as real history. Thurman, L. Duane. 1978. HOW TO THINK ABOUT EVOLUTION.* InterVarsity Press. Downers Grove, IL. A good analysis of the philosophical issues involved in the integration process of faith and science. Definitely opposed to evolution and seems to be scholarly. I have not read this book, but have heard him speak at a conference. JFM Torrance, Thomas F., 1969. SPACE, TIME, AND INCARNATION. Oxford University Press. Torrance critiques the history of Christian conceptions of space-time and its relation to God by focusing on the reality of the incarnation and working from the concepts embedded in the Nicene Creed. He demonstrates the failure of the receptacle notion and elaborates a relational one, taking into account both Einstein's theory of relativity and Gödel's theorem on axiom-unverifiability to paint a consistent and intriguing picture. Two things Torrance is widely recognized for—using the idea of contingent order to balance the transcendence and immanence of God and stressing the requirement that our way of knowing a subject must be in accordance with the subject's nature—also show up nicely in this book. Annotation by Arnold Sikkema then a physics professor at Dordt College, now at Trinity Western in BC. **Wright, R.T., 2003. Biology through the Eyes of Faith.* Harper and Row, San Francisco, 298pp. This book written for the Christian college Coalition takes a theistic evolutionary position, which is not a position I hold. Yet I think this is important book for Dordt students to be aware of for a couple of reasons. You should be aware that this is a very common position taken by many Christian scholars. Dordt students should read a thoughtful defense of the position by a proponent and not depend on secondary sources for understanding this position. Often we tend to categorize positions we think wrong into something that they are not. It is important to realize that Wright and most folks who take this position are evangelical Christians. While not rejecting the evolutionary theory, they clearly reject the secularism often found among scientists and see evolution as the way God created some of the diversity. Wright does a pretty good job of summarizing the various positions and showing their strengths and weaknesses. He is not afraid of tackling difficult ideas like humanoid fossils. He also does a good job of showing that Christians should be concerned about the environment and are called as Christians to be stewards of the Creation that they have been placed in. JFM Young, Davis A., 1982. CHRISTIANITY & THE AGE OF THE EARTH.* Zondervan Publishing House. (Now published by Artisian Sales). A very good historical and philosophical survey of the controversy concerning the earth's age by a Christian geologist. At times I think he makes too much of a compromise with evolutionary theory, but he is a good geologist and has some good critiques of some of the weaknesses of some of the flood model theories. I think there is less dichotomy between science and faith in his than in H. Van Till's position. JFM BIBLIOGRAPHIES (WITH SOME ANNOTATIONS) These two bibliographies should be useful for books. Both seem to be fairly extensive and do some annotation. McIver, Tom 1989 ANTI-EVOLUTION: AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY John Hopkins University Press. 385 p. I don't know the perspective of the author (he might not be a Creationist). This bibliography seems to be very inclusive and very well (and fairly) annotated. JFM Wirth, Kevin H.. 1991 THE CREATION-EVOLUTION BIBLIOGRAPHY. This is a very large bibliography of books, subdivided into an index of creationists and one of evolutionists. The bibliography comes with an index, which is 50 pages long. The author attempts and probably succeeds in his own words, "to provide a massive and very comprehensive bibliography of most of the literature" (books not journals). Perhaps as a result of such a massive compilation, the author is very limited in the works that he annotates and it is the annotations that really add to a bibliography like this. There is much more annotation of the evolutionistic books than the ones in the creationist part. The author is a creationist. You can get this for $25 from the Kevin Wirth, 1420 NW Gilman Blvd., #2563, Issaquah, WA 98027. He apparently only provides it on a disk. I have a copy if you would like to see what you would be getting. JFM

9 10 Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

II ON SPECIFIC QUESTIONS IN EVOLUTION AND CREATION Ator, Joe T., 1998. THE RETURN OF CREDIBILITY.* New York, NY: Vantage Press, 1998. 102 pages, index, footnotes. Softcover; $9.95. The subtitle of this book, "Scientific Discoveries Support Belief in the Bible's Creation Account,” at first led me to believe it was yet another "the earth is young and evolution is fraudulent” diatribe. But, at the urging of an elder at our Durango, Colorado, Presbyterian church, I [the annotator, John Burgeson] agreed to give it a read. I am pleased I did. The author, a physicist, accepts the time scales and other well understood findings of physics and geology, and spends little time rehashing tired old "creation/evolution” arguments. His writing is fresh, clear and readable, much in the style of Hugh Ross. His goal is to persuade the reader that being a Christian is wholly compatible with a scientific career. The target audience appears to be the serious and inquiring high school or undergraduate college student. The good news is that the author has done a very credible job with his thesis, and on that basis I have no hesitation recommending it as a Christian apologetic. It does not answer every question, of course, but those that are discussed are explored clearly, without excess "polysyllabic profundity." The bad news is that the book is incomplete. Most issues are discussed only to one level, and, in several cases, authors (Denton, for instance) are quoted as if no credible counter arguments exist. Armed only with this book, a person will get cut to pieces on the Internet LISTSERVs and other discussion groups! The book is worth giving as a gift, but do so with a warning. Origins issues are complex, and this book is, at best, a primer. John W. Burgeson **Behe, Mike 1996, DARWIN'S BLACK BOX: THE BIOCHEMICAL CHALLENGE TO CHEMICAL EVOLUTION.* Free Press (A division of Simon and Shuster) 307 p. Through the ages, Christians seeing the marvelous complexity of the creation have marveled at the Creator. The intricate biology of the eye, the wonderful machinery of a cell, the heavens themselves, all seem to call out for a declaration, with the Psalmist of old, of how wonderful is his handiwork. Yet the irony of the strength of the neo-Darwinian explanation and the secularism of today's science is that we Christians hesitate to use such an argument. In our culture, blind Nature has supplanted a Creator and this world, no longer run by a providential God, chugs down its self-directed tracks laid down by the rules of science. Not only has our culture and (perhaps too many of us) seen a world that runs itself we have also bought into the apologetic of scientists like Dawkings who tell us that the complexity in living things that seems to call out to their designer, is only apparent, and all can be explained by the power of an evolutionary selection blindly and gradually selecting for the genes that optimize traits in all creatures. This book is a must reading for any Christian because of the powerful argument that Mike Behe makes, often with simple and appropriate analogy to illustrate his points. He restores the respectability of a design argument, using his incisive logic to show that there are cellular structures and pathways so "irreducibly complex" that they simply cannot be explained as being produced by gradual steps but have to point to a designer. The simplest cell is so complex, the odds against all the necessary components being there at the right time for it to spontaneously originate too astronomical to be plausible. And if one looks at cellular structures like the cilia, with all their complex parts, all of which must work together in a certain fashion, it seems impossible to postulate the needed and functional intermediate structures neo-Darwinian theory requires as useful precursors as these structures developed. He uses similar arguments effectively in talking about the clotting and immune system. The author Mike Behe is someone who knows what he is talking about. A biochemist from Lehigh University, Mike is someone active in research, who knows both his chemistry and the primary literature. With his command of the literature Mike shows he knows the evolutionary explanation, and deals with it responsibly (for instance when talking about the hypothetical evolution of hemoglobin he uses long quotes from an article in the literature suggesting how it formed). The reader also learns that what is in the professional literature is often different than in the introductory texts. You learn for instance that many of the research scientists in the area of spontaneous origin of life have some real doubts about a plausible scenario by which it could have evolved. Although it will give this book more force in the scientific community, a weakness of the book is that Mike assumes that design to be a purely scientific question that should be demonstrated only on scientific grounds. In one sense he is right that if design shows in the creation it should be demonstrated empirically with scientific methodology. Yet I would like to see more of a realization that the scientific methodology occurs within a science that is not unaffected by world and life views. He is aware that proving a designer would Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update 11

shake the scientific community, but I don't think he realizes how powerful the effect would be in a science that assumes that no one affects the course of the world. Sadly because of that, I suspect the scientific world will avoid dealing with his argument. He also limits himself to using design argument only where it is clear that other explanations will not work and does not deal with other aspects of the neo-Darwinian theory. Because of this restricted critique, the book which powerfully shakes some of the dogma of the neo- Darwinian theory does not provide much of an alternative. Yet his powerful argument for design is a small step in the direction of changing the paradigm of the neo-Darwinian as an all explaining explanation. By showing some of the weaknesses of the current theory, it starts to answer Alvin Plantinga's call to develop an alternative Christian theory to the neo-Darwinian synthesis. His case is clear and strong and should be read by every thoughtful Christian. For reaction (negative) to this book from mainstream scientists the reader is encouraged to look at one of these two of many reviews. One by Robert Dorit, of Yale University appeared in American Scientists of Sept-Oct of 1997 and can be found at URL: http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/a-review-of- darwins-black-box-the-biochemical-challenge-to-evolution-by-michael-j-behe Another by H. Allen Orr appeared in the Boston Review of December/January 1996- 97 Vol. XXI No. 6 http://www.bostonreview.net/BR21.6/orr.html and Behe’s response http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/arn/behe/mb_brresp.htm JFM

**Behe, Michael 2007. The edge of evolution: The search for the limits of Darwinism. Free Press (A division of Simon and Schuster). New York 220 p.* Mike Behe, one of the leaders in the Intelligent design movement, makes a powerful case for the insufficiency of random mutations as the causal agent of the complexity of life. He argues his point in a very clear manner from the area of his own research in hemoglobin showing what evolution can do in causing resistance to malaria in humans or resistance to antimalarial drugs in the case of the malaria parasites. He has no problem with common descent (in fact he believes the evidence for it is strong). Nor does he have any problem with evolution (random mutation) causing sickle cell anemia or chloroquine resistance. However, he argues that you can show that more than two simultaneous mutations or the forming of more than three protein binding sites is too improbable to be caused by random mutational changes. I see this as an honest attempt to evaluate what sort of changes are and are not possible by random mutation. Mike’s science credentials and willingness to accept common descent make his case stronger in the scientific arena. Mike writes in a style that is readable by the lay folks. In fact at times I think he over simplifies things just a bit too much.

Brand, Leonard 1997. FAITH, REASON & EARTH HISTORY*, Andrews University Press, Berrien Springs, Michigan. This book is probably one of the best books written by someone who believes that a universal flood had a powerful effect on the fossil record. While I have not read this book myself, this book was recommenced to me by some of the YEC (Young Earth Creationists - but Brand believes the earth could be old) as one of the better books. I also received very positive feedback from a review on the book by one of his colleagues, Art Chadwick, whom I have gotten to know fairly well and whose judgment I trust. Leonard Brand comes out of a SDA University and the SDA are known for their good scholarship among Creationists. One of the Amazon reviewers (Ray Westermeyer) of this book suggests the Brand is one of the few creationist authors who respect mainstream science. The same reviewer says that Brand, presents “in extremely lucid terms the major available data on microbiology, cell biology, speciation, microevolution, and geologic record and fossil data, pertinent to the earth history, supplemented with excellent and understandable charts and illustrations.” He apparently deals with the nature of scientific process, but I suspect Plantinga (1991), Marsden (1994), Kuhn (1962) or Rushdoony (1967) [all cited elsewhere in this bibliography] would be better places to start for an analysis of the nature of science. While not as popular as Walter Brown, Brand probably will give you a much more scientifically defensible YEC position and should be read by anyone that takes this position. JFM

Brown, Walter. 2001. IN THE BEGINNING: COMPELLING EVIDENCE FOR CREATION AND THE FLOOD.* (7th edition), Center for Scientific Creation. (ISBN 1-878026-03-8) 240pp. I have not kept up on all the YEC (young earth creation) publications, but last February (2000) I asked for feedback to find out which are their better advocates from evangelical scientists on the ASA list (2000 - http://asa.chm.colostate.edu/archive/asa/200002/). This was one of the books that was thought to be one of the better publications of this movement. Another was Bones of Contention by Martin Lubenow, which I annotate elsewhere in this bibliography. 12 Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

While the library has a copy the reader can also look at the online version of the book at Walter Brown’s web page at URL: http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ Walter does a good job in stating the evidence used for the YEC position, but you will likely have to go elsewhere to hear the weaknesses of the models. For instance, while he talks about carbon 14 dating he does not deal with the other dating methods that are used for older rocks. For a perspective on the YEC position the reader is advised to look at Moreland and Reynold’s 1999 book or Ron Numbers 1992 detailed and insightful study of the Creationists both of which are annotated elsewhere. I suspect Leonard Brand’s 1997 book, Faith, Reason & Earth History, would be more scholarly than this one and I know that Kurt Wise does a very scholarly treatment of fossils from a YEC perspective in Moreland’s 1994 The Creation Hypothesis. JFM

Blocher, Henri. 1984. IN THE BEGINNING.* InterVarsity. Downers Grove. A careful exposition of the meaning of the opening chapters of Genesis. Dr. Bruce Waltke of Westminster Seminary says this IS the definitive book. Russ sees this French theologian as offering a mostly good study of these passages. He does make a case for a poetic component, but sees Eve as created from Adam. He may allow for evolution of man from animals (which I would not). RM Ted Davis says he takes a framework hypothesis. JFM Coffin, Harold G. and J. Kerby Anderson. 1977. FOSSILS IN FOCUS.* Zondervan. Grand Rapids. Best analysis I've seen of the fossil record from Christian standpoint.

Collins, C.J., 2003. Science and Faith. Crossway, Wheaton, 448pp. Jack Collins a professor of Old Testament at Covenant seminary (PCA - solid and reformed) has written a book for the layman dealing with science and Christianity. I have only glanced at it, but it appears to be an easy read and should be especially helpful in someone interested in the theological issues of creation. Jack appreciates the Intelligent Design issue (see Johnson, Behe, and Dembski annotated elsewhere) and sees it as a valid alternative to Neo-Darwinism as the world view that harmonizes most science. He sees Neo-Darwinism to a naturalistic worldview and presenting, “an unbroken pathway from molecules to mankind, along strictly natural lines.”(p.282) This opposes the position his faith leads him to that both, life and mankind ... result from special or supernatural lines.” (p.282) See my annotation of earlier book on miracles for more of my critique of his position. JFM.

**Collins, C.J., 2011. Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?: Who They Were and Why You Should Care.* Crossway, Wheaton 192 pp. Jack Collins an Old Testament scholar from Covenant Seminary takes and defends a position of believing in a historical Adam and Eve. While I have not yet read this book, I heard his talk on this topic at the 2009 ASA meetings in Texas. You can his article on this topic in their journal at this URL. At his talk Dr. Collins demonstrated a good grasp of relevant scholarship. This topic is currently important in reformed circles largely stimulated by two other college professors at the same meeting who took the position that Adam and Eve were not historical figures. Their position caused a controversy in the Christian Reformed and broader evangelical community. I would recommend the reader who wants to know more about the controversy to start with this book or Collins article. JFM

Collins, Francis. 2006. The language of God.* Free Press. New York. 295 pp. Francis Collins is one of the leading genetists of today. Earlier in his career he identified the gene that caused cystic fibrosis and more recently lead the Human Genome project. Francis is a scientist who is clear about his genuine faith and this book recounts how the question of a dying lady about his faith commitment made him question his own atheism and was led by a minister to read C.S. Lewis. While he sees God active in the world he also sees no conflict between the evolutionary science and his faith. He is perhaps strongest in giving examples from genetics of the similarity of chromosomes of different creatures. However, I found that he does not really understand the fossil record and dismisses some of the weight of arguments about the implausibility of abiogenesis (although he acknowledges that abiogenesis is hard to explain). JFM Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update 13

Dembski, W.A. (Ed.), 1998. Mere Creation: Science, Faith and Intelligent Design.* IVPress 475 pages. This book is probably one of the best places to start for the student that wants to learn more of the ideas of some of the current proponents of the Intelligent Design movement. The book is a result of papers given at a conference sponsored by Biola University November 14 - 17 1996. This book has articles by a number of well-known folks in the ID movement like Michael Behe and Phillip Johnson but also by a number of lessor- know folks and would be a good place to get a feel for the ideas of many of the folks in the movement. I know and respect the scholarship of some of the authors, but cannot vouch for the scholarship of others. Some of them like Nancy Pearcey are professional writers and make excellent points, but I would go to the professional historians like Numbers (cited elsewhere in the bibliography) who make similar points with the weight of a professional historian. There is another author, Sigrid Hartwig-Scherer, who writes on fossil humanoids and seems to know and publish in the primary literature, but I don’t know enough about her to be able to judge her reputation. One person suggested to me that this article is not great anthropology. The student should also be warned that intelligent design has its own weaknesses. My annotation of Behe’s book, Darwin’s Black Box, found elsewhere in this bibliography elaborates a bit on some of them. JFM

**Dembski, W.A., 1999. Intelligent Design: The bridge between science and theology. * IVPress 312 pages. The Intelligent Design movement is currently very important among evangelicals (see Phil Johnson, Mike Behe, Moreland, and the other Dembski reference in this bibliography). This movement seeks in the world of science to replace what they see as the failed weakness of the neo-Darwinian synthesis or origins with a science that will not exclude the fact that the world or creation shows evidence that demands explanation of a designer. Bill Dembski and Mike Behe are two of the active people in the movement that have the best established reputations in the academic world in the areas that they are challenging. While Behe is the scientist, working on the biochemical level, Bill enters the arena with good graduate training and some publications both in the area of mathematics and philosophy. Bill has developed the mathematical support for how design can be scientifically detected and in 1998 published the theory in the book, The Design Inference by Cambridge Press (in our library). This book is a popularization of the theory of Intelligent Design written at a level that can be understood by the average science undergrad. A strength of the book is that is starts with the historical and philosophical background. Science tends to think it is based solely on the evidence and often tries to be ahistorical denying the effects of its own culture and history. I especially liked the chapter devoted to British natural theology showing some of its real strengths and weakness. Dembski also makes clear, as others have, that Darwin’s theory was accepted in large part because it provided a non-miraculous explanation for origins that fit the philosophy of the science of that age. I applaud the attempt to dethrone the stranglehold science exclusively based on naturalistic methodology that consciously segregates God and theology to another realm. While I have strong doubts that Intelligent Design will force itself to be accepted enough to cause a paradigm shift, the seriousness of the proposals in the academic arena, have already made it less easy to classify Christian scientists as creationists who believe in pseudoscience at least when it comes to origins. As I comment elsewhere, I still think the movement puts too much faith in proving design and doing that without doing it on the basis of the God of Scriptures. It is clear that Bill himself believes in the God of Scriptures (references are throughout his book), but he thinks Intelligent Design can be shown on purely scientific grounds. Dembski is also guilty at times of oversimplification. While his focus is not neo-Darwinian theory, when he points out the weaknesses all of which are true, be makes little mention that there are structural and genetic similarities in creatures that can be explained by the theory [I am not a proponent of Neo-Darwinism.] He also gives too much credit to current intelligent design proponents and almost leaves the reader with the assumption that there were few credible neo-Darwinian critics before Phil Johnson [see annotation elsewhere]. Ian Barbour, Plantinga and 14 Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

Numbers [all annotated elsewhere], show a deeper appreciation of others who have worked in this area. Yet the Dordt student would do well to read this book both for a better understanding of the important movement Intelligent Design by one of its proponents and a better understanding of the historical context in which Darwinism arose. JFM

**Denton, Michael. 1986 EVOLUTION: A THEORY IN CRISIS*. Adler and Adler 368pp. This is a very important book by a non-Christian scientist (molecular biologist) showing some of the problems of the neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory. Every biologist should be aware of this book. That is why I added it to the list. Compare this to the book by Johnson. JFM

**Falk, Darrel. 2004. Coming to Peace with Science: Bridging the Worlds between Faith and Biology. * InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove IL. I must confess I have not yet read the book cover to cover, but still feel I have read enough of it to make some comments. Let me begin by saying that the title should be changed to the basic thesis of the book, namely, “Coming to peace with evolution.” Even though I disagree with that thesis, there is much good to be said about the book. Firstly, Falk effectively dismantles the warfare model of the interaction between science and religion, but that isn’t surprising, given that he is a Christian scientist who holds to both general and special revelation. Secondly, in contrast to many in this usually polarized creation-evolution debate, Falk does not stoop to bashing those whose viewpoint differs from his. In fact I noticed several cases where Falk references (with approval) supporters of Intelligent Design. Thirdly, and most importantly, unlike most [some JFM] theistic evolutionists I have read, Falk still holds a high view of God’s providence. Essentially he says that what seems random to us in evolution is not random from God’s perspective but all of evolutionary history is God working out his plan in creation. On the negative side, I feel that Falk is too easily convinced by the arguments for evolution. Falk presents some compelling data supporting evolution (for example mammalian evolution) but skips over the more difficult areas like invertebrate evolution. Falk also fails to distinguish pattern from process i.e. he argues for common ancestry but does not address the ability of Darwinian mechanisms to account for this pattern. Still, I have to say that this is the best book arguing for theistic evolution that I have read. Reviewed by Tony Jelsma, a biology prof. at Dordt College.

Frair, W. and W. Davis. 1983 (3rd ed) THE CASE FOR CREATION. Moody Press. Chicago. One of the better discussions of the issues from the special creation paradigm. Russ agrees with David Wilcox that this is a decently done defense. RM

**Giberson, Karl W. and Donald A. Yerxa. 2002 Species of Origins: America's Search for a Creation Story. Species of Origins: America's Search for a Creation Story.* Rowman & Littlefield 277pp. Reviewers suggest that this book gives a fair summary of the positions of Young earth Creationists (YEC), Intelligent Design (ID) and secular evolutionary theory. They argue that there is a real difference in world view between at least some of the evolutionary theory and some of the Christian accounts. JFM

Gish, Duane T. 1972. EVOLUTION: THE FOSSILS SAY NO!* Creation Life Publishers. San Diego. The best known analysis of the fossils by the best known spokesman for special creation/ young earth concept. Gish is very good on spontaneous generation of life, since he is a chemist; but may be weaker in other areas. RM JFM

Gray, Asa. 1876, 1963. DARWINIANA.* Belknap Press, Harvard University Press. Integrative articles by a conservative Christian botanist who was Darwin's major American defender. (On going to the horse's mouth!)

Haarsma, Debora and Haarsma, Loren 2007. Origins: A Reformed Look at Creation, Design, and Evolution CRC Publications. 208 p. This is a book that was recommended to me by some ASA members. The authors are physics folks and apparently sometimes don't get the biology quite right Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update 15

but it is supposed to be a very readable book. JFM Here is the annotation of a colleague of mine John Zwart in Dordt's physics department. It was a pleasure to read a draft of the book on origins by Deborah and Loren Haarsma. I have read a number of books that discuss Christianity and origins, but not a one of them is as thorough in exploring the range of views that exist within the Christian community on this important topic. Nor have I read one that speaks so clearly with a ‘Reformed accent’ (to use the author’s words) in looking at God’s sovereignty over science and theology. This is a book that should be on the shelf of any Christian interested in going beyond the simplistic view that one must choose either faith or science when discussing origins.

Hayward, Alan. 1985. CREATION AND EVOLUTION: THE FACTS AND FALLACIES.* This is a book suggested by Dr. Maatman as a lesser known book that gives a good critique of both theistic evolution and the Creation Science movement. RM

Hunter, Cornelius 2003. Darwin’s proof. The triumph of religion over science. Brazos Press (Division of Baker Book Co.) This is a book by an ID proponent that seems to know his biology. While I have only glanced at it, one of the things that I appreciate is that deals with the harder biological “evidence for evolution” like similarity in genes head on. I am not sure I always agree or understand his response but some in the ID movement have narrowly focused on just there area of expertise. (See annotation of Behe) Hunter believes as I do that Darwinianism is not neutral but driven by religious assumptions. JFM

**Johnson, Philip E. 1991 DARWIN ON TRIAL*. IV Press & Regnery Gateway. This is a very interesting book by a Berkeley law professor that in the word of M. Denton “combines a broad knowledge of biology with the incisive logic of a leading legal scholar to deliver a brilliant and devastating attack on the whole edifice of Darwinian belief.” Unlike Denton, the author is an evangelical, but his argumentation is mainly based on logic. Along with Denton, this is a book you should be aware of. I read it and found it quite easy to read and very powerful. For a non-scientist the author seems to have a good grasp of both current science and of the philosophy of science as it relates to Neo-Darwinism. This book is important because it and Phil Johnson really started the movement called intelligent design. See the Aug. 8, 91 review in Nature (p. 485-486) and the not too fair comments in the July 26, 1991 issue of Science (p. 379) to see what the reaction of some of the science community is to this book. Stephen Gould also reviewed this book quite caustically in the July, 1992 issue of Scientific America. This review and Johnson’s response, which they did not print, (found in PERSPECTIVES IN SCIENCE AND FAITH of March 1993 (45:46-48) or ORIGIN’S RESEARCH of Spring/ Summer 93) are really revealing of the differing world and life views. JFM

Kidner, Derick. 1967. GENESIS. TYNDALE OLD TESTAMENT COMMENTARY* - TOTC. Intervarsity Press. This commentary was recommended to me by Jack Collins, an Old Testament Scholar whose judgment I trust. He said this commentary for the general reader is the one he likes best. Of course he adds that He encourages you, of course, to read it critically. See also John Walton’s commentary annotated elsewhere. JFM

Klapwijk, Jacob, Purpose in the Living World? Creation and Emergent Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. 311 pages, ISBN-978-0-521-72943-7 Reviewed by Tony Jelsma Klapwijk, a Dutch philosopher in the Reformational tradition, applies this philosophy to the study of evolution. Klapwijk accepts evolution as fact, rejects young earth creationism as misunderstanding the intent of Genesis 1, and rejects Intelligent Design as a God-of-the-gaps explanation. In keeping with his philosophical tradition Klapwijk shows how living things have domains at different levels and which are irreducible to each other. These domains include the biotic domain (which all living things have), a sensitive domain (which animals have) and a mental domain (which only humans have). While I find this kind of classification helpful, I do have some issues with his description of these domains that are not 16 Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

consistent with what we find in the biological world. I have the most difficulty with his assertion that since evolution is a fact; these irreducible functions simply emerged during evolution. Klapwijk asserts emergence but doesn't really provide a mechanism. Instead I would argue that the irreducibility of the different domains is evidence against evolution.

Lester, Lane P. and Raymond G. Bohlin. 1984. THE NATURAL LIMITS TO BIOLOGICAL CHANGE.* Zondervan. Grand Rapids. Best analysis I’ve seen of the mechanisms of evolution from a Creationist perspective.

Lubenow, Martin 1992. BONES OF CONTENTION*, Baker Books, Grand Rapids Michigan, 295 pp. . I have not kept up on all the YEC (young earth creation) publications, but to find out which are their better positions I asked for feedback from evangelical scientists on the ASA list last February (2000 - http://asa.chm.colostate.edu/archive/asa/200002/). This was one of the books that was thought to be one of the better publications of this movement. Although I have not read it myself, I gather from a review that the focus of the book is apparently on humanoid fossils. I suspect it would be a good place to find an alternative interpretation for the humanoid fossils. Glenn Morton who reads a lot on humanoid fossils and is VERY critical of sloppy science recommended it as one of the best YEC (Young Earth Creationist) publications and would not have if the author did not know his fossils. I should hasten to add that does not mean that Glenn approves of a YEC position (he does not), but simply is an indication that the author knew his paleontology at the time he wrote it. While it was one of the best YEC books he has seen, Glenn also does not agree that all of the anthropology in this book is correct. That may be a bit of a sad commentary of general sloppiness in other YEC publications. JFM

**Maatman, Russell, 1993 The Impact of Evolutionary Theory: A Christian View*. Dordt College Press 318 pp. Maatman, well known among evangelical scholar (he was a fellow of the ASA), in those circles has been very important in opposing trends toward dualism in the sciences. In this book he provides a broad critique of evolutionary theory and shows some of the impact the theory has had on culture and science. Dr. Maatman writes with the strength of someone who has a very broad grasp of the evangelical scholars in the areas he is addressing. I found the book very helpful in providing introductions to a variety of areas from origin of life to interpretation of Genesis or historicity of Adam. Particularly useful to me was the chapter dealing with the spontaneous origin of cells from matter. He speaks here from his strengths as a chemist and catches the most cogent arguments of some of the best Christian apologetes (like Thaxton et al.). JFM

Macbeth, Norman. 1971. DARWIN RETRIED: AN APPEAL TO REASON.* Gambit Incorporated. Boston. A discussion of the holes in modern evolutionary theory by a non-Christian lawyer who’s done his homework

**Meyer, Stephen 2009. Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design. Harper and Collins 624 pp. *I also have a copy. I have not read this book yet but the reviews suggest the book contains one of better ID arguments done in a very thoughtful and professional manner. As the title suggests Steve makes his argument for design based on the complexity of DNA.

A colleague of mine, Tony Jelsma, has kindly provided the following annotation. In this book Meyer describes his studies into the origin of life. Meyer shows how cells not only contain information that is encoded in the DNA but they also possess a processing system to interpret the information. Meyer examines a variety of proposed mechanisms for the source of the cell's information. He shows how neither chance nor a self-organization are capable of generating information and that the best explanation is intelligent design. Although he is a Christian, Meyer's Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update 17

argument is a scientific argument, not a religious one. The book is somewhat long but a fairly easy read and has some nice explanations of molecular biology.

The following are a few quotes from Keith Mathison of Ligonier Ministries. “Stephen C. Meyer's new book, Signature in the Cell, may be the most persuasive case for intelligent design yet published.” “Meyer's book differs from the others mentioned above in that he makes the case for intelligent design on the basis of the information (the digital code) stored in DNA.”

On the more negative side you might like to read Darrel Falk’s review on BioLogos. Darrel is a solid Christian who has written a good book on science and Christianity (see annotation elsewhere). His criticism seems to be more directed toward lack of knowledge of some of the major players in the field than the substance of Stephen’s critique. See http://biologos.org/blog/signature-in-the-cell JFM

**Meyer, Stephen 2013. Darwin’s Doubt. Harper and Collins (Harper One) 498 pp. *I also have a copy. This book is by a prominent ID advocate. It is written to make the case that current neo Darwinian explanations cannot account well for the extensive Appearance various fossils rather suddenly in the Cambrian. Stephan writes in a lucid style for the non-expert. At the same time he shows a good grasp of what are the major objections to the early Cambrian being a real sudden appearance. This book is a must read for the Christian interested in the fossil record. I intend to write a fuller annotation including some of the weak points soon but needed to get the annotation in my bibliography. JFM

**Miller, K. (editor) 2003. Perspectives on an evolving Creation. Eerdmans.* 542 pp. While theistic evolution is not the position I take, the reader should be aware that many Christian scientists do take some form of this position. This is book brings together evangelical scientists from a number of areas that take this position and may be one of the better defenses of this position. On the book cover Davis Young says the book is “a superb slate of contributors for a volume dedicated to the proposition that an evolutionary conception of creation is compatible with orthodox, evangelical Christianity and with a high view of the Bible as the infallible Word of God. The authors approach the theme of an evolving creation from the vantage points of history of science, cosmology, geology, paleontology, biochemistry, anthropology, theology, and environmental studies.”

Mixter, Russell L., EVOLUTION AND CHRISTIAN THOUGHT TODAY.* Eerdmans, 1959. A series of articles showing where the “Christian-scientific” community was at the end of the 50's. Dr. Mixter wrote (not in this book) a classic monograph for the ASA on evolution and the eye, asking how the structure could evolve. Taught at Wheaton College in biology and was important in developing a progressive creationistic position there. RM

**Moreland, J.P. and Reynolds, J.M. (general editors). 1999. Three Views on Creation and Evolution.* Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Pub., 1999. The goal of this book is to "inform the reader about the issues involved in the dialogue about creation and evolution..." (pg. 8). The "three views" are three different schools of thought in discussion among Christians in this area: 1) young earth creationism (by Paul Nelson and John Mark Reynolds), 2) progressive or old-earth creationism (by Robert C. Newman), and 3) theistic evolution or "the fully gifted creation" (by Howard J. Van Till). It is not a discussion of Christian vs. non-Christian views--no one in this volume questions the Christian faith commitment of any of the contributors. The book is written as a dialogue, where each section contains an articulation of the author's position and a discussion of various aspects of this position such as their philosophy of science, theology, and epistemology. This articulation is followed by a response by four other scholars and a conclusion by the author. I think the book is a good and very approachable introduction to the positions and issues in this debate. It is well suited to a person new to the debate (particularly students and lay people (which is why I read the book in the first place). The introduction section is a solid introduction to a philosophy and theology of 18 Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

science. There are sufficient footnotes to access primary literature and the select bibliography at the end of the book will be useful for further study. One weakness is that the sections do not lay out how each position is based on the known evidence (scientific and Biblical)--the emphasis is more on philosophical and doctrinal position which is how the editors layed out the framing questions. Also, in terms of the general quality of the positions, the young earth section is probably the weakest of the three. Despite these weaknesses, I would certainly recommend it. CPF (Carl Fictorie is a chemist at Dordt College with an interest in perspectives in science).

Morris, Henry & Morris John 1996. THE MODERN CREATION TRILOGY,* three volume set Volume 1 Scripture and Creation 228pp., Volume 2: Science and Creation 343 pp., Volume 2: Society and Creation 203pp. Master Books, Inc. Green Forest, Arizona . This large three volume set was written by Henry Morris, who coauthored the Genesis Flood. He and John Morris are both associated with the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). This book is considered important by that organization and the YEC (Young Earth Creation movement). I have only skimmed parts of these books. They are strong in showing that evolutionary story of intro texts is not that simple and they do show some of the major problems with the evidence for evolution. One of the strongest weaknesses is a one-sidedness of only talking about evidence that supports their position. I think defenses of the flood model theory by Roth, Brand, Wise (in Moreland), or the position of Nelson and Reynolds (all annotated elsewhere in this bibliography), are better than Morris’ trilogy but this would be an important book to read for those interested in the YEC or ICR movement. JFM

Moore, John N. 1983. HOW TO TEACH ORIGINS (WITHOUT ACLU INTERFERENCE). Mott Media, Milford, MI. A salvo from the C.R.S., a book of teaching aids for refuting evolution and teaching creation.

Newman, Robert and Herman Eckelmenn. 1977 GENESIS ONE AND THE ORIGIN OF THE EARTH. A proposed “Age-day” reconciliation by the 2 theologians/astronomers. A bit of a different theory of 24-hour widely spaced days.

**Plantinga, Alvin. 2011 Where the conflict really lies: Science Religion and naturalism. Oxford University Press. 359 p. This book by a first class philosopher of a deep Christian (of a reformed flavor) perspective who makes the case that “there is superficial conflict but deep concord between science and religion and superficial concord between science and naturalism (p. 265)” While he accepts evolution he sees it as a process guided by God. See the New York Times review at UEL: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/14/books/alvin-plantingas-new-book-on-god-and- science.html?pagewanted=all See also the significant article is the article section at the end of this bibliography. JFM

Pun, Pattle P.T. 1982 EVOLUTION: NATURE AND SCRIPTURE IN CONFLICT.* Zondervan 336pp. This is a Wheaton biologist, whom Russ thinks wrote a good book. He is very fair to everyone. He is probably a progressive creationist. He is definitely not a theistic evolutionist. RM

Ratzsch, Del. 1996. THE BATTLE OF BEGINNINGS: WHY NEITHER SIDE IS WINNING THE CREATION- EVOLUTION DEBATE.* InterVarsity Press. Written in a very readable style for a college- age market, this book presents clearly the faulty arguments used on both sides of the evolution/creation issue. This work should help Dordt students become aware of arguments that really don’t work and often tend to get Creationist too easily classified on the side pseudoscience. As the author says in his preface, “most lay Christians ... have virtually no defense with those confusions (the arguments that really don’t work - presented by both sides).” The author speaks form the strength of someone who knows both sides, having moved from a childhood fundamentalisitc faith to a secular evolutionary commitment and then back to the faith (he now teaches at Calvin College). Ratzsch tries, and to a large extent succeeds, in not trying to push the position of either side. That lack of a stand is, in my opinion, Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update 19

itself a bit of a weakness, but he really understands and respects the strong arguments of both sides. As Phil Johnson said in a recent review (Books and Culture_, May-June 1996. P. 30), “In all these instances Ratzsch insists upon a principle I heartily endorse; he will not permit either side to win its case by controlling the definition of terms.” He also clearly shows the reasonableness of taking a Christian position, even one that is at odds with much of the established science. Ratzsch has really dug into the writings of the young earth Creationists and I think shows more of a firsthand understanding of their writing than in his previous book (see other annotation). For instance, he helped me understand what Morris really means with his argument from the second law of thermodynamics in contrast to what a lot of others claim he is saying. He also shows an appreciation for what he calls a “upper tier” of Creationists with solid degrees often from first rate universities and with a commitment to doing science as rigorously as anyone in academia.

Ross, Hugh 1994. CREATION AND TIME: A BIBLICAL AND SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE ON THE CREATION-DATE CONTROVERSY. Navpress. and Ross. 1993. THE CREATOR AND THE COSMOS: HOW THE GREATEST SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERIES OF THIS CENTURY REVEAL GOD.* Navpress Ross. I haven’t had time to check them out yet but I have heard some good things about these two books by Hugh Ross. He basically takes a day age view. I may annotate them later. JFM

**Roth, Ariel 1998. Origins: Linking Science and Scripture.* Review and Herald Publishing Association, Hagerstown, MD. 384. This book was recommended to me as one of the best written by an advocate of the flood model theory. The author was a professor in Seventh Day Adventist schools. Like others from this denomination (see Brand annotated elsewhere), he shows good scholarship. While Roth believes the six days are recent, he believes the earth may be very old. Jon Clarke, a geologist, whose judgment I trust, says, “He is the best example of the old-earth-recent-creation position” I liked the tone of the volume and the carefulness of not overstating his case. When showing some problems with some of the forms of dating, he is also points out that most of the dates work. He also does not toss out the geologic column and reminds the reader that the places where it seems to be in the wrong order are almost always in mountainous areas where layers could move over each other. I thought he made a very interesting case of showing that many of the widespread and thin layers don’t fit that well into standard models of deposition. Overall the book was much better than Walter Brown, which may be more popular. Someone interested in buttressing his flood model theory would be wise to read this or Brand first. I think the flood model is flawed, but it is refreshing to see a good scientist defending it. See also my comments on Brand and Brown annotated elsewhere. JFM

Smith, A. E. Wilder. 1970. THE CREATION OF LIFE. Harold Shaw Pub. Wheaton. and Smith, A. E. Wilder. 1981. THE NATURAL SCIENCES KNOW NOTHING OF EVOLUTION. Master Books, San Diego, CA. Particularly good in the analysis of the probabilities involved in the origin of life. In liked what I saw in one of his early books. JFM

Thaxton, C., Bradley, W. and R. Olsen. 1985. THE MYSTERY OF LIFE’S ORIGIN: REASSESSING CURRENT THEORIES.* Philosophical Library Publishers, New York. A new publication which looks like a very good critique of current debate. Russ thinks he does a quite good job of tearing apart the theory of naturalistic origin of life. RM

Van Till, Howard J. 1986. THE FOURTH DAY.* Eerdmans 286pp. This is really the book that started the controversy about creation/evolution at Calvin College. Dr. Van Till tends to separate his science and his faith into different areas. He also wrote a book (1988) with C. Menninga and D. Young SCIENCE HELD HOSTAGE* IVP which covers a bit more of the geology. He also authored PORTRAITS OF CREATION* with Robert E. Snow, John Steck and Davis A. Young in 1990. Needless to say In don’t think we can or should neatly separate our science and faith world. JFM 20 Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

Walton, John. 2001. GENESIS. THE NIV APPLICATION COMMENTARY.* According to an Old Testament scholar Jack Collins, whose judgment I trust, John Walton is a respected and evangelical theologian. Dr. Collins thought this commentary was also written more on the non-technical side and may be easier for the non-theologian to read. He thought it is a commentary that the college student might find useful. He encourages you, of course, to read it critically. See also the annotation of Kidner’s commentary. JFM

Ward, Rowland S., Th.D., 1988. FOUNDATIONS IN GENESIS: GENESIS 1-11 TODAY. New Melbourne Press, 358 Mountain Hwy., Wantirna, Victoria 3152 Australia, 208 pp., paperback. ($15 US available from author at press address [prefers cash, since small checks are expensive to cash].) Initial impression: A non-technical but solid and up-to-date study of foundational issues in the early chapters of Genesis. "I am convinced that Christians need to come to grips with the teaching of Genesis by a careful examination of the text in its context and setting as part of the early special revelation given to us by God." Although controversial at points, the study is balanced and ironic. It examines God's covenantal relationship with his people as it deals with creation, the fall, the promise of redemption, and the flood. Includes a select bibliography (which would have been more helpful if annotated) and a thorough Scripture index. JWM (John Mahaffy)

Whitcomb, Jr. and C. Henry M. Morris. 1961 THE GENESIS FLOOD.* Pres. And Ref. Publishing Co. Philadelphia. The "classic" defense of a young earth which started the present controversy. For a more current position see the 1996 book Henry Morris published with his son John. JFM

Wiester, John. 1983. THE GENESIS CONNECTION.* Thomas Nelson, Inc. Nashville, Tenn.. A survey of current thought in science with a Christian perspective. One of the authors of the ASA publication on Teaching Science in an Age of controversy. His personal position (Russ’s conversations) is that we won’t get answers to some questions (e.g. origin of man). RM

Wilcox, David. 2004. GOD AND EVOLUTION. 2004. Judson Press. David Wilcox is a good geneticists and Christian biology teacher at Eastern University. I have only glanced at parts of this book but I think the summary on the back cover gives a good indication of what this book is about. It says: “Biology professor David L. Wilcox is committed both to a strong biblical faith and to faithful, responsible science. He maintains that there can be no conflict between Scripture and the natural world because God is the author of both. Wilcox further suggests that the contentious debate over evolution is a result of a failure to recognize and honor the respective boundaries of science and technology.” His book is an example of a thoughtful defense of a form of theistic evolution that shows a high regard for God and Christian positions that differ from his. If you look at the introduction you will notice that he originally started this bibliography, although most of the annotations now have been added by me. JFM

Wonderly, Dan. 1977. GOD'S TIME--RECORDS IN ANCIENT SEDIMENTS.* Crystal Press. Flint, MI. A careful analysis of the fossil evidence for an old earth by a Christian geologist. He argues against both Creation Science and theistic evolution. JFM

Young, Davis A. 1982. CREATION AND THE FLOOD.* Baker Books, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1982. A definitive scientific defense of an old earth. See my earlier comments. JFM

BIOGRAPHY

**Desmond, A, and Moore, J. 1991. DARWIN: THE LIFE OF A TORMENTED EVOLUTIONIST.* Warner Books, New York 808 pages. I have only read parts of this fascinating and widely acclaimed biography of Darwin, but that reading and a number of reviews give me a good feeling about the book. In fact, what makes the book unique is their seeing Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update 21

Darwin in terms of his social position, the influence of his family and the social context of the time. To show the effect of these influences and make them real (both of which they powerfully do) they write as if they know what was influencing Darwin and going through his mind, and flush out historical details where needed. Although well footnoted, sometimes I would like to have known what is fact and what is reasonable conjecture. Still there is a mass of documented detail and their style makes Darwin and his situation live. I am sure every Dordt student would appreciate "indignation" at a friend begin confined to the college for the rest of the semester because he fell asleep on Darwin's couch after a hike in the wilds and missed curfew. This is a good biography but every biologist should still read for himself some of what Darwin wrote. Pick up and look at the book On the Origin of the Species by Means of natural Selection from our library to feel the force of his arguments and the type of logical presentation he makes. Darwin provided a mechanism that scientists could use to explain origins without the supernatural to a world that to a large extent was ready to explain it that way. But in the empirical sciences, he could not have changed the paradigms of his time without some force to his argument. Even those of us who walk in a different paradigm, believing in a God who creates and sustains this world, should still understand the present neo-Darwinian theory and its historical origins. This book is in our library and I have a copy that you are more than welcome to borrow. JFM

SOME INTRODUCTORY READINGS BY EVOLUTIONISTS OF THE PRESENT For really understanding the evolutionary theory, students need to move from these secondary sources to the academic journals in evolutionary theory, biology, genetics and paleontology.

EVOLUTION: SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, Sept. 1978. An issue discussing various ideas.

Dawkins, R., 1976. THE SELFISH GENE.* Oxford Univ. Press 224 pp.(Second edition 1989 350 pp.)

Dawkins, R. 1986. THE BLIND WATCHMAKER: WHY THE EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION REVEALS A UNIVERSE WITHOUT DESIGN.* Norton, New York. Dawkins is an outspoken proponent of an atheistic evolutionistic theory. He sees Darwin making evolution respectable. Dr. Maatman suggested he is an important person to be aware of. RM

Futuyma, Douglas. 1983 SCIENCE ON TRIAL: THE CASE FOR EVOLUTION. Pantheon. According to Phillip Johnson (see citation elsewhere) this is the book most recommended to him by "Darwinists as having made the most powerful case for Darwinism and against Creationism. Futuyma does a particularly thorough job of marshaling the evidence and his viewpoint is orthodox Neo-Darwinism." p.158. This book was also recommended to me by a leading paleobotanist. Dordt’s library has his 1998 Evolutionary Biology (3rd edition). JFM

Gould, Stephen Jay. 1970and more recent. Gould has written a number of books. Best known current spokesman for evolutionary thought, punctuated equilibrium. Interested in philosophy and history, writes well, very thought provoking. Very much a materialist. Gould, a paleontologist at Harvard, is one of the early developers of the punctuated equilibrium model, which is producing an almost Kuhnsian revolution in paleontology, although it is not yet clear to what extent this paradigm will become generally accepted. I hasten to add that, although the theory is an alternative to evolution proceeding by very gradual changes, Gould is a strong proponent of neo-Darwinian evolution and is strongly and articulately opposed to any Creationistic explanation. I haven't read him extensively, but I do have the book, THE PANDA'S THUMB (1980). This book is not his most recent, but it is one of his significant ones that provides a good introduction to his thinking. It includes a very basic non-technical chapter on the punctuated equilibrium theory, that he and Niles Eldredge were largely responsible for starting. There is also a chapter on the Piltdown hoax with interesting speculation on who was responsible for this. JFM 22 Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

Lewontin, R. C. 1974. THE GENETIC BASIS OF EVOLUTIONARY CHANGE.* Columbia University Press. NY. Intensive discussion of the evidence for randomness vs. selection. Especially interesting philosophically.

Niklas, K.J., 1997. The evolutionary Biology of Plants.* University of Chicago Press. 449p. This book will give you a good summary of current thinking on speciation, evolution and the fossil record. I also like the fact that the book presents some of the competing theories so you get a feel for both cladistic and non-cladistic approaches to taxonomy and speciation. Except for a couple of chapters on morphospace this is a very readable book and will give you a good background to the field.

Kitchner, Philip 1982 ABUSING SCIENCE: THE CASE AGAINST CREATIONISM. MIT Press 213 p. * Although a bit dated, this is one of the "classic" books often used or referred to by the secular evolutionists against the Creationists. His arguments are probably most effective against the flood model brand. Kitchner is smart and this is probably a good place to see the type of arguments one is likely to encounter in the secular scientific world. Another book in a similar vein is Scientists confront creationism (1983) edited by Laurie R. Godfrey, which is also in our library. I have read neither of them yet, but have received enough feedback to think that this annotation is fair. JFM

Somit, Albert and Steven A. Peterson (Eds.) 1992 (1989) THE DYNAMICS OF EVOLUTION: THE PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM DEBATE IN THE NATURAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES. Cornell University Press. An earlier version of this appeared in The Journal of Social and Biological Structures of July 1989. This book includes articles by leading proponents and opponents of Punctuated Equilibrium and would be a good place for someone to start to get an idea of that movement. There are articles by Gould (one of the founders) and some big names like Ernst Mayr and Michael Ruse, who suggests that the theory may now warrant status as a new paradigm. To sense the power of this approach I leave the reader with the following quote by the philosopher Ruse: "The orthodox Darwinian searches for these gradual linking sequences in the fossil record and tries to understand change in terms of adaptive response to selective pressures. The punctuated equilibrium supporter knows that these links will be rare or nonexistent, and the search for them a waste of time, and looks for other reasons behind change (or nonchange)." p. 161. You may borrow this book from me. JFM

Smith, J. Maynard (Ed.) 1982. EVOLUTION NOW. W. H. Freeman. San Francisco. Annotated articles from the leaders of the current evolutionary debates.

Solbrig, Otto T. and Dorothy J. Solbrig. 1979. INTRODUCTION TO POPULATION BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Reading, Mass. A rather intensive introduction to the science of evolution.

Stansfield, William D. 1977. THE SCIENCE OF EVOLUTION. MacMillan Pub. Co. NY. A less intense text introducing evolution.

Stanley, Steven M. 1981. THE NEW EVOLUTIONARY TIMETABLE.* Basic Books, Inc. New York, NY. A lucid presentation of the concept of punctuated equilibrium by a paleontologist. (not too technical).

Trinkaus, Erik and Pat Shipma 1993 NEANDERTALS: CHANGING THE IMAGE OF MANKIND* Knopf. This is a fascinating book by one of the leading researchers studying these fossils. One gets a real feel for how a researcher's own perspective really influences and has influenced how these fossils were interpreted. Their image has gone from a brutish ancestor to a human or similar race with human-like cranial capacity, social structure, and biology. The last chapters (which are the only ones I have read carefully at the time of this annotation) are especially fascinating as one learns how much can really be learned from fossils. (I was especially fascinated by the story of how Neanderthal was first thought to have a gestation period of 12 months and how one fairly complete and well preserved female pelvis demonstrated that birth channel and gestation period must be close to ours.) Although the author thinks the Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update 23

Neanderthals are ancestral to man as we know him, he admits that the case is weakened by evidence of early non-Neanderthal human fossils and evidence of some contemporaneous existence of both. JFM

Wilson, Edward and William H. Bossert. 1971. A PRIMER OF POPULATION BIOLOGY. Sinauer Associates, Inc. Publishers. Stamford, Conn. Introduces the mathematical side of evolutionary theory.

ARTICLES AND TALKS OF SOME SIGNIFICANCE

Barnett, Stephen F. and W. Gary Phillips. "Genesis and Origins: Focus on Interpretation*", Presbyterian Journal, Feb. 6, 1985.

**Clouser, Roy, 2009. Can we know God is real? Convocation address Dordt College. Clouser makes an interesting case for the validity of faith beliefs as valid knowledge. I really liked him saying that philosophers “not being able to tell you that the table is real” is wacky. In other words their rules of what is evidence are too narrow. You can hear his 2009 address at this site at Dordt. http://tv.dordt.edu/cgi-bin/recordings.pl? tab=audio JFM

Hermann, Kenneth W. 1990 "Innocent as Doves, But Not Wise as Serpents: 19th Century Evangelicals and Evolution." PRO REGE *(XIX) Sept. 1990. John Kok suggested both this and Livingston's Pro Rege articles. These are both the published forms of papers presented at Dordt College. Those of you who are Dordt students should take advantage of these opportunities. Ken is very good at showing the spirit of the age (? influence of Dr.Herman Dooyeweerd). In fact he reminds me a bit of Francis Schaeffer. In my opinion, a weakness may be that his broad strokes oversimplify history a bit. JFM

Jones, D. Gareth. 1983 "Approaches to Evolutionary Theorizing. Some Nineteenth Century Perspectives*", Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation 35 (June).

Lewis, Clive S. "The Funeral of a Great Myth*", in CHRISTIAN REFLECTIONS. Reviews the history of the "progress myth" of the enlightenment before and after Darwin.

Livingstone, David N., 1983. "Evolution as Metaphor and Myth*", CHRISTIAN SCHOLAR'S REVIEW XII: 2.

Livingstone, David N. 1990. "Evangelicals and Evolution: Retrospect and Prospect." PRO REGE* (XIX) Sept. 1990. This was part of the same lecture series that K. Hermann gave a paper for. You could probably do better reading Lindberg or Moore from the book section, but you might look at this when you are reading Ken's article. JFM

Marsden, George M., 1983. "Creation Versus Evolution: No Middle Way*", NATURE 305, October 13, 1983.

Numbers, Ronald L., 1982. "Creationism in 20th Century America*", SCIENCE 218, Nov. 5, 1982.

**Plantinga, Alvin, 1991. "When Faith and Reason Clash: Evolution and the Bible." pp. 8-33; “Evolution, Neutrality, and Antecedent Probability: A Reply to McMullin and Van Till," pp. 80-109 both in Christian Scholar's Review XXI: 1 (September, 1991). Alvin Plantinga, one of the leading Christian philosophers, has written a very significant and thought provoking article. (I think all biology students should read it.) While he accepts an old earth and progress in Creation, he raises serious questions about the thesis of common ancestry and neo- Darwinian thesis. I think he does a very good job in showing the semi-deism among many evangelical scholars and calls for a theistic science. In the same issue are responses by Ernan McMullin (who is a big name in philosophy of science and also at Notre Dame) and Howard Van Till. I think Plantinga's response to them is just as 24 Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update

informative as his original article. This article produced quite a stir in scientific circles (see also W. Hasker's article "Evolution and Alvin Plantinga" in Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith (1992) 44(3):150-162. This discussion has continued in academic circles with an article by Ernan McMullin in an article “Evolution and Special Creation" in Zygon 28(1993):299-335 (can be found in Dordt's library). Alvin Plantinga response, which Zygon decided not to publish, has some good points that are not raised in the original article. I have a copy of this response and his permission to pass it on to any interested reader. I would also encourage you to look at these articles especially Plantinga's response. JFM

Shin, Kuk-Won 1994 POSTMODERNISM AND A CHRISTIAN RESPONSE: PRO REGE (XXII) June 1994 This paper was originally presented to Humanities faculty of Dordt College on November 18, 1993. This is one of the clearest explanations of "post-modernism" I have seen (although I have not seen that many). "Post-modernism" involves a "collapse of scientific objectivism" (p.16) in the minds of our culture. That is not to imply that the empirical sciences do not and should not still require a scientific rigor in their methodology, but post- modernism is clearly a legitimate reaction against the deification of science and a sense of the failure of science to produce the utopia it had seemed to promise. Dr. Shin also provides a bibliography that will allow the more philosophically minded to study the cultural paradigm shift in more depth. Because this is the age we are in it would be well worth your while to get a copy of this article from me (free). JFM

Van Till, Howard J. "Categorical Complementary and the Creationomic Perspective* "JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC AFFILIATION Vol. 7 (3), Sept. 1985. Van Till has written several books. SCIENCE HELD HOSTAGE coauthored with Davis Young and Clarence Menninga is a good place to see his perspective. He seems to separate science from religion, so he can accept much of the science as it is. JFM

Wilcox, D. L. 1986. "Taxonomy of Creation*", JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC AFFILIATION (now PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE AND FAITH), V.38 No.4:244-250.

Wilcox, D. L. 1987. "Three Models of Making: Prime Mover, Craftsman and King,*" PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE AND FAITH (Dec. 1987) V.39:212-220

Wilcox, David L. 1993. "Covenantal Science: Impossible or Required?" CHRISTIAN SCHOLAR'S REVIEW (June 1993) 22(4):367-379. This and A. Plantinga's article in the same journal (Sept. 1991) are two pivotal articles by leading Christian scholars calling attention to the fact that the way we look at science may in some cases be quite wrong. Dr. Wilcox, who is a genetist, calls attention to the fact that many Christian scientists seem to have left themselves open to the God of the gaps and see the Creator active only in origins or in the inexplicable. Although this is somewhat similar to A. Plantinga's concern about semi-deism among Christian scientists, David Wilcox expresses the concern from the science perspective and expresses it well and powerfully. I really think all of you should read this article. It should move us in our talk and science from nature to creation; from a supreme being to a providential God that upholds the world. JFM

TWO JOURNAL ISSUES ADDRESSING THE CREATION/EVOLUTION ISSUES

IN THE BEGINNING...CHRISTIANITY TODAY*, Oct. 1982. Articles by both D. Gish and D. Young in opposition to each other.

ORIGINS AND CHANGE: Selected Readings from the JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC AFFILIATION. A.S.A., Elgin, Ill. 1978. This journal is now called PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE AND CHRISTIAN FAITH. Science and Christianity Bibliography - 2013a update 25

JOURNALS OF AN EVANGELICAL BENT THAT OFTEN ADDRESS EVOLUTION/ORIGIN ISSUES

CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY QUARTERLY*. Members of the society represented by this journal, are generally committed to a young earth and to using Noah's Flood to explain much of the geologic strata. Many evangelical scientists have difficulty with one or both of these positions, so it tends to be avoided by many solid evangelical scholars. Although a reviewed journal, its scholarship is not always as high as I would like. Still their position has found wide spread acceptance in protestant evangelicals in North America, and for that reason alone, you should be aware of this journal. JFM

ORIGINS This journal is produced by the Geoscience Research Institute of the SDA (Seventh Day Adventist) Church. An index can be found on the web at URL: http://www.grisda.org/origins/index.htm The SDA is known for being one of the more academic groups committed to a flood model theory. They will sometimes publish refutations of evidence used for YEC (young earth creation) if it is poor science. An example of this is Art Chadwick’s 1981 article in Origins showing that Precambrian pollen in the Grand Canyon are likely contamination. JFM

PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE AND CHRISTIAN FAITH*. A.S.A., Elgin, Ill. This journal used to be called JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC AFFILIATION. This is the Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation. Members take a variety of stands on origin, but have a solid commitment to an evangelical expression of their faith. JFM

SCIENCE AND CHRISTIAN BELIEF*. This is the British equivalent of PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE AND CHRISTIAN FAITH (the journal of the ASA). It is published by Christians in Science which is the British equivalent of ASA. I have been impressed by the thoughtful and scholarly content of this journal. JFM

JOURNAL OF AN NON-EVANGELICAL BENT THAT ADDRESS SIMILAR ISSUES

Zygon*, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, England. I was reminded by a colleague, Harry Cook, that I should point students to this journal. While this journal does not restrict itself to evangelical or even Christian Scholarship, it is probably the journal where much of the scholarly articles on science and religion are published. For instance in the June 2000, issue there is an article by MichaPlel Ruse entitled, Can a Christian be a Darwinists? 35(2):287-298. JFM

Bibliography updated on Aug. 29, 2013