Product Description

Evaluates the evidence of modern science in relation to the debate between the atheistic and theistic interpretations of the universe, and provides a fresh basis for discussion. The book has grown out of the author's lengthy experience of lecturing and debating on this subject in the UK, USA, Germany and Russia, and has been written in response to endless requests for the argumentation in written form. Chapters: *War of the worldviews *The scope and limits of science *Gods, gaps and goblins *Designer universe *Designer biosphere *The nature and scope of evolution *The origin of life *The genetic code and its origin *Matters of information *Taming chance without intelligence *The origin of information

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #2013 in Books
• Published on: 2007-09-01
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 192 pages

Review
This short book is more than just a critical analysis of the deep question posed in the title. It is a scientific detective story, which keeps the reader on his toes as the evidence is put in place bit by bit. John Lennox reaches his final conclusion in grand Hercule Poirot style, revealing the answer that he sees as the only possible solution to the pieces of evidence he has amassed along the way. If you begin this book thinking the answer to the question in the title is 'No', you will enjoy this masterful collecting of the evidence. If you begin it thinking it is 'Yes', maybe you won't in the end be persuaded to change your view, but you will certainly be faced with a lot of challenging and thought-provoking ideas that will certainly tax your powers of reasoning. Whatever your final conclusion, it is impossible not to find this a stimulating read. --Keith Frayn, Professor of Human Metabolism, University of Oxford

As an agnostic in the true sense of the word as 'not knowing', I found John Lennox's book intriguing and providing much food for thought. The relationship between science, both biological and cosmological, and Christian beliefs is closely examined and evidence carefully marshalled to dispel the idea that the two approaches are incompatible. The author is a committed Christian and an internationally recognised mathematician. Will the reader be convinced by his arguments? I must leave this to others to judge. But whatever the conclusion, one must agree that this is a well-written and thought-provoking book and will contribute to reasoned discussion on a fundamental question: Has Science Buried God? --Alan Emery, Emeritus Professor of Human Genetics, University of Edinburgh

God s Undertaker: Has Science buried God; by John Lennox is an important and topical contribution to the debate and questions about the origin of the universe and its physical laws, the origin of complex biological design and the purpose (if any) of mankind. There are some (both religious and materialists) who would like to give the impression that we have answers to these most fundamental questions, and, most disturbingly, even attempt to stifle and censor debate. However, it is my opinion that rather than inhibit further discussion we should encourage further intelligent debate about mankind's origins and that is why I believe it is essential that manuscripts such as God s Undertaker; be published and made available to the public so that they can judge for themselves. --Chris Paraskeva, Professor of Experimental Oncology, University of Bristol

Synopsis
This book evaluates the evidence of modern science in relation to the debate between the atheistic and theistic interpretations of the universe, and provides a basis for discussion. The book has grown out of the author's lengthy experience of lecturing and debating on this subject in the UK, USA, Germany and Russia, and has been written in response to endless requests for the argumentation in written form as people seem to feel that the approach draws them in to the debate in a fresh way.

About the Author
John Lennox is Raeder in Mathematics at the University of Oxford and Fellow in Mathematics and the Philosophy of Science at Green College. He has lectured in many universities around the world and is particularly interested in the interface of Science, Philosophy and Theology.

Customer Reviews

Heaven knows we're agnostics now
Don't get me wrong, this isn't a bad book. It is thought provoking and has confirmed my agnosticism in the existence of some kind of transcendent reality/being/whatever that may relate to our physical existence (I shall return to the idea of agnosticism later in criticsing this book).

The author is trying to persuade us that, not only does science not have the ability to disprove the existence of God (something that science cannot possibly do anyway!) but, also that the results of science in cosmogony and biology make God a more probable alternative than naturalism. On the surface the book is very persuasive. And that is part of the problem, by digging a little deeper you realise that is all it is and offers very little substance for its hypothesis - that science can help us understand the necessary existence of the Christian God.

Mr Lennox argues that because the existence of the universe that we inhabit, the emergence of life, and the emergence of minds from matter are so improbable, then an external intelligent designer must be postulated.

One of the biggest problems I have is with Mr Lennox's idea that macro-evolution does not happen because their is no evidence for it and so we are left with micro-evolution within species rather than macro-evolution of species. The message of this is got across by bombarding the reader with quotes from scientists to the effect that macro-evolution isn't scientific. Two points arise from this, firstly a brief look at the literature on the subject shows that their is ample evidence that macro-evolution has occured (a case in point being the fossil remains of Homo Erectus, Homo Habilis, Paranthropus Robustus, etc, etc, which some might claim is good evidence of the macroevolution of Homo Sapiens). The second point is that the only alternative that Mr Lennox provides is that 'God did it'.

This is a major drawback to the book, as if a plausible scientific alternative had been even mentioned with a cursory examination of this alternative then this would have added weight to his argument. As an aside it is may be the case that Mr Lennox didn't propose a scientific alternative because as Professor Michael Behe (an authority that Mr Lennox quotes to support his ideas) has said, "There are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occured." Quite so.

The annoyance I found at Mr Lennox's carefully selected use of evidence to 'disprove' macroevolution could also be levelled at his account of the 'impossibility' of abiogenesis. And reminded me of words that Mr Lennox uses to sum up the case for macroevolution that some evolutionary scientists hold, - "It is surely a 'curious inversion' of the normal scientific process to assume the truth of what you want to prove and on that basis discredit evidence that is brought against it." Instead of assuming the truth of macroevolution, Mr Lennox is assuming the truth of the necessity of an intelligent designer and negelecting to mention evidence brought against it.

And this is the ultimate failing of the book - it is essentially biased and selective rhetoric. Mr Lennox asks us , "to see where the evidence leads." And the evidence in this book leads to either agnosticism or deism, but because Mr Lennox has not been persuaded by his own evidence (I assume he remains a committed Christian) how can he expect anyone else (atheists I assume) to be persuaded by it either.

As to the eixstence of God, 'There is much speculation and very little evidence.'

Some Old Nobody
With some letters after his name, but without the presumption to believe that this means that I know what I'm talking about.
Miskatonic University

Has science buried God? Er, no.
There are at least three analogies relevant to the philosophy of science at the beginning of the book which Dr. Lennox has been using in talks for years. I know, because I was at one of them in Oxford in 2003. On that day he had been given half an hour to burn through all his material, so he spoke at breakneck speed and barely had time to catch breath. There's something of that vibe about this book, too. Over these 179 pages of fine print, Lennox seems to have been determined to cover as much ground as possible, which makes for either an exhilarating or an infuriating read, depending on the disposition of the reader. I loved it.

One immense positive of the book is that it clears up a whole mass of confusions over issues relating to the question in the title. For instance, he points out that to see this big argument as one between science and religion is to commit a category error: the argument is between two worldviews: naturalism and theism*. Briefly, the naturalist sees the universe as a closed and self-sufficient system, while the theist sees the universe as caused by, ontologically dependent on and liable to inference from God. He also argues that the question "Is intelligent design science?" is misplaced - what we should be asking is "Is there scientific evidence for intelligent design?" (taken pan-scientifically). He clearly thinks there is, and goes on to explain way.

And so the rest of the book consists of a series of expositions and defences of teleological arguments. In all this it is quite clear where Lennox's expert knowledge lies, that is, in Mathematics and Philosophy of Science. During the first couple of chapters dealing with scientific methodology, worldview construction and inferences Lennox is clearly in his element, but this authoritative tone rather drops off in chapters 5-7 ("Designer universe?", "Designer biosphere?" and "The origin of life") as he relies heavily on quotations. Now, these are well-chosen quotations, and the arguments he constructs with them are cogent, but I was left longing for a return to the assurance of the first few chapters.

That return duly comes, as the discussion turns to information theory and hence Mathematics. Now, Lennox has been concerned on numerous occasions throughout the book to anticipate and rebut the objection that he's arguing for a "God of the gaps", insisting that abduction is a valid method of inference in science and that we make inferences to intelligence all the time. However, it's when he turns to treating DNA in information-theoretical terms that these ideas are really fleshed out. Noting that in pure mathematics "If a conjecture [...] has been thought about for many years and all attempts to prove it true have failed, then, though mathematicians will not necessarily give up trying to prove it true, they may also mount an attempt to see if it is provably false", he spends about a chapter and a half arguing for a "law of energy conservation", to the effect that "no molecular device is capable of generating any information that does not either belong to its input or its own informational structure". He also takes a swipe at Dawkins' infamous "METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL" while he's at it.

Furthermore, if information is conserved in this way, then it is most likely more fundamental than matter. And information implies intelligence. This is the argument with which Lennox closes: "In the beginning was the word...". This is a popular level book, it's an overview and, as I said at the start, the pace of it will not be to everyone's liking. But for what it is, it is very good book indeed, and comes recommended.

* Lennox doesn't intend for these two worldviews to be taken as exhausting all the possibilities; it's just that these are the two most obviously and publicly in conflict at the moment.

A Scientific and Philosophical Defence of Rational Faith
Possibly the best thing about this book is the foundation from which it approaches the current debate. Lennox identifies the real confrontation as not being Science vs. Christianity (a fundamental category mistake), but as Materialistic Naturalism vs. Christian Theism. Lennox provides some great evidence for those who actually want to think for themselves about the direction in which science points.

In the opening chapters Lennox surveys the leading theories in cosmology and physics to show that on the macro scale our universe shouts "design" much louder than "random chance". The fact of a beginning to all things, the fine tuning of many independent constants, the beauty of mathematical formulae and many other pieces of evidence are amassed against the hypothesis of naturalistic materialism. The conclusion that an intelligent mind is behind the universe is seen at least to be a plausible, rational explanation.

Lennox then sails in to the stormy waters of Biology and Biochemistry to see what the unfolding world of DNA and chemical microstructures has to say to us. He draws on his vast knowledge of mathematics and information theory to shows the incredible implausibility of the first mutating self-replicator arising by purely by chance. He shows that whilst random mutation and natural selection can certainly carry some weight, they crumple under the full force of atheism which demands they be the full explanation for all the specified complexity in the world.

In part this book is a refutation of various writings of Richard Dawkins (both are lecturers at Oxford University), but it goes far beyond that. It shines light on the poor philosophy that lurks in the shadows of the recent New Atheist writings. It deals in broad terms with the limits of science and the epistemological ignorance of those who insist, with Bertrand Russell, that the only source of knowledge is scientific knowledge.

Lennox also spends a long time identifying and avoiding a "God of the gaps" approach to Christian apologetics. His objection to this form of lazy intellectualism comes across loud and clear. Lennox highlights the "bad gaps" that we don't know the answer to because science hasn't advance well enough and refuses to simply posit "God did it" as the explanation. But he also shows a number of "good gaps" where atheistic materialism fails because of what we know, not what we don't know. Lennox also highlights the ironic "evolution of the gaps" dogma of those committed to a naturalistic worldview who meet any deficiency in our current understanding with the creedal cry of "evolution did it"!

In summary, I know of no better contribution to the atheism / theism debate than this book. It will provide a great resource for those wishing to defend Theism. And it will be a challenge to those who can sufficiently divorce themselves from their atheistic presuppositions to objectively evaluate the evidence.