I love to read, too, Daneen, so I'm looking forward to lots of good ideas! As I begin to see the sand running ever more swiftly through the hourglass of time, I keep trying to cram more books into my reading schedule! This year I surfeited on 36 books. Besides The Language of God and Search for a Sanctuary , some of my favorites have been:

Our Endangered Values: America’s Moral Crisis by Jimmy Carter. on the threat of fundamentalism, both at home and abroad, and how it has undermined our traditional values of generosity, equality, respect, peace, stewardship of the earth, financial accountability, separation of church and state, and others.

When Religion Becomes Evil by Charles Kimball, a Baptist minister and specialist in Islamic studies, on the role of religion in many wars throughout history and the warning signs that the foundational ideals of a religious community have become corrupted.

Dogs of God: Columbus, the Inquisition and the Defeat of the Moors by James Reston, Jr. History of Spain during the Ferdinand nd Isabella period.

Searching for the God of Grace by Stuart Tyner, addressing our Adventist fear of grace. One of the best books I've read on grace.

Faith and Politics by John Danforth, ordained Episcopal priest and former 3-term US senator (R), as well as former UN ambassador. He sets forth his belief that faith should make politicians reconcilers, not dividers as those from the Christian Right have been. True faith should breed humility, not hubris, in Christians.

Prayer: Does It Make Any Difference? by Phillip Yancey, my favorite author. It covers the subject very comprehensively, not only how to pray and what to pray for, but exploring the difficult questions, such as why are some prayers answered and others aren’t? What difference does prayer make? Does it change God?

The Wild Trees by Richard Preston, on the people who have been exploring the canopies of ancient trees – redwoods, sequoias, Douglas firs, eucalyptus – often in tiny, unexplored pockets of virgin forest. These daring explorers of the last frontier on our planet have discovered many new species of plant and animal life – more than there are on the ground.

How Doctors Think by Jerome Groopman, MD, a fascinating and educational description of how doctors form diagnoses and how patients can be more proactive in communicating with their doctors.

God’s Politics by Jim Wallis, on the alternative route the US could have followed aft 9/11 in the light of the Christian imperative to work for peace. Accurately predicted the results of the course followed instead. Offers suggestions for taking back the moral high ground.

Persian Fire: The First World Empire and the Battle for the West by Tom Holland, on Persia’s rise as a world empire, from Darius to Xerses, and the history of the Greek city-states, constantly warring among themselves, but coming together to resist Xerses’ attempt to bring Greece under his dominion.

The Team by Kim Allen Johnson, an exposition of the doctrine of the Trinity and his understanding that the work Jesus entrusted to the church was to reproduce the love and unity of the Trinity, through its characteristics such as creativity, transcendence, incarnation, community, oneness, diversity, doctrines and love.

My Grandfather’s Blessings by Rachel Naomi Remen, Jewish physician, the daughter of secular Jews and granddaughter of a rabbi who emigrated from Russia, sharing in short vignettes the gentle wisdom gleaned from her family and from a lifetime of serving the suffering.

The Inescapable Love of God by Thomas Talbot, a passionate argument for the idea of biblical verses that seem to indicate God’s plan for universal reconciliation. Recommended by Bob Rigsby.

Straight to Jesus: Sexual and Christian Conversions in the Ex-Gay Movement by Tanya Erzen, sociologist and ethnographer, who spent over three years volunteering in the New Hope residential program and conducting many interviews with participants and leaders, as well as those from other ministries and religions, attempting to uncover the various theories and methods of therapy that underlie them. Her compassionate conclusion was that the men were transformed spiritually but not sexually. She exposes how the Christian Right has twisted and used the testimonies of these men in a political attempt to deny gay rights.

Understanding Genesis: Contemporary Adventist Perspectives , Brian Bull, Fritz Guy & Ervin Taylor, Editors. Dedicated to my academy classmate, Peter Hare (son of famed Adventist story-teller Eric B Hare). A thoughtful and provocative effort to mine the first book of the Bible for its true theological meaning and reconcile it with science.

Come Be My Light: the Private Writings of the “Saint of Calcutta” Mother Teresa , Brian Kotodiwjchuk, ed. and commentary. I have long admired Mother Teresa and this book made a great impression on me. At the age of 36, as a Loreto nun in Calcutta, she had three visions, each stronger than the last, in which she heard God’s call to satiate the thirst of Jesus on the cross (which she called a thirst for souls) by leaving the convent and going into the “dark holes” in the slums where India’s poorest of the poor suffered and bringing God’s light to them. Until that time she had felt a deep sense of God’s presence, but from then on she experienced a sense of emptiness and darkness that lasted for the rest of her life, causing her much pain and sorrow, which she kept hidden under a cheerful exterior. She eventually came to believe that she was sharing Jesus’ feelings of abandonment on the cross, and that in those she ministered to she was ministering to Jesus.

We should get a lot of good books suggestions, Daneen. "Who Wrote the Bible" has been by my computer for years as a most handy reference book. He is the one who wrote the article on James L. Kugel's massive book "How to Read the Bible" which I'm anxiously looking forward to receiving from Amazon.

Just finished Groopman's "Second Opinion" and I love his books and articles. So many books, so little time.

Straight to Jesus: Sexual and Christian Conversions in the Ex-Gay Movement by Tanya Erzen, sociologist and ethnographer, who spent over three years volunteering in the New Hope residential program and conducting many interviews with participants and leaders, as well as those from other ministries and religions, attempting to uncover the various theories and methods of therapy that underlie them. Her compassionate conclusion was that the men were transformed spiritually but not sexually.

I have not read Erzen's research, but I'm interested in her ethnographic account and sociological analysis. Does anyone know Adventists who have researched ex-gay communities using a method similar to Erzen's as participant observers? They can help us better understand what homosexuality is and is not.

A reviewer of Erzen's book submits:

"Sexual identity is malleable and changeable," Erzen writes, "because it is completely entwined with religious conversion." Religious conversion and sexual conversion are so linked that participants don't change their sexual orientation so much as commit to a life of "following Jesus."

- "Formerly gay?" Christian Century, May 15, 2007 by Amy Johnson Frykholm

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_10_124/ai_n19328502

PS: I have been re-reading books by the Niebuhr brothers and by Mortimer J. Adler.

Joselito said: "Does anyone know Adventists who have researched ex-gay communities using a method similar to Erzen's as participant observers? They can help us better understand what homosexuality is and is not."

Uh, well, there were all those vulnerable young gay Adventist men who were abused by Colin Cook in his Adventist Church-supported ex-gay live-in community in Reading, PA...

Carrol,

Evidently, the sense you and I use "participant-observer" isn't the same. Our individual preconceptions blur the discussion.

"Erzen offers some of the nuances that we miss when we are focused on the black-and-white politics and the pronouncements of organizational spokespeople. One such nuance is that while heterosexual marriage and biological children are touted as the ideal by many in conservative Christian politics, ex-gay communities actually provide alternative family structures. Ex-gay people build networks of relationships within the ex-gay community, and these relationships provide the friendship, encouragement and spiritual support that many ex-gay people long for."

- "Formerly gay?" Christian Century, May 15, 2007 by Amy Johnson Frykholm

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_10_124/ai_n19328502

The following is a list of the books I read in 2007 - many of which deal with religious issues, particaularly that of the sayings of Jesus Christ, Muhammad, and Siddhartha Gautama; the topics covered have also included the Sabbath, Gay Theology, the history of Christianity, and the Adventist Church. I was also able to read some fiction this past year, which I enjoyed greatly.

Right now the first book that I am reading for this new year is "A History of France: From the Gauls to the Third Republic."

A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam
by: Karen Armstrong

Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time: The Historical Jesus and the Heart of Contemporary Faith
by: Marcus J. Borg

The Lost Gospel Q: The Original Sayings of Jesus
by: Marcus Borg and Thomas Moore

The Sabbath
by: Abraham Joshua Heschel and Susannah Heschel

Abraham : A Journey to the Heart of Three Faiths
by: Bruce Feiler

Going Home: Jesus and Buddha as Brothers
by: Thich Nhat Hanh

Jesus and Muhammad: The Parallel Sayings
by: Sayyid Muhammad Syeed, Joey Green, and Kenneth Atkinson

The Holy Land: An Oxford Archaeological Guide from Earliest Times to 1700 (Oxford Archaeological Guides)
by: Jerome Murphy-O'Connor

365 Dalai Lama: Daily Advice from the Heart
by: Dalai Lama XIV

The Devil and Miss Prym: A Novel of Temptation
by: Paulo Coelho

Seeking a Sanctuary: Seventh-day Adventism and the American Dream
by: Malcolm Bull and Keith Lockhart

Harvest for Hope: A Guide to Mindful Eating
by: Jane Goodall, Gary McAvoy, and Gail Hudson

The Passover Plot
by: Hugh J. Schonfield

Running with Scissors: A Memoir
by: Augusten Burroughs

Jesus and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings
by: Marcus Borg and Jack Kornfield

The Kite Runner
by: Khaled Hosseini

The Muslim Jesus: Sayings and Stories in Islamic Literature
by: Tarif Khalidi

A New Christianity for a New World: Why Traditional Faith is Dying & How a New Faith is Being Born
by: John Shelby Spong

Taking a Chance on God: Liberating Theology for Gays, Lesbians, and Their Lovers, Families, and Friends
by: John J. McNeill

This is great fun talking about favorite books.
Three that were given to me over the holidays are:
God Laughs and Plays by David James Duncan -- I notice that he includes in this an interview with him that was done for Scanner, the publication that came out of Glendale Church a number of years ago.
Three Cups of Tea by Greg Mortenson and David Oliver Relin -- the story of the mountain climber turned school developer has me eagerly awaiting that nightly time of reading before sleep.
Flame of Yahweh, Sexuality in the Old Testament by Richard M. Davidson -- a major tome with 658 pages of text and then over two hundred pages of bibliography, references, and sources by Andrews University Professor Dick Davidson. I'm curious if anyone else has taken a look at it and would be willing to comment.

Joselito, my comment was meant tongue-in-cheek.

Great list! I posted mine at my book blog, Compulsive Overreader. Your number #1 and #2 were my #1 and #2 but in reverse order. Good taste! I think those were the only crossovers on our lists, but A Thousand Splendid Suns, which is on your to-read list, was in my Top Ten.

http://compulsiveoverreader.wordpress.com/2007/12/26/my-top-ten-books-of...

Ooooh, thanks everybody! Trudy, I wish I could loosen up on fiction - I do read some, but always feel guilty. You see, my mother told me that reading fiction would turn my mind into a sieve and I wouldn't be able to remember anything, and sure enough, at the age of 71, that's just what has happened! Anyway, I've already found enough interesting titles here to keep me busy for the next two years at least!

Hi Trudy--Great list. Thanks for the suggestions. I am relishing my next few months of reading.

Raymond, you mentioned books my two of my favorite authors: Karen Armstrong (I have more than half a dozen of hers) and John Shelby Spong, also more than half a dozen. Books with provocative, new ideas are so appealing; much more so than those by apologists.

Thanks, Daneen, I think you'll like that A Thousand Splendid Suns focuses on female characters while The Kite Runner had male ones. It wasn't as gripping, but still a good read to show the culture and character of the country through its humanity.

I am reading right now "The Language of God," by Francis S. Collins, the renowned man in charge of the Human Genome project, and I need tome help.

In Chapter Five, he argues that what he learned from his observations regarding the DNA sequencing, forced him to reject the "Common Design" response to the evolutionary "Common Descent" explanation of human origin.

How can I, a non scientist, defend the biblical notion running from Genesis through Revelation indicating that human beings were the direct result of God's creative work, and not of a long protracted evolutionary process, with death existing for millions of years before the appearance of homo sapiens?

How can I explain Jesus' mission to save humanity from eternal death, if death was not the result of Adam's sin? Can anyone respond to Collins arguments and provide some scientific evidence showing that his reasoning is faulty?

Nic--

The simple answer: reject the idea that evolution is is any way compatible with Christianity. Be an evolutionist, be a Christian, but don't fool yourself into thinking you can be both. One automatically, almost a priori (or at least analytically) excludes the other.

Cliff

Not a book I've read yet but one that caught my eye in a WSJ review today and might be an interesting read..."Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning." by Jonah Goldberg.

Nic, a quick answer to your question if one can give a reasonable SCIENTIFIC rebuttal to common descent is no, not at this time. One can raise all sorts of philosophical objections but there is not any viable scientific alternative at this time that even comes close to matching the explanatory power of common descent with modification. You can certainly fight it theologically but it has been supported by over a hundred years of research and has only got stronger with current data. I want to emphasize, you asked if there was a SCIENTIFIC rebuttal. No. Are there theological complications. Yes.

Cliff

It has been said that to every question there is a simple answer that is usually wrong.
For someone who is not involved in biology it is easy to dismiss the huge amount of data that has been generated over the last 15 years in the genome project as of no consequence and simply the product of science so called.
Based on the same principles used forensically for DNA testing it is now clear that there can be only two conclusions for a fundamentalist christian. Either man and non-human primates are related by descent or God has created man by divine fiat in such a way as to make it appear that evolution of man has occurred. You may be happy with a God who plays games of deceit but most serious scientists who claim to be Christians are not and will attempt to honestly reconcile their life of faith with the biological realities as they understand them. Such men as Peter Hare to whom the book "Understanding Genesis" is dedicated have grappled with the dilemma of reconciling Christian tradition and their original research in science. Are you suggesting that he should not be considered a Christian?

Nic

I suggest it may be more productive, rather than trying to find the fault in Collin's logic, to consider; have we correctly interpreted a book written in an historical context over 2000 yrs ago to a prescientific people? The christian church and Adventism has only to look at history to see that we have perhaps at times erred in interpretation. The Catholic response to Copernicus and Adventisms "Shut door" theory as revealed to Ellen White are but 2 examples.
Understanding Genesis is one attempt to avoid repetition of such errors.

Folks like Collins and the whole scientific community have for so long imbibed of the evolutionary paradigm that they automatically, by default, intepret everything in the paradigm. Could there not be another explanation that explains the links, one that has utterly nothing to do with evolution? I bet there is but these folks can't seem to entertain the idea, can they?

Cliff

Cliff, have you read The Language of God and Understanding Genesis? Because you can't really be informed and unbiased unless you are willing to look at honest attempts to reconcile what is known through the "book of nature" and what the Bible says.

Cliff, you are trying to find a fundamentalist Christian answer to a scientific question. What makes you think that is a possibility? Where can one find such evidence that will agree with scientists?

Attempting to reconcile any of the creation stories told by people thousands of years ago cannot answer the questions raised by today's much more educated scientists. You may, like Sisyphus, keep trying, but also without the success you're seeking. Reading the Bible so literally, is no different than reading Shakespeare or Joseph Conrad and demanding that they be "literally true." Did the Hebrews who told these stories even question whether they were factual, or were they telling a symbolic truth that was far more profound?

I think it is true that the scientific community is immersed in the evolutionary paradigm and not looking for fundamentally different options at this point. But that is not bad. As a research programme (term from Imre Lakatos), evolution has been spectacularly successful and continues to advance in a non ad-hoc way (see, especially, evolutionary developmental biology). It may one day falter and be ripe for revolution, but evolution is still going strong so far.

One of my favorite books this year was Sean Carroll's "Endless Forms Most Beautiful," which is an introduction to evolutionary developmental biology.

Another favorite was Nancey Murphy's "Theology in The Age of Scientific Reasoning," in which she makes a very interesting proposal for theology practiced as a science using Lakatos's ideas about the philosophy of science.

Was Jesus the pinnacle of human evolution or are we still getting better?
Also, has science completely ruled out his ressurection? If so, what becomes of Christianity?

Many thanks,

Why should science even consider the Resurrection? It is not a subject for consideration by the scientific community. It is a theological, not a scientific proposition.

Both Cliff and Nic reveal a troubling approach to learning on this issue.

Instead of weighing facts, they work to interpret information in light of their existing theory. Nic's plea expresses this common tendency well, asking for a rebuttal as the Collins reading causes him to have to rethink other frameworks for interpreting the world.

Of course, everyone does this at some level, the difference comes down to comprehension of facts. It takes a lot of work to keep going back to the assumptions behind ideas while also keeping the big theoretical picture in mind.

Cliff/Nic curse the data in light of the implications for the big picture, while atheists treat the data as the whole picture. Cliff/Nic are right in realizing the big picture has to be reevaluated in light of the facts of evolution, just Christians did with slavery, astronomy (Calvin never accepted the heliocentric model) or women in leadership or now with global warming.

In a year of opposition, I have never seen Cliff actually marshal serious evidence, just as one reading through Nic's "dissertation" can see the care with which he evaluates data. If one has doubts, read through the arguments on the old blog.

Asking "could there be another explanation" is a recursive hope, not an argument. And this hope that one can avoid paradigmatic charge, that the mass of evidence would be washed away from the flood or geo-gap fuels all sorts of wacky apologetics -- from sophists (Dr. Veith, Dr. Hovind) hitting the church circuit to the plethora of popular rebuttal literature. But note their approach, it focuses on gaps rather than the weight of evidence, missing the fact that every theory has gaps (humans ain't perfect), but science creates explanatory models.

I have a feeling this won't be the last night that we hit on this topic, we do hope that we'll move from quick comment big picture apologetics to the hard work of weighing evidence. I think that antifoundationalism helps us integrate data and worldviews, but until people face the facts clear-eyed, there's no point in talking Truth.

Cliff

Your implication that Collins and the scientific community are dishonest and brainwashed is offensive to anyone involved in this enterprise. Do you not think we have seriously considered the alternatives? You seem to suggest that the alternatives are clear and compelling. If one honestly considers the paucity of alternative explanations proposed by creationism and its latest iteration ID I am afraid one is more than underwhelmed. This alternative is of blindly following a nebulous idea with no empirical or experimental data to support it and no real "theory of creation" that can be tested. This alternative is a very religious gestalt proposed by men of questionable integrity [see Creationsism Trojan Horse by Barbara Forrest the Paul Gross for documentation] that start from a preconceived idea and then attempt to selectively construe the facts to that preconception.
Which approach has greater integrity? To honestly search for an explanation without preconceived conclusions or make observations fit the conclusions however ill that fit.

Elaine: your comment is well taken, of course "science" is uninterested (and dismissive) of the ressurection. But I am very interested in it, and, as a Christian, can it be a fact for me (or a "Truth" as Alex asks)? Or is a theological proposition only an idea that has only a poetic or philosophical relationship to facts?
thanks,

Why would a Christian NEED scientific validation for the Resurrection? Is faith in it insufficient and evidence by scientific verification still needed? Is a Christian so insecure in his faith that he needs something more?

If a lover needs validation and consent from others to approve and acknowledge that his love is genuine, does that seem totally unnecessary; and how secure is he in his love?

One thing that struck me when I was reading The Language of God was Collins' discussion of the temperament of scientists--they tend to be individualistic, sometime ornery folks who pride themselves on new ways of thinking. If there were obvious flaws in the common descent model, scientists are not the type to "hold the fort"--they would blow it open and line up for their prizes. That's how their reward system works.

I agree Alex that we all start with a worldview and then examine the evidence. This is, of course, how it always works, and the challenge is to recognize our own assumptions (and those of others) so that our worldview can actually be modified when appropriate--a difficult and confusing process at the best of times.

P.S. I just wanted to direct folks to Dr. Wagner's very thoughtful review of The Language of God (it's what prompted me to bring it down from the shelf and finally read it).
http://spectrummagazine.org/reviews/book_reviews/2007/11/16/language_god

For anyone who liked "Language of God" I wanted to recommend another book that has been out a big longer. "Finding Darwin's God" by Kenneth Miller I personally think is a better book. Miller is a very articulate teacher and lecturer and he does a great job laying out the foundation for evolution and explaining how his Christian beliefs intersect. If you search his name on YouTube you will find several lectures that are fascinating. While Collins is very much respected for his scientific work, he has been roundly criticized for his "God of the Gaps" attempt to justify God. Miller does a much better job and is more consistent with his arguments. And honestly, while I find Miller's theological arguments rather unsatisfying, at least they fit. I found myself getting irritated with Collins whose does not seem familiar with the research on the evolution of altruism and morality. And he's awfully casual with the theological ramifications of evolution.

I have read all the comments of those who have tried to help me figure out what to do with Collins’ arguments favoring a marriage between evolution and Christianity. I agree with Cliff that evolution and Christianity are mutually exclusive. I cannot reconcile two diametrically opposed worldviews. The Bible paints a picture of a fallen humanity in need of divine help.

Collins tells me that such help is unavailable. God created the universe, provided the fine tuning for its existence, and then let it develop and evolve at random. This sounds like an absent, deadbeat father, who limits his activity to procreation. This is not the picture of God I get from the Bible and from Jesus Christ.

Collins sounds like an honest scientist and an honest seeker of God, but he seems to have a terrible blind spot, which prevents him from realizing that the picture of the God he worships is a pitiful caricature of the God revealed by Jesus Christ. If humans are the result of a long protracted evolutionary random process, with death existing for millions of years before the appearance of Homo Sapiens, then sin and salvation is a mere figment of my own imagination, and I have no need of a Savior.

If Collins is right, I see no reason to hope for a resurrection and a future eternal life with God and those I love; I will never see again my dear parents or my lovely daughter who died in a car accident twelve years ago. Collins’ science will never allow me to fulfill my dreams of a life free from suffering, disappointment and loss. This life is all I will get for all my effort at living a decent and honest life. The many sacrifices I have made for the sake of humanity will loose all their meaning the day I am gone.

Beth tells me that there is no scientific alternative to evolution at the present time. Perhaps she is right, but I believe in science. I believe that science is possible thanks to the Creator of life. I cannot show where Collins went wrong in his blatant rejection of the Common Design alternative to Darwin’s Common Descent theory because I am not a scientist. Nevertheless, I do believe and hope that someone who understands the intricacies of the DNA and the Human Genome Project will eventually discover where Collins went wrong.

Cameron tells me that finding fault with Collin’s logic is not productive. I have a hard time accepting this. If God is the author of science, then the facts of science, interpreted correctly should agree with the main message of the Bible, which point to a Creator, to a fall from grace, and to salvation through Jesus Christ. The Bible may contain scientific minor errors, but it cannot be wrong regarding the science of salvation.

Cliff tells me that Collins is blinded by his past experience and cannot see but a connection between his faith in God and his belief in evolution. This means that he is misinterpreting the scientific facts. If this is true, then someone who understands the Human Genome and DNA should be able to provide me with the correct interpretation of those scientific facts.

Elaine tells me that reading Genesis literally does not help. I am not trying to do that. What I am saying is that the Bible, from Genesis through Revelation teaches me one main lesson: Homo Sapiens was the result of a direct creation by God, he rebelled against heaven, and God sent his Son to save humanity from eternal death. If the Bible is wrong on this central issue, then there is no hope for humanity.

I agree with Tim who believes that evolution may be going strong today, but the day will come when a revolution will take place. I think that Christian scientists have a duty to hasten to coming of such a day when evolution will be replaced with revolution. Notice that for this to happen all we need to do is to add an “r” to “evolution.”

Gerard wonders whether science has ruled out the resurrection. I believe that if humanity is the outcome of a long protracted evolution with death and suffering taking place for thousands of years before the appearance of Homo Sapiens, then sin and salvation looses its meaning, and resurrection makes no sense. Elaine suggests that resurrection has nothing to do with science. True, but we should not allow science to destroy our faith in God’s promised resurrection. Resurrection is the undoing of the original sin. If original sin is a myth, then the resurrection is a myth as well!

Alexander claims that both Nic and Cliff are cursing the scientific date. I cannot accept this. I am not cursing the data, but rather asking someone to interpret the data correctly for me. Gerard tells me that Collins is honest. No doubt. There are many honest people who have been deceived by the Great Deceiver. I agree with Gerhard that the resurrection is not mere poetry, but rather a sure promise by the one who keeps his promises. He promised to come the first time, and he did, knowing that he would suffer. Why would he fail to keep his promise to come back to reap the fruits of his labor?

Elaine says that there is not need to validate the resurrection. True, but there is a need to validate the fact that the resurrection is the logical corollary for the plan of salvation, which was a response to sin and rebellion. Evolution ignores both.

Nic,

It's been awhile since I read Collins' book but I wanted to point out that he is an evangelical and has, in no way, rejected the idea that humanity is lost and in need of a Savior, that the Savior was Jesus, that Jesus was crucified, rose again, and that God will come again to establish a perfect kingdom. All of these concepts are perfectly valid to believe along with evolution. Here are the premises that science (not necessarily evolution) overturns:

1) That the earth is less than 4 billion years old. The evidence is beyond overwhelming and that comes from geology and physics though TofE (theory of evolution) confirms it as well.
2) That all of life appeared suddenly, a few thousand years ago, in its more or less present form. Again, the evidence is simply so strong against this hypothesis that the likelihood of it being confirmed is nil. Even if there is a scientific revolution that overturned the TofE, the new theory would not confirm the young earth, six day hypothesis because it has been completely and thoroughly discredited.
3) That there was no death on the earth before humans arrived. It is absolutely clear that things were dying before we arrived. Any attempt to interpret the fossil record differently simply makes a mockery of science. This will not be overturned any more than the theory that the earth orbits the sun will be overturned.

So what does a Christian do with that? It is helpful to know what science can comment on (see above) and what it can't. Science can say that there is no doubt things were dying before we arrived but it cannot say that the entire concept of human sin is therefore falsified. I mean look at us! We sin! All the time! We are in desperate need of salvation. It disproves the idea that every bad thing that happens on this earth is a direct result of a literal Adam and Eve eating an apple, but it has nothing to say about how we sin now. Science can say nothing about the concept that God took human form 2000 years ago, died, and rose from the dead. It can say nothing about a God that tenderly intervenes in our lives either. I believe we get into trouble when we start to insist that those interventions are demonstrable scientifically, but I can still believe that when I pray and practice the presence of God that my behavior changes. I can't prove that it is God doing it and noone can prove that it isn't. I have faith that it is.

As for rejecting the Theory of Design, science rejects it because it is not a scientific theory, not because it is necessarily wrong. It is untestable and cannot be falsified. How would one prove that a "Great Designer" didn't do it when Christians believe that God is capable of anything? One can argue, as Collins does, that there are big questions about why a Designer would design to give the results we see. You cannot prove that God did not intervene in the evolutionary process but to accept that God did raises all sorts of other questions. Scientists jump up and down over ID because it claims to be a scientific theory when it is not.

I understand that it is a really big shift in thinking from the traditional Christian paradigm but please don't think that you have to throw it all out. There is much that science is inadequate to address and one does not have to become a deist. Collins certainly isn't.

And I'm so sorry about your daughter. What a terrible thing for a parent to go through. A big reason I am a Christian is the promise of a God that will make things right. I worship a God who has shown that death is not the end and that is mind-boggling to a world so saturated with it. God bless you and guide you in your searching.

These comments and various lists challenged me to examine what I had been reading this past year in leisure time, absent devotional material. Many of these books were read for background in several books I have written. Others for bedside reading or travel assignments. Not in any particular order:

1. Seeking a Sanctuary, Bull and Lockhart
2. American Creation, Joseph Ellis
4. Presidential Courage, Michael Bescloss
5. Arminian Theology, Roger Olson
6. American Gospel, Jon Meacham
7. The Case for Christ, Lee Strobel
8. Morning on Horseback, David McCullogh
9. Augustine, James O'Donnell
10. Houdini, Kalush and Sloman
11. A Train to Potenka, Mike Ramsdell
12. The Language of God, Francis Collins
13. Surprise by Jesus, Tim Stafford
14. Apocalypse, Eugen Weber
15. The Nature of the Atonement, Boyd, etal.

My hobbies, obviously, are the remarkable yesrs, 1770-1800, and the excitement of studying the world views that are in combat among seminal Christian theologians. For sheer diversion, I am a World War II nut with shelves of stuff on famous battles and decisive moments. Let's all keep thinking, letting the Holy Spirit lead us along. Herb Douglass herbdouglass@sbcglobal.net

I think this creation/evolution debate has gotten a bit off-topic. I understand the segue, but I think it has become more involved than is necessary for this article on books people have liked. That debate is alive and well other places on this site and countless other Christian blogs and websites where more scientists visit. Nic, it is my opinion that there are some views not represented by this particular mix of respondents. Good questions, though. God is leading your search for truth.

In 2007 I especially appreciated (and now recommend to you) the following:

1. Let My People Go Surfing (Yvon Chouinard)
2. This Beautiful Mess (Rick McKinley)
3. Faith Works (Jim Wallis)
4. Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger (Ron Sider)
5. The Speed of Trust (Stephen M.R. Covey)
6. Walking with the Poor (Bryant Myers)
7. The 8th Habbit (Stephen R. Covey)
8. God is My Success (Larry Julian)
9. Leadership and Self Deception (Arbinger Institute)
10. Lead Like Jesus (Ken Blanchard)
11. The Equipping Church (Sue Mallory)
12. Simple Church (Rainer & Geiger)
13. Sex God (Rob Bell)

Currently Reading:
14. The End of Poverty (Jeffrey Sachs)
15. Seeking Peace (Johann Christoph Arnold)

Wish List for 2008 and beyond:
1. Culture Jam (Kalle Lasn)
2. Design Anarchy (Kalle Lasn)
3. Natural Capitalism (Hawkins & Lovins)
4. Beyond Growth (Herman Daly)
5. The Externally Focused Church (Rusaw & Swanson)
6. Churches That Make a Difference (Sider, Olson & Unruh)
7. The Church of Irresistible Influence (Lewis & Wilkins)
8. For the Beauty of the Earth (Steven Bouma-Prediger)
9. Serve God, Save the Planet (Matthew Sleeth)
10. The Drama of Scripture (Bartholomew & Goheen)
11. Less Than Two Dollars a Day (Kent Van Til)
12. Compassion, Justice and the Christian Life (Robert Lupton)
13. Red Letters (Tom Davis)
14. Practical Justice (Kevin Blue)
15. Swimming Against the Current (Chris Blake)
16. Disruptive Religion (Christian Smith)
17. Consuming Faith (Tom Beaudoin)
18. Jesus The Jewish Theologian (Brad Young)
19. Read the Bible for a Change (Ray Lubeck)
20. Bird by Bird (Anne Lamott)

The other 16 pages of my Amazon Wish List will have to wait for 2009. With all the great suggestions here, it could expand yet another page.

Also, Rob Bell is going to be coming out with another book. Rumor is that it will discuss the new exodus. That will have to be added near the top of my list.

Daneen, any chance of a similar thread for films and documentaries people have valued over the past year? Is there already one posted I just haven't seen?

Somehow I completely missed Beth's comments. My apologies, Beth. Some of your thoughts were what I perceived as missing from the conversation, but I don't have the credentials or clarity of thought to present such ideas. Thus, I simply pointed out that there was more to be said without saying any of it. Even now, I'm sure there is still evidence missing on both sides.

And now back to lists and descriptions of books...

Hi Jeff--there is indeed such a list! It was on the home page, but now you just have to click the "Reviews" tab at the top and scroll down (come to think of it, we could improve that navigation). Here's the direct link though:
http://spectrummagazine.org/reviews/film_reviews/2007/12/31/top_10_films...

Please do add your favorites.

Daneen, I tried to leave a Top Films comment, but it hasn't posted. Any advice for me? Thanks.

Jeff: You are right. There is a more suitable place for my comments regarding Collins' book, "The Language of God." For this reason, I posted my response to Beth there.

Beth:Because I felt that Jeff's objection was reasonable, I did post my answer to your comments on another place in Spectrum. You will find it under the article entitled "The Language of God." The Internet link is: http://spectrummagazine.org/reviews/book_reviews/2007/11/16/language_god.... Thank you for taking the time to respond to my previous posting!

Bonnie, one of the first books I got from the library as a result of reading this blog was one you suggested: God Laughs and Plays. I've read about a third so far. Interesting to note that his well-documented rant against evangelical and fundamentalist Christians has its roots in his experience growing up Adventist.

I am reminded of my totally Adventist education by his statement: "Possessing little knowledge of or regard for the world's wealth of religious, literary, spiritual, and cultural traditions, fundamentalist leaders allow themselves no concept of love or compassion but their own."