The Veritas Forum: The Language of God (Francis Collins)

The author of Genesis makes a distinction between the "nefesh" and the "neshama". The nefesh is the spirit which pervades all living beings, but the neshama is given only to human beings for, in my view, the sake of divine providence.

But at the same time, WE, along with all other animals, are made from the "adamah", the physical earth. The earth is a remnant of the Tohu and Bohu which were used to form it 'in the beginning'. Interestingly, all matter is star dust.

I think that one of the reasons Christianity is diverse today is that it has been forced this way by the advancement of scientific knowledge, which has made many of the more supernatural accounts of the Bible seem all the more far fetched. As a result, you have different sects believing in this but not that. Question, don't most Christians believe in the resurrection? If so, I find it hard to understand how a scientist can believe.

Yeah, advancement of scientific knowledge may be the cause of some of the diversity, but there are other factors also, which are social, theological and interpretive factors as well. Take the example of the Arian and Athanasian controversy, the Nestorian controvery, the Great Schism, the Protestant Reformation, the Catholic Reformation, the birth of Restorationism, and the rebirth of Christian Universalism in modern times.

Yes, you are right.

And I correct myself in that Dr. Collins DID mention the Resurrection in his presentation, but very briefly.

Yes, most Christians do believe in the Resurrection in some way, shape, or form. As do I believe in the Resurrection, but that's not to take in the fact that the four versions of the Resurrection can ALL be true while contradictions may be present. The overall meaning of the Resurrection is clear.

"If so, I find it hard to understand how a scientist can believe."

You know, ever since I read that science humbles itself and that it doesn't claim to have all the answers, it encouraged me to actually be one. Science, unlike some religions, is willing to go through changes of perspective on different topics, revising or building upon older hypotheses. If you are a scientist who has been convinced of a God, how much more His awesome power?!

because you believe that Science is the handy work of God, if you are a Christian Scientist like Francis Collins. So you think logically if God is the auther of Science is it really that hard for such a being to overwrite his own handy work? The answer is No.

Secular life may suck for some but it does not suck for me and for many other secularists I know and associate with. There is enough awe inspiring reality in this world to satisfy me without having to appeal to some supernatural dimension. I would hardly call Carl Sagan "pissy and negative", would you?

But at the same time, strict Atheism, as I understand it, dies hard in the presence of data and LOGIC presented by those representing the BioLogos. The Anthropic Principle, among others, is one that can be applied in these areas of research, but also quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle, refuting scientific determinism, and therefore, a deist aspect of God.

I'd like to comment on one of the questions posed by a young man in the audience, the one about the spiritual worth of non-human animals. I was hoping Dr. Collins would say more on this, but didn't mention much about that "spiritual gift" that God so instilled within our species, requiring full consciousness, free will, reason, judgement and spiritual hunger.

Schroeder, however, addresses this in presenting the original Hebrew words of Genesis 2:7. It is summed up in one word, "neshama".