What do you think?
Rate this book
Christianity and Science
This Companion to Theologian Herman Bavinck’s Christian Worldview Explores Christianity’s Contributions to Higher Education After writing his well-known book Christian Worldview , Dutch Calvinist theologian and scholar Herman Bavinck focused his attention on how the Christian faith benefits higher learning, particularly religious studies, natural sciences, and the humanities. Christianity and Science explores the pros and cons of Christian science and features brief, informative sections on the natural sciences, the humanities, theological science and religious studies, the doctrine of revelation, the benefits of Christianity for scholarship, and what it means to develop a Christian university. Responding to the challenges of the modern age, Bavinck recognizes the significance of faith in education. Edited and translated in English for the first time by N. Gray Sutanto, James Eglinton, and Cory C. Brock, this fundamental work will inspire Christian teachers, practitioners, and seminarians in their pursuits.
240 pages, Hardcover
Published August 29, 2023
9 people are currently reading
166 people want to read
About the author
Herman Bavinck
110 books190 followersHerman Bavinck (1854-1921) succeeded Abraham Kuyper as professor of systematic theology at the Free University of Amsterdam in 1902.
His nephew was Johan Herman Bavinck.
His nephew was Johan Herman Bavinck.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
January 24, 2024
For Bavinck, Christianity and science need not be reconciled - they're already true friends. Bavinck's view of the sciences puts them in the wider framework of God's work in the world, effectively offering them a far more dignified position than simple positivism could ever afford them. The editors wonderfully describe this setting alongside of religion and science as "the gift of neighborliness" (38). Per usual, Bavinck's capacious, irenic, and generous theology shows us a better way, a world-and-life view that trades dogmatism for dogmatics.
October 19, 2023
“At present, the love of truth is in a poor state among people. It is absolutely not a virtue that is innate in all by nature. In daily life, we continually learn by experience that the truth is sacrificed to self-interest. Those who devote themselves to science are usually no exception to this rule.”
Okay, so this book is not for everyone.
And I don’t think I’m the target audience. I had seen Herman Bavinck quoted in a lot of books so when I saw that Crossway was putting out a translated book of his called Christianity and Science, I was intrigued.
But it wasn’t what I was expecting to be reading.
For one, it’s very challenging to read just in the writing style and vocabulary. I think the translators did a good job, but it was just a bit dense and hard to follow for the average reader. Plus I was not familiar with many of the references in the book. There were footnotes to help with that, but I quickly grew tired of also reading the footnotes.
Secondly, I think I was expecting more of a conversational style book on how Christians should interact with science. Today it’s a normal claim to make that Christians ‘don’t believe’ in science or that Christianity is at odds with it.
I was hoping for more of a discussion on that. Which there was some of that I think. I just honestly am not sure how much of the book I was truly grasping.
The editor says in a note at the beginning, “While many secularized Westerners continue to ponder the place of religion in a scientific world, Bavinck’s text challenges us to invert this perspective and learn, instead, to ponder the place of science in a religious world.”
Another important note from the editor gives more background on what Bavinck means when he uses the term science: “The Dutch term is broader in scope and encompasses all higher forms of reflective, critical knowledge… To Bavinck, the question of whether a scientist or a theologian speaks with greater authority would make little sense: to him theology is a science, belongs in the university of the sciences, and is practiced by scientists.”
Who is Herman Bavinck?
“Herman Bavinck formerly professor of dogmatics at the Free University of Amsterdam, and author of the magisterial four-volume Reformed Dogmatics… widely regarded as a modern classic in the Christian literary canon.”
He was a Dutch theologian who died in 1921 and was known for his Calvinist beliefs.
A few other notes on this book:
- It is a companion to Bavinck’s book titled Christian Worldview.
- There is often the Dutch word given in parentheses— apparently for greater clarity for those who know the Dutch language, but I feel like those people would probably just read the entire book in Dutch.
- The book itself looks nice, but it has a textured cover and for some reason retains some fingerprints making it look dirty.
One of the main philosophies of thought that Bavinck critiques is positivism.
“In Bavinck’s view, positivism was marked by a naive belief that empirical science is somehow neutral, objective, and presuppositionless— for which reason, positivists saw their approach to science as uniquely authoritative.”
So Bavinck talks about how no philosophy is truly neutral and that actually, if science is the pursuit of truth, then it falls back on the Christian concept of absolute truth. He also comments on the requirements of faith in both Christianity and in science (which includes history, literature, etc.)
“Concepts such as thing, property, cause, effect, law, condition, time, space, truth, falsehood, and more are assumed as realities despite their invisibility. Thus, faith is required to maintain objectivity.”
Positivism isn’t as largely held anymore as it was in Bavinck’s time. Today the philosophy is postmodernism. The reaches of this ideology is explored very interestingly in the book Cynical Theories (Cynical Theories is definitely a book I would recommend. It’s not a Christian book. It’s just a book that looks at critical theories’ origins and impact today which does overlap some with the principles in Bavinck’s book). In Cynical Theories, the authors say,
“The central themes of postmodernism include doubting that any human truth provides an objective representation of reality, focusing on language and the way societies use it to create their own local realities, and denying the universal.”
“Knowledge, truth, meaning, and morality are therefore, according to postmodernist thinking, culturally constructed and relative products of individual cultures, none of which possess the necessary tools or terms to evaluate the others.”
In Bavinck’s book there is a lot of discussion on how we come to know things. What is a valid way of ‘knowing’ or ‘learning.’ Positivism says science, but postmodernist thought even rejects that. Postmodernist thought questions whether or not objective knowledge or truth can be obtained at all. It also points to systems of power as controlling or deciding what can be known or how. This bleeds into critical theory and a whole host of other things.
So there are definitely still things to be learned from this book, but as to direct application to American society and culture, I’m not sure if positivism is the biggest ideology at work around us today.
“Research justice- acts upon the belief that science, reason, empiricism, objectivity, universality, and subjectivity have been overvalued as ways of obtaining knowledge while emotion, experience, traditional narratives and customs, and spiritual beliefs have been undervalued.” [Cynical Theories]
One example of how postmodern thought rejects science is given in Fat Studies that reject the science of the unhealthiness of obesity. We also see it in the rejection of the simple anatomy of two genders and their belief in the fluidity of gender in general.
I think there are two attacks on science today: the postmodern left who thinks that objective knowledge and the use of science is a construct for power, and then some sects of the right that think science undermines God and the Bible.
But as Christians we should know that science can’t undermine God. Science is ultimately the discovery of God and his truth and his creation. Everything must be tested against God’s Word— we don’t blindly accept all science, but we also don’t blindly reject it.
Some of the main points of Bavinck’s book (to my far less educated mind) are: a critique of positivism’s claims that science is an unbiased authority on truth and reality; that science is dependent on the concept of absolute truth which is founded in Christianity; argues for Christian education.
Some chapters were harder to read than others. One of the hardest to understand chapters was ‘Consequences of the Verdict’ and one of the easiest to read chapters was ‘The Blessing of Christianity for Science.’
Recommendation
I don’t think the average reader will enjoy reading this unless they are particularly interested in Herman Bavinck’s writing, used to reading old theological writings, or highly interested in an argument for Christian education.
I feel like I’m fairly well-versed in theology, but this was just pretty difficult to get through and requires some time— which frankly, I wasn’t really interested in putting in right now. If you’re willing to reread a lot of sections as well as the footnotes and are devoted to really understanding the writing, then you’ll be able to get out of it a lot more than I did.
If you’re looking for a book you can pick up here and there and easily grasp what the author is saying, this probably isn’t for you.
Also, I’m not super confident in my ability to summarize this book for you, so I would read more than my review when deciding whether or not to take this book on.
Even though my understanding of Christianity and Science is a bit spotty, here is a compilation of quotes that may give you a taste of some of the things you’ll find within.
Quotes
Here were some quotes that stood out to me:
“Philosophy is not in a position to make known the truth we need, not so much because the faculty of reason is so weak and limited but because the human being is so corrupted by sin. One’s pride, one’s self-love in particular, stands in the way of the discovery of truth.”
“Subjective sincerity is not proof of objective truth”.
“This is now the general prevailing concept of science. It is true that people give little or no consideration to the “epistemology” to which they are committed. They take it for granted that the concept of science is fixed and has been elevated above all criticisms and thus they are amazed when someone draws the correctness of this concept into doubt or earnestly disputes them. They are imprisoned in the dogma of the theory of presuppositionless science and hold it to be absolute, though they declare everything else to be relative.”
“There is a hatred against God and religion, against Christ and Scripture, against church and confession, which often clouds the clearest mind and confuses the most lucid thinking.”
“The first thing that advocates of this view [positivism] have to learn is that their definition of science is just one alongside others.. we must always remember that our view is not the only one in the world, and that, in addition to ours, there are others that have equal rights in the practice of life. If we do not recognize this, we become intolerant and exclusive, and we are not far from striving to suppress all others with violence.”
“The struggle for the liberation of higher education is precisely against the monopoly of scientific knowledge from a single direction, and has no other goal than to ensure that the various directions in science can freely wrestle with one another in society, and that competition is not rendered impossible through the granting of state privileges to one but not the other.”
“It is not acceptable to say beforehand that a person sets to work in scientific research without prejudice and proceeds from nothing but sensible or internally observable facts and phenomena, and yet from the outset continually brings along all sorts of assumptions that are not the fruit of empiricism but rather have a philosophical and metaphysical character.”
“[science] cannot strive against religion, against morality, against art… it can never bring forth and may never destroy [life].”
“We are not animals but humans— reasonable, moral, religious, aesthetic beings. The awareness of truth, goodness, and beauty is implanted in our nature; the distinction between true and untrue, between good and evil, between justice and injustice, between godless and pious is just as fixed in our consciousness as the distinction between light and dark, between day and night, between sour and sweet, between sound and silence, between use and destruction, between welcome and unwelcome. We would have to eliminate human nature itself if we wanted to rid ourselves of this awareness.”
“The purpose of science is to expand and correct ordinary knowledge.”— Julius Kaftan
“Art, religion, state, society, law, [and] morality are always subject to the direction of the age; it is a miracle when the practitioners of science make an exception to this [rule].”
“The practice of science needs not only a sharp view, a clear head, a diligent zeal, a good method, and a focused investigation. At the same time, it also demands a creative imagination, a gifted intuition, a surprising divination.. It has been the geniuses, not only in art but also in science, who have been given first place.”
“If religion is objective truth, then it is clear that religions that emerge among humankind cannot all be true to the same degree. Religions have this idiosyncratic quality, distinct from, for example, languages, in that they stand directly opposed to one another, in that one regards as lies what another counts as truth…”
“There is no science of religion in general unless God exists, is knowable, and has revealed himself. It is thus untrue and superficial if one person says to another ‘You are dogmatic, but we are scientific; you are prejudiced and sectarian, but in my research I set to work wholly objectively and accept nothing other than by evidence.”
“The concept of science did not arise through Christianity. The whole history of humankind has been a search for truth… [science] did not offer unity; it did not satisfy the heart. The world in all its wisdom did not know God. Christianity then saved science. The gospel was the proclamation of an eternal, undeniable, indubitable truth, which was revealed in Christ.”
“The tacit assumption of all science is that there is a sovereign, unchangeable truth, and that it is knowable to the human being… In Christianity, the truth is not a subjective idea, not the mutual relations of human ideas, but, rather, it is an objective reality that stands high above and yet remains accessible to the human being. Through this, science is given a fixed, strong, and essential foundation. For if there is no certainty to be had in matters of religion and morality and in respect tot he unseen, spiritual things, science loses a great deal of its value. It runs the risk also of falling prey of skepticism in other fields and is threatened with decay and ruin as a whole.”
“Sharp self-criticism and stern self-denial are necessary in order to remain faithful to the truth and not deny or falsify it by the craftiness of the heart. There is much truth we do not want because it is in conflict with our lives.”
“If there is no supernatural, if God is not to be thought of other than as the “personification” of natural laws, if there is no higher power than that which works in nature, then the human spirit is subjugated to matter, the religious-ethical life loses its foundation, and belief in the triumph of the good is a vain dream.”
**Received a copy via Crossway in exchange for an honest review**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest | StoryGraph
Okay, so this book is not for everyone.
And I don’t think I’m the target audience. I had seen Herman Bavinck quoted in a lot of books so when I saw that Crossway was putting out a translated book of his called Christianity and Science, I was intrigued.
But it wasn’t what I was expecting to be reading.
For one, it’s very challenging to read just in the writing style and vocabulary. I think the translators did a good job, but it was just a bit dense and hard to follow for the average reader. Plus I was not familiar with many of the references in the book. There were footnotes to help with that, but I quickly grew tired of also reading the footnotes.
Secondly, I think I was expecting more of a conversational style book on how Christians should interact with science. Today it’s a normal claim to make that Christians ‘don’t believe’ in science or that Christianity is at odds with it.
I was hoping for more of a discussion on that. Which there was some of that I think. I just honestly am not sure how much of the book I was truly grasping.
The editor says in a note at the beginning, “While many secularized Westerners continue to ponder the place of religion in a scientific world, Bavinck’s text challenges us to invert this perspective and learn, instead, to ponder the place of science in a religious world.”
Another important note from the editor gives more background on what Bavinck means when he uses the term science: “The Dutch term is broader in scope and encompasses all higher forms of reflective, critical knowledge… To Bavinck, the question of whether a scientist or a theologian speaks with greater authority would make little sense: to him theology is a science, belongs in the university of the sciences, and is practiced by scientists.”
Who is Herman Bavinck?
“Herman Bavinck formerly professor of dogmatics at the Free University of Amsterdam, and author of the magisterial four-volume Reformed Dogmatics… widely regarded as a modern classic in the Christian literary canon.”
He was a Dutch theologian who died in 1921 and was known for his Calvinist beliefs.
A few other notes on this book:
- It is a companion to Bavinck’s book titled Christian Worldview.
- There is often the Dutch word given in parentheses— apparently for greater clarity for those who know the Dutch language, but I feel like those people would probably just read the entire book in Dutch.
- The book itself looks nice, but it has a textured cover and for some reason retains some fingerprints making it look dirty.
One of the main philosophies of thought that Bavinck critiques is positivism.
“In Bavinck’s view, positivism was marked by a naive belief that empirical science is somehow neutral, objective, and presuppositionless— for which reason, positivists saw their approach to science as uniquely authoritative.”
So Bavinck talks about how no philosophy is truly neutral and that actually, if science is the pursuit of truth, then it falls back on the Christian concept of absolute truth. He also comments on the requirements of faith in both Christianity and in science (which includes history, literature, etc.)
“Concepts such as thing, property, cause, effect, law, condition, time, space, truth, falsehood, and more are assumed as realities despite their invisibility. Thus, faith is required to maintain objectivity.”
Positivism isn’t as largely held anymore as it was in Bavinck’s time. Today the philosophy is postmodernism. The reaches of this ideology is explored very interestingly in the book Cynical Theories (Cynical Theories is definitely a book I would recommend. It’s not a Christian book. It’s just a book that looks at critical theories’ origins and impact today which does overlap some with the principles in Bavinck’s book). In Cynical Theories, the authors say,
“The central themes of postmodernism include doubting that any human truth provides an objective representation of reality, focusing on language and the way societies use it to create their own local realities, and denying the universal.”
“Knowledge, truth, meaning, and morality are therefore, according to postmodernist thinking, culturally constructed and relative products of individual cultures, none of which possess the necessary tools or terms to evaluate the others.”
In Bavinck’s book there is a lot of discussion on how we come to know things. What is a valid way of ‘knowing’ or ‘learning.’ Positivism says science, but postmodernist thought even rejects that. Postmodernist thought questions whether or not objective knowledge or truth can be obtained at all. It also points to systems of power as controlling or deciding what can be known or how. This bleeds into critical theory and a whole host of other things.
So there are definitely still things to be learned from this book, but as to direct application to American society and culture, I’m not sure if positivism is the biggest ideology at work around us today.
“Research justice- acts upon the belief that science, reason, empiricism, objectivity, universality, and subjectivity have been overvalued as ways of obtaining knowledge while emotion, experience, traditional narratives and customs, and spiritual beliefs have been undervalued.” [Cynical Theories]
One example of how postmodern thought rejects science is given in Fat Studies that reject the science of the unhealthiness of obesity. We also see it in the rejection of the simple anatomy of two genders and their belief in the fluidity of gender in general.
I think there are two attacks on science today: the postmodern left who thinks that objective knowledge and the use of science is a construct for power, and then some sects of the right that think science undermines God and the Bible.
But as Christians we should know that science can’t undermine God. Science is ultimately the discovery of God and his truth and his creation. Everything must be tested against God’s Word— we don’t blindly accept all science, but we also don’t blindly reject it.
Some of the main points of Bavinck’s book (to my far less educated mind) are: a critique of positivism’s claims that science is an unbiased authority on truth and reality; that science is dependent on the concept of absolute truth which is founded in Christianity; argues for Christian education.
Some chapters were harder to read than others. One of the hardest to understand chapters was ‘Consequences of the Verdict’ and one of the easiest to read chapters was ‘The Blessing of Christianity for Science.’
Recommendation
I don’t think the average reader will enjoy reading this unless they are particularly interested in Herman Bavinck’s writing, used to reading old theological writings, or highly interested in an argument for Christian education.
I feel like I’m fairly well-versed in theology, but this was just pretty difficult to get through and requires some time— which frankly, I wasn’t really interested in putting in right now. If you’re willing to reread a lot of sections as well as the footnotes and are devoted to really understanding the writing, then you’ll be able to get out of it a lot more than I did.
If you’re looking for a book you can pick up here and there and easily grasp what the author is saying, this probably isn’t for you.
Also, I’m not super confident in my ability to summarize this book for you, so I would read more than my review when deciding whether or not to take this book on.
Even though my understanding of Christianity and Science is a bit spotty, here is a compilation of quotes that may give you a taste of some of the things you’ll find within.
Quotes
Here were some quotes that stood out to me:
“Philosophy is not in a position to make known the truth we need, not so much because the faculty of reason is so weak and limited but because the human being is so corrupted by sin. One’s pride, one’s self-love in particular, stands in the way of the discovery of truth.”
“Subjective sincerity is not proof of objective truth”.
“This is now the general prevailing concept of science. It is true that people give little or no consideration to the “epistemology” to which they are committed. They take it for granted that the concept of science is fixed and has been elevated above all criticisms and thus they are amazed when someone draws the correctness of this concept into doubt or earnestly disputes them. They are imprisoned in the dogma of the theory of presuppositionless science and hold it to be absolute, though they declare everything else to be relative.”
“There is a hatred against God and religion, against Christ and Scripture, against church and confession, which often clouds the clearest mind and confuses the most lucid thinking.”
“The first thing that advocates of this view [positivism] have to learn is that their definition of science is just one alongside others.. we must always remember that our view is not the only one in the world, and that, in addition to ours, there are others that have equal rights in the practice of life. If we do not recognize this, we become intolerant and exclusive, and we are not far from striving to suppress all others with violence.”
“The struggle for the liberation of higher education is precisely against the monopoly of scientific knowledge from a single direction, and has no other goal than to ensure that the various directions in science can freely wrestle with one another in society, and that competition is not rendered impossible through the granting of state privileges to one but not the other.”
“It is not acceptable to say beforehand that a person sets to work in scientific research without prejudice and proceeds from nothing but sensible or internally observable facts and phenomena, and yet from the outset continually brings along all sorts of assumptions that are not the fruit of empiricism but rather have a philosophical and metaphysical character.”
“[science] cannot strive against religion, against morality, against art… it can never bring forth and may never destroy [life].”
“We are not animals but humans— reasonable, moral, religious, aesthetic beings. The awareness of truth, goodness, and beauty is implanted in our nature; the distinction between true and untrue, between good and evil, between justice and injustice, between godless and pious is just as fixed in our consciousness as the distinction between light and dark, between day and night, between sour and sweet, between sound and silence, between use and destruction, between welcome and unwelcome. We would have to eliminate human nature itself if we wanted to rid ourselves of this awareness.”
“The purpose of science is to expand and correct ordinary knowledge.”— Julius Kaftan
“Art, religion, state, society, law, [and] morality are always subject to the direction of the age; it is a miracle when the practitioners of science make an exception to this [rule].”
“The practice of science needs not only a sharp view, a clear head, a diligent zeal, a good method, and a focused investigation. At the same time, it also demands a creative imagination, a gifted intuition, a surprising divination.. It has been the geniuses, not only in art but also in science, who have been given first place.”
“If religion is objective truth, then it is clear that religions that emerge among humankind cannot all be true to the same degree. Religions have this idiosyncratic quality, distinct from, for example, languages, in that they stand directly opposed to one another, in that one regards as lies what another counts as truth…”
“There is no science of religion in general unless God exists, is knowable, and has revealed himself. It is thus untrue and superficial if one person says to another ‘You are dogmatic, but we are scientific; you are prejudiced and sectarian, but in my research I set to work wholly objectively and accept nothing other than by evidence.”
“The concept of science did not arise through Christianity. The whole history of humankind has been a search for truth… [science] did not offer unity; it did not satisfy the heart. The world in all its wisdom did not know God. Christianity then saved science. The gospel was the proclamation of an eternal, undeniable, indubitable truth, which was revealed in Christ.”
“The tacit assumption of all science is that there is a sovereign, unchangeable truth, and that it is knowable to the human being… In Christianity, the truth is not a subjective idea, not the mutual relations of human ideas, but, rather, it is an objective reality that stands high above and yet remains accessible to the human being. Through this, science is given a fixed, strong, and essential foundation. For if there is no certainty to be had in matters of religion and morality and in respect tot he unseen, spiritual things, science loses a great deal of its value. It runs the risk also of falling prey of skepticism in other fields and is threatened with decay and ruin as a whole.”
“Sharp self-criticism and stern self-denial are necessary in order to remain faithful to the truth and not deny or falsify it by the craftiness of the heart. There is much truth we do not want because it is in conflict with our lives.”
“If there is no supernatural, if God is not to be thought of other than as the “personification” of natural laws, if there is no higher power than that which works in nature, then the human spirit is subjugated to matter, the religious-ethical life loses its foundation, and belief in the triumph of the good is a vain dream.”
**Received a copy via Crossway in exchange for an honest review**
Book Review Blog | Facebook | Pinterest | StoryGraph
March 20, 2024
What a refreshingly comforting book. Written 100 years ago, you’d think Bavinck was critiquing the divorce of the sciences from all of life that is common today. Universities are so piece-meal in their education that students are unable to leave truly learned. Science and faith, history and revelation, psychology and ethics ought not to be separated but united and set on their proper path. In Christ, both the hard sciences and the liberal arts can be studied and enjoyed for the benefit of humanity.
If only our (world) leaders were reading this book and being guided by the wisdom and hope of the gospel, perhaps we’d be in a much different place.
This book isn’t for everyone. For someone who’s well versed in Philosophy and theology, and well versed with Bavinck as a conversation partner, parts of this book had to be read a bit slower, for it is quite dense all throughout. But man, it was well worth it. The vision Bavinck casts for (Christian) education can be all the more appreciated in light of what he and Kuyper sought to do with the Free University of Amsterdam.
For how lofty and philosophical this book is, of what it speaks is preeminently practical. Knowledge is for all of life. The church is for the world. All fields of science are for the glory of God. Christian leaders in particular can do the most good for the church and for the world in creating avenues and facilities that work out in the real world what Bavinck envisions for the Christian university. Perhaps this vision is part of the key to being the “salt and light” of the world.
If only our (world) leaders were reading this book and being guided by the wisdom and hope of the gospel, perhaps we’d be in a much different place.
This book isn’t for everyone. For someone who’s well versed in Philosophy and theology, and well versed with Bavinck as a conversation partner, parts of this book had to be read a bit slower, for it is quite dense all throughout. But man, it was well worth it. The vision Bavinck casts for (Christian) education can be all the more appreciated in light of what he and Kuyper sought to do with the Free University of Amsterdam.
For how lofty and philosophical this book is, of what it speaks is preeminently practical. Knowledge is for all of life. The church is for the world. All fields of science are for the glory of God. Christian leaders in particular can do the most good for the church and for the world in creating avenues and facilities that work out in the real world what Bavinck envisions for the Christian university. Perhaps this vision is part of the key to being the “salt and light” of the world.
September 14, 2023
Herman Bavinck was a leading theologian of the Dutch Neo-Calvinists from the last 19th and early 20th century. While there are many things I disagree with on the Neo-Calvinists when it comes to the doctrine of salvation and questions on Free Will or Determinism. I really enjoyed the Neo-Calvinist view of the physical creation as presented in Neo-Calvinism A Critique by Sutanto and Brock.
Well Sutanto, Brock are back and James Eglinton is here with them in a translation of Bavinck’s Christianity and Science. I wanted to read this one as soon as I saw it because I am homeschool dad. My wife and I homeschool our four children. We are on the board of the local homeschool Co-op in New Orleans and I just started teaching P.E. for the kids because PE is the most important subject in school.
I wanted to see what Bavinck had to say on this subject of Christian Science since I believe he takes science in a way that is much more broad than we take it in America today and I think this book could end up being required reading in the homeschooling world, only time will tell if that is the case, but I think there is an outside chance that it becomes popular in the homeschooling world.
I think this could be an important book for those in all levels of Christian education from homsechoolers to Christian schools to Christian universities. And let me tell you why.
The first thing about Christian and Science is that it is poorly named. Maybe this was a good name back when Bavinck wrote, although part of me thinks it might have been a poor name even back then and Bavinck was the kind of guy who would name his book Christian and Science to encourage people to think different about Science.
It should be called A Defense or A Call for a Christian Education. For Bavinck science includes all aspects of education – mathematics, literature, law, history, philosophy, and religion is still the queen of the sciences. So this is not just about what we might call “Science” proper – earth science and physics and chemistry but this is all of education.
The purpose of this book is to call for Christian education, more specifically protestant universities to be established both by the state and private institutions that rival the greatest Catholic and Secular Universities in the world.
But in making that call, he encourages all level of Christian education – Christian education in the home, high school, college, and university.
Now my complaint about this book is tough to give because I have so many wonderful notes and great highlights on the importance of Christian education that I would love this to be a complaint free review. And if I was reviewing this book back in 1904, I wouldn’t even make this complaint.
But at times, this book is too focused on Bavinck’s own time, again it wouldn’t be a complaint if I was in 1904, but today some of his arguments – especially his focus on Positivism just don’t hit home since we have left positivism behind for post modernism. And if you don’t know anything about positivism I would suggest reading an article on it preparation for reading Christian and Science, the translators do give a short definition for it in the introduction but it could be given a little more space.
Now on the good and there is so much, I can’t hope to cover it all. Bavinck makes a strong argument that without Christianity we can’t hold together the shape of modern life and the advances of science will fall apart and dissolve into chaos and actually become harmful without the foundation of Christianity.
At times I felt like Bavinck was a prophet looking forward to what we would be experiencing today through Critical Theory and the harm of post modernism and how a diet of the physical sciences could make our lives more comfortable but they will also make us more empty.
He will build his arguments by first showing the short comings of what is seen as neutral science – this belief that scientists and historians can examine the facts free of bias and a controlling worldview. He presents a thorough case that the so-called unbiased scientists has a worldview directing his thoughts and conclusions like everyone else. I really liked when he wrote on how scientists of all stripes, and we need to remember this is just covering biologists and meteorologists but also religious doctors, archeologists and political scientists.
But we all naturally gravitate toward the popular thoughts of the day. And the true great scientists who are so very rare are those who are willing to break free from the popular mindset, be the 1 scientist who disagrees with the consensus and then tests his theory. Sadly all too few are great. We are all driven by our worldview and the social pressures in our field.
This is important because a Christian does come with a worldview and certain fundamentals but so does everyone else and in fact it is a net positive for a Christian scientist to lay his view out on the table at the beginning which the so-called unbiased scientists refuse to do.
So he provides the Christians student and professor with arguments and motivation to stand by their worldview.
Then he covers different areas in science, natural, humanities, and religion. He writes on how Christianity far from making them worse and keeping them stuck in the dark ages – it is Christianity that pushes us forward with a view of God and His sustaining power over the world.
The best chapter was the Blessing of Christian Science where Bavinck listed all the way Christianity is a blessing to all forms of science. And what I loved was that Bavinck listed ways that Christianity is a blessing to Science.
The first thing that science owes to this gospel is the reality of an eternal, incorruptible truth.
If there is no truth, there is no science and Christianity saved science by proclaiming an indisputable truth in Christ. And if science undermines Christianity it will also work toward its own destruction which is what I believe we are seeing today.
Second, Christianity simultaneously planted belief in and love for the truth in [many] hearts. Because of Christianity we develop a love for truth.
Third, the entirety of the science that bears the name theology is indebted to Christianity. Religion is the queen of the sciences and that is thanks to Christianity.
Fourth, Christianity is also a blessing to science in general, for the investigation of nature and history. Christians see nature as God’s creation. History as the unfolding of God’s story in this world and so we are excited and motivated to study both history and science in all its forms. When you read J Warner Wallace’s Person of Interest – this becomes crystal clear.
If you are a Christian in education and feel like you should crawl in a hole and leave the scientific or education world behind – Bavinck comes and encourages you to persevere and understand just how much you are needed in your field. And I am thinking in part toward the wonderful Christians who faithfully serve in our public school systems – you do a tremendous work for Christ in your field.
The book ends with Bavinck’s call for a Dutch Reformed University for a protestant university in his own country to be the compass for scientific advancements from a protestant viewpoint. It’s a great way to end the book because in some way – it is Bavinck putting into practice all he has written thus far.
So I found Christian and Science to be a great read. I hope it will be read widely and I hope that when people read it and get stuck in the past in 1904, they will persevere to the end because I think if they do they will get more out of this book than they would have expected.
You can find the video of my review by searching for Rev Reads on YouTube.
Well Sutanto, Brock are back and James Eglinton is here with them in a translation of Bavinck’s Christianity and Science. I wanted to read this one as soon as I saw it because I am homeschool dad. My wife and I homeschool our four children. We are on the board of the local homeschool Co-op in New Orleans and I just started teaching P.E. for the kids because PE is the most important subject in school.
I wanted to see what Bavinck had to say on this subject of Christian Science since I believe he takes science in a way that is much more broad than we take it in America today and I think this book could end up being required reading in the homeschooling world, only time will tell if that is the case, but I think there is an outside chance that it becomes popular in the homeschooling world.
I think this could be an important book for those in all levels of Christian education from homsechoolers to Christian schools to Christian universities. And let me tell you why.
The first thing about Christian and Science is that it is poorly named. Maybe this was a good name back when Bavinck wrote, although part of me thinks it might have been a poor name even back then and Bavinck was the kind of guy who would name his book Christian and Science to encourage people to think different about Science.
It should be called A Defense or A Call for a Christian Education. For Bavinck science includes all aspects of education – mathematics, literature, law, history, philosophy, and religion is still the queen of the sciences. So this is not just about what we might call “Science” proper – earth science and physics and chemistry but this is all of education.
The purpose of this book is to call for Christian education, more specifically protestant universities to be established both by the state and private institutions that rival the greatest Catholic and Secular Universities in the world.
But in making that call, he encourages all level of Christian education – Christian education in the home, high school, college, and university.
Now my complaint about this book is tough to give because I have so many wonderful notes and great highlights on the importance of Christian education that I would love this to be a complaint free review. And if I was reviewing this book back in 1904, I wouldn’t even make this complaint.
But at times, this book is too focused on Bavinck’s own time, again it wouldn’t be a complaint if I was in 1904, but today some of his arguments – especially his focus on Positivism just don’t hit home since we have left positivism behind for post modernism. And if you don’t know anything about positivism I would suggest reading an article on it preparation for reading Christian and Science, the translators do give a short definition for it in the introduction but it could be given a little more space.
Now on the good and there is so much, I can’t hope to cover it all. Bavinck makes a strong argument that without Christianity we can’t hold together the shape of modern life and the advances of science will fall apart and dissolve into chaos and actually become harmful without the foundation of Christianity.
At times I felt like Bavinck was a prophet looking forward to what we would be experiencing today through Critical Theory and the harm of post modernism and how a diet of the physical sciences could make our lives more comfortable but they will also make us more empty.
He will build his arguments by first showing the short comings of what is seen as neutral science – this belief that scientists and historians can examine the facts free of bias and a controlling worldview. He presents a thorough case that the so-called unbiased scientists has a worldview directing his thoughts and conclusions like everyone else. I really liked when he wrote on how scientists of all stripes, and we need to remember this is just covering biologists and meteorologists but also religious doctors, archeologists and political scientists.
But we all naturally gravitate toward the popular thoughts of the day. And the true great scientists who are so very rare are those who are willing to break free from the popular mindset, be the 1 scientist who disagrees with the consensus and then tests his theory. Sadly all too few are great. We are all driven by our worldview and the social pressures in our field.
This is important because a Christian does come with a worldview and certain fundamentals but so does everyone else and in fact it is a net positive for a Christian scientist to lay his view out on the table at the beginning which the so-called unbiased scientists refuse to do.
So he provides the Christians student and professor with arguments and motivation to stand by their worldview.
Then he covers different areas in science, natural, humanities, and religion. He writes on how Christianity far from making them worse and keeping them stuck in the dark ages – it is Christianity that pushes us forward with a view of God and His sustaining power over the world.
The best chapter was the Blessing of Christian Science where Bavinck listed all the way Christianity is a blessing to all forms of science. And what I loved was that Bavinck listed ways that Christianity is a blessing to Science.
The first thing that science owes to this gospel is the reality of an eternal, incorruptible truth.
If there is no truth, there is no science and Christianity saved science by proclaiming an indisputable truth in Christ. And if science undermines Christianity it will also work toward its own destruction which is what I believe we are seeing today.
Second, Christianity simultaneously planted belief in and love for the truth in [many] hearts. Because of Christianity we develop a love for truth.
Third, the entirety of the science that bears the name theology is indebted to Christianity. Religion is the queen of the sciences and that is thanks to Christianity.
Fourth, Christianity is also a blessing to science in general, for the investigation of nature and history. Christians see nature as God’s creation. History as the unfolding of God’s story in this world and so we are excited and motivated to study both history and science in all its forms. When you read J Warner Wallace’s Person of Interest – this becomes crystal clear.
If you are a Christian in education and feel like you should crawl in a hole and leave the scientific or education world behind – Bavinck comes and encourages you to persevere and understand just how much you are needed in your field. And I am thinking in part toward the wonderful Christians who faithfully serve in our public school systems – you do a tremendous work for Christ in your field.
The book ends with Bavinck’s call for a Dutch Reformed University for a protestant university in his own country to be the compass for scientific advancements from a protestant viewpoint. It’s a great way to end the book because in some way – it is Bavinck putting into practice all he has written thus far.
So I found Christian and Science to be a great read. I hope it will be read widely and I hope that when people read it and get stuck in the past in 1904, they will persevere to the end because I think if they do they will get more out of this book than they would have expected.
You can find the video of my review by searching for Rev Reads on YouTube.
December 11, 2023
What is the relationship of Christianity and Science? Here famous theologian Herman Bavinck wrote this book to help answer this question. Bavinck is a Dutch Reformed Theologian that is known for his nuances and careful handling of theological matters; his Reformed Dogmatics is a must-have for those who are going to be specialists in Systematic Theology. This book was originally written in 1904 and only in 2023 was it published in English. I am glad for the translation team that had this published in English as we can benefit from this book today. I also enjoyed this book because it provided a window into the discussion of the relationship between Christianity and science, a discussion that many can think is only recent but as Bavinck demonstrates this is an issue that people have been thinking about for a long time.
The book consists of thirteen chapters from Bavinck, though there’s an acknowledgment and editor’s introduction that is very helpful to situate the book in proper context and perspective. Chapter one is an introduction to the book from Bavinck, chapter two is on how the concept of a Christian Science emerged historically and chapter three is on defects that clung to Christian Science. There’s a chapter then on positive science followed by a chapter evaluating Positivism and a chapter on consequence of the verdict. Following this chapter seven is on the concept of science, then a look on the natural sciences, the humanities and theological sciences, each with its own chapter. Chapter eleven looks at revelation and chapter twelve is on the blessing of Christianity for science while chapter thirteen is on the concept of a Christian university.
I am a big proponent of Presuppositional apologetics as articulated by Cornelius Van Til. Reading this book felt like I am reading something Proto-Van Tilian. I was glad to see that Bavinck tackle on issues of science and religion during his day; in some ways I felt I learn that the issues he faced are also issue contemporary Christians face today intellectually and academically. Granted there’s some differences in that Bavinck is Dutch and he’s writing during a time when the Netherlands was a colonial power and the separation of religion and society isn’t as strongly divided as it is now; though its already heading in that direction.
I really enjoyed reading Bavinck’s critique of Positivism. That was really enjoyable to read. I also thought Bavinck’s argument about the historical development of science under Christian influences was also good. These themes I see have been highlighted and crystalized by Van Til and his followers. His discussion about the problem of pretend neutrality was also very good. There’s times I’m blown away that Bavinck is so insightful even for today though he wrote this book in 1904.
One last personal note: I saw the translator N. Gray Sutanto wrote in his acknowledgement that he was working on this project during the summer in Bali, Indonesia. Ironically I read this book while I was in Bali, Indonesia during the late summer! Sometimes providence can be fascinating. I am glad he and the two other editors translated this book for modern English readers for today.
NOTE: This book was provided to me free by Crossway without any obligation for a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.
The book consists of thirteen chapters from Bavinck, though there’s an acknowledgment and editor’s introduction that is very helpful to situate the book in proper context and perspective. Chapter one is an introduction to the book from Bavinck, chapter two is on how the concept of a Christian Science emerged historically and chapter three is on defects that clung to Christian Science. There’s a chapter then on positive science followed by a chapter evaluating Positivism and a chapter on consequence of the verdict. Following this chapter seven is on the concept of science, then a look on the natural sciences, the humanities and theological sciences, each with its own chapter. Chapter eleven looks at revelation and chapter twelve is on the blessing of Christianity for science while chapter thirteen is on the concept of a Christian university.
I am a big proponent of Presuppositional apologetics as articulated by Cornelius Van Til. Reading this book felt like I am reading something Proto-Van Tilian. I was glad to see that Bavinck tackle on issues of science and religion during his day; in some ways I felt I learn that the issues he faced are also issue contemporary Christians face today intellectually and academically. Granted there’s some differences in that Bavinck is Dutch and he’s writing during a time when the Netherlands was a colonial power and the separation of religion and society isn’t as strongly divided as it is now; though its already heading in that direction.
I really enjoyed reading Bavinck’s critique of Positivism. That was really enjoyable to read. I also thought Bavinck’s argument about the historical development of science under Christian influences was also good. These themes I see have been highlighted and crystalized by Van Til and his followers. His discussion about the problem of pretend neutrality was also very good. There’s times I’m blown away that Bavinck is so insightful even for today though he wrote this book in 1904.
One last personal note: I saw the translator N. Gray Sutanto wrote in his acknowledgement that he was working on this project during the summer in Bali, Indonesia. Ironically I read this book while I was in Bali, Indonesia during the late summer! Sometimes providence can be fascinating. I am glad he and the two other editors translated this book for modern English readers for today.
NOTE: This book was provided to me free by Crossway without any obligation for a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.
October 20, 2025
Bavinck’s work on the relationship between Christianity and Science is much needed in our day and age. The last 5-6 years have seen an explosion of anti-science, pseudoscience, or just bad science. For Bavinck, science is not opposed to faith, nor should it be. The God who created all things in their macro and micro has not left himself without a witness. The Christian, then, should pursue science out of his or her faith, trusting that they would discover truth as God has revealed it in creation. After all, creation is part of God’s revelation and therefore is filled with truth, goodness, and beauty.
These two quotes summarize much of what Bavinck argues throughout.
"How could it ever be defensible to suppose that a man, because of and in proportion to his fear of God, is incapable of the pursuit of science?"
"The ideal for the [scientist] cannot be that in his work, his heart's deepest and noblest convictions are kept silent. Rather, it is much more that he is a man of God who is perfectly equipped for every good work."
The Christian has the best reason to pursue science.
4.5 ⭐️ -0.5 only because if you’ve read anything else from Bavinck this feels more like a synthesis and distillation of some of his other writings. Still, the last 3 chapters were unique from what else I’ve read.
These two quotes summarize much of what Bavinck argues throughout.
"How could it ever be defensible to suppose that a man, because of and in proportion to his fear of God, is incapable of the pursuit of science?"
"The ideal for the [scientist] cannot be that in his work, his heart's deepest and noblest convictions are kept silent. Rather, it is much more that he is a man of God who is perfectly equipped for every good work."
The Christian has the best reason to pursue science.
4.5 ⭐️ -0.5 only because if you’ve read anything else from Bavinck this feels more like a synthesis and distillation of some of his other writings. Still, the last 3 chapters were unique from what else I’ve read.
May 24, 2025
Very, very good! Will need to revisit over time, especially some of his comments on the humanities.
"Christian science is a science that investigates all things by the light of God's revelation and, therefore, sees them as they truly are in their essence. In the eyes of the world this might be foolishness, but the folly of God is wiser than men, just as the weakness of God is stronger than men. 'For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth' (2 Cor. 1:3-8)."
"Christian science is a science that investigates all things by the light of God's revelation and, therefore, sees them as they truly are in their essence. In the eyes of the world this might be foolishness, but the folly of God is wiser than men, just as the weakness of God is stronger than men. 'For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth' (2 Cor. 1:3-8)."
November 17, 2023
Homie Herman pops off sometimes, and then other times I’m not really sure what he’s talking about. But his arguments were easier to follow in this book compared to his other stuff.
October 2, 2023
Rating: If you are looking for something
Level: Difficult (wordy, academic style, knowledge of enlightenment and higher critical philosophies/theories is helpful); Short - 230 pages
Summary
The book has 13 chapters - Intro, How the Concept of Christian Science Emerged, Defects That Clung to Christian Science, Positive Science, Evaluation of Positivism, Consequence of the Verdict, The Concept of Science, The Natural Sciences, The Humanities, Theological Science, Revelation, The Blessing of Christianity for Science, and A Christian University. There is also a lengthy Editors' Introduction, which explains some of the translation issues and gives a little bit of background in to Bavinck's life and situation.
Written in 1904, but looking back over the previous 50-70 years, the book focuses on changes to society and to the university system that has come from recent official moves towards liberalism and secularism. Bavinck is focused specifically on The Netherlands, but also broadly on the post-enlightenment and higher critical movements of Europe in general.
There is a also a good explanation of what Bavinck means by 'science', which was essentially synonymous with 'learning' or 'knowledge', and science was often still in the title of disciplines (e.g. Theological Science). The book was also originally titled Christian Science, which the editors changed due to the current American religious movement. However, the phrase is used throughout the book.
It should also be noted that this is not a discussion of Christianity vs. Science, in the way of some of our modern American discussions.
My Thoughts
I'll get the negative out of the way first, if you haven't read Bavinck before, it can be difficult. This may only bother me, but he has sentences that run for paragraphs, and paragraphs that run for pages. Also, he is distinctly a product of his time, the theological and philosophical arguments that were raging at the time are front and center in his writing. While most people are probably familiar with Kant, I'd guess that Schleiermacher is less well known (though maybe not to the type of people that would read a Bavinck book), let alone the list of other German philosophers and theologians that have faded into obscurity. The editors make short notes as to whom he is referring and what they did, but without some background knowledge, I'm not sure how impactful it is. The notes help for those who were contemporary politicians in The Netherlands, because their thoughts/arguments are pretty straight forward, but the writings of the academics and their nuance may be lost.
That being said, so much of his writing then is still applicable to us today. It is odd as an American, hearing the arguments about the Government funding private (including religious) schools, but most of Europe started in a different place than we did. They are coming from an official (confessional) religion and then moving secular. So, often 'equality' means funding all viewpoints/religions equally, while here it means funding none. For a more modern/current take on these issues, look up Michael Bird, as he writing/arguing some of these same issues right now in Australia (where the Government does fund all schools).
There are some esoteric arguments in the first few chapters, especially about 'positivism', but especially starting in the Humanities chapter to the finish, the writing sounds very contemporary. He points out the issues/problems of 'greatest good for the greatest number' argument of morality, while also criticizing the 'private matter' of a 'preference and taste' view of choosing a 'personal religion'. The Theological Science chapter discusses how theology can/should be taught and the issues of many schools moving (in some cases required) to religion departments; pointing out that if there is no universal or deeper truth, then the studies of religion may as well move to History or Psychology departments, or if the Bible is just writings, why not a subset of Literature? Finally, the University chapter is wild it how it almost predicted the future. He feared the political re-shuffling of the professors based on 'openness' and 'tolerance' not actually being use the way the word implies. He states, 'according to the doctrine, there is room for all, but according to life, only for us and our friends. If you ever see studies/surveys of professors today and see their very narrow set of beliefs/viewpoints (for the most part), you can see he is correct. He even points to the fact that professors come from other professors and is less about how might be the 'best' and more about 'who do we want to get along with', which is just interesting to see that written 120 years ago.
Overall, as is just about everything from Bavinck, this was a great book, he is truly a talented and gifted writing/academic. I just wonder how many people would benefit from this book, or rather who the audience would be. So, if you like Bavinck and are exciting more of his works are being translated to English, this will be pretty great. If you are in academia, you would also benefit. Obviously, some of the issues are a bit dated and the refences to contemporary Dutch politics isn't always applicable. However, if you are studying or wanting to learn more about history and how we've gotten to our modern moment, this could be helpful. So, if you are looking for something, this book is great, but I do think you need to be looking to get much out of it.
*I received a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. More reviews at MondayMorningTheologican.com
Level: Difficult (wordy, academic style, knowledge of enlightenment and higher critical philosophies/theories is helpful); Short - 230 pages
Summary
The book has 13 chapters - Intro, How the Concept of Christian Science Emerged, Defects That Clung to Christian Science, Positive Science, Evaluation of Positivism, Consequence of the Verdict, The Concept of Science, The Natural Sciences, The Humanities, Theological Science, Revelation, The Blessing of Christianity for Science, and A Christian University. There is also a lengthy Editors' Introduction, which explains some of the translation issues and gives a little bit of background in to Bavinck's life and situation.
Written in 1904, but looking back over the previous 50-70 years, the book focuses on changes to society and to the university system that has come from recent official moves towards liberalism and secularism. Bavinck is focused specifically on The Netherlands, but also broadly on the post-enlightenment and higher critical movements of Europe in general.
There is a also a good explanation of what Bavinck means by 'science', which was essentially synonymous with 'learning' or 'knowledge', and science was often still in the title of disciplines (e.g. Theological Science). The book was also originally titled Christian Science, which the editors changed due to the current American religious movement. However, the phrase is used throughout the book.
It should also be noted that this is not a discussion of Christianity vs. Science, in the way of some of our modern American discussions.
My Thoughts
I'll get the negative out of the way first, if you haven't read Bavinck before, it can be difficult. This may only bother me, but he has sentences that run for paragraphs, and paragraphs that run for pages. Also, he is distinctly a product of his time, the theological and philosophical arguments that were raging at the time are front and center in his writing. While most people are probably familiar with Kant, I'd guess that Schleiermacher is less well known (though maybe not to the type of people that would read a Bavinck book), let alone the list of other German philosophers and theologians that have faded into obscurity. The editors make short notes as to whom he is referring and what they did, but without some background knowledge, I'm not sure how impactful it is. The notes help for those who were contemporary politicians in The Netherlands, because their thoughts/arguments are pretty straight forward, but the writings of the academics and their nuance may be lost.
That being said, so much of his writing then is still applicable to us today. It is odd as an American, hearing the arguments about the Government funding private (including religious) schools, but most of Europe started in a different place than we did. They are coming from an official (confessional) religion and then moving secular. So, often 'equality' means funding all viewpoints/religions equally, while here it means funding none. For a more modern/current take on these issues, look up Michael Bird, as he writing/arguing some of these same issues right now in Australia (where the Government does fund all schools).
There are some esoteric arguments in the first few chapters, especially about 'positivism', but especially starting in the Humanities chapter to the finish, the writing sounds very contemporary. He points out the issues/problems of 'greatest good for the greatest number' argument of morality, while also criticizing the 'private matter' of a 'preference and taste' view of choosing a 'personal religion'. The Theological Science chapter discusses how theology can/should be taught and the issues of many schools moving (in some cases required) to religion departments; pointing out that if there is no universal or deeper truth, then the studies of religion may as well move to History or Psychology departments, or if the Bible is just writings, why not a subset of Literature? Finally, the University chapter is wild it how it almost predicted the future. He feared the political re-shuffling of the professors based on 'openness' and 'tolerance' not actually being use the way the word implies. He states, 'according to the doctrine, there is room for all, but according to life, only for us and our friends. If you ever see studies/surveys of professors today and see their very narrow set of beliefs/viewpoints (for the most part), you can see he is correct. He even points to the fact that professors come from other professors and is less about how might be the 'best' and more about 'who do we want to get along with', which is just interesting to see that written 120 years ago.
Overall, as is just about everything from Bavinck, this was a great book, he is truly a talented and gifted writing/academic. I just wonder how many people would benefit from this book, or rather who the audience would be. So, if you like Bavinck and are exciting more of his works are being translated to English, this will be pretty great. If you are in academia, you would also benefit. Obviously, some of the issues are a bit dated and the refences to contemporary Dutch politics isn't always applicable. However, if you are studying or wanting to learn more about history and how we've gotten to our modern moment, this could be helpful. So, if you are looking for something, this book is great, but I do think you need to be looking to get much out of it.
*I received a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. More reviews at MondayMorningTheologican.com
May 15, 2024
A very excellent but dense read! I have always enjoyed quotes and excerpts I’ve read from Bavinck concerning his doctrine of God, but this is the first work I read by him. It is a companion book to his work on worldviews, but my interest in a Christian philosophy of science was piqued during my Christian Philosophy class, so I decided to read this work.
It is hard to summarize Bavinck’s careful and nuanced argumentation throughout the book, so I will just summarize the overall impact it had on me. I felt very validated reading this work as a student who received an undergraduate degree in theology, and now is pursuing a graduate degree in biblical and theological studies. I remember once being told by a non-believer that the degrees I am pursuing were not real degrees, nor were they true academic disciplines. This is an interesting argument to me considering the host of Christian scholars and academics in the history of philosophy and science—a point that Bavinck highlights in his final fascinating chapter on education and universities. Bavinck dispels the myth of “presuppositionless” or “neutral” science, and follows Thomas Aquinas’s lead by arguing for the scientific nature of theology. Indeed, for Bavinck and Aquinas Christian theology is queen of the sciences. He also shows how life precedes philosophy and science, and how these disciplines actually need religion for the pursuit of objective truth.
This book doesn’t exactly feel like an introductory work on the relationship between science and faith, so I don’t know if I could recommend it to someone who is looking to jump into this field of study. It may prove helpful after you have studied an introduction to a philosophy of science. However, anyone who does take up this book will be both challenged and edified in their apologetic and cultural witness for the faith as religion and theology are increasingly pushed out of the cultural and educational sphere.
It is hard to summarize Bavinck’s careful and nuanced argumentation throughout the book, so I will just summarize the overall impact it had on me. I felt very validated reading this work as a student who received an undergraduate degree in theology, and now is pursuing a graduate degree in biblical and theological studies. I remember once being told by a non-believer that the degrees I am pursuing were not real degrees, nor were they true academic disciplines. This is an interesting argument to me considering the host of Christian scholars and academics in the history of philosophy and science—a point that Bavinck highlights in his final fascinating chapter on education and universities. Bavinck dispels the myth of “presuppositionless” or “neutral” science, and follows Thomas Aquinas’s lead by arguing for the scientific nature of theology. Indeed, for Bavinck and Aquinas Christian theology is queen of the sciences. He also shows how life precedes philosophy and science, and how these disciplines actually need religion for the pursuit of objective truth.
This book doesn’t exactly feel like an introductory work on the relationship between science and faith, so I don’t know if I could recommend it to someone who is looking to jump into this field of study. It may prove helpful after you have studied an introduction to a philosophy of science. However, anyone who does take up this book will be both challenged and edified in their apologetic and cultural witness for the faith as religion and theology are increasingly pushed out of the cultural and educational sphere.
December 1, 2025
See complete review and summary on my substack (Lius Daniel's substack)
This book is best understood as an apologetic and philosophical argument defending the claim that genuine science must ultimately be grounded in Christianity. Because of this, the tone is highly analytical and often technical. Readers without background in key philosophical concepts—such as presuppositions, metaphysics, or the intellectual movements Bavinck engages (Kantianism, positivism, empiricism)—may find parts of it challenging. Bavinck also does not always unpack these issues in detail, which, combined with significant historical and contextual distance, sometimes reduces the clarity and situational sensitivity of his arguments.
In terms of structure and internal coherence, the book is quite solid, but there are moments where Bavinck’s meaning remains difficult to pin down. Some of this may stem from translation choices or from shifts in terminology across different eras. For instance, when Bavinck speaks of “theology” or “modern religious science,” readers familiar with his wider corpus may wonder exactly how these terms are being defined in this particular work. Those who have read his other writings will likely find this book more accessible.
If your interest lies in arguing against the separation of faith and science—or in strengthening your own confidence that such a separation is artificial—this book is a valuable resource. However, if you are looking for concrete guidance on how to practice science as a Christian in day-to-day research, this book offers relatively little. One exception is Bavinck’s discussion of the Christian scientist’s posture, which has practical relevance.
A particularly noteworthy aspect of the book is Bavinck’s affirmation that non-Christian science can make genuine progress and that Christians should learn from it, grounded in the doctrine of natural revelation. This insight is often overlooked in some Christian academic contexts, where engagement with secular scholarship is avoided or dismissed. Bavinck offers a more balanced and generous approach—one that recognizes the value of truth wherever it is found.
This book is best understood as an apologetic and philosophical argument defending the claim that genuine science must ultimately be grounded in Christianity. Because of this, the tone is highly analytical and often technical. Readers without background in key philosophical concepts—such as presuppositions, metaphysics, or the intellectual movements Bavinck engages (Kantianism, positivism, empiricism)—may find parts of it challenging. Bavinck also does not always unpack these issues in detail, which, combined with significant historical and contextual distance, sometimes reduces the clarity and situational sensitivity of his arguments.
In terms of structure and internal coherence, the book is quite solid, but there are moments where Bavinck’s meaning remains difficult to pin down. Some of this may stem from translation choices or from shifts in terminology across different eras. For instance, when Bavinck speaks of “theology” or “modern religious science,” readers familiar with his wider corpus may wonder exactly how these terms are being defined in this particular work. Those who have read his other writings will likely find this book more accessible.
If your interest lies in arguing against the separation of faith and science—or in strengthening your own confidence that such a separation is artificial—this book is a valuable resource. However, if you are looking for concrete guidance on how to practice science as a Christian in day-to-day research, this book offers relatively little. One exception is Bavinck’s discussion of the Christian scientist’s posture, which has practical relevance.
A particularly noteworthy aspect of the book is Bavinck’s affirmation that non-Christian science can make genuine progress and that Christians should learn from it, grounded in the doctrine of natural revelation. This insight is often overlooked in some Christian academic contexts, where engagement with secular scholarship is avoided or dismissed. Bavinck offers a more balanced and generous approach—one that recognizes the value of truth wherever it is found.
October 16, 2023
The first half of the book was over a dispute over philosophical "positivism," which was sort of boring unless you have a really unusual set of circumstances which requires knowledge of it. The second half improved, and there are a number of excellent arguments put forth for Christian education.
This is a particularly helpful work in that it reminds the reader that the great revolution which neocalvinism emerged from is foreign to our own time. It was a day when universities were still so much more conservative than they are now, and nobody actually believed in complete free expression. You also see glimmers of the modernists arguing that science must be independent of religion, and using figures such as Christopher Columbus to justify their case. This probably explains his appearance in the early 20th century American architecture in places like Union Station, as poor religious Italians were more or less used to support American monuments that proclaimed the death of supernatural Christianity. It was oddly reminiscent of Jefferson and Madison's alliance with the Baptists to remove religion from the public square.
Bavinck's work is articulate, but he is also clearly convinced that pluralism is the way to navigate the religious and philosophical differences of the Dutch nation effectively. This may well have been the case for the Dutch in 1904, I don't know, but 120 years later, it doesn't seem like Christian pluralists left an inheritance for their children.
It certainly left me feeling "wow, this is nice, our own situation is so different than Bavinck's own, I'm not sure why neocalvinists think this is going to help our fight in the west in 2023." As a purely academic resource however, it does shed light on Bavinck and his time.
This is a particularly helpful work in that it reminds the reader that the great revolution which neocalvinism emerged from is foreign to our own time. It was a day when universities were still so much more conservative than they are now, and nobody actually believed in complete free expression. You also see glimmers of the modernists arguing that science must be independent of religion, and using figures such as Christopher Columbus to justify their case. This probably explains his appearance in the early 20th century American architecture in places like Union Station, as poor religious Italians were more or less used to support American monuments that proclaimed the death of supernatural Christianity. It was oddly reminiscent of Jefferson and Madison's alliance with the Baptists to remove religion from the public square.
Bavinck's work is articulate, but he is also clearly convinced that pluralism is the way to navigate the religious and philosophical differences of the Dutch nation effectively. This may well have been the case for the Dutch in 1904, I don't know, but 120 years later, it doesn't seem like Christian pluralists left an inheritance for their children.
It certainly left me feeling "wow, this is nice, our own situation is so different than Bavinck's own, I'm not sure why neocalvinists think this is going to help our fight in the west in 2023." As a purely academic resource however, it does shed light on Bavinck and his time.
September 9, 2023
I’m glad that Crossway has made this volume of Bavinck’s writing accessible to English speakers. Bavinck clearly puts forth his arguments for how science (and scholastic pursuits in general) must always be influenced by the worldview of its practitioners. His careful logic reminds me of some of C.S. Lewis’s writings, though not as easy to read.
The translation from the Dutch seems to be quite clear and is not overly clunky. However, one aspect of the translation is puzzling to me. Occasionally the translators will include the original Dutch word in brackets after the English word that is translating it, not in a footnote but in the text itself. For instance: “Liberalism’s awkward teenage years [vlegeljaren] are over.” The editors’ introduction states that this is done “where knowledge of a particular Dutch term might help some readers appreciate the text with a greater degree of nuance.” I’m trying to imagine who these readers would be. I mean, if these readers know enough about Dutch words to glean nuances of meaning from them, they probably could just read the work in Dutch, couldn’t they?
Crossway’s publishing with this volume is ok but not great. The paper is good quality and looks nice, and the type is easy to read, but the binding is glued, and the texture on the outside of the hard cover gets grimy very quickly and makes the writing on the back cover quite difficult to read.
Full disclosure: I received a free copy in exchange for a review.
The translation from the Dutch seems to be quite clear and is not overly clunky. However, one aspect of the translation is puzzling to me. Occasionally the translators will include the original Dutch word in brackets after the English word that is translating it, not in a footnote but in the text itself. For instance: “Liberalism’s awkward teenage years [vlegeljaren] are over.” The editors’ introduction states that this is done “where knowledge of a particular Dutch term might help some readers appreciate the text with a greater degree of nuance.” I’m trying to imagine who these readers would be. I mean, if these readers know enough about Dutch words to glean nuances of meaning from them, they probably could just read the work in Dutch, couldn’t they?
Crossway’s publishing with this volume is ok but not great. The paper is good quality and looks nice, and the type is easy to read, but the binding is glued, and the texture on the outside of the hard cover gets grimy very quickly and makes the writing on the back cover quite difficult to read.
Full disclosure: I received a free copy in exchange for a review.
July 15, 2023
As the editors point out, "science" isn't perhaps the best term today to translate the concepts about which Bavinck is writing here, but it's the one used in his era. He is writing about science, but also about knowledge more generally and especially epistemology, how we come to have knowledge. Bavinck is making the classic case that Christianity is not opposed to science; in fact, the latter pursuit has typically presupposed the former.
I can't say Bavinck makes the case as clearly as some others have, and he'll spend a lot of time discussing figures you and I have never heard of it. But every so often you'll stumble across an insight that more or less makes the book worthwhile (it's short, anyway). Considering Bavinck's status today, it was inevitable that someone would translate and publish this work, and I'm happy that Crossway has done so in its typically handsome way.
I can't say Bavinck makes the case as clearly as some others have, and he'll spend a lot of time discussing figures you and I have never heard of it. But every so often you'll stumble across an insight that more or less makes the book worthwhile (it's short, anyway). Considering Bavinck's status today, it was inevitable that someone would translate and publish this work, and I'm happy that Crossway has done so in its typically handsome way.
December 27, 2023
Surprisingly thoughtful discussion of how to justify Christianity in a materialist, positivist culture. Bavinck is dated, with plenty of references to now-obscure thinkers and local politics, but his arguments are the same you'll see deployed in religious debates today. He discusses the distinction between hard and soft sciences, the basic philosophical assumptions required to do science, the difference between religious studies and theology, the difference between saving faith and assent to propositions, and how to see Christianity as an underlying basis for science rather than an alternative to science. Much more relevant than Christian Worldview.
October 10, 2024
A thorough engagement with the claims of modernity in the world of science and university. Separating science and life, research and faith, is impossible, because it is unnatural and unhealthy. Reality works the other way.
Even though he clearly disagrees with him on the major things, a few places had statements about knowledge that seemed too Kantian ("we cannot overemphasize how relative our knowledge is"), and in a few the benefits of the gospel for finding scientific truth were overstated or unclear (it is a neocalvinist work, after all). This Kantian emphasis becomes even more unbalanced in later generations of neocalvinists.
But overall, a fantastic work.
Even though he clearly disagrees with him on the major things, a few places had statements about knowledge that seemed too Kantian ("we cannot overemphasize how relative our knowledge is"), and in a few the benefits of the gospel for finding scientific truth were overstated or unclear (it is a neocalvinist work, after all). This Kantian emphasis becomes even more unbalanced in later generations of neocalvinists.
But overall, a fantastic work.
June 29, 2025
Despite being over a hundred years old, Bavinck's work is highly relevant to the contemporary situation. At times, the focus on history and/or philosophy can be a slog, but the helpful editorial footnotes make this an accessible volume without much prior reading in the topic. Consistent with Bavinck's other works, he emphasizes the centrality of revelation and worldview, with the key point that Christianity is a blessing to the pursuit of truth that should be the goal of science.
September 27, 2024
I was looking forward to this book as I have been blessed by Bavinck's 4 volume dogmatics. However, aside from some obvious truths, the book was pretty thin on content. I was hoping for a much more biblically grounded treatment. Instead Bavinck takes almost a modernist perspective on the relation between science and faith. Not really all that helpful.
November 17, 2023
This is a wonderful book that melds the Christian worldview with the scientific realm. Bavinck clearly illustrates the inseparability of the two. Easy to follow and shockingly relevant even 100 years after its original publishing.
April 8, 2024
Bavinck is incredibly skilful in all his writing, but this is something else.
His deconstruction of the idea of empiricism being completely unbiased is phenomenal.
Highly recommended to anyone thinking about the apparent incompatibility of science and Christianity.
His deconstruction of the idea of empiricism being completely unbiased is phenomenal.
Highly recommended to anyone thinking about the apparent incompatibility of science and Christianity.
June 10, 2024
Excellent book! One only wishes that Bavinck wrote Christian Worldview as lucidly. Just like the individual yearns for unity/harmony so ought the university curriculum coalesce around the unity of a confession.
Read
September 22, 2024a bavinck a year
keeps the heresy afar
keeps the heresy afar
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews