What do you think?
Rate this book
Origins: Christian Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design
When it comes to the history of the universe, many believe that science and faith are mutually exclusive. But in this revised version of Origins, physics professors Loren and Deborah Haarsma explore what God's Word and God's world teach us about creation, evolution, and intelligent design. Clearly explaining the science, the authors focus on areas where Christians agree. They also present the strengths and weaknesses of areas where Christians differ.
Origins helps you develop a deeper understanding of the origins of the universe and sort out your own views on faith and science. Small group discussion questions follow each chapter. A companion website provides resources for further study.
Origins helps you develop a deeper understanding of the origins of the universe and sort out your own views on faith and science. Small group discussion questions follow each chapter. A companion website provides resources for further study.
315 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2007
43 people are currently reading
275 people want to read
About the author
Deborah B. Haarsma
5 books4 followersDeborah Haarsma serves as President of The BioLogos Foundation, a position she has held since January 2013. Previously, she served as professor and chair in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Gifted in interpreting complex scientific topics for lay audiences, Dr. Haarsma often speaks to churches, colleges, and schools about the relationships between science and Christian faith. She is author (along with her husband Loren Haarsma) of Origins: Christian Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design (2011, 2007), a book presenting the agreements and disagreements of Christians regarding the history of life and the universe. Many congregations, Christian high schools, and Christian colleges use the book as a guide for navigating Christian debates over creation and evolution.
Haarsma is an experienced research scientist, with several publications in the Astrophysical Journal and the Astronomical Journal on extragalactic astronomy and cosmology. She has studied very large galaxies (at the centers of galaxy clusters), very young galaxies (undergoing rapid star formation in the early universe), and gravitational lenses (where spacetime is curved by a massive object). Her work uses data from several major telescopes, including the Very Large Array radio telescope in New Mexico, the Southern Astrophysical Research optical and infrared telescope in Cerro Pachon, Chile, and the Chandra X-ray Observatory in orbit around the earth. Haarsma completed her doctoral work in astrophysics at M.I.T. in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Gifted in interpreting complex scientific topics for lay audiences, Dr. Haarsma often speaks to churches, colleges, and schools about the relationships between science and Christian faith. She is author (along with her husband Loren Haarsma) of Origins: Christian Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design (2011, 2007), a book presenting the agreements and disagreements of Christians regarding the history of life and the universe. Many congregations, Christian high schools, and Christian colleges use the book as a guide for navigating Christian debates over creation and evolution.
Haarsma is an experienced research scientist, with several publications in the Astrophysical Journal and the Astronomical Journal on extragalactic astronomy and cosmology. She has studied very large galaxies (at the centers of galaxy clusters), very young galaxies (undergoing rapid star formation in the early universe), and gravitational lenses (where spacetime is curved by a massive object). Her work uses data from several major telescopes, including the Very Large Array radio telescope in New Mexico, the Southern Astrophysical Research optical and infrared telescope in Cerro Pachon, Chile, and the Chandra X-ray Observatory in orbit around the earth. Haarsma completed her doctoral work in astrophysics at M.I.T. in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
October 15, 2021
The authors expertly and gently guild the reader away from definitive thinking on a topic where so many of us have unknowingly become entrenched in binary catagories.
I’m grateful for this book. I actually felt a tremendous sense of relief as I read it and my once narrow worldview was allowed to shift in a way that made God seem bigger. God is not limited by observable natural processes. He is not just a “God of the gaps” in scientific discovery. Rather He is the author and creator of the natural world and He oversees every molecule.
I’m grateful for this book. I actually felt a tremendous sense of relief as I read it and my once narrow worldview was allowed to shift in a way that made God seem bigger. God is not limited by observable natural processes. He is not just a “God of the gaps” in scientific discovery. Rather He is the author and creator of the natural world and He oversees every molecule.
February 12, 2013
As much as I enjoyed some of the issues that the authors dealt with, such as the age of the earth and the early chapters of Genesis, I was frustrated by their lack of engagement with what I consider to be the primary issue in the whole creation/evolution controversy, and that is the issue of creation itself.
Are the concepts of design and creation meaningful within the field of science itself? In the early centuries of science, the years of Galileo and Newton, they certainly were. But with the rise of a closed, mechanistic view of the universe and Darwin's seemingly plausible account for the history of biology, design was seen as apparent only, counterfeited by purely natural processes. And so design and creation were unceremoniously booted out of the natural sciences and into the realm of religious belief. The question is, what about today? Was Darwin right?
The authors certainly think so. But just what is "evolution"? They are right in pointing out that the word has several meanings. However, I believe they are mistaken in identifying the primary meaning with common ancestry rather than the process which would account for common ancestry. Certainly common ancestry is necessary for evolution, but it is not sufficient. How do I know this? Because not only is common ancestry compatible with evolution, but also with intelligent design. Evolution is not so much about the "that" question of common ancestry, but about the "how" question. The theory of evolution purports to give the mechanism explaining "how" organisms evolved one from another. So to give all the evidence that they do to establish common descent is all well and good as far as it goes, but it does nothing to distinguish the theory of evolution from the theory of intelligent design.
The theory of intelligent design is very easily distinguished from evolution, and as such it is disappointing that the authors fail to see that distinction, and instead perpetuate the well-worn myths about I.D. that continue to circulate. Here is the difference: the theory of evolution claims that all the diversity of life came about through strictly natural causes, while intelligent design claims that we have evidence not only of natural causes but of intelligent causes in the history of life. That's it; it's that simple. Miracles are irrelevant to the discussion as they are suggested modes by which intelligent causes operate but they are not the only ones possible. For example, human beings leave evidence of intelligent causation all the time without performing miracles.
And to say that intelligent design is invoked to explain the complexity in life is also mistaken. Intelligent design purports to explain not complexity per se but a particular kind of complexity called specified complexity. Here it is invoked not out of ignorance and out of the throwing up of hands "because there's no way this could have happened by chance", but as the result of a particular kind of reasoning called "inference to the best explanation." This is in fact the same kind of reasoning that Darwin used in the Origin of Species to come to his conclusions.
It is critical to a correct understanding of intelligent design to realize that it does not throw out the explanatory toolbox of evolution, but merely adds to it. Thus where natural causes suffice to explain a given phenomenon, I.D. is happy to concur with what evolutionary science currently claims. But where the evidence clearly indicates intelligent causation, such as the origin of the information content of DNA (see my review of Stephen Meyer's "Signature in the Cell"), intelligent design has the intellectual apparatus to deal with that, whereas evolution must keep futilely hammering away to find some kind of natural cause.
Here's what it boils down to. Suppose a police chief sends his detectives out to solve a murder case. After giving them their instructions, he says "Oh, one more thing. You can't implicate a white man." Wouldn't that be odd? Now, a non-white person might actually be guilty, but with this restriction in place, I would not feel to comfortable looking at a line-up of six black suspects. In the same way, it is possible that theistic evolution (or evolutionary creationism) is correct. But with the paltry relevant evidence and the restrictions placed on origin-of-life research (only natural processes allowed), is it really surprising that one could be skeptical of evolution?
The authors make an unsubstantiated leap from their case that stellar evolution proceeded by natural laws, to their claim that biological evolution also proceeded by natural laws. They assert that "Evolutionary creationists argue that God also fine-tuned the laws of nature so that simple organisms can evolve into complex ones." This isn't an argument, but a bald assertion, because whereas we can identify the natural laws and processes by which stellar evolution proceeded, no such laws are identified governing biological evolution.
It is important that we do not uncritically take the conclusions that secular science gives us, and then baptize them with theological language. When historical questions, such as what was the primary reason Darwin won, and philosophical questions, such as why must science adopt methodological naturalism (an exclusion of intelligent causation) are considered, a strong case can be made for the supposition that behind evolutionary biology is a desire to be rid of the concept of "creation" as a necessary item of knowledge. As long as it is reduced to a mere item of "faith" (understood as not pertaining to reality) we are still allowed to speak of creation. Ridding us of creation also rids us of that annoying necessity of a Creator, one who can actually make demands of us and (shudder) judge us for how we live our lives.
Theistic evolutionists, of course, will say that evolution is true in spite of the atheistic spin put on it by some. But then, I would respond, where is the evidence for the purely material process? The scientific community can content itself with evidence for common descent because evidence for common descent is assumed to be evidence for a purely natural process, because in a closed universe, there is nothing else. You can kind of fudge the mechanism, and they do, because to them that is a secondary issue. The most important thing is a commitment to materialism, and it must be absolute, "for we cannot allow a Divine foot in the door" (Harvard biologist Richard Lewontin).
Christians, on the other hand, should never accept this. If God used a purely material process, fine. But if there is evidence of intelligent causation in the natural world, the kind of evidence we accept in other branches of science such as archeology and the SETI program, we cannot dismiss it out of hand like the scientific naturalists do. We cannot decide in advance how creation unfolded.
To be intellectually honest, theistic evolutionists should read the works of I.D. proponents themselves, and not the caricatured falsehoods that are endlessly circulated by the media and the evolutionary establishment. Even if they don't agree with some or all the evidence presented by intelligent design, I think they would agree that the concept, the view that is open to following the evidence where it leads, is sound. Because currently they, and the scientific establishment, are settling for the best naturalistic explanation rather than pursuing the truth. (Of course, the scientific establishment equates the best naturalistic explanation with the truth).
The most important question in the creation/evolution controversy is the very possibility of creation as an item of knowledge in our study of the natural world. Is it even possible that a creator has, in some sense, left tangible, empirical, scientifically detectable fingerprints, undeniable evidences of his activity, in the created order, or are we going to decide in advance that God acted only through natural laws?
Design and creation were legitimate concepts within science from its inception. They were wrongly removed based on views of nature that we now know to be false (the universe consists not only of matter and energy, but also information). That the scientific community as a whole is resistant to the reinstatement of these concepts is not surprising, but when such resistance is given tacit approval by Christians by their perpetuation of bad arguments and misrepresentation of good ones, this requires an explanation.
Because of the academic rigour of men like Alvin Plantinga, theism has, after a lengthy absence, once again become a respectable concept within the discipline of philosophy. I think the same will happen in biology, but only when we stop throwing our best and brightest, men like Stephen Meyer and William Dembski, under the bus, and give them a fair hearing.
Are the concepts of design and creation meaningful within the field of science itself? In the early centuries of science, the years of Galileo and Newton, they certainly were. But with the rise of a closed, mechanistic view of the universe and Darwin's seemingly plausible account for the history of biology, design was seen as apparent only, counterfeited by purely natural processes. And so design and creation were unceremoniously booted out of the natural sciences and into the realm of religious belief. The question is, what about today? Was Darwin right?
The authors certainly think so. But just what is "evolution"? They are right in pointing out that the word has several meanings. However, I believe they are mistaken in identifying the primary meaning with common ancestry rather than the process which would account for common ancestry. Certainly common ancestry is necessary for evolution, but it is not sufficient. How do I know this? Because not only is common ancestry compatible with evolution, but also with intelligent design. Evolution is not so much about the "that" question of common ancestry, but about the "how" question. The theory of evolution purports to give the mechanism explaining "how" organisms evolved one from another. So to give all the evidence that they do to establish common descent is all well and good as far as it goes, but it does nothing to distinguish the theory of evolution from the theory of intelligent design.
The theory of intelligent design is very easily distinguished from evolution, and as such it is disappointing that the authors fail to see that distinction, and instead perpetuate the well-worn myths about I.D. that continue to circulate. Here is the difference: the theory of evolution claims that all the diversity of life came about through strictly natural causes, while intelligent design claims that we have evidence not only of natural causes but of intelligent causes in the history of life. That's it; it's that simple. Miracles are irrelevant to the discussion as they are suggested modes by which intelligent causes operate but they are not the only ones possible. For example, human beings leave evidence of intelligent causation all the time without performing miracles.
And to say that intelligent design is invoked to explain the complexity in life is also mistaken. Intelligent design purports to explain not complexity per se but a particular kind of complexity called specified complexity. Here it is invoked not out of ignorance and out of the throwing up of hands "because there's no way this could have happened by chance", but as the result of a particular kind of reasoning called "inference to the best explanation." This is in fact the same kind of reasoning that Darwin used in the Origin of Species to come to his conclusions.
It is critical to a correct understanding of intelligent design to realize that it does not throw out the explanatory toolbox of evolution, but merely adds to it. Thus where natural causes suffice to explain a given phenomenon, I.D. is happy to concur with what evolutionary science currently claims. But where the evidence clearly indicates intelligent causation, such as the origin of the information content of DNA (see my review of Stephen Meyer's "Signature in the Cell"), intelligent design has the intellectual apparatus to deal with that, whereas evolution must keep futilely hammering away to find some kind of natural cause.
Here's what it boils down to. Suppose a police chief sends his detectives out to solve a murder case. After giving them their instructions, he says "Oh, one more thing. You can't implicate a white man." Wouldn't that be odd? Now, a non-white person might actually be guilty, but with this restriction in place, I would not feel to comfortable looking at a line-up of six black suspects. In the same way, it is possible that theistic evolution (or evolutionary creationism) is correct. But with the paltry relevant evidence and the restrictions placed on origin-of-life research (only natural processes allowed), is it really surprising that one could be skeptical of evolution?
The authors make an unsubstantiated leap from their case that stellar evolution proceeded by natural laws, to their claim that biological evolution also proceeded by natural laws. They assert that "Evolutionary creationists argue that God also fine-tuned the laws of nature so that simple organisms can evolve into complex ones." This isn't an argument, but a bald assertion, because whereas we can identify the natural laws and processes by which stellar evolution proceeded, no such laws are identified governing biological evolution.
It is important that we do not uncritically take the conclusions that secular science gives us, and then baptize them with theological language. When historical questions, such as what was the primary reason Darwin won, and philosophical questions, such as why must science adopt methodological naturalism (an exclusion of intelligent causation) are considered, a strong case can be made for the supposition that behind evolutionary biology is a desire to be rid of the concept of "creation" as a necessary item of knowledge. As long as it is reduced to a mere item of "faith" (understood as not pertaining to reality) we are still allowed to speak of creation. Ridding us of creation also rids us of that annoying necessity of a Creator, one who can actually make demands of us and (shudder) judge us for how we live our lives.
Theistic evolutionists, of course, will say that evolution is true in spite of the atheistic spin put on it by some. But then, I would respond, where is the evidence for the purely material process? The scientific community can content itself with evidence for common descent because evidence for common descent is assumed to be evidence for a purely natural process, because in a closed universe, there is nothing else. You can kind of fudge the mechanism, and they do, because to them that is a secondary issue. The most important thing is a commitment to materialism, and it must be absolute, "for we cannot allow a Divine foot in the door" (Harvard biologist Richard Lewontin).
Christians, on the other hand, should never accept this. If God used a purely material process, fine. But if there is evidence of intelligent causation in the natural world, the kind of evidence we accept in other branches of science such as archeology and the SETI program, we cannot dismiss it out of hand like the scientific naturalists do. We cannot decide in advance how creation unfolded.
To be intellectually honest, theistic evolutionists should read the works of I.D. proponents themselves, and not the caricatured falsehoods that are endlessly circulated by the media and the evolutionary establishment. Even if they don't agree with some or all the evidence presented by intelligent design, I think they would agree that the concept, the view that is open to following the evidence where it leads, is sound. Because currently they, and the scientific establishment, are settling for the best naturalistic explanation rather than pursuing the truth. (Of course, the scientific establishment equates the best naturalistic explanation with the truth).
The most important question in the creation/evolution controversy is the very possibility of creation as an item of knowledge in our study of the natural world. Is it even possible that a creator has, in some sense, left tangible, empirical, scientifically detectable fingerprints, undeniable evidences of his activity, in the created order, or are we going to decide in advance that God acted only through natural laws?
Design and creation were legitimate concepts within science from its inception. They were wrongly removed based on views of nature that we now know to be false (the universe consists not only of matter and energy, but also information). That the scientific community as a whole is resistant to the reinstatement of these concepts is not surprising, but when such resistance is given tacit approval by Christians by their perpetuation of bad arguments and misrepresentation of good ones, this requires an explanation.
Because of the academic rigour of men like Alvin Plantinga, theism has, after a lengthy absence, once again become a respectable concept within the discipline of philosophy. I think the same will happen in biology, but only when we stop throwing our best and brightest, men like Stephen Meyer and William Dembski, under the bus, and give them a fair hearing.
February 5, 2022
This is the best introduction to science itself, the science underlying (what is for American Christians) the controversial theory of evolution, and the spectrum of beliefs on the biblical teaching of God’s creation of the heavens, the earth, the animal kingdom and humanity I have ever read. It is so clear, it is a joy to read! I don’t want to put it down.
Drs. Loren and Deborah Haarsma teach physics and astronomy respectively at Calvin University. Deborah also serves as president of BioLogos. The Haarsmas’s mastery of their disciplines, their skill as educational communicators, and their unifying and irenic tone give this resource a depth and richness of understanding that laypeople and professional ministers and scholars alike will learn much from. Out of their communicative skills, helpful group discussion questions, sidebars leading to online pdf resources for deeper dives on various related topics along the way in each chapter, and a well-produced six-part video lecture series including associated discussion questions of its own, further enrich and commend this book for study by your church’s high school or adult Sunday School and small groups.
The only thing hindering this book from being worked through by every church in America is the anxiety that goes along with bringing up this subject in potentially mixed company. But I daresay that any proponent of concordist and young earth persuasions with the grace and courage to expose themselves to the information presented in this volume will find themselves and their views respected and included. While making a clear case for the science of evolution and showing its compatibility with the Bible, sound hermeneutics and theology, Origins recommends believers be introduced to the spectrum and encouraged to find their own way through the issues, rather than dogmatically dictating what the reader must think about creationism, evolution and intelligent design.
Do yourself a favor and avail yourself of the wealth of understanding and the warmth of brotherly love exemplified by the presentation in this book.
Drs. Loren and Deborah Haarsma teach physics and astronomy respectively at Calvin University. Deborah also serves as president of BioLogos. The Haarsmas’s mastery of their disciplines, their skill as educational communicators, and their unifying and irenic tone give this resource a depth and richness of understanding that laypeople and professional ministers and scholars alike will learn much from. Out of their communicative skills, helpful group discussion questions, sidebars leading to online pdf resources for deeper dives on various related topics along the way in each chapter, and a well-produced six-part video lecture series including associated discussion questions of its own, further enrich and commend this book for study by your church’s high school or adult Sunday School and small groups.
The only thing hindering this book from being worked through by every church in America is the anxiety that goes along with bringing up this subject in potentially mixed company. But I daresay that any proponent of concordist and young earth persuasions with the grace and courage to expose themselves to the information presented in this volume will find themselves and their views respected and included. While making a clear case for the science of evolution and showing its compatibility with the Bible, sound hermeneutics and theology, Origins recommends believers be introduced to the spectrum and encouraged to find their own way through the issues, rather than dogmatically dictating what the reader must think about creationism, evolution and intelligent design.
Do yourself a favor and avail yourself of the wealth of understanding and the warmth of brotherly love exemplified by the presentation in this book.
April 27, 2014
This book was written in attempt to show various viewpoints of creation. Where I feel the author has done well was in showing how there are various viewpoints that fit within the realm of orthodoxy.
But another goal of the book was to demonstrate the strength of the Old Earth viewpoints. As far as that goal is advanced I have three major criticisms.
1.) The authors fail to deal significantly with the appearance of age theory" They really only mention it in a few brief paragraphs. They recognize that it is compatible with the science but fails to be a strong view because of the theological insufficiency of the viewpoint.
But when they get around to demonstrating the insufficiency they do very poorly. Only engaging with the view flippantly. If the appearance of age theory is scientifically viable then they need to really spend time showing how its theologically insufficient.
2.) They call natural revelation the 67th book. They rely heavily on the truth that nature is able to reveal but that subject is one that is hotly debated. If Old Earth proponents are going to rely so heavily on natural revelation they need to really give an account of why natural revelation can be as reliable as they say it is.
3.) The authors really don't do well with the important issue of the historical Adam. They do offer various views but when it comes to putting their weight behind one they end up saying, "we don't really know" and "all of these views have serious holes". Being that the historical Adam is such a huge criticism of Young Earth creationists with Old Earth creationists I really felt like they should have spent more time here.
But another goal of the book was to demonstrate the strength of the Old Earth viewpoints. As far as that goal is advanced I have three major criticisms.
1.) The authors fail to deal significantly with the appearance of age theory" They really only mention it in a few brief paragraphs. They recognize that it is compatible with the science but fails to be a strong view because of the theological insufficiency of the viewpoint.
But when they get around to demonstrating the insufficiency they do very poorly. Only engaging with the view flippantly. If the appearance of age theory is scientifically viable then they need to really spend time showing how its theologically insufficient.
2.) They call natural revelation the 67th book. They rely heavily on the truth that nature is able to reveal but that subject is one that is hotly debated. If Old Earth proponents are going to rely so heavily on natural revelation they need to really give an account of why natural revelation can be as reliable as they say it is.
3.) The authors really don't do well with the important issue of the historical Adam. They do offer various views but when it comes to putting their weight behind one they end up saying, "we don't really know" and "all of these views have serious holes". Being that the historical Adam is such a huge criticism of Young Earth creationists with Old Earth creationists I really felt like they should have spent more time here.
April 8, 2017
This book very clearly lays out various viewpoints concerning issues where science, or observations of the natural world, seem to conflict with what is written in the Bible. They include both evidence from science and the Bible in terms that anyone could understand, whether they have a lot or very little previous knowledge of either the Bible or scientific findings.
This book should be read by anyone who has ever wondered how the evidence for evolution can coincide with a Christian perspective. My dad recommended this book to me because I was taking a course on evolution last semester. This book really helped me to sort out what I believe.
It emphasizes the fact that God created both the universe and the Bible, and so we should not ignore what He is trying to say through one or the other. "Because they are both revelations from God, nature and Scripture cannot conflict with each other. Conflict comes at the level of human interpretation of one or both revelations." (Page 276). In addition, they also emphasize that what we believe about how science relates to the teachings in the Bible does not affect whether we have salvation or not.
This book should be read by anyone who has ever wondered how the evidence for evolution can coincide with a Christian perspective. My dad recommended this book to me because I was taking a course on evolution last semester. This book really helped me to sort out what I believe.
It emphasizes the fact that God created both the universe and the Bible, and so we should not ignore what He is trying to say through one or the other. "Because they are both revelations from God, nature and Scripture cannot conflict with each other. Conflict comes at the level of human interpretation of one or both revelations." (Page 276). In addition, they also emphasize that what we believe about how science relates to the teachings in the Bible does not affect whether we have salvation or not.
June 3, 2018
This book is a well-organized and succinct source for the layperson to learn about the most commonly held views among Christians regarding the Creation/Evolution debate. It lays out the scientific evidence within several fields of study as well as giving information about biblical hermeneutics, all while maintaining that God speaks truth through both nature and scripture and that He is sovereign over all things.
The authors are both scientists and Christians from the Reformed tradition. I appreciate the knowledgeable yet humble tone with which the book is written. This isn’t fear-mongering, nor is it propaganda like so many books and resources on this subject seem to be. The authors reject the idea that there are only two options: atheistic evolutionism or Young-Earth creationism. This false dichotomy caused me to nearly lose my faith years ago, so I especially appreciate the balanced approach they take here.
I will be handing this book to each of my children when they reach high school age. I want them to learn from Christian intellectuals who interact with the prevailing ideas of the day yet stand on the truth of God’s Word, who reject scientism but not science, who are willing to say “we don’t know” or “there is not yet a consensus among Christian theologians” without having their faith crushed.
I love that the authors don’t take a combative stance and that they bring it around in the end to areas where Christians DO agree. This will not be a comfortable read for most people, but it is an important read - especially for young people who are being told it’s all or nothing.
The authors are both scientists and Christians from the Reformed tradition. I appreciate the knowledgeable yet humble tone with which the book is written. This isn’t fear-mongering, nor is it propaganda like so many books and resources on this subject seem to be. The authors reject the idea that there are only two options: atheistic evolutionism or Young-Earth creationism. This false dichotomy caused me to nearly lose my faith years ago, so I especially appreciate the balanced approach they take here.
I will be handing this book to each of my children when they reach high school age. I want them to learn from Christian intellectuals who interact with the prevailing ideas of the day yet stand on the truth of God’s Word, who reject scientism but not science, who are willing to say “we don’t know” or “there is not yet a consensus among Christian theologians” without having their faith crushed.
I love that the authors don’t take a combative stance and that they bring it around in the end to areas where Christians DO agree. This will not be a comfortable read for most people, but it is an important read - especially for young people who are being told it’s all or nothing.
December 13, 2025
I really like this book! Its main theme / takeaway is that science is a way of studying the world God created, nothing we discover about science disproves God or threatens the truth in scripture.
“God created nature and scripture, so they cannot conflict with each other (p. 276).”
Consider the audience the Bible was written too and what knowledge they had of the world. God did not choose to reveal to them how the world was created or how it functions, He chose to reveal Himself to His people and that He is the creator and sustainer of this world. This is so important to keep in mind when reading the Bible, especially for Genesis 1 & 2. The book also dives into different views of Adam & Eve and different views on the creation of the earth, like young-earth creationism and evolutionary creationism. The authors do a good job of presenting all views and describe the scientific and theological issues with all of them. Essentially, there is no perfect view of how the earth was created, they each have gaps in science and/or theology. But what they all agree on is that God is the creator of the universe, He created humans in His image and made us stewards of this earth, and that our Creator is also our Redeemer.
So it was never a question of if God created the universe, but how He did it. The Bible ultimately does not give us this answer. Genesis 1 & 2 simply reveal that God created the world and has all authority.
“Questions about when and how God created the earth are important, but they are not essential to our salvation (p. 280).”
“God created nature and scripture, so they cannot conflict with each other (p. 276).”
Consider the audience the Bible was written too and what knowledge they had of the world. God did not choose to reveal to them how the world was created or how it functions, He chose to reveal Himself to His people and that He is the creator and sustainer of this world. This is so important to keep in mind when reading the Bible, especially for Genesis 1 & 2. The book also dives into different views of Adam & Eve and different views on the creation of the earth, like young-earth creationism and evolutionary creationism. The authors do a good job of presenting all views and describe the scientific and theological issues with all of them. Essentially, there is no perfect view of how the earth was created, they each have gaps in science and/or theology. But what they all agree on is that God is the creator of the universe, He created humans in His image and made us stewards of this earth, and that our Creator is also our Redeemer.
So it was never a question of if God created the universe, but how He did it. The Bible ultimately does not give us this answer. Genesis 1 & 2 simply reveal that God created the world and has all authority.
“Questions about when and how God created the earth are important, but they are not essential to our salvation (p. 280).”
February 28, 2019
Objective, persuasive, and gracious
This is the kind of discussion that honors God and shows respect for the brethren! This is how to conduct an in-house debate on an issue that has the capacity to set brother against brother. It should be required reading for every spiritual leader, from pastor to parent, professor to Sunday School teacher. And for those who are worried about the loss of evangelical children after one semester at University, this book demonstrates just how unnecessary that can be. It is a false choice to present our children that they must choose either the Bible or science.
This is the kind of discussion that honors God and shows respect for the brethren! This is how to conduct an in-house debate on an issue that has the capacity to set brother against brother. It should be required reading for every spiritual leader, from pastor to parent, professor to Sunday School teacher. And for those who are worried about the loss of evangelical children after one semester at University, this book demonstrates just how unnecessary that can be. It is a false choice to present our children that they must choose either the Bible or science.
March 4, 2024
Overall, “Origins” did a good job in what it set out to accomplish. The Haarsmas gave a broader viewpoint to the dichotomy between science and faith. The common mindset is that one has to reject science if they are to accept faith, or vice versa. However, the Haarsmas show that there are more options than that.
On the other hand, I was disappointed they also did not give more evidence for their scientific claims. Just because “Origins” was written for laypeople, doesn’t mean you can forego a bibliography. Readers are repeatedly forced to take the author’s word for it with the blatant lack of sources.
On the other hand, I was disappointed they also did not give more evidence for their scientific claims. Just because “Origins” was written for laypeople, doesn’t mean you can forego a bibliography. Readers are repeatedly forced to take the author’s word for it with the blatant lack of sources.
July 6, 2021
I very much appreciate the tempered approach this book takes to both scientific and scriptural interpretation, explaining the reasoning behind many different approaches to creation, evolution, and intelligent design, and both the scientific and theological problems each poses, and trying not to push any one view (obviously it's hard to avoid explaining where one comes from). The emphasis on both nature and scripture as revelations from God was a helpful way to think about integrating science and faith which is always a good reminder.
June 23, 2020
The authors' perspective as evolutionary creationists is pretty clear, and they certainly spend the most time talking about that view, but they do a good job describing other viewpoints. They thoughtfully address the strengths and weaknesses of each view, including their own. They look at both the scientific and theological issues of each viewpoint. There's a clear heart to encourage discussion and unity among Christians even in areas of sincere disagreement. A worthwhile read, fo sure.
October 28, 2021
This book was very accessible for the non-scientifically literate, and it carefully laid out a wide variety of views held by Christians regarding creation and evolution. It very clearly explains that there is not one view that must be held. With each view it presented the way that science and theology work and don’t work to support that view. And it showed how strong theology is compatible with a wide spectrum of views on origins.
March 6, 2025
Really good read, I struggled through my Geology classes in college because I grew up being told carbon-dating is fake, the earth is young, and to simply ignore lies about the age of the earth. I met a few Christian evolutions and they recommended this book to me. It brought me back to my faith even more and strengthened it so much. It is quite biased but still explores other perspectives on the matter and doesn’t trash people for holding other views.
July 21, 2018
Fantastic and Comprehensive!
I really enjoyed reading this book. The Haarsma’s know how to teach controversial and complex topics in a way that a nonscientist can understand. I appreciate their willingness to be honest about their personal views, yet at the same time teach an array of views in a charitable spirit. I highly recommend this book.
I really enjoyed reading this book. The Haarsma’s know how to teach controversial and complex topics in a way that a nonscientist can understand. I appreciate their willingness to be honest about their personal views, yet at the same time teach an array of views in a charitable spirit. I highly recommend this book.
October 1, 2018
Excellent book to show you don't have to choose between faith and science. They can work hand in hand to reveal God's glory and sovereignty. My wife said it well in her review at https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
December 18, 2017
The book is very comprehensive. The authors do an outstanding job providing the different approaches to the treatment and interpretation of creation and Genesis 1 & 2.
July 4, 2018
Works cited? Lots of vague references to "other evidence" or wide sweeping statements with little to no details to support them.
February 14, 2019
There was a fair amount I didn’t agree with (a lot, really), but I thought it was well-written. Glad I read it (or skimmed it at times).
June 25, 2019
Fantastic study.
December 23, 2023
I can imagine how encouraging this book would have been to the 16-20 year old version of myself.
July 18, 2014
Here's the rub. Once upon a time--and still today--people who believe in a Christian education, like me, used evolution as a kind of shibboleth. Those of us who chose to send our kids to a Christian school could always say, "You know, if our kids went to public schools, they'd be taught that their ancestors were chimpanzees--how does that square with biblical thinking?"
End of conversation. Maybe. Creation was a mainstay, a foundational principle. That God almighty created all things was a given in what most people considered a Christian worldview. Belief in evolution was belief in Godlessness.
And it still is.
Well, somewhat.
The alternatives, for some, are few. Either He did or He didn't. Now if we hang two scenarios on that "either-or" dilemma, only two possibilities exist: either 6000 years ago God almighty snapped his fingers and it all started on time; or, creation is a cute little story for pre-schoolers.
Already in 1925, the theory of evolution was a lightning rod. When William Jennings Bryan, a fiery Christian populist known for his passionate oratory, entered a Tennessee courtroom, not having practiced law for more than thirty years, he was taking on nothing less than atheism itself. On the other side stood an equally powerful heavyweight advocate--and agnostic--Clarence Darrow. For the two of them, the question of creation vs. evolution was perfectly either/or.
That trial set a paradigm in the American mind ever since: evolution is Godless; creation is Godly.
Wouldn't it be sweet if life was that simple?
We've been reading Origins, a wonderful little compendium of the parameters of the conversation, for quite some time now, a fascinating study. It's rare to find a book so generously written. That Loren and Deborah Haarsma, the husband/wife pair who authored the book, have a point of view in all of this goes without question, but their largess for those who don't share their views is immensely gracious, given the passion most of us bring to the arguments.
There are land mines in the war between creation and evolution, plenty of them. The Haarsmas don't try to sidestep them. They go out of their way to find them and open them so the reader doesn't miss either the land mines themselves or how they operate. This little study does us all well because their mission impossible is to discuss an issue that has made people point their fingers--and wag them--ungraciously for a long, long time.
There's nothing new about the debate--except science. What has changed since that old steamy Tennessee courtroom is what we know about ourselves and our world. Today, solid scientific evidence exists about genes and chromosomes, knowledge that could barely be theorized just a few decades ago. That knowledge has enriched our sense of origins, of how humankind has developed. After all, the science of genetics tells a story, too, a story we can't simply burn or deliver to the landfill.
Orthodox Christianity has always recognized two sources of revelation--that which we discover in the Bible, the Spirit-breathed Word of God; and that which we see around us, God's own continuing revelation in creation. "The heavens declare the glory of God," David says, because every last painting in the sky teaches us his glory. No one on the face of the earth misses that sermon.
Balancing the weight of the two can be something of a high-wire act. How can ordinary Christian believers go to the bank with a six-day creation and the fossil record or the science of genetics? Answering that question is tough stuff.
What the Haarsmas do in Origins is try to explain the strengths and weaknesses of various deeply held points of view on just exactly how God almighty created this world of ours--and His.
We live in an immensely fractured world. Even in churches, politics are often far, far more highly regarded than theology. Have no doubt, Origins could raise cain and probably does in some strongholds.
But the Haarsmas have gone out of their way to treat just about everyone with dignity and justice. The book--it's not long and very methodical and comprehensive--is a real blessing.
End of conversation. Maybe. Creation was a mainstay, a foundational principle. That God almighty created all things was a given in what most people considered a Christian worldview. Belief in evolution was belief in Godlessness.
And it still is.
Well, somewhat.
The alternatives, for some, are few. Either He did or He didn't. Now if we hang two scenarios on that "either-or" dilemma, only two possibilities exist: either 6000 years ago God almighty snapped his fingers and it all started on time; or, creation is a cute little story for pre-schoolers.
Already in 1925, the theory of evolution was a lightning rod. When William Jennings Bryan, a fiery Christian populist known for his passionate oratory, entered a Tennessee courtroom, not having practiced law for more than thirty years, he was taking on nothing less than atheism itself. On the other side stood an equally powerful heavyweight advocate--and agnostic--Clarence Darrow. For the two of them, the question of creation vs. evolution was perfectly either/or.
That trial set a paradigm in the American mind ever since: evolution is Godless; creation is Godly.
Wouldn't it be sweet if life was that simple?
We've been reading Origins, a wonderful little compendium of the parameters of the conversation, for quite some time now, a fascinating study. It's rare to find a book so generously written. That Loren and Deborah Haarsma, the husband/wife pair who authored the book, have a point of view in all of this goes without question, but their largess for those who don't share their views is immensely gracious, given the passion most of us bring to the arguments.
There are land mines in the war between creation and evolution, plenty of them. The Haarsmas don't try to sidestep them. They go out of their way to find them and open them so the reader doesn't miss either the land mines themselves or how they operate. This little study does us all well because their mission impossible is to discuss an issue that has made people point their fingers--and wag them--ungraciously for a long, long time.
There's nothing new about the debate--except science. What has changed since that old steamy Tennessee courtroom is what we know about ourselves and our world. Today, solid scientific evidence exists about genes and chromosomes, knowledge that could barely be theorized just a few decades ago. That knowledge has enriched our sense of origins, of how humankind has developed. After all, the science of genetics tells a story, too, a story we can't simply burn or deliver to the landfill.
Orthodox Christianity has always recognized two sources of revelation--that which we discover in the Bible, the Spirit-breathed Word of God; and that which we see around us, God's own continuing revelation in creation. "The heavens declare the glory of God," David says, because every last painting in the sky teaches us his glory. No one on the face of the earth misses that sermon.
Balancing the weight of the two can be something of a high-wire act. How can ordinary Christian believers go to the bank with a six-day creation and the fossil record or the science of genetics? Answering that question is tough stuff.
What the Haarsmas do in Origins is try to explain the strengths and weaknesses of various deeply held points of view on just exactly how God almighty created this world of ours--and His.
We live in an immensely fractured world. Even in churches, politics are often far, far more highly regarded than theology. Have no doubt, Origins could raise cain and probably does in some strongholds.
But the Haarsmas have gone out of their way to treat just about everyone with dignity and justice. The book--it's not long and very methodical and comprehensive--is a real blessing.
November 18, 2014
As the title says, this book seeks to present and contrast the various Christian perspectives on Origins. The authors cover both scientific and theological ramifications of various views. All told, the structure of the book was outstanding and the authors have succeeded really very well in achieving their purpose. In fact, this is the best book I have yet read that makes this attempt. The difficulty with the book is that even if it the best example, it is still not what I was looking for. The bias and opinions of the authors are very clear, and some of their commentary on other views is not as gracious as I would have hoped for. I had hoped that this was a book that I could give or recommend to university students who are thinking about this topic, but I am not convinced that it is quite good enough. While I agree for the most part with the views of the authors (i.e., my criticism is not because I disagree!), they seemed to be occasionally blinded by their (and my) views. It is a shame that they were not able to bounce their arguments off those who would disagree as this could have strengthened some of their arguments and softened others. So, while I cannot really recommend it to those who are searching, I can certainly recommend it to leaders who would like good reference material.
June 26, 2018
This book written by two Christian scientists (err....scientists who are Christians), went a long way in making me open to Evolutionary Creationism (a.k.a Theistic Evolution). It's a good book, and one of the things I like about it is that it doesn't really tell you what to think and why. It just surveys the main positions on science and faith held by believers, those from the young earth camp, the old earth camp, and the evolution camp. They talk about the strengths and weaknesses of all of the views (including the ones the authors hold), and I think they do a good job of accurately representing the differing views. They do make their position known and they do go into reasons as to why they hold the positions they do (that's why I said the book caused me to be open to theistic evolution), but they made it clear that their number 1 goal is to just get you to think about these issues and see that the list of options is much wider than just young earth creationism or atheistic evolution (a very common false dichotomy pushed today).
This is a book I highly recommend to believers and unbelievers alike. If you find yourself conflicted on science/faith issues, I think this book will be a big help to you. And it might even change your mind on some things.
This is a book I highly recommend to believers and unbelievers alike. If you find yourself conflicted on science/faith issues, I think this book will be a big help to you. And it might even change your mind on some things.
May 23, 2013
Consummate teachers, Professors Deborah and Loren Haarsma have crafted an essential book for any student of the intersection of science and faith. As both scientists and devout Christians, they bring an unparalleled combination of knowledge and sensitivity to the public discussion of human origins. They present a wide array of Christian points of view, analyzing the strengths and shortcomings of each respectfully and fairly, as they also familiarize readers with the methods and the findings of science. Origins: Christian Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design is an invaluable resource for pastors and for laypeople alike. Highly recommended.
Bruce Glass
--author of Exploring Faith and Reason: The Reconciliation of Christianity and Biological Evolution
Bruce Glass
--author of Exploring Faith and Reason: The Reconciliation of Christianity and Biological Evolution
April 16, 2022
This is a helpful book. Debora Haarsma does a really good job at outlining the diversity of thought and interpretive approaches in understanding cosmology, evolution, and human origins. The book is written from a distinctly Christian and scientific point of view and is a needed addition to this discussion.
October 9, 2012
I found this to be a good book explaining the different theories of creation, evolution, and intelligent design. They make a good case for evolutionary creationism - obviously their bent. I found it to be a good base for better understanding of all the different theories and beliefs.
June 3, 2013
A great summary of the variety of approaches to human origins. I would recommend that any Christian reading it also read this article http://www.worldmag.com/2013/05/a_bib... and do a Biblical word search on Adam before drawing any conclusions.
December 18, 2016
I read this for a class. A good overview of the common questions and objections on all sides of the arguments about evolution. The authors argue for scientific integrity while offering a range of Christian options within that.
June 11, 2012
Whether you agree with the conclusions I think this is a very well written and approachable book on the topic of creation.
December 31, 2012
Well written argument; easily accessible; cause for pause and discussion.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews