God and Galileo: What a 400-Year-Old Letter Teaches Us about Faith and Science

by David L. Block, Kenneth C. Freeman

"A devastating attack upon the dominance of atheism in science today."Giovanni Fazio, Senior Physicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

The debate over the ultimate source of truth in our world often pits science against faith.

In fact, some high-profile scientists today would have us abandon God entirely as a source of truth about the universe.

In this book, two professional astronomers push back against this notion, arguing that the science of today is not in a position to pronounce on the existence of God—rather, our notion of truth must include both the physical and spiritual domains.

Incorporating excerpts from a letter written in 1615 by famed astronomer Galileo Galilei, the authors explore the relationship between science and faith, critiquing atheistic and secular understandings of science while reminding believers that science is an important source of truth about the physical world that God created.

Genres: Nonfiction, Faith, Science

258 pages, Kindle Edition

Published May 17, 2019

About the author

David L. Block (PhD, University of Cape Town) is a professor in the School of Computer Science and Applied Mathematics at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. His research has twice been featured on the cover of Nature, the world's most prestigious scientific journal. He is the author of several books, including Starwatch and Shrouds of the Night. He has been a visiting research astronomer at Harvard University, the Australian National University, and the European Southern Observatory, among other institutes.

Reviews

[Dan Curnutt · Rating 5 out of 5]

God and Galileo takes us on a journey back in time to when Galileo wrote a letter to describe the circumstances of his being censored by The Church. It was when he came up with some of his Astronomy theories that flew in the face of accepted church theories on the origin of the Universe.

Galileo was able to prove that the Earth is not the center of the universe. As such, he came under fire for going against Copernicus and the accepted belief that the Earth was the center of the universe and everything orbited the Earth. Instead he showed how the Sun was what the Earth orbited and thus we were relegated to being a bit less important in the scheme of things.

David Block takes us from how the Church was the authority to how Science is now seen as the authority. But he brings us back to Galileo and the concept that the Church and Science should be able to coexist. One does not trump the other. But they are complimentary.

I found his hypothesis interesting and enjoyed reading the views that he is pushing forward. I think this book will give you much to think about and much to talk about with your science friends.

Enjoy!

[Jeanie · Rating 4 out of 5]

We see before us two books, as Galileo did: the book of nature (a book of process, unfolding the mysteries of our universe step by step according to scientific methodologies)and the Bible, the book of Scripture. The book of Scripture is a book of purpose. The blindness of Galileo's opponents was to force the book of Scripture to say what it does not say. The nature of truth spans a vast horizon, not being restricted to science or to the book of nature alone.

How the pendulum swings. As the church back in Galileo's day thought the earth was the center, when in truth the Sun is and now we today think of ourselves as the center of all things. Where we are still in confusion of what is truth. In this text Galileo's struggle was against the church's ideals and their own agendas and that his own fight on what is truth is an example for us today as we struggle for truth. The culture says your truth matters and the reality of that stinks. It does not hold to reality. The text is historical but also cultural in the age of Christianity as it plainly points that two truths do not contradict each other.

The fight for truth matters as it clearly displays God. In my opinion, truth matters because it affects how we worship him and ultimately how we love others. If you find yourself in your search for the truth, looking back historically in Galileo's life and fight teaches us that faith and science ultimately do not contradict each other, but strengthen each other.

A Special Thank you to Crossway Publishing and Netgalley for the ARC and the opportunity to post an honest review.

[Kerry Nietz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Faith and science (especially Astronomy) have been subjects of interest for me since my youth, so this book seemed like the perfect fit. All the better that one of the authors is a Computer Science professor, since I worked in that field for several years. And as expected, I found “God and Galileo” to be a quick and enlightening read.

The purpose of this book is to push back against the idea that science and faith are at odds—an idea that has come into prominence with the works of anti-theist like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. The authors do this by examining the time where the two sources of truth, science and faith, first came at odds. Namely, Galileo’s feud with the Church of Rome over the Copernican theory. (i.e. The theory that the Earth moves around the Sun.)

Block and Freeman present the history of why the feud of Galileo’s time happened, including the circumstances and personalities involved, and make a solid case that the controversy could have been avoided. (And if it had, perhaps the contention between the two sources of truth wouldn’t exist today.) There’s a smorgasbord of relevant facts and anecdotes here. One of the things I realized early on was how well-versed and sophisticated Galileo was in his thinking. Gave me a greater appreciation for him as a man.

I also enjoyed the inclusion of history and science that were outside the scope of the book’s theme. The investigation into Galileo’s telescope and the glass it was made of, for instance. Also, the handful of pictures in the middle of the book were a nice touch too. I almost wish they were in color. (And maybe they are in the final book—I have an advanced reader copy.)

I found it refreshing to read a book about science by two established scientists who are also dedicated believers. They were respectful and knowledgeable in both sources of truth. The book reinforced something I’ve thought for a long time: Science is a field always in motion (or at least, it should be) while the tenants of faith are solid. If the two sources of truth seem to be in conflict, it doesn’t mean that one is in error. It only means that we either don’t understand the science well enough yet, or that we misinterpreted what Scripture was telling us. Only when we get overly dogmatic—on either side—do we interrupt the potential harmony of the two sources.

“God and Galileo” is an interesting read. I recommend it!

[AnnE · Rating 5 out of 5]

God and Galileo: What a 400-Year-Old Letter Teaches Us about Faith and Science is a wonderfully written book that presents the ever present conflict between science and faith in a very unique way. The author’s/astronomer’s purpose in writing this book is to share their “thoughts on the grace of God in the context of science.” With combined scientific careers spanning more than 95 years, these two scientists offer their thoughts and experiences on the God they “have come to know both through scripture and experience,” bringing a unique perspective to the science and faith debate. Today when many scientists believe that God is unnecessary, these two scientists/authors argue that true science does not disprove the existence of God and state that “God is ultimately known not through human logic or experiment but through His self revelation.” Hoping to push back against the notion that science and faith are at odds and to change the perception that they are continually opposites, these scientists start at the beginning during Galileo’s time where the conflict between science and faith first began, when science and faith stood so dangerously at odds. By explaining why the conflict happened and how it could have been avoided, the authors theorize that if it could have been avoided the contention between science and faith may not even exist today.

Part 1 of this book discusses Galileo’s conflict with the church and how “Galileo sowed the seed for the apparent divorce between science and faith” by supporting Copernicus’ theory of the universe which stated that the sun (NOT the earth) was the center of the universe. Galileo supported this because of what he observed through his telescope. However, this theory was in direct opposition to the then accepted Aristotelian view that the sun orbited around the earth and the churches interpretation of the Biblical creation account.

The authors use Galileo’s famous 1615 letter dedicated to the Grand Duchess Christina of Tuscany for further insight into the conflict of faith and science. In this letter Galileo presents a recurring theme of tension between what he observed with his telescope and what the theologians of his time believed. Galileo believed that the study of the universe would provide a clearer understanding of the scriptures and he saw no conflict between his research and his faith in God. The theologians erroneously thought that understanding of the physical world was imposed by the literal sense of the sacred scripture. They did not understand that there were “two realms of knowledge, one which has its source in revelation and one which reason can discover by its own power. To the later belong the experimental sciences and philosophy.” The church allowed Galileo to continue his work provided he presented his findings as theory. However, Galileo could not restrain himself and thus began the trial by Inquisition in 1633.

Here the authors present the two realms of truth as two books. There is the Book of Scripture which is a revelation of God to Humanity over thousands of years. This book relies on faith not experiment or observation. In great contrast there is the Book of Nature which encompasses the knowledge of observational and theoretical science that are transient with ever changing goals. In the Book of Scripture God exists outside of space and time, his love is timeless. It is a book with its own context. It is not a scientific textbook. It does not explain the universe and space. It focuses on the spiritual, on mans place in the universe, on God’s people and His purposes for mankind. The Book of Nature in contrast, is ever changing, a work of progress. Here scientists observe a universe “calculated to be 92 billion light years across, filled with billions of stars and galaxies in which mankind seems insignificant.” Science is an ever evolving study that is never the truth but only a set of partial truths as set up in the scientific method.

Galileo understood that there were two books. He was not threatened spiritually by what he observed. He saw the two books “as if in balance.” Through his telescope he saw the universe and he clearly understood that the scriptures are about Gods relationship and purposes for mankind. He did not see the scriptures as scientific. He also understood that the Book of Nature enabled progress. Galileo as a sincere believer was more perceptive with regards to the two books than the theologians that opposed him. In Galileo’s day his scientific discoveries were in conflict with the literal interpretation of scripture. In his letter he suggested that the church listen to St. Augustine on the “need for caution in coming to a firm conclusion about obscure matters which cannot be readily understood by the use of reason alone.” At the time of Galileo’s letter, Scripture was the only source of truth which Galileo explained was out of balance because it didn’t allow for scientific observation.However, the church would never allow the Book of Nature to rule over the Book of Scripture.

What I liked most was how the authors explain how the opposite situation exists today. It’s “equally out of balance to the other extreme.” The shoe is now on the other foot. The Book of Nature is where many high profile scientists look for the living truths. The Book of Scripture is seen as only something mythical and irrelevant and thus abandoned entirely as a source of truth. Today political correctness and high profile scientists act as the Inquisition. Science has its own power play agenda and science is revered as today’s God with many believing that science has made God unnecessary. Today, like in Galileo’s day science and faith can both be embraced. A major point in this section is that science cannot describe the spirit of God and its laws thus faith should not be expected to be the authority of nature. Throughout this section the authors, through Galileo’s letter, help to explain the universe and scripture, the importance of grace, the opinions of time, Galileo’s time of transition and how science is an evolving “discipline in which lie many mysteries.”

I personally I felt that part 1 was filled with a vast amount of knowledge about Galileo’s time, his letter and today’s conflict between science and faith. It took me quite a while to organize this wealth of information into a review. The next two parts jumped around a bit and were somewhat confusing in their set up. So I choose to quickly highlight what they described and to not go into any great detail.

Part 2 is labeled Historical Vignettes and it goes beyond the historical conflict of Galileo’s time and delves into the creation of the spyglass and descrbes the authors trip to Murano, Venice. It also introduces Pablo Scarpi and his key role in the history of the telescope. In this section they also retrace the background of Galileo’s letter and focus on why the Vatican has its own observatory at the Popes summer residence in Italy and its involvement in astronomical research today.

Part 3 has personal experiences of faith and of Gods presence, the life of Blaise Pascal and how he came away from his work with a wonder of actually knowing God and experiences in South Africa.

The authors at the beginning of this book stress that this book is not about Galileo but rather it’s written to offer a different perspective, allowing that science can illuminate the glories of creation but that its “beyond the domain of science to infer that God does not exist. God exists outside of space and time. Science does not have the weapons to expunge Gods spirit or the revelation of his spiritual kingdom.” They state that this book is about the God they have come to know and that He is “ultimately known not through human logic or experiment but through his self revelation.” The authors clearly state that they are determined not to add another book to the debate but to share their thoughts on “the grace of God in the context of science” as two professional astronomers “reflect on the universe and space.” It is my opinion that they accomplished these goals marvelously.

I thoroughly enjoyed God and Galileo! I found it refreshing considering today’s prevailing belief in science with little consideration to faith. It was somewhat surprising to discover a book about spirituality and faith that was written by two knowledgeable and experienced scientists/ astronomers. I recommend this book to anyone interested in reading about history, faith and science and anyone who sees science as a way to discover not just the mysteries of the universe but to discover the grace of God.

I thank the publishers for a free copy through NetGalley in exchange for my honest, unbiased review.
Edit
Delete
Comment Permalink

[Ben Makuh · Rating 2 out of 5]

Faith vs. Science: from nearly every vantage point, there is some degree of tension between the two. Like oil and water, they just don’t mix. To some, the answer to this “tension” is obvious: faith is a weird hobby you do in private like designing intricate LARPing costumes or browsing obscure subreddits, but nobody in their right mind would suggest our weird hobbies ought to inform policymaking decisions. To others, the answer also seems obvious: science is good and honoring to God except for when scientists construe evidence to contradict the Bible, in which case the Bible’s authority wins. Many see the root of this tension stretching all the way back to Galileo in his fight with the Medieval church over Copernican heliocentrism and whether the earth orbits the sun or the sun orbits the earth. And yet according to Ecclesiastes 1:5, “The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises” (NIV), and in Job 38:4 God takes credit for laying the foundation of the Earth. How could anyone who claims to believe in the authority of the Bible be a loon enough to suggest that it was the earth that moves rather than the sun?

In their new book, God and Galileo, astronomers David Block (University of Cape Town) and Kenneth Freeman (Cambridge) dig into this tension between what they call “The Book of Nature“ and “The Book of Scripture.” Their aims are threefold:

To dig historically, carefully considering what really happened between Galileo and the Church,
To dig analytically, thinking through the substance of the tension itself,
And to dig existentially, pondering what it means to be a human being alive to scientific inquiry and yet who sees such inquiry as a means of worship to God.

Block and Freeman do a great job from the outset of reframing the debate around “who controls the access to the wells of truth” (23) rather than about which celestial body orbits which. To wit, if the Church allows the Book of Nature to overrule the Book of Scripture, there would be an immediate crisis of authority. Things get very messy when there is more than one source of truth, and so quite naturally there was quite a pushback to Galileo’s statements.

This way of viewing things is problematic in two ways, though. First, it assumes Scripture is self-evident, as if merely quoting the text somehow losslessly transfers its meaning into the hearer’s brain and thus settles any debate. This is simply not the case: all written texts are interpreted texts, and that is doubly true for texts written in different times and cultural settings. Second, it assumes scientific inquiry to be a static (rather than dynamic) knowledge, and this is also not the case. Hypotheses and theories and laws are contextually situated models of the material world around us, and when we receive new experimental data, those models sometimes are refined and sometimes must be entirely abandoned. We love to call those theories we agree with “facts” so as to imply a greater sense of authority, but this is a rather dishonest thing to do. They may be facts within the models of reality that we ourselves have constructed, but we ought not kid ourselves that our models of reality are equivalent to reality itself, or that we have a perfect knowledge of the Universe as it is.

Once we rightly understand that both holy texts and empirical data must both be interpreted, we can begin to make headway in finding resolution to the dilemma of faith and science, argue Block and Freeman. They quote St. Augustine to this effect: “If physical facts are clearly demonstrated and appear to be contrary to the Holy Scriptures, then the interpretation of what is written in the Holy Scriptures may be concluded without any hesitation to be quite false” (76). Note that this luminary father of the Church is not suggesting scripture itself is corrected by nature, but that our interpretation of scripture is. Block and Freeman fight fair: this is a corrective both to overzealous Christians that their interpretations may not always be correct, as well as to overzealous scientists who believe “the data speaks for itself,” blind to their own interpretive work on that data or who fail to remember that a new data point in the future might skew the trend line.

This is where the authors are at their best: reconciling faith and science by putting the onus of the tension on our own incomplete, fallible knowledge of faith and science. They also do a good job of expanding the list of Things Worth Knowing™ out past the confines of scientific empiricism, given that the axiom “Only empirical knowledge is valid knowledge” is not itself empirically provable. I found this to be an immensely encouraging aspect of the book; those in STEM fields only rarely have this sort of humility to admit the validity of knowledge, learning, and wisdom of other disciplines.

The book takes a perplexing turn in Part 2 (“Historical Vignettes”) when, with basically no transition, the authors tell a story about their search to find if any glass factories in Venice still exist whose family histories trace back to the time of Galileo. Part 2 contains two other historical vignettes tangentially related to Galileo and the Church’s stance toward astronomy and science in general.

Shortly thereafter is another jolting transition from Part 2 to Part 3 (“Personal Experiences of Grace“) where the authors speak to the more existential questions of the lived experience of walking by faith in the empirical world of science. Theoretically, these two turns make sense: faith-vs-science is not merely an interesting analytical problem to be solved, but a history to be told and a way of life to be lived. Practically speaking, though, the flow and organization of this book feels random and unclear, at least to me. Parts 2 and 3 feel much more like appendices to the book rather than chapters contributing to the thesis, or like a rough draft. Were this a collection of essays, the lack of cohesiveness would be more defensible, but as it stands it doesn’t fit together very well.

In general, the book seems to me as if it tries to accomplish too many things for too many people. It’s a shame, because Part 1 really is fairly well-argued and thought provoking. Perhaps if Parts 2 and 3 had been stirred into the batter of Part 1, the overall cake might’ve tasted better.

Block and Freeman start out really well and raise some fascinating ideas, but I just could not see myself recommending this book to those wrestling with the truth claims of Christianity. It took me a couple weeks to try to understand what it was they were arguing for! Their analysis of the books of Nature and Scripture and the issues of authority between them was great, but ultimately the book felt like it didn’t know what it needed to be.

DISCLAIMER: I received a copy of this book from the publisher for the purpose of a fair, unbiased review.

[Andrea · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was an okay read. The premise sounded really interesting but you pretty much got the plot of the book in the first two chapters. It was tough to finish because it was pretty repetitive... glad I read it though!

[Joseph Knowles · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overview
Rating: 4 out of 5
Length: 7.5 hrs. to read (224 pages)
Short Summary :
“The book of nature can never be in conflict with the book of Scripture because both have the same author.” Galileo butted heads with the church and lost, but Christians today need not repeat that famous error.

NOTE: I received a free review copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.

Summary

In God and Galileo: What a 400-Year-Old Letter Teaches Us about Faith and Science, authors David L. Block (PhD, University of Cape Town) and Kenneth C. Freeman (PhD, Cambridge University) use the famous Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei’s letter to the Grand Duchess of Tuscany as a guide for exploring how we think about the interplay between science and religion. The book is not a chronological account of the events of Galileo’s life, but rather uses his life and work as the backdrop for the book’s central theme: “This is God’s universe, wherein grace prevails; we need to be receptive to both reason and revelation.”

Reason and faith--the book of nature and the book of Scripture--are often accused of being at odds with one another. The authors, however, demonstrate how Galileo refused to accept such accusations and used his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church to forcefully argue his point. Although the issue that precipitated his famous fight with Rome was his insistence that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around, there were larger issues at stake.

The issues that Galileo faced never really went away, of course. Christians and scientists must still wrestle with many of the same overarching questions. The authors say, however, that they “were determined not to add yet another book to the God-science debate but rather to share our thoughts on the grace of God in the context of science . . . to consider the grace of God, who had entered the restrictions of space and time.” Because for so many today “science is god,” Block and Freeman have also tried to reflect on the questions: “When did science lose its grace? . . . When and why have so many scientists today been blinded to the grace of God, unlike scientific giants like Pascal and Galileo?”

Analysis

Nicolaus Copernicus might have been the one who set the heliocentric “Copernican Revolution” in motion, but it was the astronomical observations of Galileo, a century later, that famously forced the Catholic Church to deal with clear-cut scientific evidence. However, as the authors point out, the effort to condemn Galileo for heresy is not quite as simple as many people today might think because “if power and control had not been such a focus for the church at the time, then this long battle between the church and science may never have taken place.”

Americans, especially, have lived for a long time with the firmly-entrenched idea of the separation of church and state, but such a concept was virtually unthinkable in Galileo’s time. Rome was loath to give up any claim to authority (not merely in the realm of science), because to do so was to risk its own continued existence. What we saw “at the heart of the Galileo trial was not science but rather a potential tsunami eroding church power and authority--beginning, first and foremost, in the mind of Pope Urban VIII himself, in those tumultuous religious-political times.”

One of the points that the authors really drive home is that when we interpret Scripture, we must be careful not to try to force the Bible to be a science textbook. Taking a few lines of Hebrew poetry and trying to force the physical universe to literally fit their description is not just bad science, but is also bad Biblical interpretation. The Bible is the revelation of God's truth without any mixture of error, but that fact does not inoculate humans against making their own errors. That was, at bottom, the trap into which the Catholic Church fell in Galileo’s day.

However, that line of reasoning cuts both ways. As Block and Freeman put it: “Science is driven as much by the mood of our age and the personalities and beliefs of individual scientists as it is by empirical data and rigorous theory.” As an example, they highlight the multiverse theory, the idea that “instead of one universe, there are myriad others.” In such a system, not only is there nothing special about our “pale, blue dot,” but there is nothing special even about our vast universe. Thus, scientists can safely ignore the idea of finely-tuned universe that might otherwise force them to consider the idea of a Creator. But as the authors point out “belief in a multitude of universes is an exercise in faith, not in observation.”

Block and Freeman seem to go too far, however, when they write: “God cannot be known by reason and experiment; he reveals himself through grace to those who seek him. He is not in competition with science.” It’s true that we cannot run a test in a laboratory to prove God’s existence. However, everything that we know, we know through the exercise of reason. Even when it comes to reading God’s special revelation in the Bible, we use our reasoning faculties to understand the words, their meaning, and the context.

We cannot, of course, know God as our father except by His grace in our hearts, but simply saying that “God cannot be known by reason” runs the risk of ignoring the first chapter of Romans. There, the Apostle Paul makes it unmistakably clear that not only God’s existence, but also “his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived.” And by what means have those things been clearly perceived? Paul tells us that it is in “the things that have been made,” i.e., in the book of nature.

The authors also refer to Blaise Pascal who wrote that “The heart has its reasons, which reason does not know.” Pascal was a famous advocate for the idea of fideism. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, fideism is the idea “that faith is in some sense independent of, if not outright adversarial toward, reason.” Given their assertion that the book of nature (reason) and the book of Scripture (faith) not only do not contradict each other, but cannot contradict each other, their deference toward Pascal and his fideistic approach to these issues strikes a discordant note. Pascal may be an example to the world that Christians can be good scientists or mathematicians, but his fideism is not an example that ought to be held up for Christians to emulate.

Conclusion

In an age where many have forgotten that the “scientific method has as its focus only ‘the truth of nature’ and not ‘the nature of truth’,” there is much good in this book for Christians. Block and Freeman cast the Galileo affair in terms that help the reader gain a better understanding of what was truly at stake and what Christians can learn from it still today.

[Noel Adams · Rating 1 out of 5]

It is an unfortunate fact of history that when we refer to "The Church" during Renaissance, what we are really referring to is Roman Catholicism and the Papacy, and not the remnant of Gospel Christians which God has always preserved for Himself. So when we discuss how "The Church" went toe-to-toe with Galileo, it is extremely important to recognize that we are referring to the Papacy, not the remnant. I would love to read a book on how Gospel Christians reacted to Galileo. Did it stretch them? challenge their hermeneutics? grow Biblical literacy? Did it make them better and more careful exegetes?
The authors are correct in that the Papacy read the Bible badly. Nothing new (or old, for that matter) there. But the book loses much of its punch since the authors themselves affirm the Big Bang as good science. While Block and Freeman correctly understand that one must read the books of poetry as poetry, with all of its figurative nuance, they at the same time fail to read the history books as, well, history. Genesis is not allegory; it is history. And the opening chapters of Genesis are as historical as the Battle of Hastings or the discovery of America.
One day, someone will write the book on how Christians received Galileo. But this is not that day. And God and Galileo is not that book.

[Chandler Collins · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book as I continue to study the relationship between Christianity and science. I am specifically interested in the area of astronomy and the history of the relationship between faith and science, so the concept of this book really intrigued me. Overall, it’s an accessible book with clearly argued thesis. However, the structure of the book is very strange and worth further discussion. Part 1 of the book is where the authors put forward and develop their thesis: there is the book of nature and the book of Scripture, and when the two books are rightly interpreted, they will not contradict each other since God is the author of both. The authors argue that the Catholic Church in Galileo’s day incorrectly interpreted the Scriptures concerning the functions of the heavenly bodies, and in an attempt to maintain power and control, they sought to suppress Galileo and his discovery about the heliocentric solar system. The authors believe that if the Church had listened to Galileo, who also relied heavily on the thought of Augustine, then the tensions that have been so evident between Christianity and science over the past few centuries may never have occurred. While this may be a bit of an overstatement, I appreciate their approach to the two disciplines.

Similar to Gavin Ortlund’s argument in “Retrieving Augustine’s Doctrine if Creation,” the authors also contend that Christians should be careful not to make pronouncements about science and scientific discovery if they understand little about science. Such pronouncements may damage Christian witness and cause further complications between Christians and skeptical scientists. They also argue that God is only known by Grace and that science alone cannot lead one to certain knowledge about the existence of God.


The above argumentation is part 1 of the book and would have made for a sufficient work. The interesting thing is that the authors add a part 2-3, as well as an appendix. Parts 2-3 feel like a random collection of chapters on scientific issues and I could not discern a purpose to the chapters in these sections. There is also a photo gallery of images and composites taken by the authors or by NASA. These two parts of the book really lost and affected the quality of the resource as the authors share personal stories about their work as astronomers, and devote a chapter to Blaise Pascal randomly. Yet, the appendix is a translation of the letter by Galileo mentioned in the title of the book, and that letter is extremely compelling. If you are interested in reading about the history of astronomy or the relationship between faith and science, you will find part 1 of this book very helpful, but you may not like the rest of the book.

SIDE NOTE: How about Galileo’s affirmation of divine impassibility and argument that God does not get angry as he contested literalist readings of the Scriptures (p. 185)? I didn’t expect this book to pertain to my thesis research but it did!

[Lucas G. · Rating 4 out of 5]

While the authors discuss Galileo quite a bit, this book isn't ultimately about him. Rather, Block and Freeman are both professional scientists, and throughout this book they use Galileo's "Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina of Tuscany" as a mechanism for providing their personal commentary on the interaction between science and faith.

Block and Freeman set Galileo up as a type of protagonist, representing a reasonable approach to questions of science and faith. In general, they argue that whatever is discernable through science, logic, and reason must be used to inform how scripture is understood. This, after all, is the thrust of Galileo's argument in his Letter to the Grand Duchess.

But Block and Freeman go deeper than that. They outline the limitations of both science and theology, and the dangers of one being extended beyond those limitations (eg. scientism). When allowed to function as intended, science and faith can work together to provide a fuller understanding of reality. It is only when approached improperly that science and faith appear to have conflict. But this conflict is ultimately illusory.

When it comes to the historical discussion, both Block and Freeman remind the reader than neither of them is an historian Unfortunately, this shows. There are two main historical problems. First, they romanticize Galileo. They say next to nothing about how his abrasive personality contributed to his treatment by the church. The most they provide is a footnote stating that he embarrassed the pope. This is an understatement.

Second, they perpetuate this idea that removing the Earth from the center of the universe would result in a loss of earth's exalted status. This is anachronistic. The "center of the universe" was not understood to be an exalted place at the time. Quite the opposite was the case. In fact, elsewhere in Galileo's own writings he calls the center of the universe a "sump...where the universe's filth and ephemera collect."

I get that the authors weren't primarily writing an historical book, but missing the mark on these two major points weakens their commentary.

Overall, this book is worth the read to get a glimpse of how two scientists approach the question of science and faith. Additionally, Galileo is quoted frequently (and the Appendix contains his full Letter to the Grand Duchess). This allows for some significant interaction with Galileo's arguments instead of just reading the authors' commentary.

[Tim A Little · Rating 2 out of 5]

In God and Galileo, Block and Freeman attempt to untie the Gordian knot—find the balance between faith and science—using Galileo and his interaction with the church as a model. In Galileo's day, the church possessed the power and silenced truth. Today, the scientists have the power, and silence truth. Block and Freeman provide some interesting insights concerning astronomy and the limits of science, but the real problem with this conversation is philosophy, not science. And they are ill-equipped for the discussion.
Block and Freeman interact with philosophy and philosophers on a regular basis but fail to recognize the implications of Galileo’s insistence that heliocentrism was fact. Block and Freeman interviewed Jean Mesnard who explained to them that Galileo was “the ultimate empiricist” and “opened the way to atheism” (45). Block and Freeman failed to expand upon this error of Galileo’s. They failed to ask the question, “Why did Galileo insist it was fact?” “Why couldn’t heliocentrism be simply a hypothesis?” Block and Freeman fail to recognize that geocentrism was also taught as a hypothesis, not fact.
By insisting heliocentrism was a fact, Galileo opened the door to modernism and empiricism. Block and Freeman failed to recognize that the church men did not need to look through Galileo’s telescope because Galileo’s real error was philosophy, not science.
Block and Freeman also fail to recognize the real threat to science in Galileo’s day—a state church. Block and Freeman argue that this battleground between faith and science is not really a battleground because God is the creator of both. But the threat in Galileo’s day wasn’t the Bible, it was the state church.
Block and Freeman assume an old universe view (124-25). They do not argue for it (at least I did not see where they did), but it is assumed. The logical conclusion of Block and Freeman’s book is that science is correct concerning the age of the universe and the Bible should be interpreted in light of this knowledge. Block and Freeman are interacting with issues concerning theological method for which they are once again ill-equipped to discuss.

[Cas · Rating 4 out of 5]

|| Book Review - God and Galileo ||
4 Stars, ****/5

I was provided an eARC copy of this book from the fine folks at NetGalley and Crossway Publishing for review.

I am not a super religious person but have always found the cross section of religion/spirituality and science to be interesting. Especially during times long ago when they stood so dangerously at odds. This book scratched a deep itch about the historical context surrounding both faith and early scientific innovation during Galileo's time.

This book, written by two astronomers, does an admirable job of detailing both the religious and the scientific. I never felt like there was a bent or bias one way or the other. The book is painstakingly researched and referenced and I felt like I was getting a holistic view of Galileo's time and existence. I came to a greater understanding of his work but also a greater understanding of the Church at the time, something I feel like most history classes don't do a great job of expounding upon.

This is a dense book. It took concerted effort to read as it is quite dry but that's not necessarily a bad thing if you like dry non-fiction. I think it presents both the science and the religion in ways that are relatively easy to grasp for non-religious and non-scientific readers. I also really appreciated their inclusion of Galileo's actual letter. I didn't even know of its existence before reading this book and the letter alone brought so much understanding to me.

I'd recommend this book to anyone with an interest in astronomy, history of science, history of religion or a desire to expand on what you learned in school.

[E · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eminently forgettable book, probably worth a rating of 2.5 stars (which still isn't available on Goodreads, for some reason). The main point is that the arrogance and stubbornness of the Roman church at the time of Galileo is now matched by the arrogance and stubbornness of atheistic scientists today. A fine point, although I'm not sure why it took nearly 200 pages to make it. Block and his co-author, Kenneth Freeman, are not philosophers of science, and it shows. That's not necessarily a bad thing, of course, but they don't have a good sense of what they want to say, or how to get there.

I would say that at times they might be guilty of some of the errors of which they accuse others. For instance, they are nigh-dogmatic about an old universe, even when they go on to admit that no one will be using today's scientific textbooks a year from now. Worse, their explanation for their view seems entirely to reject the possibility of instantaneous creation, which would require some bit of apparent, but not actual, age in the universe (which is not the same thing as God's trying to "mislead" anyone, as I've heard alleged by others).

Anyhow, a nice book for the writers to produce in the waning years of their impressive careers, but it won't do much needle-moving. J. P. Moreland's Scientism and Secularism: Learning to Respond to a Dangerous Ideology is slightly more likely to do that.

[Andrea · Rating 2 out of 5]

This made some interesting points but the chapters felt more repetitive than any fleshing out of their implications. One of the biggest points was that humanity has two books to learn from - nature and scripture - and that these can't be in opposition to each other so any perceived opposition comes from an incomplete understanding. The book focused on the pride and power of the Catholic Church in Galileo's time and how that can relate to the influence of present-day science. To me, the example falls a little flat because Galileo and the opposition to the heliocentric model is opposition to something that we can easily verify now and that was verified by experts in their field in his day. It wasn't that the scriptures said something and they were trying to convince people otherwise, it was that scripture was intentionally being misread to keep power. The modern day question that I assumed the authors were trying to address was how an honest reading of scripture about the origin of life and humanity can be reconciled with a scientific understanding of the origin of life. the latter examples seems in conflict with the book of scripture whereas the former was just an issue as part of an institution's power struggle, so this writing wasn't as helpful a read as I had hoped. It did have interesting examples and the basic premise that we have to learn how to interpret and appreciate both sources of truth is a good reminder for any person who was interested enough to pick up this book.

[Carey Smoak · Rating 4 out of 5]

Many people perceive that science and religion are at odds. This book looks back on the controversy at the time that Galileo lived as to whether the sun revolved around the Earth or the Earth revolved around the Sun. What this book correctly shows is that science and faith should be in agreement. In this case, in Galileo's time, Scripture was misinterpreted to mean that the Sun revolves around the Earth. As Galileo pointed out when there is clear evidence from astronomy that the Earth revolves around the Sun then one's interpretation of Scripture needs to be re-examined.

This book has great applicability in today's culture. If one assumes that God has revealed Himself through Nature and through His Word (the Bible) then there cannot be a conflict between Nature and the Bible. Science is an interpretation of Nature and theology is an interpretation of the Bible. Thus, humans interpretations of Nature and the Bible can be contradictory. But the revelation by God through Nature and the Bible cannot be contradictory.

[Mark · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent book about a letter Galileo wrote about how God's truth is seen both in science and in Divine Revelation (the Bible). If there is a contradiction it is because we are misinterpreting the Bible or we don't know enough science. In Galileo's case the theologians were insisting that the heavens traveled around the earth, however Galileo could show by looking through his telescope that this was wrong - a misinterpretation of Scripture. He just wanted the theologians to look through his telescope! The moons of Jupiter obviously rotated around Jupiter, not around the earth. The earth rotated around the sun, not the other way around.

Galileo lived in a time where religion and theology ruled. Now we have the opposite problem - science rules. However, it was a little hard for me to read this book and not think of the anti-vaxers - those believing that the Covid vaccine is dangerous and Covid is a political conspiracy, despite overwhelming scientific evidence that the vaccine works and is a pandemic that has killed millions, and the Bible is silent about vaccinations. In any case we ignore the truth in Science and/or the truth of Scripture at our personal peril. God has communicated to us in 2 books - the book of nature and the book of Divine Revelation. Science is always changing as we gain more information. The Bible can always be badly interpreted or misunderstood.

I highly recommend this book.

[Randall O. Watkins · Rating 3 out of 5]

I received this book for free as a monthly partner of Reasons to Believe. As I love history, I was excited to learn about the life of Galileo. However, the book focuses primarily on a letter and is, for sure, not a biography per se. It is a short, interesting book and informative. However, I believe it could have been condensed down to less than 100 pages for the authors to get their point across. Nonetheless, it's still worth a quick read.

[Nathan · Rating 3 out of 5]

The central thesis here is sound: The two Books of Nature and of Faith do not contradict. But the chapters only seem to rehash this thesis over and over. The book could have been a blog post. The Appendix of the original text of Galileo’s letter to the Grand Duchess Christina of Tuscany was the most interesting part.

[Robert St cyr · Rating 5 out of 5]

A well written and interesting read. Inspired by a letter Galileo wrote to royalty, explaining and defending his research and scientific discoveries. His knowledge of scripture and his clear, logical reasoning leaves no doubt that he knew more about theology and astronomy than the knuckle headed religious elite that tried to anathematize him.

[Dr Natalie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting read. Faith, God and Science. Wanted to see more photos though.

[georgiebaebi · Rating 5 out of 5]

I LOVE THIS BOOK. It was perfect for me. The history. THe poetry. The science. The philosophy. The GOSPEL. Just amazing.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

The authors are both well know astronomers in their own right. You can read about them online. But this work isn’t about technicalities or theories: the heart of scientific endeavor is based on the conviction that the material works is knowable and testable. As scientists Block and Freeman get to the heart of science, namely, the BELIEF that undergirds it.
This work is full of life and discovery. It’s abounding in hope. It points the reader to the Creator and the Sustainer of our vast universe. You can’t miss Him when looking through Galileo’s eyes— or telescope as the case may be!
I highly recommend this book for science buffs, for Christians digging into the roots of science and Faith.

One side note: the Editorial Crece (www.editorialcrece,cl) in Santiago Chile published this book in Spanish in October 2024. If you read Spanish, check it out!!