Cosmic Chemistry: Do God and Science Mix?

by John C. Lennox

Is the rigorous pursuit of scientific knowledge really compatible with a sincere faith in God?




Building on the arguments put forward in God's Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?, John Lennox examines afresh the plausibility of a Christian theistic worldview in the light of some of the latest developments in scientific understanding. John Lennox focuses on the areas of evolutionary theory, the origins of life and the universe, and the concepts of mind and consciousness to provide a detailed and compelling introduction to the science and religion debate. He also offers his own reasoning as to why he continues to be convinced by a Christian approach to explaining these phenomena. Robust in its reasoning, but respectful in tone, this book is vital reading for anyone exploring the relationship between science and God.

Genres: Science, Christian, Religion, Nonfiction, Philosophy, History, Atheism

400 pages, Paperback

Published September 17, 2021

About the author

John Carson Lennox is Professor of Mathematics in the University of Oxford, Fellow in Mathematics and the Philosophy of Science, and Pastoral Advisor at Green Templeton College, Oxford. He is also an Adjunct Lecturer at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University and at the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics and is a Senior Fellow of the Trinity Forum. In addition, he teaches for the Oxford Strategic Leadership Programme at the Executive Education Centre, Said Business School, Oxford University.

He studied at the Royal School Armagh, Northern Ireland and was Exhibitioner and Senior Scholar at Emmanuel College, Cambridge University from which he took his MA, MMath and PhD. He worked for many years in the Mathematics Institute at the University of Wales in Cardiff which awarded him a DSc for his research. He also holds an MA and DPhil from Oxford University and an MA in Bioethics from the University of Surrey. He was a Senior Alexander Von Humboldt Fellow at the Universities of Würzburg and Freiburg in Germany. He has lectured extensively in North America, Eastern and Western Europe and Australasia on mathematics, the philosophy of science and the intellectual defence of Christianity.

He has written a number of books on the interface between science, philosophy and theology. These include God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? (2009), God and Stephen Hawking, a response to The Grand Design (2011), Gunning for God, on the new atheism (2011), and Seven Days that Divide the World, on the early chapters of Genesis (2011). Furthermore, in addition to over seventy published mathematical papers, he is the co-author of two research level texts in algebra in the Oxford Mathematical Monographs series.

Reviews

[Christian Barrett · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lennox remains a prolific giant in apologetics as he converses with the top intellectuals in this work on the matters of faith, religion, science, and philosophy. In many ways he approaches the subject to tear down the barriers that have been set between religion and science by exposing major scientific ideas and how they do not contradict Scripture. While ultimately arguing for the Christian God, Lennox effectively uses theists to argue his case against dogmatic scientism.

[Larry White · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Evidence Mounts

I read “God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?” by the author a few years ago and found it compelling and deeply satisfying. Since that 2009 edition, of course, science has continued its relentless advancement, and new scientific discoveries presumably should tell us more about (or begin to cast doubt upon) the compatibility of the created universe with a Creator, God. I needed both to refresh my understanding and to catch up.

In “Cosmic Chemistry” Lennox has provided just that with a complete update of his earlier excellent work. Lennox, a former mathematics professor (and hence scrupulously logical) at Oxford, is renowned also as a Christian apologist (defender) of great wit and wisdom, who has authored several other books on the subject and debated some of atheism’s most insistent anti-theists (which can be found on YouTube).

“Cosmic Chemistry” examines the long history of the supposed irreconcilable differences between science and theism, explaining that the underlying premises behind science itself (an orderly universe governed by immutable laws and discoverable by logical minds and reason) are derived from a belief in a creative source. Laws must be created, and have no creative power of their own. He contrasts theism with scientism/naturalism as explanations for science itself and convincingly supports the theistic Creator position.

Lennox goes on to consider discoveries and advances in the great “origin” matters of science: the universe and life, especially sentient, sapient human life. He addresses evolution in many of its forms and from various fascinating angles. Scientific advancement in biology and genetics has not offered any explanations but rather widened the “science-of-the-gaps” gaps. Much attention is devoted to information theory discoveries in the science of life.

“Cosmic Chemistry” isn’t casual reading, but neither is it ponderous. Lennox is an excellent communicator and goes far in bringing scientific complexity into understandable explanations. By its very nature, however, this is a topic and work for those who want to dig deeper into a fascinating subject, and it is highly recommended for anyone of that level of curiosity.

[Frank Peters · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an outstanding book, which combines, updates, and expands on some of his previous books. The main topic of this book is life and where it came from. The author systematically looks at the physics, chemistry, and biology that are required for life to exist. He demonstrates how in each of these scientific fields, the probability of life occurring by chance are essentially zero, meaning that scientists have absolutely no idea how we are here (despite numerous tales). Rather, as science advances, it is becoming more and more clear that we really shouldn’t be here at all, if we are only a cosmic accident. Central to his argument is the idea of information since DNA is ultimately life’s code. Using numerous experts in information theory, the author argues that information cannot appear randomly, especially not the enormous amount of information in the cell. Then after completely dismantling the wishful thinking of the naturalist/materialist scientist regarding life’s beginnings, at the end of the book Prof. Lennox makes a scientific argument for God as the source. The source not only of the material, but also of the information content that is required for life.

[John Rossitto · Rating 5 out of 5]

Strong argument for Intelligent design

Others far more gifted then I have written reviews and perhaps critiques of this book so mine will be brief. The author offers to present an objective view from biology to quantum mechanics of the need for an intelligent designer in the creation of the universe. His writings are not caustic but rather humble yet brilliant. He concludes with a brief description of his relation to Jesus. Well worth one’s time and effort.

[Lisa Marie Gabriel · Rating 4 out of 5]

An intelligent argument but a demanding read

I felt, when reading this book that it was more appropriate to a unit of study in a philosophy course than a book for the general reader. As an author, I am often saddened by those who one star books because they are difficult to understand so I will simply say it does make demands on the reader. There are points in the book where I was lost and I did drop a star because some parts were repetitive but for all this I thought it was excellent and I may well return to the difficult bits.

There are some who will dislike the book because it attacks their worldview and others who will love it because it upholds the opposite. Personally I never felt God was a problem for science and agreed that the most appropriate attitude in scientific research would be an agnostic one. By this, I mean that theories are not set in stone, the scientist seeks to disprove them, otherwise society adheres to nonsense like phlogiston or a flat Earth.

I appreciated the historical perpective, found the maths and philosophy a little difficult, laughed at the idea that each equation halves a book's sales, and yet again found myself intrigued by irreducible complexity and the unexplained transition from non-life to life.

This was harder than Darwin's Black Box, but covered much of the same ground. It is an incredibly well researched and well thought out book. My thoughts at the end? The only problem is that human beings, whether theist or atheist, seem determined to impose their worldview on others, just as they belong to tribes, nations, teams, religions, denominations and other groups to oppose, fight or simply disrespect those who do not belong or agree. The problem isn't God, it's adherence to ideas born solely from faith, it's allowing religion, which definitely includes atheism and anti-theism, to blindside us, prevent research, and silence new ideas

[David · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was given this book to read for Christmas by a zealous Christian relative, so I decided to read through it. The author defines the "central concern" of the book on page 12: "Which worldview sits most comfortably with science - theism or atheism?" The author defines "God": "...as in the Judaeo-Christian Biblical tradition though we shall be mainly interested in the scientific aspects of the underlying question." The Author states that his book will focus on the question: "Does science provide evidence of a designing intelligence involved in the universe and life?" The Author asserts that his book will *not* focus on, "What is the nature of that designing intelligence, if it exists?"

I find these initial statements highly unsatisfactory, perhaps even disingenuous. The author appears to know that he needs to define what he means by "God". At first, the author appears to be defining the term "God" by referencing the, "Judaeo-Christian tradition"; however, he backtracks in the next paragraph by stating his book will not be addressing what the nature of "God" is. This is double-speak of the highest order. I believe Dr. Lennox does this because he realizes that although he can't reasonably write a book about theism without defining the term "God", he also can't afford to be dragged down the associated theological rabbit-hole. His answer is to dodge the question by appealing to a vague and elusive "Judaeo-Christian tradition", a tradition that does little beyond excluding pantheism (assuming we exclude Baruch Spinoza), polytheism (assuming we exclude the tribes of Northern Israel prior to the Babylonian exile), and feminism (because if there's one thing Jews and Christians can agree on, it's that "God" is *male*... somehow).

Having dodged the bullet of defining who or what "God" is, Dr. Lennox proceeds in Chapter 2 to dodge the bullet of scientific consensus. The Author cites a 2018 survey of the Fellows of the Royal Society wherein the respondents were asked to agree or disagree with the statement, "I believe that there is a strong likelihood that a supernatural being such as God exists or has existed." (p. 23). 78% strongly disagreed and 8% strongly agreed. This doesn't help the author's case, of course, so he concludes that "statistics are complex business" and "statements by scientists are not necessarily statements of science". By this point, I am underwhelmed.

Having launched himself into the debate without a clear definition of terms and without the support of scientific consensus, the author bravely begins Chapter 3: "A Historical Perspective: The Forgotten Roots of Science and Arguments from Design". Here he states that, "At the heart of science lies the conviction that the universe is orderly. Without this deep conviction science would not be possible. So we are entitled to ask: Where does the conviction come from? [...] the ancient Hebrews: namely that the universe is governed by a single God, and is not the product of the whims of many gods, each governing his own province according to his own laws." (p. 27). One wonders what the ancient Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, and Chinese would have to say about this.

"Part 3: Understanding the Universe and Life" argues that because the Universe is fine-tuned to produce the Universe, it must have been designed to produce the Universe. Yes, that is what we call a "tautology", but instead of arguing it is not a tautology, the Author asserts the tautological configuration of the Universe still requires an explanation.

The problem with this is the author's assumption that *any* other configuration of the Universe (however slight might be its difference from our own configuration) would result in a complete absence of conscious observers capable of questioning the origins of the Universe. This assumption is unwarranted not only because we don't know what consciousness is or what requirements it might have, but more especially because the author's initial premise is that a conscious observer (God) exists independently of the Universe. If such a thing is possible, then the laws of physics and biology are ultimately unrelated to the emergence of consciousness, making it possible for *any* configuration of reality to produce one or more conscious identifies capable of asking metaphysical questions about the origins of existence.

Moving on... the Author rejects the "multiverse" as an explanation for why things are the way they are because the multiverse theory cannot be proven scientifically. It's merely a "preference", not a scientific conclusion. So why not prefer the Multiverse to the "Judaeo-Christian" (whatever that means) "God" (whom/whatever he/she/it is)? To answer this, the Author suggests that if the Multiverse is real, God must exist in one of the multiverses because the existence of God is possible. If God exists anywhere, God must exist everywhere because God is, by definition, omnipotent.

There are multiple problems with this argument. First, it begs the question: is the "Judaeo-Christian" "God" logically possible? Without a clear definition of who or what is the "Judaeo-Christian God", we don't know. We do know that the Author attributes to this god the property of "omnipotence", and that implies such a "God" is *not* possible due to the "omnipotence paradox" (look it up). Second, Multiverse theories generally do *not* suggest the possibility of traversing between universes. The realities of the Multiverse are typically considered to be unreachable from each other, much to the chagrin of Dr. Lennox and science fiction authors (which is not to imply that there is a difference).

This failure to address the question of whether the "Judaeo-Christian God" is logically possible is, ultimately, the downfall of this book. If Dr. Lennox had defined "God" as the "Unmoved Mover" or "Prime Mover" as conceived by Aristotle, I think we would be on firmer ground. But because Dr. Lennox asserts that he is arguing for the existence of the "Judaeo-Christian God", it behooves him to define what "Judaeo-Christian" means and address any perceived logical inconsistencies (including, but not limited to, omnipotence and gender) that might result. Instead, Dr. Lennox launches into what is *effectively* a defense of the Prime Mover (an impersonal deity sharing little in common with the "Judaeo-Christian God") while implying this defense suggests the existence of the "Judaeo-Christian God". This is an inexcusable sleight of hand from an author who should know better, and it tells me the entire book was written disingenuously.

[Ruth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Much like its predecessor, God's undertaker, this is an excellent read. It covers a huge amount of current and historic science and religion, and touches on where they have historically clashed. A great (if sometimes a little too mathmatical) read for anyone trying to explore how christianity and science could possibly be compatible. Would highly recommend.

[Aaron Strange · Rating 5 out of 5]

God and Science not in opposition

John Lennox is a mathematician and loves the study of science. He states that his faith stirred his quest for learning. This author writes convincingly in support of his viewpoint but comes across as kind and patient.

[Blake · Rating 3 out of 5]

Having functioned as a dilettante for decades, I figured I might as well dabble in the realm of cosmic chemistry. Those who know me from high school days (and my family) know that I am about as scientifically and mathematically minded as a fence post so there is little wonder that such a book as this one is clearly out of my realm of understanding. Of course, John C. Lennox is not a new author to me since I first heard him debate with an atheist professor at Montana State University and came away understanding that Lennox was in a whole different realm of brilliance than the said professor. Lennox has functioned as Emeritus Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford and Emeritus Fellow in Mathematics and the Philosophy of Science at Green Templeton College. As one who has lectured for decades and has publicly debated atheists, such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, as well as authored numerous books, Lennox clearly has something to say and this book did not disappoint. Granted, much of the material within was way over my mind since I am neither scientific nor mathematical in my thinking. Nonetheless, the parts that I did understand were excellent. Lennox covers topics such as: Evidence and Faith; The forgotten roots of Science and arguments from design; presuppositions, worldviews, naturalism-and its shortcomings; Theism and the relationship Theism has to true science; God of the gaps; Miracles; The Universe; Genetic Codes and DNA; The arguments for Evolution and the problems therein; Biology; A Word-Based World; Quantum Mechanics; and the Brain, Mind relationship. All of what Lennox is doing in addressing the whole of these subjects is leading to the understanding that behind all of the design and the laws of science is a designer, and believing in such actually enhances one's love for and study of true science.

Strengths: The extent to which Lennox covers so many different topics; His graciousness extended to those who disagree; His arguments for a designer; and his conclusions about many areas of mathematics and science.

Weaknesses: Book seemed to be somewhat redundant at times; Font was very small and 373 pages provided a very long, hard read; Lennox is an Intelligent Design person but seems reluctant to embrace a young earth, thus, in an ultimate sense, the authority of Scripture is called into question by virtue of his own stand, which is unfortunate.

I think the book would be a great read for one who stands as a skeptic regarding creation/design. It presents an excellent argument for an Intelligent Designer behind all that exists.

[Rick Townsend · Rating 5 out of 5]

Superbly Argued Casemaking!

Lennox is clearly brilliant, but he communicates brilliance in a way that is understandable at the Lemon’s level. This is a gift, but it is also hard work to communicate complex ideas in terms that are understandable to the masses. I believe Lennox has done this exceedingly well in this volume.

The book comprises a history of science, and a history of the relationship between science and philosophy. It does so by carefully selecting important discussions in the history of the conversation between religious and scientific people the conclusion is that those two can and should be on the same page.

Lennox just spells the notion of a conflict between science and sincere faith, and elucidates the ways in which harmony should dominate discussions regarding the two realms.

This is a brilliant read, and people interested in the relationship between science and faith would benefit from its discussions

R. Townsend, Ph.D., History of Ideas

[Jared · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a terrific and thorough book on the discussion between science and faith/religion. I think Dr. Lennox deeply explores conversations across many disciplines.
Two reasons I gave it 4 stars instead of 5:
First, the book is nowhere near as unbiased as it pretends to be. A more accurate subtitle would be to remove "Do" and replace the question mark with an exclamation point.
Secondly, I don't like how Dr. Lennox deconstructed the arguments of those he disagrees with. It almost felt like a personal attack on those scientists.
That being said, I greatly enjoyed the discussion on the many topics involved in the science/faith conversation. I particularly resonated with the discussions on the brain-consciousness problem and the entire section on evolution. I will be looking for more books on this subject.

[Israel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unnecessarily complex for someone looking to explore the rational existence of God (would recommend first few chapters The Reason For God by Tim Keller for this instead) but an interesting book exploring the limitations of the classical Darwinian understanding of evolution. He calculates that the probability that complexity of life arose spontaneously completely by random mutation is extremely unlikely in the available time frame - therefore there must be other mechanisms at work. While interesting, I didn't think the argument was at all necessary to defend the possibility of a God (which, to be fair, he sets out fairly well in the first half of the book). Instead, it was more to see what science has yet to uncover and how much more complicated the world is than we think.

[Roger L Jay · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rationality Confirmed!

Dr Lennox does a masterful job of carefully and considerately showing in a very convincing way the paucity of pure materialism to explain humans and the material world without an appeal to purpose. I strongly recommend it to serious seekers of all persuasions.

[Levi Hancock · Rating 2 out of 5]

It has a great ideas and a message I’m very interested in, but I just found it fairly boring

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a very deep and academic analysis of the God vs Science debate. It is very academic but worthwhile as, yet again John Lennox destroys the new atheists and Richard Dawkins worldview.