Many of my friends were intrigued by Nye-Hamm. However, as I argued in a recent post, I felt the debate format lacked in that the true scope of the debate was not hinted at during it. If you would like a fuller study of just what some Christians have been doing with these issues, here is a broader reading list:
The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. Francis Collins. A scientist at the forefront of genetic research who argues forcefully for a detente between science and religion. He also presents a readable and reasonable defense of theistic evolution.
Mere Creation: Science, Faith, and Intelligent Design. William Dembski and Michael Behe. ID has unfortunately been negatively and unfairly associated with a dumb kind of creationism. But what these scientists are arguing is both more complex and less aggressively theistic than their critics would have you believe. In a book like this you get a better feel for the warp and woof of ID thought. It is more than Kirk Cameron’s banana would led you to believe.
Christianity and Evolution. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. These previously unpublished and uncollected essays present a winsome and daring discussion of the field. de Chardin (like some other 20th century Continental Catholics such as Hans Kung) gets flack because he was not conservative enough for the RCC; but his work here is as exciting as it is intriguing. The book is worth just the ‘springs’ essay.
The Evolution of Adam: What the Bible Does and Doesn’t Say about Human Origins. Peter Enns. This majestic work by one of our generations great bible scholars has upended the field without really going out on too far a limb. Truthfully I have yet to read it in its entirety and so cannot fully endorse it, let it be said that it occupies a place on my to-do list and should on yours as well.
Genesis 1-11: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture (New American Commentary #1). Kenneth Matthews. I was honored to sit under Matthews for Hebrew Exegesis, and Old Testament. His forthright and broad discussion of the possibilities for interpretation was refreshing and invigorating.