Furthermore, philosophy and science can also offer religion insight in terms of the difference between 'brain' and 'mind.' Entwistle is a passionate advocate of the power of the 'mind' of consciousness that extends beyond the existence of mere brain, or physiology, although he does not deny the impact brain and body can have upon human cognitive life. But for Entwistle, as a believing Christian, reason is something more than mere chemistry. Entwistle quotes C.S. Lewis that the seemingly innate, hard-wired desire in the human consciousness for the structures of faith and morality demonstrates the existence of something beyond the tangible, measurable world of nature. At its best, psychology, philosophy, neuroscience, and religion when reflected upon in tandem can overcome the increasingly vast divide between the gulf of the sciences and the humanities. The Christian mind must be able to take on the various challenges and debates regarding religion and use recent research and study to lead him or her to a more active conception of faith.

Response

Entwistle's discussion of philosophy, religion, and psychology is thought-provoking in the way that it highlights how modern religion does not necessarily have to exist in a vacuum -- in other words, even a conservative philosopher...

Entwistle attempts to find a cognitive space for religion, without creating an alternative culture of faith entirely outside of the discoveries of modern science. However, at times in the text, the author's own faith interferes with his ability to see certain psychological issues with any clarity, as he still doggedly insists that there is scientific evidence that homosexuality is chosen, rather than due to innate biological and genetic factors.
The text provides some admirable assistance in condensing different philosopher's views about reason and religion over a broad span of time, from the church patriarchs, to Freud, to C.S. Lewis. However, because of the author's very selective ideological focus, the reader must approach these excerpts with caution as representative of these thinkers' larger philosophies -- the author has an ideological agenda of his own. Also, Entwistle's book does not reflect some recent developments in the field of neuroscience that challenges some of the assertions he makes in a blanket fashion -- for example, some scientists would argue that what Entwistle sees as the innate proof of faith in the idea of God might be, evolutionary biologists argue, a naturally selected gene or defense mechanism.