Biographical Background

Francis Sellers Collins is best known for being Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—a post he recently retired from at the end of 2021. Collins was born in Staunton, Virginia, earned a Bachelor’s in chemistry at UVA, a PhD in physical chemistry from Yale, and an MD from UNC at Chapel Hill. Working at the University of Michigan, he identified the genes responsible for cystic fibrosis, neurofibromatosis, and Huntington’s disease.[1] Working as the director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, he worked alongside Celera Genomics and successfully sequenced the human genome as part of the Human Genome Project in 2000.[2] In 2009, he was appointed director at the NIH. He was recipient of Virginia’s Outstanding Scientist award, the Guthrie Family Humanitarian award, the Lifetime Achievement award, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the Philip Hauge Abelson prize, among many more.[3]

Lewisian Method

In terms of apologetic method, Collins takes a three-pronged approach: appeal to the fine-tuning of the universe (the starry sky above), the natural law (the moral law within), and, most briefly, the historical Jesus. He is especially a follower of C. S. Lewis in the latter two categories. Students of Lewis may find similarities in even their conversion experiences; moving from atheist to theist and then from theist to Christian, in an uncannily peaceful way. After examining the historical reliability of the New Testament and pondering Lewis’s Trilemma (Christ as liar, lunatic, or lord), Collins recalls his experience on a hike and his subsequent conversion the next morning: "…The majesty and beauty of God's creation overwhelmed my resistance...and [I] surrendered to Jesus Christ."[4] Although, the fine-tuning and historical Jesus are important points, we will focus on the moral law within, which Collins holds to be the “strongest signpost to God.”[5]

The Moral Law Within

As an atheist, Collins was recommended to read Mere Christianity by Lewis where, in the very first book—“Right and Wrong as a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe”—his ideas of “science and spirit” were rocked “down to their foundation.”[6] Appeals to some sort of moral law, whether complaining about “unfair” ice cream portions or the “obligation” to spread democracy in international affairs, seem to readily pervade all levels of social complexity. It is expressed in his own field of medical science through principles in bioethics—respect for autonomy, justice, beneficence, and nonmaleficence.[7] Some of these concepts have been given naturalistic evolutionary explanations. But the moral component is not reducible to nature. Moreover, there are supererogatory acts that are taken to be honorable and not irrational (as would be the case on naturalism). Collins gives the example of agapic love. Agape love, such as expressed by Oskar Schindler and Mother Teresa, requires one to save a drowning man even if he is an enemy. Collins says that this sort of moral phenomenon is inexplicable merely as an evolutionary byproduct of group altruism. He states that Richard Dawkins himself, whom Collins debated, appeals to the unique human ability to cultivate “disinterested altruism” against our genetic imperatives and yet in accordance with the Moral Law.[8]

BioLogos

Collins is not against evolutionary explanations. Yet, any explanation of morality requires some theistic component. Contrary to Stephen Jay Gould, Collins holds that, “Religion in almost all of its manifestations is more than just a collection of value judgements and moral directives. Religion often makes claims about ‘the way things are.’”[9] On the question of Adam and Eve, Collins holds to a moral or allegorical interpretation of Genesis 1-2. He quotes Lewis saying, “In the fullness of time, God caused to descend upon this organism” and granted this creature the humanly psychology and physiology to become self-aware and make judgements of truth, goodness, and beauty.[10] Because humans are not de novo created by God, some call his position theistic evolution. However, Collins prefers the term BioLogos (also the name of the organization he founded) over the label theistic evolution. “BioLogos,” he says, “expresses the belief that God is the source of all life and that life expresses the will of God.”[11] This view focuses less on the “evolution” aspect and more on the creative power of the Word of John 1:1. This is not mere theism, but Christian theism.*

The Moral Signpost

Collins holds that universal moral standards are consistent and coherent with Christianity. However, he has wavered on the credence that the Moral Law confers to Christianity. He states, “We shouldn’t be too eager to build a logical argument for God’s existence on this foundation…On the other hand, without God undergirding the moral order, there is little reason to think of it as a moral order at all.”[12] Minimally, the moral law is not an end in itself, but is a signpost “deep within the human spirit” that points toward something grander than ourselves. And why (again appealing to Lewis) should such a desire exist unless there is something that is capable of satisfying that desire? The “God-shaped vacuum” and our inability to live up to even our own moral standards should indicate our longing for, and potential separation from, the Author of the Moral Law. [13] Even the treasure trove of biological functions found in DNA will never explain moral knowledge and the universal search for God.[14]

Free Will Defense

But why would a God of love allow suffering? Again, Collins turns to Lewis. The possibility of authentic love requires the freedom to say no, with all of its natural and moral consequences. This is sometimes called the free will defense. For Collins, God thought the natural suffering it took to create volitional capacities in creatures and the moral evil that comes from choice was worth it. And who are we to argue? Yet, God uses pain as a megaphone to the world and builds character through adversity. “If God blocked the consequences of human moral choices (e.g., committing murder) and natural events (e.g., tsunamis) every time they led to evil results, moral responsibility would disappear and the natural world would become incoherent.”[15]

*Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of MoralApologetics.com or its contributors.

[1] Liam Rodger and Joan Bakewell. “Collins, Francis Sellers,” Chambers Biographical Dictionary. 9th edition. Chambers Harrap. 2011.

[2] Ibid.

[15] “Collins, Francis Sellers,” Marquis Who’s Who in the World. 33rd edition. Marquis Who’s Who LLC. 2016.

[4] Francis Collins. “Truth Seekers,” The Language of God : A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. Free Press. 2007.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid., “From Atheism to Belief.”

[7] Ibid., “Appendix: The Moral Practice of Science and Medicine.”

[8] Ibid., “Atheism and Agnosticism (When Science Trumps Faith).”

[9] Karl W. Giberson and Francis S. Collins. “How Do We Relate Science and Religion?” The Language of Science and Faith : Straight Answers to Genuine Questions. InterVarsity Press. 2011. 87.

[10] Ibid., “Option 4: BioLogos (Science and Faith in Harmony),” Language of God.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid., Language of Science. “Science and the Existence of God.” 143.

[13] Ibid., Language of God. “The War of the Worldviews.”

[14] Ibid., “Deciphering God’s Instruction Book: The Lessons of the Human Genome.”

[15] Ibid., Language of Science, “Science and the Existence of God.” 141.