Science and Theology: Questioning the “Two-State Solution”
Theology needs science, but science needs theology; there can be no two-state solution.
Series: Fundamentalists, Modernists, and Evolution (5 entries)
A Biologist's Perspective
Responses to David Barash on God and Evolution in the Classroom
The Tradition of Wisdom for Today: a Relational Theology of Science
Communication, Love, And Faith: A “Sayonara” from former BioLogos Web Editor Emily Ruppel (Part 1)
Series: Reviewing “Darwin’s Doubt” (9 entries)
Series: Evolution Basics (50 entries)
Origins News Roundup for September 3, 2014
Series: Excerpts from “Evolving: Evangelicals Reflect on Evolution” (13 entries)
Series: Belief in God in a World Explained by Science (3 entries)
Origins News Roundup for July 9, 2014
Religion, Science, and Society
Series: Creation, Evolution, and the Over-Active Imagination (2 entries)
The Strange Tension Between Theology and Science
The problem comes when materialism, claiming the authority of science, denies the possibility of all other types of knowledge — reducing human beings to a bag of chemicals and all their hopes and loves to the firing of neurons. Or when religion exceeds its bounds and declares the Earth to be 6,000 years old. In both cases, the besetting sin is the same: the arrogant exclusive claim to know reality.
Series: On Creating the Cosmos, by Ted Peters (9 entries)
Last year I introduced readers to one of the leading voices about Christianity and science, John Polkinghorne. I also helped BioLogos bring in another leading voice, Robert Russell. This new series introduces a third prominent Christian thinker, Lutheran theologian Ted Peters, Research Professor Emeritus in Systematic Theology and Ethics at Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary, the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences (http://www.ctns.org/), and the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California.
An Impossible World
What if political, social, religious, and scientific groups the world over adopted [a gracious] approach to dialogue and their own desires? What if we didn’t have to be snide and aggressive to get our point across and to elicit cheering (or jeering) from our respective constituencies?
Book review: “Why Science Does Not Disprove God” by Amir D. Aczel
Thus, no matter what scientific evidence is amassed to explain the architecture of atoms, or the ways that neurons exchange chemical and electrical signals to create the sensations in our minds, or the manner in which the universe may have been born out of the quantum foam, science cannot disprove the existence of God — any more than a fish can disprove the existence of trees.