Matt J. Rossano posted a column recently at the Huffington Post: The (Lack Of) Conflict Between Science and Religion in College Students. This was later reposted at BioLogos. Dr. Rossano is a professor of psychology at Southeastern Louisiana University specializing in evolutionary psychology, especially religion and science and the evolution of religion. He has published [...]
Several weeks ago (here) I posted on the book by Karl Giberson and Francis Collins The Language of Science and Faith: Straight Answers to Genuine Questions and posed a few questions… specifically What arguments against evolution do you find convincing? Why? and What arguments would you like to see discussed on this blog (in future [...]
There is a new resource available from the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion that I would like to point to today. This web site, Test of FAITH, was put together to provide introductory resources for those who are interested in or troubled by the interaction between science and faith. There is a film: Test [...]
A couple of weeks ago I posted on the book by Karl Giberson and Francis Collins The Language of Science and Faith: Straight Answers to Genuine Questions and posed a few questions… specifically What arguments against evolution do you find convincing? Why? and What arguments would you like to see discussed on this blog (in [...]
I recently received, compliments of the publisher, a copy of a new book by Karl Giberson and Francis Collins The Language of Science and Faith: Straight Answers to Genuine Questions. This book has its origins in the avalanche of questions unleashed on Collins following the publication of his earlier book The Language of God. But [...]
Here is a letter opened in public by request about the Bible and science. This youth pastor looks at his youth group and sees one group in the Young Earth Creation position and another wondering if they can even believe in the gospel if they don’t embrace YEC. What would you tell this young pastor? [...]
BioLogos published a summary statement from the 2010 Workshop Theology of Celebration II held Nov. 9-11 (link to statement and post). Today I would like to put this statement up for consideration and discussion. There are two segments to the statement. The first part deals with the general atmosphere of debate and an affirmation that [...]
I’ve been traveling again this week, and so am somewhat off my normal schedule. My Tuesday post has become a Wednesday post. Today I would like to pose a question and look for some response and insight. Over the last several weeks we’ve been looking at the essays in a book Theology After Darwin centered [...]
In Weekly Meanderings last Saturday Scot linked to a couple of posts by Roger Olson on his blog. This led me to read those two posts, but also several others on Dr. Olson’s site. One of them is worth some serious thought and conversation. In a post entitled Those pesky “shelf doctrines” Dr. Olson contemplates the doctrines and beliefs we know we should hold, but don’t really understand, often don’t really believe, and find ways to nuance and interpret. What are these “shelf doctrines” and what should we do about them?
We’ve been looking at the essays in a book Theology After Darwin centered around a simple question: What are the implications for Christian theology if Darwin was right? In conjunction with this we are also looking at three articles in the recent theme issue of the ASA Journal Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith (v. 62 no. 3 2010) Reading Genesis: The Historicity of Adam and Eve, Genomics, and Evolutionary Science. On Tuesday we began a discussion of the article by Daniel C. Harlow, After Adam: Reading Genesis in an Age of Evolutionary Science We discussed the portion of his article where he puts forth his reasons for a literary interpretation of Gen 1-11 as story in the last post. The next part of his article looks at the consequence of taking Genesis 2-3 on its own terms and looks as well at Paul and his discussion in Romans 5. Dr. Harlow upholds what he considers a viable doctrine of both original sin and the fall. He finds the biblical support for these doctrines, not in Genesis or the Old Testament, but in Paul. The doctrines don’t stand or fall with a historical Adam, he suggests, but with the gospel of Jesus Christ preached by Paul.