The Science of Life

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donovan O. Schaefer
Keyword(s):  
Biological Sciences ◽  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
William James ◽  
Natural Theology ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Christian Faith ◽  
New Developments ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Christian Thought

This chapter examines broad transformations in Christian thought that came to pass over the course of the nineteenth century through exposure to new developments in the life sciences. Taking William Paley’s Natural Theology (1802) as a starting point, it shows how a conception of an unchanging God that could be demonstrated through rational proof was affected by the new emphasis on change in the biological sciences, especially in the aftermath of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species in 1859. Rather than suggesting that these new themes weakened Christian faith, however, a close examination of Christian thought in the latter half of the nineteenth century shows that encounters with science energized Christian theology, philosophy, and practice. This trajectory culminated with the development of the psychology of religion, as exhibited by the American pragmatists William James and Charles S. Peirce. George Eliot’s Middlemarch serves as a guide to the complexity of these transformations.

Biology and Theology: Contemporary Issues

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celia Deane-Drummond
Keyword(s):  
Biological Sciences ◽  
Intelligent Design ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Natural Theology ◽  
Mirror Image ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Science And Theology

Contemporary issues in biology and Christian theology are still dominated by the legacy of 19th-century biologist Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection. Debates in evolutionary biology in relation to religious belief have been reinforced by historical myths that stress conflict over integration. More conservative branches of Christianity, often allied to particular Protestant traditions, argue for a form of popular theology that attempts to compete with science, namely, creationism. More sophisticated versions of this position may appear under the guise of intelligent design, though creationism and intelligent design are not synonymous. The mirror image of this position has developed among biologists who identify themselves as new atheists, adding further fuel to the fire of an existing controversy. Methodologically speaking, the engagement of biology and theology will depend on different philosophical presuppositions according to basic models of (a) conflict, (b) independence, (c) dialogue, and (d) integration. The biological sciences also have broader relevance to allied subject domains including, for example: (a) ecological, agricultural, animal, and environmental sciences; (b) anthropological, social, and political sciences; (c) medical sciences, including genetic science and embryo development; and (d) new technologies that include bioengineering. Theological engagement with the biological component of each of these domains is particularly intense where there are controversial ethical issues at stake that seem to challenge specific Christian beliefs about human nature or divine purpose. A more positive approach to the biological sciences that draws on research in the constructive systematic theological task, while avoiding historically naïve forms of natural theology, is starting to emerge in the literature. Within Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant Christian traditions, there is a spectrum of possible positions, such that the field of science and theology as a whole tends to be ecumenical in orientation rather than divided along denominational boundaries. The Catholic and Orthodox churches, however, give greater precedence to official statements by their respective churches that then influence public reception of controversial issues in biology and theology in particular ways.

Scripture

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J. Abraham
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Christian Faith ◽  
Biblical Authority ◽  
Scriptural Interpretation ◽  
Divine Inspiration ◽  
Liberal Protestantism ◽  
Papal Infallibility ◽  
Historical Investigation ◽  
Radical Reconstruction

This chapter discusses the epochal shift in scriptural interpretation in the nineteenth century. Applying historical investigation to accounts of divine inspiration and revelation resulted in a call for a radical reconstruction of Christian theology, especially as developed in liberal Protestantism. There were a number of responses to such reconstruction of Christian faith. One option was to resist the logic of liberal Protestantism’s normative apologetic while retaining an existential appropriation of biblical heroes and narratives. A second option was to develop a whole new apologetic for the traditional position on inspiration and inerrancy. A third option was to shore up the appeal to biblical authority by a theory of development culminating in a doctrine of papal infallibility. Fourth, there was the populist option of focusing on personal piety and working from a deflationary soteriological vision of Scripture. All five options, if we include liberal Protestantism, continue to flourish.

Christian Faith and the Protestant Principle

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madhuri M. Yadlapati
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Karl Barth ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Christian Faith ◽  
Paul Tillich ◽  
Human Understanding ◽  
Justification By Faith ◽  
Late Twentieth ◽  
Late Twentieth Century

This chapter takes a closer look at three figures whose discussions of faith are among the most influential in twentieth-century Christian theology. Two, Paul Tillich and Karl Barth, are twentieth-century Christian theologians and one, Søren Kierkegaard, is a nineteenth-century philosopher, but all three determine directions taken by existentialist Christian theology in the late twentieth century. All three figures happen to be Protestant, not simply by denominational identification, but more importantly, each is guided by the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone to emphasize the priority of God's saving grace over any human works and human understanding. All three adhere to the Protestant Principle (an individual's right and responsibility to radically question and reinterpret questions of faith), albeit in different ways.

From Design to Dissolution: Thomas Chalmers' Debt to John Robison

1979 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Crosbie Smith
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Natural Science ◽  
Present Note ◽  
Natural Theology ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Physical Sciences ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Major Transition ◽  
Victorian Science ◽  
Design In Nature

The claim that the nineteenth century was a period of major transition for the relation between theology and natural science has become a historical truism. With its implications for the design argument and the doctrines of divine providence, Darwin's theory of evolution has rightly attracted the attention of scholars of Victorian science. Yet so much emphasis not only on Darwin himself, but on the life sciences generally, has tended to obscure some important issues concerning the relation of theology to natural science in the first half of the nineteenth century. As John Brooke has argued recently, natural theology in this pre-Darwinian period was far from being an essentially static, autonomous, and monolithic set of presuppositions about the existence of design in nature, but was, for various reasons, in a fragmented and disordered state. The general aim of the present note is to suggest some further dimensions to historical debates about the nature of natural theology, and in particular to emphasize the need for an examination of the physical sciences as well as the life sciences in this period.

scholarly journals Does the historical Jesus matter?

1995 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus J. Borg
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Historical Research ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Christian Faith ◽  
Historical Jesus ◽  
Historical Study ◽  
Christian Life ◽  
Recent Scholarship ◽  
The Relationship

Perceptions of the relationship between the historical study of Jesus and Christian theology have swung like a pendulum between two extremes. In the nineteenth century, there was a widespread assumption that the historical Jesus mattered significantly; for much of the twentieth century, the dominant claim has been that the historical Jesus has little or no theological significance. In recent scholarship, there are tentative steps toward affirming a 'both-and' position: though Christian faith is to some extent independent of historical research, it is also true that images of Jesus do very much affect images of the Christian life.

scholarly journals Dua Kutub dalam Satu Kebangkitan: Perbandingan Refleksi Kebangkitan Menurut Thomas F. Torrance dan Karl Rahner

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-186
Author(s):  
Alfonsus Ardi Jatmiko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Natural Theology ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Karl Rahner ◽  
Catholic Theology ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Relevant Topic ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Theological Debate ◽  
The Times ◽  
The Church

The doctrine of the Resurrection in the Christian faith is still a relevant topic in theological debate for Christians themselves, non-Christians, or even atheists. The questions in this debate show that people desire to learn more about the topic. The presence of theologians who reflect on the Resurrection as a response to the development of the times can help people of all faiths to deepen their knowledge of the Resurrection. Two theologians who focused on the Resurrection were Thomas F. Torrance and Karl Rahner. They have different methodological approaches, and thus produce different theological conclusions. Torrance uses natural theology to examine the Resurrection. He emphasizes the nature of the object as a determinant of the subject’s rational structure. In contrast to Torrance, Rahner offers a reflection of the resurrection that emphasizes the subject. The use of transcendental theology in examining the Resurrection results in the constitutive condition of humans as historical and transcendent beings. The differences of their Resurrection theological approaches show that Christian theology is plural. Each preserves and inherits a unique tradition of Protestant and Catholic theology and is influenced by their theological methods. Theology is not limited to the teachings of the Church, yet Church doctrines becomes a starting point and foundation for developing dynamic theological reflections to respond to contemporary developments.

Experience

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simeon Zahl
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Religious Experience ◽  
William James ◽  
Christian Faith ◽  
Scientific Analysis

The long nineteenth century was a time of intense interest in ‘experience’ for Christians, at both academic and popular levels. This interest emerged especially in the wake of the success of Pietist, ‘experience’-oriented spiritualities in the eighteenth century, and out of a desire to defend and re-establish Christian faith against recent and ongoing philosophical and scientific encroachments and critiques. This chapter examines three major trajectories during the period: Friedrich Schleiermacher’s influential approach to religious experience and its legacy in figures like Coleridge, Bushnell, and von Hofmann; creative reflection on the limits of ‘experience’ from within Pietist and renewal movements; and the transformation of the critical Protestant ‘anti-enthusiastic’ tradition into the scientific analysis of religious experience, culminating at the end of the period in the work of William James. A key theme is the under-recognized significance of Protestant renewal movements as both a resource and a foil for each of these trajectories.

scholarly journals Defining a discovery: priority and methodological controversy in early nineteenth-century anatomy

2014 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 357-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carin Berkowitz
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Small Schools ◽  
Natural Theology ◽  
Medical Science ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Sensory Nerves ◽  
The Other ◽  
Napoleonic Wars ◽  
Early Nineteenth Century ◽  
Medical Practitioners

In the early nineteenth century, Charles Bell and François Magendie engaged in a decades-long priority dispute over the discovery of the roots of motor and sensory nerves. The constantly recalibrated arguments of its participants illuminate changes in the life sciences during that period. When Bell first wrote about the nerves in 1811, surgeon-anatomists ran small schools out of their homes, natural theology was in vogue, exchanges between British and French medical practitioners were limited by the Napoleonic Wars, and British practitioners typically rejected experimental physiology and vivisection. By the end of Magendie's career, medical science was produced in the laboratory, taught through artfully produced performances of the sort at which Magendie excelled, and disseminated through journals. It is not entirely clear which historical character, Bell or Magendie, ‘won’ the dispute, nor that they even had clear and consistent positions in it, but what is clear is that one style of science had won out over the other, and over the course of the dispute, pedagogy lost pride of place in medical science.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document