St Andrews Encyclopaedia of Theology (Aug 2024)
Science-Engaged Theology
Abstract
Over the last seventy years, the field of science-and-religion has become an interdisciplinary area of study, concerned with the relationship between the natural and psychological sciences and religious faith. Within science-and-religion, scientific and theological research have sometimes been viewed as opposing or competing routes to knowledge. More frequently, science and theology have been viewed as compatible, but entirely separate, enterprises. Science-engaged theology rejects both of these options and suggests a third way. Science-engaged theology affirms the idea that the study of God (theology) must include the study of God’s creation, as conducted by the natural and human sciences. In this way, science-engaged theology is one scholarly response to the biblical incitement to ‘ask the beasts, and they shall teach you’ (Job 12:7–10), or the Psalmist’s testimony that ‘the heavens declare the glory of God’ (Ps 19:1). Unlike science-and-religion, science-engaged theology does not seek to become institutionalized into a new area of study or special interest group. Nor does science-engaged theology claim to be a school of thought localized to the pre-existing community of science-and-religion scholars. Instead, science-engaged theology encourages all theologians, across the many traditions and institutional communities of theology, to use scientific research to aid their work when appropriate. Although science-engaged theology applies to any faith and wisdom tradition, this entry focuses on Christianity (for a discussion of science-engaged theology in Judaism, see Samuelson 2023). Section one outlines the definitions and intellectual contexts of science-engaged theology. Section two provides examples of science-engaged theology in relationship to the life of a believer. The longest section, section three, outlines five objections to science-engaged theology and offers possible responses to these objections. This results, in section four, with a recommendation for two avenues for future development. The conclusion highlights the main points readers should take away from each section.
