Terry posted: "How about if we turn this discussion toward the more
apologetic and
theological bent (where perhaps more people can participate
intelligently)
and ask whether a natural theology is Biblical and what role natural
theology should play in our apologetics."
I'm for that.
I'm currently auditing a course at the Iliff School of Theology taught by
William Dean, once an associate of Tillich. The course is called
"Science, Theology & Religion" and is on the Ph.D. level.
We've studied Bultmann, McFague, Berger, and, of course, Whitehead's 1925
lectures published recently as "Science and the Modern World." Now we are
wrestling with David Griffin's "Religion and Scientific Naturalism."
Griffin discusses the Johnson/Plantigna and the Van Till proposals for
reconciling science & religion and finds them wanting. He is, as far as I
can understand, a "Whiteheadian." He sees in the evidences for
parapsychology arguments for a "naturalistic theism." (I think I have the
term right).
I wonder if anyone here has read Griffin's book and wants to comment on
it. After he spring quarter is finished, I may make some comments here
about the course and Griffin's book in particular.
My own take on parapsychology, by the way, is that, while it is not quite
in the same class as N-Rays, Polywater and Cold Fusion, it is right up
there with them in terms of credibility. But I can take that away from
Griffin's arguments and still have an interesting thesis left.
Burgy (John Burgeson)
www.burgy.50megs.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 21 2001 - 11:51:29 EDT