Christian science is an oxymoron
In the blog world series from scholarz.net yesterday it was the turn of theology blogs. I wonder to what extent the blogs presented are science blogs at all. There is a fundamental problem of theology at issue here.
I definitely don't want to start the tiresome discussion here about what a science blog is or not. I belong to the liberal group without any great claims. From the diary to the discussion of specialist articles, everything should fit in, as far as I am concerned. In the case of the theology blogs presented, however, even my minimum requirements are not met.
It is noticeable how in the presented blog neither really scientific questions are dealt with nor referenced. No day-to-day research is described, no articles are discussed. Everywhere, however, everything revolves around Christianity and the Bible. First of all, there is the ZeitGeist blog:
We want to think about the connection between culture and gospel together on this blog. How can we follow Christ in our present society, and even more so, how can we live in such a way that the society around us changes?
or on theolounge.de:
Our site should be ecumenical and communicate the Christian faith - as well as the faith in God in general.
or one in Christ:
The title of this weblog should describe what, from my point of view, ecumenism and mission are all about: As Christians, we are one in Christ (John 17:21) and sent into the world (John 20:21).
In my opinion, this has nothing to do with scientific work, methodology, thinking or topics. On the other hand, it reflects well the special status enjoyed by theology. If one doubts the scientific nature of theology, one is immediately countered with what research is being carried out. But that's only half the story. There is certainly a lot of interesting research going on in the subject of theology. I am convinced, however, that all of this could well be accommodated in other departments (as already stated by Richard Dawkins in a letter to the editor to the British Independent). The rest, however, belongs in the church but not in the university.
I would never dare call a blog a political science blog if I spent my time telling readers what to put on their paper for the next vote and which party is best. These are subjective and personal statements. But if I do, I will write (hopefully clearly declared) as an interested citizen. I would never make this the main content of a science blog because it has little to do with my scientific work. It would simply be a fraudulent label. I differentiate between my attempted, more distant opinion as a scientist and my assessments and qualifications as a private person. This is precisely what is often a problem in theology.
Although excellent academic work is certainly being done in many theological faculties, there is a mixture of research and religious hocus-pocus. Belief in something in the absence of evidence is, by definition, unscientific. Science wants just the opposite. Theology should therefore decide whether it wants to be science or not. Dancing at both weddings at the same time is no longer possible in the 21st century.
- How does Facebook recognize people in photos
- How recruiters use the LinkedIn product
- Is this study on GMOs flawed?
- How do Segway scooters balance
- How can I find people in Australia
- Is the Pentium processor well suited for coding?
- Why was Ned Kelly imprisoned in 1871
- What is a system in football
- How do transcription factors bind to DNA
- How to say grandma in Japanese
- Toy Story 4 will be a success
- How good are the best forged passports
- How can I join HBTI K?
- What is endopathogenic fungi
- Physics knows all physical laws
- Why does Java not support multiple inheritance
- How is Dropbox doing in 2015
- How is architecture published
- How intelligent is Bono from U2
- Have you ever eaten paella
- Are there alternatives to mesospheres DCOS
- What are some other music examples
- What is the HEX function in MySQL
- How effective are paid Instagram promotions