Materialistic Science

Behnke, James (
Wed, 1 Sep 1999 11:47:55 -0400

One of our English faculty is using Johnson's paperback on Defeating
Darwinism in Freshman Composition, so some of us scientists are discussing

We (the academic community) seem to have decided that good theology is not
required to do good science. An unbeliever can do it just as well as a
believer. See Ted Davis' book on Robert Boyle.

Is good theology necessary to do good science? Can an unbeliever do science
just as well as a believer? (If so, some form of naturalism is part of

Johnson and Moreland have pushing the view that says "No" to the above
questions. My view is that J and M are wrong. What do others feel? Is the
study of evolution more naturalistic or materialistic than the study of
atoms, molecules and forces?

Jim Behnke