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?