Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
In this essay, I compared notes with Wentzel van Huyssteen, one of the most prominent theologians in the science–religion discussion. I followed the topics dealt with in a casual interview with Frits Gaum, in which Van Huyssteen responded to set questions: on his academic journey, God, the Bible, creation and evolution, human uniqueness, original sin, eternal life, Jesus and the relation between faith and research. Whilst there was considerable consensus between us in most respects, I would change the focus from an ‘apologetic’ agenda (science and theology were describing the same world from equally valid vantage points using comparable rationalities) to a ‘missionary’ agenda (making the Christian faith more accessible to scientists by following the approach of ‘experiential realism’). Science confined its operations to different aspects of the reality that was accessible to human observation, explanation and manipulation, whilst theology concentrated on our relation to the transcendent Source and Destiny of all of reality. To make sense to a scientist, theology must shun unsupported postulates and speculations and confront the scientist with the basic alternative of claiming to be the ultimate authority over the immanent world (presuming to be the owner, master and beneficiary of reality) and being derived from, and responsible to, the ultimate Source and Destiny of reality. The confusion between immanent transcendence (aspects of immanent reality that were not accessible to our observation, explanation and manipulation) and transcendent immanence (immanent reality as a whole was open towards a higher Source and Destiny) bedeviled the interface between science and faith. Science challenged theology to provide experiential evidence; theology challenged science to be responsible to ultimate authority.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: Both Wentzel van Huyssteen and I have worked consistently on an interdisciplinary basis. However, whilst Wentzel focused strongly on the natural sciences, I spent most of my time on the relation between the Christian faith and the human sciences (economics, ecology, cultural anthropology, politics, etc.) and concentrated on the natural sciences only after my retirement. In my essay, I highlighted the difference between trying to demonstrate the comparability and compatibility between theology and science on the one hand and highlighting the challenge that science posed to faith and faith posed to science on the other hand.
Highlights
A Festschrift is an occasion where we recall the academic achievements of a senior academic and the human encounters and relationships with him
At the time I was a lecturer in Systematic Theology at the Lutheran Theological College, Maphumulo, I was working on my second doctorate and deeply immersed in the Theory of Science
Exploiting the occasion of a conference in Tutzing near Munich, I desperately wanted to discuss a few issues with Pannenberg whose Wissenschaftstheorie und Theologie (1973) I had studied before
Summary
A Festschrift is an occasion where we recall the academic achievements of a senior academic and the human encounters and relationships with him. For a natural scientist to follow the argument, we must state unambiguously that Jesus of Nazareth was a real human being who has suffered an irreversible biological death on the cross and that the assumption of a ‘bodily resurrected’ Christ belongs not to the biological but to the spiritual level of emergence It is the symbol or prototype of the authentic human being whose new life in fellowship of God has become universally accessible to participation.. Wentzel says that ‘our faith in the revelation of God in Jesus Christ presupposes that God’s presence in this world is mediated through (human) history’ (Claassen & Gaum 2012:128) This implies that it is subject to the ambiguity of history and the tentative and provisional nature of our understanding of nature. I have learnt to understand why Luther maintained that the Christian faith is always, and constitutively, an afflicted faith, because it represents a defiant and activating protest against an unforgiving reality in the name of a loving God. Put differently, God’s word must overcome the world in us first, before it can begin to overcome the world through us
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
