Narrating and Navigating Authorities: Evangelical and Mainline Protestant Interpretations of the Bible and Science

Chan, Esther; Ecklund, Elaine Howard

doi:10.1111/jssr.12245

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dawkins, 2006). Indeed, religious groups often lead anti-science campaigns (Alumkal, 2016; Blancke et al, 2013), reject the theory of evolution (Chan and Ecklund, 2016; Numbers, 2006), and may have lower levels of scientific literacy (Sherkat, 2011; see Evans, 2011 for an alternative perspective). The more scientifically minded, such as scientists, tend to be less religious than the general public (Ecklund et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are the religious suspicious of science? Investigating religiosity, religious context, and orientations towards science

Chan

2018

Public Underst Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are the religious suspicious of science? Drawing on data from 52 nations in the World Values Survey (wave 6) ( N = 58,474), I utilize multilevel models to examine the relationship between religiosity, religious context, and five different orientations towards science: confidence in science, trust in scientific authority under conditions of conflict with religion, faith in science, views on the moral effects of science, and interest in scientific knowledge. Results show that while religiosity is on average negatively associated with the five outcomes, the relationship between religiosity and orientations towards science varies by country such that religiosity is sometimes positively associated with the different outcomes. Religiosity is only consistently negatively associated with trust in scientific authority in all countries and with all orientations towards science in western countries. Finally, differences in orientations towards science also exist across country religious contexts, with countries dominated by the unaffiliated having more positive orientations towards science.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are the religious suspicious of science? Investigating religiosity, religious context, and orientations towards science

Chan

2018

Public Underst Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such a view of the “vast majority” of Christians, however, obviously fails to recognize the diversity of approaches to science and morality within Christianity, both in the United States and globally. Indeed, recent research (Chan and Ecklund ) suggests that literalism and “inflexibility” in interpretation of the Bible might not be nearly as common among Christians as the respondent suggests. These studies also focus specifically on the U.S. context, which brings up questions about the salience of biblical literalism as a boundary marker across national contexts.…”

Section: Voices From Non‐christian Traditionsmentioning

confidence: 94%

A Way Forward for Sociological Research on Science and Religion: A Review and a Riff

Ecklund¹,

Mehta²,

Bolger³

2019

Zygon

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

John Evans's new book Morals Not Knowledge pushes scholars to rethink contemporary debates about religion and science by moving past the rhetoric of societal elites to examine the perspectives of everyday Americans, identifying the moral conflicts at the heart of debates. We review Evans's key contributions while also extending and challenging his arguments, urging consideration of how renewed moral debates might be informed by a broader set of U.S. "publics." Drawing on empirical research, we highlight four sets of voices that are missing from Evans's analysis. Specifically, we highlight the voices of racial and ethnic minorities, religious communities (as opposed to individuals), members of minority religious traditions, and everyday religious scientists. Through doing so we offer avenues for future research on these diverse publics that will help facilitate a broader set of better and more informed debates about moral conflict between religious and scientific communities.

show abstract

“…There is a large literature on creationism, including, for example, numerous educational studies (see the journal Evolution: Education and Outreach), studies of the Creation Museum in Kentucky (Butler 2010;Homchick 2009;Oberlin 2014;Trollinger and Trollinger 2016), analysis of creationist texts (Locke 2014;Aechtner 2014), creationist study groups (Toumey 1994) and conferences (Rosenhouse 2012), historical studies (Numbers 2006;Moran 2011;Larson 2008), numerous analyses of survey data (Miller, Scott, and Okamoto 2006;Haider-Markel and Joslyn 2008;Baker 2012;Hill 2014;Unsworth and Voas 2018;Village and Baker 2013;Ecklund and Scheitle 2017;Aechtner and Buchanan 2018;Baker, Rogers, and Moser 2018), and an examination of creationism in different contexts in the English-speaking world (Coleman and Carlin 2004). However, there are few qualitative congregational studies concerned with creationism; one exception is Esther Chan and Elaine Howard Ecklund's study of mainline and evangelical Protestant understandings of evolution and miracles (Chan and Ecklund 2016). We are therefore missing important information about how and why evangelicals create, maintain or weaken evolution rejection as a boundary between those they consider to be 'true' Bible-believing Christians and everyone else.…”

Section: Comparative Congregational Studies Of Evangelicalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evangelicals, evolution, and inerrancy: a comparative study of congregational boundary work

Unsworth¹,

Ecklund

2021

Journal of Contemporary Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of evangelical Christian denominations and networks uphold a specific doctrine of Scripture, stating that the Bible is the 'inerrant' word of God. Those who adhere to biblical inerrancy tend to reject literary interpretations of the creation accounts in the Bible and therefore to reject evolutionary theory. Indeed, evolution rejection frequently functions as a key boundary for biblical inerrantists that must be strictly maintained. In this comparative study, we analyse interview data and other materials to uncover the mechanisms by which evolution rejection as a boundary is strengthened, maintained or weakened within two evangelical church congregations that adhere to biblical inerrancy: one in London, UK, the other in Texas, US. We find significant differences in boundary work between the two congregations and consider how the interplay of three factors-1) orientation of the congregation (internal or external), 2) religious context (minority or majority), 3) boundary salience-may lead to boundary strengthening or weakening.

show abstract

Narrating and Navigating Authorities: Evangelical and Mainline Protestant Interpretations of the Bible and Science

Abstract: Research on the way Protestants interpret the Bible in relationship to

Cited by 14 publications

References 44 publications

Are the religious suspicious of science? Investigating religiosity, religious context, and orientations towards science

Are the religious suspicious of science? Investigating religiosity, religious context, and orientations towards science

A Way Forward for Sociological Research on Science and Religion: A Review and a Riff

Evangelicals, evolution, and inerrancy: a comparative study of congregational boundary work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About