The Temptation of Lot's Wife: How Far Theology Departs from Science

Abstract

How far has theology departed from both religion and science, insofar as it intends to be accountable to the Academy? Our argument shows that insights on this issue can be drawn from the current discussion in the cognitive science of religion (CSR). Robert McCauley's arguments on this matter, represented by the image of ''Lot's Wife's temptation,'' are discussed here around four topics: the unnaturalness of religion, the naturalness of science, the scientificity of Biblical scholarship, as well as (partially) of theology. This discussion engages three of McCauley's publications, which are analyzed with the purpose of assessing the appropriateness of this image. It is shown that, despite many insights that it may provide, neither science nor theology are adequately represented in the image of ''Lot's Wife.'' How well does theology fare in comparison with the natural sciences, both in epistemological terms and regarding its presence in the Academy? What is the proper relationship between theology and religious thought in general, and the beliefs of the average person, in particular? These questions have perennial appeal, and underlie much of the scholarship in the area that is conventionally called ''the dialogue between science and religion.''In the past twenty years or so, a new discipline has emerged out of several strands of research, called the cognitive science of religion (CSR). Within the framework of the theory of evolution, most of the scholarship in the area claims that religion is an evolutionary by-product of basic cognitive dispositions such as: a theory of agency, a theory of causality, and folk psychology, making understandable the human intercourse with gods. 1

Unnatural comparisons: commentary on Robert McCauley'sWhy Religion is Natural and Science is Not

“…The myths serve as the starting points for critical reflection, which is the lever of imagination, leading to new proposals. It is science, though, not theology (or philosophy), that has developed the (relatively) most sophisticated and comprehensive set of critical tools, and it is science, far more than theology, that renounces its earlier myths and heads off in completely new directions (Cruz, 2012).…”