- Quantum Leap: How John Polkinghorne Found God in Science and Religion a book by Dean Nelson and Karl Giberson, with endorsements from Alister McGrath and Charles Townes, who calls John "a great and thoughtful person"
- The Evolution of Adam: What the Bible Does and Doesn't Say About Human Origins by Peter Enns.
- Jenseits Der Konflikte: Eine Konstruktiv-Kritische Auseinandersetzung Von Theologie und Naturwissenschaft (Beyond the Conflicts: A Constructive-Critical discussion of theology and science) by Andreas Losch, which won the Karl Heim Prize for 2011-12.
There is an extraordinary paper in Science entitled "Analytic Thinking Promotes Religious Disbelief" which shows changes in what the subjects (mostly Canadian) say about their religious beliefs. They do admit that "these findings do not speak directly to conversations about the inherent rationality, value, or truth of religious beliefs" But they fail to notice or even acknowledge that changing wat people say about their beliefs is not at all the same thing as changing their beliefs or that it "promotes disbelief".
Many people will modify how they express their religious views in response to their cultural situation: for example in work situations where there may be a risk of lawsuits for religious discrimination, or from a desire not to offend or to fit in. I see no evidence at all that levels of belief were changed in these studies, merely levels of expression of belief.
Sloppy! And in no other area would such nonsense be accepted. Would Science publish a study which showed that X made people more courageous or truthful on the basis of questionnaires about "how courageous/truthful are you?"
I've emailed the authors asking about this, and also asking for the data to see whether the effect is:
- To increase the reported levels of disbelief amongst people in the sample who were not strong believers.
- To decrease the reported levels of belief amongst people in the sample who were strong believers
- To move waverers from one point to another.