Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellowships in Science & Religion

In recent years, some Americans have come to view science and religion as consistent antagonists, butting heads over everything from the origin of the cosmos to when human life begins (abortion) and when it ends (euthanasia).

Conservative denominations, like the Southern Baptists, Catholics, Assemblies of God and some non-denominational evangelicals, object to particular areas of scientific research — embryonic stem cells and cloning, for instance. By contrast, mainline Protestant and Jewish denominations, as well as Hindu and Muslim communities, have tended to support embryonic stem cell research, adding a new voice to such highly politicized debates.

What is sometimes obscured by the clamor is that there was once an era in American history when science and religion were considered symbiotic allies, rather than the rancorous adversaries they too often are today.

The issue surfaced again over the summer. When President Obama named Francis Collins, an outspoken evangelical as well as former director of the Human Genome Project, to head the National Institutes of Health, some scientists, secularists and at least one prominent atheist criticized the appointment. They were concerned that Collins' faith might influence his decisions at the NIH. This despite the fact that Collins, author of The Language of God, supports both evolution and embryonic stem cell research — although he has also written

From Charles Darwin to Richard Dawkins, science has been seen as an ally of atheism, religion's aggressive adversary.

“Historically, religious faith–and its denial–have played a major part in science,” says Keith Ward, author of The Big Questions in Science and Religion. The pioneering work of Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler all came into conflict with church authorities and doctrines, although these astronomers and cosmologists insisted they were sincere believers. In fact, theology was once considered the “queen of the sciences.”

Modern scientists do not routinely identify their spiritual affiliation; it's extremely difficult to say for certain how many are religious. Even so, among contemporary American scientists, many–perhaps a majority–have declared themselves skeptics, secularists, agnostics and atheists. Carl Sagan, arguably America's best-known cosmologist, and an agnostic, wrote a book titled The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.

When Orlando-based missionary and author Grady McMurtry talks about science and the Bible today at St. Cloud Church of the Nazarene, one question is bound to come up: How should evangelicals respond to the burning issue of global warming?

Relying as much on his degrees in agriculture and environmental science as on his theological education, McMurtry uses Scripture to argue his case that there is no global warming, no thinning of the Earth's ozone layer.

In lectures devoted entirely to climate change, he argues that what warming there may be is cyclical and natural, not caused by human activity. Christians, he insists, should not pay attention to what he calls “junk science” that argues the contrary, as opposed to his controversial brand of “biblical science.”

“Many foundational scientific laws and processes are accurately described in the Bible,” says McMurtry, author of Creation: Our Worldview.

Yet McMurtry, 61, may be swimming against the evangelical tide. There is a growing scientific consensus on global warming among researchers in the United States and Great Britain who are as devout in their evangelical Christianity as McMurtry is but who have reached dramatically different conclusions on the cause, effect and remedy for world climate change.

This view resonates with a growing number of evangelical congregations across North America, including Northland, a Church Distributed, in Longwood.