Protected: Supporting Structures: information for webinar course participants

In This Section:

This webpage serves as a resource for webinar course participants to keep informed of webinar meeting dates, links, and other key pieces of information.
Webinar 1 Topic: Introduction to the Course

Webinar Leader(s): SCIO staff

Time/Date: 9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern / 5pm Oxford on Wednesday, September 21, 2022 & Thursday, September 22, 2022

Link for Wednesday, September 21:

Click here to join the meeting

Meeting ID: 396 604 878 144
Passcode: BS7cE5

Link for Thursday, September 22:

Click here to join the meeting

Meeting ID: 380 506 390 546
Passcode: PjDFTv

Readings: 

Alister McGrath, Inventing the Universe: Why we can’t stop talking about science, faith and God (Hodder and Stoughton, 2015), chapter 9.

You can find a PDF scan of this reading here

Alister McGrath, Science and Religion: A New Introduction, 3rd edition (Wiley Blackwell, 2020), chapter 1 (some overlap with first reading; please focus on non-overlapping material) and chapter 2.


Webinar 2 Topic: Biblical Studies

Webinar Leader(s): John Walton, Wheaton College

Time/Date: 9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern / 5pm Oxford on Tuesday, October 18, 2022 & Wednesday, October 19, 2022

Link for Tuesday, October 18th: 

Click here to join the meeting

Meeting ID: 348 813 074 333
Passcode: WU6MKU

Link for Wednesday, October 19th:

Click here to join the meeting

Meeting ID: 315 890 294 97
Passcode: 2bq2Ug

Readings:

John Walton, The Lost World of Adam and Eve: Genesis 2-3 and the Human Origins Debate (IVP, 2015), propositions 1-5, 8-9, 13-15, 20-21.

Questions to Guide Reading:

  1. What do you think of the overall argument that the current cognitive landscape misinterprets the nature of the genesis story? Do you find the argument convincing for a more ancient cognitive frame of reference? (Pg. 15-20; 24-26) 
  2. What is the functional/material distinction that Walton makes? Why does he think it is important to make it? How does it shape how he reads Genesis? 
  3. How does the identity (or essence)/substance distinction (p. 76) regarding the creation of Adam specifically work within a scientific framework? In other words, do you think that there is a meaningful distinction between the two in the way the author uses these concepts? 
  4. What do you think of the house/home analogy that Walton makes (pg. 44-45)? Does this capture the nuance of the argument? In what ways does the metaphor work or fall short? Are there other images that might capture this better? 
  5. What does the notion of the archetype add to the creation story and what role does it play in Walton’s shift away from an essentially substance-based view of creation? (pg. 74-77) 

Webinar 3 Topic: Psychology

Webinar Leader(s): Erin Smith, California Baptist University

Time/Date: 9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern / 5pm Oxford on Wednesday, November 16, 2022 & Thursday, November 17, 2022

Link for Wednesday, November 16th:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 861 1188 3538
Passcode: 868206
Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kbpFHerRC2

Join by Skype for Business
https://us02web.zoom.us/skype/86111883538

Link for Thursday, November 17th: 

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 874 6628 4818
Passcode: 016641
Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kANlW3TzK

Join by Skype for Business
https://us02web.zoom.us/skype/87466284818

Readings: 

Erin Smith, “The Role of Psychology in Advancing Dialogue between Science and Christianity” (2020).

You can find a PDF scan of this reading here

Tyler J. VanderWeele, “Religious Communities and Human Flourishing” (2017).

You can find a PDF scan of this reading here

Erin Smith, “A Tale of Two Perspectives: How Psychology and Neuroscience Contribute to Understanding Personhood” (2021).

You can find a PDF scan of this reading here

Questions to Guide Reading:

Reading 1: The Role of Psychology in Advancing Dialogue Between Science and Christianity  

 Why is Smith’s articulation of implicit bias as a guiding cultural paradigm and its role in shaping the science and religion dialogue important? 

To what extent do you think psychology can help not just within particular applications of science and religion, but in shaping the nature of the debate itself? 

Are there other considerations Smith has not touched on that would strengthen or challenge her argument? 

Reading 2: Religious Communities and Human Flourishing 

Are you persuaded by VanderWeele’s argument that religious communities promote human flourishing? Why or why not?

What types of success markers are used in establishing this argument, and do you agree that they indicate flourishing? 

What are some arguments for a causal versus correlational relationship, and what are some pros and cons of this type of reasoning? 

Reading 3: A Tale of Two Perspectives 

Are you persuaded by Smith’s claim that: “research in psychology and neuroscience can serve as an anchor for philosophical and theological examinations of the human person, grounding those discussions according to evidence about how personhood functions in the lives of people.”? (pg. 44-45) Why or why not?

In what ways does Smith propose that theological and philosophical thinking can improve psychological and empirical thinking about the self? 

Are there areas of integration between science and theology, especially surrounding the concept of personhood, that you would add to this debate?


Webinar 4 Topic: History

Webinar Leader(s): Ted Davis, Messiah College

Time/Date: 9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern / 5pm Oxford on Wednesday, January 11, 2023 & Thursday, January 12, 2023

Link for Wednesday, January 11th:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting
Meeting ID: 872 3730 0488
Passcode: 086742

Link for Thursday, January 12th:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 846 3775 8849
Passcode: 990918

Readings: 

1. Davis, “Christianity, Science, and the History of Science: Some Thoughts on the Integration of Faith and Learning,” (141-156). Link Here.

2. Davis, “Appendix” (157-159).

3. Drake, “Introduction: Third Part” (145-171 in Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo).

4. Galileo, “Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina” (175-216 in Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo).

5. (optional) Veracity Hill podcast episode on Galileo

6. Hitchcock, Elementary Geology (1847), 284-302. Link here.

Questions to Guide Reading:

Reading 1: Christianity, Science, and the History of Science

  1. Do you find at your institutions that “the sciences might not always be seen as having the crucial role in general education, especially not a role that is on par with courses in theology, history, philosophy, Bible, or literature.”? (p. 143)
  2. Do you think that science is a necessary element in an interdisciplinary humanities curriculum? Why or why not? What additional arguments might you offer to support this?
  3. What do you think about White’s distinction between religion and theology? Do you believe that religion needs to be saved from its dogmatic theological aspect? (p. 145-46)
  4. What is NOMA and what do you think of the division of science and religion in this way? (p. 146-47)
  5. What is Davis’ argument for the importance of the history of science in the science and religion dialogue? Do you agree? Is there anything you would add to or rebut in his argument? (p. 148-149)
  6. What are some of the main points Davis makes about “the very large pedagogical differences between” college “courses that are about science” rather than “in one of the sciences”? (p. 150) Are there any more you would add to this in terms of possible advantages and disadvantages of adopting his approach?
  7. Do you agree that “The biggest challenges related to teaching science at a Christian college undoubtedly come from evolution”? (p. 151) Do you find this with your students? If not, what other challenges have you encountered either in your own integration of science and faith or encountered with students?
  8. In Davis’ view, how should faculty at evangelical colleges approach the question of evolution with students? Do you agree, disagree, or have any different suggestions? (p. 154)

Webinar 5 Topic: Theology – Introduction

Webinar Leader(s): Benno van den Toren, Protestant Theological University

Time/Date: 9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern / 5pm Oxford on Wednesday, February 22, 2023 & Thursday, February 23, 2023

Link for Wednesday, February 22nd:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 868 8293 7122
Passcode: 065174

Link for Thursday, February 23rd:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 846 6060 8086
Passcode: 504683

Readings: 

Ian Barbour, When Science Meets Religion: Enemies, Strangers, or Partners? (Harper Collins, 2000), pp. 1-38. Link here.

Neil Messer, Science in Theology: Encounters between Science and the Christian Tradition (Bloomsbury, 2020), chapters 1 and 5.

Questions to Guide Reading:

Reading 1: When Science Meets Religion

  1. What are the four types of engagement offered by Barbour for the interaction of science and religion? Do you agree with arranging the relationship between science and religion in this way?
  2. Are there any of the four that you particularly associate with in your own approach to your work?
  3. Do you agree with Langdon Gilkey’s separation of “how” and “why” in science and religion (p. 18)?
  4. Do you agree that science and religion ask different questions (p. 18-19), or that “science is interested in causes, while religion is interested in personal meaning” (p. 26)?

Reading 2: Science in Theology

  1. What are the differences between talking about “religion” and talking about “theology” that Messer identifies?
  2. Why does Messer claim there is limited usefulness in creating typologies (like Barbour’s) and do you agree (Messer 1.4)?
  3. In what way might Messer’s questions in 5.5.1 and 5.5.2 be applied to your particular field? Are these questions helpful? Are there any you would add?

 


Webinar 6 Topic: Theology – Original Sin

Webinar Leader(s): Megan Ulishney, Gannon University

Time/Date: 9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern / 4pm Oxford on Wednesday, March 22, 2023 & Thursday, March 23, 2023

Link for Wednesday, March 22nd:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 814 0806 5905
Passcode: 627827

Link for Thursday, March 23rd:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 830 0036 7030
Passcode: 407542

Readings: 

Selected chapters from Stan Rosenberg (ed.), Finding Ourselves After Darwin

  • Benno van den Toren, “Original Sin and Evolution,” 111-16
  • Gijsbert van den Brink, “Questions, Challenges, and Concerns for Original Sin,” 117-29
  • Christopher M. Hays, “A Nonhistorical Approach: The Universality of Sin without the Originating Sin,” 187-202.

Optional: Stephen J. Duffy, “Our Hearts of Darkness: Original Sin Revisited,” Theological Studies 49 (1988), 597-622.

Questions to Guide Reading:

  1. What is the difference between doctrine and theological theory? (p. 113)
  2. What is the Kuhnian paradigm shift in views of original sin that van den Brink highlights is happening in many Christian circles? (p. 124)
  3. Why does van den Brink propose an alternative solution of recontextualization? (p. 124)
  4. How does Hays argue that no historical Adam and Eve are necessary for a doctrine of original sin? (p. 187)
  5. What three big questions does Hays identify as the pertinent questions for doctrines of original sin in the modern era? (p. 194)
  6. Describe Hays’ answer to the question, “If the fall is not the reason for universal sin, then what is?” (p.199)

Webinar 7 Topic: Sociology

Webinar Leader(s): Jonathan Hill, Calvin University

Time/Date:  9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern / 5pm Oxford on Wednesday, April 19, 2023 & Thursday, April 20, 2023

Link for Wednesday, April 19th:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 865 9508 9518
Passcode: 949180

Link for Thursday, April 20th:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 898 8900 1565
Passcode: 663709

Readings:

Jonathan Hill, National Study of Religion and Human Origins, 1-40. (PDF here)

James K.A. Smith, How (Not) to Be Secular: Reading Charles Taylor, introduction. (PDF here)

Questions to Guide Reading:

  1. Why does Hill suggest quality science education is not necessarily the best approach when challenging people to rethink their beliefs about human origins?  (pg. 18-19)
  2. Hill asks (pg. 29) “What sorts of understandings of science and scientists are associated with different beliefs about human origins?” How might the data on this influence how you approach conversations about science and religion, if at all?
  3. To what does Smith’s “Cross-pressured space” refer (pg. 3)?
  4. Do you think it “ought to be difficult to believe in God”? (pg. 4)
  5. How is Taylor’s approach to secularism different than other approaches? (pg. 12-13)

Webinar 8 Topic: Bringing it all together

Webinar Leader(s): Cara Wall-Scheffler

Time/Date:  9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern / 5pm Oxford on Wednesday, May 10, 2023 & Thursday, May 11, 2023

Link for Wednesday, May 10th:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 838 0763 8101
Passcode: 340870

Link for Thursday, May 11th:

Click here to join the Zoom meeting

Meeting ID: 874 1004 5265
Passcode: 530825

Readings:

Rick Steele, “Toward a Hermeneutic of Gravitas”. (Link here)

Amanda Townley, “Evolution Education and Science Literacy in the South”. (Link here)

Questions to help you prepare for the session:

  1. How do you see yourself as a professor? A Sage-on-the-Stage? A Guide-on-the-Side? Something else? How does this shape your interest in developing new examples, new assignments, and/or introducing topics for which you are not the expert, but about which your students are curious?
  2. What is your process for thinking about how your students receive information and/or what your students might struggle with (pedagogically or emotionally) when you are teaching?  Are you able to predict student reactions? How do you work with these reactions? For example, when teaching about eumelanin production in a physiology class, I was initially surprised that students did not know how eumelanin protects DNA from photons. Now I prepare for that surprise and we discuss the range of things eumelanin does. That being said, I was prepared for students to not know that eumelanin production by melanocytes is different for every person, that production varies across a life span, and that population averages of eumelanin production exist along a cline that follows complex interactions between culture and the environment. Since I was prepared for some pre-knowledge but not others, I have multiple stopping points in my lecture for questions, break out groups, etc.
  3. What are some aspects of teaching Gen Z students that has surprised you? What are cultural touch points that you still have in common with Gen Z? With increasingly diverse student backgrounds, how have you already changed your pedagogical techniques to try to provide entry points for different students? For example, I used to give analogies from movies when explaining some processes. Now, I ask the students to come up with their own analogies (and why they might work!).
  4. In his CSR article, Rick Steele explicates four different assignments that he uses to work with students through different readings and interpretations of texts.  Please choose one topic you have covered for this webinar this year (e.g. history of science, original sin, religion as a research variable), and consider how that topic could increase your students’ worldview, or specific understanding of a topic that you teach.  Describe the assignment that you will use in the future in order to integrate this webinar into your teaching. IF you have already done this (!), please share what you did and how it worked—student feedback, what you will change next time, etc.
Back To Top
Get in Touch