In terms of the basic categories of relating science and theology, Yong
is what we would term a Complementarist. 62 However, when biblical texts
and science converge, it seems to us that Yong fi nds meaning in the bib-
lical text as it relates to reality, while understanding reality from a per-
spective that uses insights from contemporary science and philosophy of
science, rather than centering the meaning in the perspective or intention
of the biblical authors.
R EAL STORIES OF THEOLOGY/SCIENCE INTEGRATION
While some writers speculate that the gulf separating the natural sciences
and biblical theology is too vast for there to be any relationship between
them, 63 contemporary sociological studies of both practicing scientists 64
and Christian youth 65 tell us the opposite. We have reported elsewhere on
the development and fi eld testing of the Science–Theology Paradigm Scale
(STPS) 66 which identifi es theology/science relational approaches people
use. We provided empirical evidence for the existence and use by diverse
groups of people of fi ve science–theology paradigms (mental frameworks
or constructs) to relate scientifi c understanding and Christian theology.
These categories are not mutually exclusive and people often utilize more
than one of them at the same time.
People using Confl ict: Theology over Science or “Theologians Know
Best” believe that when science and theology are at odds, theological
explanations are more credible. Kurt Wise 67 and Ken Ham 68 utilize this
approach.
The contrasting confl ict view is Confl ict: Science over Theology or
“Scientists Know Best.” Users of this paradigm also see theology and sci-
ence fundamentally in confl ict with each other, but in this case, scien-
tifi c explanations prevail. Many atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Daniel
Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens apply this approach.
Stephen Jay Gould popularized the idea that theology and science share
no common ground using the moniker “Nonoverlapping Magisteria.” 69
We call this approach Compartmentalism. Neither confl ict nor agreement
between scientifi c and theological descriptions of reality can exist. Neil
deGrasse Tyson 70 popularizes this view today.
The two integrative approaches are Complementarism and Concordism.
Complementarists feel that an accurate description of reality requires both
theological and scientifi c insights even though they describe different
SURPRISING BEDFELLOWS: THEOLOGY AND SCIENCE INTERPRETATION... 289