Atheist Scientists v. Christian Theologians.
It seems that the debate over whether or not the study of God can be considered science has been going on far longer than one might expect.
It seems that John of Damascus (circa AD 7th century) thought that theology could not properly be called “the science of God because it is impossible to say what God is.” Yet Thomas Aquinas (circa AD 13th century) had quite a different perspective. He argued that “if the qualities and relations of an object are the subject matter of any science, it is proper to call it the science of that object.” In other words, if the study of the qualities and relations of a subject are what one does when one is involved in a scientific endeavor, then it is completely natural to call what one is doing “the science of …” that subject.
Shedd adds to Aquinas’ argument by saying “it is certain that there could be no science of anything if it is asserted that there must first be a perfect comprehension. There is no science of matter any more than of God, if by science be meant a knowledge that excludes all mystery.”
It seems to me that the differences between atheist scientists and christian theologians are merely the presuppositions, conclusions and lack of omniscience!
Quotes from “Dogmatic Theology” by William Shedd.