The divide between science and religion has its roots in the early modern period. In the first part, the popular talk of oracles of reason is traced back to the ancient oracles published in the 15th century, and it is shown how this led to the emergence of a "natural" theology that does without revelation, so that eventually reference to a divine creator seems superfluous. In the second part, using the concept of the cosmos, it is shown that mathematics, especially geometry, has been part of the theological interpretation of Creation since the Middle Ages. From this developed the concept of transcendence as rooted in human thought. Therefore, cosmos, creation, and humanity, which are mutually exclusive, form a unity of complementary elements.

Is a life cycle that depends on eating or being eaten compatible with a creation in which 'the heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims His handiwork'? Are animal death and extinction manifestations of a good God's majesty and power? When creating the world, did God use animal death and extinction as a means to realize his intentions? This study challenges the view that the emergence and acceptance of the theory of evolution brought a break in thinking about animal suffering in a good creation. Even before Darwin, people thought about animal suffering, about how God's goodness and good creation related to this, and about whether animals were already subject to death in paradise. Historically, Charles Darwin's theory of evolution did not form a watershed in the debate about animal suffering, nor did concerns about animal suffering only emerge with the Darwinian theory of evolution.

This book provides an in-depth analysis of the relationship between the sciences and the concept of divine revelation. It includes a historical overview of the notion of revelation, its role in scientific debates over the centuries, and current challenges in light of non-religious and especially non-revelational proposals. The volume emphasizes that discussions of divine revelation cannot be limited to theology alone but must also involve scientific and philosophical approaches. The contributions examine methodological, ethical, and theoretical questions related to the sciences. The main argument is that divine revelation not only played a historical role in shaping our understanding of knowledge but is also present in contemporary scientific endeavours and will continue to be important in the future. Divine revelation is considered to be a critical element of human existence that cannot be avoided in any scientific context. The book will be relevant to scholars of theology and philosophy, particularly those interested in religion and science.

Saint John Henry Newman is widely acknowledged to be an important theologian. Despite this, Newman commentators believe that his work has received little recognition by philosophers. This book explores whether or not Newman’s supposed philosophical isolation constitutes a misconception in Newman historiography. First of all, it does this by examining Newman’s general philosophical reception over the last two centuries; surveying a wide range of philosophical positions and philosophers from the many different branches of this discipline. The book then focuses upon whether or not Newman has made a contribution to one specific philosophical position, seldom given attention within Newman scholarship: the particularist approach to epistemology. In its investigations into this and the other more general dimension of Newman’s philosophical reception, the book offers an historical re-evaluation of Newman’s philosophical legacy.