Notes

1. . ThorHall, “Does Systematic Theology Have a FutureChristian Century  (March 17, 1976), p. 254.
2. . Ralph WendellBurhoe, “The Human Prospect and the ‘Lord of History,”” Zygon  10(1975): 365.
3. . Ibid. p. 306.
4. . Ibid.
5. . Ibid.
6. . Ibid.
7. . Ibid. p. 305. p. 312. p. 306. p. 312.
8. . RalphBurhoe, “The Civilization of the Future: Ideals and Possibility,” Philosophy Forum  13 (1973): 156–57.
9. . Ibid., p. 157.
10. . Ibid., pp. 157, 150. For Burhoe, the terms “civilization,”“culture,” and “society” are interchangeable.
11. . Ibid., p. 159.
12. . Ibid. In conversation Burhoe has claimed that this notion is similar to Teilhard's noösphere.
13. . Ibid. For a criticism of the oddity of the term “cultural evolution” and its seemingly inherent paradoxical character, see Langdon Gilkey's Religion and the Scientific Future (New York: Harper & Row, 1970), pp. 163–66, where the views of Julian Steward, G. G. Simpson, Theodosius Dobzhansky, and Victor Ferkiss are considered.
14. . Burhoe, “Civilization of the Future,” p. 162.
15. . Ibid., p. 163.
16. . The crisis or situation to which scientific theology is addressed is among others that portrayed by Robert L. Heilbroner in An Inquiry into the Human Prospect (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1974). For a more detailed analysis of this, see Burhoe, “Human Prospect,” pp. 321–33.
17. . Burhoe, “Civilization of the Future,” p. 172.
18. . Ibid.; Ralph WendellBurhoe, “Potentials for Religion from the Sciences,” Zygon  5 (1970): 112;and “What Specifies the Values of the Man‐made Man” ibid. 6 (1971): 227.
19. . Burhoe, “What Specifies the Values,” p. 228.
20. . Ibid., p. 229.
21. . Burhoe, “Civilization of the Future,” p. 173.
22. . Burhoe, “Potentials,” pp. 119–27.
23. . Ibid., p. 120.
24. . My argument follows that suggested by William K. Frankena in Ethics, 2d ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice‐Hall, Inc., 1973), p. 99.
25. . Burhoe, “Human Prospect,” p. 332.
26. . Ibid., p. 359.
27. . Ibid., p. 317.
28. . Ibid., p. 330.
29. . Stephen Toulmin, “Contemporary Scientific Mythology,” in Metaphysical Beliefs, ed. A. Macintyre (London: SCM Press, 1957), pp. 13–81.
30. . These criticisms are based upon Toulmin by way of Gilkey (n. 13 above), p. 38.
31. . Burhoe, “Human Prospect,” p. 328.
32. . Anders Nygren, Meaning and Method: Prolegomenon to a Scientific Philosophy of Religion and a Scientific Theology, trans. Philip S. Watson (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972).
33. . Ibid., p. 275.
34. . Ibid., pp. 227, 275.
35. . Ibid., p. 276.
36. . Ibid., p. 278.
37. . Ibid., p. 279.
38. . Anders Nygren, Essence of Christianity, trans. Philip S. Watson (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1973), pp. 34–36.
39. . Nygren, Meaning and Method, p. 295.
40. . Ibid., p. 40; an allusion to 2 Tim. 3:5.
41. . Ibid., p. 2.
42. . Ibid., p. 50.
43. . Ibid., p. 67.
44. . Ibid., pp. 69–71.
45. . Ibid., p. 103.
46. . Ibid., p. 105.
47. . Ibid., pp. 105–7.
48. . Ibid., p. 114.
49. . Ibid., pp. 107–17.
50. . Ibid., p. 193.
51. . Ibid., p. 124.
52. . Ibid., pp. 205–7.
53. . Nygren established the category of religion and its ultimate presupposition, eternity, in 1921 in an as yet untranslated work, Religious A Priori. For a brief discussion of this, see Ragnar Bring, “Anders Nygren's Philosophy of Religion,” in The Philosophy and Theology of Anders Nygren, ed. Charles W. Kegley (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1970), pp. 36–37. A more extended discussion appears in Bernhard Erling, Nature and History (Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, (1960), pp. 49–79.
54. . Nygren, Meaning and Method, p. 343.
55. . See Paul Holmer, “Nygren and Linguistic Analysis: Language and Meaning,” in Kegley, p. 86.
56. . I refer to the untranslated Religious A Priori.
57. . Nygren, Meaning and Method, p. 352.
58. . Agape as the fundamental presupposition of Christianity is established by Nygren in Agape and Eros, trans. Philip S. Watson (1953; reprinted., New York: Harper & Row, 1969).
59. . Ibid., p. 35.
60. . Ibid., p. 34.
61. . Nygren, Meaning and Method, p. 371.
62. . Ibid., p. 183. Strictly speaking, this quotation refers to the task of philosophy, but it applies equally to theology given the previous definition: “As it is the task of the philosophy of religion to clarify the presuppositional concepts of religion, so it is the task of theology to clarify the content of an individual religion” (p. 12).
63. . Ibid., p. 179.
64. . Burhoe, “Human Prospect,” p. 329.
65. . Ibid.
66. . Ibid., p. 331.
67. . Van A. Harvey, review of Nygren's Meaning and Method, Religious Studies Review (September 1975), p. 15.
68. . Burhoe, “Human Prospect,” p. 367.