Book contents
- Naturalism in the Christian Imagination
- Reviews
- Naturalism in the Christian Imagination
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Part I Setting the Scene
- Part II Expanding the Explanatory Scope of Natural Causality
- Part III Curtailing the Explanatory Ambitions of Naturalistic Philosophies
- Part IV Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 June 2022
Book contents
- Naturalism in the Christian Imagination
- Reviews
- Naturalism in the Christian Imagination
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Part I Setting the Scene
- Part II Expanding the Explanatory Scope of Natural Causality
- Part III Curtailing the Explanatory Ambitions of Naturalistic Philosophies
- Part IV Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Naturalism in the Christian ImaginationProvidence and Causality in Early Modern England, pp. 198 - 216Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Primary Sources
Anonymous. 1682. Strange and wonderful prophecies and predictions taken from the apparition of the late dreadful comet, the last wonderful ecclips, and the great and signal conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn. London.Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. 1861–74. ‘The Advancement of Learning’. In The Works of Francis Bacon, vol. 6, edited by Spedding, James, Leslie Ellis, Robert and Heath, Douglas Denon, 77–412. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company.Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. 1861–74. ‘The New Organon’. In The Works of Francis Bacon, vol. 8, edited by Spedding, James, Ellis, Robert Leslie and Heath, Douglas Denon, 57–350. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company.Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. 1861–74. ‘Of Atheism’. In The Works of Francis Bacon, vol. 12, edited by Spedding, James, Ellis, Robert Leslie and Heath, Douglas Denon, 131–135. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company.Google Scholar
Balmford, James. 1593. A short and plaine dialogue concerning the unlawfulnes of playing at Cards or Tables. London.Google Scholar
Burnet, Thomas. 1690. A Review of the Theory of the Earth, and Its Proofs: Especially in Reference to Scripture. London.Google Scholar
Burnet, Thomas. 1691. The Theory of the Earth: Containing an Account of the Original of the Earth, and of all the General Changes which it hath already undergone, or is to undergo, till the Consummation of all Things. London.Google Scholar
Burnet, Thomas. 1697. The Theory of the Earth: Containing an Account of the Original of the Earth, and of all the General Changes which it hath already undergone, or is to undergo, till the Consummation of all Things. London.Google Scholar
Charleton, Walter. 1652. The Darknes of Atheism Dispelled by the Light of Nature. London.Google Scholar
Charleton, Walter. 1654. Physiologia-Epicuro-Gassendo-Charltoniana: Or, A Fabrick of Science Natural, Upon the Hypothesis of Atoms. London.Google Scholar
Charleton, Walter. 1657. The Immortality of the Human Soul, Demonstrated by the Light of Nature. London.Google Scholar
Collinges, John. 1678. Several Discourses Concerning the Actual Providence of God. London.Google Scholar
Crane, Thomas. 1672. Isagoge ad Dei Providentiam: Or, A Prospect of Divine Providence. London.Google Scholar
Croft, Herbert. 1685. Some Animadversions Upon a Book Intitled the Theory of the Earth. London.Google Scholar
Cudworth, Ralph. 1678. The True Intellectual System of the Universe, the First Part: Wherein, All the Reason and Philosophy of Atheism is Confuted; and, its Impossibility Demonstrated. London.Google Scholar
Descartes, René. 1985. ‘Principles of Philosophy’. In The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, edited and translated by Cottingham, John, Stoothoff, Robert and Murphy, Dugald. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, John. 1697. Brief Remarks upon Mr. Whiston’s New Theory of the Earth. London.Google Scholar
Estey, George. 1603. Certaine Godly and learned Expositions upon divers parts of Scripture. London.Google Scholar
Fenner, Dudley. 1587. A short and profitable Treatise, of lawfull and unlawfull Recreations, and of the right use and abuse of those that are lawefull. Midleburgh.Google Scholar
Galilei, Galileo. 1914. Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences. Translated by Crew, Henry and de Salvio, Alfonso. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gataker, Thomas. 1619. Of the Nature and Use of Lots: A Treatise Historicall and Theologicall. London.Google Scholar
Gataker, Thomas. 1623. A just defence of certaine massages in a former Treatise concerning the Nature and Use of Lots. London.Google Scholar
Gataker, Thomas. 1627. Of the Nature and Use of Lots: A Treatise Historicall and Theologicall. London.Google Scholar
Glanvill, Joseph. 1671. Philosophia Pia; Or, A Discourse of the Religious Temper, and Tendencies of the Experimental Philosophy, which is profest By the Royal Society. London.Google Scholar
Glanvill, Joseph. 1676. Essays on several important subjects in philosophy and religion. London.Google Scholar
Hakewill, George. 1635. An Apologie or Declaration of the Power and Providence of God in the Government of the World. London.Google Scholar
Hill, Thomas. 1574. A Contemplation of Mysteries: Contayning the Rare Effectes and Significations of Certayne Comets. London.Google Scholar
Jackson, Thomas. 1637. A Treatise Concerning the Signes of the Time, Or Gods Forewarnings. London.Google Scholar
Jones, Thomas. 1681. An astrological speculation of the late prodigy. Or A clear discovery of the approaching miseries signified by that comet, or blazing star which hath so long been visible. London.Google Scholar
Keill, John. 1698. An Examination of Dr. Burnet’s Theory of the Earth. Together with some Remarks on Mr. Whiston’s New Theory of the Earth. London.Google Scholar
Keill, John. 1699. An Examination of the Reflections on The Theory of the Earth. Together with a Defence of the Remarks on Mr. Whiston’s New Theory. London.Google Scholar
Lucretius. 1924. De Rerum Natura. Translated by Rouse, W. H. D.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Northbrooke, John. 1577. Spiritus est vicarius Christi in terra. A treatise wherein dicing, dauncing, vaine playes or enterluds with other idle pastimes &c. commonly used on the Sabboth day, are reproved by the authoritie of the word of God and auntient writers. London.Google Scholar
Salter, Robert. 1626. Wonderfull prophecies from the beginning of the monarchy of this land hidden under the parables of: Three young noble-men in a fiary fornace. A chast wife, and two old fornicators. The idol Belus and his dragon. daniel in a den amid lyons. London.Google Scholar
Spencer, John. 1663. A Discourse Concerning Prodigies: Wherein the Vanity of Presages by Them Is Reprehended, and Their True and Proper Ends Asserted and Vindicated. London.Google Scholar
Sprat, Thomas. 1667. The History of the Royal-Society of London, for the Improving of Natural Knowledge. London.Google Scholar
Twyne, Thomas. 1578. A view of certain wonderful effects, of late dayes come to passe and now newly conferred with the presignyfications of the comete, or blasing star, which appered in the Southwest upo[n] the.x. day of Novem. the yere last past. 1577. London.Google Scholar
Veron, John. 1561. A Fruteful Treatise of Predestination, and of the Devyne Providence of God. London.Google Scholar
Warren, Erasmus. 1690. Geologia: Or, A Discourse Concerning the Earth before the Deluge. Wherein The Form and Properties ascribed to it, In a Book intitlued The Theory of the Earth, Are Excepted against. London.Google Scholar
Whiston, William. 1696. A New Theory of the Earth, From its Original, to the Consummation of all Things. London.Google Scholar
Wilkins, John. 1649. A Discourse concerning the Beauty of Providence in All the Rugged Passages of It. London.Google Scholar
Secondary Sources
Aechtner, Thomas. 2015. ‘Galileo Still Goes to Jail: Conflict Model Persistence within Introductory Anthropology Materials’. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 50:209–226.Google Scholar
Anstey, Peter R. 1999. ‘Boyle on Occasionalism: An Unexamined Source’. Journal of the History of Ideas 60:57–81.Google Scholar
Anstey, Peter R. 2005. ‘Experimental versus Speculative Natural Philosophy’. In The Science of Nature in the Seventeenth Century: Patterns of Change in Early Modern Natural Philosophy, edited by Anstey, Peter R. and Schuster, John A.. 215–242. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Anstey, Peter R., and Vanzo, Alberto. 2012. ‘The Origins of Early Modern Experimental Philosophy’. Intellectual History Review 22:499–518.Google Scholar
Arcangeli, Alessandro. 2003. Recreation in the Renaissance: Attitudes Toward Leisure and Pastimes in European Culture, c.1425–1675. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ashworth, William B. 1989. ‘Light of Reason, Light of Nature: Catholic and Protestant Metaphors of Scientific Knowledge’. Science in Context 3:89–107.Google Scholar
Atkins, P. W. 1995. ‘The Limitless Power of Science’. In Nature’s Imagination: The Frontiers of Scientific Vision, edited by Cornwell, John. 122–132. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aylmer, G. E. 1978. ‘Unbelief in Seventeenth-Century England’. In Puritans and Revolutionaries: Essays in Seventeenth-Century History Presented to Christopher Hill, edited by Pennington, Donald and Thomas, Keith. 22–46. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Bartlett, Robert. 2008. The Natural and the Supernatural in the Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bellhouse, David R. 1988. ‘Probability in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries: An Analysis of Puritan Casuistry’. International Statistical Review 56:63–74.Google Scholar
Bellhouse, David R., and Franklin, James. 1997. ‘The Language of Chance’. International Statistical Review 65:73–85.Google Scholar
Berman, David. 1990. A History of Atheism in Britain: From Hobbes to Russell. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Blair, Ann. 2006. ‘Natural Philosophy’. In The Cambridge History of Science, Volume 3: Early Modern Science, edited by Park, Katharine and Daston, Lorraine. 365–406. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blair, Ann, and von Greyerz, Kaspar, editors. 2020. Physico-Theology: Religion and Science in Europe, 1650–1750. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blowers, Paul M. 2012. Drama of the Divine Economy: Creator and Creation in Early Christian Theology and Piety. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boas, George. 1969. The History of Ideas: An Introduction. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
Booth, Emily. 2005. ‘A Subtle and Mysterious Machine’: The Medical World of Walter Charleton. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Bowler, Peter J. 1971. ‘Preformation and Pre-Existence in the Seventeenth Century: A Brief Analysis’. Journal of the History of Biology 4:221–244.Google Scholar
Brooke, John Hedley. 1979. ‘The Natural Theology of the Geologists: Some Theological Strata’. In Images of the Earth: Essays in the History of the Environmental Sciences, edited by Jordanova, Ludmilla and Porter, Roy. 53–74. Oxford: Alden Press.Google Scholar
Brooke, John Hedley. 1991. Science and Religion: Some Historical Considerations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brooke, John Hedley. 1996. ‘Science and Theology in the Enlightenment’. In Religion and Science: History, Method, Dialogue, edited by Mark Richardson, W. and Wildman, Wesley J.. 7–27. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brooke, John Hedley. 2018. ‘The Ambivalence of Scientific Naturalism: A Response to Mark Harris’. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 53:1051–1056.Google Scholar
Burns, R. M. 1981. The Great Debate on Miracles: From Joseph Glanvill to David Hume. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press.Google Scholar
Burns, William E. 1995. ‘“Our Lot Is Fallen into an Age of Wonders”: John Spencer and the Controversy over Prodigies in the Early Restoration’. Albion 27:237–252.Google Scholar
Burns, William E. 2002. An Age of Wonders: Prodigies, Politics and Providence in England 1657–1727. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Burrell, David B., Cogliati, Carlo, Soskice, Janet M., and Stoeger, William R., editors. 2010. Creation and the God of Abraham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Calloway, Katherine. 2014. Natural Theology in the Scientific Revolution. London: Pickering and Chatto.Google Scholar
Cameron, Euan. 2010. Enchanted Europe: Superstition, Reason, and Religion, 1250–1750. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carter, Christopher. 2008. ‘A Constant Prodigy? Empirical Views of an Unordinary Nature’. The Seventeenth Century 23:265–289.Google Scholar
Carter, Christopher. 2012. ‘Meteors, Prodigies, and Signs: The Interpretation of the Unusual in Sixteenth-Century England’. Parergon 29:107–133.Google Scholar
Christian, William A. 1988. Doctrines of Religious Communities: A Philosophical Study. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ciofarri, Vincenzo. 1973. ‘Fortune, Fate, and Chance’. In Dictionary of the History of Ideas, edited by Wiener, Philip P.. 225–236. New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
Clark, Stuart. 1984. ‘Scientific Status of Demonology’. In Occult and Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance, edited by Vickers, Brian. 351–374. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Stuart. 1990. ‘Protestant Demonology: Sin, Superstition, and Society (c. 1520–c. 1630)’. In Early Modern European Witchcraft: Centres and Peripheries, edited by Ankarloo, Bengt and Henningsen, Gustav. 45–81. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Stuart. 1991. ‘The Rational Witchfinder: Conscience, Demonological Naturalism and Popular Superstitions’. In Science, Culture and Popular Belief in Renaissance Europe, edited by Pumfrey, Stephen, Rossi, Paolo L. and Slawinski, Maurice. 222–248. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Stuart. 1997. Thinking with Demons: The Idea of Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clarke, Desmond M. 1992. ‘Descartes’ Philosophy of Science and the Scientific Revolution’. In The Cambridge Companion to Descartes, edited by Cottingham, John. 258–285. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clericuzio, Antonio. 2001. ‘Gassendi, Charleton and Boyle on Matter and Motion’. In Late Medieval and Early Modern Corpuscular Matter Theories, edited by Lüthy, Christoph, Murdoch, John E. and Newman, William R.. 467–482. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Cohen, I. Bernard. 1969. ‘Isaac Newton’s Principia, the Scriptures, and the Divine Providence’. In Philosophy, Science, and Method: Essays in Honor of Ernest Nagel, edited by Morgenbesser, Sidney, Suppes, Patrick and White, Morton. 523–548. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Colle, Ralph Del. 2011. ‘Miracles in Christianity’. In The Cambridge Companion to Miracles, edited by Twelftree, Graham H.. 235–253. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Corneanu, Sorana, and Vermeir, Koen. 2012. ‘Francis Bacon on the Imagination and the Medicine of the Mind’. Perspectives on Science 20:183–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costello, William T. 1958. The Scholastic Curriculum at Early Seventeenth-Century Cambridge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Courtenay, William J. 1973. ‘The Critique of Natural Causality in the Mutakallimun and Nominalism’. Harvard Theological Review 66:77–94.Google Scholar
Courtenay, William J. 1984. Covenant and Causality in Medieval Thought: Studies in Philosophy, Theology and Economic Practice, III 1–26. London: Variorum.Google Scholar
Coyne, Jerry. 2010. ‘Science and Religion Aren’t Friends’. USA Today, 11 October. https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-10-11-column11_ST_N.htm.Google Scholar
Coyne, Jerry. 2016. Faith vs Fact: Why Science and Religion Are Incompatible. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Cunningham, Andrew. 1988. ‘Getting the Game Right: Some Plain Words on the Identity and Invention of Natural Philosophy’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 19:365–389.Google Scholar
Cunningham, Andrew. 1991. ‘How the Principia Got Its Name; or, Taking Natural Philosophy Seriously’. History of Science 29:377–392.Google Scholar
Cunningham, Andrew. 2000. ‘The Identity of Natural Philosophy: A Response to Edward Grant’. Early Science and Medicine 5:259–278.Google Scholar
Cunningham, Andrew. 2001. ‘A Reply to Peter Dear’s “Religion, Science and Natural Philosophy: Thoughts on Cunningham’s Thesis”’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 32:387–391.Google Scholar
Dales, Richard C. 1978. ‘A Twelfth-Century Concept of the Natural Order’. Viator 9:179–192.Google Scholar
Daston, Lorraine. 1991. ‘Baconian Facts, Academic Civility, and the Prehistory of Objectivity’. Annals of Scholarship 8:337–363.Google Scholar
Daston, Lorraine. 1991. ‘Marvelous Facts and Miraculous Evidence in Early Modern Europe’. Critical Inquiry 18:93–124.Google Scholar
Daston, Lorraine, and Park, Katharine. 1998. Wonders and the Order of Nature, 1150–1750. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
Davenport, Anne. 2015. ‘Atoms and Providence in the Natural Philosophy of Francis Coventriensis, 1652’. Journal of Early Modern Studies 4:29–45.Google Scholar
Dawkins, Richard. 1998. ‘When Religion Steps on Science’s Turf: The Alleged Separation Between the Two Is Not So Tidy’. Free Enquiry 18:18–19.Google Scholar
Dear, Peter. 2001. ‘Religion, Science and Natural Philosophy: Thoughts on Cunningham’s Thesis’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 32:377–386.Google Scholar
Dear, Peter. 2001. ‘Reply to Andrew Cunningham’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 32:392–395.Google Scholar
Dear, Peter. 2001. Revolutionizing the Sciences: European Knowledge and Its Ambitions 1500–1700. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Dear, Peter. 2001. ‘Reply to Andrew Cunningham’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 32:392–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deconinck-Brossard, Françoise. 2005. ‘Acts of God, Acts of Men: Providence in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century England and France’. In Signs, Wonders, Miracles: Representations of Divine Power in the Life of the Church, edited by Cooper, Kate and Gregory, Jeremy. 356–375. Rochester: Boydell and Brewer.Google Scholar
Dodds, Michael J. 2012. Unlocking Divine Action: Contemporary Science and Thomas Aquinas. Washington: Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar
Donagan, Barbara. 1981. ‘Providence Chance and Explanation: Some Paradoxical Aspects of Puritan Views of Causation’. Journal of Religious History 11:385–403.Google Scholar
Donagan, Barbara. 1983. ‘Godly Choice: Puritan Decision-Making in Seventeenth-Century England’. Harvard Theological Review 76:307–334.Google Scholar
Donagan, Barbara. 1988. ‘Understanding Providence: The Difficulties of Sir William and Lady Waller’. Journal of Ecclesiastical History 39:433–444.Google Scholar
Doran, Susan, and Durston, Christopher. 2003. Princes Pastors and People: The Church and Religion in England, 1500–1700. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Draper, Paul R. 2007. ‘God, Science, and Naturalism’. In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion, edited by Wainwright, William J.. 272–303. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Drees, Willem. 2008. ‘Religious Naturalists and Science’. In The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science, edited by Clayton, Philip. 108–123. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Elliott, Mark W. 2012. The Heart of Biblical Theology: Providence Experienced. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Emerton, Norma. 1989. ‘The Argument From Design in Early Modern Natural Theology’. Science and Christian Belief 1:129–147.Google Scholar
Feingold, Mordechai. 1997. ‘The Humanities’. In The History of the University of Oxford: Volume IV Seventeenth-Century Oxford, edited by Tyacke, Nicholas. 211–358. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Feingold, Mordechai. 1997. ‘The Mathematical Sciences and New Philosophies’. In The History of the University of Oxford: Volume IV Seventeenth-Century Oxford, edited by Tyacke, Nicholas. 359–448. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fergusson, David. 2019. The Providence of God: A Polyphonic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Flint, Thomas P. 1988. ‘Two Accounts of Providence’. In Divine and Human Action: Essays in the Metaphysics of Theism, edited by Morris, Thomas V.. 147–181. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Force, James E. 1985. William Whiston: Honest Newtonian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Force, James E. 1990. ‘The Breakdown of the Newtonian Synthesis of Science and Religion: Hume, Newton, and the Royal Society’. In Essays on the Context, Nature, and Influence of Isaac Newton’s Theology, edited by Force, James E. and Popkin, Richard H.. 143–163. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Force, James E. 1990. ‘The Newtonians and Deism’. In Essays on the Context, Nature, and Influence of Isaac Newton’s Theology, edited by Force, James E. and Popkin, Richard H.. 43–73. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Force, James E. 1994. ‘The God of Abraham and Isaac (Newton)’. In The Books of Nature and Scripture: Recent Essays on Natural Philosophy, Theology, and Biblical Criticism in the Netherlands of Spinoza’s Time and the British Isles of Newton’s Time, edited by Force, James E. and Popkin, Richard H.. 179–200. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Force, James E. 2004. ‘Providence and Newton’s Pantokrator: Natural Law, Miracles, and Newtonian Science’. In Newton and Newtonianism: New Studies, edited by Force, James E. and Hutton, Sarah. 65–92. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Freddoso, Alfred J. 1988. ‘Medieval Aristotelianism and the Case Against Secondary Causation in Nature’. In Divine and Human Action: Essays in the Metaphysics of Theism, edited by Morris, Thomas V., 74–118. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Freddoso, Alfred J. 1991. ‘God’s General Concurrence with Secondary Causes: Why Conservation Is Not Enough’. Philosophical Perspectives 5:553–585.Google Scholar
Freddoso, Alfred J. 1998. ‘Molina, Luis de (1535–1600)’. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Craig, Edward. 463–464. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Frei, Hans. 1974. The Eclipse of Biblical Narrative: A Study in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Hermeneutics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gabbey, Alan. 1982. ‘Philosophia Cartesiana Triumphata: Henry More (1646–1671)’. In Problems of Cartesianism, edited by Lennon, Thomas M., Nicholas, John M. and Davis, John W.. 171–250. Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
Gaukroger, Stephen, ed. 1998. The Soft Underbelly of Reason: The Passions in the Seventeenth Century. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gaukroger, Stephen. 2002. Descartes’ System of Natural Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gelbart, Nina Rattner. 1971. ‘The Intellectual Development of Walter Charleton’. Ambix 17:149–168.Google Scholar
Genuth, Sara Schechner. 1997. Comets, Popular Culture, and the Birth of Modern Cosmology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Genuth, Sara Schechner. 2000. ‘Comets and Meteors’. In The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition: An Encyclopedia, edited by Ferngren, Gary B.. 371–374. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Giberson, Karl, editor. 2016. Abraham’s Dice: Chance and Providence in the Monotheistic Traditions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gillespie, Neal C. 1990. ‘Divine Design and the Industrial Revolution: William Paley’s Abortive Reform of Natural Theology’. Isis 81:214–229.Google Scholar
Gould, Stephen Jay. 2002. Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Gowland, Angus. 2006. ‘The Problem of Early Modern Melancholy’. Past and Present 191:77–120.Google Scholar
Gowland, Angus. 2006. The Worlds of Renaissance Melancholy: Robert Burton in Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grafton, Anthony. 1988. ‘The Availability of Ancient Works’. In The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy, edited by Schmitt, Charles B., Skinner, Quentin, Kessler, Eckhard and Kraye, Jill. 767–791. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grant, Edward. 1993. ‘Jean Buridan and Nicole Oresme on Natural Knowledge’. Vivarium 31:84–105.Google Scholar
Grant, Edward. 1999. ‘God, Science, and Natural Philosophy in the Late Middle Ages’. In Between Demonstration and Imagination: Essays in the History of Science and Philosophy Presented to John D. North, edited by Nauta, Lodi and Vanderjagt, Arjo. 259–278. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Grant, Edward. 2000. ‘God and Natural Philosophy: The Late Middle Ages and Isaac Newton’. Early Science and Medicine 5:279–298.Google Scholar
Guerlac, Henry, and Jacob, M. C.. 1969. ‘Bentley, Newton, and Providence (The Boyle Lectures Once More)’. Journal of the History of Ideas 30:307–318.Google Scholar
Guthrie, W. K. C. 1967. ‘Man’s Role in the Cosmos. Man the Microcosm: The Idea in Greek Thought and Its Legacy to Europe’. In The Living Heritage of Greek Antiquity, edited by The European Cultural Foundation. 56–73. Paris: Mouton and Co.Google Scholar
Hankinson, R. J. 2013. ‘Lucretius, Epicurus, and the Logic of Multiple Explanations’. In Lucretius: Poetry, Philosophy, Science, edited by Lehoux, Daryn, Morris, A. D. and Sharrock, Alison. 69–98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hardon, John A. 1954. ‘The Concept of Miracle from St. Augustine to Modern Apologetics’. Theological Studies 15:229–257.Google Scholar
Harris, Mark. 2018. ‘Apocalypses Now: Modern Science and Biblical Miracles: The Boyle Lecture 2018’. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 53:1036–1050.Google Scholar
Harris, Mark. 2018. ‘On “the Natural Nature of Naturalism”: Answers to John Hedley Brooke’s Questions’. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 53:1057–1063.Google Scholar
Harris, Sam. 2006. ‘Science Must Destroy Religion’. Edge. www.edge.org/response-detail/11122.Google Scholar
Harris, Sam. 2011. ‘Religions Are Failed Sciences’. Big Think. www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQgI4bHpAlA.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 1995. ‘Newtonian Science, Miracles, and the Laws of Nature’. Journal of the History of Ideas 56:531–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 1998. The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2000. ‘The Influence of Cartesian Cosmology in England’. In Descartes’ Natural Philosophy, edited by Gaukroger, Stephen, Schuster, John A. and Sutton, John. 168–192. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2001. ‘Scaling the Ladder of Being: Theology and Early Theories of Evolution’. In Religion, Reason and Nature in Early Modern Europe, edited by Crocker, Robert. 199–224. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2004. ‘Noah’s Flood and the Western Imagination’. In Flood: Essays Across the Current, edited by Thom, Paul. 1–28. Lismore: Southern Cross University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2005. ‘Physico-Theology and the Mixed Sciences: The Role of Theology in Early Modern Natural Philosophy’. In The Science of Nature in the Seventeenth Century: Patterns of Change in Early Modern Natural Philosophy, edited by Anstey, Peter R. and Schuster, John A.. 165–183. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2006. ‘Miracles, Early Modern Science, and Rational Religion’. Church History 75:493–510.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2006. ‘“Science” and “Religion”: Constructing the Boundaries’. Journal of Religion 86:81–106.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2006. ‘“The Book of Nature” and Early Modern Science’. In The Book of Nature in Early Modern and Modern History, edited by van Berkel, Klass and Vanderjagt, Arjo. 1–26. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2008. ‘The Development of the Concept of Laws of Nature’. In Creation: Law and Probability, edited by Watts, Fraser. 13–36. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2009. ‘The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science: A Rejoinder’. Science and Christian Belief 21:155–162.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2011. ‘Natural History’. In Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science, edited by Harrison, Peter, Numbers, Ronald L. and Shank, Michael H.. 117–148. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2013. ‘Laws of Nature in Seventeenth-Century England’. In The Divine Order, the Human Order, and the Order of Nature: Historical Perspectives, edited by Watkins, Eric. 127–148. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2015. The Territories of Science and Religion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2016. ‘Religion, Scientific Naturalism, and Historical Progress’. In Religion and Innovation: Antagonists or Partners, edited by Yerxa, Donald A.. 87–99. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2017. ‘Science and Secularization’. Intellectual History Review 27: 47–70.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2019. ‘Introduction’. In Science without God? Rethinking the History of Scientific Naturalism, edited by Harrison, Peter and Roberts, Jon H.. 1–18. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2019. ‘Laws of God or Laws of Nature? Natural Order in the Early Modern Period’. In Science without God? Rethinking the History of Scientific Naturalism, edited by Harrison, Peter and Roberts, Jon H.. 58–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter. 2020. ‘Naturalism and the Success of Science’. Religious Studies 56:274–291.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter and Roberts, Jon H. (eds.), 2018. Science without God: Rethinking the History of Scientific Naturalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Peter, Milbank, John, and Tyson, Paul, editors. 2022. After Science and Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hart, David Bentley. 2009. ‘Providence and Causality: On Divine Innocence’. In The Providence of God: Deus Habet Consilium, edited by Murphy, Francesca Aran and Ziegler, Philip G.. 34–56. London: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
Henry, John. 1990. ‘Henry More Versus Robert Boyle: The Spirit of Nature and the Nature of Providence’. In Henry More (1614–1687): Tercentenary Studies, edited by Hutton, Sarah. 55–76. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Henry, John. 1992. ‘The Scientific Revolution in England’. In The Scientific Revolution in National Context, edited by Porter, Roy and Teich, Mikulas. 178–209. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Henry, John. 2004. ‘Metaphysics and the Origins of Modern Science: Descartes and the Importance of Laws of Nature’. Early Science and Medicine 9:73–114.Google Scholar
Henry, John. 2012. A Short History of Scientific Thought. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Henry, John. 2013. ‘The Reception of Cartesianism’. In The Oxford Handbook of British Philosophy in the Seventeenth Century, edited by Anstey, Peter R.. 116–143. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Henry, John. 2020. ‘Primary and Secondary Causation in Samuel Clarke’s and Isaac Newton’s Theories of Gravity’. Isis 111:542–561.Google Scholar
Heyd, Michael. 1995. ‘Be Sober and Reasonable’: The Critique of Enthusiasm in the Seventeenth and Early Eighteenth Centuries. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Hoskin, M. A. 1977. ‘Newton, Providence and the Universe of Stars’. Journal of the History of Astronomy 8:77–101.Google Scholar
Hughes, Ann. 2003. ‘Religion, 1640–1660’. In A Companion to Stuart Britain, edited by Coward, Barry. 350–373. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael C. 1981. Science and Society in Restoration England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael C. 1985. ‘The Problem of “Atheism” in Early Modern England’. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 35:135–157.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael C. 1989. Establishing the New Science: The Experience of the Early Royal Society. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael C. 1990. ‘Science and Heterodoxy: An Early Modern Problem Reconsidered’. In Reappraisals of the Scientific Revolution, edited by Lindberg, David C. and Westman, Robert S.. 437–460. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Michael C. 1992. ‘“Aikenhead the Atheist”: The Context and Consequences of Articulate Irreligion in the Late Seventeenth Century’. In Atheism from the Reformation to the Enlightenment, edited by Hunter, Michael C. and Wootton, David. 221–254. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchison, Keith. 1983. ‘Supernaturalism and the Mechanical Philosophy’. History of Science 21:297–333.Google Scholar
Jaeger, Lydia. 2012. ‘Against Physicalism-Plus-God: How Creation Accounts for Divine Action in Nature’s World’. Faith and Philosophy 29:295–312.Google Scholar
Jardine, Lisa. 1974. Francis Bacon: Discovery and the Art of Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, Monte, and Wilson, Catherine. 2007. ‘Lucretius and the History of Science’. In The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius, edited by Gillespie, Stuart and Hardie, Philip. 131–148. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jordan, Peter N. 2017. ‘John Spencer and the Limits of Natural Causation in Early Modern England’. In Are There Limits to Science?, edited by Straine, Gillian. 121–130. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.Google Scholar
Jordan, Peter N. 2022. ‘Providence and the Affective Benefits of Natural Causality’. Journal of Religion 102:27–46.Google Scholar
Joy, Lynn S. 2006. ‘Scientific Explanation from Formal Causes to Laws of Nature’. In The Cambridge History of Science, Volume 3: Early Modern Science, edited by Park, Katharine and Daston, Lorraine. 70–105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kargon, Robert. 1962. ‘Walter Charleton, Robert Boyle, and the Acceptance of Epicurean Atomism in England’. Isis 55:184–192.Google Scholar
Kargon, Robert. 1966. Atomism in England from Hariot to Newton. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kargon, Robert. 1966. Introduction to Physiologia Epicuro-Gassendo-Charltoniana, by Charleton, Walter. xiii–xxv. New York: Johnson.Google Scholar
Kettle, Martin. 2004. ‘How Can Religious People Explain Something Like This?’ The Guardian, December 28. www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/dec/28/religion.comment.Google Scholar
Konstan, David. 2003. ‘Epicureanism’. In The Blackwell Guide to Ancient Philosophy, edited by Shields, Christopher, 237–252. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kraye, Jill. 2003. ‘The Legacy of Ancient Philosophy’. In The Cambridge Companion to Greek and Roman Philosophy, edited by Sedley, David. 323–352. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kubrin, David. 1967. ‘Newton and the Cyclical Cosmos: Providence and the Mechanical Philosophy’. Journal of the History of Ideas 28:325–346.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Larmer, Robert. 2002. ‘Is There Anything Wrong with God of the Gaps Reasoning?’ International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 52:129–142.Google Scholar
Lewis, C. S. 1962. They Asked for a Paper: Papers and Addresses. London: Geoffrey Bles.Google Scholar
Lewis, Eric. 2001. ‘Walter Charleton and Early Modern Eclecticism’. Journal of the History of Ideas 62:651–664.Google Scholar
Lightman, Bernard, editor. 2019. Rethinking History, Science, and Religion: An Exploration of Conflict and the Complexity Principle. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Lindberg, David C. 2003. The Beginnings of Western Science: The European Scientific Tradition in Philosophical, Religious, and Institutional Context, 600 B.C. to A.D. 1450. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lucci, Diego, and Wigelsworth, Jeffrey R.. 2015. ‘“God Does Not Act Arbitrarily, or Interpose Unnecessarily”: Providential Deism and the Denial of Miracles in Wollaston, Tindal, Chubb, and Morgan’. Intellectual History Review 25:167–189.Google Scholar
MacIntosh, J. J. 2003. ‘Locke and Boyle on Miracles and God’s Existence’. In Robert Boyle Reconsidered, edited by Hunter, Michael. 193–214. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mandelbrote, Scott. 2007. ‘The Uses of Natural Theology in Seventeenth-Century England’. Science in Context 20:451–480.Google Scholar
Mandelbrote, Scott. 2011. ‘Early Modern Biblical Interpretation and the Emergence of Science’. Science and Christian Belief 23:99–113.Google Scholar
Mandelbrote, Scott. 2013. ‘Early Modern Natural Theologies’. In The Oxford Handbook of Natural Theology, edited by Brooke, John Hedley, Manning, Russell Re and Watts, Fraser. 75–99. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, Peter, and Walsham, Alexandra. 2006. ‘Migrations of Angels in the Early Modern World’. In Angels in the Early Modern World, edited by Marshall, Peter and Walsham, Alexandra. 1–40. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, Dale B. 2004. Inventing Superstition: From the Hippocratics to the Christians. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
May, Gerhard. 1994. Creatio Ex Nihilo: The Doctrine of ‘Creation Out of Nothing’ in Early Christian Thought. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
McGrath, Alister. 2010. Science and Religion: A New Introduction. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
McGuire, J. E. 1972. ‘Boyle’s Conception of Nature’. Journal of the History of Ideas 33:523–542.Google Scholar
McKim, Donald K. 1980. ‘The Puritan View of History: Or, Providence Without and Within’. Evangelical Quarterly 52:213–237.Google Scholar
McMullin, Ernan. 2011. ‘Darwin and the Other Christian Tradition’. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 46:291–316.Google Scholar
Meinel, Christoph. 1988. ‘Early Seventeenth-Century Atomism: Theory, Epistemology, and the Insufficiency of Experiment’. Isis 79:68–103.Google Scholar
Morel, Pierre-Marie. 2009. ‘Epicurean Atomism’. In The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by Warren, James. 65–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Morgan, John. 2009. ‘Science, England’s “Interest” and Universal Monarchy: The Making of Thomas Sprat’s History of the Royal Society’. History of Science 47:27–54.Google Scholar
Muller, Richard A. 2001. ‘Reformation, Orthodoxy, “Christian Aristotelianism,” and the Eclecticism of Early Modern Philosophy’. Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis / Dutch Review of Church History 81:306–325.Google Scholar
Muller, Richard A. 2012. ‘God and Design in the Thought of Robert Boyle’. In The Persistence of the Sacred in Modern Thought, edited by Firestone, Chris L. and Jacobs, Nathan A.. 87–111. South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, Francesca Aran, and Ziegler, Philip G., editors. 2009. The Providence of God: Deus Habet Consilium. London: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
Naphy, William G., and Roberts, Penny, editors. 1997. Fear in Early Modern Society. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Norford, Don Parry. 1977. ‘Microcosm and Macrocosm in Seventeenth-Century Literature’. Journal of the History of Ideas 38:409–428.Google Scholar
Numbers, Ronald L. 2003. ‘Science without God: Natural Laws and Christian Beliefs’. In When Science and Christianity Meet, edited by Lindberg, David C. and Numbers, Ronald L.. 267–284. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
O’Briant, Walter H. 1975. ‘The Genesis, Definition, and Classification of Bacon’s Idols’. Southern Journal of Philosophy 13:347–57.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 1979. ‘Descartes and Charleton on Nature and God’. Journal of the History of Ideas 40:445–456.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 1983. ‘Providence and Divine Will in Gassendi’s Views on Scientific Knowledge’. Journal of the History of Ideas 44:549–560.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 1985. ‘Eternal Truths and the Laws of Nature: The Theological Foundations of Descartes’ Philosophy of Nature’. Journal of the History of Ideas 46:349–362.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 1994. Divine Will and the Mechanical Philosophy: Gassendi and Descartes on Contingency and Necessity in the Created World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 1996. ‘From Immanent Natures to Nature as Artifice: The Reinterpretation of Final Causes in Seventeenth-Century Natural Philosophy’. The Monist 79:388–407.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 1996. ‘Triangulating Divine Will: Henry More, Robert Boyle, and Réne Descartes on God’s Relationship to the Creation’. In Mind Senior to the World: Stoicismo e Origenismo nella Filosofia Platonica del Seicento Inglese, edited by Baldi, Marialuisa. 75–87. Milano: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 1997. ‘Mixing Metaphors: Science and Religion or Natural Philosophy and Theology in Early Modern Europe’. History of Science 35:91–113.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 2000. ‘Renaissance Humanism, Lingering Aristotelianism and the New Natural Philosophy’. In Humanism and Early Modern Philosophy, edited by Kraye, Jill and Stone, M. W. F.. 193–208. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 2001. ‘Whose Ends? Teleology in Early Modern Natural Philosophy’. Osiris 16:151–168.Google Scholar
Osler, Margaret J. 2010. Reconfiguring the World: Nature, God, and Human Understanding from the Middle Ages to Early Modern Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Paget, James Carleton. 2011. ‘Miracles in Early Christianity’. In The Cambridge Companion to Miracles, edited by Twelftree, Graham H.. 131–148. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parish, Helen, and Naphy, William G.. 2002. ‘Introduction’. In Religion and Superstition in Reformation Europe, edited by Parish, Helen and Naphy, William G.. 1–22. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Peacocke, Arthur R. 2007. All That Is: A Naturalistic Faith for the Twenty-First Century. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.Google Scholar
Pennock, Robert T., editor. 2001. Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, and Scientific Perspectives. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Perry, John, and Ritchie, Sarah Lane. 2018. ‘Magnets, Magic, and Other Anomalies: In Defense of Methodological Naturalism’. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 53:1064–1093.Google Scholar
Pleins, J. David. 2003. When the Great Abyss Opened: Classic and Contemporary Readings of Noah’s Flood. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Polkinghorne, John. 2011. Science and Religion in Quest of Truth. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Poppi, Antonino. 1988. ‘Fate, Fortune, Providence and Human Freedom’. In The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy, edited by Schmitt, Charles B., Skinner, Quentin, Kessler, Eckhard and Kraye, Jill. 641–667. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Porter, Roy. 1977. The Making of Geology: Earth Science in Britain 1660–1815. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Porter, Roy. 2000. Enlightenment: Britain and the Creation of the Modern World. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Preston, Jesse and Epley, Nicholas. 2009. ‘Science and God: An Automatic Opposition Between Ultimate Explanations’. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45:238–241.Google Scholar
Principe, Lawrence M. 2011. The Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Riskin, Jessica. 2020. ‘Just Use Your Thinking Pump!’ New York Review of Books, July 2. www.nybooks.com/articles/2020/07/02/just-use-your-thinking-pump/.Google Scholar
Ritchie, Sarah Lane. 2019. Divine Action and the Human Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rivers, Isabel. 1993. ‘“Galen’s Muscles”: Wilkins, Hume, and the Educational Use of the Argument from Design’. The Historical Journal 36:577–597.Google Scholar
Roger, Jacques. 1982. ‘The Cartesian Model and Its Role in Eighteenth-Century “Theory of the Earth”’. In Problems in Cartesianism, edited by Lennon, Thomas M., Nicholas, John M. and Davis, John W.. 95–112. Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
Rogers, G. A. J. 1985. ‘Descartes and the English’. In The Light of Nature: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Science presented to A.C. Crombie, edited by North, J. D. and Roche, J. J.. 281–302. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Ryrie, Alec. 2019. Unbelievers: An Emotional History of Doubt. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schuster, John A. 1990. ‘The Scientific Revolution’. In Companion to the History of Modern Science, edited by Olby, R. C. and Christie, J. R. R.. 217–242. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Scribner, Robert W. 1993. ‘The Reformation, Popular Magic, and the “Disenchantment of the World”’. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 23:475–494.Google Scholar
Scribner, Robert W. 1997. ‘Reformation and Desacralisation: From Sacramental World to Moralised Universe’. In Problems in the Historical Anthropology of Early Modern Europe, edited by Po-chia Hsia, R. and Scribner, Robert W.. 75–92. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Segal, Robert A. 2002. ‘Myth as Primitive Philosophy: The Case of E.B. Tylor’. In Thinking Through Myths: Philosophical Perspectives, edited by Schilbrack, Kevin. 18–45. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Serjeantson, Richard W. 1999. ‘Testimony and Proof in Early-Modern England’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30:195–236.Google Scholar
Serjeantson, Richard W. 2006. ‘Proof and Persuasion’. In The Cambridge History of Science, Volume 3: Early Modern Science, edited by Park, Katharine and Daston, Lorraine. 132–175. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shanahan, Timothy. 1988. ‘God and Nature in the Thought of Robert Boyle’. Journal of the History of Philosophy 26:547–569.Google Scholar
Shank, Michael H. 2019. ‘Naturalist Tendencies in Medieval Science’. In Science Without God? Rethinking the History of Scientific Naturalism, edited by Harrison, Peter and Roberts, Jon H.. 37–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Barbara J. 1983. Probability and Certainty in Seventeenth-Century England: A Study of the Relationships Between Natural Science, Religion, History, Law, and Literature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sharp, Lindsay. 1973. ‘Walter Charleton’s Early Life 1620–1659, and Relationship to Natural Philosophy in Mid-Seventeenth Century England’. Annals of Science 9:311–340.Google Scholar
Shaw, Jane. 2006. Miracles in Enlightenment England. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sheppard, Kenneth. 2015. Anti-Atheism in Early Modern England 1580–1750: The Atheist Answered and His Error Confuted. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Smith, Christian. 2003. ‘Secularizing American Higher Education: The Case of Early American Sociology’. In The Secular Revolution: Power, Interests, and Conflict in the Secularization of American Public Life, edited by Smith, Christian. 97–159. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Smoller, Laura. 1997. ‘Defining the Boundaries of the Natural in Fifteenth-Century Brittany: The Inquest into the Miracles of Saint Vincent Ferrar (d. 1419)’. Viator 28:333–360.Google Scholar
Snobelen, Stephen D. 1996. ‘The Argument over Prophecy: An Eighteenth-Century Debate between William Whiston and Anthony Collins’. Lumen: Selected Proceedings from the Canadian Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies 15:195–213.Google Scholar
Snobelen, Stephen D. 2004. ‘William Whiston, Isaac Newton and the Crisis of Publicity’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 35:573–604.Google Scholar
Snobelen, Stephen D. 2012. ‘The Myth of the Clockwork Universe: Newton, Newtonianism, and the Enlightenment’. In The Persistence of the Sacred in Modern Thought, edited by Firestone, Chris L. and Jacobs, Nathan A.. 149–184. South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Spurr, John. 1990. ‘“Virtue, Religion and Government”: The Anglican Uses of Providence’. In The Politics of Religion in Restoration England, edited by Harris, Tim, Seeward, Paul and Goldie, Mark. 29–47. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stanley, Matthew. 2011. ‘The Uniformity of Natural Laws in Victorian Britain: Naturalism, Theism, and Scientific Practice’. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 46:536–560.Google Scholar
Stanley, Matthew. 2015. Huxley’s Church and Maxwell’s Demon: From Theistic Science to Naturalistic Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Tanner, Kathryn. 2003. ‘Is God in Charge?’ In Essentials of Christian Theology, edited by Placher, William C.. 116–131. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.Google Scholar
Taub, Liba. 2009. ‘Cosmology and Meteorology’. In The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by Warren, James. 105–124. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, Keith. 1991. Religion and the Decline of Magic: Studies in Popular Beliefs in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century England. St. Ives: Penguin.Google Scholar
Todd, Margo. 1986. ‘Providence, Chance and the New Science in Early Stuart Cambridge’. The Historical Journal 29:697–711.Google Scholar
Torrance, Andrew B. 2017. ‘Should a Christian Adopt Methodological Naturalism?’ Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 52:691–725.Google Scholar
Torrance, Andrew B. 2018. ‘The Possibility of a Theology‐Engaged Science: A Response to Perry and Lane Ritchie’. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 53:1094–1105.Google Scholar
Tuveson, Ernest. 1950. ‘Swift and the World-Makers’. Journal of the History of Ideas 11:54–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ungureanu, James C. 2019. Science, Religion, and the Protestant Tradition: Retracing the Origins of Conflict. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
van der Meer, Jitse M., and Oosterhoff, Richard. 2009. ‘The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science: A Response to Harrison’s Thesis’. Science and Christian Belief 21:133–153.Google Scholar
VanderMolen, Ronald J. 1978. ‘Providence as Mystery, Providence as Revelation: Puritan and Anglican Modifications of John Calvin’s Doctrine of Providence’. Church History 47:27–47.Google Scholar
Visser, Arnoud S. Q. 2011. Reading Augustine in the Reformation: The Flexibility of Intellectual Authority in Europe, 1500–1620. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Waddington, Raymond B. 2012. Looking into Providences: Designs and Trials in Paradise Lost. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Walker, D. P. 1988. ‘The Cessation of Miracles’. In Hermeticism and the Renaissance: Intellectual History and the Occult in Early Modern Europe, edited by Merkel, Ingrid and Debus, Allen G.. 111–124. Washington: Folger Library Books.Google Scholar
Walsham, Alexandra. 1999. Providence in Early Modern England. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Walsham, Alexandra. 2001. ‘Sermons in the Sky: Apparitions in Early Modern Europe’. History Today 51:56–63.Google Scholar
Walsham, Alexandra. 2005. ‘Miracles in Post-Reformation England’. In Signs, Wonders, Miracles: Representations of Divine Power in the Life of the Church, edited by Cooper, Kate and Gregory, Jeremy. 273–306. Rochester: Boydell.Google Scholar
Walsham, Alexandra. 2008. ‘Recording Superstition in Early Modern Britain: The Origins of Folklore’. In The Religion of Fools? Superstition Past and Present, edited by Smith, S. A. and Knight, Alan. 178–206. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Walsham, Alexandra. 2010. ‘Invisible Helpers: Angelic Intervention in Post-Reformation England’. Past and Present 208:77–130.Google Scholar
Ward, Benedicta. 2011. ‘Miracles in the Middle Ages’. In The Cambridge Companion to Miracles, edited by Twelftree, Graham H.. 149–164. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Warhaft, Sidney. 1971. ‘The Providential Order in Bacon’s New Philosophy’. Studies in the Literary Imagination 4:49–64.Google Scholar
Warren, James. 2004. Facing Death: Epicurus and His Critics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Webster, Tom. 2003. ‘Religion in Early Stuart Britain, 1603–1642’. In A Companion to Stuart Britain, edited by Coward, Barry. 253–270. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Westfall, Richard S. 1973. Science and Religion in Seventeenth-Century England. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Wigelsworth, Jeffrey R. 2009. ‘A Sheep in the Midst of Wolves: Reassessing Newton and English Deists’. Enlightenment and Dissent 25:260–286.Google Scholar
Wigelsworth, Jeffrey R. 2014. ‘“God Always Acts Suitable to His Character, as a Wise and Good Being”: Thomas Chubb and Thomas Morgan on Miracles and Providence’. In Atheism and Deism Revalued: Heterodox Religious Identities in Britain, 1650–1800, edited by Hudson, Wayne, Lucci, Diego and Wigelsworth, Jeffrey R.. 157–172. Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Willen, Diane. 2012. ‘The Case of Thomas Gataker: Confronting Superstition in Seventeenth-Century England’. Sixteenth Century Journal 43:727–749.Google Scholar
Wilson, Catherine. 2008. Epicureanism at the Origins of Modernity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Catherine. 2009. ‘Epicureanism and Early Modern Philosophy’. In The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, edited by Warren, James. 266–287. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Winship, Michael P. 1994. ‘Prodigies, Puritanism, and the Perils of Natural Philosophy: The Example of Cotton Mather’. The William and Mary Quarterly 51:92–105.Google Scholar
Winship, Michael P. 1996. Seers of God: Puritan Providentialism in the Restoration and Early Enlightenment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, Charles. 2008. The Question of Providence. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.Google Scholar
Wood, P. B. 1980. ‘Methodology and Apologetics: Thomas Sprat’s History of the Royal Society’. British Journal for the History of Science 13:1–26.Google Scholar
Wootton, David. 2016. The Invention of Science: A New History of the Scientific Revolution. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Worden, Blair. 1985. ‘Providence and Politics in Cromwellian England’. Past and Present 109:55–99.Google Scholar
Yoshinaka, Takashi. 2011. Marvell’s Ambivalence: Religion and the Politics of Imagination in Mid-Seventeenth-Century England. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer.Google Scholar
Zagorin, Perez. 2001. ‘Francis Bacon’s Concept of Objectivity and the Idols of the Mind’. British Journal for the History of Science 34:379–393.Google Scholar