You suggest that science may bring about "advances in theological thinking". In reality, the only contribution that science can make to the ideas of religion is atheism.

This book is written from the perspective of a conservitive [sic] Christian with extensive knowledge and access to NDEs. Scripture is used to interpret NDEs. When NDEs agree with the Bible, they become prof [sic] that the scriptures are inerrant and when NDEs don’t, it is because evil has tainted the experience. Purely from a Christian point of view.. Not recommended for those looking for a more universal or balanced perspective. 

"I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidae with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars, or that a cat should play with mice." 

"As I look at these natural experiments, mostly I am impressed by how similarly evolution turns out when it is allowed to run twice. We have seen how alike Thylacinus is to a dog, Notoryctes to a mole, Petaurus to flying squirrels, Thylacosmilus to the sabretooths (and to various ‘false sabretooths’ amongst the placental carnivores). The differences are instructive too. Kangaroos are hopping antelope-substitutes." 

 

…

 

"I am tempted by Conway Morris’s belief that we should stop thinking of convergent evolution as a colourful rarity to be remarked and marvelled at when we find it. Perhaps we should come to see it as a norm, exceptions to which are occasions for surprise. For example, true syntactic language seems to be unique to one species, our own. Perhaps – and I shall return to it – this is one thing that a re-evolved brainy biped would lack?

 

In my opening chapter, The Conceit of Hindsight, I listened to warnings against seeking patterns, rhymes or reasons in evolution, but said that I would cautiously flirt with them. The Host’s Return has provided an opportunity to sweep over the whole course of evolution in the forward direction and see what patterns we can descry. The idea that all evolution was aimed at producing Homo sapiens was certainly well rejected, and nothing we have seen on our journey reinstates it. Even Conway Morris claims only that something approximately similar to our kind of animal is one of several outcomes – others being insects, for example – that we would expect to see recurring if evolution were rerun again and again."

For example, if there is some kind of independent mentality within the universe, then this might help us to understand the existence of consciousness. Think of another branch of science, quantum mechanics. As the physicist Eugene Wigner put it: "The very study of the external world led to the conclusion that the content of consciousness is an ultimate reality." Consciousness existing like air, land and water? It is a contentious proposition but not simply "not science".  

Ruse himself is more cautious: it is easy to run ahead of the science. "Darwinism has major implications for thoughts of purpose," he concludes, but be careful. On the other hand, it is easy to lag behind the science too, not least when evolution is used as a political stick rather than celebrated as part of the human quest for knowledge.