Scholars have long been aware of Robert Boyle's status as a lay theologian. To date, however, no one has analysed any of Boyle's theological writings in the specific context of the theological controversies of his day. On the face of it, there is good reason for this neglect. These writings appear to be non-polemical in nature, and when this fact is considered along with Boyle's known distaste for controversy it is easy to assume that his theological writings represent simply Boyle's desire to show that a dedicated natural philosopher could be an even more dedicated Christian.

A closer look at Boyle's 1681 Discourse of Things above Reason, however, indicates that when he wrote it Boyle was indeed engaging in a religious controversy — one which has important implications for his philosophical epistemology. Specifically, he was addressing the question of the extent to which human reason can and should be applied to the mysteries of Christianity. In this controversy the Anglican Latitudinarian, Joseph Glanvill, in arguing reason's competence, had pitted himself against certain nonconformist ministers (those refusing to conform to the Church of England after the Restoration of Charles II) who had argued — and would continue to argue — that human reason is not capable of understanding (at least some of) the mysteries of Christianity.