In my thesis with the translated title “A Systematic-theologian account from an epistemological perspective on the theology-science dialogue”, I take epistemology ……., – fused with transcendence – as point of departure in order to understand the theologian-science debate within a theologian as well as a philosophical context. As a starting point, the research reflects upon humans as they are involved in practical and relevant day to day situations, consequently religious, within a religious, philosophical and natural science contexts. (Theology) constitute the so called first discourse in due course, the natural sciences follows as the second discourse. Within the context of epistemology and the cosmology metaphor embedded in a transcendental philosophical viewpoint, we are ultimately led to a ‘third discourse’ as an answer to the theological-science debate. Five statements guide the unfolding of the research process, namely: first that the religion-science discourse is shaped by the biological make-up of human beings. This entails that the discourse / debate starts and ends with human dimensions. Second, we as humans long for something metaphysical that gives us our sense and longing for life, and that includes religion, philosophy and mysticism. Third, the natural science is entertained as the second discourse where an interdisciplinary debate between the philosophical-cosmology and cosmology as metaphor is manifested as a metaphysical longing with strong ties in our thought towards the metaphysical. It examines the deconstruction as well as the participation of human resources for human rationality and in doing so it proposes that evolutionary epistemology sustains the theological question of biological roots and origin for human rationality. Fourth, a theological reflection questions whether Jesus Christ may provide an answer to this religion-science debate from a reinterpretation of a hermeneutical Christ. Fifth, and last, a meaningful perspective that all three discourses be intertwined as a process to encourage the dialogue / debate as a ‘third discourse’ between the religion-science debates. Viewpoints on Jesus Christ as theological paradigm and the way beliefs are synthesised are also examined from various theological and philosophical angles: the palaeontologist-theologian Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and the the Danish systematic theologian Niels Gregersen, German systematic theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg, as well as certain South African systematic theologians namely, Wentzel J. van Huyssteen, Daniël P. Veldsman, Cornel W. du Toit and Klaus Nürnberger. The research focus on mentioned theologians reveals a closer but different understanding of the religion-science debate with Jesus Christ as theological point of departure. The closer, but different clarification of the religion-science debate is elaborated on and subsequently justified by a discussion of different definitions of the place of Christ in the religion-science debate. A tentative indication of the road to a new kind of metaphysical Christian religion-science debate is suggested, which entails a transformation of Christian Christology as manifested in the ‘third discourse.’ Finally, the terms Spirit and Hope are identified especially by the German theologian Jürgen Moltmann and his Theology of Hope and The Crucified God are discussed as integral parts of the theological paradigm and syntheses of believes. At the same time, their significance for the synthesis of the religion-science debate is indicated. The importance and crucial role of hermeneutics are subsequently elucidated within the theological religion-science discourse. The research opening statement in which the research problem is formulated, is taken up/explained/explicated in the conclusion as…….that human intentionality for life can be accommodated in the religion-science debate. The loose based (paradoxical) discourse that is called the ‘third discourse’ can be accommodated in more than one religion, philosophy, or intuitive infinite believe in a person’s spiritual life and can satisfy humans in their expectations, experiences, hopes, fears, in their vulnerable existence within the contexts of the religion-science discourses.