Re^3: Science and Theology

Lawrence H Johnston (johnston@uidaho.edu)
Fri, 31 Oct 1997 07:57:46 -0800 (PST)

Keith - You said it for me. At the end I will add an observation of my
own.

On Fri, 31 Oct 1997, Keith Walker wrote:

> What is debated is whether the existence of the Watchmaker can properly be
> inferred from simple observation of the watch.
>
>
> Whilst the text does not starkly insist that God's existence is properly
> inferrable from the world around, it does say that certain qualities are
> discernible. And it would need explaining how qualities could be inferred
> to a being whose existence cannot be.
>
> This is not independent natural theology because it asserts that a
> sufficient knowledge of God can only come through special revelation, but
> it accords some true and decisive content to general revelation
> nonetheless.
>
> Keith Walker
>
Here's Larry J speaking.
And I don't think we need to fear the accusation of using the "God of
the gaps" argument, if we are modest about our pronouncements, as we
should be. We do not have final wisdom, but we can raise Design
observations as pointers that things exist whose origin is beyond the
purview of science.
Good scientists do not worry about "Science of the Gaps" when they
report a new phenomenon, and offer a *tentative* interpretation of it.

Larry
=============================================================
Lawrence H. Johnston 917 E. 8th st.
professor of physics, emeritus Moscow, Id 83843
University of Idaho (208) 882-2765
http://www.uidaho.edu/~johnston/ ==========================