On Wed, 21 Feb 1996 23:43:18 -0600 your wrote:
>My goodness, and welcome to the reflector Clarence. Tell us, does your
>theology provide a shaping principle or a driving principle for your
>science? In other words, does your belief in God affect the way you derive
>conclusions from naturalistic observations, or does your belief in God
>affect, a priori, which naturalistic observations you will believe?
That was a somewhat lengthy post, wasn't it. With all Christians I believe
in Christ as my Saviour. This is our foundation. I believe God created
all things (Gen 1 & 2), that by Christ "all things were created" and in
Christ "all things hold together." (Col 1:16,17). Therefore all of nature
will be of Christ. Naturalistic observations, then, will be of what Christ
has made and holds together. My belief in God through Jesus Christ,
therefore, must affect the way I derive conclusions from naturalistic
observations, for all of nature, I believe, is from him.
As for whether we view the evidence from nature, including man, as our
starting point or God as revealed through Christ as our starting point is,
correct me if I am wrong, the distinction between classical and
presuppositional apologetics. As for beginning with Jesus Christ, in our
understanding of nature, I believe is important, especially the more I read
about classical apologetics, philosophy and the hints I am getting from
reading presuppositional apologetics.
It's good to be a part of the reflector. We're getting some pigs in this
week (I live on a pig farm for those who missed the first post). Those
critters are cute. I see them horsing around, and for the life of me, I
can't imagine them being evolved (which isn't an argument at all, that's
just plain life).
Yours in Christ,
Clarence Bos