Re: Science and supernatural explanations #2/2

Brian D. Harper (bharper@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu)
Fri, 3 May 1996 13:39:14 -0400

At 07:46 PM 5/2/96 EDT, Steve wrote:

>Group
>
>On Mon, 22 Apr 1996 08:44:46 -0400 Brian wrote:
>
>BH>...Steve J wrote...quoting Hugh Ross:
>
>SJ>In 1988 George Greenstein expressed these
>>thoughts: "As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently
>>arises that some supernatural agency-or, rather, Agency-must be
>>involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have
>>stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being?
>>Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for
>>our benefit?" ("Symbiotic Universe, p27)"
>
>BH>and in the next paragraph Greenstein writes:
>>
>> A heady prospect. Unfortunately I believe it to be illusory.
>> As I claim mankind is not the center of the universe, as
>> I claim anthropism to be different from anthropocentrism,
>> so too I believe that the discoveries of science are not
>> capable of proving God's existence-not now, not ever.
>> And more than that: I also believe that reference to God
>> will never suffice to explain a single one of these
>> discoveries. God is not an explanation.
>
>BH>(Ross H., "Astronomical
>>Evidences for a Personal, Transcendent God", in Moreland J.P. ed.,
>>"The Creation Hypothesis", InterVarsity Press: Illinois, 1994, p164)
>
>Brian (perhaps inadvertently), by inserting "the next paragraph"
>between my quote of Greenstein by Ross and the citation of Ross'
>chapter in Moreland's "The Creation Hypothesis", may give the
>impression that "the next paragraph" appears in Ross and that I have
>deliberately omitted it. It doesn't -the quote of Greenstein that
>Ross gives ends exactly where I ended it.
>

First of all, what I said was: "in the next paragraph *Greenstein*
writes" (emphasis added).

As regarding your last sentence above, yes that is exactly the
point, Ross's quote ends exactly where you ended it.

>The fact that Greenstein acknowledges that "the evidence" points to
>"scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being", but claims it
>is "illusory", is testimony to the darkening effect of naturalism (Rom
>1:21).
>

And this is testimony to the darkening effect of selective quotation.
Greenstein did not acknowledge the above. This is clear if one reads
the surrounding context.

========================
Brian Harper | "I can't take my guesses back
Associate Professor | That I based on almost facts
Applied Mechanics | That ain't necessarily so"
Ohio State University | -- Willie Nelson
========================