From: George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Thu Oct 09 2003 - 18:11:32 EDT
Fivefree@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 10/9/2003 1:04:35 PM Mountain Standard Time,
> jwburgeson@juno.com writes:
> >>Virtually all science assumes there is no God of the bible. We all know
> that and it is a basic assumption of all modern science>>
>
> Wrong on both counts.
>
> Burgy
> Ah contraire. Document for me a quote out of ANY textbook that discusses any
> process that is not all natural in its origin and even HINTS at a creator that
> is used on a college level.
>
> Jack Jackson
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> In a message dated 10/9/2003 1:04:35 PM Mountain Standard Time,
> jwburgeson@juno.com writes:
>
> >>Virtually all science assumes there is no God of the
> bible. We all know
> that and it is a basic assumption of all modern science>>
>
> Wrong on both counts.
>
> Burgy
>
> Ah contraire. Document for me a quote out of ANY textbook that
> discusses any process that is not all natural in its origin and even
> HINTS at a creator that is used on a college level.
There is a fundamental difference between operating without the assumption that
there is a God and assuming that there is no God. The first is methodological
naturalism & is the procedure used by virtually all scientists of any religious (or
non-religious) belief. The second is metaphysical or ontological naturalism, a belief
held by some but by no means all scientists & not necessary for scientific work. Your
parallel post about Philip Johnson indicates that you aren't familiar with thse
distinctions, perhaps since I think you are new to this list. They have been discussed
extensively here. You might want to consult the archive.
Science does not claim that the processes that it studies are "all natural in
their origin" in the sense that it denies God as a first cause. But it does not explore
the question of whether or not there is any cause more fundamental than those that can
be discerned in terms of natural processes themselves. That is one of the requirements
of methodological naturalism. This is not the same as denying God as first cause, which
is metaphysical naturalism.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Oct 09 2003 - 18:20:03 EDT