RE: Cobb County

My original post should have read:

There is a difference between our conception of the universe and the
actual, real thing. Perhaps nature should be studied in the light of
Scripture. We ought to attempt to use Christian theology as regulative,
NOT CONSTITUTIVE, when choosing a particular philosophy of science
and/or the metaphysics that we want to derive from the results of
experimental science-physics, chemistry, etc.

Moorad

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Jan de Koning
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 11:10 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: Cobb County

At 09:32 AM 19/01/2005 -0500, Alexanian, Moorad wrote:
>There is a difference between our conception of the universe and the
>actual, real thing. Perhaps nature should be studied in the light of
>Scripture. We ought to attempt to use Christian theology as regulative
>when choosing a particular philosophy of science and/or the metaphysics

>that we want to derive from the results of experimental
science-physics,
>chemistry, etc.
>
>
>
>Moorad

Your definitions of Theologu and Ohilosophy are strange. There is a
Christian Philosophy developed by a Theologian: Dr Vollenhoven, who was
Doctor in Theology, who wrote his thesis on the basis of Mathematics.
In
several aspects it is like the Philosdphy of his brother-in-law
Dooyeweerd,
but V. is more openly using the BIble as foundation. Unfortunately, his

books have not been translated in English. However, on some points
D.and
V. agree: when you study Theology you have already a Philosophy.
Anything
you do is based on a Philosphy you have, knowingly or unknowingly.
The errors mad in making Theology as the basis of your Philosophy will
cause you to think that everything in life may be deducted from the
Bible. Here is already a difficulty: you do not know what happened
before
"original" man was "created". They certainly did not know how to
write. While some parts of the Bible conform to what the oldest
writings
show, other parts do not. Was God lying, in nature or in the Bible?
Also, how does anyone know what was written originally? Some old
transcripts do not agree with other transcripts.
My concern is that the way you and others are talking is alienating
science
students from God's service. Else, I don't think we should even talk
about
it. Your talking alienates young people from studying science, since
there
are several areas where there findings would contradict a "literal"
(therefor untrue) reading of Genesis. Genesis was not written to teach
us
the history of the world. If anything, it wants to show us how man
turned
away from God, and therefor needed Jesus Christ, God's Son as their
saviour.

Another danger: we will not get enough Christians wanting to study
certain
areas of science.

Jan de Koning
Received on Wed Jan 19 12:09:32 2005