Re: Cobb County

Dick Fischer wrote:

>
>
> Science is not inherently atheistic. It needs to be theistically neutral.

There is no such thing as theistically neutral. It is a myth created by
atheists that some Christians in the current era have bought into but
which no Christians in history before us would accept as a valid maxim.

> If God emerges as a logical conclusion after a careful examination
> of scientific evidence then we can include divine intervention in
> scientific theories. But the starting point needs to be neutrality.

Neutrality is a myth, no one starts without presuppositions. To claim
that science is neutral and without presuppositions is just plain wrong
and contradicts the most respected scientists themselves.

>
>> Scripture teaches us what nature says about God, not the other way
>> around.
>
>
> Okay, cite your Scripture verses. How does God act in nature? Be
> specific.

Just to start"

He creates - Genesis 1

He feeds, sustains and directs it - Job 39-40

Jeremiah 23:34 - God fills all the universe, nature cannot be studied
neutrally because God is present in all of it

Isaiah 42:5 He created all and gave life to everything that has life on
earth

Acts 4: 24 God made everything in the earth, not just the start,
everything that lives

Colossians 1:15-17 - He keeps things in existence and holds all the
universe together constantly -

Hebrews 1:2-3 - He maintains, and guide the universe constantly and
sustains him, without his constant action it would fall apart

Psalm 148 - the universe itself praises God so study of it could never
be neutral!

Isaiah 24:4 - even nature is in pain because of sin, that pain itself
could be read in science as a distorted history which could deceive the
neutral scientist

>
>>> Otherwise you open it all up to how we interpret Scripture. And no
>>> one interprets the same. Can we impose on nature six 24-hour days
>>> of creation because God says so?
>>
>
>> So we can impose a evolutionary system on nature because man says so?
>
>
> As a famous President once said, "There you go again." Man did not
> impose anything on nature. We make observations and logical
> consistent conclusions based upon those observations.

So when a Christian interprets what he sees in nature be scripture he is
imposes scripture on nature. But when the scientist does the exact same
thing, imposing his scientific theories on nature, then it is just
making logical conclusions. that is quite hypocritical for an
objectively neutral discipline.

>
>> So you admit, man has authority over GOd and man's view can be
>> imposed on nature, while God's revelation cannot!
>
>
> Again, you have the Book. Give us chapter and verse. How did God
> cause mammals to evolve from reptiles?

He didn't. He created them as his word says. To claim the bible must
explain atheistic science which seeks to remove God from the equation
and be "neutral" about God is the problem of your science. You claim
science can be neutral when nothing sinful man does can ever be
neutral. Scripture cannot explain atheistic science because atheistic
science tells too many lies about the universe to support its dismissal
of God from the equation. Your myth of neutrality acts in exactly the
same way, removing God from what he has created, sustains, and upholds
as if that were even possible.

>
> Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
> Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
> www.genesisproclaimed.org
> <http://www.genesisproclaimed.org/>

-- 
.......................................................................................
The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between 
classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every 
human heart   -  Alexander Solzhenitsyn
.......................................................................................
Edward J. Hassertt
Reason By Faith
Auburn, Washington
http://www.reasonbyfaith.org
Christian Legal Discussion:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advocatusdeus/