Re: Cobb County

Ed,

You want science to be based on a philosophy that is false because there is no supernatural foundation.

But, the evidence does not fit that claim. Do you really think that all of science is inaccurate? I dont really think you think that. Do you go to a doctor that practices western medicine, or do you use faith healing alone? Would you choose a doctor based solely on whether they were a Christian or not?

The truth is that God exists, and acts supernaturally in the universe. And scientists study that universe and the laws that God has created. And some scientists will acknowledge that the only reason there is a universe worth studying is because of the God who created it. But, some dont look or believe in anything beyond the natural, even though they cant see that they couldnt be doing science without a Creator. But that doesnt mean that the science they do is no good, and not full of Truth.

And this is not unique to science. Do musicians have to assume there is a supernatural to make music? Do poets have to assume there is a God? Or mathemeticians? Yet all of us, of every profession, vocation, every calling, use the fundamental laws that God created, with or without acknowledging the supernatural foundation. There are plenty of great atheist painters, and there are bad Christian poets.

The place to use the presuppositional arguments Ed, imo, is not here. The people doing science here agree that there is a supernatural foundation. They agree that they are working within the laws of God. The place to use presuppositionalism is with the scientists who are atheists/agnostics.

I my opinion, you are making an error in logic by making the claim that if one doesnt accept a supernatural presupposition, then whatever that person does is false because the foundation is false. Something along the lines of "all good things come from God, therefore if it doesnt come from God it isnt good."

----- Original Message -----
  From: Edward Hassertt
  To: D. F. Siemens, Jr. ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2005 11:24 PM
  Subject: Re: Cobb County

  D. F. Siemens, Jr. wrote:

    Edward J. Hassertt wrote in part
    So, if God did supernaturally acts, then the assumptions of methodological naturalism are false and the foundations on which scientific discoveries are based are nonexistent. If God does or did act in the events of the universe in a supernatural way and science assumes a priori that such actions are not present, then if they are present, science will always miss describing the universe or its history accurately.

    If we a priori exclude the possibility of discovering supernatural signatures in science, is that really science? How can one claim that certain types of evidence will always be ignored or interpreted to mean something else just because of a presupposition of methodological naturalism?

 This is a typical lawyer approach, distort matters so that the unwary are seduced by nonsense.
  This childishness is uncalled for. I did not insult you or anyone else, I was discussing an issue. The personal attacks are not becoming a Christian or a person over the age of 5. I await your apology if you are Christian enough to give it.

  I'll just ignore the fact that what the rest of your inane post claims is not true of science is exactly what the person I was responding to said was necessary for science.

  --
  .......................................................................................
  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/
Received on Mon Jan 24 07:29:08 2005