> (3) You have completey ignored the second matter I raised, viz the > lessons that might be learned from the widespread negative reaction to > news of the numero-geometrical features of Genesis 1:1. Wouldn't you > agree that these phenomena strongly challenge the view that > _methodological naturalism_ is the only valid basis for the proper > investigation of ultimate origins? It would be good and proper if you > were to consider joining me in disabusing others of this significant > error.
I don't think the numero-geometrical features address whether methodological naturalism is relevant to ultimate origins.
The text of Genesis 1:1 makes it clear that methodological naturalism will be unable to address ultimate origins. However, Genesis 1 also makes it clear that methodological naturalism is highly appropriate for addressing pentultimate or antepentultimate origins:
Everything is created by an orderly God.
There aren't any rouge powers, quarreling deities, or other factors that might disrupt the regular workings of creation, unlike pagan views.
We were made to rule over creation. In order to do so well, as good stewards, we need to be able to determine how creation works.
Thus, there are good reasons to expect a study of the ordinary workings of the universe to be very productive and informative.
Dr. David Campbell
Old Seashells
University of Alabama
Biodiversity & Systematics
Dept. Biological Sciences
Box 870345
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0345 USA
bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at Droitgate Spa
Received on Fri Jan 28 17:26:49 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jan 28 2005 - 17:26:50 EST