--- Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net> wrote:
> When we get all the way back to the "first cause" before the universe
> came into being, and we can foresee no prior natural causes, then I
> think we can safely invoke the Creator and be on fairly solid ground.
> Beyond that the ground gets slipperier and slipperier.
>
This could easily be misinterpreted as deism. The Bible seems to me to deal
chiefly with God's dealings with human beings, and (in time-bound human
perception anyway) these have taken place in history. So God acts in history.
And admittedly miracles have occurred at His hands in history. But these
miracles occur infrequently and generally for very specific purposes. So it's
safe to say He doesn't meddle in the natural world.
> Is it possible to do science without naturalistic presuppositions?
>
> If you mean, is it possible to do science without assuming natural
> causation, the answer is "no."
>
Agreed
> The world functions in an orderly way because God is an orderly God, and
> that
> is how he acts. When we observe the orderliness of natural phenomena, we
> are
> observing the orderliness of God's actions. I can go about my scientific
>
> experiments in exactly the same way without any naturalistic assumtions.
>
However, will a buddhist or a Hindu do science the same way?
Bill Hamilton
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
586.986.1474 (work) 248.652.4148 (home) 248.303.8651 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
Received on Wed Jan 4 21:41:25 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jan 04 2006 - 21:41:25 EST