Great way of reconciling science and faith by keeping them separated
by initial conditions that lie outside our realm. God as the provider
of the 'Laws of nature', not exactly what the original IDers had in
mind but I agree with Mike that this is the only scientific and
theological defensible position. However by using the front loading
argument, it seems that one has also explained why science will remain
unable to detect ID or be able to differentiate it from 'natural'
initial conditions.
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 5:19 PM, Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com> wrote:
> I like this quote -
>
> "Many excellent and religious persons not deeply versed in what they
> mistakenly call "human knowledge" but which is in truth the interpretation
> of those laws that God himself has impressed on his creation, have
> endeavoured to discover proofs of design in a multitude of apparent
> adaptations of means to ends, and have represented the Deity as perpetually
> interfering, to alter for a time the laws he had previously ordained; thus
> by implication denying to him the possession of that foresight which is the
> highest attribute of omnipotence. Minds of this order, insensible of the
> existence of that combining and generalising faculty which gives to human
> intellect its greatest development, and tied down by the trammels of their
> peculiar pursuits, have in their mistaken zeal not perceived their own
> unfitness for the mighty task, and have ventured to represent the Creator of
> the universe as fettered by the same infirmities as those by which their own
> limited faculties are subjugated."
>
> http://www.victorianweb.org/science/science_texts/bridgewater/b1.htm
>
> -Mike Gene
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Jun 7 01:17:04 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jun 07 2008 - 01:17:04 EDT