Re: [asa] Two questions...

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Bill Powers <wjp@swcp.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure what you mean by saying that "science created a new issue." I
> don't see why "science" should be viewed any differently than any other
> "tradition of men" or worldly temptation.
>
> I can only guess you think it different because you believe that science is
> a "new truth," meaning, I suppose that its "truth," as another authority of
> truth, can stand in opposition, or contrast, with Biblical "truth."
>
> But isn't this just the position of external criticism and conflict that has
> historically bugged the church from the beginning.
>
> My only point here is that science, as far as I can tell, has no special
> distinctive. Remember, that "science" is historically contextualized, and
> that before Newton there was Aristotle. From the perspective of church
> history both are equal.
>
> bill powers
> White, SD
>

Bill,

It's not that science has any particular distinction; it's just that
the advent of science created a new "issue" for us to sort through
with regard to what scripture has to say about those topics. In the
same way that the bible doesn't talk at all about communism or
capitalism because those ideas of government did not exist then, the
bible also does not talk about modern science. This isn't to say that
scripture is doesn't supply what we need to properly address these
modern issues, but it doesn't specifically or directly teach about
them. We have to address modern issues by contemplating the character
and purposes of God (most fully revealed in Christ) in relationship to
people and creation as a whole and working out our salvation based on
that worldview.

And this is where concordists and the rest of us disagree. Concordists
assume that the bible DOES specifically address all such issues by way
of God's embedding detailed future answers into the ancient inspired
texts. The rest of us think it's an ABUSE of scripture to think in
that way. In fact, I would say that straightforward-YEC is
theologically a more defensible position than concordism because it
does not add modern human ideas to the original meaning of scripture.

Doug

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Feb 9 09:21:30 2009