Unbelievers will continue to say that Christianity is not scientific...but you can't have the latter without the prior. Below is a good article on this topic
Christianity and Science
posted by Dale Callahan at 3:20 PM
Mind/Mined Nuggets
God has given us inexhaustible treasure fields to search out. As we search for these treasures in God's world and in His Word, we find nuggets of wealth that are far greater than that of silver and gold. Below are some nuggets I have discovered...some nuggets were found close to the surface...while others took years of searching and digging. May the Lord give us all hearts to continue seeking Him, our exceeding great reward.
Monday, May 29, 2006
Christianity and Science
9 Comments:
An article that starts with an obvious falsehood ("It is one of those embarrassing historical ironies that modern science could not have arisen except in the atmosphere of a Christian world-and-life view." ) is hardly likely to prove anything.
Modern science came to a dead stop once the Church came to power in the Roman Empire and stifled the learning of the Greeks. It did not return until the Enlightenment when men began to turn away from the Church and put their faith in reason and rational inquiry.
If the author doesn't even know the basic history of his subject, he is unlikely to have anything to teach.
You have been very silent in justifying the uniformity of nature.
Oh yeah...I forgot...look out the window...wow.
As I read your second paragraph I see that you have learned your catechism of unbelief very well, grasshopper,lol.
The Bible teaches that all men know God and try their hardest to hide this clear truth.
The Romans and Greeks could accomplished what they did because of their "suppressed" beliefs.
I find it amazing that you still don't understand the argument. I am not saying that you have to agree with it...but to read the argument in a article and come out with your response is wilfull blindness.
Nature is not uniform - it is wildly diverse. Don't you have a window?
I don't understand your problem with the 2nd paragraph. I'm simply recounting well known history. Do you somehow deny history?
Well, I had to look up the author of this mish-mosh and found that he's a Christian Reconstructionist (in other words, pretty much a nut case [no offense]).
He and you tend to use circular reasoning that "...rests on a belief in the Bible as the source of truth because it is inspired by God, in whom we can believe because the Bible affirms it and the Bible is the source of truth".
Well I don't buy it and I'm not going to get caught up in developing fancy philosphical arguments about why down is not up, or why down is only down because the Bible says it's down, or that the knowledge of up and down comes from God so therefore it assumes the Trinity, etc., etc. These are totally nutty ideas - do you believe this stuff?
Do you even understand what the uniformity of nature is...man oh man.
Uniformity of nature isn't talking about the lack of diversity in the world...yes God has created and governs a very diverse world.
Uniformity of nature is speaking about how when you put two chemicals together "today" and get a certain outcome, and tomorrow when you do the exact same thing...under the exact same condidtions you will get the same result.
But as Hume said why do you assume that the future is going to be like the past.
This is like talking to a wall...
I have a problem with your view of history...you know...just like you don't like my view.
You again judge Bahnsen as a "nut case" but you have no standard for doing so...but that is typical DL.
Again...and again and again...you too argue in a circle...you haven't proven your ultimate authority...you assume it and prove all else by it.
At least Bahnsen realizes this and goes from there. You...on the other hand...sit in darkness...thinking the other side is involved in circular reasoning and you are not.
When you say "Well I don't buy it and I'm not going to get caught up in developing fancy philosphical arguments" what you really mean is I don't have an answer...and I agree you don't have an answer for the enduring philosophical questions that men have tried to answer throughout history...but God does have the answers.
You can assume God has answers or is the answer. You can presuppose, you can assert, you can believe, you can imagine, but you cannot prove. If you can't prove without assuming that the thing you wish to prove is true, then you can't prove.
Now that I see the cult you fallen into, I understand better the origin of your confusing and illogical constructs.
No, I can't answer in any way that you will ever find acceptable, because I will not presuppose your presuppositions and do not accept your unprovable assertions.
I only hope that some day, preferably before you ruin your children's education, you come to your senses and realize how drastically wrongheaded this particularly branch of theology is.
When my children stand of the "right" hand of God...trusting in Christ their Savior...while others are being taken away to the "outer darkness"...they will be very thankful that they were "ruined" [in the worlds eyes] in their education.
I pray for you DL that you too will be standing on the "right" side.
If the fantasy of a jealous and vengeful God sitting in judgment of humanity, one person at a time, makes you feel better then you are welcome to it. I find it a useful construct for those who wish to control the behavior of other people, but of marginal usefulness as a spiritual center for one's life. To each his own.
Post a Comment
<< Home