Re: Science: working in the flesh?

Michael K. Thompson (
Sun, 23 Feb 1997 18:01:21 -0800

Rodney Dunning wrote:
> One drawback, for those seeking objective historical proof, is that we
> don't know what we may yet discover. For example, one day someone may
> propose an alternative hypothesis that is imminently more reasonable than
> the resurrection. There is no way on purely rationalistic grounds to say
> this won't happen, as far I know. It seems this is where faith enters into
> the issue. My faith in Christ leads me to believe that such a hypothesis
> CANNOT be discovered, or at least it cannot be successfully defended.

Something in this statement does not sit well with me. Is reason pure
enough (indeed sinless enough) that a "better" hypothesis cannot be
found? Can an atheist find a "better" hypothesis and "successfully"
defend it in front of sceptics and still be wrong?

I realize that similar challenges to our thinking fuel the YEC
movement. But still I believe that Satan can come up with a better
apologetic than I can. NO APOLOGETIC is worth the paper it is written
on unless it is has an evangelistic core viz. a witness of Christ
himself. Ultimately I know that Jesus rose from the dead, not because
my argument is better (though I think it is), but because I have a
personal relationship with him.

The scientist side of me is not totally comfortable with this, but this
is where faith leads me. Can I have input on this?