Re: Testing in historical science
George Murphy (email@example.com)
Sun, 16 Nov 1997 13:38:57 -0500
Bill Payne wrote:
> Sat, 15 Nov 1997 21:34:23 -0500 (EST) George Murphy wrote:
> > & we don't have theories of celestial mechanics detailed enough
> > to tell us why the solar system has 9 planets. But that doesn't mean
> > that they were designed in some way that bypassed the laws of physics.
> > The contingency of evolutionary process, physical or biological, cannot
> > be ignored.
> IYHO, would a miracle, e.g. the changing of water to wine, bypass the
> laws of physics?
Not neccessarily. I think it more in line with an adequate
understanding of God's actions to see miracles as rare natural processes
for whose possibility God has provided in the laws of nature. If we
knew the relevant laws, we wouldn't call it a miracle. But this wasn't
the point at issue in the post I was replying to.