Allen Roy wrote:>The problem is just as Mortenson says. Glenn has uncritically accepted the foundational assumptions of naturalism and all it's associated corollaries that are the antithesis to sound Biblical thinking. As a result he must
>reinterpret the Bible within that atheistic concept. So obviously there was no Flood and all life forms evolved from single cells, and genetic information is purely randomly generated.<
Although appreciating Burgy's questioning of the word "uncritically", I think that the attribution of naturalism is a more basic problem of this claim. If Genesis 1 is correct in asserting that God created us to rule over creation and that He created everything according to His plans, then we are created with the capacity to study and understand how creation works. Furthermore, if there is only one God, sovereign over everything, then creation should behave in an orderly manner, as there is no risk of e.g., Zeus and Poseidon getting mad at each other and disrupting the natural order. Although He does work miracles, they serve a particular purpose, not whim. Thus, the scientific reconstruction of past events may be firmly rooted in Chrisitan presuppositions. In contrast, naturalism gives no a priori reason why creation should behave in an orderly manner, even though it is empirically obvious that it does.
The fact that many of the early geologist were evangelical believes, yet rejected a young earth likewise shows that accusations of naturalism are false.
In contrast, the claim that non-miraculous explanations of earth history supports a naturalistic world view requires a god of the gaps approach. By denying God's general providence, Mortenson and Roy accept naturalistic presuppositions.
Dr. David Campbell
46860 Hilton Dr #1113
Lexington Park MD 20653 USA
That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at Droigate Spa
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 06 2002 - 16:34:55 EST