Re: Science vs. Theology

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed Apr 13 2005 - 17:22:40 EDT

Of course, no one on this list does this, do they Vernon?

Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vernon Jenkins" <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net>
To: <bdffoster@charter.net>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 10:00 PM
Subject: Re: Science vs. Theology

> Hi Brent,
>
> It seems to me that in Mt.6:24 the Lord provides sensible guidance for all
> who are concerned about the matter you raise. There he said, "No man can
> serve two masters...". Now, for one like myself who regards the Bible as
> _divine revelation_, I expect to find ultimate truth only in the Word of
> God. Others, of course, in accepting Science as the dominant master,
> appear to be able to live happily with a Book for which the term
> _Authoritative_ is no longer appropriate.
>
> I have no problem with God's gift of science and the positive technologies
> that spring therefrom, but when those who practise it attempt to extract
> _absolute truths_ from certain inferences vis-a-vis the distant past -
> thereby calling into question what God has already declared - I say, No,
> this is unacceptable. The prevailing attitude regarding the creation and
> subsequent history of the earth appears to be that all of relevance that
> can possibly be known, is known. This, of course, is sheer fiction; the
> most obvious reason being that the _supernatural_ is ignored - despite the
> fact that in Eph.6:10-18 the Apostle Paul warns Christians that in this
> life, whatever our calling, we shall never be free from such unwelcome
> attention. We therefore do well to constantly remind ourselves that one of
> the Enemy's prime objectives in this _war_ is the destruction of the
> Scriptures and of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
>
> Vernon
> www.otherbiblecode.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <bdffoster@charter.net>
> To: <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 10:44 PM
> Subject: Science vs. Theology
>
>
>> God gave us scripture, and God gave us creation. He is the author of
>> both. Is it appropriate to allow what we know from the study of creation
>> to affect how we study and interpret scripture? I think many on this
>> list, including myself, would answer yes. But how many of us would answer
>> yes to the converse: is it appropriate to allow what we know from the
>> study of scripture to affect how we study and interpret creation? As a
>> scientist my knee jerk reaction is to say "no way!". But how can you
>> honestly answer yes to one and not the other? After further reflection, I
>> lean toward yes to both questions. But (it's a big but, yes I have a big
>> but) scientific studies should not force scripture to say something it
>> doesn't say. And theological studies should not force creation to say
>> something it doesn't say. I also think a case can be made for answering
>> yes to the former and no to the latter. And I think some YECs would
>> answer no to the former and yes to the latter. But I am interested!
>> in what the Christian scientific community has to say.
>>
>> Brent
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Wed Apr 13 17:24:50 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 13 2005 - 17:24:52 EDT