> ...
> With all my strength, I firmly believe that to accept a dualistic system of reality when it comes to theology
> vs. science, is to place us in the realm of Velikovsky and the YECs. Since I have already spent too much time
> as a YEC, I will not go back into that box willingly.
>
> glenn
>
Right on target, Glenn. This is all too reminiscent of the medieval
Muslim philosopher Averroes who maintained that "truths of reason" and
"truths of faith" existed in two logic-tight compartments, so he could
"save" both his Aristotelian natural scuence and his faith based on the
Qur'an. Thomas Aquinas opposed Averroism and argued strongly for the
unity of truth, and I don't see how he could be wrong about this. The
laws of logic apply accross the board, and if a statement of faith is the
contradictory of a statement of reason, one of them must be true and the
other false. To say they are both true in their own way is to open a
pandora's box which, if recent history is our guide, will result in
people denying the Resurrection and still claiming to be Christians; or
affirming that all religions are equally truthful even though Christians
affirm the uniqueness of Christ; etc. The fact that any particular
person adopting an Averroistic dualism of truth doesn't go that far
doesn't mean that such extremes are not the logical end of such a denial
of the unity of truth.
Garry DeWeese