>A post-modern approach will surely in the end kill all scientific
>discussion (not to mention theological discussion). When I pointed out
>that I would have to throw away science in order to believe that the
>laws of physics changed when Adam fell causing apparent age, he said I
>wouldn't. But he never explained why that was so.
>
I would agree with you in that I would also "have to throw away science in
order to believe that the laws of physics changed when Adam fell" but I
wouldn't deny that it may of happened that way based on science. It is by
my faith in the consistency of my Lord that I would deny that there was a
change in physics.
>I also interacted with the speaker afterwards. In passing he said
>something about how God wants us to avoid philosophy to which I
>responded that God created philosophy and science and that it is good.
>He thought about that one for a while. I can only hope it puts him on
>another path.
>
>Other exchanges happened but I will spare you. Any insight from your
>interactions with YEC would be helpful.
>
I would disagree that God created philosophy (and theology) and science. He
gave us the ability to conduct abstract thought, but I find no reason to
believe that he gave us the methodology. He did give us revelation of
Himself and His love for us, however revelation is outside the realm of
science and philosophy.
I have noticed over the years that there is a fundamental difference between
the Calvinist and the Lutheran views of reason. I believe that our
differences should also color differently our views on faith/science issues.
Is there any interest in exploring this topic?
John
**********************************
John P. McKiness
P.O. Box 5666
Coralville, Iowa (U.S.A.) 52241
jmckines@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu
**********************************