Moorad
-----Original Message-----
From: mortongr@flash.net <mortongr@flash.net>
To: Behnke, James <james.behnke@asbury.edu>
Cc: 'evolution' <evolution@calvin.edu>; 'ASA reflector' <asa@calvin.edu>;
Wilbur, Frank <frank.wilbur@asbury.edu>; Olsen, Larry <lolsen@asbury.edu>;
Baldridge, Bobby <bobby.baldridge@asbury.edu>
Date: Wednesday, September 01, 1999 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: Materialistic Science
>Hi Jim,
>
>I am going to take a different approach than what I have seen others take.
>
>At 11:47 AM 09/01/1999 -0400, Behnke, James wrote:
>>Is good theology necessary to do good science? Can an unbeliever do
science
>>just as well as a believer? (If so, some form of naturalism is part of
>>science.)
>>
>>Johnson and Moreland have pushing the view that says "No" to the above
>>questions.
>
>It has been my observation that Christians do not do as good in science as
>nonbelievers. Why? Far to often their theology gets in the way of their
>observational skills. I see this in the ID group who often get their facts
>wrong or the Ph.D. YECs who don't get their facts correct because of their
>theological bias. I have observed it occasionally among people working in
>the oil and gas business. Those sometimes with the strongest religious
>beliefs are those who are not rigorous enough--they don't question facts
>like they should. THis is esspecially true if the issue that needs
>questioning violates their theology. There are exceptions to this of
>course, but it has been my general observation.And I think I saw this in my
>YEC days vs. today. There were areas I wouldn't question when I was a YEC.
>Today I will question anything.
>glenn
>
>Foundation, Fall and Flood
>Adam, Apes and Anthropology
>http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
>
>Lots of information on creation/evolution