Re: On evangelical seminaries, etc., and religion/science

The specifically theological matters that Keith notes especially need to be discussed. Lack of attention to these matters was the major thing lacking in the panel discussion at last summer's asa meeting. & until some of the theological presuppositions get out in the open I'm doubtful that much progress will be made.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Keith Miller
  To: American Scientific Affiliation
  Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:06 PM
  Subject: Re: On evangelical seminaries, etc., and religion/science

  ...............................
  I agree with Ted that ASA should be the place for such a discussion. The focus of such a discussion should be the substantive underlying issues NOT the the validity, or lack thereof, for ID. The focus needs to be on issues such as the nature and limitations of science, the meaning and validity of "methodological naturalism" as a description of the scientific enterprise, the nature of historical science, the meaning and implications of the theology of creation, the validity of "natural theology," and the meaning and practice of a Christian vocation in the sciences. These are very important issues and they have rarely been the topic of focussed discussion.

  I also think that such discussion needs to be face-to-face at an ASA meeting with the majority of time devoted to extended questioning.

  Keith

  Keith B. Miller
  Research Assistant Professor
  Dept of Geology, Kansas State University
  Manhattan, KS 66506-3201
  785-532-2250
  http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~kbmill/
Received on Thu Apr 6 08:13:36 2006