>>> John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com> 10/31/2008 7:56 AM >>> writes:
I agree with RTB and ID on general principles if they wouldn't deny and
spin CD and they wouldn't try to overplay their hand and call faith science.
Ted comments:
This reflects Hugh Ross' personal approach to religious faith. I've heard
him speak several times, and every time I come away with the overwhelming
impression that he is a modern Cartesian--he requires absolute proof for
something before he will "believe" it. It's a highly unusual attitude for a
religious person, in my experience. I understand everything I just wrote,
but I don't understand it all.
He seems to strike a chord with many Christians, however, judging from the
size and influence of his ministry. IMO, however, he puts far too much
confidence in science's ability to generate indubitable propositions, and
he's set the bar for religious belief far too high. Whatever happened to
Polanyi's insight that we often need to commit to things that we can't be
sure about?
Ted
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Oct 31 09:48:44 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Oct 31 2008 - 09:48:44 EDT