On Thu, 1 Feb 1996 09:05:39 -0500 you wrote:
SJ>But if science is estricted
>to considering only natural causes, and there is in fact an
>Intelligent Designer who intervened in nature at strategic points to
>introduce new information and direction, then to to that extent
>science will be an incomplete description of reality.
BH>Science _is_ an incomplete description of reality -- at least for
>those of us who acknowledge that there is a spiritual side of reality.
SJ>There is nothing wrong with science being an incomplete
>description of reality, providing scientists state that up front and
>don't then claim that science is a complete description of reality.
BH>Agreed. Perhaps it's time to throw a party. I don't know when
>Stephen and I have agreed so completely.
I am genuinely puzzled by this, Bill. I thought most of the time we
"agreed...completely"? Am I now cast as the resident creationist with
whom all must be seen to disagree? :-)
BH>One small caveat: I don't think Christians should wait for
>scientists to make the above disclaimer. People like Sagan and
>Dawkins won't because they don't accept it. Organizations like AAAS
>and NAS won't, because their members have differing views, and
>besides it's outside their charter. Christians should make it.
>That's our job.
Agreed. That's what Phil Johnson, in particular is doing. I have now
received a quantity of PJ's audio tapes and one video. I can now
understand much better where Phil is coming from. He is IMHO much
better at explaining himself in person than he is is writing.
God bless.
Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones ,--_|\ sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave / Oz \ http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ phone +61 9 448 7439. (These are |
| Perth, Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
----------------------------------------------------------------