quote:
Originally posted by minnemooseus:
Seemingly, the fundamentalist creationist view is that the various sciences have a long history of conspirering to deny God and the works of God.
Interestingly Issac Newton in his OPTICKS, has an interesting even if somewhat cryptic sentence where he states he prefers chemical bond science to conspiring motions which leaves the reader with a circle of fire at the end of stick and yet the modern Harvard read on Newton's PRINCIPIA puts off the idea that in the end, in the General Sholium Newton had as if any intentions to read back the SPIRIT into his system. This much modern science seems to deny to the experimental philosophy experience and so does in Laplace preeminenced deny God and the Works of God. Good works in grace do however sit in good behavior on the stations of the earth where science is practiced. Sounds like a contardiction in terms but words are true.
quote:
Do the creationist here truly believe that mainstream biology, geology, etc. beliefs are not a result of solid, valid work?
There is solid faith and works in the current probabilistic atmosphere of science, works of creationists that is. That or this credibility has been won. Thank you creationists before me. It would be nice if this new learning style transferered to new works that contribute to scinece change as a whole and beyond "imprinting" the entropy concept.
quote:
Are all these scientists guilty of putting together a vast, complicated story, to replace the obvious and simple story of God and God's creation?
Maybe not they simply communicate more by a math that is not engaging the caterory that approaches the unconditioned unconditionally.
quote:
Or is the story truly vast and complicated?
Moose
Indeed it is Moose, indeed it is. We can but all learn to see the complex as simple. We can never think God's thoughts but we can think them after HIM by GOD.
™ Version 4.2
