RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 18, 2016 at 4:22 pm
(July 18, 2016 at 1:03 pm)Rhythm Wrote:(July 18, 2016 at 12:48 pm)SteveII Wrote: To sum this up, I believe that where core theology is not on the line, we can listen to what science thinks is the best explanation and go forward to see where that leads.Why should this matter...why is this an acceptable metric for exemption to the very standards you propose..and are you even applying the method you offered by making this exemption?
Because science is always subject to change (and often does). To make a statement like "my theology will change as science proposes new theories" is even worse. It has to be a case by case basis. Is x scientific theory compatible with y theological concept? Perhaps we need to adjust our theological understanding because new facts come to light. My caution is scientific theories. By necessity, they presuppose naturalism and as such may be wrong--especially if a theological concept requires God's interaction with nature.
Quote:Quote:In my opinion, science has not produced contradictory proof of anything that would nullify core theology if true. Sure, our understanding has shifted over the centuries, but looking closer, it really does not affect core theological issues. If science gets around to disproving any core theological concept, then we can look at it on a case-by-case basis.
Why would it matter whether or not it had, if you exempt it on principle....and on top of that suggest that no comment can be made on it anyway, because supernatural?
Like I said above, the theological concept might need to be re-evaluated. It can only be solved on a case-by-case basis.
Quote:Quote:YEC is a good example. Why hang your hat on something that all indications are that it is not the best explanation for the observations? Time will tell so why fight about it like it is a core theological concept when it really isn't?
No it's not..if I can use the word "supernatural" to rescue it...or simply mention that it -is- core theology....just not yours.
This is a good example. We can, but why would we use the word "supernatural" to rescue it? In my opinion, after examination of the pertinent theology it is not required that YEC is true.