quote:
methodological naturalism is the blanket, and as long as it is adhered to the science is solid. Getting back to the topic, where in the laws that govern the celestial bodies should we insert supernatural mechanisms? What evidence can only be explained by the supernatural or the direct interference of a diety into the natural world as observed in the field of astronomy? How can we reliably test for the presence of the diety's influence in a repeatable fashion? No one has ever been able to do this, and this is why methodological naturalism, the "blanket of pureness' within science, works, has worked, and will continue to work. Methodological supernaturalism has yet to make a reliable theory, why is that?
Although naturalism is not and technically can not be put under the category of 'religion,' I think that in this case it comes extremely close.
It is written many times on this board that the "creos," as they are called, adhere to their religion and try to mingle it with science because they fear the loss of their fundemental beliefs in the Bible and Jesus.
On the other hand evolutionists adhere to naturalism because they fear that their own way of life, which depends on the godlessness and moral lawlessness of evolution, will be shattered and the creos might be right. (and when i refer to moral law, i am not refering to relative moral law as determined by humans, but the moral law established by the God professed by creationists...massive difference)
quote:
Science is the study of natural phenomena through natural mechanisms. If you stray away from this you are no longer a scientist.
Throughout my education it was never until "creation science" was popularized that the "
through natural mechanisms" part was added to this definition. I find that interesting. Oh and i can already hear the responses in poor taste taking shots at my education, please refrain...there are people i have respect for on this board, but there are many more who resort too often to juvenile cut-downs so i have come to expect them.
quote:
Traditional Christianity regards God as creator of all the natural world
however true this may be, I think the common mistake made by creationists & by evolutionists concerning creationist hypotheses is the assumption that the created stuff (that's a technical term) at the time of creation equates to the stuff in existence today. That all species in existence now existed right after creation, etc.
™ Version 4.2