From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Tue Oct 12 2004 - 01:34:43 BST
On 11 Oct 2004 at 18:02, Platt Holden wrote:
As Scott as pointed out several times, orthodox theology has evolved
over the years in light of new knowledge. But, it's faith in a
spiritual presence hasn't changed from the beginning. Similarly,
science has evolved in the light of new knowledge. But it's faith in
naturalism hasn't changed from the beginning. It will not allow an
unmeasurable creative power, like DQ, into it's explanations.
msh says:
Science can't make room for anything unmeasurable or otherwise
physically undetectable; if it did it wouldn't be science. It's
simply wrong to say that science denies God; Science has nothing to
say about God except, insofar as the concept has any meaning at all,
there is no scientific basis for believing in a supreme being of any
kind. This doesn't mean that one, or more, doesn't exist.
As long as religion insists that God is unmeasurable, the two realms
of thought will be concerned with mutually exclusive domains. The
only time religion and science come into conflict is when religious
people seek for their beliefs the imprimatur of science (or math or
logic). The interesting social and psychological question, at that
point, is why they desire this stamp of approval.
Best,
msh
--
InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
"Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is
everything." -- Henri Poincare'
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 12 2004 - 01:36:33 BST