Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | A Christian View of Science | Acts 17:28 | Lionstrong | 48410 | ||
A Christian View of Science: An Excerpt from a tract Science: In Him, Not Matter, We Live Those who put their trust in science as the key to understanding the universe are embarrassed by the fact that science never discovers truth. If the Bible is the source of all truth, science cannot discover truth. One of the insoluble problems of the scientific method is the fallacy of induction; induction, in fact, is a problem for all forms of empiricism (learning by experience). The problem is simply this: Induction, arguing from the particular to the general, is always a logical fallacy. No matter how many crows, for example, you observe to be black, the conclusion that all crows are black is never warranted. The reason is quite simple: Even assuming you have good eyesight, are not colorblind, and are actually looking at crows, you have not, and cannot, see all crows. Millions have already died. Millions more are on the opposite side of the planet. Millions more will hatch after you die. Induction is always a fallacy. There is another fatal fallacy in science as well: the fallacy of asserting the consequent. The atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell put the matter this way: All inductive arguments in the last resort reduce themselves to the following form: If this is true, that is true: now that is true, therefore this is true. This argument is, of course, formally fallacious. Suppose I were to say: "If bread is a stone and stones are nourishing, then this bread will nourish me; now this bread does nourish me; therefore it is a stone and stones are nourishing.’’ If I were to advance such an argument, I should certainly be thought foolish, yet it would not be fundamentally different from the argument upon which all scientific laws are based. Recognizing that induction is always fallacious, philosophers of science in the twentieth century, in an effort to defend science, developed the notion that science does not rely on induction at all. Instead, it consists of conjectures, experiments to test those conjectures, and refutations of conjectures. But in their attempts to save science from logical disgrace, the philosophers of science had to abandon any claim to knowledge: Science is only conjectures and refutations of conjectures. Karl Popper, one of the twentieth century’s greatest philosophers of science, wrote: First, although in science we do our best to find the truth, we are conscious of the fact that we can never be sure whether we have got it.... [W]e know that our scientific theories always remain hypotheses.... [I]n science there is no "knowledge’’ in the sense in which Plato and Aristotle understood the word, in the sense which implies finality; in science, we never have sufficient reason for the belief that we have attained the truth.... Einstein declared that his theory was false: he said that it would be a better approximation to the truth than Newton’s, but he gave reasons why he would not, even if all predictions came out right, regard it as a true theory.... Our attempts to see and to find the truth are not final, but open to improvement:...our knowledge, our doctrine is conjectural;...it consist of guesses, of hypotheses rather than of final and certain truths. Observation and science cannot furnish us with truth about the universe, let alone truth about God. The secular worldview, which begins by denying God and divine revelation, cannot furnish us with knowledge at all. What Is Christian Philosophy? is a Trinity Foundation publication. For additional copies of this pamphlet, or for further information about the Bible and Jesus Christ, please write to The Trinity Foundation, Post Office Box 68, Unicoi, Tennessee 37692. What Is Christian Philosophy? copyright 1994, John W. Robbins. The Trinity Foundation hereby grants permission to all readers to download, print, and distribute on paper or electronically any of its Reviews, provided that each reprint bear our copyright notice, current addresses, and telephone numbers, and provided that all such reproductions are distributed to the public without charge. The Reviews may not be sold or issued in book form, CD-ROM form, or microfiche. Peace, |
||||||
2 | A Christian View of Science | Acts 17:28 | Parable | 48413 | ||
This Christian's view of Science: There is no logical reason logic is valid, i.e. to use logic as a means of making decisions or deriving understanding, yet we seem to think that in many areas, logic is the best way to proceed. Obviously, there are things to which logic is not so quickly applied, e.g. art, music, culture, fashion, relationships. I hesitate to say this about faith, for we are called to love God with all our mind, meaning with the fullest conviction of our intellectual capabilities, and this no doubt includes that part of our mind that depends on logic. truth (small t) and falsehood are fundamental elements of logic, not derivable from the rules that govern analysis, synthesis, deduction and induction. They are assumed, not proven. Such is not the case for faith, except these basic elements are not merely assumed, with all the potential for error that assumption entails, but rather they are recognized when we encounter them. When God shows us Himself, through His Creation, His Word, His Incarnation as Jesus and His Presence as the Holy Spirit, He show us absolute Truth. Jesus said "I am the truth." Hence, it's only logical to conclude that if it's not of God, its not true. We need God to show Himself to us because we live in a fallen world that can be described thus: all experience is understood in terms of theory and all theory is derived from experience! Without God, there is no firm ground on which to stand, we are just vapors. Science is a human endeavor, a process based in experience, built with logic. Remarkably, it serves us well so long as we are mindful of its fundamental limitations, which are a direct consequence of our human condition. Science has only recently come to understand the profound implications of this. On its own, science is just as lost as we are without God. With God, we use science to reveal His Creation in ever more profound ways, and thereby glorify Him. That is this Christian's view of science. Parable |
||||||
3 | A Christian View of Science | Acts 17:28 | Lionstrong | 48423 | ||
"There is no logical reason logic is valid, i.e. to use logic as a means of making decisions or deriving understanding, yet we seem to think that in many areas, logic is the best way to proceed. " To make any rational statement requires logic. To proceed rationally (i.e. logically) is the ONLY way to proceed. You can't understand the first word in the Bible without logic. See the discussion below. Three Laws of Logic The three laws of thought are universal, irrefutable, and true for reasons already stated. Without these laws, it is impossible to imagine how anything written or spoken could be intelligible. More to the point, the laws are the basis of necessary inference, for without them, necessary inference vanishes! To repeat, the laws of logic are universal, irrefutable, and true. By "universal," we mean allows for no exception. "Irrefutable" means that any attempt to refute them, makes use of them; thus, establishing them as necessary for argument. "True" means not only "not-false," but not-false because they are grounded in the Logos of God, the source and determiner of all truth. Moreover, the laws stand together as a trinity; to fault one, is to fault all, and to uphold one, upholds the others. Together, these laws establish and clarify the meaning of necessary inference for logic and all intelligible discourse. Here is a brief statement of each. 1 The law of identity states that if any statement is true, then it is true; or, every proposition implies itself: A implies A. 2 The law of excluded middle states that everything must either be or not be; or, everything is A or not-A. 3 The law of contradiction states that no statement can be both true and false; or, A and not-A is a contradiction and always false: thus, not both A and not-A. Without the first, identity or sameness is lost; without the second, confusion begins; and without the last, irrationalism is in full residence. To recapitulate. Logic is the science of necessary inference. The basic elements are propositions in arguments. A proposition is the meaning of a declarative sentence. An argument is composed of propositions some of which are premises, one of which is the conclusion. The premises are reasons given to support the conclusion of an argument or a position. Arguments are classified as either inductive or deductive. With Deductive Argument, we ask: "Does this conclusion follow as a necessary consequence from these premises?" If the answer is affirmative, the Deductive Argument is valid; otherwise, the argument is invalid. Deductive Arguments are either valid or invalid. Also, if the argument is not invalid, then it is valid. If the argument is not valid, then it is invalid. Three reasons for the study of logic are (1) correct thinking requires it; (2) discerning minds necessarily depend on it; and (3) man is a rational being in the image of his Creator. Logic is universal, necessary, and irreplaceable. Man's mind was formed on the principles of identity, excluded middle, and contradiction. These three laws are the basis for all intelligible thought. Without them, all rational discourse vanishes. (http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/carranza/study1.htm) Much more needs to be said about your comments, but I will stop with your confusing statement about logic. Peace, |
||||||
4 | A Christian View of Science | Acts 17:28 | Parable | 48432 | ||
"If you're not confused, you haven't been paying attention!" Forgive me if I have appeared to suggest that logic should be discarded or is in any way less than trustworthy. Indeed, I agree logic is a fundamental part of productive thought, as is imagination. Without imagination, "if" has no meaning. Rather, my point is that logic itself cannot be derived logically or logically proven to be valid. You said "To proceed rationally (i.e. logically) is the ONLY way to proceed." I disagree, we are to proceed by faith. "We live by faith, not by sight." -- 2 Corinthians 5:7 Let me "prove" my point: You presented the notion that any attempt to refute the fundamental laws of logic fails because that refutation makes use of them. I submit that in like manner, any attempt to establish those laws also fails because that derivation must also make use of them. What comforts me is knowing logic is a gift from God, yet it is surpassed by the peace of God. "And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus." -- Philippians 4:7 |
||||||
5 | A Christian View of Science | Acts 17:28 | Lionstrong | 48504 | ||
Dear Parable, 2 Cor 5:7, do you quote this verse to mean that Scripture teaches that faith is irrational? Faith (the act of believing an understood proposition) by its very definition cannot be irrational. Biblical faith requires reason. We must understand the Gospel before we can believe it. (Rom 10:11-17) Just because the things we believe are invisible does not make our faith irrational (except to the world, but their reasons for concluding that our faith is irrational are invalid or they start with the wrong premises). Second, Phil 4:7 says the peace of God transcends OUR understanding, not logic. It does not teach that God's peace transcends logic; it transcends the limits of our ability to understand it. Because calculus transcends a first grader's understanding, does it mean that calculus is beyond mathematics? Logic is the structure of God's mind. God did not create it and then gift man with it. It is eternal because God is eternal. We are rational because we are created as the image of a rational God. The centurion was commended by Christ for his great faith because he logically reasoned to a valid conclusion (that Chirst did not have to come with him because Christ had the authority to command reality) and believed it, a faith demonstrated by the request he made of Jesus.(Notice his premise and conclusion.) (Mat 8:5-10) Peace, |
||||||
6 | A Christian View of Science | Acts 17:28 | Parable | 48796 | ||
I'm struggling to see where we disagree. You make excellent points. You asked "2 Cor 5:7, do you quote this verse to mean that Scripture teaches that faith is irrational?" Quite the contrary. I'm just suggesting that faith is the first premise in any line of reasoning, even if we are not aware of this crucial first step. My point is people depend on faith, in one form or another, even when they argue against it. I agree that our faith in things unseen is not irrational. For example, in science, we have faith in things unseen, such as magnetic fields, which are well established, but no one has or will ever see one directly, yet we see how they exert their influence. It is no different for our faith in Christ. He is well established and we who see and understand His influence have faith in Him. You said "Phil 4:7 says the peace of God transcends OUR understanding, not logic. It does not teach that God's peace transcends logic; it transcends the limits of our ability to understand it." As I read it, the verse says "all" understanding, not "our", but this is hardly the point and in fact I may agree with you. However, I'm not sure logic exists without us to think it, so I'm not sure what you have said makes any real sense. That is, if we can't understand logic at some point, it might as well be gibberish, so all we have at that point is faith in God's providence. You said "Logic is the structure of God's mind. God did not create it and then gift man with it. It is eternal because God is eternal." These statements seem like a good summary of your opinion. Clearly, you have strong faith in the divine nature and integrity of logic. I'm with you. "We are rational because we are created as the image of a rational God." That we are rational is debatable. :) Finally, the centurion's very logical request followed from His faith in Christ's authority. Parable. |
||||||