An Assumption... Naturally.
David M. S. Watson - "Evolution is a theory universally accepted not because it can be proven by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible."
David Nutting - “Creationists are not anti-science. It is just that someone has snuck in during the middle of the night and changed the definition of science. It used to be the search of knowledge, now it is a search for naturalism and only naturalism. I believe this was purposely done to exclude any mention of creation or intelligent design in the classroom.”
Naturalism is a philosophy, not a truth. It is logical, in that science can only determine upon the physical world, from that which is testable and repeatable, but the problem comes when science attempts to monopolize reality.
Our culture assumes that the physical world is all there is, for that is all science can test, which in a sense is true. The natural world is all that it can test. But there are some answers that science can never answer.
Just like the problem with logic - it cannot be proven for logic is necessary to prove itself - the super-natural cannot be proven for it cannot by definition be tested for it is by nature NOT physical. But it also has the same support as logic does. Logic cannot be disproven either. Neither can the super-natural. By super-natural, I merely mean something that is not physical.
An example of the non-physical, or super-natural, would be your soul. The spiritual existence of who you are. Now if it does exist, I would contend that it is forever connected and intertwined with your physical body, but the argument goes - does the chemicals in your brain create your thoughts, or do your thoughts trigger the emotional response of the chemical excretion? A question science by definition CANNOT test and thus cannot prove or disprove.
The danger is that scientists who assume naturalism is true assumes that naturalism is all that is out there. Their presuppositions presume certain things which lead logically to different conclusions upon which may have been different if all options were open. But why do they like to so easily assume such a thing? Because it eliminates possibilities. Possibilities such as life after death, the judgement, miracles, and the existence of God. I have seen that which is physically impossible happen. That is not why I believe in the supernatural, but my point in mentioning it is that if I told certain stories of my experience one of two things would happen, no explanation would be possible, or the only explanation to be assumed would be that I either hallucinated or I am insane.
Richard Dawkins - “...if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but i’d rather not consider that).”
But here is a question that should be attended to... what evidence do they have that naturalism is all there is?
Oh wait, there is none...
“We don’t need evidence. We know it [evolution] to be true.” ~Richard Dawkins, Quoted by World, March 22, 1997)
“Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic.” ~Dr. Scott Todd, correspondence to Nature 410(6752):423 (September 30, 1999)
And I thought scientists were supposed to be objective.
Science wasn’t always anti-spiritual. For centuries it was the love of God that brought about scientific growth. But don’t take my word for it, look it up for yourself.
Louis Pasteur - "Science brings man nearer to God."
Wernher Von Braun - "I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advance of science."
Albert Einstein - "I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human beings toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations."
Francis Bacon - "There are two books laid before us to study, to prevent our falling into error; first, the volume of Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the Creatures, which express His power."
Galileo Galilei - "I am inclined to think that the authority of Holy Scripture is intended to convince men of those truths which are necessary for their salvation, which, being far above man's understanding, can not be made credible by any learning, or any other means than revelation by the Holy Spirit."
George Washington Carver - "Years ago I went into my laboratory and said, "Dear Mr. Creator, please tell me what the universe was made for?" The Great Creator answered, "You want to know too much for that little mind of yours. Ask for something more your size, little man." Then I asked. "Please Mr. Creator, tell me what man was made for?" Again the Great Creator replied, "You are still asking too much. Cut down on the extent and improve your intent." So then I asked, "Please, Mr. Creator, will you tell me why the peanut was made?" "That's better, but even then it's infinite. What do you want to know about the peanut?" "Mr. Creator, can I make milk out of the peanut?" "What kind of milk do you want? Good Jersey milk or just plain boarding house milk?" "Good Jersey milk." And then the Great Creator taught me to take the peanut apart and put it together again. And out of the process have come forth all these products!"
Nicolaus Copernicus - "The Universe has been wrought for us by a supremely good and orderly Creator"
Isaac Newton - "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being
Lord (William Thomson) Kelvin - "I believe that the more thoroughly science is studied, the further does it take us from anything comparable to atheism."
What happened?
“... someone has snuck in during the middle of the night and changed the definition of science. It used to be the search of knowledge, now it is a search for naturalism and only naturalism.”
Will you be fooled over an assumption?
Jared Williams
David Nutting - “Creationists are not anti-science. It is just that someone has snuck in during the middle of the night and changed the definition of science. It used to be the search of knowledge, now it is a search for naturalism and only naturalism. I believe this was purposely done to exclude any mention of creation or intelligent design in the classroom.”
Naturalism is a philosophy, not a truth. It is logical, in that science can only determine upon the physical world, from that which is testable and repeatable, but the problem comes when science attempts to monopolize reality.
Our culture assumes that the physical world is all there is, for that is all science can test, which in a sense is true. The natural world is all that it can test. But there are some answers that science can never answer.
Just like the problem with logic - it cannot be proven for logic is necessary to prove itself - the super-natural cannot be proven for it cannot by definition be tested for it is by nature NOT physical. But it also has the same support as logic does. Logic cannot be disproven either. Neither can the super-natural. By super-natural, I merely mean something that is not physical.
An example of the non-physical, or super-natural, would be your soul. The spiritual existence of who you are. Now if it does exist, I would contend that it is forever connected and intertwined with your physical body, but the argument goes - does the chemicals in your brain create your thoughts, or do your thoughts trigger the emotional response of the chemical excretion? A question science by definition CANNOT test and thus cannot prove or disprove.
The danger is that scientists who assume naturalism is true assumes that naturalism is all that is out there. Their presuppositions presume certain things which lead logically to different conclusions upon which may have been different if all options were open. But why do they like to so easily assume such a thing? Because it eliminates possibilities. Possibilities such as life after death, the judgement, miracles, and the existence of God. I have seen that which is physically impossible happen. That is not why I believe in the supernatural, but my point in mentioning it is that if I told certain stories of my experience one of two things would happen, no explanation would be possible, or the only explanation to be assumed would be that I either hallucinated or I am insane.
Richard Dawkins - “...if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but i’d rather not consider that).”
But here is a question that should be attended to... what evidence do they have that naturalism is all there is?
Oh wait, there is none...
“We don’t need evidence. We know it [evolution] to be true.” ~Richard Dawkins, Quoted by World, March 22, 1997)
“Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic.” ~Dr. Scott Todd, correspondence to Nature 410(6752):423 (September 30, 1999)
And I thought scientists were supposed to be objective.
Science wasn’t always anti-spiritual. For centuries it was the love of God that brought about scientific growth. But don’t take my word for it, look it up for yourself.
Louis Pasteur - "Science brings man nearer to God."
Wernher Von Braun - "I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advance of science."
Albert Einstein - "I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human beings toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations."
Francis Bacon - "There are two books laid before us to study, to prevent our falling into error; first, the volume of Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the Creatures, which express His power."
Galileo Galilei - "I am inclined to think that the authority of Holy Scripture is intended to convince men of those truths which are necessary for their salvation, which, being far above man's understanding, can not be made credible by any learning, or any other means than revelation by the Holy Spirit."
George Washington Carver - "Years ago I went into my laboratory and said, "Dear Mr. Creator, please tell me what the universe was made for?" The Great Creator answered, "You want to know too much for that little mind of yours. Ask for something more your size, little man." Then I asked. "Please Mr. Creator, tell me what man was made for?" Again the Great Creator replied, "You are still asking too much. Cut down on the extent and improve your intent." So then I asked, "Please, Mr. Creator, will you tell me why the peanut was made?" "That's better, but even then it's infinite. What do you want to know about the peanut?" "Mr. Creator, can I make milk out of the peanut?" "What kind of milk do you want? Good Jersey milk or just plain boarding house milk?" "Good Jersey milk." And then the Great Creator taught me to take the peanut apart and put it together again. And out of the process have come forth all these products!"
Nicolaus Copernicus - "The Universe has been wrought for us by a supremely good and orderly Creator"
Isaac Newton - "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being
Lord (William Thomson) Kelvin - "I believe that the more thoroughly science is studied, the further does it take us from anything comparable to atheism."
What happened?
“... someone has snuck in during the middle of the night and changed the definition of science. It used to be the search of knowledge, now it is a search for naturalism and only naturalism.”
Will you be fooled over an assumption?
Jared Williams
