Comment on Science, Methodological Naturalism, and Faith by Gene Fortner.
Scientific Naturalism
Scientific Naturalism is the view that the universe, its characteristics, and its behaviors are to be investigated and understood in purely naturalistic terms. Everything that exists and everything that occurs is part of the natural universe and is subject to examination. Scientific Naturalism assumes that the universe is a closed system where all events occur for naturalistic reasons, and that there cannot be anything or anyone from outside that system which acts upon it. Therefore, Scientific Naturalism excludes the possibility of the supernatural and God as an explanation for any phenomena.
Scientific naturalism is really an ideology over the entire intellectual framework of inquiry. It actively tries to suppress any opposing POV and in this sense it is a sin against the intellect.
John Angus Campbell
In a recent court case involving the right of the ICR Graduate School to teach science from a Biblical perspective, a physics professor from California State University at Long Beach testified that if Isaac Newton were on the school’s faculty today, his position on creation would prevent the school from being recognized by the State of California. This professor objected to statements such as the following in Mathematica Principia where Newton said:
“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being. This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all, and on account of His dominion He is wont to be called Lord God, Universal Ruler.”.1
When questioned how this professor could make such a statement about one who is recognized as possibly the greatest scientist who ever lived, he replied that if Isaac Newton persisted in maintaining a creationist position as he did in Mathematica Principia, knowing what we know today, he would not be recognized as a credible scientist.2
http://www.icr.org/article/422/
Gene Fortner Also Commented
Science, Methodological Naturalism, and Faith
George,
A historical narrative does not have to be “scientific” to be true.
There is plenty of “scientific” evidence to support Gen 1-11.
The truth will make you free.
Science, Methodological Naturalism, and Faith
Bob,
I am a YLC and I got there by studying the Bible and science.
The only thing that makes sense is the creationism of the Bible.
Without that you have nothing.
Science, Methodological Naturalism, and Faith
Has anyone seen the video of Ford and Rea on the John Ankerberg show?
Too bad no real SDA’s showed up??
Recent Comments by Gene Fortner
GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
yes
GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
Bill “How inane would it be to claim an apple tree is not an apple tree unless and until it has apples on it?”
Bill,
Comparing babies and apple trees is a bit more inane than comparing apples and oranges.
BTW,
“The ONLY DEFINITION FOR SIN that we have in the Bible is that it is the transgression of the law… IT CONDEMNS EVERY SIN, AND REQUIRES EVERY VIRTUE.” E.G. White, ST, March 3, 1890 par. 3.
If it is a sin to possess a fallen nature then there must be a law against it. Has God given a law forbidding anyone from being conceived with a fallen human nature? If there ever was a law that was impossible to keep, this would be it, for how could one choose not to violate it before one existed?!
Summary of 60th General Conference Session (2015)
Thanks Sean
GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
Ethan,
IMHO,
No statement was necessary.
In fact I consider it thoughtless.
FB#6 should have absolutely no effect on their ability to support the world church and perform work faithfully and with integrity.
GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
@Bill Sorensen:
Bill,
Sin is transgression of the law.
Where does it say being born is a sin?
