Naturalism

[Gus2009]

So often when discussing evolution with yec types, one argument that is used is that "evolution supposes naturalism". Indeed, i suppose it has to, as does the scientific method itself. So i was reading up on naturalism and i found distictions within the definition. A) Methodological Naturalism, A disciplinary method that says nothing about the existence or non existence of a supernatural. B) Metaphysical Naturalism, denying anything supernatural exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)

I suppose these two distinctions are valid. But often evolution and science itself are attacked as espousing metaphysical naturalism. In fact i have heard a line of reasoning that argues "Because science assumes naturalism , evolution will always be the conclusion. It cant see anything else. It doesnt take into account that sin entered the world and that this is messing up our veiw of history" In other words, when looking back through the past, science sort of sees the past through a funhouse mirror. Its warped, distorted and wrong. It will always conclude evolution because sin has sort of, distorted the facts if you will, to make it look that way.

My questions to Y.E.Cs or anyone who sees the world is this way is this

A) Why would sin distort naturalistic interpretations? It seems rather arbitrary that it disorts them in ways that you would like to have them distorted

B) Is methodological naturalism unserperable from metaphysical naturalism? Or can they can be seen as seperate and distinct? Does methodological naturalism necessitate metaphysical naturalism?

 

[juvenissun]

So often when discussing evolution with yec types, one argument that is used is that "evolution supposes naturalism". Indeed, i suppose it has to, as does the scientific method itself. So i was reading up on naturalism and i found distictions within the definition. A) Methodological Naturalism, A disciplinary method that says nothing about the existence or non existence of a supernatural. B) Metaphysical Naturalism, denying anything supernatural exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)

I suppose these two distinctions are valid. But often evolution and science itself are attacked as espousing metaphysical naturalism. In fact i have heard a line of reasoning that argues "Because science assumes naturalism , evolution will always be the conclusion. It cant see anything else. It doesnt take into account that sin entered the world and that this is messing up our veiw of history" In other words, when looking back through the past, science sort of sees the past through a funhouse mirror. Its warped, distorted and wrong. It will always conclude evolution because sin has sort of, distorted the facts if you will, to make it look that way.

My questions to Y.E.Cs or anyone who sees the world is this way is this

A) Why would sin distort naturalistic interpretations? It seems rather arbitrary that it disorts them in ways that you would like to have them distorted

B) Is methodological naturalism unserperable from metaphysical naturalism? Or can they can be seen as seperate and distinct? Does methodological naturalism necessitate metaphysical naturalism?

Interesting. As a YEC, I never relate sin to evolution. Why do I have to do that? Sin is true, evolution is false.

 

[Gus2009]

Interesting. As a YEC, I never relate sin to evolution. Why do I have to do that? Sin is true, evolution is false.

I see. So how do you deal with things like dating methods, distances between celestial objects observable from earth and the speed of the light being a constant, etc....

What is science doing wrong?

 

[lawtonfogle]

I see. So how do you deal with things like dating methods, distances between celestial objects observable from earth and the speed of the light being a constant, etc....

What is science doing wrong?

Might be better to ask them to define science to begin with. I have learned to not assume even those sort of things...

 

[pastorkevin73]

I see. So how do you deal with things like dating methods, distances between celestial objects observable from earth and the speed of the light being a constant, etc....

What is science doing wrong?

I don't think it would be that science is doing anything wrong. After all God created science. The problem comes to the person interpreting science.

 

[juvenissun]

I see. So how do you deal with things like dating methods, distances between celestial objects observable from earth and the speed of the light being a constant, etc....

What is science doing wrong?

Nothing. Science did not do enough. We do not understand time.

 

[juvenissun]

Might be better to ask them to define science to begin with. I have learned to not assume even those sort of things...

Good for you.

Usually we need to go back to definition on the most key point of an argument. I am not sure what it is in this thread.

 

[Mallon]

Might be better to ask them to define science to begin with. I have learned to not assume even those sort of things...

Bingo. Neocreationists do not typically use the same definition of science that the scientists themselves use. Institutions like AiG even admit that in their version of science, evidence is rejected if it does not agree with their preferred interpretation of Scripture. Of course, real scientists do not allow such a practice.

 

[icamewithasword]

Bingo. Neocreationists do not typically use the same definition of science that the scientists themselves use. Institutions like AiG even admit that in their version of science, evidence is rejected if it does not agree with their preferred interpretation of Scripture. Of course, real scientists do not allow such a practice.

HA!

 

[icamewithasword]

I see. So how do you deal with things like dating methods, distances between celestial objects observable from earth and the speed of the light being a constant, etc....

What is science doing wrong?

Dating methods:
Like carbon dating?
Fossil record?
Geologic columns?

Distances between celestial objects?
Scripture says God stretched out the heavens; good enough for me.

Speed of light being constant?
I've never clocked it before. I couldn't say it's constant, as I did not create it.

God answered all the questions we need to know. Scripture contains the revealed will of God.
Scoffers dispute it and ridicule it because they don't understand it; they cannot comprehend the light.
Those professing to know Christ are much the same.
Some others have great faith in the god they are comfortable with.
And others... God's Word is not good enough. So they heap on themselves teachers with doctrines that tickle their ears.

And then there are those 'ignorant to the world' that prefer to take God at His Word; never thinking enough of themselves to either question God or His motives, or thinking they are in fact smarter than God.

It's sad to see so many Christians that think they have God and His ways all figured out. They apparently have the same omniscient qualities as The Creator because they read text books or were intrigued by a show on the Discovery Channel. Not to mention all the 'smart' scientists that know how God did exactly what He did, regardless what His Word says.
These people follow those on the wide path to destruction.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Dating methods:
Like carbon dating?
Fossil record?
Geologic columns?

Distances between celestial objects?
Scripture says God stretched out the heavens; good enough for me.

Speed of light being constant?
I've never clocked it before. I couldn't say it's constant, as I did not create it.

God answered all the questions we need to know. Scripture contains the revealed will of God.
Scoffers dispute it and ridicule it because they don't understand it; they cannot comprehend the light.
Those professing to know Christ are much the same.
Some others have great faith in the god they are comfortable with.
And others... God's Word is not good enough. So they heap on themselves teachers with doctrines that tickle their ears.

And then there are those 'ignorant to the world' that prefer to take God at His Word; never thinking enough of themselves to either question God or His motives, or thinking they are in fact smarter than God.

It's sad to see so many Christians that think they have God and His ways all figured out. They apparently have the same omniscient qualities as The Creator because they read text books or were intrigued by a show on the Discovery Channel. Not to mention all the 'smart' scientists that know how God did exactly what He did, regardless what His Word says.
These people follow those on the wide path to destruction.

Have you ever derived the speed of light? It is not simple, takes about a whole year to learn the physics to do so, even if you already know the math. But saying that the speed of light can change is basically like saying the gravitational constant can change. Except by way of miracle, it can't (through a vacuum, of course), and science doesn't do miracles.

 

[Gus2009]

I don't think it would be that science is doing anything wrong. After all God created science. The problem comes to the person interpreting science.

Well obviously that is what i meant when i said "science", the people doing science, but i shall re-ask the question. How are they interpreting it wrong?

 

[Gus2009]

Nothing. Science did not do enough. We do not understand time.

How so?

 

[Gus2009]

Dating methods:
Like carbon dating?
Fossil record?
Geologic columns?

Yes

Distances between celestial objects?
Scripture says God stretched out the heavens; good enough for me.

Are you suggesting that God made the universe appear to be old? The light from distant objects was made visible from earth, regardless of it being more than 6000 light years away in some cases? Could you cite that verse as well. To simply say "God stretched out the heavens" doesnt really answer my question. I would take it more as the simple idea that God made the universe. The idea of stretching out the heavens means He established the great distances between stars galaxies etc... Which may be exactly how you meant it too. But that begs the question, how did the light get here in 6000 years. I dont see anything in that, that lends itself to the "God decided to make the universe appear older than it is" interpretation.

God answered all the questions we need to know. Scripture contains the revealed will of God.
Scoffers dispute it and ridicule it because they don't understand it; they cannot comprehend the light.
Those professing to know Christ are much the same.
Some others have great faith in the god they are comfortable with.
And others... God's Word is not good enough. So they heap on themselves teachers with doctrines that tickle their ears.

And then there are those 'ignorant to the world' that prefer to take God at His Word; never thinking enough of themselves to either question God or His motives, or thinking they are in fact smarter than God.

It's sad to see so many Christians that think they have God and His ways all figured out. They apparently have the same omniscient qualities as The Creator because they read text books or were intrigued by a show on the Discovery Channel. Not to mention all the 'smart' scientists that know how God did exactly what He did, regardless what His Word says.
These people follow those on the wide path to destruction.

Ok

 

[juvenissun]

How so?

I do not know.

 

[Gus2009]

I do not know.

But nonetheless, you are still sure that we do not understand time? You are asserting that our understanding of time is flawed, yet you yourself do not know how it is flawed exactly? Is that what youre saying?

 

[icamewithasword]

Have you ever derived the speed of light? It is not simple, takes about a whole year to learn the physics to do so, even if you already know the math. But saying that the speed of light can change is basically like saying the gravitational constant can change. Except by way of miracle, it can't (through a vacuum, of course), and science doesn't do miracles.

Short answer; No, I have not. But that was exactly my point. How can you (or someone else) make an absolute statement like 'the speed of light is constant' as in it's the same now as from the begining of its creation, unless you hold a claim to the same omniscience as God?
You are making an 'assumption' without any proof. And the only way you could prove this was to have been there from the beginning.

 

[icamewithasword]

Are you suggesting that God made the universe appear to be old? The light from distant objects was made visible from earth, regardless of it being more than 6000 light years away in some cases? Could you cite that verse as well. To simply say "God stretched out the heavens" doesnt really answer my question. I would take it more as the simple idea that God made the universe. The idea of stretching out the heavens means He established the great distances between stars galaxies etc... Which may be exactly how you meant it too. But that begs the question, how did the light get here in 6000 years. I dont see anything in that, that lends itself to the "God decided to make the universe appear older than it is" interpretation.

First, carbon dating and fossil record and geologic column ..... It's junk science. I'm sorry to see how you've been indoctrinated into the world system. Did you develope these 'scientific' dating methods? Have you done extensive study and concluded that are indeed absolutely true? Or have you decided to disbelieve Genesis because a man said so?

God stretching out the heavens is spoken in scripture some dozen or so times. I'll not do the homework for you, though. Your exegesis is incorrect. You are interpreting scripture through the 'world's' vision.

And here is another point.....
You're not simply discounting Genesis with your heresy; you're discounting and/ or discarding multiple other verses in Scripture to fit your man-made beliefs.
The apostle Paul warned of exactly what your doing.
Did your revelation come from the Spirit, or from man?

 

[Gus2009]

First, carbon dating and fossil record and geologic column ..... It's junk science. I'm sorry to see how you've been indoctrinated into the world system. Did you develope these 'scientific' dating methods? Have you done extensive study and concluded that are indeed absolutely true?

Well no, but i havent done extensive study on ic engines either. Nonetheless, i feel pretty confident that in some general sense, i understand internal combustion and thats how my car works. If i had to independently redevelop every scientific discovery on my own to really trust it than id be a pretty unsure indivdual.

Now i agree that things must be observed, they must be verified. But i trust that the speed of light is constant. You yourself trust in many scientific facts either knowingly or unknowingly. The fact that you are responding to my post on a computer or cell phone or whatever is just one demonstration of this. Did you derive ohms law before you plugged it in? The speed of light being constant(correct me if wrong physicist) is pretty crucial to relativity. And that understanding is pretty crucial to timing our modern day GPS system. Of course, if you could demonstrate to me how the speed of light shouldnt be assumed to be constant in a vacuum, then i will join youre side. If you could tell me how these methods are so "junky" then i will join youre side.

Or have you decided to disbelieve Genesis because a man said so?

Who said anything about disbelieving genesis? Perhaps youre interpretation of it.

God stretching out the heavens is spoken in scripture some dozen or so times. I'll not do the homework for you, though. Your exegesis is incorrect. You are interpreting scripture through the 'world's' vision.

Thats convenient. Youre quite willing to tell me im wrong, but not how. At best this comes off as aloof and arrogant. At worst, incompetent, dishonest unsure and scared of the validity of youre own position.

And here is another point.....
You're not simply discounting Genesis with your heresy; you're discounting and/ or discarding multiple other verses in Scripture to fit your man-made beliefs.

Ok ill ask again, how? prove it, show me.

The apostle Paul warned of exactly what your doing.
Did your revelation come from the Spirit, or from man?

If were calling scientific method and observation "revelation", then man. If were talking about knowing what the truth is and not letting falsehoods be propagated then i suppose that would be the Spirit. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like duck then it is probably a duck. To call it a turtle would be a lie. If scientific method and test after test verifies the speed of light being constant and you insist it isnt so or, refuse to believe it. Well....ill let you do the homework on that one .

 

[Assyrian]

Distances between celestial objects?
Scripture says God stretched out the heavens; good enough for me.

To simply say "God stretched out the heavens" doesnt really answer my question. I would take it more as the simple idea that God made the universe. The idea of stretching out the heavens means He established the great distances between stars galaxies etc... Which may be exactly how you meant it too.

The only indications in those verse to tell us what was meant by stretching heavens are the descriptions of the heavens being stretched out like a curtain or like a tent to dwell in, in the context of God stretching out the earth too.
Psalm 104:2 covering yourself with light as with a garment, stretching out the heavens like a tent.
Isaiah 40:22 It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in;
Isaiah 44:24 Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb: "I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself.
I really don't think this is a cryptic and obscure reference to the expanding universe that would only be understood three millennia later. Especially when it is repeated again and again in 11 verses. This meant something them. People looked at the world spread out around them and the sky spread overhead like a curtain and declared that the Lord created it all. It is not hinting at the expansion of space time, but the declaration of people who could watch with awe at the evening sky and watch the starry darkness spreading over them and proclaim in truth it is the Lord who does this.