Originally posted by Bosse de NageI already answered this question a few pages back, but...
You'll have to explain what "general revelation" means. Give us a peek into your world, man.
I take general revelation to mean that information related to God that is available to everyone, but non-propositional. That which can be seen in conscience, creation and history.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou're speaking gobbledygook. Seriously--your language is opaque. Give me some examples of what is "general revelation" and what is not.
I already answered this question a few pages back, but...
I take general revelation to mean that information related to God that is available to everyone, but non-propositional. That which can be seen in conscience, creation and history.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageWhat can be known about God through creation, for instance, is considered general revelation. Everyone can understand some basic ideas about God simply by observing the natural world. It is general information, and it is available by general means to the general public. This is non-propositional (no words are required).
You're speaking gobbledygook. Seriously--your language is opaque. Give me some examples of what is "general revelation" and what is not.
Further, divine revelation is necessary in order for man to know more about God, such as the characteristics and attributes of His essence, His thoughts, desires and intents as well as how to establish a relationship with Him. This is propositional in nature, thus the Bible.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAttempted translation: "general revelation" = "nature". "Divine revelation" is self-explanatory (= "messages from God" ). How am I doing?
What can be known about God through creation, for instance, is considered general revelation.This is non-propositional (no words are required).
Further, divine revelation is necessary in order for man to know more about God, such as the characteristics and attributes of His essence, His thoughts, desires and intents as well as how to establish a relationship with Him. This is propositional in nature, thus the Bible.
2 edits to swat the smiley with the tic.
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Everyone can understand some basic ideas about God simply by observing the natural world.
Presuppositional; I can learn nothing about god from the natural world, unless I first learn what god is and accept that god exists, this is not an a priori judgement.
It is general information, and it is available by general means to the general public.
Not true, it is available only by contact with religious means (better word?) and only to those with the opportunity/desire to seek it.
This is non-propositional (no words are required).
See above.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHCould you cite some specific examples...like the complexity of an ant colony, the awesome power of a tornado? And then, what is the basic idea(s) about God that we're supposed to understand via these mechanisms?
Everyone can understand some basic ideas about God simply by observing the natural world.
You have corrected my opinion of the definition of the word science. I admit I was wrong. However usage of the word in the title of the thread refers to a specific set of sciences usually called the 'natural sciences' and this does not include Theology. Theology is also not studied via the 'scientific method.' Also, although some may say 'the science of Theology', I believe it would be incorect to say 'Theology is a branch of science' as your origional post implied. The term science is often used interchangably with 'natural science' and when the term 'branch of science' is used it implies the natural sciences and not the social sciences or whatever other sciences are out there.
Originally posted by quelanceI was going to add that to the mix, but thanks for beating me to the punch. I'm sure that the many God-related quotes that came from Al and other scientists make the God non-botherers a tad queasy.
Just to add my two cents, and what I believe, here's a quote from Einstein:
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Originally posted by David CFor instance, we see God's faithfulness as He perpetuates the laws of nature and preserves the universe for His intended results. These same laws also indicate His genius, organization and efficiences.
Could you cite some specific examples...like the complexity of an ant colony, the awesome power of a tornado? And then, what is the basic idea(s) about God that we're supposed to understand via these mechanisms?
Originally posted by FreakyKBHEinstein quotes are frequently co-opted.
I was going to add that to the mix, but thanks for beating me to the punch. I'm sure that the many God-related quotes that came from Al and other scientists make the God non-botherers a tad queasy.
"The idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I am unable to take seriously. [Albert Einstein, letter to Hoffman and Dukas, 1946]"
More:
http://atheism.about.com/library/quotes/bl_q_AEinstein.htm
""I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."
Nice Einstein site here:
http://dipc.ehu.es/digitalak/orriak/english/religion.html
Originally posted by FreakyKBH""As far as the theorems of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality". Einstein. Which side does this quote support? 😕
So apparently you agree with CALD's assessment of science as the exclusion of such branches as, say, mathematics.