Originally posted by JS357
A current thread prompted this thinking but I can't find it so I'll start afresh. It was Suzianne talking about the clarity of religion.
Alvin Plantinga says what I want to say better, from his Christian POV.
There is still another reason for methodological naturalism; this one, too, is common sense simplicity itself. God has created this whole w ...[text shortened]... ther inquiry.
I agree. "God did it" is not good enough. Let's go find out *how* He did it. This is science's job. Evolution was a good start. Modern astrophysics answers other questions. Christians need not fear science. Science is the "how", after all. Teaching Creationism in schools doesn't do our kids any favors, it only teaches them that critical thinking, the exploration and discovery of facts, is not required or desired, when just the opposite is true.
This started when ChessPraxis quoted Carl Sagan:
“In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.”
I answered, "Because sometimes, in some ways religion is more clear cut than science." I meant that, as Christians, we are told what the truth is in the Bible. It clearly delineates what we should believe and why. This is what makes religion "clear cut". Islam's concepts are codified in the Koran, and the Jews have the Old Testament. It's all laid out for us. Our Faith should be solid, like a rock, unchanging, because we've been told just what the truth is.
Not so with science. We have to figure out science for ourselves. That is why we have the scientific method. And it works well, because we now understand a lot of how the real world works the way it does. Because of the scientific method, we can challenge old ideas and progress forward.
I have often said that Science gives us the "how", while Religion offers us the "why". I consider these two sides of the same coin, and together, they fill in nearly all the blanks we need to understand our place in the universe.
Some theists, however, like the YECs, disrupt this natural flow of knowledge by confusing the two sides, thinking that religion can take the place of science, or that science is somehow "wrong" because it does not follow the "God did it" formula. Similarly, atheism fails also, and in much the same way as the fundamentalists, because they remove God entirely from the equation, just as the YECs remove science from the equation. Atheists seem to think that science can (or should) take the place of religion, or that religion is somehow "wrong" because God cannot be "proven". Certainly, there is a long way to go before there can be any agreement between the sides, but those of us who feel that there can be, in fact, a sort of "unified field theory" uniting these opposing views are a voice of moderation and if only both sides can relax their "set in stone" mindsets, perhaps some true progress could be made.