Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘creation’ Category

Many books are on my desk at the moment.  Books for my theological study, and books for my personal interest.  I have too many books on my desk.  I cannot read them all…

Yet this did not prevent me from picking up 7 more books on our recent trip to the states… (more…)

Read Full Post »

This just in…

* * *

The Tertiary Students Christian Fellowship
&
The New Zealand Association of Rationalists and Humanists

present a debate between

Atheist Historian *Bill Cooke*

and

Christian Philosopher *William Lane Craig.*

Adjudicated by *John Bishop*, head of Philosophy Department, Auckland University.

*Moot: Is God a Delusion?*

7PM, Tuesday the 17th of June 2008
Lecture Theatre OGGB5, 12 Grafton Road, Auckland University

* * *

Of course, this kind of thing is only one of hundreds of its kind. The apparent -or ‘felt’- ‘winning’ of either ‘side’ will not, of course, be (directly or indirectly) indicative of the superiority of that position. Debates are like that. But it will be entertaining, interesting and a better use of time than watching most of the nonsense which will be on television at the same time (not that I watch much television anyway). So do come.

Read Full Post »

I’ve enjoyed the few articles I’ve skimmed at this blog called “Just Thomism”.

(Thomism designates the study of the life and work of St. Thomas Aquinas)

I found this post having to do with atheism, theism, evolution and science(s) of particular interest.

Here’s a quote…

It is mere historical chance that popular theism did not end up insisting that God could only exist in an evolutionary world, where all matter had been developing to the point where man could emerge at last- At last! man! prepared for by all the ages! Who all creation leads up to, just as it says in the book of Genesis!

This is one of many interesting philosophical reflections (and certainly not necessarily the best) in basically each and every post. We often don’t think about how we think; observe how we observe; ponder how we ponder; distinguish how we distinguish; wonder how we wonder; know how we know; ‘etc.’ how we ‘etc.’

🙂

Happy browsing… (and thinking)

Read Full Post »

This question (‘Is anything significant?’) can be fleshed out a bit…

We could ask, “Is everything equally in-significant?”, or we could ask, “Is everything equally highly-significant?”

What makes something (an event or object [which can quite rightly be said to be ‘events’ in themselves]) significant, and another thing not so?

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Consolmagno has done it again…

Yet another poignant and wise article, helpfully navigating the intersection of faith and science…

Here’s a sampler:

…there’s the world of nature, the world I study as a scientist, nice and neat and well described by some beautiful equations, elegant in their simplicity. And there’s the world of human beings, strange fleshy bundles of ego and free will, who can sometimes be described in a statistical sense but who as individuals never cease to surprise you.

Read the whole thing here.

Read Full Post »

WrightEhrmanBart Ehrman and N.T. Wright have agreed to ‘blog’ through the issue of Suffering and God over at Beliefnet. You can follow their discussion here.

Bart Ehrman (author of ‘Misquoting Jesus‘, ‘God’s Problem‘ and other titles) and Tom Wright (author of ‘Evil and the Justice of God‘, ‘Suprised by Hope‘ and other titles) are both recognised scholars. Ehrman is currently an ‘agnostic’ and is open about his slow departure from the Christian faith. Wright is Bishop of Durham.

I look forward to following their contributions and interaction with one another.

Read Full Post »

In another interesting article over at Thinking Faith, Guy Consolmagno posits three things all scientists must ‘believe’. He calls them “three axioms of science that must be taken on faith before you can do science.”

  1. “You have to believe that the physical world actually exists – I am not just a butterfly, dreaming that I am a scientist, in an imaginary universe.”
  2. “You have to believe, ahead of time, that the physical world actually does have rules and regularities – well hidden ones perhaps, but something that eventually you’ll be able to figure out.”
  3. “…you have to believe that the physical universe is worth studying. Think of it… if your religion says that the goal of life is to meditate yourself out of this corrupting universe onto a higher plane, you’re not going to be a physical scientist.”

The article can be found here, (PDF version) or by clicking the link in my RSS for Thinking Faith in the sidebar…

Thoughts?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »