Science is certainly reasonable if somewhat limited epistemologically. Revelation is more certain, but that's limited in other ways. Naturalism is anti-science for the observations in this article for it assumes a priori that the physical universe is self-supporting and denies the possibility of the sustaining influence of a Creator. So the error most people make is that science has developed out understanding sufficiently enough to deny certain truths given by revelation.
Science is certainly reasonable if somewhat limited epistemologically. Revelation is more certain, but that's limited in other ways. Naturalism is anti-science for the observations in this article for it assumes a priori that the physical universe is self-supporting and denies the possibility of the sustaining influence of a Creator. So the error most people make is that science has developed out understanding sufficiently enough to deny certain truths given by revelation.
ReplyDelete