I think indifference to science is theologically wrong. We are told that we can learn something of God's attributes through general revelation, and we have the analogy:
Special Revelation : Theology :: General Revelation : Science
Indifference to science is wrong, but somewhat understandable. (As the analogy suggests, indifference to science is more or less the same error as indifference to doctrine.) Still, in the grand scheme of things it's not a big deal if someone doesn't want to reconcile his beliefs with science and takes the honest route of saying: "I don't care what science teaches." But what the fixed earth site and others like it do—well that's just plain 'ole lying for Jesus.
At the risk of upsetting some of my readers and fiends, the difference between the fixed earth site and AiG or the ICR is simply a matter of spit-polish and funding. Rather than admit the possibility that their private interpretation of Genesis might be wrong, they all prefer to make God into a god of confusion--one whose creation doesn't proclaim his glory, it proclaims his deceitfulness. How could it proclaim the glory of God, if the information it reveals cannot be trusted?
Hmmm. But the earth is globe-like, rather than flat. I wonder why they didn't go all the way.
ReplyDeleteMartin: I had the same thought.
ReplyDelete