Ok, so I've been thinking more about Jason Lisle's presentation that I heard yesterday at the Multnomah chapel. Lisle, like almost every creation science textbook in print, makes the claim that "everyone wears mental glasses" and that "only if you wear the correct mental glasses can you interpret the data correctly." Lisle compared the glasses that secular (non-Christian) scientists wear to wearing glasses with red lenses. Everything they see is red or distorted. The implication is that non-Christians can’t do good science because they don't see nature through the right set of lenses. I call this view, "Biblicism."
Not only does biblicism not represent the historic Christian perspective, I have yet to see anyone point out the fact that biblicism seems to promote epistemological relativism. The net effect of the biblicist approach is that since all "facts" can be interpreted from a different point of view then no interpretations can be tested to see if they're truly valid. At that point, objective knowledge of the real world is at best inaccessible or unknowable and at worst, doesn't even exist.
Just some thoughts that maybe I'll develop into an article at some point. I'm not even sure this is a valid argument. Anyone have any thoughts?