Is Newton's scientific failure, a theological failure?

Following Arianism, Newton believed not the trinity doctrine. Could this have caused his narrow view of the classical mechanics? A genius of his time, Newton has many defenders of the latest generations to his humility in his physics principles.

To the least, could there be any relationship at all causing a narrow view between theology and his understanding of space and time.

[@more@]

I believe like many, Newton's scientific approach was based on hunches, clues and bread crumbs. The doctrine of trinity begins with the realm of revelation, a progressive one.

On the other hand, Newton wasn't too stubborn. For he pursued the unexplained in alchemy, forerunner of chemistry. Nonetheless, he was persistent enough to tackle the unexplained over all things until a resolution was found. Solutions must be found regardless. Such is the birth of narrow viewpoints. A scientific contradiction to that of Gauss, who would rest at Fermat's last enigma.

Such scientific approach, though incredibly remarkable, is shamed by that of the latest generations. It was unfortunate, that Newton, genuine enough to glorify God, had to bring his limited view on the universe to his grave. It was his limitation irrespectively. Together with the world of his era.

This entry was posted in Questions. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Is Newton's scientific failure, a theological failure?

  1. Soichi says:

    Did you watch the Nova's Newton show last night? I love all those Nova shows.

    "On the other hand, Newton wasn't too stubborn" did you mean he *was* too stubborn?

  2. Tim says:

    As a matter of fact, I did. Looks like we share a lot of common interests.

    I was referring to his belief against a triune God. Arius, several hundreds years before Newton, held the belief that Jesus cannot be God, was defeated by several key roles, such as Athanasius. Hence the Nicene Creed.

    However, as God fearing as Newton was trying to be, unlike the Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, he had to follow Arius' path.

    The Bible is not contra-rational. But it is definitely supra-rational. Everything thus far is explained on human terms, progressively.

    Deu 29:29
    II Peter 3:16

  3. Tim says:

    Newton has written commentary on parts of the Bible. I sure would like to get my hands on those.

Leave a Reply to Tim Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.