Does Science Agree With the Bible?

[Michael]

And so it has been foretold. What were you expecting?

I was expecting something more than "Trust me and my personal infallibility as it relates to the book of Genesis". Alas, that's all I got.

 

[Loudmouth]

And that is why no one should ever take you serious.

Your lack of evidence is why no one should ever take you seriously. All hat and no cattle.

 

[Michael]

Not close minded at all, but claims need to be verifiable if they aught to have any meaning. Otherwise we will just all shout something that can never be checked.

Which is in fact exactly what he did.

 

[ScottA]

Not close minded at all, but claims need to be verifiable if they aught to have any meaning. Otherwise we will just all shout something that can never be checked.

It is very impressive. So then you see conclusions, you can look up what that conclusion is based on, retest the experiment and see if you get the same results. This is the very basis of science.

1) Open-minded? If that is true, you would be a first here. But, you will first have to be open-minded enough to drop your version of "verifiable" as being the only thing verifiable. Example: If you make a claim about something that science considers a fact, I am open-minded enough to go into the matter and verify it in your/and their way. But if I make a claim about spiritual things...no one has yet been open-minded enough to reciprocate and verify it in any other way than their own conventional science way - no one. In fact, they also cop an attitude. So, never checking, is not my problem. That one is on you all.

2) Good. Then you should have no trouble applying the same to spiritual matters.

 

[ScottA]

All hat and no cattle.

You don't even know how backwards that is.

 

[ScottA]

Yes, I am. How am I not qualified to determine if something is a verifiable fact?

You are not born of the spirit of God.

 

[ScottA]

I was expecting something more than "Trust me and my personal infallibility as it relates to the book of Genesis". Alas, that's all I got.

Nor was Israel expecting a child...though they were told.

 

[Reasoning]

1) Open-minded? If that is true, you would be a first here. But, you will first have to be open-minded enough to drop your version of "verifiable" as being the only thing verifiable. Example: If you make a claim about something that science considers a fact, I am open-minded enough to go into the matter and verify it in your/and their way. But if I make a claim about spiritual things...no one has yet been open-minded enough to reciprocate and verify it in any other way than their own conventional science way - no one. In fact, they also cop an attitude. So, never checking, is not my problem. That one is on you all.

2) Good. Then you should have no trouble applying the same to spiritual matters.

Ok you seem to see de difference, which is good. I'm sure you would agree that there is then no way I could ever test your sincerity or claims? And that therefore the claims objectively cannot be a basis for decisions or conclusions. How would I know if you are not telling plain lies (not that I say you are)? If you know a way that can verify those claims objectively, then let me know and I'll try. The problem is, there is no such way, and if there was, it would be called science.

Consider this crazy example: 10 people say that they have been abducted by Aliens, and that their spaceship will attack New York tomorrow. There is no scientific way of testing that claim, so all we are left with is believing these people on their word. Would you go and evacuate New York?

In order to draw conclusions that would come close to the truth, we have to have verifiable evidence. If we don't have that, what do we have left? Only stories, myths and loose words.

 

[ScottA]

Ok you seem to see de difference, which is good. I'm sure you would agree that there is then no way I could ever test your sincerity or claims? And that therefore the claims objectively cannot be a basis for decisions or conclusions. How would I know if you are not telling plain lies (not that I say you are)? If you know a way that can verify those claims objectively, then let me know and I'll try. The problem is, there is no such way, and if there was, it would be called science.

Consider this crazy example: 10 people say that they have been abducted by Aliens, and that their spaceship will attack New York tomorrow. There is no scientific way of testing that claim, so all we are left with is believing these people on their word. Would you go and evacuate New York?

In order to draw conclusions that would come close to the truth, we have to have verifiable evidence. If we don't have that, what do we have left? Only stories, myths and loose words.

I hear you, but that's just wrong. We are not trying to prove anything, so there is no burden of proof. We have, on the other hand, been witnessing to the truth that you cannot verify down through all of history, and even predicted things to come as proof (among other things). Which if now you just want to deny them, that is your choice. There is no loss to us, if you choose not to believe what we have reported. But by the nature of what it is that we are reporting, withdrawing to home court, accomplishes nothing.

Consider this crazy example: 1000 people are born into a large room, and no one had ever been or seen outside the room. How then would anyone know what was outside?

1. The smart ones in the room would test everything in the room.
2. The wise ones would give their conjecture and philosophy.
3. The information comes in from the outside.

...And what if about 500 of the people didn't believe those who shared the information?

Crazy, right?

 

[Reasoning]

I hear you, but that's just wrong. We are not trying to prove anything, so there is no burden of proof. We have, on the other hand, been witnessing to the truth that you cannot verify down through all of history, and even predicted things to come as proof (among other things). Which if now you just want to deny them, that is your choice. There is no loss to us, if you choose not to believe what we have reported. But by the nature of what it is that we are reporting, withdrawing to home court, accomplishes nothing.

Consider this crazy example: 1000 people are born into a large room, and no one had ever been or seen outside the room. How then would anyone know what was outside?

1. The smart ones in the room test everything in the room.
2. The wise ones give their conjecture and philosophy.
3. The information comes in from the outside.

...And what if about 500 of the people didn't believe those who shared the information?

Crazy, right?

Ok if you do not want to prove anything, that is fine of course. But then Christianity (and all other religions) should completely stop involving itself into things that are universally applicable to anyone (that what I call the objective truth). Decisions in societies should be made based on rationale that can be tested, not on faith that cannot be tested. So no trying to explain the universe / earth / life or if men should have sex with men etc. And it should especially not teach children this stuff like it is the truth.

You can think about it and believe whatever of course. But do not get that near children and do not see it as absoute truth for all. In that case, we would agree . I am not sure what you mean with what you have predicted, could you clarify that point a little more?

Your example is more philosophical, there are similar ones with people inside a submarine etc. The answer is we don't know, but for sure the only way you could come anywhere close to the truth that is applicable to everyone, is by the scientific method. I think we agree on that right?

 

[Loudmouth]

1) Open-minded? If that is true, you would be a first here. But, you will first have to be open-minded enough to drop your version of "verifiable" as being the only thing verifiable. Example: If you make a claim about something that science considers a fact, I am open-minded enough to go into the matter and verify it in your/and their way. But if I make a claim about spiritual things...no one has yet been open-minded enough to reciprocate and verify it in any other way than their own conventional science way - no one. In fact, they also cop an attitude. So, never checking, is not my problem. That one is on you all.

How are any other methods of verification valid? Can you make a case that other methods of verification are reliable?

Do you think that anyone can just make something up and expect it to be accepted as true?

2) Good. Then you should have no trouble applying the same to spiritual matters.

Why would spiritual matters need a different method of verification?

 

[Loudmouth]

You are not born of the spirit of God.

Where is your evidence that there are any spirits?

 

[AV1611VET]

Where is your evidence that there are any spirits?

Romans 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

 

[Loudmouth]

Romans 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

That's the claim. Where is the evidence?

 

[AV1611VET]

That's the claim. Where is the evidence?

Luke 7:19 And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?
20 When the men were come unto him, they said, John Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?
21 And in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits; and unto many that were blind he gave sight.
22 Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.
23 And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me.

 

[Loudmouth]

Luke 7:19 And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?
20 When the men were come unto him, they said, John Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?
21 And in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits; and unto many that were blind he gave sight.
22 Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.
23 And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me.

More claim does not make it into evidence.

 

[AV1611VET]

More claim does not make it into evidence.

If you're on the outside looking in, try this ...

Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

 

[Loudmouth]

If you're on the outside looking in, try this ...

Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

Yet another claim.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yet another claim.

You're welcome to peruse the Evidence Locker all you want.

Be careful though.

It might lead to some positive results.

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

 

[Loudmouth]

You're welcome to peruse the Evidence Locker all you want.

Be careful though.

It might lead to some positive results.

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

It appears that all you have is the faith locker.