Does Science Agree With the Bible?

[dad]

Cavemen didn't have science. That is why they turned to magic as an explanation.

The modern cave dwellers of condos and skyscrapers have chosen to omit truth from their knowledge.

 

[Haasrecht]

Where science disagrees with the Bible, science can take a hike.

I meant it in the sense that I do not see why the two have to be seen as conflicting.

 

[AV1611VET]

I meant it in the sense that I do not see why the two have to be seen as conflicting.

Neither do I.

 

[The Barbarian]

Where science disagrees with the Bible, science can take a hike.

Science can't disagree with the Bible, although scientists can. Science is just a way of finding out about the physical universe. Science can disagree with some people's modern revisions of the Bible, but of course, that's a different thing entirely.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
So far, every time we check the past, things worked just as they do now.

You NEVER checked the past,

Sorry, your postmoderney story that we can't learn about anything we didn't personally observe isn't very persuasive. Evidence from numerous sources says you're wrong.

you checked in with present state ideas and tried to hammer the past into submission.

If that were so, we wouldn't be able to make accurate predictions about what we should find as evidence. And we have done that repeatedly. Would you like to see some examples?

Black magic.

Sorry, your magic won't stand up to the evidence. If your ideology tries to keep you ignorant of the truth, isn't that something to reflect on?

 

[AV1611VET]

Science can't disagree with the Bible, although scientists can. Science is just a way of finding out about the physical universe.

Science can't disagree with the Bible, yet it can find out about the physical universe?

 

[JackRT]

Almost always when science and the bible disagree the fault does not lie in the bible itself but rather in the way in which we interpret the bible.

 

[AV1611VET]

Almost always when science and the bible disagree the fault does not lie in the bible itself but rather in the way in which we interpret the bible.

Okay ... we sync the Bible to science.

Then science changes one of its paradigms.

What do we do?

Sync the Bible to the new paradigm again?

And again ... and again ... and again?

Isn't that how we got abortion justified?

 

[The Barbarian]

Science can't disagree with the Bible, yet it can find out about the physical universe?

Yep. Science is just a method. So no way to disagree with the Bible. And yes, it's been very successful in telling us about the physical universe.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yep. Science is just a method. So no way to disagree with the Bible. And yes, it's been very successful in telling us about the physical universe.

Good for science.

God ordained science to enrich our lives.

But when science (or scientists) contradict the Bible, science (or scientists) can take a hike.

 

[Loudmouth]

It is not a "claim." Call it what you want, do with it what you want.

I call it a claim, and since you have not evidenced that claim, I can dismiss it without evidence.

I have pointed to a world of physical evidence (the world), and also to spiritual evidence. Don't blame me because you don't know what you are looking at.

You have not pointed to any physical evidence. Also, spiritual evidence appears to be indistinguishable from stuff you make up.

You definition of demonstrating evidence is inadequate. That may (for the umptheenth time) work in you little world...but...HELLO!...we are NOT talking about your little world.

We are talking about the natural world.

No, what I have is "knowledge"...that your kind of evidence will not convey, and "belief" and "faith" have nothing to do with it. HELLO! How many times do I have to tell you that?!

It isn't knowledge. It is faith based belief.

 

[dad]

Sorry, your postmoderney story that we can't learn about anything we didn't personally observe isn't very persuasive. Evidence from numerous sources says you're wrong.

We can learn plenty we did not personally observe. Get a grip. That doesn't include overruling the Almighty on how the future or past was and will be of course.

If that were so, we wouldn't be able to make accurate predictions about what we should find as evidence. And we have done that repeatedly. Would you like to see some examples?

Sure 2 examples. We all need a laugh.

Sorry, your magic won't stand up to the evidence.

The evidence tells of His magic, but science is too dumb to get it.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Sorry, your postmoderney story that we can't learn about anything we didn't personally observe isn't very persuasive. Evidence from numerous sources says you're wrong.

We can learn plenty we did not personally observe.

Then it was probably a bad idea for you to make that argument against it.

If that were so, we wouldn't be able to make accurate predictions about what we should find as evidence. And we have done that repeatedly. Would you like to see some examples?

Sure 2 examples. We all need a laugh.

1. Based on anatomical data, Huxley wrote that there must have been transitionals between dinosaurs and birds. We have since found many of them.

2. A small amount of heme found in the bones of a T-rex fossil, turned out to be most similar to that of birds, and not so similar to that of living reptiles, again confirming the prediction.

 

[dad]

If that were so, we wouldn't be able to make accurate predictions about what we should find as evidence.

Only within limits. Otherwise you get into prophesy and dreams.

1. Based on anatomical data, Huxley wrote that there must have been transitionals between dinosaurs and birds. We have since found many of them.

Fine with me, but not because of any reason Hux imagined. Rapid evolving in the former nature allowed Eden's creatures to move on out over the earth. If a bird evolved into a little dino and later bigger...whoopee do!

 

[HitchSlap]

God ordained science to enrich our lives.

Why'd he wait so long?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why'd he wait so long?

Maybe they had abortions back then like they do today?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Maybe they had abortions back then like they do today?

Abortions have been with us for quite a while. They were not as safe as today, but they used to be done by a Hebrew priest, if the wife had been supposedly cheating on the husband.

 

[HitchSlap]

Maybe they had abortions back then like they do today?

Look like he dun' goofed, then?

 

[Davian]

God ordained science to enrich our lives.

Why'd he wait so long?

Indeed. It's like we had to work it out on our own.

 

[JackRT]

Indeed. It's like we had to work it out on our own.

Well, His evidence was left all over the place in the stones and the bones and the stars. I think it wise to read the evidence carefully and to regard the bible as speaking only to the spiritual aspect of our lives.