Actually, what you and those like you overlook, is why we do this.
Scientism, in my opinion, forces us to take a hard-line stance in defense of our faith; else we'll eventually be forced to say even the Resurrection didn't happen.
Nonsense. That's not a testable event at this point. And goodness AV, if you think that then I wonder if you think your faith has any validity? DO you really think that concrete evidence will disprove the resurrection?
If so you're not a believer, are you?
Science deals with hard evidence. You don't seem to understand this, and take a somewhat paranoid stance instead. Don't worry AV, Jesus said no weapon formed against us will prosper. He said to love even those who hate us and if sued to give more than asked for. Why do you worry? NO matter what anyone brings around to harm Jesus it will not work.
Of course that doesn't mean you should do your bit to harm Him though. But you are. Don't you see? We're many christians in my university, but none are creationists that I know of. In fact it's scoffed at and usually ridiculed. However, at times when I run across an atheist the question tends to be: "How can you believe in something you know to be wrong? Something your own lab results reveal without a doubt IS wrong?"
Their questions and rejection of the gospel as a whole is based on one thing:
People like you who insist there is a connection which no-one else sees. Goodness gracious! Conservative priests scoff at your position. Ultra-orthodox priests call it heretical and sectarian. Catholics often do the same. Lutherans as well.
So... Why do you do this? If you believe there is a heaven and hell AV, then it follows that because of you people will be going to hell. People who could be rejoicing with you at the end of days praising Jesus' name with joy will suffer in His absence.
Tell me, how is that defensible? Wouldn't it be better to just shut up about that when talking near non-believers and instead show them who Jesus is, love, mercy and all?
We have to draw the line somewhere, and I choose to draw the line right where I'm at and not budge an inch.
But this is based on the false premise that science is anti-christian. It isn't. It only deals with things we can observe and test. If you
truly believe you would not be threatened by that, but excited. Surely a true believer would rejoice in knowing that any examination of God's creation will eventually point to God? Surely, only a believer in name only would feel threatened by
facts?!
Since I sincerely believe what I believe, I feel I'm forced to defend it with the utmost amount of faith I can muster
What you're displaying isn't faith. You're like a ceramic AV. You're hard in your belief, but also very weak. Your position does not hold, and I think you know it is both weak, shattered and worth far less than nothing: It is harmful.
-- and even if I have to bury my head in the sand to do it, I choose to err on the side of empiricism, rather than give in to interpreting the Scriptures allegorically; which I refuse to do.
Ahh. You take your one interpretation of one of multiple creation stories, ignore the other ones and call it "literal". That's nonsensical, and I think you realize as much.
By the way, I do not think you have understood the word 'empiricism'. What you're erring on the side of is not empiricism.
I believe God has blessed me, in return, with my Apple Challenge and my set of Boolean Standards that allow me to go the extra mile in solidifying my points.
You haven't solidified anything. You haven't displayed any proper logic, nor any decent argument. You just repeat yourself and ignore other people.
I have also noticed in my five years here, that whatever we get accused of, I am able to hold a mirror up to my accusers; and in so doing, noticed that they too, won't budge an inch.
I have not seen that happen once.
In short, I absolutely will not compromise my beliefs to any science book; and I feel that scientism is what forces that adamant nature out of me.
Then you are a fanatic, and your position is worthless and not representative of true faith, as the latter will require humility and admission of personal fallibility while the former is self-centered fanaticism which harms the kingdom of God through usurpation of His throne and rejection and damnation of souls He would call through this said fanatical approach.
My deepest regret in my life, AV. The deepest deepest one is being at one point what you are now. Doing what you do. I pray and hope that I did not drive anyone to reject God, but know I may very well have done so. By doing
exactly what you're doing now.
And, AV: Scientism? Come on. Stooping to language abuse now? Why don't you just slap a swearword in front of it. That would be a just as valid method of argumentation. Show some integrity, will you?
