Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Can evolutionists handle the truth
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="GoSeminoles!" data-source="post: 23865582"><p>Science does not make this assuption. Science disallows appeals to authority, such as saying X is true merely because a government or a religious document or even another scientist says so. Only verified data can support or refute a testable hypothesis.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>This can be true, but only depending on how the person interprets Genesis. If it is a literal interpretation, then very little of science agrees with Genesis. Can science "demonstrate attributes of the Creator?" Impossible to say, since we have no way of meauring directly the attributes of the Creator and therefore no way to see how his attributes compare to those of his creation.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>And this is the fatal logical flaw of creationism and it is what casts it in the bin labeled "religion" and not the one tagged "science." The reason is that there are many possible interpretations of the Bible and no way to determine which, if any, is The Correct one. Moreover, even if everyone agreed on The Correct version, what we see happening in nature trumps anything we read in a book, no matter who the author is, because we assume correctly that our senses accurately reflect reality. If the Bible says X but nature repeatedly reveals Y to us, then the Bible is wrong or our interpretation of it is wrong.</p><p> </p><p>This is old ground. Christian naturalists in the 17th-19th centuries, who contributed greatly to fashioning the naturalistic approach of modern science, deferred to <em>nature</em>, not the Bible, when they perceived a conflict between the two. They reasoned that God reveals himself to us through the Bible and through nature. Since God cannot lie, an apparent conflict between the Bible and nature is due to human errors in the translation, editing, and interpretation of the Bible.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>The premise of your post is nonsense at the start because many scientists, including evolutionists, are religious. Regardless, I think every scientist will agree that science is only capable of discovering a portion of The Truth, the portion which can be found by measuring and testing nature. However, when what scientists have discovered in just this portion is substantially at odds with a literal interpretation of Genesis, no objective evaluation of all the evidence could support special creation.</p><p> </p><p>Which leads to the obvious question: if special creation is The Truth, then why did God create a world in which <em>all</em> the scientific evidence points in the other direction?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="GoSeminoles!, post: 23865582"] Science does not make this assuption. Science disallows appeals to authority, such as saying X is true merely because a government or a religious document or even another scientist says so. Only verified data can support or refute a testable hypothesis. This can be true, but only depending on how the person interprets Genesis. If it is a literal interpretation, then very little of science agrees with Genesis. Can science "demonstrate attributes of the Creator?" Impossible to say, since we have no way of meauring directly the attributes of the Creator and therefore no way to see how his attributes compare to those of his creation. And this is the fatal logical flaw of creationism and it is what casts it in the bin labeled "religion" and not the one tagged "science." The reason is that there are many possible interpretations of the Bible and no way to determine which, if any, is The Correct one. Moreover, even if everyone agreed on The Correct version, what we see happening in nature trumps anything we read in a book, no matter who the author is, because we assume correctly that our senses accurately reflect reality. If the Bible says X but nature repeatedly reveals Y to us, then the Bible is wrong or our interpretation of it is wrong. This is old ground. Christian naturalists in the 17th-19th centuries, who contributed greatly to fashioning the naturalistic approach of modern science, deferred to [I]nature[/I], not the Bible, when they perceived a conflict between the two. They reasoned that God reveals himself to us through the Bible and through nature. Since God cannot lie, an apparent conflict between the Bible and nature is due to human errors in the translation, editing, and interpretation of the Bible. The premise of your post is nonsense at the start because many scientists, including evolutionists, are religious. Regardless, I think every scientist will agree that science is only capable of discovering a portion of The Truth, the portion which can be found by measuring and testing nature. However, when what scientists have discovered in just this portion is substantially at odds with a literal interpretation of Genesis, no objective evaluation of all the evidence could support special creation. Which leads to the obvious question: if special creation is The Truth, then why did God create a world in which [I]all[/I] the scientific evidence points in the other direction? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Can evolutionists handle the truth
Top
Bottom