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="Split Rock" data-source="post: 23866640" data-attributes="member: 17087"><p>Agreed</p><p> </p><p></p><p>In the <em>scientific</em> study of origins. You can study "origins" theologically if you like, it just isn't science. </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>True.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Supreme over what? </p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>OK, but what happens when science conflicts with your <em>interpretation</em> of God's word? You reject it. </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Maybe the first part is correct, but how can science demonstrate attributes of the Creator?</p><p></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Maybe, but only if it is interpreted correctly. </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>But if he interprets scripture wrong, it leads him down the wrong path. </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>It rejects anything that conflicts with the assumption that the YEC interpretation of scripture is correct. Therefore, how is it broader? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree that if the YEC model is correct, it means that science cannot give us a true (not scientific) understanding of "origins." However, this would be the first time that science was unable to accurately describe an aspect of the physical world. The ball is in your court to show how science fails to describe origins correctly. So far, YECs have failed miserably in this goal.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Split Rock, post: 23866640, member: 17087"] Agreed In the [I]scientific[/I] study of origins. You can study "origins" theologically if you like, it just isn't science. True. Supreme over what? OK, but what happens when science conflicts with your [I]interpretation[/I] of God's word? You reject it. Maybe the first part is correct, but how can science demonstrate attributes of the Creator? Maybe, but only if it is interpreted correctly. But if he interprets scripture wrong, it leads him down the wrong path. It rejects anything that conflicts with the assumption that the YEC interpretation of scripture is correct. Therefore, how is it broader? Yes. I agree that if the YEC model is correct, it means that science cannot give us a true (not scientific) understanding of "origins." However, this would be the first time that science was unable to accurately describe an aspect of the physical world. The ball is in your court to show how science fails to describe origins correctly. So far, YECs have failed miserably in this goal. [/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