Many Christians think the Bible contradicts the Big Bang, and other aspects of the development of the universe. Archaeology and history may orvmay not be considered science, but current near east history doesn’t match the OT until the time of the kings, and even that is controversial.
This depends upon your exegesis, but many Christians think current understanding of sexual and gender identity contradicts Scripture.
The scientific question isn’t whether to accept it, but various facts about it. Many Christians deny that sexual orientation exists, and believe that these are just personal,choices. That is a rejection of mainstream science. The question of actual sexual standards is a moral one, which is not dictated by science. However a large fraction of CF posting include not just that kind of moral judgement but statements that vary to one degree or another from mainstream science or medicine. It seems unlikely that the traditional sexual standards would have developed in a culture that accepts current mainstream knowledge of sex.Archaeology and history are definitely kinds of science. The gender and sexuality issue is definitely a big one. That's also a tough one though. Mainstream psychology currently embraces homosexuality and transgenderism, but how scientific is that?
The value of pi. The Bible asserts it is three.We are at the point in our apologetics course where we are examining the claim that science and Scripture are in conflict. The most famous example of this is Darwinism and evolution. Can you think of other instances wherein science and Scripture are in an apparent conflict?
That one is dubious. It seems likely that the measurements used for this were given to the nearest unit.The value of pi. The Bible asserts it is three.
The value of pi. The Bible asserts it is three.
Psychology is science because it follows the scientific method. Philosophy of science and research methodology are fundamentals for an undergraduate course.Mainstream psychology currently embraces homosexuality and transgenderism, but how scientific is that?
Well yeah, but if God makes rounding errors one wonders how he made reality.That one is dubious. It seems likely that the measurements used for this were given to the nearest unit.
1 Kings 7:23 (KJV) And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round aboutHaha I'm not aware of that. Where does the Bible talk about pi?
Psychology is science because it follows the scientific method. Philosophy of science and research methodology are fundamentals for an undergraduate course.
And this is why you're an atheist?1 Kings 7:23 (KJV) And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about
True, but that is a criticism of the person, not the discipline.Psychology is science generally speaking. But lots of scientists who do science regularly go outside the bounds of science in their conclusions. Just because psychology is a legitimate science does not mean that everything a psychologist says is scientific.
Agreed. But there can be large movements within scientific disciplines that are unscientific.True, but that is a criticism of the person, not the discipline.
Well yeah, but there are also large movements within the Body of Christ that are un Christian.Agreed. But there can be large movements within scientific disciplines that are unscientific.
Well yeah, but there are also large movements within the Body of Christ that are un Christian.
A good place to start would be to examine the research. I have not done so but I guess you must have. Can you link me to the unscientific research that leads you to your conclusion?I agree. I'm just saying that it makes sense to ask whether the pro-transgender movement within psychology is really scientific or not.
A good place to start would be to examine the research. I have not done so but I guess you must have. Can you link me to the unscientific research that leads you to your conclusion?
That it makes sense to ask if pro transgender is unscientific. What research have you read that has inclined you to ask if it is infact, unscientific?What is my conclusion?
That it makes sense to ask if pro transgender is unscientific. What research have you read that has inclined you to ask if it is infact, unscientific?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?