Science and Scripture

[Halbhh]

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?

There are none.

No conflicts.

I've read through the bible multiple times, and have read a lot of science.

There are some individual atheists that attempt to claim there are significant disagreements, as a tactic.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Sure you can, even though that is a weak definition. That does not cover the sciences since they are more than mere beliefs or impressions.

Lol, I saw that.

So now you shift to beliefs and impressions, or different terminology to try to confuse the issue.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lol, I saw that.

So now you shift to beliefs and impressions, or different terminology to try to confuse the issue.

No Once again science is more than mere belief. You have mere belief and try to project your wrong doings on others. The sciences have to be testable and verifiable. Opinion. . . not so much.

 

[Tree of Life]

There are none.

No conflicts.

I've read through the bible multiple times, and have read a lot of science.

There are some individual atheists that attempt to claim there are significant disagreements, as a tactic.

There may not be any ultimate conflicts but surely there are some apparent or alleged conflicts.

 

[Tree of Life]

No Once again science is more than mere belief. You have mere belief and try to project your wrong doings on others. The sciences have to be testable and verifiable. Opinion. . . not so much.

Science is a method of acquiring knowledge. Knowledge is a kind of belief but it’s a very special kind of belief. We do not know to be true everything that we believe to be true.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

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?

There is good direct evidence that a worldwide flood could not have happened.

Twenty-One Reasons Noah’s Worldwide Flood Never Happened | Skeptical Inquirer

 

[Subduction Zone]

Science is a method of acquiring knowledge. Knowledge is a kind of belief but it’s a very special kind of belief. We do not know to be true everything that we believe to be true.

And that is when context is important. The poster that I responded to was trying to justify beliefs that have been shown to be wrong.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

When we really think about it, science is nothing more than our opinion of the natural, and what the natural means, so in the end it is only man who chooses to confict with scripture.

Call it what you want but science has been demonstrated over and over that it is the most reliable pathway to truth. What has scripture revealed that we knew was true before science confirmed it? Nothing. When science is wrong science corrects the mistake. How is faith self correcting?

 

[Kenny'sID]

No Once again science is more than mere belief. You have mere belief and try to project your wrong doings on others. The sciences have to be testable and verifiable. Opinion. . . not so much.

And?

You are arguing with yourself it seems. Of course it must me testable/verifiable.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Call it what you want but science has been demonstrated over and over that it is the most reliable pathway to truth. What has scripture revealed that we knew was true before science confirmed it? Nothing. When science is wrong science corrects the mistake. How is faith self correcting?

So says the Atheist. What else would you say.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And?

You are arguing with yourself it seems. Of course it must me testable/verifiable.

Come on Kenny, can't you do any better than this?

An honest person would own up to his errors.

 

[Ophiolite]

"Real" and "apparent" are not mutually exclusive.

In this context they are, but it is your thread and you are free to obfuscate in your own way. I'll leave you to it.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

So says the Atheist. What else would you say.

Wow Kenny you win. You have found the universal defeater to all atheist arguments. Good job!

 

[Tree of Life]

In this context they are, but it is your thread and you are free to obfuscate in your own way. I'll leave you to it.

It’s just a fact of the English language, friend.

 

[hedrick]

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.

 

[Ophiolite]

It’s just a fact of the English language, friend.

That was my point from the outset. Another fact of the English language is that the only sense in which I am your friend is if you were being sarcastic. Otherwise I'm just a pedantic guy on the internet who thinks you are mistaken. Can we just leave it here? Tell you what. You have the last word.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Come on Kenny, can't you do any better than this?

An honest person would own up to his errors.

Then you do that, oh, wait.....

 

[Kenny'sID]

Wow Kenny you win. You have found the universal defeater to all atheist arguments. Good job!

Lol

 

[Subduction Zone]

Then you do that, oh, wait.....

I regularly do that. Again, watch the projection.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I regularly do that. Again, watch the projection.

lol