science falsely so called

[TwinCrier]

1 Timothy 6:20-21 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

For some interesting reading, vitit any evolution site and see what they say about brontosaurus or the number of bones actually discoved to create the many missing links. Often the few bones they had were missing pieces and entire skeletons were created from a hadful of bones some of which were found to be fake after the fact. Lucy and Pilt-down man have good stories behind them. Stories being the operative word.

 

[mhess13]

Yet christians are so quick to throw out what the word of God says in favor of this type of "science"

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Your quote is out of context, and you are using it to further your own end. The verses clearly refer to the deceitfulness of wealth, and are not about paranoia against scientists of the 21st century.

New Amercian Standard does not even use the word "science". You will have to find a different argument to make your case. The "science" that Paul was referring to in these verses was self interest at the expense of others, and the lie that riches make people happy.

1 Timothy 6:17
Instruct those who are rich in this present world not to be conceited or to fix their hope on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly supplies us with all things to enjoy.

[size=-1]1 Timothy 6:18
Instruct them to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share,

[size=-1]1 Timothy 6:19
storing up for themselves the treasure of a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is life indeed.

[size=-1]1 Timothy 6:20
O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding worldly and empty chatter and the opposing arguments of what is falsely called "knowledge"--

[size=-1]1 Timothy 6:21
which some have professed and thus gone astray from the faith. Grace be with you.
[/size][/size][/size][/size]

 

[TwinCrier]

And scientist get very wealthy off their lies.

self interest at the expense of others, and the lie that riches make people happy.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

And scientist get very wealthy off their lies.

still a distortion. you have not proved that scientists are lying

 

[Beowulf]

"While talking to the leader of the expedition, I happened to mention in passing that I felt uncomfortable referring to the stuff we were digging as rock. She replied that she knew exactly what I meant. She used to call it sediment, but a more senior professor rebuked her saying, it can’t be sediment because it is 75 million years old. Since she really believes it is 75 million years old, she doesn’t call it sediment anymore. Isn’t it interesting that a preconceived interpretation can affect the description of data?"

http://www.ridgenet.net/~do_while/sage/v4i1f.htm

 

[Beowulf]

2Ti 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

 

[Vance]

And the leading Creationist organization, Answers in Genesis, includes this argument in it's list of arguments Creationists should not use:

‘The phrase “science falsely so called” in 1 Timothy 6:20 (KJV) refers to evolution.’ To develop a Scriptural model properly, we must understand what the author intended to communicate to his intended audience, which in turn is determined by the grammar and historical context. We must not try to read into Scripture that which appears to support a particular viewpoint. The original Greek word translated ‘science’ is gnosis, and in this context refers to the élite esoteric ‘knowledge’ that was the key to the mystery religions, which later developed into the heresy of Gnosticism. This was not an error by the KJV translators, but an illustration of how many words have changed their meanings over time. The word ‘science’ originally meant ‘knowledge’, from the Latin scientia, from scio meaning ‘know’. This original meaning is just not the way it is used today, so modern translations correctly render the word as ‘knowledge’ in this passage.

 

[mhess13]

well, evolution is still falsely called science.

 

[Beowulf]

Evolution is scientific conclusion, not science. Evolution is based on a conclusion of what evidence is presented to support it requiring an opinion, an interpretation of what the evidence under scrutiny is supposed to represent. It may be science to produce the evidence in question but as far as conjucture, conclusion and supposition is concerned scientific conclusion does not make the pursued assumption a fact.

 

[mhess13]

BTW- happy b-day beowulf.
I hope you went out to the polls on your b-day!

 

[GodSaves]

Happy Birthday Beowulf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[GodSaves]

I was talking with my Pastor and he told me about a morning news show he watched a bit ago. They had a leading science who is an advocate for evolution. He was asked that since he was doing alot of work in that field if he thought it was good science. He replied no, he didn't think it was good science. Further more he said that the only reason why they continue with it is because the alternative is unthinkable.

I have read another quote by another scientists who has said something similiar to the above.

A Ph.D professor in Hebraic and Cognate Studies did research on Genesis to see if it was to be read as poetry. He compared it to many ancient hebrew poetry, comparing the verbs and such. His conclusion is that the writer of Genesis did not intend anyone to read it as poetry. He then did more research to compare it to narrative writing and concluded that the writer of Genesis intended the book to be read literally.

It was a very extensive study, using numerous comparisons of other writings dating about the time of the book of Genesis from Hebrew writers. It was very interesting.

 

[TwinCrier]

"While talking to the leader of the expedition, I happened to mention in passing that I felt uncomfortable referring to the stuff we were digging as rock. She replied that she knew exactly what I meant. She used to call it sediment, but a more senior professor rebuked her saying, it can’t be sediment because it is 75 million years old. Since she really believes it is 75 million years old, she doesn’t call it sediment anymore. Isn’t it interesting that a preconceived interpretation can affect the description of data?"

http://www.ridgenet.net/~do_while/sage/v4i1f.htm

Facinating page! You may want to post that in the Origins Theology forum to have all the TE's take a look. Although it seems most of them peek in here daily anyhow.

 

[TwinCrier]

And the leading Creationist organization, Answers in Genesis, includes this argument in it's list of arguments Creationists should not use:

‘The phrase “science falsely so called” in 1 Timothy 6:20 (KJV) refers to evolution.’ To develop a Scriptural model properly, we must understand what the author intended to communicate to his intended audience, which in turn is determined by the grammar and historical context. We must not try to read into Scripture that which appears to support a particular viewpoint. The original Greek word translated ‘science’ is gnosis, and in this context refers to the élite esoteric ‘knowledge’ that was the key to the mystery religions, which later developed into the heresy of Gnosticism. This was not an error by the KJV translators, but an illustration of how many words have changed their meanings over time. The word ‘science’ originally meant ‘knowledge’, from the Latin scientia, from scio meaning ‘know’. This original meaning is just not the way it is used today, so modern translations correctly render the word as ‘knowledge’ in this passage.

I'm glad to see you peruse creation sites, even if it is just to get ammunition to use agains YEC, however, that science is separate from knowledge, I agree. That the latin scientia was mistranslated though I will have to disagree. The word science is practically spelled out, and while science may be wrong, knowledge is truth. The bible doesn't call knowledge false.

 

[Micaiah]

"While talking to the leader of the expedition, I happened to mention in passing that I felt uncomfortable referring to the stuff we were digging as rock. She replied that she knew exactly what I meant. She used to call it sediment, but a more senior professor rebuked her saying, it can’t be sediment because it is 75 million years old. Since she really believes it is 75 million years old, she doesn’t call it sediment anymore. Isn’t it interesting that a preconceived interpretation can affect the description of data?"

http://www.ridgenet.net/~do_while/sage/v4i1f.htm

Hey, I checked out that site you gave as a reference. I liked the way they write the articles. Here is one quote that made me chuckle:

There are only two documented cases of inanimate objects coming to life.

• Pinocchio
• Frosty the Snowman

Most scientists consider these two reports to be false.

 

[versastyle]

Just so we are all clear on this. No one should call evolution OR creationism science. They both are born on ad hocs.

They are studies of history and BOTH have their unfalsifiable claims.

 

[mhess13]

Just so we are all clear on this. No one should call evolution OR creationism science. They both are born on ad hocs.

They are studies of history and BOTH have their unfalsifiable claims.

Ok! Since evolution is NOT science can we at least get it out of the classroom and out of the textbooks and stop using tax $$ to support it's propaganda in museums?

 

[mark kennedy]

2Ti 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Amen!

 

[versastyle]

Ok! Since evolution is NOT science can we at least get it out of the classroom and out of the textbooks and stop using tax $$ to support it's propaganda in museums?

Well it should be taught as a proposed idea alone, but evolutionary concepts have not been disproven, so unfortunately it is the only acceptable way to discuss origins at this point.

YECism however, scientifically and logically, has been disproven for a long time.