Can we even proof scientifically that George Washington ever lived? I mean sure we can go and dig his grave up, but wouldn't that be historically?
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
scientifically or historically?
- Thread starter jjoel
- Start date
JohnR7
Well-Known Member
There is a record in the DNA. But you would have to put the historical account together with the DNA results. Some of the very best genologys are in the Bible, that is why the Mormons at BYU in Provo, Utah are putting the historical account together with the scientifice DNA account to come up with a family tree for all 6 billion of us. Someday you maybe able to type your family name into the computer and get a genology record of everyone in your family back to the very first "Adam" & "Eve".
They ran a DNA test on the decendants of Jefferson, to find out if he really did have children with a servant of his at the time.
Upvote
0
LewisWildermuth
Senior Veteran
Prove? As in 100% knowlege?
No, science cannot do that. Science can raise something beyond a reasonable doubt. Nothing can ever be proven to a 100% level since we cannot even prove that we exist.
Upvote
0
LewisWildermuth
Senior Veteran
That'sabout it, but even then math and logic can get a little fuzzy when it starts to get complex.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
Good point. Historical studies are not, strictly speaking, part of science. Even if you get DNA from the body, you are relying on the historical documents that the body really is that of George Washington. BTW, we still have artifacts associated with George that we can all look at: his teeth, sword, house, wig, etc.
However, what makes George so important is what he did in his life, and that comes down to us two ways: consequences of his actions and accounts of his actions by others. For instance, we have an account that several of his officers pushed George to become king. We have accounts of George reading his farewell address to his troops, where George totally quashed the plot. We also have the consequence that the US is not a kingdom. Between those two we infer/conclude that the event happened.
Upvote
0
sure, but you might think about waking up too. there's always the chance that nobody detected a football-size meteorite falling through the atmosphere and smashing through your roof right where you stand up when you get out of bed.
some things you just gotta take for granted.
Upvote
0
JohnR7
Well-Known Member
Unless God has told you otherwise. There is no promise of our next breath or our next heartbeat.
We recently had one of our singers die. He had a very deep voice and that is hard to find. They just had to find people to replace him as best as they could.
His wife was talking to him on the phone and he was fine. They made plans to go see his mom. When she got home three hours later, she found that he had gone on to be with the Lord.
Of course he is better off than we are. He just went on ahead of us. We will all make it there in God's timing.
Upvote
0
LewisWildermuth
Senior Veteran
Well, yes... And your problem with that is?
Life is a risk, it wouldn't be much fun if it wasn't.
Science is ideas in humans minds, so is the interpretation of the Bible, and even the writing and translation of the Bible.
Since these are all done by man, they all are subject to error.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
In terms of positive theories, what you say about certainty and science is correct. While we scientists often loosely speak of "proving" this or that theory, that is shorthand for saying "we have falsified all the alternative hypotheses we can think of".
However, what science can absolutely do is falsify. Thus we know with 100% certainty that the earth is not flat. Because we have falsified a flat earth. Similarly, we know with 100% certainty that each species was not specially created and that there never was a world-wide flood.
Now, every search for truth begins with assumptions. And all searches for truth, whether theological or scientific, begin with the two assumptions:
1. I exist.
2. I am sane.
The second is necessary in order to trust what your senses tell you, since personal experience is the basis of all knowledge. Science and Judeo-Christian theology each also depend on 5 other assumptions about the character of the universe: rational, accessible, contingent, objective, and unified.
Upvote
0
LewisWildermuth
Senior Veteran
That is true... Thank you for adding it, I didn't think about the falsification side when I posted that since I was answering a positive side question. But you are quite right, Science can falsify to 100%
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
I know. The original poster used "proving 100%". That is how most people look at science and, quite frankly, we scientists are partly to blame for our imprecise language to the news media, who immediately publish it.
The reason I emphasize falsification so much and every chance I get is because the discussion usually tends to focus on supporting evidence, particularly that evolution is "proved". What gets buried when that happens is that creationism is falsified. Once a theory is falsified by data that can't be there if the theory were true, then that is the end for the theory. It doesn't matter how much evidence "for" the theory you find. The theory is false and always will remain false.
So, no matter how much evidence "for" a young earth or a flood or "problems" for evolution creationists post, it doesn't matter. Creationism is still falsified and remains so. Creationism is a dead scientific theory, just like flat earth or geocentrism are dead scientific theories. And science is unlike Christian theology: the dead don't come back to life.
Upvote
0
JohnR7
Well-Known Member
The "dead do not come back to life" because science has redefined what it means to be dead. People are resuscitated all the time. That means to restore life.
To say that "Creationism is a dead" is simply narrow minded thinking. To say that the young earth theory has been "falsified" is one thing. But creationism is made up of a LOT more then just one little theory. There is still a creator and there is still a creation. There are always going to be popluar theorys that attempt to explain the relationship between creator and creation.
I do not mean always in terms of eternity, because when we step into eternity then we shall know as we are known.
1 Cor. 13:11-12 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. [12] For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.
Mark 10:15 Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it."
If you do not have the understanding of a child, then you can in no way be mature. But I guess that is another subject.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
We need to get some terms straight here. Creationism and creation are two different things. Creation is a theological assertion that there is a Creator and that the universe is its creation. As you say, there are theories explaining the relationship between creator and creation. These are scientific theories because they propose a mechanism for the how of creation.
Creationism is one such scientific theory. It proposes, in essence, that deity formed each species and placed it on the planet in its present form. All forms of creationism -- from YEC to ID -- have that claim. Creationism has been falsified.
Now, evolution is also a scientific theory of the how of creation. It can be, and most Christians do, view evolution as how deity created.
I stand by my statement: creationism has been falsified. And falsified theories do not come back to life.
CREATION has not been falsified. But it is the confusion between the two that generates a lot of the discussion on the board, as some Christians mistakenly fear that evolution denies creation.
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, The Religious Aspects of Evolution, 2d ed. 1890, pg 68.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
John, any doubt that the earth is not flat? That is a falsification of the theory that the earth is flat.
How is this done? Simple. True statements can't have false consequences. Thus, assume that the statement "the earth is flat" is true. If that were true, then shadows cast by the sun at two places exactly north and south of each other at the same time will have the same angle. Erasthones checked this deduction about 300 BC and found that the shadows were not at the same angle. Therefore, since the statement "the earth is flat" had a false consequence, then the statement is false.
This is where creationism becomes as much a danger to science as militant atheism. Faced with refutation of favored theories, creationists eventually have to deny the entire process of science fails to yield truth or reliable results. Which is just what you have done here, John.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
