27 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerThe fact that science has done a stunningly good job of explaining many, many natural phenomena, and has helped us correctly and repeatably predict the requirements for the construction and use of many, many technologies that make use of those natural phenomena, makes many people sure that science is superior to the Bible as a tool for understanding the world we live in.
See:http://www.bibleandscience.com/science/bibleandscience.htm
What makes you so sure that science needs to be able to explain everything? Is science not simply human effort? What makes you sure that science is superior to the Bible? Can science explain everything?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by PBE6Why do you think that the Bible and science don't go together?
The fact that science has done a stunningly good job of explaining many, many natural phenomena, and has helped us correctly and repeatably predict the requirements for the construction and use of many, many technologies that make use of those natural phenomena, makes many people sure that science is superior to the Bible as a tool for understanding the world we live in.
27 Jun 05
1 edit
Originally posted by dj2beckerI didn't necessarily say that they don't go together (meaning that they are incompatible, contradictory and mutually exclusive). But I will say dogma and science don't go together.
Why do you think that the Bible and science don't go together?
The Bible relies on dogma to explain the "how", "what" and "why" of the world. Science relies on experimentation, observation, and methodical corroboration of evidence to provide proof of the "how", "what" and even the "why" of the world. I included "why" here because philosophy, while not a "hard science", uses the same principles to arrive at solutions.
The scientific method is far more useful than the dogmatic "method" in this regard, because the scientific method constantly challenges conclusions with a burden of proof, ensuring that weak and/or incorrect conclusions are eventually elimitated when they cannot stand up to scrutiny. The dogmatic method assumes the correctness of many conclusions based on tradition, references to texts assumed to be infallable, heresay, and other less than rigorous techniques, and does not challenge conclusions once they are established.
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by PBE6Do you think it is possible for thoughts or ideas within the community
I didn't necessarily say that they don't go together (meaning that they are incompatible, contradictory and mutually exclusive). But I will say dogma and science don't go together.
The Bible relies on dogma to explain the "how", "what" and "why" of the world. Science relies on experimentation, observation, and methodical corroboration of evidence ...[text shortened]... her less than rigorous techniques, and does not challenge conclusions once they are established.
of people who work in science to become dogmatic?
Kelly
27 Jun 05
Originally posted by KellyJayYes, it's possible, probable, and even happens from time to time, in the sense that scientists/people can believe something to be true without proper research and proof. However, this is a case of the scientific method not being applied rigorously.
Do you think it is possible for thoughts or ideas within the community
of people who work in science to become dogmatic?
Kelly
Despite the possible validity of some scientific conclusion being taken as dogma, not to challenge the conclusion until it is proved (or similarly, not to revisit the conclusion when new evidence arises which could alter the conclusion), would be wrong. Until something is proved conclusively, it should be considered a hypothesis.
28 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerAre you still searching for a site defending the garbage math in the OP that you dumped upon us? You really are going to have to think for yourself on this one. I suggest you enroll in the "Business Math" course at your college, and we'll see you again in about 3 years.
Why do you think that the Bible and science don't go together?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
28 Jun 05
Originally posted by telerionWhat garbage Math? You are the one that has to defend the statement that DNA has evoloved.
Are you still searching for a site defending the garbage math in the OP that you dumped upon us? You really are going to have to think for yourself on this one. I suggest you enroll in the "Business Math" course at your college, and we'll see you again in about 3 years.
28 Jun 05
1 edit
Originally posted by dj2beckerTaking Genesis as a allegorical parable, like the ones Jesus told, leaves no contradiction at all. So much for reason 1. Reason 2, 3, 4 are all lies. And why don't you ever answer a direct question? You're one of the biggest, most snotnose jerks I've ever had the misfortune to deal with.
Why do you think the Bible and evolution are compatible?
http://www.exchangedlife.com/Creation/compat.shtml
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
28 Jun 05
Originally posted by no1marauderAre you saying that Genisis 1 was not refering to literal 24 hour days?
Taking Genesis as a allegorical parable, like the ones Jesus told, leaves no contradiction at all. So much for reason 1. Reason 2, 3, 4 are all lies. And why don't you ever answer a direct question? You're one of the biggest, most snotnose jerks I've ever had the misfortune to deal with.