Originally posted by Halitose [b]But when Christians choose to fight worldly fights utilizing wordly(sic??) weapons, and moreover, choosing to do so over and against waging the true spiritual battle, it is stultifying.
If you are saying science is a "worldly weapon", I couldn't disagree with you more. Johannes Kepler, one of the great "founding fathers" in astronomy and mathemati ...[text shortened]... e method of experimentation.
IMO science and Christianity are perfectly compatible.[/b]
Originally posted by KellyJay Both deal with truth and faith.
Kelly
Only you religicos say that science deals in faith, it seems to me that either you are using a different meaning of the word when you use it to describe what a scientist believes about science than you are when you use it to describe a religious belief, that really makes your usage a fallacy of four terms.
like this one is:
"A poor lesson is better than a good lesson because a poor lesson is better than nothing, and nothing is better than a good lesson."
Originally posted by frogstomp Only you religicos say that science deals in faith, it seems to me that either you are using a different meaning of the word when you use it to describe what a scientist believes about science than you are when you use it to describe a religious belief, that really makes your usage a fallacy of four terms.
The purpose of equating science with religious faith is far more sinister. This is an attempt to devalue science itself while establishing a baseline which can be used (dishonestly) in debate.
Claiming that science is equal to faith allows an individual to say that the theory of evolution and creationism are on equal evidentiary footing, for example, and that both are simply beliefs.
Originally posted by Churlant The purpose of equating science with religious faith is far more sinister. This is an attempt to devalue science itself while establishing a baseline which can be used (dishonestly) in debate.
Claiming that science is equal to faith allows an individual to say that the theory of evolution and creationism are on equal evidentiary footing, for example, and that both are simply beliefs.
Originally posted by FreakyKBH And we all know TOE really doesn't rate.
Except with the vast majority of scientists in dozens of related disciplines, of course. Must we really start this particular argument? The point here isn't to yet again bicker over TOE itself, but to show that any scientific process can be far-too-easily dismissed by claiming it is all only "faith".
Originally posted by FreakyKBH [b]Why do you think there is no logic for their bother? (bother?) I used 'bother' because it seems to most fit for the activities that said atheists/agnostics busy themselves with in this forum, and (it can be assumed from the posts) in their lives.
Why make a claim if there is nothing to make a claim about? If, in the course of a conversation, so ...[text shortened]... whether you are being amusingly sarcastic, or deluded and arrogant.[/b]
You and me both.[/b]
FSM proponents aren't trying to control governments.
Originally posted by FreakyKBH [b]What if you were surrounded by FSM promoters, and FSM worship buildings were on nearly every street corner? In a sense, Christianity has lost civilization already, and the situation you describe is in full swing. For instance, as in my post regarding worldly weapons, the vocal majority of Christianity has it so wrong that it hurts. When I see the But, I have learned that not all battles can be won, nor should they be fought.[/b]
While you of course, are the lucky one who knows the REAL truth. Or is it because you are just better than the rest of us?
Originally posted by AThousandYoung While you of course, are the lucky one who knows the REAL truth. Or is it because you are just better than the rest of us?
Yeah , he does know the real truth, I told it to him in my thread "the Ox Goad god"
Originally posted by FreakyKBH By way of example, there is much dissention in the evolution camp, but the dissenters are immediately written off as wingnuts, regardless of their bodies of work and their previous contributions.
Wrong. If they can substantiate their work it passes into the literature. It's only when they make baseless assertions, such as your friend Behe, that they discredit themselves.
Originally posted by frogstomp Only you religicos say that science deals in faith, it seems to me that either you are using a different meaning of the word when you use it to describe what a scientist believes about science than you are when you use it to describe a religious belief, that really makes your usage a fallacy of four terms.
like this one is:
"A poo ...[text shortened]... esson because a poor lesson is better than nothing, and nothing is better than a good lesson."
Kelly has not, despite my numerous posts on the subject, got it into his head that his definition of "believe" (based on his "gut feeling"😉 and a scientists definition of believe (based on empirical evidence) are entirely different. Same as the popular usage / scientific usage of the word "theory".
Originally posted by scottishinnz Kelly has not, despite my numerous posts on the subject, got it into his head that his definition of "believe" (based on his "gut feeling"😉 and a scientists definition of believe (based on empirical evidence) are entirely different. Same as the popular usage / scientific usage of the word "theory".
Kelly will never understand this.
His thick head still thinks that Science and religion "Both deal with truth and faith.".
He does not realise that Science = Truth (or at least the empirical search for it)
and
religion = Faith (Where empirical evidence is ignored,e.g. dinosaur bones).
Originally posted by AThousandYoung While you of course, are the lucky one who knows the REAL truth. Or is it because you are just better than the rest of us?
We aren't lucky, we're blessed. Sorry, but I couldn't resist pulling some o' dat ol' time language out of my you-know-where.
I'm not sure what criteria you're using for 'better than.' If, by 'better than,' you mean, 'better off,' I'd say I agree with you.
Originally posted by frogstomp Yeah , he does know the real truth, I told it to him in my thread "the Ox Goad god"
Enough of your shameless advertising for an inferior thread. The reason no one is responding to the thread is because it has exceeded the threshold of lameness.
Rational Proofs
24 Jun '06 15:49
Back to Top