Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by mandym, Feb 10, 2012.
Nope. Definitely disagree.
Something to disagree about in every paragraph.
I suspect your disagreements are philosophical, and not scientific.
the Bible and science will not be in conflict, as it IS the inspired/infallible word of theLord!
When it aapears to be in disagreement, its due to faulty interpretation of the biblical text, and/or faulty presumptions/wrong interpretation of the scientific facts!
But of course, this was presented as a philosophical argument after all.
God reveal himself in many ways. He is revealed in scripture and in his creation (Ps 19; Rom. 1:19-20).
One might say that the "special revelation" of scripture is subservient to the "general revelation" on nature but to ignore either is to ignore God's revelation to us.
Science is not knowledge. Bringing up an archaic definition doesn't make it so. One definition of science is "the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment." (Concise Oxford English Dictionary (11th ed.). 2004). To simplify this, science is an attempt to understand the physical world.
Both the physical world and scripture require interpretation.
Both the bible and the physical world can be improperly interpreted.
To pit one form of revelation against another would make God a liar – and he never lies (2 Tim. 2:13; Titus 1:2).
The Galileo affair presents an interesting study of the misunderstanding of scripture in relation to the physical world.
Theologians understood Joshua 10:12-13; Psalm 93:1; 104:19 and Ecclesiastes 1:4,5 (among others) to refer to the earth's immobility.
As evidence grew, theologians had to change the way they understood scripture. Today we are the beneficiaries of this knowledge.
That is one philosophy of science, and completely arbitrary. If the revelation of God is to be understood through the study of the natural world, as you say, then science is indeed drawing theological conclusions. Limiting the study to mere natural processes is to limit science.
Could you expand on what you posted Aaron?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
The definition of science you cited is arbitrary. It's made up.
Well if we can't see eye-to-eye on a basic definition it's not worth pursuing more important ideas.