"How could you believe that?"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-12-2012, 10:05 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
(07-12-2012 09:03 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(07-12-2012 08:57 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  OEC may have found a way to reconcile dinosaurs with their faith, but they have not found a way to reconcile it with what we know about reality and nature. This is why OEC, ECs, and TCs, don't have the support of science. They tack on something extra and unnecessary to the end of it to "reconcile" it with their faith.

As Laplace said to Napoleon when presenting him with his model for the Solar System
"[Sire,] je n'ai pas eu besoin de cette hypoth├Ęse."

Sire, I had no need of that hypothesis.
What's a TC?

Anyway, ECs and TEs do have the support of science. They follow science as much as any atheist. The only difference is that they believe God authored evolution.
No, just no.
"God authored evolution" is not a scientific concept, so no, they don't follow science as much as any atheist.

This is a real problem in your understanding.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2012, 10:07 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
(07-12-2012 09:03 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(07-12-2012 08:57 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  OEC may have found a way to reconcile dinosaurs with their faith, but they have not found a way to reconcile it with what we know about reality and nature. This is why OEC, ECs, and TCs, don't have the support of science. They tack on something extra and unnecessary to the end of it to "reconcile" it with their faith.

As Laplace said to Napoleon when presenting him with his model for the Solar System
"[Sire,] je n'ai pas eu besoin de cette hypoth├Ęse."

Sire, I had no need of that hypothesis.
What's a TC?

Anyway, ECs and TEs do have the support of science. They follow science as much as any atheist. The only difference is that they believe God authored evolution.
You said the opposite here.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2012, 10:09 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
(07-12-2012 10:07 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(07-12-2012 09:03 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  What's a TC?

Anyway, ECs and TEs do have the support of science. They follow science as much as any atheist. The only difference is that they believe God authored evolution.
You said the opposite here.
No I didn't.

I blatantly said that they follow science.

They reconcile an unanswerable question with theology; however, it doesn't affect science.

The science and theology is kept separate.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2012, 10:13 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
"Anyway, ECs and TEs do have the support of science."


No, evolution has the support of science. The Big Bang has the support of science. The propositions that make someone a TE or EC are not. Ergo, they are not supported by science.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
07-12-2012, 10:14 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
(07-12-2012 10:09 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  The science and theology is kept separate.
What? If you propose that god "authored" evolution, you're not keeping theology and science separate; you're mixing them together.

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
07-12-2012, 10:27 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
(07-12-2012 10:13 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  "Anyway, ECs and TEs do have the support of science."


No, evolution has the support of science. The Big Bang has the support of science. The propositions that make someone a TE or EC are not. Ergo, they are not supported by science.
Oh, sorry misunderstanding.

I was saying that ECs and TEs have the support of science in their terms of understanding.

I wasn't saying that science backs the theological claims of them. I was saying that they claim science as understood by nature and... well... science.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2012, 10:29 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
(07-12-2012 10:14 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(07-12-2012 10:09 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  The science and theology is kept separate.
What? If you propose that god "authored" evolution, you're not keeping theology and science separate; you're mixing them together.
Fine line, but no.

Much like faith, it's filling in the unanswerable questions with answers. Science is based on empirical evidence that can be tested again and again. That claim cannot be proved through science; thus, it becomes a theological claim.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2012, 10:29 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
Alright, I buy that they accept evolution and other science claims before tacking on a nonscientific principle onto the end of it.

I have friends in the geosciences that do the same thing. Still scientists, but believe something outside of it that isn't science that they use as a justification for their beliefs.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
07-12-2012, 10:32 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
(07-12-2012 10:29 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Alright, I buy that they accept evolution and other science claims before tacking on a nonscientific principle onto the end of it.

I have friends in the geosciences that do the same thing. Still scientists, but believe something outside of it that isn't science that they use as a justification for their beliefs.
Honestly, if you didn't know someone was an EC or TE, you probably couldn't tell that they believed in God if you're discussing science.

Take a look at biologos.com and see what I mean.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2012, 10:32 AM
RE: "How could you believe that?"
I agree with Vosur, it is mixing it at some level (fine line or not).

If it is an unanswerable question, then there can be no known answer, which is why science does not mix it into the equation. When someone else does this, they are mixing science and something else (in this case faith). Even if they admit that this is a theological speculation, they are still mixing them. Do they think that the science bolsters their claim or that their claim bolsters that made by science? Or both? The answer to all 3 is that it is indifferent because the answer to the question is not known or knowable and any attempt to answer it is irrelevant.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: