Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Scripture

logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?
tyler90az
Posts: 971
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 8:40:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

That is true the Bible has been translated many times. It has lost many truths, through many translations. Do not get me wrong the Bible is the word of God, I cherish as such. One of the translators was William Tyndale he said, "If God spare my life, ere many years I will cause a boy that driveth the plough, shall know more of the Scripture than thou dost!" He translated all of the New Testament and some of the Old Testament in English, prior to being burned at the stake. That is significant because Joseph Smith was a farm boy and also a prophet of God.

Like the Bible, The Book of Mormon, another testament of Jesus Christ, is the word of God. The only difference is The Book of Mormon is directly from God. There has been no translations of The Book of Mormon, it is the pure word of God. Joseph Smith said, "the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion." It is the most correct book of any on earth because it has not been trifled with like the Bible.
Today we begin in earnest the work of making sure that the world we leave our children is just a little bit better than the one we inhabit today. - President Obama
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 9:00:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 8:40:25 AM, tyler90az wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

That is true the Bible has been translated many times. It has lost many truths, through many translations. Do not get me wrong the Bible is the word of God, I cherish as such. One of the translators was William Tyndale he said, "If God spare my life, ere many years I will cause a boy that driveth the plough, shall know more of the Scripture than thou dost!" He translated all of the New Testament and some of the Old Testament in English, prior to being burned at the stake. That is significant because Joseph Smith was a farm boy and also a prophet of God.


Like the Bible, The Book of Mormon, another testament of Jesus Christ, is the word of God. The only difference is The Book of Mormon is directly from God. There has been no translations of The Book of Mormon, it is the pure word of God. Joseph Smith said, "the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion." It is the most correct book of any on earth because it has not been trifled with like the Bible.


LOL are you completely goofy? LDS are among the biggest offenders and theologically ignorant of all groups. There is some question of culpability, but none regarding the intention. Your propaganda is goofy, a lie of omission and evil, to any with an operant.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 9:38:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 8:40:25 AM, tyler90az wrote:

Like the Bible, The Book of Mormon, another testament of Jesus Christ, is the word of God. The only difference is The Book of Mormon is directly from God. There has been no translations of The Book of Mormon, it is the pure word of God. Joseph Smith said, "the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion." It is the most correct book of any on earth because it has not been trifled with like the Bible.

According to whom?
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming, resource depletion, Genetically engineered food, and immune suppressive disorders. Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 12:03:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming, resource depletion, Genetically engineered food, and immune suppressive disorders.

Science is nearly a synonym for aquired knowledge. So, your above statement could be rendered "You got to love human knowledge...". The dichotomy is between knowledge and ignorance (or religion, if you like:). Would we be better off knowing or not knowing?

Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.
Actually, there still are working scientist in existence - doing experiments, developing theories, etc.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 3:44:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 12:03:27 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming, resource depletion, Genetically engineered food, and immune suppressive disorders.

Science is nearly a synonym for aquired knowledge. So, your above statement could be rendered "You got to love human knowledge...". The dichotomy is between knowledge and ignorance (or religion, if you like:). Would we be better off knowing or not knowing?

Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.
Actually, there still are working scientist in existence - doing experiments, developing theories, etc.

Nearly right is still wrong. Many are doing many things, all irrelevant to that which is done, known and accepted. No denying the historical Significance of Judeo-christian scripture, regardless of belief. Therefore, it is clear you care not for science as questioning, but rather as proof of your paradigmatic construct.
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 4:17:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 3:44:13 PM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 12:03:27 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming, resource depletion, Genetically engineered food, and immune suppressive disorders.

Science is nearly a synonym for aquired knowledge. So, your above statement could be rendered "You got to love human knowledge...". The dichotomy is between knowledge and ignorance (or religion, if you like:). Would we be better off knowing or not knowing?

Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.
Actually, there still are working scientist in existence - doing experiments, developing theories, etc.

Nearly right is still wrong. Many are doing many things, all irrelevant to that which is done, known and accepted. No denying the historical Significance of Judeo-christian scripture, regardless of belief. Therefore, it is clear you care not for science as questioning, but rather as proof of your paradigmatic construct.

Why do people always have to bring up my paradigmatic construct.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 4:17:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming,

Which a) business, not science, created excess of and b) science proved its existence and applied this knowledge to stop its occurrence, unlike, ironically, faith. Even if you reject a, science solves its own problems.

resource depletion,

Again, business (or life in general), not science. And science meant that resource depletion is slowing down, as we become more efficient.

Genetically engineered food,

Yes, and it's great, it gives loads of food, stopping resource depletion, makes food cheaper, and the danger is equal to normal plants now we've fixed it.

and immune suppressive disorders.

No, God made hereditary diseases. Or evolution. Whatever floats your boat.

Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.

I use it all the time. One of my favourite examples: http://biotech.biology.arizona.edu...

Science cures diseases. Faith hopes things get better. Science has created vaccines, vehicles and medicine. Faith has made prayer and the church bus.
Even faith's biggest achievement, wonders of art, are made of science's paint on science's canvas inventions. Sorry.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2011 5:48:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 4:17:24 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming,

Which a) business, not science, created excess of and b) science proved its existence and applied this knowledge to stop its occurrence, unlike, ironically, faith. Even if you reject a, science solves its own problems.

resource depletion,

Again, business (or life in general), not science. And science meant that resource depletion is slowing down, as we become more efficient.

Genetically engineered food,

Yes, and it's great, it gives loads of food, stopping resource depletion, makes food cheaper, and the danger is equal to normal plants now we've fixed it.

and immune suppressive disorders.

No, God made hereditary diseases. Or evolution. Whatever floats your boat.

Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.

I use it all the time. One of my favourite examples: http://biotech.biology.arizona.edu...

Science cures diseases. Faith hopes things get better. Science has created vaccines, vehicles and medicine. Faith has made prayer and the church bus.
Even faith's biggest achievement, wonders of art, are made of science's paint on science's canvas inventions. Sorry.

Science does not cure a disease it does identify the cause. Antibiotics actually kill bacteria. You silly Faith hopes... is based on the ignorants' understanding f of theology. The belief that science and faith are incomparable is the Faith of the atheist scientist, which is certainly permitted. Over the last 500 years has medical science ever been correct after the fact?
lotus_flower
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2011 8:26:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

the school I used to go to went to that museum. It was completely ridiculous.
"Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it."
- Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
*******************************************************
http://www.bbc.co.uk...
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2011 9:05:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/16/2011 8:26:25 AM, lotus_flower wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

the school I used to go to went to that museum. It was completely ridiculous.

Was it a public school?
lotus_flower
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2011 9:31:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/16/2011 9:05:32 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/16/2011 8:26:25 AM, lotus_flower wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

the school I used to go to went to that museum. It was completely ridiculous.

Was it a public school?

no, a christian school. lol I wrote my EOC English paper on Christopher Hitchens... I failed the coarse.
"Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it."
- Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
*******************************************************
http://www.bbc.co.uk...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2011 9:49:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/15/2011 5:48:41 PM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 4:17:24 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming,

Which a) business, not science, created excess of and b) science proved its existence and applied this knowledge to stop its occurrence, unlike, ironically, faith. Even if you reject a, science solves its own problems.

resource depletion,

Again, business (or life in general), not science. And science meant that resource depletion is slowing down, as we become more efficient.

Genetically engineered food,

Yes, and it's great, it gives loads of food, stopping resource depletion, makes food cheaper, and the danger is equal to normal plants now we've fixed it.

and immune suppressive disorders.

No, God made hereditary diseases. Or evolution. Whatever floats your boat.

Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.

I use it all the time. One of my favourite examples: http://biotech.biology.arizona.edu...

Science cures diseases. Faith hopes things get better. Science has created vaccines, vehicles and medicine. Faith has made prayer and the church bus.
Even faith's biggest achievement, wonders of art, are made of science's paint on science's canvas inventions. Sorry.

Science does not cure a disease it does identify the cause. Antibiotics actually kill bacteria.

Oh, OK. So now we cannot say something which causes an event is not relevant? OK, Manchester United winning the FA cup doesn't have anything to do with them winning matches, nor does Fire have anything to do with London burning.

The scientific method makes a hypothesis, tests it, adjusts if necessary, then repeats until it has got it right. Then it tests it again and again, to make sure. e.g. Scientists test different antibiotics. The antibiotics only slow the bacteria down. Scientists adjust it, as per the scientific method. Then they repeat. Now, saying this isn't science at work is the equivalent of saying there is no capitalism in society, or no politics in society, because they are too specific. Or because scientists do not enact science, in the same way that politicians enact politics

P1 - If science is at work, then the scientific method is used to do things.
P2 - The scientific method is used to do things
C - Therefore, science is at work.

You silly Faith hopes... is based on the ignorants' understanding f of theology. The belief that science and faith are incomparable is the Faith of the atheist scientist, which is certainly permitted. Over the last 500 years has medical science ever been correct after the fact?

What? Has it ever been correct after the fact? What do you mean by that? I suppose saying things like Penicillin working after we've proved it works is not how you meant to word it... Do you mean has science changed it's mind? If so, that means that science is at work. Changing your mind with new information is the basis of science. When new information proves you wrong, then science accepts it. This is good. We then apply the new information, and come up with new solutions.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2011 2:53:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/16/2011 9:49:12 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:48:41 PM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 4:17:24 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming,

Which a) business, not science, created excess of and b) science proved its existence and applied this knowledge to stop its occurrence, unlike, ironically, faith. Even if you reject a, science solves its own problems.

resource depletion,

Again, business (or life in general), not science. And science meant that resource depletion is slowing down, as we become more efficient.

Genetically engineered food,

Yes, and it's great, it gives loads of food, stopping resource depletion, makes food cheaper, and the danger is equal to normal plants now we've fixed it.

and immune suppressive disorders.

No, God made hereditary diseases. Or evolution. Whatever floats your boat.

Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.

I use it all the time. One of my favourite examples: http://biotech.biology.arizona.edu...

Science cures diseases. Faith hopes things get better. Science has created vaccines, vehicles and medicine. Faith has made prayer and the church bus.
Even faith's biggest achievement, wonders of art, are made of science's paint on science's canvas inventions. Sorry.

Science does not cure a disease it does identify the cause. Antibiotics actually kill bacteria.

Oh, OK. So now we cannot say something which causes an event is not relevant? OK, Manchester United winning the FA cup doesn't have anything to do with them winning matches, nor does Fire have anything to do with London burning.

The scientific method makes a hypothesis, tests it, adjusts if necessary, then repeats until it has got it right. Then it tests it again and again, to make sure. e.g. Scientists test different antibiotics. The antibiotics only slow the bacteria down. Scientists adjust it, as per the scientific method. Then they repeat. Now, saying this isn't science at work is the equivalent of saying there is no capitalism in society, or no politics in society, because they are too specific. Or because scientists do not enact science, in the same way that politicians enact politics

P1 - If science is at work, then the scientific method is used to do things.
P2 - The scientific method is used to do things
C - Therefore, science is at work.


You silly Faith hopes... is based on the ignorants' understanding f of theology. The belief that science and faith are incomparable is the Faith of the atheist scientist, which is certainly permitted. Over the last 500 years has medical science ever been correct after the fact?

What? Has it ever been correct after the fact? What do you mean by that? I suppose saying things like Penicillin working after we've proved it works is not how you meant to word it... Do you mean has science changed it's mind? If so, that means that science is at work. Changing your mind with new information is the basis of science. When new information proves you wrong, then science accepts it. This is good. We then apply the new information, and come up with new solutions.

I get it. You know nothing about scripture and little about science. so you go on and on about the little you do know. This is about scripture and scientific disciplines applied, like Literary criticism based on archeological evidence dating the earliest writing to no earlier than 600 bce. Early tribal culture of hunter gatherers.
bigbob91
Posts: 132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2011 4:26:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/16/2011 2:53:37 PM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/16/2011 9:49:12 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:48:41 PM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 4:17:24 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming,

Which a) business, not science, created excess of and b) science proved its existence and applied this knowledge to stop its occurrence, unlike, ironically, faith. Even if you reject a, science solves its own problems.

resource depletion,

Again, business (or life in general), not science. And science meant that resource depletion is slowing down, as we become more efficient.

Genetically engineered food,

Yes, and it's great, it gives loads of food, stopping resource depletion, makes food cheaper, and the danger is equal to normal plants now we've fixed it.

and immune suppressive disorders.

No, God made hereditary diseases. Or evolution. Whatever floats your boat.

Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.

I use it all the time. One of my favourite examples: http://biotech.biology.arizona.edu...

Science cures diseases. Faith hopes things get better. Science has created vaccines, vehicles and medicine. Faith has made prayer and the church bus.
Even faith's biggest achievement, wonders of art, are made of science's paint on science's canvas inventions. Sorry.

Science does not cure a disease it does identify the cause. Antibiotics actually kill bacteria.

Oh, OK. So now we cannot say something which causes an event is not relevant? OK, Manchester United winning the FA cup doesn't have anything to do with them winning matches, nor does Fire have anything to do with London burning.

The scientific method makes a hypothesis, tests it, adjusts if necessary, then repeats until it has got it right. Then it tests it again and again, to make sure. e.g. Scientists test different antibiotics. The antibiotics only slow the bacteria down. Scientists adjust it, as per the scientific method. Then they repeat. Now, saying this isn't science at work is the equivalent of saying there is no capitalism in society, or no politics in society, because they are too specific. Or because scientists do not enact science, in the same way that politicians enact politics

P1 - If science is at work, then the scientific method is used to do things.
P2 - The scientific method is used to do things
C - Therefore, science is at work.


You silly Faith hopes... is based on the ignorants' understanding f of theology. The belief that science and faith are incomparable is the Faith of the atheist scientist, which is certainly permitted. Over the last 500 years has medical science ever been correct after the fact?

What? Has it ever been correct after the fact? What do you mean by that? I suppose saying things like Penicillin working after we've proved it works is not how you meant to word it... Do you mean has science changed it's mind? If so, that means that science is at work. Changing your mind with new information is the basis of science. When new information proves you wrong, then science accepts it. This is good. We then apply the new information, and come up with new solutions.

I get it. You know nothing about scripture and little about science. so you go on and on about the little you do know. This is about scripture and scientific disciplines applied, like Literary criticism based on archeological evidence dating the earliest writing to no earlier than 600 bce. Early tribal culture of hunter gatherers.

You cannot see the truth of the scripture and how it works unless you have a true relationship with Jesus. If your heart is closed you will not see the truth.
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2011 4:30:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/16/2011 9:49:12 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:48:41 PM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 4:17:24 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 12/15/2011 11:01:53 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 12/15/2011 10:48:45 AM, vbaculum wrote:
At 12/15/2011 5:49:13 AM, logicrules wrote:
With all the scholarship of the last century in areas of archeology, anthropology, sociology and other areas of study bearing upon ancient texts, why do so many cling to their own personal reading of poor translations as dogmatic regarding scripture? There is even a museum in Kentucky that teaches garbage to children regarding dinosaurs. Is ignorance a prerequisite to evangelicalism (fundamentalism)?

Religion isn't about getting things right. It's about wishful thinking. Religion isn't science; it's the opposite.

Yes, gotta love science and all the wonders it hath wrought. Global warming,

Which a) business, not science, created excess of and b) science proved its existence and applied this knowledge to stop its occurrence, unlike, ironically, faith. Even if you reject a, science solves its own problems.

resource depletion,

Again, business (or life in general), not science. And science meant that resource depletion is slowing down, as we become more efficient.

Genetically engineered food,

Yes, and it's great, it gives loads of food, stopping resource depletion, makes food cheaper, and the danger is equal to normal plants now we've fixed it.

and immune suppressive disorders.

No, God made hereditary diseases. Or evolution. Whatever floats your boat.

Course no one bother with the scientific method any more, they just promulgate.

I use it all the time. One of my favourite examples: http://biotech.biology.arizona.edu...

Science cures diseases. Faith hopes things get better. Science has created vaccines, vehicles and medicine. Faith has made prayer and the church bus.
Even faith's biggest achievement, wonders of art, are made of science's paint on science's canvas inventions. Sorry.

Science does not cure a disease it does identify the cause. Antibiotics actually kill bacteria.

Oh, OK. So now we cannot say something which causes an event is not relevant? OK, Manchester United winning the FA cup doesn't have anything to do with them winning matches, nor does Fire have anything to do with London burning.

The scientific method makes a hypothesis, tests it, adjusts if necessary, then repeats until it has got it right. Then it tests it again and again, to make sure. e.g. Scientists test different antibiotics. The antibiotics only slow the bacteria down. Scientists adjust it, as per the scientific method. Then they repeat. Now, saying this isn't science at work is the equivalent of saying there is no capitalism in society, or no politics in society, because they are too specific. Or because scientists do not enact science, in the same way that politicians enact politics

P1 - If science is at work, then the scientific method is used to do things.
P2 - The scientific method is used to do things
C - Therefore, science is at work.


You silly Faith hopes... is based on the ignorants' understanding f of theology. The belief that science and faith are incomparable is the Faith of the atheist scientist, which is certainly permitted. Over the last 500 years has medical science ever been correct after the fact?

What? Has it ever been correct after the fact? What do you mean by that? I suppose saying things like Penicillin working after we've proved it works is not how you meant to word it... Do you mean has science changed it's mind? If so, that means that science is at work. Changing your mind with new information is the basis of science. When new information proves you wrong, then science accepts it. This is good. We then apply the new information, and come up with new solutions.

You may say, or write, whatever you like, and I shall have the same prerogative. You should remember the adage, better to remain silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. I think you may fancy yourself quite the genius, supported by the sycophants you permit to be your friends. You are not. It is obvious that what you do not know exceeds what you know by a great margin. It is equally obvious that you do not know that you do not know.

In every period an earlier period was proved WRONG regarding science, the post modern is no different. A short list, Blood letting, dratfs, rest after heart event, antibiotic use...the list is legion. Thus, it is reasonable to infer that current minions of man, are equally wrong in their faith.