Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum ⇒ Social and Religious Issues ⇒ Faith and Belief ⇒

Which came first: the young earth, or the inerrant scripture?

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Which came first: the young earth, or the inerrant scripture?
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1373 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 4 of 161 (236658)
08-25-2005 1:30 AM 		Reply to: Message 1 by Silent H
06-27-2005 6:21 AM

inerrancy comes first.
​
i don't think anyone convers, then is presented with a load to scientific evidence and is unbiased because of faith reasons. people convert because of faith, not evidence.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Silent H, posted 06-27-2005 6:21 AM Silent H has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1373 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 6 of 161 (236665)
08-25-2005 2:11 AM 		Reply to: Message 5 by ringo
08-25-2005 2:00 AM

also a good point.
​
i was interested in dinosaurs at a young age, as a lot of people my age were. but i was interested in them on a very technical level. i researched a lot of paleontology. i took classes, hung out with paleontologists, and just generally learned everything i could get my hands on.
​
when i became a christian, and i started hearing creationist rhetoric about "no evolution" and "young earth" and all of that stuff, my immediate reaction was (at the age of 13), "you're full of shit. i know better than that."
​
This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 08-25-2005 02:11 AM
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by ringo, posted 08-25-2005 2:00 AM ringo has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by cavediver, posted 08-25-2005 5:08 AM arachnophilia has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1373 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 86 of 161 (237498)
08-26-2005 5:46 PM 		Reply to: Message 84 by Chiroptera
08-26-2005 5:17 PM

Re: Hoaryhead Answers Detractors
far beit from me to agree with this guy, but i'm fairly certain most people classify mathematics with sciences. for instance, at the university, the math department is in a building called "science and engineering" which is next to "physical sciences" which used to occupy the same building.
​
in the library of congress system, sciences are all Q's, QA is math, QB is cosmology, QC is physics.
​
however, the people around the math department tend to say things like "mathematics is the only true religion."
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Chiroptera, posted 08-26-2005 5:17 PM Chiroptera has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Nuggin, posted 08-27-2005 7:33 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1373 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 88 of 161 (237501)
08-26-2005 5:50 PM 		Reply to: Message 85 by Rahvin
08-26-2005 5:43 PM

Re: Why cannot men add to 160?
Science includes biochemistry, physics, astronomy, etc. Not math.
​
again, i hate to point this out, but physics is math. calculus, generally creditted to newton, was devised entirely to deal with real world problems, regarding things like falling bodies.
​
Mathematics does not concern experimental observations, theories, or falsifications.
​
math does indeed deal with theories and falsifications. proof by reduction to absurdity is a good method of falsifaction, for instance.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Rahvin, posted 08-26-2005 5:43 PM Rahvin has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Nuggin, posted 08-27-2005 7:37 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1373 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 115 of 161 (238019)
08-28-2005 4:01 PM 		Reply to: Message 107 by Nuggin
08-27-2005 7:33 PM

Re: Hoaryhead Answers Detractors
I would suggest this has more to do with math's relationship to engineering.
​
don't tell that to a mathematician. they won't like you very much. aroudn the department, they spend hours making fun of the stupid engineering students, and how engineers just build stuff like mousetrap cars.
​
Besides, which building it's located doesn't make much difference. When I was in college the Anthro dept was under the library and the Gym and Art dept shared a building.
​
yeah, but this isn't the same thing. this is a fairly large college. even if you look at one of the largest math departments, such as waterloo which has its own 5-story math building, it's grouped with things like computer science.
​
If you ask a man on the street, is math a science, they'd probably say yes. This is because math seems more "science-like" than, say, French.
​
math is the language of science.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Nuggin, posted 08-27-2005 7:33 PM Nuggin has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1373 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 116 of 161 (238020)
08-28-2005 4:04 PM 		Reply to: Message 108 by Nuggin
08-27-2005 7:37 PM

Re: Why cannot men add to 160?
Let me ask you this Arach, is English science?
​
no, of course not.
​
but english:technical writing::math:science.
​
one is the application of the first's language. and in cases like newtonian physics it's completely inseparable from the math. newtonian mechanics is calculus.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Nuggin, posted 08-27-2005 7:37 PM Nuggin has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024