What Science is NOT

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:

The problem with prophecies (Chara) is that they can be used to support religious views you probably do not subscribe to. I can think of Mormon prophecies that appear to have come to pass.

​

[This message has been edited by gene90, 11-14-2002]

---

Gene,I'm pretty ignorant of Mormons, I thought they were a "simply" a christian sect, what Mormon prophecies are unique to that particular faith but not the rest of christianity?Thanks,Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

Administrators of the LDS church are considered living prophets. Also, The Doctrine and Covenants has what is thought to be a prophecy foretelling the US Civil War, and the World Wars.ScripturesNeedless to say this is always a hot topic between members and critics. And of course, now it is interpretation after the fact!Of course, it's all very circumstantial. I don't think you can use a prophecy to prove a religion is correct. I think Nostradamus got very close a couple of times but I don't believe he had any prophetic abilities.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chara:

I think you read something into my statement that wasn't there .... I said that the prophecy had not been completely fulfilled. There is no "yet" there. I think you expected me to say "yet". I promised that I would not bring that "argument" to this thread.

​

---

Well, that being the case, sorry. The phrase 'had not been completely fullfulled' implies to me a holdout, but I guess I misunderstood.------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

Gene,Thanks for the info.Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chara:

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:

​

The point is, unless you set specific criterion ahead of time to test your theory that the Bible is inspired by God, all you are ever doing is interpreting after the fact.

---

​

quote:

---

Specific criterion, in this case would be?

---

I dunno. This is your experiment, so go ahead and pick something.

quote:

---

Prophecies used must be exact,understandable, written before the event, and have come true just as they said they would?

---

Yup.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chara: There is no time limit on the Scientific Method is there?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:
No. The limitation on the scientific method is in the reliability of results.

​

I mean, you could use the scientific method to try to make a free energy machine, as many have done over the years, but at some point it is realized by most reasonable people that it just is not likely to happen.

---

quote:

---

The point being though is that we need to recognize that Science is always evolving when new data presents itself or we realize that we have misinterpreted the data?

---

Absolutely.

quote:

---

And in reference to bible prophecy, we can't close the book on the possibility that it is the Word of God. Would that not be a reasonable conclusion?

---

Why would you scientifically consider the Bible to be the word of God unless you had positive evidence?

quote:

---

the present discussion, can the bible be proven to be the word of God, probably can never be proven by this methodology... why? because, as the bible says (paraphrasing here), those who don't want to see (use inductive and/or deductive logic) won't see... they "hide the truth" from themselves... this means that the logic steps might be left out or denied...

---

LOL! Logic steps "left out" is not the problem.The insistance on seeing "magic" where there is none in order to make Bible stories come true is often the problem. [QUOTE]i noticed someone's signature about occam's razor... it always struck me as kinda funny that a lot of people say they (rightly so) believe in the truth of that, yet when it comes to questions of faith they tend to go the other way... if the simplest explanation which accounts for all the facts is usually the right one, how can anyone deny the existence of a creator? oh well, think i'll read some more[/B][/QUOTE]"Simplistic" is not the same as "simple"."Godidit" is a simplistic, catch-all answer which doesn't account for the facts.

quote:

---

Does this shatter my belief that the Bible is the Word of God? No, because the conclusions of science are always tentative.

---

This seems a strange couple of sentences.I would have expected the first to be followed by something like, "No, because the Bible speaks to how to become closer to God and how to live a good life. It's power is not in perfect historical or scientific accuracy, but in the life lessons it teaches." [QUOTE]The Word of God, and the truth found in it affect everything in my life. I don't want to base my life on something as tentative as science. [/B][/QUOTE]You do base much of your life on science, though. The fact that science is tentative allows it to be non-dogmatic and to correct itself. This is one reason why science is so very, very powerful and useful. Another reason science works so well is because it compensates for all of the illogical and irrational thinking that we humans are so prone to.

Chara,http://EvC Forum: What Science is NOT -->EvC Forum: What Science is NOT

quote:

---

Does this shatter my belief that the Bible is the Word of God? No, because the conclusions of science are always tentative. The Word of God, and the truth found in it affect everything in my life. I don't want to base my life on something as tentative as science.

---

When you provide your objective, deductive reasoning for belief in the bible, you may want to factor in the fact that Ezeks Tyre prophecy was wrong (there are people living there today). Not unvalidated, but wrong. How can you place faith in ANY of the bible when it gets things so spectacularly wrong?Please.Thanks,Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.[This message has been edited by mark24, 11-16-2002]

Chara may have promised to say the prophesy has not yet been fulfilled but i didn't. If you read the whole thing the prophesy is not supposed to be completely fulfilled until the end.Ezekiel 26
19 "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: When I make you a desolate city, like cities no longer inhabited, and when I bring the ocean depths over you and its vast waters cover you, 20 then I will bring you down with those who go down to the pit, to the people of long ago. I will make you dwell in the earth below, as in ancient ruins, with those who go down to the pit, and you will not return or take your place [1] in the land of the living. 21 I will bring you to a horrible end and you will be no more. You will be sought, but you will never again be found, declares the Sovereign LORD .""THEN I will bring you down with those who go down to the pit"this is at the end, not yet happened, not YET fulfilled.so i guess not a good example of fulfilled prophesy. YET------------------
saved by grace

Funk,This is a retreat to an untestable position, the prophecy, & any others like it are utterly worthless for testing the validity of the bible.Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

Science is not the way to "prove" God exists. You are all very right on that point. How can a being with limited forms of expression describe divinity? Even if you saw God how would you tell other people what he looks like what he's like and so on? You can't. There is no form of expression in humanity to encompass anything more than a vague description of God. Only divinity could possibly describe and explain divinity. Only God can show you who he is. Only God can prove he exists. Maybe try asking God to reveal himself to you. Science is only a little part of God's creation. Therefore science is good. Used against God's will it is wrong. All evil is the pursuit of good in the wrong way. Good gone rotten so to speak. So what is science not? Science is not the way to "prove" God exists. I guess in some cases God may decide to use science to reveal himself to some people. But is NOT the way to prove God. It is like trying to measure the size of the universe with a standard ruler. I would respond to whatever it is that Mark has posted but for some reason my post before this one and Mark's are not showing right now.------------------
saved by grace

Funky,

quote:

---

Science is not the way to "prove" God exists

---

We are talking about an extant entity, so please describe a BETTER method than one that involves a testable hypthesis, positive supporting evidence, & potential falsifications, to demonstrate that that entity potentially exists. When describing your evidence, please take care to omit clear subjectives in support of your claim.Mark------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

I presented a better method of proving God exists. Asking him to show you personally. God has the advantage of not having language barriers, of being able to clearly and efficiently communicate. Even better he created you knows the # of hairs on your head and every thought before you think it. I'm sure he could find a very personal and efficient way to show you he is there. A unique custom designed way of communication for you in particular.
Man through science cannot cover the broad spectrum that is God he encompasses more than we can fathom on our own understanding. So this test is doomed to fail every time. Not for the lack of evidence but the lack of real wisdom and understanding to use it.
So my only other method is to appeal to God himself for the wisdom and understanding needed to know he exists.------------------
saved by grace

quote:

---

Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
I'm sure he could find a very personal and efficient way to show you he is there.

---

But he hasn't.I shall wait for the standard answer now.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

This is a retreat to an untestable position, the prophecy, & any others like it are utterly worthless for testing the validity of the bible.

​

Mark

---

This is not a retreat, merely a statement that says prophesy is not the way to prove God. I don't subscribe to subjecting God to such a small and limited process. And having it seen said above that the prophesy was wrong i thought i'd correct that statement. It was not wrong and is unfolding as fortold by zeke. To show that it has thus far been accurate does not discredit the prophesy, moreover it would give some credibility to zeke. Again I agree this was a flawed way of "proving" the existance of God. I think Chara is just trying to find a way of communicating with people that think much differently than she does. Trying to come into your way of thinking to speak with you. I give her alot of credit for attempting such a thing, the rest of us do not do this. We stay in our own little boxes and refuse to move.------------------
saved by grace