Ben, couple of points. First, I am saying it is reasonable to think the Bible is true if you have valid personal experiences to think that.
I agree that you cannot necessarily prove beliefs founded on subjective experience in a scientific debate, but it is worth noting that science is limited by it's technology.
Randman, this is fine, but you're not addressing my point. My point is about objectivity and discussion. Are we using objectivity (things that are observable by anybody) ONLY in our discussion, or are YECs requiring that subjectivity be allowed into the discussion.
When I asked you the question, you suggested that only objective things are being introduced; faith is available to all.
Second, I think some aspects of science are indeed indicating that what was formerly called "spiritual" is a fundamental part of reality, but that's a different thread.
Yes, that's a different thread. I don't see any need for it to be incorporated here at all. It's way outside of what I'm asking about.
Third, I don't really accept the rules of debate as you think in limiting them to "observables." I think to make a scientific claim, that since science is built on observables, it comes into play, but we debate more than science on the forum.
But what we're discussing here is YEC vs. EVO methodologies for empirical investigation. i.e. dealing with observables. So yes, you're right. But not in any way that applies to this thread.
Moreover, even in science, such as string theory, you see a lot of work and discussion way past "observables", based on math which can be loosely called a form of logic, and so I would argue that what is often excluded as philosophical and what is included as real science can at times be a subjective call, and that some open-mindedness is necessary if we are to obtain truth.
That's fine, I agree to some extent. Nevertheless, what is being called "observable" or what is being presented philosophically, etc--as far as it is empirical, it is objective.
My question is about objectivity and it's role in this debate. I'd really appreciate if you go back to my
message 39 and address the thinking there: if you continue to claim that you
are staying within the bounds of objectivity for debating, and you continue to claim that faith is objectively available to all, then you need to back it up with some objective evidence and arguments. I only have personal experiences and testimonies to go on; I don't have any evidence going either way. But I'm not the one making the claim--you are.
Thanks!
Ben