Against my better judgment, I will reply to this nonsense.
First off, yes it is true that scientific disciplines are science, and secular is not one of them.
Next, physics, astronomy and geology are not Darwinian.
It is anachronistic to frame biology as Darwinian. But biology is just a snapshot of evolution, and evolution is just biology over time.
I’ve been trying to find out if you believe that the earth doesn’t move, like the Bible says. “Secular science” claims that it does move.
If we threw out the Darwinian model we would just reconstruct it from the evidence because that is where the evidence leads. Sorry, but honest scientists can’t just ignore the facts. You are telling people that they can’t make certain conclusions even if that is exactly what the evidence supports.
“By denying scientific principles, one may maintain any paradox.”–Galileo Galilei
“I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the Scriptures, but with experiments, and demonstrations.”–Galileo Galilei
“It vexes me when they would constrain science by the authority of the Scriptures, and yet do not consider themselves bound to answer reason and experiment.”–Galileo Galilei
Satan tried to tempt Jesus into ignoring secular gravity.
Well, I think it was more into the testing God area, sort of like going without a vaccination.
That is only true if you can “throw out the Darwinian model and take on the Biblical narrative” without fudging measurements, quote mining, misrepresenting or cherry-picking evidence, exaggerating or downplaying errors, subverting peer review, or cutting corners.
Remember, “taking on the Biblical narrative” means first and foremost obeying Deuteronomy 25:13-16 and the Ninth Commandment. Biblical interpretation must be honest and must get its facts straight.
Yep. Truth comes from reality, but I have difficulty getting that across to YECs. The classic example that I’ve mentioned before is when a YEC asked me for the chapter and verse where the Bible said that. XD
beaglelady, as long as you make comments like this, i will not respond to them. if you wish to exercise your talents in insulting ones intelligence, please go to your local pub during happy hour and talk with the drunks!
almost certainly that YEC must have been influenced adversely by Jehovahs Witnesses. That denomination is corrupting even sensible people here on these forums…help us!
You are insulted by a question? I thought we were discussing the Bible. We should be having a wonderful conversation.
Stop mentioning JWs in a derogatory way that is completely irrelevant to the conversation.
From our guidelines:
- Be willing to learn from the perspectives and expertise of others and respect the diversity of your conversation partners. This includes being sensitive to differences in educational backgrounds, faith traditions, cultural contexts, and levels of English language fluency.
We don’t appreciate it when entire groups are used as an example of what is wrong with the world. That’s just prejudice.
I don’t see how there’s even a connection to what I said, either, not to mention that @adamjedgar did not address my question.
If JWs are so terrible and corrupting, why do you use the Bible translation they produced?
Ironically, it is the young-earthers and ID advocates who are actually putting science ahead of the Bible. They accept the modernist claim that science is the ultimate authority and try to find science to support their theological claims, rather than rightly seeing science as merely the application of certain theological or philosophical principles to the physical world. Likewise, the valuing of “this supports my position” over “is it true?” puts their scientific claims over the plain ethical teaching of the Bible. Jesus did not approve of letting human traditions trump God’s commandments.
Note that there is a certain validity to Adam’s comment that some of the whale transitional forms suggest a crocodile, or other young-earth claims that they’re otters. The implied slander that paleontologists who are experts on whales are incompetent and dishonest enough to claim that a crocodile or otter is a whale is, of course, not true. I work on mollusks, not vertebrates, but I know enough about teeth and bones to easily see that there is only a rough general resemblance of shape between the whale ancestors and a crocodile or otter. But what is the life habit of crocodiles [ignoring all sorts of fossil types not found today] and otters? They are semiaquatic predators, living a life transitional between land-dwelling and fully aquatic. Both have more fully aquatic relatives. In other words, “it looks kind of like a crocodile or otter” is exactly what a transitional form on the way to being a whale should look like.
You hit the nail square on the head. To the YEC, ironically, everything outside the casual mundane experience is a farce. This is why evolution cannot be true because “After all the generations of dogs we’ve bred, we never got a cat”, where humans couldn’t have shared a common ancestor with chimpanzees because “We don’t see monkey people around today”, where solid rock can’t warp no matter the heat and pressure because “when I try to bend a rock it just breaks”, and where foxes are in the dog kind (whatever that means) because “Even a child could see how dog-like they are”.
The Earth is blue but there is no God, am I right folks?
It’s a bit like going to a classic muscle car show and telling the car show judges that a Chevy Camaro looks just like a Ford Mustang. Perhaps to the non-expert there are not a lot of differences between the two, but if you wade into the midst of experts you might want to be aware of the difference in experience and knowledge.
im sorry what? 
I really struggle to follow your thinking processes when statements like this get made…is that an understanding of SDA doctrine or are you just making a claim out of a vacume?
No that is complete nonsense…statements made based on the secular scientific model that disagree with bible theology are a farce! That is what YEC’s believe!
Look here is the bottom line…
if so,
If my understanding of the statements of the founder of this movement here are correct, then the reason for the existence of biologos was to find a compromise between the two so that people who were supposedly struggling with their theology and allowing secular science to overwhelm a poor philosophical position, could still remain Christian. That is exactly the place where this theology makes a grave mistake. Jesus said quite directly “it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to give up his wealth”…that statement applies to our spirituality directly. Earthly possessions, such as the concept of the inerrancy of science, cannot explain or replace God and they certainly are not first and foremost over and above God! To take this position is to take the identical position to those who laughed at Noah’s preaching for many many years prior to the flood. It is generally accepted that they simply discounted his warnings citing that no evidence existed concerning the idea of rain and flood prior to this time. That was proven a foolish position in the end, as the fossil record now shows quite clearly, and the same will happen again!
This is what you wrote in December:
Here is a list of some the published scriptures that i use:
Vulgate (translated into English because i cannot read latin)
Codex Sinaiticus (found here Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Genesis |)
King James
New King James
NIV
ESV
NASB
NLT (although i dont see this as authoritative so where it disagrees with above texts i use them)
*Greek interlinear ( Nestle 1904 〈NE **〉*Eberhard Nestle, Η ΚΑΙΝΗ ΔΙΑΘΗΚΗ. Text with Critical Apparatus . (British and Foreign Bible Society, 1904))
Strongs concordance
I will even use NWT published by JW’s at times, although not authoritatively as this production has a lot of conflicts with practically every other translation that i regularly use…it is very clear that is writers have changed the original text to suit doctrines as it disagrees in many many places with their own published interlinear…and they just so happen to always be in the very places where there are very significant doctrinal issues.
btw, the word is vacuum not vacume
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.