Someone might even conclude that BioLogos is taking the “same view”—that the Bible trumps science (the following issues are a prime example: an intelligent, conscious, cognitive being in contrast to an eternal animating force; miracles from a supernatural world in contrast to psychic phenomena from the human organism itself; demonic possession in contrast to psychopathy). When I log in to BioLogos I’m beginning to feel like I’m at a Jehovah’s Witnesses Kingdom Hall.
No Christy… you aren’t proposing a different conclusion (If science and Scripture conflict, then science has to win) you are proposing (If science and Scripture conflict, then Scripture has to win). I don’t see any concordism when you reject any attempt at reconciling science and Scripture. How do you justify what you are saying here with what you said in response to the my following quote taken from the topic—Demon Possession in 2016;
Tony’s comment;
Therefore to all those here who defend this position — @Eddie, @Dr.Ex-YEC, @OldTimer, @Casper_Hesp, @Henry, @Find_My_Way, @Christy:
(1) What are the symptoms of demonization?
(2) How does it differ from the symptoms of psychopathic personality?
(3) How does it differ from the symptoms of mental illness?
(4) How does it differ from the symptoms of neurological disease such as epilepsy?
If incidences are as OldTimer stated, that demoniac patients and mentally ill patients receive the same treatment, perhaps there is no difference and we are referring to the same psychological conditions.
Christy’s response;
I actually have no interest in this kind of “prove it to me” discussion.
Science does not speak to the supernatural, and there is no way of compiling evidence, or subjecting the supernatural world to testing.
Seems rather hypocritical to me.
Well then Christy… science is challenging you on an aspect of your theology/interpretation of Scripture—EXAMINE that aspect of your theology/interpretation of Scripture. DON’T TRUMP SCIENCE by saying;
I actually have no interest in this kind of “prove it to me” discussion.
Science does not speak to the supernatural, and there is no way of compiling evidence, or subjecting the supernatural world to testing.
Your comment here implies that science automatically loses with no contest—the opposite of what @George is being accused of. However, because of your statement “Science does not speak to the supernatural,” you stand accused of TRUMPING science. It’s as simple as that—since you are suggest that “the supernatural speaks to the natural” by insisting on demonic possession. If you are speaking for BioLogos—what does that say about BioLogos!?