Author suggests conservatives reject “scientific consensus,” but many scientists have ill-formed understanding of historical and observational sciences.
Continue reading...
Continue reading...
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
[__ Science __ ] Do Conservatives have a “Difficult Relationship with Science”?
- Thread starter AIG.com
- Start date
Barbarian
Member
Some conservatives do, although it's difficult to classify the most extreme among them as "conservative." Surely Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan would not have seen them as "conservative."
The simple denial of science we see on the far right in the last few years is something quite different than "conservatism." It's an addiction to cult-like anti-vaxxers, flat Earth creationism, quack COVID "cures", and all the rest.
The simple denial of science we see on the far right in the last few years is something quite different than "conservatism." It's an addiction to cult-like anti-vaxxers, flat Earth creationism, quack COVID "cures", and all the rest.
Gee. Those who don't want to get the vaccine are cult like?
Gee. Neither I nor the Bible ever projected a flat earth creation. So?
So, anything in the Bible going against your 'science' is 'quack'?
And what are all the rest? The Flood of Noah? Joshua's long day? Jonah and the whale? How does science support these? How does science support the Virgin birth and Resurrection of Christ?
Quantrill
Barbarian
Member
Not necessarily. I know someone who has a tendency to a rare reaction to the influenza vaccine. She's wary of taking a COVID-19 vaccine for good reasons. She and her physician are sorting it out to figure out the most sensible thing.
Only those peddling fake stories about the vaccines are cult-like. The anti-vaxxer cult is older than this pandemic and includes leftists as well as the far right. The unfortunate thing is that for many on the far right, being anti-vaxxer is now politically-correct and must be adhered to.
Many creationists disagree with you, pointing out that a literal understanding of many Bible verses indicate that the world is flat.
Some quacks re-interpret the Bible as anti-science,but it's not true.
Science, being merely methodologically naturalistic, can't rule out miracles. Science just can't say anything about them. But scientists can.
You say "Only those peddling fake stories about the vaccines are cult-like". Such as Biden, and Fauci?
Neither the Bible or I ever projected a flat earth creation.
Again you didn't answer the question. Does anything in the Bible that goes against your science considered 'quack'?
Quantrill
Speaking of 'science' and political association ...
Christ_empowered
Member
I lean progressive on most issues. I think the hard right is closer to fascism than old school conservatism.
Politics. Religion. Science.
My opinion.
We as Christians must be willing and able to address all of these. Why? Because our faith in Jesus Christ will affect our views on Politics and Science.
Just like the unbelief of those who are not Christian affects their views on Politics, Religion, and Science.
For some reason, we as believers seem to accept the idea that we should not talk about politics. As though it is divorced from religion. Where in the world did we get that idea? What form of government exists that is not directly tied to it's view of religion?
Quantrill
My opinion.
We as Christians must be willing and able to address all of these. Why? Because our faith in Jesus Christ will affect our views on Politics and Science.
Just like the unbelief of those who are not Christian affects their views on Politics, Religion, and Science.
For some reason, we as believers seem to accept the idea that we should not talk about politics. As though it is divorced from religion. Where in the world did we get that idea? What form of government exists that is not directly tied to it's view of religion?
Quantrill
Barbarian
Member
They follow demonstrated science. Anti-vaxxers are cult-like in peddling fake stories.
Flat Earth creationists disagree with you. They are just more literal in their interpretation of scripture than you are.
Until his death in March 2001, Charles K. Johnson of Lancaster, California, was the head of the International Flat Earth Research Society, an organization with a claimed membership of 3,500 (Martin 2001) that may not long outlive its leader's demise. Johnson — and we assume the members of his society — were very serious about their contention that the shape of Earth is flat rather than spherical, because they are the most strict of biblical literalists. Few other biblical literalists hold to such stringent interpretations of the Bible. To flat Earthers, many passages in the Bible imply that God created an Earth that is shaped like a coin, not a ball: flat and round at the edges. Earth's disklike (not spherical) shape reflects biblical passages referring to the "circle" of the Earth (Isaiah 40:22) and permits one to sail around the planet and return to one's starting point: one merely has to sail to the edge of Earth and make the circuit.
Because their theology requires the Bible to be read as literally true, flat Earthers believe Earth must be flat (Schadewald 1991). The Englishman responsible for the nineteenth-century revival of flat Earthism, Samuel Birley Rowbotham, "cited 76 scriptures in the last chapter of his monumental second edition of Earth Not a Globe" (Schadewald 1987: 27). Many of these refer to "ends of the Earth" (Deuteronomy 28:64, 33:17; Psalms 98:3, 135:7; Jeremiah 25:31) or "quadrants" (Revelation 20:8). For flat Earthers — and other literalists — the Bible takes primacy over the information provided by science; thus, because modern geology, physics, biology, and astronomy contradict a strict biblical interpretation, these sciences are held to be in error.
The Creation/Evolution Continuum | National Center for Science Education
Many — if not most — Americans think of the creation and evolution controversy as a dichotomy with "creationists" on one side, and "evolutionists" on the other.
Barbarian
Member
I don't see anything in the Bible that contradicts science. Indeed, as science has progressed, it has come to recognize some things first seen in the Bible.
For example, God says that the world's earth, air, and waters brought forth living things. And there is more and more evidence for abiogenesis from the earth, air and waters.
The Bible is not consistent with YE creationism, but does not contradict anything science has found.
Any author making that kind of statement, as the OP did, clearly answers their own question. After all, if you have the audacity to say that scientists don't know what science is, then clearly you are having a hard time with it. Why should we take the author's word for it, anyway? Over the scientists?
Jesus walked on water.
Jesus arose from the dead.
Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead.
God stooped the sun.
Yahda,yahda,yahda...
God determines science, it's beginning, end and it's continuance in time; time also being created of God and time itself is dependent upon the created substances on space and matter.
Science is simply God's decree to let substances react repetitively in such as manner that His creation, man, can use observations to propose laws and theories to predict future physical reactions ALL based on the hope that God doesn't change the rules we catorigize under headings or physics, chemistry, etc.
They follow demonstrated science. Anti-vaxxers are cult-like in peddling fake stories.
Flat Earth creationists disagree with you. They are just more literal in their interpretation of scripture than you are.
Until his death in March 2001, Charles K. Johnson of Lancaster, California, was the head of the International Flat Earth Research Society, an organization with a claimed membership of 3,500 (Martin 2001) that may not long outlive its leader's demise. Johnson — and we assume the members of his society — were very serious about their contention that the shape of Earth is flat rather than spherical, because they are the most strict of biblical literalists. Few other biblical literalists hold to such stringent interpretations of the Bible. To flat Earthers, many passages in the Bible imply that God created an Earth that is shaped like a coin, not a ball: flat and round at the edges. Earth's disklike (not spherical) shape reflects biblical passages referring to the "circle" of the Earth (Isaiah 40:22) and permits one to sail around the planet and return to one's starting point: one merely has to sail to the edge of Earth and make the circuit.
Because their theology requires the Bible to be read as literally true, flat Earthers believe Earth must be flat (Schadewald 1991). The Englishman responsible for the nineteenth-century revival of flat Earthism, Samuel Birley Rowbotham, "cited 76 scriptures in the last chapter of his monumental second edition of Earth Not a Globe" (Schadewald 1987: 27). Many of these refer to "ends of the Earth" (Deuteronomy 28:64, 33:17; Psalms 98:3, 135:7; Jeremiah 25:31) or "quadrants" (Revelation 20:8). For flat Earthers — and other literalists — the Bible takes primacy over the information provided by science; thus, because modern geology, physics, biology, and astronomy contradict a strict biblical interpretation, these sciences are held to be in error.
The Creation/Evolution Continuum | National Center for Science Education
Many — if not most — Americans think of the creation and evolution controversy as a dichotomy with "creationists" on one side, and "evolutionists" on the other.ncse.ngo
Neither the Bible or I have ever projected a flat earth creation.
Quantrill
What does science say about the Virgin Birth and Resurrection of Christ? What does science say about the Flood, Joshua's long day, and Jonah and the whale?
Where did God say that the worlds earth, air, and waters brought forth living things as opposed to God creating them?
Why isn't the Bible consistent with God creating? (Gen. 1:1) "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth"
Pretty straight forward. Pretty consistent.
Quantrill
I think God created a flat earth with a giant "slinky" on the underside that 2000 years later retracted in a manner that caused the flat earth to become a sphere.
Technically, the earth wasn't perfectly flat, but curved up at the edges so that the water of Noah's global flood would not flow off the edges into outer space.
Barbarian
Member
Science doesn't rule out miracles. My point is that if one's interpretation of scripture requires adding non-scriptural miracles, that's a pretty good clue that something is wrong with the interpretation.
Barbarian
Member
Are you saying that science takes a side on transgender issues? How?
Corn Pop
Member
Fascism is authoritarian and forcible suppression of opposition. Thats why freedom of speech and opinion is important, and when i see people who say to others they disagree with that they respect there opinion i know they are not a fascist and are not respecting or agreeing with the persons view or opinion itself, but the right for that person to have one.
Last edited:
Barbarian
Member
Seems to me that we can consider others to be wrong, without denying that they have a right to hold a contrary opinion. I don't think anyone here has denied this fact. Actually, I think everyone or almost everyone has acknowledged the right to disagree.
Most left wing liberals, don’t even know anything about science or facts, they just parrot what the main steam media says, or their socialist puppet masters.
For example: masks don’t work, it’s scientifically proven, yet the liberal Democrats fueled by the main steam media keeping pushing the socialist agenda of making people wear masks.
Most Conservatives and Christians don’t have any problem with science.
It’s the politically driven left wing “science” that is questioned.
JLB