• Love God, and love one another!

    Share your heart for Christ and others in Godly Love

    https://christianforums.net/forums/god_love/

  • Wake up and smell the coffee!

    Join us for a little humor in Joy of the Lord

    https://christianforums.net/forums/humor_and_jokes/

  • Want to discuss private matters, or make a few friends?

    Ask for membership to the Men's or Lady's Locker Rooms

    For access, please contact a member of staff and they can add you in!

  • Need prayer and encouragement?

    Come share your heart's concerns in the Prayer Forum

    https://christianforums.net/forums/prayer/

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join Hidden in Him and For His Glory for discussions on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/become-a-vessel-of-honor-part-2.112306/

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • CFN has a new look and a new theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes coming in the future!

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

[_ Old Earth _] Is it valid to quote Christian sources in science?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thespunk
  • Start date Start date
While we might be suspicious of the orgins of sources for obvious and logical reasons.

We should weigh each matter by its own merits.
 
Brutus/HisCatalyst said:
Yes. A source is a source. You may want to check it's credibility.

I agree with you 100%. Secular or religious sources need to checked for their validity. They should not be knocked as to their validity because they are coming from a Christian perspective.

Especially in a Christian forum.
 
Yes, a peer-reviewed source is a peer-reviewed source. Christian scientists that get published have valid scientific opinions. Christian fraud's like Kent Hovind do not have valid scientific opinions, but twisted and distorted pseudoscience.
 
Or Ken Ham...Dwayne Gish...and the rest of those funny people at ICR and AiG...
 
cubedbee said:
Yes, a peer-reviewed source is a peer-reviewed source. Christian scientists that get published have valid scientific opinions. Christian fraud's like Kent Hovind do not have valid scientific opinions, but twisted and distorted pseudoscience.

Each scientific opinion needs to be weighed. Even Kent Hovinds.

Some things he believes are valid and some things are not.
 
thespunk said:
I do believe quoting Christian sources for scientific information is valid. But, I encourage keeping a healthy degree of skepticism about any source one reads. What do you guys and gals think?


Hi there!

:smt039


I'm a Christian source and you can quote me anytime! :-D :-D


Jer 1:5
I chose you before I formed you in the womb;
I set you apart before you were born.
I appointed you a prophet to the nations.


God says... "I formed you" ... that's sufficient for this Bible thumper. Arguments in science don't affect my understanding because the Bible wasn't written to be a science book, but instead, a book for living, for spiritual enlightenment, for spiritual growth, and for hope.


All of this life is about that Blessed Hope, and all of the Word of God is about the Blessed Hope... and that Hope is Jesus. Man fell in the garden, and there is only way to be reconciled back to God... that's the Blessed Hope... because Jesus died to build that bridge back to God, we can have Hope and know that we have the Blessed Hope.

~serapha~
 
bibleberean said:
cubedbee said:
Yes, a peer-reviewed source is a peer-reviewed source. Christian scientists that get published have valid scientific opinions. Christian fraud's like Kent Hovind do not have valid scientific opinions, but twisted and distorted pseudoscience.

Each scientific opinion needs to be weighed. Even Kent Hovinds.
Hovind has an opinion, but it is not a scientific one. He is not a scientists and does not utilize the scientific method. He is a charlatan who can scam money out of fundamentalists who are eager to believe anyone masquarading as a scientists who will affirm their preconceived beliefs.
 
cubedbee said:
Hovind has an opinion, but it is not a scientific one. He is not a scientists and does not utilize the scientific method. He is a charlatan who can scam money out of fundamentalists who are eager to believe anyone masquarading as a scientists who will affirm their preconceived beliefs.

I believe I must agree with you there. A friend of mine ordered his lecture series on dvd.

That was one of the most grievous things I've ever heard from someone proclaiming to be a Christian. I don't even think it bothers my friend that he wasted a hundred, its just sad that we basically tossed out 18 hours of our lives.
 
Sara929 said:
cubedbee said:
Hovind has an opinion, but it is not a scientific one. He is not a scientists and does not utilize the scientific method. He is a charlatan who can scam money out of fundamentalists who are eager to believe anyone masquarading as a scientists who will affirm their preconceived beliefs.

I believe I must agree with you there. A friend of mine ordered his lecture series on dvd.

That was one of the most grievous things I've ever heard from someone proclaiming to be a Christian. I don't even think it bothers my friend that he wasted a hundred, its just sad that we basically tossed out 18 hours of our lives.

Apparently you can get your money back...that's what Hovind claims.
 
Back
Top