• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Prosecution—The Philosophy and Correct Application of Science

mandym

New Member
The Bible First

The Bible must come first in our quest for knowledge; it is superior to other sources of information, including knowledge gained from the natural sciences. This must be the case because other sources of knowledge presuppose the Bible. In other words, in order for us to gain knowledge about anything in the universe through any means (including scientific analysis), we would have to already assume that the Bible is true. People do not often realize this, so let’s briefly explore this idea.

The Nature of Science

The word science comes from the Latin scientia, which means “knowledge.” So, in its broadest sense, science is what we know. Under this definition, all historic events, including all the events recorded in the Bible, fall within the realm of science.

Operational Science and Origins Science

Since science relies on observation and experimentation, it is well suited for describing and quantifying how the universe operates today. To be clear, we’ll call this kind of study “operational science.” Operational science would include such branches as physics, chemistry, and biology. For example, by observing how things fall, and by performing controlled experiments, we can deduce the formula for gravity, as Isaac Newton did. This formula, along with other laws of physics, can then be used to make predictions about the future—such as the positions of the planets next year. For the most part, physics, chemistry, and biology describe


The Bible as a Starting Point for Science


Many times, unbelievers will ask a Christian to leave the Bible out of the discussion when talking about the age of the earth or evolution. The foolish response would be to accept these terms, say okay, and then proceed to throw science evidences at the unbeliever without the Bible. And sadly, this is what many Christians do. This approach is generally futile.


The Biblical Axioms of Science

The consistent Christian approaches science from the following perspective. Since God created the universe, and since God is logical, we expect the universe to be logical. We expect it to obey rational laws, since God is the ultimate Lawgiver. Since God created our minds, and has given us stewardship of the earth (Gen. 1:26, 28), we expect to be able to understand, to some degree, how the world works. Since God is the omnipresent sustainer of all things, and since He does not change, it makes sense that God would not arbitrarily change the way He sustains the universe. Granted, there have been times when God has acted in an extraordinary way to accomplish an extraordinary purpose. But the fact that God normally upholds the universe in a logical and quantifiable way is what the Christian would expect. The laws of nature are descriptions of the logical, consistent way that the Lord sustains the universe. The fact that these laws apply throughout space and do not vary with time is a reflection of God’s omnipresent and consistent nature.


Secular Assumptions in Science

We have seen that most secular scientists use a number of biblical assumptions when doing science. They assume (just as a Christian does) that the universe obeys natural laws, that these laws do not change with time or space, and that the human mind is capable of understanding the laws of nature, etc. However, the secular scientist has no logical reason to believe these things if the universe were merely an accident. He might argue that he uses these assumptions because they work—they make science possible. But that does not explain why they are true, whereas the Bible does explain this.



The Assumptions of Age-Dating Methods

Recall that questions of age are not “science” questions but history questions, since they ask when in the past something happened. Age is not a substance that can be measured in the present by scientific processes. Age-dating methods are applied to a process—where something changes to something else at a known rate, such as the radioactive decay of substances in a rock. By extrapolating backward, one can estimate when the process began. There are several assumptions involved in this process that cast serious doubts on such methods.


Secular Assumptions and the Age of the Earth


Since the majority of secular scientists believe in naturalism and uniformitarianism, this causes them to make incorrect assumptions about the initial conditions and constancy of rates of various earth processes. These faulty assumptions lead to inflated estimates for the age of the earth. Here is a real-world example to illustrate this concept.


Don’t Answer, Answer


In the spirit of Proverbs 26:4, we refuse to accept the erroneous and unbiblical philosophies of uniformitarianism and naturalism. These doctrines have caused unbelievers to make incorrect assumptions about initial conditions and constancy of rates. In fact, virtually all old-earth arguments assume these false philosophies. Clearly, we cannot accept the conclusions of age estimates that are based on faulty starting assumptions. Unfortunately, old-earth creationists generally do accept such arguments. In some cases, they may not have realized the assumptions from which such estimates are derived.



Science Confirms a Young Earth


Rivers are constantly removing small fractions of salt from the land and transporting it to the ocean. The rate at which this happens has been measured. The salt added to the ocean by all the rivers in the world is about 450 million tons per year.11 The water at the ocean’s surface is constantly evaporating and then falls as rain, which collects in rivers, completing the cycle. The salt does not evaporate and only a fraction (27 percent is a generous upper limit) of the salt added to the ocean every year can be removed (by salt sprays and a handful of other processes). As a consequence, the ocean gets saltier every year by at least 330 million tons.


http://www.answersingenesis.org/art...+Genesis+Daily+Articles)&utm_content=FaceBook
 

DaChaser1

New Member
Nope. Definitely disagree.

the Bible and science will not be in conflict, as it IS the inspired/infallible word of theLord!

When it aapears to be in disagreement, its due to faulty interpretation of the biblical text, and/or faulty presumptions/wrong interpretation of the scientific facts!
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I suspect your disagreements are philosophical, and not scientific.
But of course, this was presented as a philosophical argument after all.

God reveal himself in many ways. He is revealed in scripture and in his creation (Ps 19; Rom. 1:19-20).

One might say that the "special revelation" of scripture is subservient to the "general revelation" on nature but to ignore either is to ignore God's revelation to us.

Science is not knowledge. Bringing up an archaic definition doesn't make it so. One definition of science is "the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment." (Concise Oxford English Dictionary (11th ed.). 2004). To simplify this, science is an attempt to understand the physical world.

  • Both the physical world and scripture require interpretation.
  • Both the bible and the physical world can be improperly interpreted.
  • To pit one form of revelation against another would make God a liar – and he never lies (2 Tim. 2:13; Titus 1:2).
The Galileo affair presents an interesting study of the misunderstanding of scripture in relation to the physical world.

Theologians understood Joshua 10:12-13; Psalm 93:1; 104:19 and Ecclesiastes 1:4,5 (among others) to refer to the earth's immobility.
As evidence grew, theologians had to change the way they understood scripture. Today we are the beneficiaries of this knowledge.

Rob
 

Aaron

Member
Site Supporter
One definition of science is "the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment." (Concise Oxford English Dictionary (11th ed.). 2004). To simplify this, science is an attempt to understand the physical world.
That is one philosophy of science, and completely arbitrary. If the revelation of God is to be understood through the study of the natural world, as you say, then science is indeed drawing theological conclusions. Limiting the study to mere natural processes is to limit science.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Could you expand on what you posted Aaron?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

Rob
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Well if we can't see eye-to-eye on a basic definition it's not worth pursuing more important ideas.

Rob
 
Top