Hail, Oh Infallible Science!

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Indeed, you wait one year.

Are you sure? I thought it was six years from your first term at the university, plus you had to have held your degree (BA) for two years.

Originally posted by dottewell
Are you sure? I thought it was six years from your first term at the university, plus you had to have held your degree (BA) for two years.

You could be right - I don't pay much attention to Oxbridge - a kind of intellectual snobbery in reverse.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
You could be right - I don't pay much attention to Oxbridge - a kind of intellectual snobbery in reverse.

My experience - some good people, some bad people, some very strange people indeed.

[edit - and rubbish nightlife]

Originally posted by dottewell
My experience - some good people, some bad people, some very strange people indeed.

I detest institutions where financial solvency is a better indicator of whether you'll be granted admission than academic achievement.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
I detest institutions where financial solvency is a better indicator of whether you'll be granted admission than academic achievement.

Well, I don't know about that. I do know that when I was there I had an Albanian friend whose family were caught up in the economic collapse in that country. She went, in tears, to a college tutor to talk about it. His first words?

"This isn't going to affect your ability to pay your fees, is it?"

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Yes, but what about Chem[b]ology and Physology?[/b]

You mean chemistry and physiology?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
You mean chemistry and [b]physiology?[/b]

Nope. I was referring to the fact that neither Chemistry nor Physics is an "ology".

Originally posted by dottewell
Well, I don't know about that. I do know that when I was there I had an Albanian friend whose family were caught up in the economic collapse in that country. She went, in tears, to a college tutor to talk about it. His first words?

"This isn't going to affect your ability to pay your fees, is it?"

Sounds scarily familiar. I remember hearing on the news about kids with talent getting refused admission from Oxbridge simply because they came from poor backgrounds. This is simply despicable. If I were the government minister responsible for Universities, I'd threaten their funding until they had remidied this current situation.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Nope. I was referring to the fact that neither Chemistry nor Physics is an "ology".

You know, the logical extension of your comments is that Scientology and Astrology aren't science. Care to rethink your position?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
You know, the logical extension of your comments is that Scientology and Astrology aren't science. Care to rethink your position?

Garn! Knew I was going wrong somewhere!

Originally posted by googlefudge
There is no empirical evidence at all for the existence of any deity/supernatural entities whatsoever. In fact the very existence of beings with the kind of abilities you (religion in general not necessarily you personally) attribute to a god make a mockery of the very idea of science. Let me explain.
A certain Greek philosopher came up with hypothetica ...[text shortened]... in the time of Shakespeare no one had fixed spelling and he got on just fine 😛

There is no empirical evidence at all for the existence of any deity/supernatural entities whatsoever.
How scientific of you.

Originally posted by Churlant
Originally posted by FreakyKBH

Understanding has only progressed so far, thus limited.

There is a difference between saying science "does not know" something and saying science "cannot know" something. One does not logically follow the other.



Science can only respond to the general revelation. And, as stated, that response is lim ...[text shortened]... g the correctness and interpretation of language translations of the OT.

-JC

There is a difference between saying science "does not know" something and saying science "cannot know" something. One does not logically follow the other.
I agree. But that wasn't the point, so my agreement makes little difference. The point was that our sight is limited, thus our knowledge. Projections beyond our line of sight are risky, at best.

Nonsense. Science explains things we can't see (in any sense of the word) quite often.
Of course it's nonsense... when taken the wrong way. "Sight" refers to empirical detection, not visual ability.

Any scientist who would make such a claim as "science knows all" isn't worth their pay grade. I personally feel you would be hard pressed to actually find a quote which made that statement.
I agree, we would be hard-pressed to find any scientist who would phrase their beliefs so clearly. But this sentiment is not the exclusive domain of scientists. There are many ignorant people who only believe the conclusions they reach based on the empircial evidence before them.

What was not known is now known.
Exactly my point. This knowledge is now revealed, previously hidden. I refuse to trust in my growing knowledge based on experience.

Please don't be insulting. You have personally had arguments with people on these boards concerning the correctness and interpretation of language translations of the OT.
Had your intention been as benign as you now infer, you would have an argument. As it stands, your original statement had to do with supposed changes in the Bible, owing to translations and interpretations over the years. My statement still stands.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
By faith we know that God created the heavens and the earth, and by faith, we know that our separation from God has been resolved. While that faith has virtually nothing to say about the moons of Pluto (and precious little else to say about the remaining physical world), faith nonetheless has much to say about the most impactful things possible, i.e. ...[text shortened]... at word is carefully chosen)

Interesting. Why is that word so significant?[/b]

"Faith" has been consistently shown to lead to wrong conclusions, however.
Wrongly placed, of course.

For example, "faith" said that the Sun and the planets all revolved around the Earth.
This was the faith of who, exactly? I seem to recall that it was the accepted scientific stance at one point. In fact, it was an accepted scientific fact that the solar system was sun-based, there for awhile, as well. That faith was wrongly place, it appears.

In addition, "faith" is inflexible, without allowing any objective evidence to verify or disprove it's conclusions.
Eh? How so?

People with "faith" often disagree with people with different "faith" and there is nothing that can be done to show which is correct. If there were, it would be science.
Thank you for helping prove my point. The science is theology, the text is the Bible.

Interesting. Why is that word so significant?
The word, revealed infers somethings are still hidden. I am not willing to risk my eternal state on hidden things.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]"dull and heavy," 1848, Amer.Eng., perhaps from Du. log "heavy, dull."

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=logy&searchmode=none

😉[/b]

What's it got for 'theology,' pray tell?

Originally posted by googlefudge
point of information.
Christianity is a lable for a large plethora of religions. referring to 'christianity' is like referring to 'western civilisation', there are similarities between the western nations, but confuse a french citizen with a british one and see how much stick you get. (confusing an American with a Canadian will also not make you very po ...[text shortened]... n't any more special than any other religion, although in totality it may be more popular.

While some may use the name of Christianity in application to variously-held beliefs, I'm more of a traditionalist. I'll stick with God's definition of the term, and His criteria for the same.

Christianity is very much different from the world's religions, in that it is not a religion. In every religion on the face of the planet, human effort is rewarded and/or punished. With Christianity, access to God is granted only through faith.

Just a few points of information.