Science And The Bible - Introduction

[Daystar]

But what conflicts have you encountered? And out out of these conflicts have you EVER thrown out the part of the bible that conflicts with science rather than the part of science that conflicts with the bible?

The conflicts I have encountered are insects have four legs, bats are birds, a misapplication of pi, the earth is flat, the flood, six literal days - those sorts of things. All at the top of my head, but those are all that I can think of for now.

To answer your question, that has never happened. The point that you are making is noted, however. It is interesting that you can see the possibility of bias with me, but not yourself. You have thrown out the Bible long before you got to the point of realizing that you might have needed to throw it out for science, and there is nothing that could change that.

I see science as not really conflicting with the Bible, though I don't really know much about science as I do the Bible. You assume there is a conflict because you are ignorant - and I don't mean that in derogatory way of it. What bugs me about you is that you are willfully ignorant and yet you continue to criticize. You don't see me doing that with science.

The only thing about science that bugs me is the sort of dogmatic insistence of a tiny portion of it.

If science proved to me that the Bible was a myth I would drop the idea of God and the Bible like it was a hot potato. Just like [snaps fingers] that.

No I was of course, talking about you. I was saying that you either don't understand that the bible is not evidence of God or God's word because of ignorance. Or because of - as Ace suggested - denial. And then I asked Ace: "Is ignorance a form of denial or denial a form of ignorance?"
I now think that basically denial is a very specific form of ignorance.
Surely you understood really I think you're just messing about

Ignorance means to not know. Stupidity means willful ignorance. Denial is, in my opinion, a stupidity rather than ignorance because if you are truly ignorant you don't need to be in denial, but if you are willfully ignorant you could be in denial - which actually would come from a desire to remain willfully ignorant. To me that is you, and most militant atheists that I know and have known from online.

It is interesting that I see that sort of denial - willful ignorance - in Xian as well as people of other beliefs and atheists. A sort of predetermination that is emotional. For example; if I present an article from a biblical and secular historical accuracy which demonstrates that Jesus couldn't have died on a cross. That it would have been socially, politically, physically, medically, historically, linguistically and prophetically impossible the Xians would find insult at it and not want to believe it, but the atheists would scoff at it as well.

Someone who has no opinion formed, no sort of emotional attachment to their own predetermined opinion but has some knowledge of the Xian cross and an uninformed curiosity would find it fascinating. This happens all the time.