Bible vs. Science

I'm not going to reprise it here, but in the "Evolution? How?" thread, i put together an extremely long post to explain why the description of the Ark represents a tour de force display of abyssmal ignorance of basic naval architecture for wooden vessels. The response of "real life" was kind of a laughing "well gee, i don't know about all of that," after which he turned to some minutiae about the number of animals which would have been on board and the possibility that they would have been juveniles. In other words, having demonstrated that the vessel of which he speaks is not only implausible, but impossible, and still would not have had sufficient hull capacity for the total number of species to be carried on board--he resumes the argument on the basis of the assumption that such a vessel was possible, and that it would have had the capacity for all of the animals to have been transported.

This is par for the course for him, though, as he always changes the subject when he's driven to wall on any point.

"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be
put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their
lives." Leviticus 20:13

Which has what, Rex, to do with the topic of "The Bible vs. Science?"

Your thesis suffers from the flaw that you have never demonstrated that science is subject to the blindness which you allege. Science concerns itself with naturalistic explanations of a naturalistic world. Were there any such thing as the supernatural, science would not be concerned with it.

You're just peddling bible-thumper propaganda here, attempting to get the camel's nose under the tent--to allege that science denies the existence of a deity. Whether or not there were a deity is not relevant to science, which is not concerned with the issue.

There is no void. Science cannot be accused of suffering from a void because it does not attempt to be what it is not.

There is no void. Science cannot be accused of suffering from a void because it does not attempt to be what it is not.

Setanta wrote:

There is no void. Science cannot be accused of suffering from a void because it does not attempt to be what it is not.

Exactly. What rex is saying is no different than saying a toaster 'suffers from a void' because it can't also keep your beer cold.
Rather ridiculous (lack of)reasoning if you ask me.

So, you know this, Rex, because you talk to "God," and she answers?

Setanta wrote:

So, you know this, Rex, because you talk to "God," and she answers?

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Comment:
When is this stuff ever going to click with some of you?

RexRed wrote:

Setanta wrote:

So, you know this, Rex, because you talk to "God," and she answers?

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Comment:
When is this stuff ever going to click with some of you?

"Slaves, male and female, you may indeed possess, provided you BUY them from among the neighboring nations. You may also BUY them from among the aliens who reside with you and from their children who are born and reared in your land. Such slaves YOU MAY OWN AS CHATTELS, and leave to your sons as their hereditary property, MAKING THEM PERPETUAL SLAVES. But you shall not lord it harshly over any of the Israelites, your kinsmen."

Leviticus 25:44ff

When?????

Doktor S wrote:

Setanta wrote:

There is no void. Science cannot be accused of suffering from a void because it does not attempt to be what it is not.

Exactly. What rex is saying is no different than saying a toaster 'suffers from a void' because it can't also keep your beer cold.
Rather ridiculous (lack of)reasoning if you ask me.

Considering how dumb science is and how smart God is, yes, it is ridiculous and foolish to argue with the creator.

When is this stuff ever going to click with some of you?