tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-896190815462795229.post2381015731229466696..comments2013-01-15T19:48:04.477-07:00Comments on Internal Contradiction: Jehovah's Witnesses and Atheists, A Response Part II, Science and AtheismSheldonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04604847159462215168noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-896190815462795229.post-26079231855093328532011-05-05T13:15:40.892-06:002011-05-05T13:15:40.892-06:00Sheldon, (Part 2)
I am not sure my first response...Sheldon, (Part 2)<br /><br />I am not sure my first response made it through your blog system. It seemed to accept my information and displayed it in a comment context for me, but when I returned to the site, it wasn’t there. Maybe there is a delay in the upgrade. So I am writing this as my response to your second comment with the assumption that you already reviewed Part 1. If you are reading this without the benefit of reading my initial response, then you can review it at: <br />http://www.nils4.info/miscellaneous/geology-c/Sheldon-1.htm<br /><br />In keeping with my earlier style, I will list your comment as a lead-in to my response.<br /><br />Sheldon Said: However, it’s also true that much scientific knowledge is in conflict with the Bible's account of the creation and age of the earth, evolution etc.. Many events depicted in the Bible are magical and would seem implausible in light of a naturalistic understanding of how the world works. <br /><br />I agree with your above statement with qualifications. In my blog about my first exposure to Geology 101 (a copy of which I included along with my Part 1 comment) I made the point that the conflict to which you refer above is not between the Bible and science, it is between the natural and linguistic sciences. Some interpret the Bible to say that God created the earth in seven 24-hour days with JW’s saying that the creative days were each 7 thousand years long and finally, others like my self who believe that the days were much longer and did not necessarily run consecutively. In my opinion, the question of how long can be relegated to the natural sciences to answer with the understanding that such answers can be biased and subject to both economic and political pressure. Until something has been studied by a number of independent researchers, it is subject to change and doesn’t necessarily require an immediate reevaluation of long held beliefs. However, when a fact has been determined by multiple sources, such as the age of the earth and the intervening periods of time separating the various organizational epochs, then I believe a closer look at the language used in the Bible to describe the same events is merited. Along a similar line of reasoning, I agree that many of the Bible’s miracles do appear “magical” but I can also say that what we are learning about physics and the quantum world has provides a pathway by which such miracles can be explained as a cause-and-effect process which removes all the “magic.” <br /><br />To continue, go to: http://www.nils4.info/miscellaneous/geology-c/Sheldon-2.htmPilgrimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09795146260800561255noreply@blogger.com