Replies

Funny how hiding behind the Supreme Court (of all bodies) and avoiding the definition of the word science makes one still think one can deny being anti-science. Once the government starts to define for itself (and for all of us) what science is, we are back to the dark days of Galileo—especially if they extend that to control of education.

The Greek word gnosis is not limited to spiritual matters; it is not a word peculiar to them, any more than its Latin cognate scientia is.

The Bible is absolutely not anti-science. It is those who rail against it who are (such as Darwin, who was quite explicit in using his Greek-philosophy-derived ideas, unobserved, as basis for “gradually… disbeliev[ing] in Christianity as a divine revelation”), and nobody who uses it as a basis is ever anti-science.

Olog-hai: "Funny how hiding behind the Supreme Court (of all bodies) and avoiding the definition of the word science makes one still think one can deny being anti-science.
Once the government starts to define for itself (and for all of us) what science is, we are back to the dark days of Galileo..."

You may not like it, but the word "science" today has a legal definition, and that is in short, "natural-science" or the longer definition of "methodological naturalism" meaning: natural explanations for natural processes.
It is specifically intended to be non-religious, and to exclude any religious component.

That's why courts have resisted all efforts to impose a spiritual element on science, such as Creationism.
My opinion is, there's nothing particularly wrong with Creationism, but it's not natural-science, and really should be taught in special classes on religion -- or better yet, in church.

I put it this way: we don't teach math in English class, we don't teach German in Spanish class and we don't teach religion in science class.
Indeed, you really don't want atheistic government teachers telling your children about God's creative actions in the Universe.

Olog-hai: "The Greek word gnosis is not limited to spiritual matters; it is not a word peculiar to them, any more than its Latin cognate scientia is."

But secret spriritual matters, Gnosis, are precisely what the Apostle Paul was talking about to Timothy, not the science of building ships or celestial motions.
You simply cannot translate Paul's words into today's evolution debate.

Olog-hai: "The Bible is absolutely not anti-science. It is those who rail against it who are..."

Natural-science is certainly not anti-Bible, but it certainly is determined to stay out of any religious connections.
That's why science insists that it will only deal with natural explanations for natural processes.
All other matters must be handled by some other branch of learning -- not by science.