[Zionist Conspirator]

The use of the word "reason" as an antonym for "science" is in error.

By who? AP?

By anyone who confuses the two.

To repeat myself: "science" is (or is supposed to be) empiricism. "Reason" is any mode of thought used to solve a problem that is logically consistent. Both uniformitarian evolutionism and literalist creationism are reasonable given the premises of each. The confusion of one with "faith" and one with "reason" is a childish error.

[FreeReign]

To repeat myself: "science" is (or is supposed to be) empiricism. "Reason" is any mode of thought used to solve a problem that is logically consistent. Both uniformitarian evolutionism and literalist creationism are reasonable given the premises of each. The confusion of one with "faith" and one with "reason" is a childish error.

So then AP should be taken to task for confusing "faith" and "reason".

What about you with your remark questioning ones faith?

"Any organization that accepts the supernatural events related in the "new testament" has no business sitting in judgment on Genesis".

[Cvengr]

Both uniformitarian evolutionism and literalist creationism are reasonable given the premises of each. The confusion of one with "faith" and one with "reason" is a childish error.

Well stated. One might build upon this to amplify the meaning of faith and belief as presented in Scripture, which is discernibly different than most secular humanist interpretations. Empiricism, Rationalism, and Faith might be compared to systems of knowledge based upon perceptions of the body, soul, and human spirit respectively.