Chapter, Paragraph
1 1 | concerning the proper place of science in regard to Christian faith.
2 1 | and philosophy, faith and science, in terms of a full recognition
3 1 | ancestor of Apologetics as a science.~The same thoughts about
4 1 | thoughts about the benefits of science and the participation of
5 1 | rejected; the passion toward science must be suppressed by a
6 1 | intellect, an apprehension of science, nor an enmity towards pagan
7 1 | also widely educated in science and possessed a philosophical
8 1 | providence of philosophy and science during the epoch of the
9 1 | against the progress of science. As to this, there exists
10 1 | representatives of western science themselves. For instance,
11 1 | Struggle Between Religion and Science,” (there is a Russian translation
12 1 | Between Catholicism and Science,) says: “The Greek Church
13 1 | was innocent of opposing science. On the contrary, she always
14 1 | truth and the discoveries of science, she always expected that
15 1 | western theology with natural science would not have taken place
16 1 | relationship between faith and science, a view which results from
17 1 | evoked a new theological science, broad and diverse, and
18 1 | a particular theological science.~In the first half of the
19 1 | a strong current in both science and philosophy which tried
20 1 | illuminated in natural science the religious understanding
21 2 | impossible to prove exactly by science. Positivism (Comte) is a
22 2 | predominates, and positive, when science predominates. The answers
23 2 | with a naïve belief in science. Cutting itself off from
24 2 | knowledge, between religion and science. However, with a deeply
25 2 | Ordinary people, not tempted by science and philosophy, but being
26 4 | religion to morality, to science and to the arts.~The first
27 5 | 5. Religion and Science.~True religion and true
28 5 | True religion and true science, recognizing the limits
29 5 | that either religion or science betrayed its principles
30 5 | religion as faith is for science. Faith can be indispensable
31 5 | contradictions between religion and science.~The more deeply and thoroughly
32 5 | and between religion and science. Of course, faith plays
33 5 | role in religion than in science. But this is explained primarily
34 5 | objectives of religion and science, each demanding different
35 5 | study. The objective of science is exceptionally elementary
36 5 | inquiries of man’s spirit, which science is absolutely helpless in
37 5 | Great also asserted: “In science faith precedes knowledge.”
38 5 | fraud or a phenomenon which science cannot at present explain,
39 5 | and explainable tomorrow.~Science, setting for itself the
40 5 | from the point of view of science?~Very often atheistically
41 5 | impeded by anything found in science of philosophy.~If man’s
42 6 | form (as in philosophy and science), but in vivid, concrete
43 7 | to morality, philosophy, science and art, we see that religion
44 7 | replaced by philosophy, science, art or morality alone,
45 8 | them, in philosophy, in science, and in practical life,
46 8 | most exact and conclusive science, mathematics, is based on
47 8 | correct when he states that in science “faith precedes knowledge.”
48 8 | that, in the first place, science is composed not only of
49 8 | the meaning of empirical science for man.~Where knowledge
50 8 | originated by God Himself. In science and philosophy there are
51 8 | correct or not is to see what science has discovered about this
52 8 | strange new process unknown to science today, there is a logical
53 8 | known laws and principles of science. No reasonable person is
54 8 | phenomena. A principle of modern science has emerged in the 1980s
55 8 | that contemporary physical science (Plank, Jeans, and others)
56 10,2| is waiting for all of us. Science may prolong life, but it
57 10,2| scientists seldom consider science their religion and many
58 10,2| found in the pages of any science book. There are holes in
59 10,2| creation and life given by science that I believe can only
60 10,2| universe. Education and science cannot save your eternal
61 10,4| universe had a beginning. Science clearly confirms this point.
62 14 | therefore accepted that genuine science, based on factual studies
63 14 | occurred between people of science and people of religion (
64 14 | misunderstanding. Religion and science have their own goals and
65 14 | up in full.~ Conflicts of science and religion occur when,
66 14 | have nothing to do with science. In a like manner, conflicts
67 14 | manner, conflicts between science and religion occur when
68 14 | not existed!” But today’s science has advanced far from this
69 14 | Fortunately, such conflicts of science and religion disappear when
70 14 | related to religion and science at the same time.~ In the
71 15 | structures. However, present-day science arrives at the indubitable
72 15 | authentic conclusions of natural science in the question of the formation
73 15 | appeared before the birth of science, has passed the test of
74 15,1| clergy into believing godless science is purposely attempting
75 15,1| glorifying God.~ Naturalistic science, on the other hand, claims
76 15,1| pure form, Christianity and science are interested in the same
77 15,1| the differences between science and religion.~ The fossil
78 15,1| difficult to harmonize modern science with the Bible.~ ~
79 15,2| beginning with the 17th century, science and the Bible coexisted
80 15,2| fire of separation between science and the theologians was
81 15,3| supported by mainstream science. Some believers perceive
82 15,3| between their faith and science. Many erroneously think
83 15,3| creation date, while rejecting science, or accept the evidence
84 15,5| to understand the Bible. Science is man's attempt to understand
85 15,5| the universe. Theology and science can both be flawed since
86 15,6| is also interesting that science has been unable to decide
87 15,6| creation is literal, and science agrees with the Bible —
88 15,6| your faith, don’t blame the science. You will never meet anyone
89 15,6| preferred method is correct. Science is also uncertain on this
90 15,6| God did on the sixth day?~Science and the Bible are once again
91 15,8| scripture.~Theology and science do not have to be in opposition.
92 15,8| statement in the theology and science debate that should be addressed.~ ~
93 15,8| that should be addressed.~ ~Science can’t say anything about
94 15,8| non-existence of God.~Of course science doesn't say anything about
95 15,8| non-existence of God, because science is man's attempt to explain
96 15,8| beyond themselves.~Honest science readily admits it can never
97 15,8| anything as absolutely true. Science does not claim to prove;
98 15,8| have greatly benefited from science. Because theories are tested
99 15,8| tested against the evidence, science is fluid, changing with
100 15,8| naturalism adherents misuse science is when they fail to differentiate
101 15,9| Bible or we can believe science. But in truth, there is
102 15,9| compromise either the Bible or science.~Biologists have directly
103 15,9| that the Bible is not a science book. So why do they expect
104 15,0| the lines allowed, while science claims that life evolved
105 15,1| as the Creator, something science by its own limitations can
106 15,1| company with mainstream science when it comes to evolution.
107 15,2| another conflict between science and theology. Grass and
108 15,2| of the plant kingdom by science. Genesis maintains they
109 15,2| s classification system. Science and Genesis only appear
110 15,2| Scriptures). Meanwhile, science, with the best equipment
111 15,2| is not listing species. Science says life appears in the
112 15,2| When no explanation suits, science assumes that the explanations
113 15,2| placed in this grouping. Science is now pretty certain through
114 15,2| that is of concern to God.~Science tells us the genetic difference
115 15,2| Homo Sapiens Sapiens by science. IF God used a primate ancestor
116 15,2| revolution. Man (as defined by science) for the first time domesticates
117 15,4| not so ordinary as Western science has made us out to be for
118 15,5| between Christianity and science, wrote: “Deeper and more
119 15,5| overcoming of animosity between science and religion. It sufficed
120 15,5| parallelisms between modern science and the Mosaic world view,
121 16,2| development of the world, science follows its own path, but
122 16,2| the voice of contemporary science. We have no need to plunge
123 17,1| the primitive life of man, science has no data at all. According
124 17,1| beginning of mankind. Strict science must therefore leave inviolate
125 18,1| cardboard always folds along it. Science cannot explain why good
126 19,1| the established facts of science and the words of the Bible.
127 24 | genuine intellect, genuine science, and genuine knowledge.
128 24 | the progress of genuine science. It simply points out the
129 24 | the progress of natural science, that is, that science which
130 24 | natural science, that is, that science which was especially engaged
131 24 | dreamed of by rationalistic science (walking on water and resurrection
|