Difference between revisions of "Creation scientist"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Citation error! Oops!) |
(actually, creation scientists DON'T hold that fact must be scientifically verifiable.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | A creation scientist is one who attempts to use traditional tools of science to prove the scientific factuality of the Bible. | + | A creation scientist is one who attempts to use traditional tools of science to prove the scientific factuality of the Bible. |
| − | + | Where former Christians accepted the Bible on faith, creation scientists seek to defend its inerrancy on scientific grounds. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | Where former Christians accepted the Bible on faith, creation scientists seek to defend its inerrancy | ||
United States courts have consistently held that creation science, as practiced by creation scientists, is a form of religion. ''See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District,'' 400 F. Supp.2d 724. | United States courts have consistently held that creation science, as practiced by creation scientists, is a form of religion. ''See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District,'' 400 F. Supp.2d 724. | ||
Revision as of 18:46, March 22, 2007
A creation scientist is one who attempts to use traditional tools of science to prove the scientific factuality of the Bible.
Where former Christians accepted the Bible on faith, creation scientists seek to defend its inerrancy on scientific grounds.
United States courts have consistently held that creation science, as practiced by creation scientists, is a form of religion. See, e.g., Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 400 F. Supp.2d 724.