v. knowledge, understanding
Gen 2:9 the tree of the c of good and evil
Num 24:16 he who knows the c of the Most High
Pro 2:10 when .. the c is pleasing to your soul
Pro 18:15 the ear of the wise seeks the c
Pro 19:2 the soul without c is not good, and he who
Pro 30:3 wisdom, neither do I know the c of the Holy
Ecc 1:18 because .. whoever adds c, adds pain
Ecc 7:12 shield is the c, and shield is the money
Isa 28:9 to whom will it be taught, or to whom will it be done?
Isa 40:14 who .. taught him c, or showed him the
Dan 1:4 wise in c and understanding
Dan 5:12 a greater spirit was found in him and c
Dan 12:4 many will run .. and the c will increase
Luk 11:52 because you have taken the key out of the c
Rom 2:20 you have in the law the form of the c and of
Rom 10:2 having zeal…but not according to
1Co 1:5 enriched .. in every word and .. c
1Co 12:8 to another, word of c according to the same
1Co 13:8 tongues will cease, and c will end
1Ti 6:20 the arguments of the .. called c
Science (Heb. madda and gr. gnosis, “science”, “knowledge”; lat. scire, “to know”). Term that in the Bible is used with a versatility of meanings, but that in general terms refers to the true knowledge of things and beings, whether physical or metaphysical (Exo 31:3; Pro 2:10; Ecc 1:16; Isa 28:9; Rom 10:2; Phi 1:9; etc.).
Source: Evangelical Bible Dictionary
It is the translation in the RVR-1960 of the heb. madda in Dan 1:4 and from gr. gnosis in 1Ti 6:20, where both mean “knowledge.” Dan 1:4 means lit. †œunderstanding knowledge or thought† . In 1Ti 6:20, the reference is to that supposed knowledge that sets itself up in opposition to the truth of the gospel.
Source: Hispanic World Bible Dictionary
False, 1Ti 6:20, Col 2:8.
Christian Bible Dictionary
Dr. J. Dominguez
http://bible.com/dictionary/
Source: Christian Bible Dictionary
†¢Knowledge.
Source: Christian Bible Dictionary
type, HUNDRED
see, WISDOM
vet, It should not be confused with the modern sense of systematized knowledge, but simply “knowledge”, “erudition” or “wisdom”. The “false science” mentioned in 1 Cor. 8:1, 7 and Col. 2:8 refers to the teachings of the mystical and Judaizing sects, denounced by St. Paul, in contrast to the truth of the gospel (1 Cor. 12:8; Phil. 1:9). (See WISDOM A).
Source: New Illustrated Bible Dictionary
Set of systematic knowledge, objective and duly based on logical or experimental arguments, but always sufficiently linked to constitute a broad and harmonious intellectual body.
In this sense we speak of “Theological Sciences” referring to all logical and coordinated knowledge that, although formulated in the light of a faith and a revealed mystery, are made compatible with reason, systematization and adequate arguments.
Catechetics is a theological science because it has all these elements sufficiently treated and universally accepted. Catechesis is rather an art, because it is based on practical dimensions.
Certain expressions allusive to the idea of science and that are common in our culture, allow a better assessment of its meaning and its conceptual value.
– “Divine science” is the infinite wisdom that God has and the knowledge of all beings: omniscience, and of everything that is going to happen: foreknowledge.
– “Infused science” is the one that God is supposed to record in man directly and gratuitously and accompanies him throughout his life, unlike the acquired one.
– “Pure science” refers to science itself and not to fantasy or sensory experience. There are many pure sciences: exact sciences, human sciences, physical sciences.
– The “theological sciences” are of a different nature, since they suppose organic and systematic knowledge in the light of revelation.
– “Science of good and evil”, is the metaphor with which the Bible (Gen. 2. 9) alludes to a tree placed by God in Paradise as a test for Adam and Eve. The taking of its fruits in a disobedient way was the object of the first and what we call original sin.
Pedro Chico González, Dictionary of Catechesis and Religious Pedagogy, Editorial Bruño, Lima, Peru 2006
Source: Dictionary of Catechesis and Religious Pedagogy
(v. science and faith, gifts of the Holy Spirit, intellectual formation, reason)
(ESQUERDA BIFET, Juan, Dictionary of Evangelization, BAC, Madrid, 1998)
Source: Dictionary of Evangelization
Set of communicable general knowledge, united by a logical method, which form a system of reflection. For an understanding of what science is, it is necessary to assess the various historical moments that show the continuous progress of man’s creative capacity.
The ancient period speaks of science as episteme, that is, as certain and always valid knowledge, FTMTo of logical deduction. The modern period, with the discoveries of Galileo, Descartes, Newton, Bacon, Comte…, completely transforms this concept, identifying science with demonstrative knowledge. Science becomes privileged in the observation of phenomena and reflection capable of explaining their causes, finding its unifying principle in invariable natural laws.
The deductive method of the ancients has been replaced by the inductive method of experimentation.
A third idea of science arises after the First World War: it is the one that is currently being rethought. It is due to K. Popper the intuition of science as “self-correcting” of the principles themselves.
With Popper’s studies, science begins to be thought of outside of the modern dogmatism schemes that had identified it with mathematics and physics, and science is stripped of all pretense of absolute and certain truth: it continues to be “like a attempt” (K. Popper, The Logic of scientific discovery, London 1980, 279). Once all forms of dogmatism have been lost, science also loses all presumption of neutrality.
Through science, man develops his activity of knowing reality, sharpens understanding in the search for truth and contributes to the progress of history to make himself, nature and his history more and more intelligible. In this horizon, we must also assess in what sense it can be said that theology is a science.
R. Fisichella
Bib.: W Pannenberg, Theory of science and theology. Christianity, Madrid 1981; L. Hegenberg, Introduction to the philosophy of science, Herder Barcelona 1969. H. M, Baumgartner, science, in CFF 282-308.
PACOMIO, Luciano, Encyclopedic Theological Dictionary, Divine Word, Navarra, 1995
Source: Encyclopedic Theological Dictionary
1. THE PROBLEM OF ITS DEFINITION
Determining with some precision the concept of “science” is somewhat problematic, since on the one hand the c. it is only executable scientifically, while on the other the present reflection is not only about “the” only c., but also about the c. that appears in various sciences. From here arises the tendency to want to perceive in a single c. considered as a prototype, what is common to the various c., so that it would have to be measured by the special character of this c. the scientific nature of all the others. And so reflection is tempted to reduce the original plurality to the singularity of a single c., or, when it does not achieve this, to challenge the scientific character of a concrete thought. This trend affects e.g. eg, not just some c. experimental, when they affirm that everything that exists falls under its own object and its own problematic and that their way of proceeding is the only one that is valid.
It also affects philosophy, when it tries to consider all c. as disciplinary ramifiers of itself, then taking all the objective affirmations of the c. as mere partial knowledge of his own total knowledge. To this we must add that the c. have been formed in the course of history, not only the c. that subsist today, but “science” as such, as a specific attitude that man can adopt in the face of -> reality. It should also be added that in this story not only did the c’s develop their own special character. new ones that were emerging, but also the general conception of scientific behavior in the face of reality was transformed, a conception that embraces these c., sustains them and is manifested in them. For this reason, the general meaning of “science” throughout this history can be determined at first only by means of external analogies.
2. General characteristics of scientific knowledge
At the beginning of the history of European science, Plato and Aristotle admit an ascending progression in -> human knowledge, which starts from the sensitive perception of the particular and variable, passes through the experimental discovery of habitual regularities, and culminates in knowledge , as knowledge of the foundations that determine a thing in a universal and necessary way (cf. Aristotle, Met. A. 1). From this perspective we can say: a) C. is that process of knowledge that, judging (and, therefore, also forming concepts and drawing conclusions), comes to know the fur-daments of why something is like that (and not only exists and how it is). For this, the scientific judgment not only claims to be a “true” statement, but is itself capable of substantiating and justifying the -> truth (in the traditional sense: adequacy of the objective judgment with the thing judged) of this affirmation, and therefore carries with it the certainty of its truth. Certainty is based, on the one hand, on the agreement of an affirmation with other judgments and in particular with certain fundamental judgments (axioms) that are not founded on any other. Thus, the prosecuted fact is presented together with other facts and the known foundations appear framed in a joint foundation system (correspondence between propositions and facts, between principles and objective laws of reality). On the other hand, the certainty of the truth of the scientific statement is always based on the existence of the fact itself, which, obviously, has to be described and retained through propositions, built on the basis of concepts. b) C. is then, looking at its result, the relative totality, acquired in each case, of the propositions that are certainly true (and probable) over the systematic whole that supports the facts linked together.
This shows that the c. It is always linked, on the one hand, to a field of objective data, the whole of which forms its object of investigation (material object) and, therefore, to a point of view (formal object), under which it observes the material object of its investigation. research. This material object interests the c. by its “importance for” and in order of its formal object. Because only what is important under this fundamental and formal aspect that has been chosen is taken into account, and because all the features of the material object of…