The Battle Between The Christian Religion and Science

[Deeje]

Most people see the Christian religion and science as incompatible......I believe that it depends on your interpretation of both. Both are compatible IMV without compromising one for the other, which many seem to want to do. Faith is bending to unyielding science by those who are moving to theistic evolution as a middle ground. Is this move justified?

Faith appears to answer the questions that science alone can't, and science appears to answer the questions that faith alone can't.
This often leaves people with an either/or choice.....but the truth is you can marry them if you adjust your attitude to both. Compromising one for the acceptance of the other, (as in the case of theistic evolution,) is a weak position to take because faith appears to be sacrificed for credibility.

Science has provided some wonderful things for humanity, but it has also created the most heinous and destructive things, causing lasting harm for many and even for the planet itself. Science isn't to blame for that...it's the humans who misuse it who bear full responsibility. Religion has caused much harm in the world for the same reason.....even so called Christians have misused it to further their own agenda. So neither science nor religion are the problem.....it's us. Pitting one against the other just causes more unnecessary conflict.

Science can predict a rosy future, but human nature can thwart that intent and be used for evil purposes. There is no way to predict what humans will do through science.....who ever expected the world would be like it is in 2016?

Yet the Bible predicted exactly what humans would do in this time period. It gives us the reason for our existence, reveals a wise Creator God who has given us life, and who has revealed his long term plans for the earth and everything on it. At issue is the very thing that divides us on so many things.....free will and its appropriate use.

By giving humans free choice, the Creator was not taking a risk, because he already knew it could be abused, so he allowed humans to 'test drive' it and see where it would take them. He foreordained none of what transpired, but simply met each challenge as it arose and kept his original purpose on track. His sovereignty was challenged and he would meet that challenge and win, not with a demonstration of power, but by allowing humans to prove to themselves that they are not as clever as they think they are.

The Bible's story is simple.....at the end of the day, we have proof positive of the existence of a Creator who has allowed us to see first hand the folly of independence from him and many versions of self rule that have not worked. He will reveal himself to man at the appropriate time and bring his rulership back to mankind, who will have proven through many trials that self rule has failed time and again. (Daniel 2:44) They will not relinquish their power quietly however.

Every conceivable form of rulership has been tried and failed.....all except one. The last book of the Bible reveals one last attempt to pull humanity together under one world government. It will be a "rule of law", whereby peace and security can only be achieved by stripping its subjects of any real exercise of free will. (Have you noticed that the law enforcers now wear combat gear?) They are ready for this new rule of law.
It too will fail because the people have fought hard and value their freedom of choice even when they misuse it.

The concept has been around for a very long time, brought up in political statements decades ago as "the new world order"...."globalzation".....or "Federalism". A rose by any other name......it means the same thing. It has been on the table, just waiting for the right time to implement it. It will be offered as a solution to all man's problems and welcomed as such.....but it will be disastrous. (Matthew 24:31)

So the choice between faith and science is not really the issue. It's the choice between God and what he is offering (not forcing) and what humans are offering (soon to be forcing) upon us as a collective race, regardless of nation. Now is the time to choose our position....before it's too late to change course.

Most people are unaware of the real situation they are facing, but all will be revealed in due time. This is what the Bible says. This is an overview of where I believe we are in the stream of time.....it is confronting and sobering but if it is true, we are on the brink of great change and I think we can all feel it in our bones if we are honest.

There is only one winning side in this battle....a battle for the hearts and minds of men. If science appears to be winning, taking people away from faith, it's because this was also foretold. (Matthew 24:37-39)

So whose side are we on? The one with the big voice (Goliath) or the one who speaks quietly in the heart? (David's God)

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Most people see the Christian religion and science as incompatible......I believe that it depends on your interpretation of both. Both are compatible IMV without compromising one for the other, which many seem to want to do. Faith is bending to unyielding science by those who are moving to theistic evolution as a middle ground. Is this move justified?

Faith appears to answer the questions that science alone can't, and science appears to answer the questions that faith alone can't.
This often leaves people with an either/or choice.....but the truth is you can marry them if you adjust your attitude to both. Compromising one for the acceptance of the other, (as in the case of theistic evolution,) is a weak position to take because faith appears to be sacrificed for credibility.

Science has provided some wonderful things for humanity, but it has also created the most heinous and destructive things, causing lasting harm for many and even for the planet itself. Science isn't to blame for that...it's the humans who misuse it who bear full responsibility. Religion has caused much harm in the world for the same reason.....even so called Christians have misused it to further their own agenda. So neither science nor religion are the problem.....it's us. Pitting one against the other just causes more unnecessary conflict.

Science can predict a rosy future, but human nature can thwart that intent and be used for evil purposes. There is no way to predict what humans will do through science.....who ever expected the world would be like it is in 2016?

Yet the Bible predicted exactly what humans would do in this time period. It gives us the reason for our existence, reveals a wise Creator God who has given us life, and who has revealed his long term plans for the earth and everything on it. At issue is the very thing that divides us on so many things.....free will and its appropriate use.

By giving humans free choice, the Creator was not taking a risk, because he already knew it could be abused, so he allowed humans to 'test drive' it and see where it would take them. He foreordained none of what transpired, but simply met each challenge as it arose and kept his original purpose on track. His sovereignty was challenged and he would meet that challenge and win, not with a demonstration of power, but by allowing humans to prove to themselves that they are not as clever as they think they are.

The Bible's story is simple.....at the end of the day, we have proof positive of the existence of a Creator who has allowed us to see first hand the folly of independence from him and many versions of self rule that have not worked. He will reveal himself to man at the appropriate time and bring his rulership back to mankind, who will have proven through many trials that self rule has failed time and again. (Daniel 2:44) They will not relinquish their power quietly however.

Every conceivable form of rulership has been tried and failed.....all except one. The last book of the Bible reveals one last attempt to pull humanity together under one world government. It will be a "rule of law", whereby peace and security can only be achieved by stripping its subjects of any real exercise of free will. (Have you noticed that the law enforcers now wear combat gear?) They are ready for this new rule of law.
It too will fail because the people have fought hard and value their freedom of choice even when they misuse it.

The concept has been around for a very long time, brought up in political statements decades ago as "the new world order"...."globalzation".....or "Federalism". A rose by any other name......it means the same thing. It has been on the table, just waiting for the right time to implement it. It will be offered as a solution to all man's problems and welcomed as such.....but it will be disastrous. (Matthew 24:31)

So the choice between faith and science is not really the issue. It's the choice between God and what he is offering (not forcing) and what humans are offering (soon to be forcing) upon us as a collective race, regardless of nation. Now is the time to choose our position....before it's too late to change course.

Most people are unaware of the real situation they are facing, but all will be revealed in due time. This is what the Bible says. This is an overview of where I believe we are in the stream of time.....it is confronting and sobering but if it is true, we are on the brink of great change and I think we can all feel it in our bones if we are honest.

There is only one winning side in this battle....a battle for the hearts and minds of men. If science appears to be winning, taking people away from faith, it's because this was also foretold. (Matthew 24:37-39)

So whose side are we on? The one with the big voice (Goliath) or the one who speaks quietly in the heart? (David's God)

I honestly don't understand the debate between Christianity and science. If science is what we see with our natural eyes, theories of what we don't understand, and defining things from a "secular" perspective, from a Christian perspective, I'd assume that science is only describing creation and using human means to figure out the nature of it. Outside of that, I don't see the conflict.

 

[George-ananda]

Most people see the Christian religion and science as incompatible......

Not really nowadays. They are only incompatible when Christians make claims that are contradicted by science (which is usually only the case with the biblical fundamentalist/literalist types).

 

[RedDragon94]

Faith is bending to unyielding science by those who are moving to theistic evolution as a middle ground. Is this move justified?

I believe it is because in the second verse of the first chapter of Genesis it says that everything comes from water basically. What I mean is almost everything started off as water and was formed into other substances by God, except light. From the water comes dry ground, then animals, and lastly humans. The origins of light are a fickle in the Bible.

This often leaves people with an either/or choice.....but the truth is you can marry them if you adjust your attitude to both. Compromising one for the acceptance of the other, (as in the case of theistic evolution,) is a weak position to take because faith appears to be sacrificed for credibility.

How can there be a "marriage" without acceptance?

Science has provided some wonderful things for humanity, but it has also created the most heinous and destructive things, causing lasting harm for many and even for the planet itself. Science isn't to blame for that...it's the humans who misuse it who bear full responsibility.

Yes.

He foreordained none of what transpired,

God foreordains everything Deeje. (Romans 11:36)

 

[Sonofason]

Most people see the Christian religion and science as incompatible......I believe that it depends on your interpretation of both. Both are compatible IMV without compromising one for the other, which many seem to want to do. Faith is bending to unyielding science by those who are moving to theistic evolution as a middle ground. Is this move justified?

Faith appears to answer the questions that science alone can't, and science appears to answer the questions that faith alone can't.
This often leaves people with an either/or choice.....but the truth is you can marry them if you adjust your attitude to both. Compromising one for the acceptance of the other, (as in the case of theistic evolution,) is a weak position to take because faith appears to be sacrificed for credibility.

Science has provided some wonderful things for humanity, but it has also created the most heinous and destructive things, causing lasting harm for many and even for the planet itself. Science isn't to blame for that...it's the humans who misuse it who bear full responsibility. Religion has caused much harm in the world for the same reason.....even so called Christians have misused it to further their own agenda. So neither science nor religion are the problem.....it's us. Pitting one against the other just causes more unnecessary conflict.

Science can predict a rosy future, but human nature can thwart that intent and be used for evil purposes. There is no way to predict what humans will do through science.....who ever expected the world would be like it is in 2016?

Yet the Bible predicted exactly what humans would do in this time period. It gives us the reason for our existence, reveals a wise Creator God who has given us life, and who has revealed his long term plans for the earth and everything on it. At issue is the very thing that divides us on so many things.....free will and its appropriate use.

By giving humans free choice, the Creator was not taking a risk, because he already knew it could be abused, so he allowed humans to 'test drive' it and see where it would take them. He foreordained none of what transpired, but simply met each challenge as it arose and kept his original purpose on track. His sovereignty was challenged and he would meet that challenge and win, not with a demonstration of power, but by allowing humans to prove to themselves that they are not as clever as they think they are.

The Bible's story is simple.....at the end of the day, we have proof positive of the existence of a Creator who has allowed us to see first hand the folly of independence from him and many versions of self rule that have not worked. He will reveal himself to man at the appropriate time and bring his rulership back to mankind, who will have proven through many trials that self rule has failed time and again. (Daniel 2:44) They will not relinquish their power quietly however.

Every conceivable form of rulership has been tried and failed.....all except one. The last book of the Bible reveals one last attempt to pull humanity together under one world government. It will be a "rule of law", whereby peace and security can only be achieved by stripping its subjects of any real exercise of free will. (Have you noticed that the law enforcers now wear combat gear?) They are ready for this new rule of law.
It too will fail because the people have fought hard and value their freedom of choice even when they misuse it.

The concept has been around for a very long time, brought up in political statements decades ago as "the new world order"...."globalzation".....or "Federalism". A rose by any other name......it means the same thing. It has been on the table, just waiting for the right time to implement it. It will be offered as a solution to all man's problems and welcomed as such.....but it will be disastrous. (Matthew 24:31)

So the choice between faith and science is not really the issue. It's the choice between God and what he is offering (not forcing) and what humans are offering (soon to be forcing) upon us as a collective race, regardless of nation. Now is the time to choose our position....before it's too late to change course.

Most people are unaware of the real situation they are facing, but all will be revealed in due time. This is what the Bible says. This is an overview of where I believe we are in the stream of time.....it is confronting and sobering but if it is true, we are on the brink of great change and I think we can all feel it in our bones if we are honest.

There is only one winning side in this battle....a battle for the hearts and minds of men. If science appears to be winning, taking people away from faith, it's because this was also foretold. (Matthew 24:37-39)

So whose side are we on? The one with the big voice (Goliath) or the one who speaks quietly in the heart? (David's God)

Great post...I agree that it is most often the case that science, which is or ought to be considered true knowledge can be married with Scripture. Knowledge that is true cannot contradict the Scripture. And Scripture cannot contradict true knowledge. But we do need to be careful to not sacrifice one for the other. There ought never be an occasion to dismiss that which is written in Scripture. And there ought never be an occasion to dismiss that which is known to be true. The earth is not flat. And the Bible does not say that it is flat. If there is some new found knowledge that seems to contradict the scripture, I would suggest reviewing the scripture, as the new information may cast new light on your understanding and perception of the scripture that seems to be contradicted. If you cannot bring them into terms, that is if they cannot be married, abandon the science.

Most of us accept scientific knowledge as if it were fact. When in reality, what is oftentimes assumed to be true knowledge is nothing more than a claim. If we cannot make our own evaluations and resolve the conflict, abandon the science because God is far more reliable than the supposed knowledge of men.

 

[Sonofason]

Not really nowadays. They are only incompatible when Christians make claims that are contradicted by science (which is usually only the case with the biblical fundamentalist/literalist types).

There are no contradictions between biblical claims and true science.

 

[Deeje]

I honestly don't understand the debate between Christianity and science. If science is what we see with our natural eyes, theories of what we don't understand, and defining things from a "secular" perspective, from a Christian perspective, I'd assume that science is only describing creation and using human means to figure out the nature of it. Outside of that, I don't see the conflict.

If the Bible is correct...and I believe it is, then there is a master deceiver in the world out to shoot down belief in God so that he can siphon off worship for himself. Unfortunately, science is just an alternate religion for some. It seems to make its adherents feel superior to us feeble minded peasants, who appear to be wrapped up in silly superstition.

Time will tell I guess.

 

[Skwim]

If the Bible is correct...and I believe it is, then there is a master deceiver in the world out to shoot down belief in God so that he can siphon off worship for himself. Unfortunately, science is just an alternate religion for some. It seems to make its adherents feel superior to us feeble minded peasants, who appear to be wrapped up in silly superstition.

Time will tell I guess.

Or, perhaps this is nothing more than a defense mechanism of the feeble minded peasants shoring up their fragile position. Sure wouldn't be the first time this kind of justification was propounded.


.

 

[Deeje]

I believe it is because in the second verse of the first chapter of Genesis it says that everything comes from water basically. What I mean is almost everything started off as water and was formed into other substances by God, except light. From the water comes dry ground, then animals, and lastly humans. The origins of light are a fickle in the Bible.

Actually that is not true. A thorough study of the Bible account in Genesis makes many things apparent that are not so at a cursory reading...
Genesis ch. 1:

"1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

This is a clear and unequivocal statement. "The beginning" was the start of God's creative activity, since God himself had no "beginning".

"2 Now the earth was formless and desolate, and there was darkness upon the surface of the watery deep, and God’s active force was moving about over the surface of the waters."

There is no timeframe between Genesis 1:1 and verse 2.....it could have been millions or even billions of years because science tells us that the earth itself is very ancient. In the early stages the earth itself was uninhabitable. But God was to make provision for future tenants......guiding the process through many earth years.
A "Big Bang" if you like, was the origin of the universe, but a power greater than the universe itself was responsible for its production. Science cannot explain why that happened.

"3 And God said: “Let there be light.” Then there was light.
4 After that God saw that the light was good, and God began to divide the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, but the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, a first day".

Here the first creative period encompasses the first steps towards preparation for life. Light became visible through the cloud layers in preparation for what came next.....

"6 Then God said: “Let there be an expanse between the waters, and let there be a division between the waters and the waters.” 7 Then God went on to make the expanse and divided the waters beneath the expanse from the waters above the expanse. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.'"

Day 2 saw a division between the waters that covered the earth and water that would be suspended above it like a huge canopy that would no doubt help to filter out radiation from the sun and create a warm and moist climate in which living things would thrive.

"9 Then God said: “Let the waters under the heavens be collected together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, but the collecting of the waters, he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. "

Dry land appeared and the seas and oceans were separated in preparation for the first biological species to appear....

"11 Then God said: “Let the earth cause grass to sprout, seed-bearing plants and fruit trees according to their kinds, yielding fruit along with seed on the earth.” And it was so. 12 And the earth began to produce grass, seed-bearing plants and trees yielding fruit along with seed, according to their kinds. Then God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day."

Filtered light was enough for this plant life to grow and flourish in this moist atmosphere. This would in turn make the earth ready to support life that would feed on this vegetation. By the time living things were brought into existence, there would be an abundance of food for all. (perhaps this was why the dinosaurs were needed...huge munching machines)

"14 Then God said: “Let there be luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night, and they will serve as signs for seasons and for days and years. 15 They will serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God went on to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars. 17 Thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth 18 and to dominate by day and by night and to make a division between the light and the darkness. Then God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day."

Since 'God created the heavens and the earth' first, the sun, moon and stars already existed, so this passage is allowing for the cloud layer to dissipate and allow the luminaries to be observed from the earth. Humans and other creatures would be able to calculate time and seasons by the phases of the sun and moon.

"20 Then God said: “Let the waters swarm with living creatures, and let flying creatures fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.” 21 And God created the great sea creatures and all living creatures that move and swarm in the waters according to their kinds and every winged flying creature according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 With that God blessed them, saying: “Be fruitful and become many and fill the waters of the sea, and let the flying creatures become many in the earth.” 23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day."

The first creatures were created in the ocean and in the air. Science confirms this I believe.

"24 Then God said: “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds, domestic animals and creeping animals and wild animals of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. 25 And God went on to make the wild animals of the earth according to their kinds and the domestic animals according to their kinds and all the creeping animals of the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.'"

Each stage when it came to a completion, was examined and declared to be "good". All was progressing as the Creator intended.

"26 Then God said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every creeping animal that is moving on the earth.” 27 And God went on to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them. 28 Further, God blessed them, and God said to them: “Be fruitful and become many, fill the earth and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving on the earth.”

So the final stage was reached, and the crowning achievement of his creative process was an intelligent creature with his own qualities and attributes. This creature was installed as a caretaker of all the rest. Man's attributes and qualities were required for the responsibilities he was to be given.

"29 Then God said: “Here I have given to you every seed-bearing plant that is on the entire earth and every tree with seed-bearing fruit. Let them serve as food for you. 30 And to every wild animal of the earth and to every flying creature of the heavens and to everything moving on the earth in which there is life, I have given all green vegetation for food.” And it was so.
31 After that God saw everything he had made, and look! it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day."

All creatures were to to be vegetarians and everything required for them to be self sufficient and self replicating was provided in abundance.

God's final declaration on that 6th day, was that everything was now, not just "good" but "very good"....meaning that all God wanted to accomplish was now done to his satisfaction. He could "rest" from his creative efforts and allow the life he had created to test drive their surroundings and work out the best way to fulfill their assignment in his rest day, which I believe is still in progress.

The creation account is not outside of what science knows.

How can there be a "marriage" without acceptance?

What makes people refuse to accept the Bible's account in preference to what science says about the creation of the earth and everything on it? A 'marriage' can be made if we really understand the truth and accept it fr what it is.

God foreordains everything Deeje. (Romans 11:36)

No, I am sorry, but we are free willed beings and if all was foreordained then no one has any choice in anything they do. That means that the penalty for disobedience in Eden was meaningless.....it means that God set up his human family for failure and he is to blame for all our suffering.....that is not the actions of a loving God.

 

[Laika]

Most people see the Christian religion and science as incompatible......I believe that it depends on your interpretation of both. Both are compatible IMV without compromising one for the other, which many seem to want to do. Faith is bending to unyielding science by those who are moving to theistic evolution as a middle ground. Is this move justified?

Faith appears to answer the questions that science alone can't, and science appears to answer the questions that faith alone can't.
This often leaves people with an either/or choice.....but the truth is you can marry them if you adjust your attitude to both. Compromising one for the acceptance of the other, (as in the case of theistic evolution,) is a weak position to take because faith appears to be sacrificed for credibility.

Science has provided some wonderful things for humanity, but it has also created the most heinous and destructive things, causing lasting harm for many and even for the planet itself. Science isn't to blame for that...it's the humans who misuse it who bear full responsibility. Religion has caused much harm in the world for the same reason.....even so called Christians have misused it to further their own agenda. So neither science nor religion are the problem.....it's us. Pitting one against the other just causes more unnecessary conflict.

Science can predict a rosy future, but human nature can thwart that intent and be used for evil purposes. There is no way to predict what humans will do through science.....who ever expected the world would be like it is in 2016?

Yet the Bible predicted exactly what humans would do in this time period. It gives us the reason for our existence, reveals a wise Creator God who has given us life, and who has revealed his long term plans for the earth and everything on it. At issue is the very thing that divides us on so many things.....free will and its appropriate use.

By giving humans free choice, the Creator was not taking a risk, because he already knew it could be abused, so he allowed humans to 'test drive' it and see where it would take them. He foreordained none of what transpired, but simply met each challenge as it arose and kept his original purpose on track. His sovereignty was challenged and he would meet that challenge and win, not with a demonstration of power, but by allowing humans to prove to themselves that they are not as clever as they think they are.

The Bible's story is simple.....at the end of the day, we have proof positive of the existence of a Creator who has allowed us to see first hand the folly of independence from him and many versions of self rule that have not worked. He will reveal himself to man at the appropriate time and bring his rulership back to mankind, who will have proven through many trials that self rule has failed time and again. (Daniel 2:44) They will not relinquish their power quietly however.

Every conceivable form of rulership has been tried and failed.....all except one. The last book of the Bible reveals one last attempt to pull humanity together under one world government. It will be a "rule of law", whereby peace and security can only be achieved by stripping its subjects of any real exercise of free will. (Have you noticed that the law enforcers now wear combat gear?) They are ready for this new rule of law.
It too will fail because the people have fought hard and value their freedom of choice even when they misuse it.

The concept has been around for a very long time, brought up in political statements decades ago as "the new world order"...."globalzation".....or "Federalism". A rose by any other name......it means the same thing. It has been on the table, just waiting for the right time to implement it. It will be offered as a solution to all man's problems and welcomed as such.....but it will be disastrous. (Matthew 24:31)

So the choice between faith and science is not really the issue. It's the choice between God and what he is offering (not forcing) and what humans are offering (soon to be forcing) upon us as a collective race, regardless of nation. Now is the time to choose our position....before it's too late to change course.

Most people are unaware of the real situation they are facing, but all will be revealed in due time. This is what the Bible says. This is an overview of where I believe we are in the stream of time.....it is confronting and sobering but if it is true, we are on the brink of great change and I think we can all feel it in our bones if we are honest.

There is only one winning side in this battle....a battle for the hearts and minds of men. If science appears to be winning, taking people away from faith, it's because this was also foretold. (Matthew 24:37-39)

So whose side are we on? The one with the big voice (Goliath) or the one who speaks quietly in the heart? (David's God)

Christianity is the worlds largest religion with over 2.2 billion adherents so I find the idea that it is threatened a bit perplexing. May I ask if you have a specific threat to Christianity in mind?

Or is this sort of an eternal struggle between the arguably corrupting material interests of the body and the immaterial nature of the soul? Would that only be reconciled when all the souls of mankind are in the kingdom of heavan?

 

[Kirran]

R.e. JW doctrine most Christians aren't really Christians. Also, only 144,000 people will ultimately gain everlasting life - the 100 billion others will die permanently after their resurrection.

 

[oldbadger]

Most people see the Christian religion and science as incompatible...............

Not really......
On the side, it was sad that you selected 'Theism' for this thread, rather than 'Science and Religion'. Could you be a bit biased against Science by any chance?
No, Science is simply 'knowledge' and there is no antipathy or contention between True-Science and Real-Truth. A person's Faith is more personal, and does not need for provenance, so long as it does no affect others adversely.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If the Bible is correct...and I believe it is, then there is a master deceiver in the world out to shoot down belief in God so that he can siphon off worship for himself. Unfortunately, science is just an alternate religion for some. It seems to make its adherents feel superior to us feeble minded peasants, who appear to be wrapped up in silly superstition.

Time will tell I guess.

Em. How can science be a religion? Taking out people, what is wrong with science? (Reminds me of god punishing the snake rather than Satan). I think if god is more worried about science, he is trying to take the legs off the wrong animal.

I side tracked: What's wrong with science?

If I had a working definition of science than I can judge whether what you make sense, does, well make sense. As for now, it sounds like you are saying science (the study of god's creation?) is useless and a sin somehow.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Not really nowadays. They are only incompatible when Christians make claims that are contradicted by science (which is usually only the case with the biblical fundamentalist/literalist types).

There are claims in most major denominations that are anti-science.

For instance, the Catholic Church - the world's largest Christian denomination - holds as a tenet of faith that monogenism for humans is correct and polygenism is wrong. This is contradicted by evolutionary science: speciation just doesn't happen that way.

It doesn't get much attention, though, because:

- it's more subtlely wrong than young earth creationism.
- a lot of Catholics don't realize that monogenism is given as a required tenet of faith by their Church.

Beyond the Catholic Church... if anti-science views weren't mainstream in Christianity, Kitzmiller v. Dover would never have happened.

 

[Kirran]

For instance, the Catholic Church - the world's largest Christian denomination - holds as a tenet of faith that monogenism for humans is correct and polygenism is wrong. This is contradicted by evolutionary science: speciation just doesn't happen that way.

It doesn't get much attention, though, because:

- it's more subtlely wrong than young earth creationism.
- a lot of Catholics don't realize that monogenism is given as a required tenet of faith by their Church.

Beyond the Catholic Church... if anti-science views weren't mainstream in Christianity, Kitzmiller v. Dover would never have happened.

Monogenism is correct. Unless you're gonna put in Neanderthal, Denisovan etc admixture, but even then that's a very small amount of genetic heritage, and those groups are ultimately also of common ancestry a little further back anyway.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Monogenism is correct. Unless you're gonna put in Neanderthal, Denisovan etc admixture, but even then that's a very small amount of genetic heritage, and those groups are ultimately also of common ancestry a little further back anyway.

Sorry - I forgot that there's more than one definition for "monogenism". What I was getting at is the Catholic belief that all of humanity descended from a lone original male-female pair of the first "true humans", and didn't descend from a larger group.

Modern science has identified that the minimum viable population for humans is significantly more than 2, but the Catholic Church argues as a matter of faith that humanity started from a population bottleneck of exactly 2 individuals. That's what I was getting at.

 

[Kirran]

Really? Interesting! Considering their acceptance of evolution that is a trifle odd. I imagine that while it is RCC doctrine many Catholics will disagree!

 

[metis]

Any religion or denomination that is not largely compatible with science has to be basically bogus. For example, if any teaches that evolution has not occurred (this would include "macro-evolution"), when it's clearly obvious and even common sense that it has been occurring, then that religion/denomination should not be taken seriously.

 

[Skwim]

Em. How can science be a religion? Taking out people, what is wrong with science? (Reminds me of god punishing the snake rather than Satan). I think if god is more worried about science, he is trying to take the legs off the wrong animal.

Recasting science as a religion puts it in a category where it's more easily denounced. No need to take into account the differing nature of science if one can pretend it's just another "one of us," Just another religion. It's a ludicrous gambit that only appeases the frustrations of the believer, and a ruse usually found only among fundamentalist Christians. In short, it's a ploy that aches to be ignored, yet remembered for what it says about such people.


.

 

[RedDragon94]

This is a clear and unequivocal statement. "The beginning" was the start of God's creative activity, since God himself had no "beginning".

The beginning of God's creative activity= initiating evolution/the big bang.

There is no timeframe between Genesis 1:1 and verse 2.....it could have been millions or even billions of years because science tells us that the earth itself is very ancient. In the early stages the earth itself was uninhabitable. But God was to make provision for future tenants......guiding the process through many earth years. A "Big Bang" if you like, was the origin of the universe, but a power greater than the universe itself was responsible for its production. Science cannot explain why that happened.

I didn't say there is no God.

What makes people refuse to accept the Bible's account in preference to what science says about the creation of the earth and everything on it? A 'marriage' can be made if we really understand the truth and accept it fr what it is.

I think a person can accept that the Bible has an otherworldly origin and still be an evolutionist. There's no contradiction there. You seem to be saying that The Bible and modern science contradict.

No, I am sorry, but we are free willed beings and if all was foreordained then no one has any choice in anything they do.

You know how you posted this because I said that God foreordains everything?... You posted that because you predisposed to respond that way. So, you can't escape it.

That means that the penalty for disobedience in Eden was meaningless.

Possibly. Or it could just mean that this is God's story and we're just along for the ride.

it means that God set up his human family for failure and he is to blame for all our suffering.

Although we are not in control, we are responsible. (Isaiah 45:7, Romans 8:28) There are two extremes, one is to say we are as powerful as God and the other is to say God is to blame. Both are incorrect.

that is not the actions of a loving God.

Daniel 4:35 Romans 9:28-29