The Battle Between The Christian Religion and Science

[omega2xx]

"The why?" What is your idea of the why?


By which one can make up answers to the "whys?" all day long.


.

Why did a dog-like land animal become a whale? Evolution also fails to give the 'How." for what it says.

 

[omega2xx]

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).

Some Christians may make comments contradicted by science, but the Bible does not. The Bible says very little that is about science. One this it does say that is scientific is "after its kind," which is proven every day, 1000 of times and cannot be falsified.

 

[omega2xx]

The religious, mostly being Christians, need to wake up to themselves and realize that science are way above them in every way.

Those who accept evolution as a fact need to wake up to them selves and realize that nothing in the TOE is real science. There is no conflict between Christianity and science and God , the Creator of science puts Christianity above science, even real science, in every way.

I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else. C.S.Lewis

 

[omega2xx]

Science and Religion will always be at odds because Religion causes us to assume answers before observation. Religions and Mythologies also asks us to push back against challenges to those first assumptions, which is an inherent fault in that system of thought.

It requires a lot of mental hoola-hooping to keep the two from being at odds with each other. The first paragraph of the OP attests to this.

The trick is to recognize that neither evolution nor religion is about science,

I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else. C.S.Lewis

 

[Skwim]

Why did a dog-like land animal become a whale?

It evolved.

Evolution also fails to give the 'How." for what it says.

Excuse me! That's what the field of evolutionary study is all about: how one form of life changes into another. I strongly suggest you familiarize yourself with the basics of evolution. Here's an excellent starting point. Just keep clicking on the "next" to continue.

The trick is to recognize that neither evolution nor religion is about science,

No, but the science of evolution is about evolution.
.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The debate is not between science and Christianity. It is between evolution and Christianity. Real science proves/disproves theories. If the are proved, they become laws. That is why evolution is still called a theory.

Everything is in the process of evolution. The earth would not exist if it and we had no evolve from "lower" or simple atoms etc to more complex ones. Its the laws of nature. If christianity denies evolution as defined by scientist not people's guesses and arguments, then they deny gods creation of the world and his role in its continous evolving complexity.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Why did a dog-like land animal become a whale? Evolution also fails to give the 'How." for what it says.

People who ask questions like this really do display just how little know or understand about what the are talking about it. No animal "turns into" any other animal. It lives and it dies as it was -- whale, dog, fish, bird. But all animals that leave descendants leave descendants that are slightly different from themselves. Look at your children. They are not carbon copies of you. They're a little taller (or shorter), darker (or fairer), able to digest some things more or less easily than you are, allergic to things you're not or not allergic to things you are, able to swim a little better, or not as well, and a million more little differences. And they will pass some of those differences on to their own children. That might make your grand-children just little more or less likely to have offspring of their own, to whom they will pass along those changes, and more that occur at random.

What people who refuse to see evolution for what it is make the mistake of doing is forgetting that little changes -- happening hundreds, thousands or millions of times -- can really add up. In 100,000 generations, under very different environmental conditions than the first generation, and you can wind up with very, very different creatures.

 

[metis]

Those who accept evolution as a fact need to wake up to them selves and realize that nothing in the TOE is real science. There is no conflict between Christianity and science and God , the Creator of science puts Christianity above science, even real science, in every way.

You really do not have a clue with what you're talking about. I taught anthropology for 30 years, and I never had problems getting enough scientific material to teach from. Matter of fact, I had to cut what I covered to squeeze it all in.

And the fact that you elevate your religion to the level of absolute fact pretty much tells anyone here that you are hardly objective in any way.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

And bear in mind -- if you accept (as I do NOT) Adam from around 6,000 years ago, that's actually only about 200 generations in the male line. That's not enough generations for evolution to be very noticeable.

 

[jonathan180iq]

I can prove more in the first chapter of Genesis than evolutionist have proven in 100+ years.

Please, go right ahead.

 

[Blessed of JEHOVAH]

Science will always be a loser, it cannot ever explain the why. Whereas, a divine reality is the winner.

Look at it this way the difference between the practical wisdom of the Kingdom ( which is the bible ) and the practical wisdom of the world is like MIT and a preschooler. They may know some things but you won't ask them for advice about the meaning of life and how to live and trust that it is 100% correct if you trust it at all.

Matthew 4 : 4 But he answered: ( “It is written: ‘Man must live, not on bread alone, but on every word that comes from Jehovah’s mouth.’” )

Jesus said this to satan when he tempted him to turn stones into bread. He repeated this scripture from Deuteronomy 8 : 3. The words of the bible are the words from Jehovah's mouth and that's the practical wisdom we should be living on.

 

[Sonofason]

Really? Then you know very little about one or the other -- or more probably both! A bat is not a bird --okay? The Bible says it is, science says it's not. Score 1 for science. The sun could not have stood still for a day, the only way for that to happen (now that we know how the solar system works) is to stop the planet Earth's rotation in its tracks -- an event that would have caused catastrophic damage to everything. (Think about a fast car hitting a wall. What happens? The planet rotates at the equator over 1000 MPH. Stop that all at once and Joshua's guts would have been torn out of his body in an instant.

Let us be clear -- you are concerned with the Bible, and have extremely limited knowledge of science. You cannot make comparisons between one thing and another if you don't actually know anything at all about one of them.

What was the definition of the word bird as it was used in the time it was used when the bible verse was written that distinguished that a bat is a bird. I suggest to you that at that time a bat was indeed a kind of bird, as it was a creature that has wings, and creatures with wings were considered to be birds. And of course you have absolutely no evidence to refute this claim.

If God is capable of stopping the earths rotation in its tracks, it may very well be true that He is also capable of preventing all of the catastrophic damage that you suggest would have resulted in the stopping of the earths rotation in its tracks.

Because I am far more open minded than you, I have resolved your conflicts. Next?

 

[Sonofason]

Everything is in the process of evolution. The earth would not exist if it and we had no evolve from "lower" or simple atoms etc to more complex ones. Its the laws of nature. If christianity denies evolution as defined by scientist not people's guesses and arguments, then they deny gods creation of the world and his role in its continous evolving complexity.

Hence the concept of aeons - a power existing from eternity; an emanation or phase of the supreme deity.

 

[Sonofason]

People who ask questions like this really do display just how little know or understand about what the are talking about it. No animal "turns into" any other animal. It lives and it dies as it was -- whale, dog, fish, bird. But all animals that leave descendants leave descendants that are slightly different from themselves. Look at your children. They are not carbon copies of you. They're a little taller (or shorter), darker (or fairer), able to digest some things more or less easily than you are, allergic to things you're not or not allergic to things you are, able to swim a little better, or not as well, and a million more little differences. And they will pass some of those differences on to their own children. That might make your grand-children just little more or less likely to have offspring of their own, to whom they will pass along those changes, and more that occur at random.

What people who refuse to see evolution for what it is make the mistake of doing is forgetting that little changes -- happening hundreds, thousands or millions of times -- can really add up. In 100,000 generations, under very different environmental conditions than the first generation, and you can wind up with very, very different creatures.

I have no idea why some people will not consider that evolution might be true. The theory of evolution has not been disproved. It's like God's existence...it has not been disproved.

 

[Sonofason]

And bear in mind -- if you accept (as I do NOT) Adam from around 6,000 years ago, that's actually only about 200 generations in the male line. That's not enough generations for evolution to be very noticeable.

So you do not believe that Adam was the first modern human being? At which point does a nonhuman life form become as fully human as we are today?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

So you do not believe that Adam was the first modern human being? At which point does a nonhuman life form become as fully human as we are today?

The fact that you use the word "become" tells me that you don't get it and you won't get it. You continue to think of something "changing," and that is definitively NOT what evolution does. I'm not going to try to teach biology -- over the internet -- to somebody waiting for magic tricks. Either do some studying, or give it up.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Hence the concept of aeons - a power existing from eternity; an emanation or phase of the supreme deity.

The laws of nature do not suggest a supreme deity. Thats humans attributing who or what they think created the world to a world that existed without us and needs no descriptuon ofnits origin. . Evolution isnt creation. So realistically, how does evolution suggest a deity? Why and how in nature does it suggest this deity be supreme?

The only one of many things that underlines life is energy. Where do god fit in to it?

 

[Sonofason]

The fact that you use the word "become" tells me that you don't get it and you won't get it. You continue to think of something "changing," and that is definitively NOT what evolution does. I'm not going to try to teach biology -- over the internet -- to somebody waiting for magic tricks. Either do some studying, or give it up.

Are you suggesting that if human beings evolved from some kind of microbe, that that microbe was human?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Are you suggesting that if human beings evolved from some kind of microbe, that that microbe was human?

Sorry, but since you've decided to maintain your ignorance about the subject, I'm not going to respond further. You are permitted to be unknowledgeable -- even wilfully. And since you've decided you'd like to remain there, it would be ungentlemanly of me to try to dissuade you. Learning is only pleasurable for those who actually wish to learn. You wish to hold onto your myths with a vice-like grip and never let go, no matter what the evidence. Please do.

 

[Sonofason]

Sorry, but since you've decided to maintain your ignorance about the subject, I'm not going to respond further. You are permitted to be unknowledgeable -- even wilfully. And since you've decided you'd like to remain there, it would be ungentlemanly of me to try to dissuade you. Learning is only pleasurable for those who actually wish to learn. You wish to hold onto your myths with a vice-like grip and never let go, no matter what the evidence. Please do.

Unless I heard a good and reasonable argument to the contrary, I don't suppose I'd be capable of changing my mind.