Faith vs. Science

[the_interactionist]

Why does it have to be Faith vs. Science? These are not two mutually exclusive things. There are people on both sides of the Evolution/Creationism debate who vehemently claim that science and faith are not at odds with each other.

I'm thinking this all ties in with the same arguement that Christians vs secular world will always be in conflict with. Naturally, the secular would like to "believe" that they don't have to be responsible for their actions. How else can they continue to live a life of sin and justify it? Same is true if "scientist" can disprove the theory that the world was "created" by a "supernatural" being. Premise is , if you can disprove one then the other couldn't possibly exist as well~~~ Boy will they all be in for a "culture shock!"

The secular "world" proudly proclaims responsibility for their actions. The vast majority of intelligent atheists or secularists won't be found committing crimes against humanity. The statement that one is "living in sin," doesn't have anything to do with personal responsibility or morality - it has to do with YOUR idea of right and wrong projected onto those who choose to conform to your dogma and ideology.

How do YOU define sin anyway? Most likely, you define it according to a passage from the Bible.

I define something that is bad enough to be considered "sinful" according to how it affects other people. Not everything Christians, or other religions, define as sinful has a negative or harmful affect on anyone. I mean, if you're going to bomb an abortion clinic to save innocent life, that's pretty "sinful", regardless of whether you're a Christian or an atheist.

[ted]

There are also sins which are harmful to our relaionship to God. The might not affect other people, but are sinful and against God- which are just as bad as sins against our fellow man.

t.

[Guest Girth]

Science is evil.

be very careful with thinking like that. about 1000 years ago the muslims used to be the scientific power in the world. basically everything that america is today. about 300 years had passed with this being the case and suddenly a philosiphy began to sweep through the muslim world that taught the evilness of mathematics. look at the middle east today. that is what was left in its wake.

[EricH]

The secular "world" proudly proclaims responsibility for their actions. The vast majority of intelligent atheists or secularists won't be found committing crimes against humanity. The statement that one is "living in sin," doesn't have anything to do with personal responsibility or morality - it has to do with YOUR idea of right and wrong projected onto those who choose to conform to your dogma and ideology.

How do YOU define sin anyway? Most likely, you define it according to a passage from the Bible.

I define something that is bad enough to be considered "sinful" according to how it affects other people. Not everything Christians, or other religions, define as sinful has a negative or harmful affect on anyone. I mean, if you're going to bomb an abortion clinic to save innocent life, that's pretty "sinful", regardless of whether you're a Christian or an atheist.

So I guess what you are admitting is that you have a preconceived notion of what is right and wrong that you use to measure your behavior and the behavior of others. Yours is based on what you consider harmful. So basically it is idiosyncratic. There is another option. That there is a standard of morality that is based on the eternal and leads to life.

[Adarian]

Is it faith vs science, or faith vs evolution? Science in and of itself carries no moral weight at all. Neither can it. It is just a tool of the mind, and a tool in the hand. It has brought many great blessings to mankind. I consider pure science to be the study of the works of God in the natural realm, as all good things come from God. But faith is not always at odds with it. The stance of evolution is quite at odds with God's account of creation, but science in general is not. The use of science is not always morally correct, but neither is the use of money and many other things.

[Jesus Admirer]

The links below are example quotations from websites with free OnLine Books which challenge evolution, but they do have copyrights, so they can't be reproduced for marketing purposes. But they can be copied for teaching or private learning.

The following quote is from http://www.halos.com/. (Evidence of a young earth.)

Quote: "Etched within Earth's foundation rocks

Edited February 13, 2007 by Jesus Admirer

[tdrehfal]

If we evolved, why did it stop?

It hasn't stopped. Evolution takes millions and millions of years. There's no way to see it happen.

Why are apes still apes, monkeys still monkeys?

The apes and monkeys that are around today are not the same as the apes and monkeys that were around when early hominid species first evolved. They were different. We didn't evolve from modern-day apes.

This depends on the evolutionary model that you subscribe to, it's a matter of phyletic gradualism vs. punctuated equillibrium. If punctuated equillibrium

is true, we should theoretically be able to see it take place, somewhere, today. And if we didn't evolve from modern-day apes, why are they

referred to by so many as our ancestors, then? And you compare our DNA to theirs, claiming supposedly a 98-99% similiarity (even though you throw out

what you guys call 'junk DNA' in the process, which is MOST of the DNA, so who knows what the real number is...) You USE modern-day apes

in your evolutionary theory and then claim we didn't evolve from those apes. So I guess people need to stop using apes all together, eh?

Edited January 16, 2007 by tdrehfal

[tdrehfal]

Why does it have to be Faith vs. Science? These are not two mutually exclusive things. There are people on both sides of the Evolution/Creationism debate who vehemently claim that science and faith are not at odds with each other.

It's sad, but it does have to be this way, especially with people like Mr. Dawkins who say 'We cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door"... If People really

WERE willing to cut eachother a little slack and work together I believe the planet would 1000x better than it is. They aren't two mutually exclusive

things, but there are two mutually exclusive worldviews. And both are TOO rigid. We have people that won't admit that adaptation or microevolution

can happen, and then we have people on the opposite end that say God can't exist because there's 'no scientific proof'. Lots of scientists won't step

outside of what's scientific, and lots of Christians won't step outside of what they feel would somehow threaten God's sovereignty somehow because

they feel somehow threatened by it.

[trailmix_101]

Why does it have to be Faith vs. Science? These are not two mutually exclusive things. There are people on both sides of the Evolution/Creationism debate who vehemently claim that science and faith are not at odds with each other.

Just for some interesting reading for people interested in this topic of Faith vs Science here is an article i found by Albert Einstein.

The topics in this article are:

Religion and science Part 1, 2, and 3

and Religion and Science... Irreconcilable

http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm

Edited January 22, 2007 by trailmix_101

[Jesus Admirer]

The links below are example quotations from websites with free OnLine Books which challenge evolution, but they do have copyrights, so they can't be reproduced for marketing purposes. But they can be copied for teaching or private learning.

The following quote is from http://www.halos.com/. (Evidence of a young earth.)

Quote: "Etched within Earth's foundation rocks

Edited February 13, 2007 by Jesus Admirer