Faith And Science

[MorningGlory]

Science is in the eye of the beholder. If you hold a humanistic world view with a mix of relativism, then what is seen is explained from the concepts of one's own mind or some form of an "educated guess" which is usually aligned w/ the views of evolution (which is a distorted view). But, if science is held in view of the truth of God's Word, or a Christian world view, then science can be REASONABLY explained through creation science or apologetics.

Creation science is not science. It is theology. It explains nothing.

It explains nothing to those don't believe......to the believer the explanation is crystal clear.

[MorningGlory]

Science is in the eye of the beholder. If you hold a humanistic world view with a mix of relativism, then what is seen is explained from the concepts of one's own mind or some form of an "educated guess" which is usually aligned w/ the views of evolution (which is a distorted view). But, if science is held in view of the truth of God's Word, or a Christian world view, then science can be REASONABLY explained through creation science or apologetics.

Creation science is not science. It is theology. It explains nothing.

It explains nothing to those don't believe......to the believer the explanation is crystal clear.

It is still not science.

If it is based on your existing belief why even bother?

Well, yes, it IS science. God created everything, including science. Faith shouldn't determine conclusions....it should be the filter through which information passes. Every conclusion...about anything...is based on the beliefs of the one drawing that conclusion. An atheist won't consider Creation in his findings....a Creationist won't consider evolution of every species from a common ancestor. What's the difference? Other than the person's beliefs, that is.

[MorningGlory]

Science is in the eye of the beholder. If you hold a humanistic world view with a mix of relativism, then what is seen is explained from the concepts of one's own mind or some form of an "educated guess" which is usually aligned w/ the views of evolution (which is a distorted view). But, if science is held in view of the truth of God's Word, or a Christian world view, then science can be REASONABLY explained through creation science or apologetics.

Creation science is not science. It is theology. It explains nothing.

It explains nothing to those don't believe......to the believer the explanation is crystal clear.

It is still not science.

If it is based on your existing belief why even bother?

Well, yes, it IS science. God created everything, including science. Faith shouldn't determine conclusions....it should be the filter through which information passes. Every conclusion...about anything...is based on the beliefs of the one drawing that conclusion. An atheist won't consider Creation in his findings....a Creationist won't consider evolution of every species from a common ancestor. What's the difference? Other than the person's beliefs, that is.

The difference is whether or not you wish to ignore the evidence. Creationists, especially those who read Genesis as literal, ignore just about every piece of evidence from every branch of science to squish the real world into their beliefs.

For a true believer, jukia, Genesis is the beginning...of everything. As a Christian, I believe in science; I believe that evolution happens to a degree, I believe in the patterns of global climate change over the eons and I believe the earth itself is very old. But my God has caused to be recorded His creation of the world as we know it and the creation of man in His likeness. I can't speak for anyone else of course but, to me, the Genesis story fits perfectly with science. I don't ignore evidence; I use the brain He gave me and accept the evidence of God being the Creator.

[MorningGlory]

For a true believer, jukia, Genesis is the beginning...of everything. As a Christian, I believe in science; I believe that evolution happens to a degree, I believe in the patterns of global climate change over the eons and I believe the earth itself is very old. But my God has caused to be recorded His creation of the world as we know it and the creation of man in His likeness. I can't speak for anyone else of course but, to me, the Genesis story fits perfectly with science. I don't ignore evidence; I use the brain He gave me and accept the evidence of God being the Creator.

No, sorry, the Genesis story does not fit with science. Science indicates that animals and plants evolved, not made as separate kinds. Evolution includes man. there is no evidence of a world wide flood.

All creatures that were created, and listed in Genesis, still roam the earth today. They, and we, reproduce within our own 'kind' as set forth in the Bible. The world wide flood, as recorded in several ancient texts, was a known world wide flood, IMO. Evidence does exist of a massive flood over a large part of the world about six thousand years ago. God is science; man will not discover anything that wasn't produced by the Lord's own hand because no such thing has ever existed. If we, man, evolved from an amoeba...the Bible would tell us so.

[MorningGlory]

All creatures that were created, and listed in Genesis, still roam the earth today. They, and we, reproduce within our own 'kind' as set forth in the Bible. The world wide flood, as recorded in several ancient texts, was a known world wide flood, IMO. Evidence does exist of a massive flood over a large part of the world about six thousand years ago. God is science; man will not discover anything that wasn't produced by the Lord's own hand because no such thing has ever existed. If we, man, evolved from an amoeba...the Bible would tell us so.

What physical evidence do you have of a world wide flood?

Not a 'world wide flood' but a known world wide flood. Remember in Biblical times the Western Hemisphere was unknown.....see here.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/ctlframe4.html

[Isaiah-smiles]

The difference is whether or not you wish to ignore the evidence. Creationists, especially those who read Genesis as literal, ignore just about every piece of evidence from every branch of science to squish the real world into their beliefs.

I don't think you even got what I was saying, so obviously, you are of a world view. "Science" is the study of of everything that is around us and and our perception is based on the type of view (even the theories we may have because certain things cannot be observed). Evolution is a religion, no matter how ridiculous the theories of evolution may sound, they still hold on to their faith.

So, what are some of this "evidence" that we Christians ignore. Please, give me some examples.

[Isaiah-smiles]

What physical evidence do you have of a world wide flood?

The Grand Canyon, Fossilized clams on top of Mount Everest, Mountains that runs the course of every coast of every continent around the world (that is how we have "run-off"). When it was time for God to allow the land to re-appear, He manipulated the Teutonic plates to create higher mountains and lower valleys in order for water to run-off. Where did the Ark rest? God changed the topographical face of the world. In other words, the pre-flood earth looked different than the post-flood earth. That is how we answer why there were fossilized clams on top of one of the highest mountains

Science is taking the evidence of what we can observe and putting forth the answers in accordance to our world view, whether it be humanistic or theistic (not all things can be observed/ i.e. the whole so-called process of a star being formed by dust and debris).

[MorningGlory]

All creatures that were created, and listed in Genesis, still roam the earth today. They, and we, reproduce within our own 'kind' as set forth in the Bible. The world wide flood, as recorded in several ancient texts, was a known world wide flood, IMO. Evidence does exist of a massive flood over a large part of the world about six thousand years ago. God is science; man will not discover anything that wasn't produced by the Lord's own hand because no such thing has ever existed. If we, man, evolved from an amoeba...the Bible would tell us so.

What physical evidence do you have of a world wide flood?

Not a 'world wide flood' but a known world wide flood. Remember in Biblical times the Western Hemisphere was unknown.....see here.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/ctlframe4.html

Interesting, so the flood was not world wide. But doesn't that contradict a literal reading of the Bible?

If the flood was just in the black sea area, was there an ark with all animals on it? If just in Black Sea area then why was an ark needed? Lots of animals---and people---lived elsewhere on the globe and would not have been affected by a local Black Sea flood.

This doesn't contradict a literal reading at all...Genesis is talking about the known inhabited world being destroyed by a flood. There were probably people in other parts of the world but we don't know if they died or not. You have to remember that the world's population, at the time, would have been a few hundred thousand; not the 6.2 billion on earth today. And an Ark was called for because the Lord commanded Noah to build one and bring those animals aboard. We can't apply human reasoning to the plans of God.

[Guest lovinghim4ever]

I did not mean for this to turn into some big debate.

I was simply trying to share my belief that we can do absolutely NOTHING without God.

ALL things were created by God. ALL!

Therefore . . .

We cannot gain knowledge without God.

We cannot have faith without God.

We cannot be logical without God.

We cannot have Science without God.

We simply cannot do anything without God!