Close Topic Options

Integrating Science And Religion - Page 2

First off, I'm coming from a view that the Bible is more myth and legend than actual fact. I do, however feel that intelligent design is as plausible as macroevolutionary theory. Since we do not have any concise evidence to show any leap from monkey to man, or from any species to another, no one can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from monkeys. See that after all the fossils we have found, we have found not one link between one single species that is definitive, I am prone to think that the commonly excepted theory of evolution is most likely not true. That leaves only intelligent design as an alternative.

Intelligent design does not have to involved God necessarily creating us as the story in Genesis tells us. Any other race of beings could have provided the basic building blocks of life for the different species and the rest is history. Or, God could have started all life by just providing the basic species from which everything could evolve, Gods creation doesn't have to be the story in Genesis. After all, there are two separate accounts of creation in Genesis and if you read closely, take your notes, you realize that both accounts absolutely cannot co-exist.

But what is this debate really about? It is not about religion, or science at heart. It is in fact, a need human beings have to know where they came from. By knowing that, we can know why we are on this planet. That is why religion and science thrive in this country because they both fill a basic human need to belong.

Religion Science Integrating

I definitely agree with that. You can see it from early mythology, where there is a god for lightning, a god for volcanos, a god for the sea. Those are really abstract ideas that primaly try to satisfy that curiosity of ours as to how all of this came to be.

Integrating Science And Religion Beliefs Religious General

Christians challenge teaching of evolution

A Christian group promoting intelligent design theory over evolution has sent teaching material to schools that critics say is religious propaganda and sloppy pseudoscience.
Ref. https://www.stuff.co.nz/4599856a10.html

Page 2 Religion Science Integrating

I am one who thinks that science and the bible have a lot in common. Look into genesis. After adam and eve were out of the garden. After cain killed able. God marked him and sent him out into the masses. Where did these masses come from? I think there is a lot that can be learned from both science and religion. Taking one away is not good for either side.

Religion Science Integrating

The bible is full of internal conflicts clearly visible to anyone who reads it objectively.

It is also full of conflicts w/ science which are easy to find w/ the simplest of I-net searches. Obviously, the bible was written long before a lot of current scientific knowledge was available so the writers couldn't know how the cosmos worked, how atoms are structured, the chemistry of biology, etc.

It is well established scientifically that the age of the earth is billions of years old, and the stars and galaxies up to 14B yrs. old. Now you can be completely anti-science and not believe these facts, but you would just be inhibiting your knowledge and growth. Bible believers have two choices - admit it is a book written by man at a certain time in history for the population as then existing, and cherry pick the good or accurate parts to use as a philosophy of life. OR, as some fundamentalists point out, if one part of it is wrong, then it can't be the work of God and it is ALL wrong. Throw it away.

So, evolution. It is not a matter of belief, it is a matter of fact. I can believe the earth is flat - it LOOKS flat, even from an airplane. But science knows it is round. My belief doesn't change that. Altho a lot of creationists talk about the "theory" of evolution, a scientific theory after years (a century and a half in this case) of observation and study, becomes a fact when nothing contradicts it. Oh, yes, maybe the Discovery Institute will claim there are conflicts, but not really. Are there sill questions to be answered? Of course. There always will be. But since the time of Darwin's first publishing, the evidence at all levels has stacked up to support evolution as the method of biological change / advance. From cells, DNA, genes, embryo development, etc., there is no other better explanation. Other than a "miracle" which is like saying Santa Claus did it.

About the only place for a creator is to be the guy who flipped the switch way back in the beginning 14 billion years ago to start the machine running. The famous God of the gaps. We don't know how it started, so God did it.

The point is, religion and science are NOT really compatible. One is a belief or a philosophy (religion) and one is based on evidence and facts that get established as truths not based on faith. If a scientific fact contradicts the bible, the bible is wrong. With enough contradictions, you have to question the claim of inerrancy of the whole bible.

Some scientists are religious, and some religious folks accept that science is a way to understand the physical world and improve technology. So some people can keep a foot in both worlds.

PS. Whatever happened to Smudge? If he is still here, I hope he checks in.