Science versus Religion

[Pipedude]

3-page warning: This thread will be closed no sooner than 4:00 a.m. ET.

Legalist!

 

[Not_hard_to_find]

Before this closes, my appreciation to everyone who participated. This was an enjoyable discussion to follow and peruse later.

Thanks!

 

[The Galatian]

God hasn't told us how many teeth a horse has or how spiders taught themselves to build webs through trial and error. He has told us that he spoke the world into existence, contrary to the cosmogonies of all of Israel's neighbors and every other religion known to man at that time, and he has told us this repeatedly in the Bible.

He has, in Genesis, told us that He created life by natural means. Life was not spoken into existence as YE creationists claim, but rather was brought forth by the earth and waters, as He intended.

Should all of these statements be reinterpreted? We cannot simply disbelieve them and consider them errors, for that would be apostasy from apostolic Christianity.

The above is why orthodox Christians accept that evolution is consistent with our faith. YE creationism, because "life ex nihilo" contradicts His word in Genesis, cannot be orthodox.

Fortunately, it's not a salvation issue.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

I'm not sure whom you have in mind, but I wonder about your choice of words. Since we are Christians, would you be willing to say "This is the trouble with substituting God's word for science" or "Here's the trouble with substituting the words of Jesus for science"?

What I could say is "Here's the trouble with substituting a view of God's word, or interpretation of God's word, for science." If a view of scripture is clearly contrary to observation, then the interpretation is flawed.

 

[LadyEagle]

Closed per previous warning. LE