Note: Before reading the following arguments, please understand that they are not what I believe. On Wednesdays, I deliberately argue for wrong ideas, challenging my listeners to call and defend the obvious right answer, which is usually far harder than one would expect. This is a summary of what Wacky Andrew will be arguing, not a representation of what real Andrew believes.~Doubt and skepticism are the heart and soul of science, yet faith and credence are the essence of Christianity. Doubting Thomas is not held up as an ideal.
~Science is constantly fluctuating, but Christianity claims dogmatic and permanent certainty about so many things.
~With the rise of science, we see the decline of Christianity.
~Many of the things science discovers are opposed by Christians, such as flight, contraception, and embryonic stem cell research.
~Don’t you remember what happened with Galileo and the church? Science learns by experiment and evidence, Christians by prayer and Bible study.
~When you have a headache, do you read a psalm or take an ibuprofen?
~When you have cancer, do you pray or get chemo?
~Do you lay hands on a broken bone or get an X-ray and a cast?
Links:
Scientific principles in the Bible (GodandScience)
Science and the Bible (ClarifyingChristianity)
Scientific proof of the Bible (KingJamesOnline)
2 comments:
Hey anybody up for giving me a rundown of the counterpoints to WackyAndrew's argument for this segment? I missed the show and would really like to get the "scoop".
I don't see why science and God are so often seen as incompatible. Just because science has elucidated natural phenomena doesn't mean that God didn't create the universe and set it in motion. It seems like there are a lot of people that will use any info. they can if it helps them to explain away God. Science has been used thus since Darwin. Even if Darwin's scheme of evolution is true and factual (how can that ever really be proved though?), that doesn't mean God didn't create it all and set it to work in that way. Couldn't God have set up the necessary preconditions for humans to macro-evolve and to do so in such a way to become creatures with a soul in need of Him? He's God; He could've done it that way if He wanted to. -BA
There are two issues worth mentioning here:
1. Science is a way of knowing things. But ways of knowing (epistemologies) are not guaranteed to always agree with each other. What you see and what you feel are not always the same. over time, we learn which one should be in charge in which circumstance, but they are not always compatible. Same with Science and knowing things through the Bible.
2. Whether God could have used evolution to produce humans is not the real question. Surely He could have done anything at all. the questions is whether this particular method can be reconciled with the account of creation given in the Bible and what you do if they cannot be reconciled.
Post a Comment