Do you know what is the real problem in Science? Christianity has answers.?

Question

You find error in Bible. You say that in Bible God told us that he created light before sun and moon. But you should no that scientists
were always wrong. They modified. Scientists believe that the sun revolves around the earth. Then they change their mind. Actually,
light created before sun and moon will be proved in future. we just lack the technology to prove that. So, every contradiction in Bible which is scientific in
nature is just apparent.

Classical Mechanics was faulty. So, they invented General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.
It's faulty--so they invented String Theory which still is metaphysics.
The problem is their faulty assumptions. The scientists should study Bible first to construct real scientific theory. And also creat Biblical Mathematics. They were wrong when they believed in Darwin's theory. Now realizing that Biblical Creationist theory is the reality.
You say according to Bible--bat is a bird. Why bat is not a bird?
Modern Genetics will prove it.

You say acccording to Bible the earth is flat. But don't you see in your own eyes that is is actually flat. It's because of the optical abberation and lack of technology that our observations become erronuous
and earth seems round. We now know from Einstein theory that we live in flat space.

Answer 1

Right on... and whoever said Darwin was a scientist??? Or evolution to be a science??? Dead wrong. Don't you hate it when people reffer to evolution as a science??? Dang!!! There's heaps of evidence to support the Bible true than the 'evolving' religion...

Answer 2

Scientists did not make the claim that the sun revolved around the earth. This was a Christian belief, which is why Galileo spent the end of his life under house arrest by a Christian government.

Oh, and you're mindless babbling is completely incoherent, but then again, I wouldn't expect anything else from somebody such as yourself. If the bible fits in perfectly with science, then why have Christians tried to suppress scientific knowledge for hundreds of years? Like with the burning of the great library in Egypt, which was filled with advanced scientific ideas?

And maybe you can explain some (okay, all) of these biblical contradictions. I would appreciate it:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/

Answer 3

That's why when I want to study, say a microbe, I just go straight to the Bible for my answers. Why bother with all those other books and telescopes and studies done without the Bible. If a vaccine isn't in the Bible, then it's not real, end of story.

And I never believed those satanist scientists and their theory of our solar system which goes against the Bible. That landing on the moon was a total hoax! And I'll bet you we will find the earth has 4 corners, just like it says in the good book!

Answer 4

Wait... you talk about how faulty science is, and then want to use it to prove something in the bible? Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. Not that it will, anyway. A bat is not a bird, bats are mammals. Yes, science corrects itself all the time. Which is was has led it to being infinitely more correct than the bible. See how that works? Religion finds out it's wrong and doesn't care, stubbornly sticking to it's now obviously idiotic ideas. Science cares about whether it's true or false and strives to remain true.

Answer 5

I agree this is completely possible. Science, while it is a priceless tool we use everyday is not perfected yet. It is basicly the product of different minds over hundreds of years coming together to draw conclusions, to prove and disprove theories. The Bible also leaves us with many other questions that so far we have been unable to answer. Together they can fill in the gaps that we cannot explain with one or the other. It's my beliefe that in the end this will all be explained.

Answer 6

I have nothing to say about the topic of this post, except please, for the love of God, Bibleman, learn English. If I could understand what you meant to say, I might be able to give you a valid reply. As it is, I will say this much. Christianity has answers, yes. Science has answers. Proven theories. For what science can't answer, though, it doesn't just make stuff up. They have the guts to say "we don't know". And as for Christian answers, how about this question? What was all that stuff with heretics and witch burning and crusades and inquisitions? What's your answer for inflicting more harm on the world than good?

Answer 7

Charles Darwin Disagrees with Homosexuality
By Nathan Tabor

New Orleans’ annual week-long homosexual flesh-fest and orgy in the
streets,
widely touted as the Southern Decadence Gay Pride Festival, had been
welcomed by city officials in years past because of the large influx of
cash
it brought into the economy. But this year the gala event had to be
postponed by circumstances beyond their politically correct control –
Hurricane Katrina.

As I write this column on the afternoon of Labor Day 2005, a handful of
homosexuals in the French Quarter are holding a scaled-down “Decadence
Parade,” anyway. With dead bodies and human excrement floating in
flooded
streets throughout the devastated city, these hardy partiers refuse to
be
deterred.

“It’s New Orleans, man. We’re going to celebrate,” declared one,
wearing a
sombrero and carrying a guitar. The New York Times described this
plucky
group as “lingering signs of a fading vivacity” in the Big Easy.

But, you see, that’s what being “gay” is all about. Taking big risks
with a
great likelihood of known disastrous consequences. Homosexual males
live, on
average, to the ripe old age of 42, hardly a demographic for the
cautious
planner. They live a destructive lifestyle and are destroyed by it,
which
strikes me as a curious form of blindness to reality. No fear for them,
of
God or nature.

This little side note, based as it is on the latest headlines, is
really
just an introduction to segue into the following premise. Not only are
homosexuals seemingly blind to their moral conflict with Christianity,
they
are also blind to their natural conflict with our modern secular god,
Science, particularly as espoused by the disciples of Charles Darwin,
the
prophet of evolution.

Proponents of the gay agenda like to say their lifestyle is genetically
determined and they don't have a choice in the matter. Most homosexuals
reject God so they can’t claim they were “created” the way they are.
From
this we can conclude that most agree with the tenets of Darwin’s
evolutionary theory.

However, this position poses a logical contradiction. Just consider the
basic scientific definition of Evolution, which is, according to the
MedTerms Online Medical Dictionary: “the continuing process of change,
especially in reference to natural selection.”

Under Darwin's process of natural selection, all “beings” – as opposed
to
the outmoded religious idea of “creatures” – are continually adapting
to
their natural environment in order to have a better chance of
surviving. The
weakest and most poorly adapted die off, while the strongest and most
improved survive long enough to mate. Their offspring inherit their
genes,
and thus the species improves from one generation to the next.

Darwin “noted that successful species produce more offspring in each
generation than are needed to replace the adults who die . . . The
species
would thus have changed or evolved to favor traits that favor survival
and
reproduction,” MedTerms explains.

This means that not only must these beings be able to reproduce
sexually,
they must actually do so, for evolution to work as posited. Under
evolution,
then, successful reproduction is the key. Homosexuals would cease to
exist
because their sexual practices are such that they do not produce
natural
offspring.

Therein lies the quandary, then, for the gay activist seeking to make
his
intellectual case for respectability based on science and genetics.
These
secular gods have abandoned him to oblivion. By their iron laws of
Natural
Selection, he cannot possibly exist, let alone be genetically preserved
and
determined.

This poses a huge dilemma for both the homosexuals and the
evolutionists.
Are the evolutionists willing to weaken their dogma by accepting the
homosexuals as a genetically determined subspecies? If evolutionists
accept
homosexuals, the whole Darwinian argument falls apart.

Answer 8

I don't need to prove anything when it comes to God. I was not here on earth to witness the life, miracles, and teachings of Jesus Christ, so I have no proof of his existence - nor do I need it. Those who are constantly trying to disprove the existence of God need to look up the definition of "faith". A belief in God is faith-based. Believing in the Bible (the word of the Lord) is faith based. I wish everyone who doesn't believe in God would stop trying to change the minds of those of us who do. Let them have their beliefs and I can have mine.

Answer 9

your about as coherent in your rambling half lecture as a drunk is in trying convince a beautiful woman to go home with him....
and I'd sooner try to teach PIGS to fly than use the bible as a basis for scientific theory!

Answer 10

I really and truly hope you are just messing with everyone because if you really believe that stuff, you need to be in an insane asylum.