should the Bible be the limit to the knowledge of truth?

Question

why are there some people questioning so many things that are not LITERALLY written in the Bible, like "evolution"? science has proven that evolution occured, why are there so many people doubting its occurence?

did i say that humans came from apes? i didn't did i? evolution doesn't only apply on that theory alone.

Answer 1

Because of:
1) Closemindedness
2) Fear
3) Being naive
4) Stupidity

Answer 2

To answer they original question No the bible should not limit research.

But touching on evolution it really is frightening that many of you still try to argue against it without any proof against it. The theory of evolution is a theory but in science that is the highest level a hypotheses can reach, a law is a generalisation on a theory and as far as facts they tell you almost nothing in science it is what you take from those facts that have any use. The intelligent design theory exists because religion can't change because it is thought to be infallible no matter how much evidence shows that it is basically a joke it is still pushed. The theory of evolution on the other hand exists because it gets hit from every side and yet doesn't become disproven it it instead seems to just get stronger the more and more we learn the more and more evidence agrees with it. Any scientist would love to disprove evolution (because science doesn't presume to be right just cause someone says so) they would have more fame and money than what they would know what to do with but it can't be done. Now I'm not saying there is no God here maybe he started the thing in motion at the beginning or controlled the mutation but every peice of evidence we get agrees with evolution. And for the people who struggle to understand how we could be cousins to monkeys (not direct decedents) then ask yourself how the pygmy tribe exists or better yet just look through the Guinness book of world records and see the extremes of humans and ask yourself is it really that much to believe that if a person can be born with extra fingers, eyes that squirt milk or hair all over their bodies right now that if these mutations had children who were the same as them until they mutated and this continued over millions of years that a species change could occur.

Just open your minds all the answers to life are not found in a single book no matter who wrote it or when it was written, be sceptical keep challenging everything even evolution, even if it's probably a waste of time but your welcome to have a go.

Answer 3

Because modern Christian fundamentalism is the product of the anti-intellectual movement, and defines its doctrines according to the position taken by the adversaries. They reject the Documentary Hyposthesis, for example, and insist (as a matter of faith) that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible. But the Bible itself never makes that claim, and actually refutes that view. They insist that Moses parted the Red Sea like Charlton Heston, even though the text just describes low tide. They insist that the Flood covered the whole earth and occured before the Sumerian civilization, even though the Old Testament describes a local flood that occured durring the decline of Sumerian civilization (around 2500 BC).

Many of the early Church Fathers actually rejected the young earth theory and the literal 6 day creation, and anticipated the modern view of evolution. See, for example, St. Augustine, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Cyprian, and Justin Martyr, all of whom interpreted the creation account as an allegory.

Answer 4

Evolution is not only absent from the bible, it is flatly contradicted. Genesis says that the beasts of the earth will give birth "after [their] own kind" so an ape would always be an ape. Creationists today are just like those who refused to believe the earth was not the center of the universe. The Bible is dead.

Answer 5

Science has proven nothing. Don't you realise this?

Proving evolution occurs does not imply that man evolved from apes. These 2 are 2 separate matters. If I can prove that I have been driving, does it mean I have been to mexico? NO.

Science proved evolution, so? Evolution occurs on a very minute scale. But something as big as a human being that evolved over millions of years will yield billions of fossils bearing this transition. Can you find them???

Answer 6

Evolution has never been proven and therefore it is only a theory!
On the other hand the Word of God has endured all these centuries and it is true!
In the beginning God created.....!

Answer 7

They think evolution isn't real because they are loyal in their religion and won't let science stop them but you do have a point and i am athiest myself

Answer 8

Dear, science has not proven that evolution occurred.

Don't make statements that aren't fact.

Answer 9

Astronomer Robert Jastrow says: “To their chagrin [scientists] have no clear-cut answer, because chemists have never succeeded in reproducing nature’s experiments on the creation of life out of nonliving matter. Scientists do not know how that happened.”—The Enchanted Loom: Mind in the Universe (New York, 1981), p. 19.

Evolutionist Loren Eiseley acknowledged: “After having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort, could not be proved to take place today had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past.”—The Immense Journey (New York, 1957), p. 199.

According to New Scientist: “An increasing number of scientists, most particularly a growing number of evolutionists . . . argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory is no genuine scientific theory at all. . . . Many of the critics have the highest intellectual credentials.”—June 25, 1981, p. 828.

Physicist H. S. Lipson said: “The only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.” (Italics added.)—Physics Bulletin, 1980, Vol. 31, p. 138.

Are those who advocate evolution in agreement? How do these facts make you feel about what they teach?

The introduction to the centennial edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species (London, 1956) says: “As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution.”—By W. R. Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada.

“A century after Darwin’s death, we still have not the slightest demonstrable or even plausible idea of how evolution really took place—and in recent years this has led to an extraordinary series of battles over the whole question. . . . A state of almost open war exists among the evolutionists themselves, with every kind of [evolutionary] sect urging some new modification.”—C. Booker (London Times writer), The Star, (Johannesburg), April 20, 1982, p. 19.

The scientific magazine Discover said: “Evolution . . . is not only under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but is also being questioned by reputable scientists. Among paleontologists, scientists who study the fossil record, there is growing dissent.”—October 1980, p. 88.

What view does the fossil record support?

Darwin acknowledged: “If numerous species . . . have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution.” (The Origin of Species, New York, 1902, Part Two, p. 83) Does the evidence indicate that “numerous species” came into existence at the same time, or does it point to gradual development, as evolution holds?

Have sufficient fossils been found to draw a sound conclusion?

Smithsonian Institution scientist Porter Kier says: “There are a hundred million fossils, all catalogued and identified, in museums around the world.” (New Scientist, January 15, 1981, p. 129) A Guide to Earth History adds: “By the aid of fossils palaeontologists can now give us an excellent picture of the life of past ages.”—(New York, 1956), Richard Carrington, Mentor edition, p. 48.

What does the fossil record actually show?

The Bulletin of Chicago’s Field Museum of Natural History pointed out: “Darwin’s theory of [evolution] has always been closely linked to evidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true. . . . the geologic record did not then and still does not yield a finely graduated chain of slow and progressive evolution.”—January 1979, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 22, 23.

A View of Life states: “Beginning at the base of the Cambrian period and extending for about 10 million years, all the major groups of skeletonized invertebrates made their first appearance in the most spectacular rise in diversity ever recorded on our planet.”—(California, 1981), Salvador E. Luria, Stephen Jay Gould, Sam Singer, p. 649.

Paleontologist Alfred Romer wrote: “Below this [Cambrian period], there are vast thicknesses of sediments in which the progenitors of the Cambrian forms would be expected. But we do not find them; these older beds are almost barren of evidence of life, and the general picture could reasonably be said to be consistent with the idea of a special creation at the beginning of Cambrian times.”—Natural History, October 1959, p. 467.

Zoologist Harold Coffin states: “If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best.”—Liberty, September/October 1975, p. 12.

Carl Sagan, in his book Cosmos, candidly acknowledged: “The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer.”—(New York, 1980), p. 29.

Might it be that the evolutionary process took place as a result of mutations, that is, sudden drastic changes in genes?

Science Digest states: “Evolutionary revisionists believe mutations in key regulatory genes may be just the genetic jackhammers their quantum-leap theory requires.” However, the magazine also quotes British zoologist Colin Patterson as stating: “Speculation is free. We know nothing about these regulatory master genes.” (February 1982, p. 92) In other words, there is no evidence to support the theory.

The Encyclopedia Americana acknowledges: “The fact that most mutations are damaging to the organism seems hard to reconcile with the view that mutation is the source of raw materials for evolution. Indeed, mutants illustrated in biology textbooks are a collection of freaks and monstrosities and mutation seems to be a destructive rather than a constructive process.”—(1977), Vol. 10, p. 742.

Answer 10

The church has been doing that for centuries, and burning people who dared to question them. No wonder Europe sufferred the dark ages