Most of them have absolutely no idea what 'scientific theory' means.
If medicine were called the theory of medicine, they would probably dismiss that as well.
2007-02-10 10:42:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Sun: supporting gay rights 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
Who said we're against science? Evolution is fake and a lie, there's evidence to prove that, besides. evolution has some many loop holes in it that leads back to what you were trying to prove in the first place, evolutionists have to make up evidence to get anywhere. We use modern medicine because we're mortal and humans, humans become sick and need care, Christians aren't some special group that doesn't need medicine and can just pray to God for healing and get healed when we ask. Prayer is just a conversation with God to talk to him, ask him things, and spend time with Him, yeah we can ask him to heal or lessen pain, but he may or may not do it. It's a natural thing, getting sick, everybody does it and they need medicine. So get off your soap box about Christians....
2007-02-10 11:02:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
*laughing*...honey...evolution is not a "solid scientific finding"...... Christians are not against science. Science is merely the revealing of what has already transpired. Where they get tangled up is when they (scientists, etc.) start makin' stuff up and jumping to conclusions about things. If you notice, time after time in the news there will be something about, science has this wrong or that wrong, we now know.....etc. Heck, they even decided Pluto wasn't a planet!
2007-02-10 11:51:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by Esther 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
There is a very huge difference in being against evolution, and being against science.
Adaptation to ones environment...microevolution has a basis in fact, however, macroevolution has been shot out of the water repeatedly, and will never be proven because it just isn't happening.
Science on the other hand has many uses and it exists because God allows it. It is becoming very uneducated and obsolete to believe in macroevolution, even the evolutionists can't fill in all the gaps that are missing, and most of them admit it.
2007-02-10 11:03:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by wannaknow 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
As a Christian, I'm not against science. However I do believe that it's easier to reconcile the available evidence with the bible than with the theory of evolution.
Evolution says that we all came from one celled life forms that just came about from non-living stuff that came from..... dunno where it all came from. Observable evidence says that living stuff doesn't happen from non-living stuff. Science also says that matter can neither be created nor destroyed, so where did all the stuff come from? Evolution also says that today's life forms all have ancestors that were diferent life forms, but observable science says that life forms reproduce after their own kinds, and even when we mix two animals to make a "better" one or two plants to make a "better" one, we end up with an "it" that can't reproduce. (think mule, hybrid striped bass, seedless grapes)
The Bible on the other hand says that God always was - it's hard to try to understand, but at least it's an explaination that doesn't contradict other parts of the theory. He spoke, and made the world. He made Adam - already aged to adulthood. If we had a time machine, and went back to Adam's second day, we'd look at him and "know" that he couldn't be one day old - he'd have pimples that looked older than one day. Same thing with the earth we live on - God made it a mature planet, with craters, fossils, etc. Again, it's not an explaination you like, but it neither has contradictions with the observable evidence nor with the Bible.
Lastly, evolution says that animals evolved out of need. Giraffes got long necks to eat the higher leaves as the grasses dried up and the shorter necked "giraffe wanna bes" died out. That does make alot of sense and could explain alot of things. As sea creatures tried to come out onto land, the flippers got stronger, started changing and ended up as legs - makes sense too. Things came about by "stretching" to meet the need. My question would be - When did mankind "need" to develop the brain he has, that is only used about 8% to 12% now? Biblically speaking, Adam would have used it all. He could even communicate with the animals. Our "winding down" is consistent with the second law of thermodynamics. Evolution is not.
BTW - I don't agree with those that would say that God used evolution to put us all here. He made plants on one day, and animals the next. From my understanding of photosynthesis and breathing, if He meant 24 hour days, that could work. However, just plants for a billion years, then animals added in would not.
2007-02-10 11:24:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by teran_realtor 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I do.....only thing you will find in my house are Advil and a bottle of 25 collects dust.
37, don't eat right, drink at least 9 cans of pop a day and I smoke a pack a day for past 20 years. Last doctor check up....as healthy as a 22 yr old.
Research it....pills is what makes you ill. Your body has an immune system that will tackle anything....and win....if you allow it.
Sure as a kid I got sick, the flu, colds, etc but I never took anything. I just sweat and slept it out. Well my immune system learned and now those viruses have no effect against my immune system.
If you don't take pills as they say....who loses out? The guy making the pills as now he doesn't make money. Follow the money and you will always find the wizard behind the screen.
Humans lasted thousands of years without pills...how did they do it?
PS - since you believe evolution so much, and Darwin is the founder of this theory....read his book, Evolution and the Races. He alone denounces evolution as a fable that could never be true. Funny how they never tell you this fact even though its printed in black and white by the very man they worship.
2007-02-10 10:46:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
Actually not all christians are against evolution. Pope John Paul II said that as long as the ultimate credit for the birth of the world/universe is given to God he is OK with evolution.
Christians are also not against science, SOME are against stem cell research, because of the concerns about those stells being living creatures.
You know, I'm not a Christian, but we need to stop just making stuff up about a religion for an excuse to attack it.
2007-02-10 10:42:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by AirDevil 4
·
5⤊
2⤋
You are so so funny where did you ever get the idea that evolution is a solid scientific finding. Oh you poor lost soul. You learned it in first grade right? I am a christian and I am not against science at all, so please re-phrase your queston to read why are some christians so against science?
2007-02-10 11:00:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by alytherehn 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
for starters you give a broad generalization for christians. you assume that all of us think exactly alike. many of us like myself are not against evolution. I happen to think that it was all part of the plan. We all can learn a lot from science because God gave us the ability to think and reason. We use modern medicine, but we also pray for eachother when the other is sick. if you don't like the way we believe, then that is your buisness. but let us believe how we want to believe just the same as we let you (even though some will try to convert you, I happen to believe that because of your free will you can believe in anything you want to....I don't condemn)
2007-02-10 10:50:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by Elora 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
I am not against science in any way unless it tries to play God and/or deny the existence of God.And just to clarify..What would you do if you had an illness modern medicine couldn't fix and you were given an "X" amount of time to live? You would probably make final preparations. As for me, when modern medicine couldn't save the life of my daughter when she was diagnosed with Cystic Fibrosis,I prayed to God. God did what science couldn't...He healed her and saved her life. So forgive me if I sing praises to my God who could instead of to your science that couldn't.
2007-02-10 11:06:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I'm not against science.. I'm against evolution. And if you'll pay attention you'll notice that evolution is not science.
Laws of science:
1. Must be observable
2. Must be repeatable
3. Must draw definite conclusion
Now which one of these does evolution do? Yes to the three year old in the back row..... what's that.... you're right... it does none of these..
2007-02-10 11:23:13
·
answer #11
·
answered by Theoretically Speaking 3
·
0⤊
1⤋