Why are christians so scientifically illiterate..?

Question

They claim science is full of untruths, mistakes and lies, and has an agenda to "disprove" the existance of god, which it doesn't..

Yet they concoct psuedo science and misinformation to wage their attacks on science..

Mainstream scientific principles, concepts and understandings have no agenda and are testable and verifiable, yet these kooks fabricate facts and misinformation to challenge anything that may threaten their deity worship beliefs..

Why don't they see the facts for what they are, instead of making up more suitable psuedo facts..??

There will surely be examples given below..

Answer 1

no .. all i say is that science holds a few theoretical models up so high that they bend statistics to fit them .. or outright throw out data that doesnt fit the accepted models ...

Answer 2

While not all religions, especially Christianity, are ignorant of science I find the vast majority of certain christian denominations to be willfully ignorant. It seems to be a combination of:

-refusal or inability to look beyond what their preachers say

-a lack of basic scientific education in the school systems (Maaaaaany teachers in the south USA have told me they're strongly hinted at by superintendents to NOT to teach evolution!),

-crappy school systems, period, and

-a refusal to go beyond tradition. Leaving familiar stereotypes is frightening to many of these people.

I've met many religious folks who are very scientifically minded. Some of the world's best paleontologists are christian. One of the most level headed skeptics I know is Wiccan. Yet, as you've said, some of the WORST science I've seen have been by close minded Christians trying to pass pseudo religious junk science as fact (Re: Human footprints found with dinosaur tracks. **Shudder**)

Answer 3

You used a very important word there...FACTS. Christians do not deny scientific facts. If the concept is labeled a THEORY, that means it is unproven. So if it is a theory, there are no concrete facts to see.

You cannot prove evolution any more than I can prove creationism. That does not make a Christian illiterate. To be illiterate is not being able to read or write. I am sure you were looking for a different word.

Answer 4

Science doesn't have an agenda to disprove God, but it also doesn't want God to get any credit otherwise it wouldn't be opposed to the theory of Intellegent Design coexisting with other theories in the classroom.

To say it is Bogus is to say there is No God, hence in that point of reference science is saying that and it's proponantes include Carl Sagan and Richard Dawkins, among others.

As for lies, hey IS or ISN'T PLUTO A PLANET

I was taught in school it was

Did school LIE TO ME

Did they tell me a FAIRY TALE

Is Dr. Fred Hoyle, once the FOREMOST ASTRONOMER IN THE WORLD in the 1940's and 1950's practising ASTROLOGY AND VOODOO with his views on PLUTO as a planet and STEADY STATE of the Universe and his MOCKING of Father Georges-Henri Lemaître, a Belgian Roman Catholic priest, honorary prelate, professor of physics and astronomer with his white paper presentation to the Science community on what he termed the Primordial Atom that Hoyle MOCKED calling it "Big Bang."

Ball's in your court!

Service!

Answer 5

Science and the Bible

DOES modern science make it impossible to believe the Bible? Some appear to think so, but we should remember that the Bible is not primarily a science textbook. It reveals a different kind of truth from that revealed by scientific methods. However, it does sometimes say things that have to do with geology, archaeology or other sciences. In such cases, does it harmonize with what scientists say? Consider just two examples.

In the book of Psalms we read: “He has founded the earth upon its established places; . . . with a watery deep just like a garment you covered it. The waters were standing above the very mountains. . . . Mountains proceeded to ascend, valley plains proceeded to descend.” (Psalm 104:5-8) Do mountains really “ascend”? And are they sometimes submerged in the sea? The Book of Popular Science says: “From [earliest] times down to the present, the perpetual process of building and destroying mountains has continued. . . . Not only have mountains originated from the bottom of vanished seas, but they have often been submerged long after their formation, and then re-elevated.”

In the first verse of the Bible we read: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) At one time scientists hotly debated whether there even was a beginning, or whether matter had always existed. In 1979, though, Time magazine stated: “Most astronomers now accept the theory that the universe had an instant of creation. . . . The Big Bang theory sounds very much like the story that the Old Testament has been telling all along.”

However, it has sometimes seemed as if the Bible says one thing and science another. Is the Bible wrong? No, although sometimes those who claimed to be teaching the Bible were mistaken.

Is the Bible Really Wrong?

Back in the seventeenth century, for example, the Italian scientist Galileo taught that the earth revolved around the sun, not the sun around the earth. The Catholic Church ordered him to recant. Why? Because they considered that what he was saying contradicted the Bible. Well, Galileo was right and the Church was wrong. But the Bible was not wrong. The Bible nowhere states that the sun orbits the earth. It was the ancient astronomer Ptolemy who said that.

Today, certain fundamentalists believe that the earth was created in six days of twenty-four hours each. This is in striking contradiction to the teaching of science, but which thought is correct?

The fundamentalists believe that their teaching is based on the Bible, but a careful reading of Genesis chapter one reveals that they are mistaken. The Bible states that the earth was created at some unspecified time in the past, and the famous “six days” involved the preparing of it for man to live there.—Genesis 1:1-31.

True, the account goes on to say that huge steps in the development of the earth took one day each. But, in the Bible, “day” can mean more than a twenty-four-hour period. It can mean a thousand years or even longer! (Genesis 2:4; Psalm 90:4) The Bible record, together with verifiable history, indicates that the seventh day of that creative week covers a period of 7,000 years. Hence, each of the six preceding “days” would be of the same length.

Thus, when we read the first chapter of Genesis, we find that over six long periods of time—thousands of years, not merely hours—land appeared in the ancient seas. Day and night came to be distinguishable (possibly because of the removal of cosmic dust from around the earth). Plant life appeared, followed by fishes, birds, land animals and finally man. In many respects, this account resembles what you would read in a school textbook.

Is Modern Science Really Right?

But what about those times when the Bible says something that clearly contradicts a modern scientific theory? Should we assume that the Bible is wrong? No. Remember, science at its best is a continuing process of learning. Theories that were widely held yesterday may be abandoned tomorrow. Hence, it is quite possible that a scientific belief that contradicts the Bible might itself be out of fashion in the future.

An example of this: At the beginning of the century many agreed with the critic Wellhausen who said that the stories of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were only myths. Today, opinions are changing, as a recent book explained: “Since Wellhausen’s day views have shifted, on balance, in a conservative direction, but this trend is all too often exaggerated. A fair example is the historicity of the Patriarchs, whom Wellhausen considered ‘a glorified mirage’ from the first millennium. Now more recent scholarship has come upon evidence which has persuaded many that the Patriarchs were real people after all, and lived in the period indicated by the Bible, namely the second millennium BC.” (Ebla, a Revelation in Archaeology, by Chaim Bermant and Michael Weitzman) Hence, in this instance, progress in the science of archaeology has brought the ideas of many scholars closer to what the Bible says.

Perhaps the best-known difference between the Bible and modern science involves the theory of evolution. Evolution teaches that all living things developed gradually from a single biological source. This is different from the Bible’s version, that God created all living things separately, and each reproduces “according to its kind.” (Genesis 1:11, 12, 21, 24, 25) Science has demonstrated the possibility of wide variation within animal kinds. But the idea that, for example, the rhinoceros, the eagle and the mackerel ultimately all have the same ancestor clearly contradicts what the Bible says. Does this mean that the Bible is wrong?

No. Many do not accept that the evidence available proves that evolution took place. And who knows what the future holds for the theory? For one thing, the idea that all life descended from a single ancestral form is coming under fire in some quarters. In 1978 Professor Dr. A. E. Wilder Smith, author of over fifty scientific books, wrote: “A number of mostly young authorities have become convinced in recent years that biogenesis, the origin of life, was not monophyletic (all living things derived from a single cell), but rather polyphyletic (from many sources). Therefore there are authorities today who no longer believe that all species derived by means of transformism from one original cell. They do not believe that all species had a common biological ancestral tree with a single root for all forms of life.”

That is not exactly what the Bible says. But it is closer to what the Bible says than is pure Darwinian evolution. And future research and theorizing might bring many scientists even closer. But even if they do not, should we therefore assume that scientists are right and that the Bible is wrong?

Remember, scientific theories are based on the evidence available, as interpreted by imperfect people. In the case of paleontology (the study of fossils)—and archaeology—much of the evidence is mutilated, lost or difficult to interpret. And the scientists who make the interpretations often have strong opinions about what the evidence will prove. Hence, we should not quickly abandon the Bible because it does not agree with some scientific theory. And especially is this the case when we remember that the Bible reveals many truths that are far beyond the reach of science.

Answer 6

Well I don't think it's scientifically correct to generalize all christians this way.

Christians have a strong faith in God, and some will accept the explanations given in a bible, rather then in a science textbook.

Just a matter of opinions and beliefs.

Answer 7

Before you ask this question, you must establish that the inverse(s) is/are true. That is, that most non-Christians are NOT ignorant of science. And that most scientists are NOT ignorant of religion.

I say with complete confidence that the Bible will prove to be true the day that you stand condemned before Christ should you let science keep you from accepting Him.

Answer 8

Scientists want to prove God, which cannot be done. Anything we as human beings can prove is what we are eligible to prove because we've given limited power and knowledge... Scientists can't tell me nothing to believe because Scientist never created themselves. You cannot prove what you have no idea about.

Scientists only want to be leaders. Heck, for how long? Tell them to run away from death if they can. And ask them to tell us the truth about where they go after death.

Scientists are HUMANS. They are simply Human beings who go around in this world a inspect what they have no idea of, then tell their thinking to others.

Answer 9

The only thing scientific that the christians I know dispute is darwins theory of evolution. As for they rest we having intelligence and common sense know science has done alot for mankind.Give or take a few things. ie;atomic weapons and such. Sorry to burst your bubble and lower your soap box.

Answer 10

actually there is a great book by Lee Strobel that you should get called " case for a creater" it is very scientific with people interviewed like Stephen Hawkin and several other well known scientists and physicists.

Answer 11

Can you explain to me where life comes from? Because with the big bang theory, there was no life, then all of a sudden there was life. How do you get life from no life? Science has not been able to show this. Life must have come from somewhere. Maybe it came from an intelligent designer? Maybe it came from the toothfairy? Because we are all alive why hasn't science been able to tell us how to create life?