which should we believe about creation science or bible
2007-06-05 21:45:50 · 8 answers · asked by thato b 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Creation science isn't real science and the Bible is not science either.
Science is only interested in the truth, it is not trying to prove or disprove anything other than the facts. Science will always change it's point of view in light of new evidence.
Creation "science" does not deal in truth or facts, it just comes up with ideas in order to try and prove that the Bible is fact and will NOT change it's point of view in light of new evidence.
Which seems more reasonable?
2007-06-05 21:53:22 · answer #1 · answered by Daisy Indigo 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Approach the issue with an open mind and draw your own conclusions. In the process distinguish between good science - trying to establish reality no matter which way the evidence is pointing, and poor science motivated by undying efforts to hold onto shaky ideology in spite of the evidence. Evolutionists are wishful thinkers and their wish is not coming true. Check out the following concepts on the Net:
- irreducible complexity
- anthropic coincidences
- the kalam cosmological argument
- "Darwin on Trial"
2007-06-05 22:08:32 · answer #2 · answered by Mutations Killed Darwin Fish 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
impressive question. Your question presupposes a distinction between the two (e.g., medical creation and Biblical creation). i've got faith you have pointed out this distinction precise. The Biblical creation type is generated by utilising expertise the text textile utilising the comparable regulations of Grammar and Syntax that the writers used while penning the text textile. Upon try this continuously the Biblical type of creation will emerge. This Biblical type varieties the foundation and framework for producing a "medical creation type". the place the Biblical type won't exchange (except some errors has befell in interpreting the text textile) the medical type will continuously exchange as documents is available in and enhancements to the medical type are made. subsequently, the creationist "believes" the two fashions recognizing that the latter "morphs" as new documents and counsel are available. the comparable technique happens interior the evolutionary camp. One assumes a materialistic commencing place of the universe (the non secular factor) then in accordance with this type one creates a medical evolution type. The presupposition of strict materialism is by no potential questioned, however the medical attention of the evolutionary technique continuously differences (e.g., Darwinian type, neo-Darwinian type, Punctuated equilibria, etc.)
2017-01-10 15:47:23 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What should we believe about creation 'science' or the Bible? I should think that an intelligent adult man or woman of the 21st century would believe nothing about either one.
2007-06-05 22:20:23 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The truth about creation is not in the bible. Christians reject the true account of creation given to us by Jesus in The Apocryphon of John. Wake up, believe Jesus, not Moses.
2007-06-05 22:18:35 · answer #5 · answered by single eye 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Creation science is an oxymoron.
2007-06-05 21:56:20 · answer #6 · answered by Snark 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Creation science is baloney in sheep's clothing.
2007-06-05 21:52:52 · answer #7 · answered by Doc Occam 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Neither But islam the only true religion
2007-06-05 22:41:40 · answer #8 · answered by adamjer 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋