“Scientific evidence is consistent with the belief that the physical universe was designed by God.” There is lots of evidence for creation. Though, the Bible is our source for understandings the history of the earth, scientific “evidences” have some place.
On one hand, scientific findings don’t prove the Bibles claims. On the other hand, confirm what its divine author said. Thus, examination science can be used to confirm the bibles teachings. So when you share how scientific info is more understanding with in the Biblical structure, you are reminding your listeners that God is “clearly seen in the things He has made so that they are without excuse.”(Romans 1:20) But be told beforehand. Observational science is not primarily what moves people
…show more content…
We can use scientific evidences to fight for the worldview of the Biblical worldview people towards Gods word, the Bible. God the uses His word to change humans and things minds and hearts. When humans who believe in man’s words about an older earth come across scientific information for a younger earth, they will not automatically blame it all on their beginning point. They often guess an explanation exists but they have no clue of it yet, or they will create an explanation or rescuing device that is shown reasonable to them. Because they are messing
with the unseen past, people can always make up a stupid excuse to describe a certain scientific evidence that does not seem to affirm billions of years (Answers in
…show more content…
If the very first giraffe had a long neck and about a 2 foot long heart, but no mechanism to regulate it, when he first bent down to get a drink he would have exploded his brain. Then after his brain would have exploded, he would thought “I need to evolve valves in my arteries to regulate this.” No he would have blown up and died. The giraffe’s extremely long neck couldn’t have been evolved, it had to be completely working in the first place(inplainsite.org).
Another great animal would be the koala, they are marsupials that live most of their life in very high eucalyptus trees. They also have a diet that consists of the tree leaves that are very poisonous to humans. They can live without drinking water and no shelter, and survive in hot weather by panting just like dogs do, and a very warm coat of skin and fur keeps them warm during the winter and snowy days(inplainsite.org).
One of the greatest proceedings of man according to the theory of evolution is the rapacious hand with the opposing thumb. Many apes also have a foot like the koala that has a big toe. Not to be outclassed the koala doesn’t just have a great big toe but two opposable fingers on each
First, I will demonstrate Stephen Jay Gould’s argument against the overlapping between science and religion, which is as follows:
Koalas are arboreal mammals, meaning that they live in trees. They live in eucalyptus trees and feed on their leaves, which are poisonous to most animals. A koala’s home is decided by two main factors: the presence of other koalas and eucalyptus trees. They can eat other tree leaves, but that usually occurs only when eucalyptus leaves are absent (Crawford n.d.).
In the book, Your Inner Fish, by Neil Shubin he presents the notion of evolution and how we can trace parts that make up the human body back to jellyfish, worms, and even fish. The book not only discusses how we arose to be what we are today, but also the implications our ancestors had on our current body plan. In this essay, I will demonstrate that I have digested the entirety of Shubin’s book by convincing you (dear reader) that everything in our bodies is based on simple changes to already existing systems. To make this case, I will use the evidence of limb development in a vast array of organisms, the four arches found in the embryological stage of development, the structures inside our noses, and how our ears have come about all due to modifications.
Chapter 3, The Bible, Creation, and Science by Robert Branson, PhD presented some interesting aspects of biblical interpretations relative to science. “With the rapid changes and developments that all areas of modern science produce, it is a general belief that if an informed person is made to choose between science or the Bible, science will be chosen.” (loc 647 Kindle, Branson) Dr. Branson tries and explain the three positions people take with biblical studies. The three positions examined by Dr. Branson are 1. Concordance, 2. Young-Earth Creati...
The arguments that many Young Earth Creationists make for their belief and against evolution are that fossils were created through the great Flood, the literal belief in Genesis, and that radiocarbon dating used in Evolution is too imprecise to prove that the Earth is older than 10,000 years.
Evolution is a theory that is refuted by the majority of creationists; creationists argue that evolution is simply a “theory” and is not supported by scientific evidence. This argument is clearly false. In order for a scientific theory to become widely accepted by the majority of the scientific world, it must be supported with facts and evidence. In a recent Gallup Poll, 55% of scientists, a majority, believed in evolution with no divine intervention. An additional 40% of scientists believed in evolution with divine intervention; only 5% of scientists believe that the earth was created by a divine power in the last 10,000 years. However, the public opinion is nearly the direct opposite. 46% of those polled believed the earth was created by a divine power in the last 10,000 years; furthermore, 40% of those polled believe in evolution with divine intervention. Only 9% of those polled believed in evolution with no divine aid. The disparity between scientists and the public is too great to be ignored; despite the overwhelmingly scientific evidence, many people still do not fully support, or believe in the theory of evolution. There is also a clear correlation between belief in evolution and belief in God. While the polls attempting to record the religious beliefs of scientists are not always reliable, it is true that the percent of scientists that believe in the divine is much lower than that of the general public. According to the Eastern religions, such as Buddhism and Hinduism, these tensions between science and religion are only a Western issue, referring to the Abrahamic religions, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Many people, including scientists, believe that the relationship between science and religion should not...
John Polkinghorne’s The Universe as Creation does its best to not convince the reader of Intelligent Design, but rather to dissuade the reader from the notion that although the is intelligently designed, but in this way, it has made science possible.
Christian Science is an idealistic and most radical form of transcendental religiosity. The study of Christian Science teaches a feeling of understanding of God's goodness and the differences between good and evil, life and death. The purpose of this paper is to address how the study of Christian Science helps us better understand the impact of globalization in America, as well as the impact of American on globalization. This paper is important because globalization features a dominant worldview. All throughout the world people believe, study and teach different types of religious movements that impact others. People need to better understand how certain religions modify, conflict with, and impact the world. First, it will discuss the life and work of the founder, Mary Baker Eddy. Secondly, it will examine the primary rituals and religious services of the Christian Science movement. Then, it will outline the precursors and history of the religion. In the conclusion, a response will be offered to the question of how Christian Science helps us better understand the impact of globalization on America and of America on globalization.
In the beginning of twentieth century, an advance in science occurred with the discovery of radioactivity. Scientist learned rocks and fossils could be used as timepieces, to tell the age of Earth. Radiometric dating is common method, often relied on by the world, which uses rocks to tell the age of Earth and its materials. Through this method scientist have concluded that the earth is 4.6 billion years of age and, this date and radiometric dating is accurate. However, over the years scientists have been proven incorrect. Radiometric dating is inaccurate because scientists assume the specimen’s initial conditions of accurately known, the rate of decay or half- life is constant, and the specimen has no contaminations. All of the factors can be challenged by science itself and create controversy in the scientific realm.
Religion and science are complementary elements to our society. The notion that religion and science should not be merged together, does not mean neglecting to understand the parallel relation between these two concepts and will result in a better understanding of our surroundings. This will put an end to our scientific research and advancement because we will be relying on answers provided by religious books to answer our questions. If we don’t argue whether these answers are right or wrong, we would never have studied space stars or the universe or even our environment and earthly animals. These studies have always provided us with breakthroughs, inventions and discoveries that made our lives better.
In the past centuries scientific innovations have occupied people’s mind. People have been looking for answers about their existence with the help of science and the scientific method. But nothing has changed with people’s culture or behavior. However, something happened two thousand years ago that influenced and changed how some people perceive the world and self existence. It was the beginning of Christianity.
Many atheists have used science as a way to disapprove the existence of God. Science is not an accurate way of disapproving the existence of God(2). Scient...
The bible is very accurate, and is in harmony with science, and its own teachings. . Some points we know, to help us understand the Bible’s Divine Inspiration, is the correlation between the scriptures, and accuracy scientifically speaking, and the fact that even High Profile Scientists agree with the bible teachings. Prophetic sayings have been fulfilled, and that is the top motivation for people to believe what the Bible says. When people read the Bible, and apply it to their life, it can have a great affect, or change on them. The first point we can look at, is how it is scientifically accurate. ‘Written down on its pages, was information that was recorded centuries before the prophecy happened!’ (bh-pg. 18-19) At the time when nobody really knew what shape the earth was in, the Bible referred to it as a circle, or sphere. (Isaiah 40:22) It even said that it ‘hangs on nothing!’ (True). (Job 26:7) Even though the Bible isn’t j...
Talking on both sides of the debate, each side feels as though the other has no scientific reasoning come up with their theory. In reading the article written by Shipman, the evolutionists believe that intelligent design has no concrete evidence on how the world was crea...
First off, it is important to realize that religion and science have to be related in some way, even if it is not the way I mentioned before. If religion and science were completely incompatible, as many people argue, then all combinations between them would be logically excluded. That would mean that no one would be able to take a religious approach to a scientific experiment or vice versa. Not only does that occur, but it occurs rather commonly. Scientists often describe their experiments and writings in religious terms, just as religious believers support combinations of belief and doubt that are “far more reminiscent of what we would generally call a scientific approach to hypotheses and uncertainty.” That just proves that even though they are not the same, religion and science have to be related somehow.