Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 9

• 0%

  DonnieJack9 months, 2 weeks ago

  At last! A clergyman who is realistic and makes sense. I'd listen to HIM preach any day. Yes, religion and science ARE compatible.

  Reply
• 0%

  KMFDM9 months, 2 weeks ago

  I like him so far.

  Reply
• 0%

  StillUnashamed9 months, 2 weeks ago

  This was in our local paper as I'm a resident of Okaloosa Co. in Florida. Although I don't agree with all of his statements, it is a good article. I've been saying and teaching for decades that science and the Bible are very compatable. The so called "war" between science and the scriputres was created by extreemists on both sides.

  I am a Christian. I believe the Bible to be the word of God. I believe God created the universe and all that it contains including the physical laws that govern the universe. Thus, when it seems that science and the Bible contridict there are three possibilities:

  1. the INTERPRETATION of the relevant Bible passage is in error

  2. the INTERPRETATION of the physical (scientific) data is in error

  3. a God powerful enough to create the universe including the laws of physics is certainly powerful enough to suspend any specific law to produce a miracle.

  Reply
• 0%

  icelander9 months, 2 weeks ago

  I don't like how he's turning scientific fact into something holy, but at least he's not saying I'm going to hell for accepting facts.

  He's just saying I'm going to hell because I haven't asked his sky daddy for forgiveness.

  Reply

  5 Replies

  • 0%

    StillUnashamed9 months, 2 weeks ago

    In my science classes in state-run schools that were pro-evolution I was taught that there's no such thing as scientific "fact". A question is researched and a Hypothesis is formed. After passing certain criteria the Hypothesis becomes a theory. After passing more criteria the Theory becomes a Law and that's as high as it gets.

    Evolution is still in the Theory stage and that's the fact, Jack!

    Reply

    4 Replies

    • 0%

      smithichie9 months, 2 weeks ago

      "Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

      In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology".

      http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        StillUnashamed9 months, 2 weeks ago

        I gave you a positive rating. You gave a good explaination without using the word "fact". A hypothesis (and theory) is "proven" in the sense that conclusions are arrived at based upon observations or experimentations. However, if and when new evidence or observations occur, previously drawn conclusions may change, hence the reluctance of scientists to use the word "fact".

        Oft cited example: In the 1970s through observation the scientific community concluded that another ice age was imminent. In less than 30 years as instrumentation advanced, and through more observation, that same community reached a conclusion of global warming.

        Back to the article, the "fact" is that God created all that is and He is soverign and did it whichever way He wanted to. Oh, and to those who gave my comment a negative rating, Thank you and may God bless you.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          icelander9 months, 2 weeks ago

          The data or "facts" they had supported that assertion. Once they got more data, they adjusted their outlook.

          Reply
    • 0%

      icelander9 months, 2 weeks ago

      There are facts, pieces of data, that theories are built on. By accepting those facts and logic, I automatically accept the theory.

      Reply