Can Science and Religion be reconciled?

[dharveymi]

I want to congratulate you on located, viewing, and evaluating those videos so quickly. It is such a joy to converse with someome who has such an open mind. Talking with you reminds me of my experiences with evangelists, I didn't have much use for them though. Apparently, you missed my point. I will view the evidence you posted; the videos I recommended will explain what I am talking about, but I will try to find web references, stay tuned.

 

[dharveymi]

Q,
Sorry, I read the pdf concerning granites, but I could not find a theory concerning their origin, nor evidence to suggest that the theory was true. Help?

 

[Linus]

Although I disagrgree with your last statements, Q, I will not go into it here because this is not the place for that kind of arguement.

But although I am not completely convinced that other life exists yet, I do realize that there is much eveidence to indicate that it does. But we cannot always go by what evidence suggests. Sometimes we need proof.

 

[(Q)]

Granite is igneous rock so it forms when molten rock cools within the Earth. Basalt is also igneous rock but has cooled relativly quick in comparison, from a volcanic eruption for example.

I'm not sure why you think the origin of granite is important, but I'll hear you out.

 

[(Q)]

I will not go into it here because this is not the place for that kind of arguement.

Actually, this is exactly the place for that kind of argument. Or is it because no valid argument can be persued?

But we cannot always go by what evidence suggests. Sometimes we need proof.

We must go by what evidence suggests, that's how we learn things. If we relied on faith alone, we would all be living in caves.

 

[(Q)]

Apparently, you missed my point.

Then, what was your point?

 

[dharveymi]

My point was that we need to be open minded. Our conclusions should not drive our observations but the other way arround. There is evidence that granites where not formed by cooling molten rock, looking for web reference.

 

[(Q)]

My point was that we need to be open minded. Our conclusions should not drive our observations but the other way arround.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here - conclusions ARE driven by observation, it is part of the fundamentals of science.

Of course, one should not be so open minded that their brains fall out. 8)

 

[dharveymi]

Of course the other way around, my mistake, doing something else right now.

I agree lets take a fresh look at the evidence.

 

[Linus]

I meant that this particular thread was not the place to discuss the conflicts of the Bible. But we ARE discussing (in a way) the validity of the Bible. So I guess tou were right.

And also, I know we can go by what evidence suggests. Not only is this how we learn, but also where faith comes from. Some people have faith in in the existence of other life. I believe that some things can be proven before we die and can therefore wait until we see the proof to make a decision.

 

[dharveymi]

I have included a site that proports a young age for the earth's oldest rocks,

Young Earth

and one that proports to refute it's claims

Old Earth

I hope I got them in the right order.

 

[dharveymi]

This is not exactly a scientific paper, but it's a good overview of some popular creationist evidence, I won't bother finding refutations for each one, I will conceed that they exist. If you know of some, please post.

Creationist overview

Here's another site, not all of these are so convincing,

Young earth

 

[Ceridwen018]

dharveymi,

Look in any world atlas and you will see the so called geological column. It represents layers of sediment on the earth but there will be no mention of Noah!

I'm afraid that this quote represents the entire premise for the creationist theory...very afraid.

What's more we have the evidence on our side

If by evidence you mean ridiculousness, then yes. 'Evidence'.

"But aren't the primitive fossils found in the lower rocks and the more modern life forms found in the higher rocks?" I hear you cry. "No, no, no!" is my reply. Firstly the "lower" or "higher" do not in practice mean what they say. They're just terms used by geologists in their imaginary world.

This is all just a bunch of propaganda.

dharveymi, before I go on, do you believe in creationism?

 

[tumble_weed]

you do have to admit thought that on the creationism website he does put up some good arguments. But I mean he does say some interesting things which seem to be very hypocritical

If this evidence cannot be found then evolution is based on faith alone it is a belief! There's nothing wrong with beliefs of course - I have one, I believe Jesus Christ died for me and rose again and because I believe that, He has saved me from the wrath to come.

he condems people for believing in evolution because it's just a belief...in fact it's calles a theory...not a law...so noone was saying that it's 100% flawless...but then in his next sentence he goes and tells us something equally absurd and claims that Jesus died and rose again...when there is as much proof for that...in fact far, far less proof...since we actually have quotes and writing from Darwin saying what he believes...but there is nothing written by jesus that says "I am going to go and die for people's sins"

Also at the very top of the page the writer says something very interesting

Sediments are not laid down in these neat layers anywhere. This column only exists in the minds of evolutionists and the text books they produce. You can be forgiven for thinking this is the true geological column because we are told it is so.

now if you notice what he says....he tells us that the evolutionists have text books (plural) as opposed to just one bible where they get their information from...They are basing all their ideas on what just one "book" has written in it...and taking it as there was one boat with 2 of each species on it travelling across the water during a giant flood...

Just one thing about Noahs ark as well. Now it was raining at the time so it would be fair to assume that there would be a cover on the Ark...and also in this boat there are two of each species...and the bible says that there were also dinosaurs around at that time...I wonde how all the animals survived....two of each species....I would like to know how two T-rexs and two ants peacefully co-exist on a this Ark which Noah built....it must be a massive boat...because all of these creatures must have all been able to fit on this Ark....with a roof on it....It surprises me that they all survived....

 

[dharveymi]

The personal belief systems of the people who run these web sites and my own aside, what about the evidence. What evidence is there that the geological column was made the way evolutionists claim. Only a very few of evolutionists' claims can be supported by science (observable, testable, and explanitory.) Are you saying that I should accept the rest of their claims on faith? Why should I beleive them instead of the Bible? All I am saying is there is another possibility. If you don't immediately dismiss the other possibility because you don't want to believe it, you will find that there is at least some evidence for it.

 

[dharveymi]

Concerning Noah's ark, it is obvious to me that the Bible is suggesting that God directly intervened to save Noah and his family. If they were saved by God, why is it so hard to believe that He performed a miracle to save the animals too. This of course is NOT science or history in the classical sense, this is faith. Faith is evidence for things not seen. If you do not accept the assumptions of the Bible, don't believe in the story of the Flood, but don't believe that you are immune from making assumptions. You WILL believe in something which cannot be proven any more than the assumptions of the Bible writers. Those beliefs will rule your life.

The advantage that true Christians have is that they have hope. They have unprovable assumptions, just like you, they have evidence, just like you, but they have hope in Someone who loved them so much that He gave His Son that they might have eternal life. Crazy? No more crazy than any other worldview, and it can be quite consistant, and not a bad life altogether. If in the end, my assumptions are wrong, then I'm in good company, and I haven't lost anything. But, if I'm right, my reward is eternal.

 

[(Q)]

The Ark was a tight fit, to say the least.

Length Width Height
Cubits 300 50 30
Feet 450 75 45
Meters 137.2 22.8 13.7

Total Floor Area
Square Cubits 45000
Square Feet 101250
Square Meters 9406

Volume
Cubic Cubits 450000
Cubic Feet 1518750
Cubic Meters 43006


“First, why take adult full-sized animals, when youthful smaller animals would accomplish the same thing? Second, why put fish or other aquatic animals/creatures on the Ark when surrounded by water? Third, why put burrowing animal/creatures like insects, snails and worms in the Ark?”

Currently, there are some 10 million known species in the world with speculation that at least 20 million species exist on the Earth.

If we removed the above quoted species, there would be about 2 million left, in other words, remove potentially 18 million species from the equation. If we divide that number by the total square footage floor area, each species would have roughly 1/2 a square inch of living space - that must also include their food and water.

Any takers on this one?

 

[(Q)]

Faith is evidence for things not seen.

In other words, things that are not detected, or not part of the natural world and therefore do not follow our physical laws and therefore cannot interact with us in any way.

… in other words, invisible.

The invisible and the non-existent are one and the same.

Faith in the non-existent.

 

[dharveymi]

Faith is the evidence for things not seen. (Things that are true, because the word of God says that they are, but otherwise seem illogical or unlikely.) These things need not have no interaction with the world. The angel of the Lord killed the first-born of every Egyptian in the time of Moses, he wasn't seen. I have faith that this event occured, even though it seems unlikely and illogical to the natural mind.

 

[(Q)]

These things need not have no interaction with the world. The angel of the Lord killed the first-born of every Egyptian in the time of Moses, he wasn't seen.

Contradiction - how can something that has NO interaction with the world kill babies? Isn't that interacting with the world?