marksman
My eldest granddaughter showing the result of her
Finally, the authors also found that with such individuals, the more christianity they're exposed to, the more they distrust it. So if you're someone like me who defends christianity to atheists, it's actually counter productive to spend your time trying to explain the christianity! All you're doing is pushing them deeper and deeper into an anti-christian mindset.River Jordan said:Finally, the authors also found that with such individuals, the more science they're exposed to, the more they distrust it. So if you're someone like me who defends science to fundamentalists, it's actually counter-productive to spend your time trying to explain the science! All you're doing is pushing them deeper and deeper into an anti-science mindset.
For me this research is extremely helpful and informative. I've always suspected that when a fundamentalist says something like "Well prove it then" or "Show me the data", they're not really asking in good faith. Instead of asking out of genuine interest and curiosity, it's more of an attempt to stump me (likely because they've been told by their anti-science sources that the data doesn't exist). That's why when I do produce the data, there's rarely (if ever) a genuine attempt by the fundamentalist to look it over and understand it. Instead, since it was always about trying to stump me, producing the data only generates more attempts to stump me.
For me this research is extremely helpful and informative. I've always suspected that when an atheist says something like "Well prove it then" or "Show me the data", they're not really asking in good faith. Instead of asking out of genuine interest and curiosity, it's more of an attempt to stump me (likely because they've been told by their anti-christian sources that the data doesn't exist). That's why when I do produce the data, there's rarely (if ever) a genuine attempt by the atheist to look it over and understand it. Instead, since it was always about trying to stump me, producing the data only generates more attempts to stump me.
Sorry, but I could not resist it.
Probably my favourite sort of TV programme is the natural history ones. I love the knowledge that they give about the animal kingdom. I love the incredible photography that shows the animal kingdom in real close up and the plant kingdom in incredible beauty and the time lapse photography that shows the development of everything.StanJ said:You see, here is the real problem.....taking a non-believers opinion over God's Word. The issue is NOT how literal one takes the Bible, it's how one understands the Bible IN context. That context does not come from a worldly POV, it comes from spiritual one. God sent His Holy Spirit to empower us and bring His word into focus. That you believe man's science and theory over God's supremacy is quite sad to say the least.
I ignore all the mumbo jumbo about it happening millions of years ago by chance and focus on God's brilliant design and abilities. In fact, when I hear such claims I am reminded that God's foolishness is wiser than the wisdom of men.
I am appreciative of the dedication of those who find out the things that they are showing us but when all is said and done, their knowledge is a drop in the ocean compared to what God knows. What they have to say may be useful but in comparison to God's knowledge it is nothing more than a paragraph on the page of knowledge.
What I find is that people, including christians tend to be in awe of man's knowledge because they do not read God's word and find the gems that are scattered all over His word. Compare the two and there is no contest. God wins hands down.
A beetle does not exists in and of itself. It is an expression of the mind of God, and the more we learn of its intricacy and incredible functions should draw us closer to God. Not only that, but it exists each moment because the word of God and power of God holds it together as with every other molecule in all of creation. The ultimate goal of science and every other field of study should be worship. When people miss that, they miss everything.Wormwood said:The difference between early scientists and the predominant scientific worldview today is that early scientists...and many Christian scientists today...see their work as exploring and understanding the mind and handiwork of God. Their view was that things could be discovered because they were created by a designer who wanted to be understood and gave us intellects to see his beautiful work and divine power. Theology was seen as an umbrella and every other discipline of study was under that overarching understanding.
Today, theology has been pushed in a corner and God has become an optional, and often viewed as an ignorant concept that is opposed to discovery and exploration. The early Christian scientists who made some of the greatest scientific discoveries must be rolling in their graves. The idea that man operates by an unaided universal reason, is not only religious, but is without any scientific basis. The idea that the aim is to find how things came about "naturally" (which now means, apart from any design or mind) is not a scientific necessity, but is one that is continually rammed down people's throats. We think we have power over the creation because we can label things, learn how they work and put them under a microscope to be categorized and filed. The truth is our intellects and each breath is a gift and all of creation is an expression of God.
A beetle does not exists in and of itself. It is an expression of the mind of God, and the more we learn of its intricacy and incredible functions should draw us closer to God. Not only that, but it exists each moment because the word of God and power of God holds it together as with every other molecule in all of creation. The ultimate goal of science and every other field of study should be worship. When people miss that, they miss everything.
The goal should not be to make the Bible-thumper less anti-science. It should be to stop pretending that these two areas of study are opposing or conflicting. You cant blame religious people for being defensive when the large majority of today's scientific community fail to glorify God for the beauty and design and instead pretends "God" is nothing but a plea to ignorance and a clinging to "gaps." "God did it" is not a cop out. Science should be about praising God for how he did it, and not a means of showing God had nothing to do with it but it was all "natural." If creation is from the hand of God and is sustained by God, and our means to contemplate its order and complexity is a gift of God...then "natural" takes on a whole new meaning.
I want to highlight this part of your post as it is pure revelation for me. I shall look at beetles quite differently as a result of your comment as I had never thought of a beetle or anything like that as an expression of the mind of God but it is pure fact because if he created the heavens and the earth and everything in them (and he did), then, yes there was a divine purpose behind everything. That makes what we see, hear and experience of creation totally amazing as behind everything we can say "I wonder what your divine purpose was/is."
If that isn't enough to make you want to worship God I don't know what is.