The problem is not with science, but with false science, distorted science, and labeling things that are not science as "science."
How can we know anything about anything
To try to explain truth to him who loves it not is but to give him more plentiful material for misinterpretation. George Macdonald
Do we have to make a choice between science and the Bible?
NO!
That is NOT where the problem is, but that is what everyone seems to want to talk about.
Take science as an example.
How can we know anything about the created material world around us?
How can we know anything from what we can see using natural sciences?
We all see the same things in the material world,
but we don't come to the same answers.
Why is that?
How can we know anything about the Bible and what it teaches?
Every person believes different things about the Bible and how it should be read.
Why is that?
Same scientific facts. Different answers.
Same Bible. Different answers.
Why is that?
The true question is this: How do we come to our answers that we get
from what we can see through science
or what we can read in the Bible?
How do we think about what we see using science or what we read in the Bible?
How do we analyze what we have seen and read?
How do we interpret what we have seen and read?
We use logic, but logic always has a foundation. Jesus talked about building on the Rock.
That Rock is Jesus Christ. He is the true foundation.
There are also the false foundations of the ungodly.
An example might help.
Question: Why do you believe in evolution?
Answer: Because my science teacher told me that evolution is scientific fact.
Question: Why do you believe your science teacher?
Answer: because he agrees with the textbook he assigned us to read.
Now, we have asked, "Why?" twice.
If we continued to ask, "Why?" we would come down to the foundation of this person's thoughts.
When we get down to the foundations, there are no more questions that can be answered.
So where to the foundations come from?
There are three possibilities.
- things that we make up, pulled from the air
- demonic lies
- divine revelation
Question: Why do you believe in creation?
Answer: Because God revealed this to me. He spoke to me through the Bible and gave me His faith
so that I could believe Him.
See how quickly we got to the foundation.
This is a belief that has a foundation that is solid and that cannot be moved.
In reality, the things that we make up, that are pulled from the air,
are actually from demons and all the lies of demons spring from the prince of demons, Satan.
So these are one and the same.
Divine revelation comes from the Almighty, Creator, God, Jesus Christ.
So there are only two choices, but how do we know there are only two choices?
Because God has revealed this truth to us.
The question then is how do we tell the difference between the revelation that comes from God
and the lies of Satan?
The answer is that everyone who sincerely wants to do the will of God will know.
Jesus said, "If you really want to obey God, you will know if what I teach comes from God or from me"
The rejection of the revelation that comes from God is not an intellectual problem.
It is a moral problem.
Jesus said, "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and you shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you:
For everyone who asks receives; and he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks it shall be opened."
*
Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?
Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?
If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children,
how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?
Matthew 7:7-11 *
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
You can set the truth before someone, but you can't make anyone believe
those things that they don't want to submit to.
They have to want to obey God.
How frequently it is brought to our attention that nothing good can be done if the will is wrong! Reason alone fails to justify itself. Richard M. Weaver
Jesus said, "You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free" (John 8:32)
"If we are not prepared to buy the truth at the cost of our own humbling we shall not receive it"
Lies appear to have no price upon them.
They seem cheap and they abound everywhere.
But for the truth there is always an obvious price to pay.
"[God] has set a day when He will judge all the world's people with fairness.
And He has chosen the man Jesus to do the judging for Him.
God has given proof of this to all of us by raising Jesus from death" (Acts 17:31).
"There is a judge for the one who rejects Me [Jesus] and does not accept My words;
that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day" (John 12:48)
That also stands for every person who speaks the utterances of Jesus.
When we hear them, we hear Jesus Christ, and we either accept or reject.
Every person who follows Jesus Christ is commanded to only speak His utterances and not their own.
"When we love others, we know that we belong to the truth, and we feel at ease in the presence of God" (1 John 3:19)
Ravi Zacharias did two open forums in a university.
On the second night, one man told him that he had brought two Atheists in the night before
who said that the arguments presented were so strong that they could not contend with them,
but they were going to remain Atheists because that is what they prefer to be true.
In another case of just listening to an unbeliever and drawing out his reasoning,
the unbeliever finally came to his foundations.
They turned out to be assumptions that were pulled from the air.
When asked why he believed his basic assumption,
the unbeliever looked startled and blurted out,
"I guess I'm making the whole thing up."
It was quite a revelation to him since he hadn't even known that he had any assumptions.
However, he decided to remain an Atheist because he didn't want God to rule over him.
Some people think that anything they read with the label, science, is true. A politician recently stated that 95% of scientists believe in Evolutionism's stories, and then he stated that this makes Evolutionism's stories into science. Obviously, this poor, deceived man does not know what science is.
What is science, really? This question is more complex than meets the eye.
Our political friend was thinking that he was talking about operational science, the type of science that helps us live longer better lives. Operational science is the observation of creation, yes, but much more than that. When we observe creation, two voices speak to us about creation. One of those voices is the voice of God. The other voice is the voice of Satan. We all draw our conclusions based on which of those two voices we acknowledge. All of this happens just barely in our consciousness. Everyone who desires to be obedient to God and to do His will can discern His voice and acknowledge Him. Those who don't want to obey God will always be deceived by Satan. That is the nature of science. How can we know these things? We know them by revelation. In our real experience with the Almighty Creator, He speaks to us. The naturalists and materialists don't realize that they are responding to the voice of Satan. In fact, they are just happy believing the message of Satan to them that they are just making up their basic presuppositions (made up claims) as long as they can accuse those who follow Christ of also making everything up. The thing that keeps them from hearing God is that they don't want to do God's will. They want to do their own wills. And the thing that keeps them from seeing things as they really are is that they acknowledge Satan and refuse to acknowledge God. Read "How Can We Know Anything?" read
Scientific theories are tentative explanations of scientific facts. The Theory of Evolution and the Theory of Creation are two different explanations of the same scientific facts. Atheists and other Evolutionists get all emotional about that and misrepresent the Creation as being anti-science. To make such a statement, they must make nonsense out of logic or re-define science.
A scientific law is different from a theory. Scientific laws don't try to explain scientific facts. Laws tell what has been tested repeatedly and explain that this is highly probable to continue since no exception has ever been found. If there are exceptions that are found during testing, then those exceptions are included in the law. The odds are very high against anything ever violating either The First or Second Law of Thermodynamics. No exception has ever been found.
Evolution and the Big Bang theories are both religious beliefs about history. They are cannot be scientifically tested. They are uncheckable stories. Science, on the other hand, is testable. Observations can be made and repeated. You can't do that with history. These two related and interdependent stories do violate several known LAWS of science, but the stories are modified to say that there has to be an unknown solution to this problem. These stories would require the breaking of the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and The Laws of Probability. That may sound crazy, but these people do not want a God. They don't like God. They refuse to hold Him in their knowledge.
Romans 1:18-22 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has showed it to them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they did not glorify him as God, neither were thankful; but they became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. (This is the sin against the greatest commandment: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart.")
1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Quote from http://creation.com/neutrinos-faster-than-light
... when some 1970s creationist scientists proposed that light traveled much faster than today, they were attacked for their alleged ignorance that nothing could go faster than light at its current speed. Now plenty of scientists have no problem in theory with tachyons, and some have proposed that light was much faster in the past to rescue the big bang from its horizon problem.
A more important one is the grip of the paradigm: creationist arguments are often ruled out of court because they contradict the ruling paradigm of evolutionary materialism. But a major difference is that scientists are free to criticize relativity, and healthy debate is regarded as healthy even by those scientists who disagree with the CNGS paper. Conversely, dissenters against evolution are routinely fired or have their grades reduced. This was documented in the movie Expelled, and in Dr Jerry Bergman's book Slaughter of the Dissidents.
One reason for the difference is that evolution is a belief system about origins, about history, which is not open to experimental testing, whereas the speed of neutrinos is open to experimental testing.
However, the major reason for the difference is that relativity makes no ethical demands of its followers, but if creation is true, that might imply that we are accountable to our Creator! This is what prominent evolutionists don't want. Philosopher Thomas Nagel is more candid than most:
"I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well informed people I know are religious believers. It isn't just that I don't believe in God and naturally, hope there is no God! I don't want there to be a God; I don't want the universe to be like that."
End quote
There is something called historical science, but this "science" is not the same as operational science.
"Historical sciences try to reconstruct the natural history of the earth. Scientists like Darwin try to figure out what happened in the past, all the way back to a hypothetical first living cell. Most other fields of science are known as operational sciences which focus on how things currently behave in nature.... are limited to things that can be tested or falsified, will yield similar results if retested... Operational science can easily be described by these characteristics, but there are problems applying them to historical sciences. No one can directly observe the past and past events cannot be tested except in limited ways." Carolyn Reeves, AFA Journal
It is illogical to eliminate the option that God created the universe and everything in it relatively recently. There is no evidence that eliminates this possibility and a lot of evidence that leaves this as the only logical conclusion.
Back to top
Author/Compiler
Last updated: Feb, 2012
|