Ethic question

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
What I dislike is that people say that one must be true, and one must be false.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you explain how both could be true(using rational logic not quantum [img]/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img])? How can there be two exclusive truths?

The theories are polar opposite. If both are examined rationally, it is clear they are incompatiable.

Science is about truth, not compromise for the sake of avoiding arguement.

[Ultra Man]

what are the moderators views on lutheran christianity? because lutheran christianity is a variation of christianity, based around martin luther's biblical interpretations, rather than literal interpretations.

just curious [img]/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]
What I dislike is that people say that one must be true, and one must be false. That is too binary. But rather, like in the quantum world, no values are true or false, but rather all values are valid but represent a different truth.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bro, that's called relativism, and relativism is not defendable in any way.

We live in the real world, and here either A or -A is true. If A is true, then the negation of A cannot be true. It's as simple as that. Creation and evolution are not compatible in that relativistic sense. I'm sorry, but you'll have to clarify what you mean if you want to hold that standpoint! [img]/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
My conclusion is that science is a tool to explain all those things we can explain, but religion is a tool to explain all those things we can't explain. Both are equally right, and both need each other because without one of them we can't survive, we'll either be too ignorant or too smart for our own good. It's all about balance

[/ QUOTE ]

Another fundamental error... This is not about science versus religion, this is purely of religion vs. religion. [img]/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
what are the moderators views on lutheran christianity? because lutheran christianity is a variation of christianity, based around martin luther's biblical interpretations, rather than literal interpretations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a thing from ChristianAnswers.net,

The biblical scholar and Protestant reformer, Martin Luther believed in Creation and taught that the world was young. For example, Luther stated,

"We know from Moses that the world was not in existence before 6,000 years ago."

Luther insisted that Moses wrote about Creation in normal, literal language.

"He [Moses] calls 'a spade a spade,' i.e., he employs the terms 'day' and 'evening' without Allegory, just as we customarily do… we assert that Moses spoke in the literal sense, not allegorically or figuratively, i.e., that the world, with all its creatures, was created within six days, as the words read. If we do not comprehend the reason for this, let us remain pupils and leave the job of teacher to the Holy Spirit."

REFERENCE
Martin Luther in Jaroslav Peliken, editor, "Luther's Works," Lectures on Genesis Chapters 1-5, Vol. 1 ((I love Jesus!). Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1958), pp. 3, 6.

As far as I know, Marthin Luther was a literal interpreter of the Bible. Modern protestantism however is pretty loose, Sweden is a great example of that [img]/forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] Everyone here is a christian, yet few even believe there's a God, lol.

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]
The point Dr. Hovind raises is that the definition of science excludes evolution. Therefore evolution is not science.



[/ QUOTE ]

You're absolutely right!

Another interesting thing, is falsification. A good theory should be falcifiable. But how can you falcify evolution? Not only is it impossible because we can't go back in time, but also because the premises regarding macroevolution forbid it! Either it happened over such a long time that it's impossible to observe, or it happened so rapidly we wouldn't see any transitional forms!

Oh, and I posted my thingie on how to look at it with an open mind, check it out those of you who are unsure of what to believe in, or those who don't think it's important! [img]/forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
what are the moderators views on lutheran christianity? because lutheran christianity is a variation of christianity, based around martin luther's biblical interpretations, rather than literal interpretations.


[/ QUOTE ]

Read all our bible studies! [img]/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] We've discussed these topics in depth including how to determine what should be taking literally in the bible and what should not using Hebrew and Greek schemantics, various Christian denominations, as well as church history. This goes for everyone as well. Nearly any question you can think of regarding these topics have already been covered. We have no problem explaining things, but we prefer if you study the material we've already covered so we don't have to simply repeat ourselves over and over. [img]/forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[psaturn]

And many people assume that when you have a doctor's degree and are educated in a fine university, that you automatically believe in Evolution.

That is not true...I have shocked quite a few patients of mine when I told them that I totally believe in Creationism and I don't believe in Evolutionism. And I majored in Biology in College !

And one patient specifically asked me if I really didn't believe in Adam and Eve...and I told him yes I believe that they existed. I even told that patient that I even had a roommate at Berkeley that had a PhD in Nuclear Physics and he believed in Adam and Eve and Creationism. See? There are um smart and well educated folks that believe in what God has to say.