Christians Together : Conference on Christianity and Science

Feedback:

(page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)

	Editor	16/08/2010 15:00
To answer a couple of questions: 1. Q. Is it being recorded? A. The organisers tell me that it will be (in audio form). 2. Q. What 'line' will be speakers be taking? A. Short answer: I don't know. Longer answer: "The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him." (Proverbs 18:17) We deprive ourselves and others if we cut ourselves off from differing opinions: others might just have a truth that has thus far eluded us; and the reverse might also apply.
	A P Elsworthy (Guest)	17/08/2010 16:37
There is quite a big chunk of the agenda covering intelligent design but it might have been better to have adopted 'evolution and intelligent design compared'.
	George Orr	20/08/2010 11:49
Then again the comparison between intelligent design and creationism would show how far away ID is from believing the scriptures!
	Andrea Mac	20/08/2010 16:50
To me, it appears that ID is simply an alternative for those who accept that evolution doesn't fit with scientific fact but who don't want to believe in the God of the bible.
	John Parker (Guest)	21/08/2010 13:39
I would agree whole-heartedly with both George and Andrea. But anyone reading this thread from a non-Christian perspective is invited to realise that the whole subject of how the world was made is a red-herring issue. What is of vital importance is what the reader thinks of Jesus Christ. He was (is) either mad, bad or the Son of God. And our response - at an individual level - is what will determine the shape of our present and after-life. Christianity and atheism are both religions and both are ultimately based on 'faith' - faith that there is a God or faith that the Divine is a myth. Neither of these positions are proveable. However the Christian faith is not a blind faith. No one has yet succeeded - in spite of the many efforts to do so - in discounting the Man of Gallilee and proving him a fraud. So it's back to 'take our choice': it's 'make our mind up' time. Tomorrow might be too late.
	George Orr	21/08/2010 16:27
John, I don't think the issue of the creation and the creator is a 'red herring'. It is foundational to a persons world-view or belief system and as such invites God's wrath if denied. That so many within the Christian faith do not grasp the importance of this truth is, in my view, the main reason the church is in the mess that it is in. And by extension the reason that the nation is in a mess. Rom 1:18-31
	John Parker (Guest)	21/08/2010 18:33
George, what I mean is that the debate (with sceptics) about who and how the earth was formed will still be running on the last day before Christ returns. Those who choose not to believe in a creator God will not be swayed by scientific argument. And it is not God's purposes to prove Himself beyond theose ways in which He already has (Romans 1). I do believe that it more important to point to the way of salvation in Jesus Christ, and to point to Christ himself than to rely on scientific evidence (or lack of it). Essentially the Christian life is a 'by faith and not by sight'. If there is anyone reading this who is looking for evidence, look for evidence for Christ. I would recommend a book entitled "Evidence that Demands a verdict" by Josh McDowell. But if you really want to look further at the creation issue try www.answersingenesis.org/ However, please remember that a scientific head knowledge will not earn your acceptance with God.
	A P Elsworthy (Guest)	21/08/2010 18:49
John at 13.39 re JC: what about mistaken or misreported? I prefer misreported myself. No one has to prove JC a fraud - the thing to do it look at the subject of religion widely and objectively then draw a conclusion. Atheism is not a religion; it is based upon drawing conclusions from facts, observations and consequent liklihoods. Andrea are you really saying that evolution does not fit in with scientific fact in anyway? This site is unreal - full of people that are probably intelligent when away from religious influence but crumbly cheese when under its strange spell.
	Andrea Mac	21/08/2010 20:06
A P says, "This site is unreal - full of people that are probably intelligent when away from religious influence but crumbly cheese when under its strange spell." Why does it always have to come down to personal insult when you meet an opposing view? I don't consider atheists to be unintelligent and would hope that I wouldn't resort to insulting them purely because I don't agree with their views. There are Christian scientists who are every bit as knowledgeable about what science actually tells us (and more importantly, what it doesn't). Would you consider them stupid too? I do not trash what atheists believe and accept these beliefs are sincerely held, as are mine, and I welcome any proper debate on why each side believes what they do, and that should include actual scientific facts (and I stress facts, not thoughts). It is not science I disbelieve, it is man's interpretation of parts of it. I have taken the time to read what a Christian scientist says and the reasons given why much of what is being put out as fact is simply not true from a scientific basis. As I am not a scientist, I have to accept the accuracy of these scientific facts but, clearly, both sides cannot be right. We have already been through all this debate before and, as another poster has already said, people who don't want to believe in God are not going to be persuaded, even if such scientific evidence was available (and you may well say the same thing for Christinas). Yes, faith is required because no human has a hope of fully understanding things way beyond our level of understanding. So, yes, I welcome this debate but I don't expect much to come from it as both sides already believe what they do and, I guess, don't want to be persuaded otherwise.
	A P Elsworthy (Guest)	22/08/2010 11:20
By saying, in effect, that the theory and fact of evolution is not in accord with the best science is no way to start a debate.In has the appearance of abuse, a trashing of enlightened and tested thought that even the Pope has conceded.Science is forever open to persuasion, reviewing its understanding - that is what it does - but evolution is more that merely compelling. If you want facts about evolution please research them for yourself; I ssay that because it is not a contentious theory - even if pressure from vested interests tries to convince you otherwise. There is no personal insult rather it is cutting to the quick of your view of evolution and finding it seriously wanting. As a matter of fact I do find Christian scientists difficult to behold. All that training and for what? Fortunately it appears that they are in the great minority, as I would expect them to be. Do not be easily impressed by authority; there is a man in a high academic position at Oxford that spouts the most illogical things about Islam and shows a plain silly world view. That conclusion is well supported by others in that they have seen identical weaknesses in his daft arguments.Authority is there to be questioned and that is what science does all the time.

(page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)

Conference on Christianity and Science

The apparent conflict between Science and Christianity is the subject to be addressed at a day conference in Inverness which will bring together three expert speakers on the theme.

Conference on Christianity & Science

Inverness East Church Hall,

Margaret Street, Inverness IV1 1LU

Saturday, 28 August, 2010