Let's have a serious discussion, no name calling or fire and brimestone here. Let's look at the evidence shall we? I am asking for evidence of one thing science has discovered that the Bible doesn't support. Please don't post aggressively, give a bit of time for the other side to come back with a response.
The bible, as informative as it is, does not address every single issue in the world. There are many things that lay outside of the realm of all religious texts. The battle between science and religion is both ridiculous and unnecessary. They address different realms.
Claiming that either is superior is attempting to compare apples and oranges. Saying that they address the same issues is absurd and nothing but breeding ground for hostilities.
Give unto Caesar (or science) what is Caesar's...Give unto God what is God's.
Please don't make be break verses out about choosing who's realm is who's concern... they always piss everyone off.
P.S. I used the ducks because 1. it is a damn interesting study and 2. I was pretty sure there was no verse in the bible that included the subject.
Even though there may be homosexuality in nature and other strange events, do not make a case for anything other than, animals live on instinct and by their senses; In human terms, flesh. They are souls by the fact that they have life and move around and think. Man, given the ability to reason and discipline themselves, therefore thinks differently, giving him accountability before God. Animals follow the strongest impulse without disciplining themselves, as they are created and have no accountability before God for their actions. So even though theses things go on in nature is not an excuse or evidence to say that these things, when applied to mankind are not sinful. Just sayin
And there is biblical evidence to support this? Because, by the definition of the challenge there is nothing that science has discovered that isn't supported by the bible.
So please, exactly where does the bible support dominant homosexual necrophilia in male ducks? Don't tell me what man does, because that's not what I'm asking. I don't care whether they are sinful or not, that is irrelevant. Please stay specifically on topic... as you do tend to meander.
well, there is the curse placed back in genesis 3:17-19 and Romans 8:22 and Genesis 1:31 "it was very good" (obviously deterioration has occurred since: the second law of thermodynamics, which states that in every system - whether physical or biological - an innate tendency toward decrease of order and complexity http://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/mod_tech/node81.html
It is still "very good". In fact because the term "very good" is so vague, it could mean just about anything. "Very good" for the purpose that God intended? Or "very good" in the fundy interpretation where all animals (including those specifically designed/evolved to be carnivorous) were vegetarian, and there was no death (including no animal death)?
hhh crisitan suufer too from egraissive postes,,,, life,,,
but just e questions :
1 could the gospel dont anny scientifice facts soo all the science dont contradict with automaitically? 2 the least aboute e relgion that there teaching in faith dont contradict with them each other but in cristianity you have trinity , mormons , jesus_ yachew who have sex with his mother , and e lot and e lot of other currents
at least you have one faith if you dont have 1 faitth soo how you could approach others
Okay, ignoring the actual content of the post for now...
Seriously? You know words like automatically and contradict, use commas correctly, and spell "could" and "science" correctly but misspell "any"? Really?
I'm guessing you are going for the "ESL" thing. That's fine, but if so you might want to drop the use of contractions. ESL students almost never use contractions in speech, therefore obviously they don't use them in writing either.
Look, I really don't care about the specifics of your chosen persona, but your deliberate murder of the English language makes my teeth hurt.
1. The scientific impossibility that all of humanity came from a single human female. A female that according to the bible had only two 'male' children. (Adam and Eve)
2. The scientific impossibility that all life on earth came from a single male/female pair. That this 'replenishment' happened and the carnivours didn't need to eat any of the other animals during the re-population of earth. (Noah's Ark)
Well it doesn't say how many years passed between Cain entering the land of Nod and getting married. Perhaps 20 years in which time perhaps Eve gave birth to a daughter which are not told about and she went to Nod where she met Cain.
Alternatively Adam and Eve are allegorical poetry that are not to be understood as two literal people. In which case the Land of Nod may have been populated by a load of georgeous hotties.
I just think that seeing as there were so many animals, Noah would have been far to busy to catch fish for them all. You've heard the saying "give a lion a fish and you feed him for today. Teach a lion how to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime."
It really is unfortunate that Muslims are compelled to lie about scientific proof in the Quran. For example, I found an article on radar and satellite technology which is claimed to have been predicted by the Quran.
Here is the logic of how it was determined... baffling, indeed.
"The use of the Arabic verb "alanna," meaning "We have made malleable"
This form of iron, known as "soft magnetic iron" because of its magnetic properties is particularly used in radar and satellite technology."
"The wind being told to blow at his command..." may be a reference to electromagnetic signals being transmitted as desired in the air thanks to the use of soft iron."
Is it possible to truly be religious as well as believe in the evidence of science with theories such as evolution, the Big Bang and dinosaurs existing prior to man not along side? (Please keep it clean and civil guys,...
Though I know that being homosexual is not accepted still in today's society why is it individual feel it is there moral and civic duty to cast hatred animosity towards those who live within that population? Does not...
Assuming evolution IS correct, and we all evolved into what we are today, WHY does religion, faith or believing in something beyond ones-self pose so much of a problem to so many people?We just happened to turn out this...