Science isn't solid, either

Jeff Miller (“Science is mankind’s savior,” Aug. 21) does believe he has a savior and it is science. I wonder if Miller knows how something is proved scientifically, because a number of scientific facts haven’t passed the hypothesis (best guess) stage. I don’t think science has yet to fully explain gravity, and as for humility (and truthfulness), Albert Einstein didn’t like the fact that the universe is expanding, so he used a “fudge factor” to accommodate the fact. He later recanted.


It’s true that all Christians need to study more, but there also are some pretty dumb skeptics and atheists who cherry-pick their responses. Evidence is very critical in any investigation, and eyewitness reports, historical and geographic accuracy and archeological discoveries strongly support the Bible. The point that several cultures reported on a great flood does not constitute plagiarism because of who wrote first, but it does indicate consensus.

Morality and ethics have been the study of greater minds than Miller’s or mine, and his statement that his morality comes from a very close circle of acquaintances is rather frightening – as Walter Lippman said: “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.” How does Miller respond to individuals’ morals and ethics that conflict with – or just come from different sources than – his? Are they just medieval something-or-others?

Women did have significant roles in the Bible: in the Old (Hebrew) Testament, Deborah was a judge in Israel, and Esther saved her people from annihilation. In the New (Christian) Testament, Lydia of Thyatira was a businesswoman who had a house church. Non-Christian Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia, tortured two Christian women who were called deaconesses. The women were slaves, and that indicated their position in life had nothing to do with their status in the church.

Paul told husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave His life for it.

James Wertz


Science is mankind's savior