Just one question, please

  • Follow Letters

On Aug. 21, The Augusta Chronicle published a letter to the editor from Jeff Miller titled “Science is mankind’s savior.” Mr. Miller’s letter was well-written, and he asked several thought-provoking questions.

He is right – Christians need to both consistently read the Bible, and gather knowledge from several sources so that they actually know what the Bible teaches.

Mr. Miller closed his excellent letter with the question, “Have you any substantive questions for me?” I trust my question will be as substantive and thought-provoking as Mr. Miller’s questions: Mr. Miller, what if you are wrong?

Comments (16) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
soapy_725
43555
Points
soapy_725 09/03/13 - 08:12 am
1
0
Search the scriptures....they are they that testify of ME.
Unpublished

Search the scriptures....they are they that testify of ME.

soapy_725
43555
Points
soapy_725 09/03/13 - 08:13 am
1
0
soapy_725
43555
Points
soapy_725 09/03/13 - 08:14 am
1
0
Just shut up your ears & refuse to hear. Like God said u would
Unpublished

Just shut up your ears & refuse to hear. Like God said u would

soapy_725
43555
Points
soapy_725 09/03/13 - 08:16 am
1
0
you are covered with gas & about to lite a match, we will tell u
Unpublished

you are covered with gas & about to lite a match, we will tell u

grouse
1635
Points
grouse 09/03/13 - 10:52 am
0
1
Ah, Paschal's wager. What if
Unpublished

Ah, Paschal's wager. What if you are wrong about the other gods, past or present, that exist or existed in other religions?

Willow Bailey
20579
Points
Willow Bailey 09/03/13 - 11:20 am
3
1
I'll help Mr. Miller out...

I'll help Mr. Miller out... He'll be more sorrowful than a human could ever imagine.

dichotomy
30663
Points
dichotomy 09/03/13 - 12:17 pm
4
3
" Mr. Miller, what if you are

" Mr. Miller, what if you are wrong?"

And just as valid, what if he is right? This is a no win argument. Why won't people just leave it alone? I do wish EVERYONE would just keep their mouths shut, believe what they wish, and not worry about what anyone else believes.

If you are so insecure in your beliefs...either way.... that you feel obligated to argue your beliefs in public in a futile attempt to change anyone's mind, then I question how confident you really are that you are right. Most people who are secure and comfortable with their beliefs do not have to go around hollering "I'm right, I'm right, I'm right." Those who ARE confident in their beliefs and STILL go around hollering "I'm right, I'm right, I'm right" are commonly referred to as zealots.

OJP
5935
Points
OJP 09/03/13 - 02:09 pm
3
4
What if you're wrong, though?

The one true god could be Zeus for all we know.

grouse
1635
Points
grouse 09/03/13 - 07:03 pm
0
1
I wonder if Miss Willow has
Unpublished

I wonder if Miss Willow has any evidence to back up that statement??

Willow Bailey
20579
Points
Willow Bailey 09/03/13 - 09:42 pm
2
2
Mirror time

dichotomy, many times I agree with you and this time I'll partially agree with you.

First, let me say than one can be a zealot about anything....it doesn't necessarily apply to supporting and believing in Jesus Christ, Lord & Savior.

For instance, I could say you are a zealot for your beliefs regarding the county commissioners and your view of receiving less than what you consider to be your fair share of county revenue. How many times do you need or want to expand on that? Are you insecure about your beliefs and values? Should I follow your example and admonish you to just keep your mouth shut that it isn't a contest?

Isn't it interesting when we find ourselves ranting against another about a behavior that we are also doing?

Second, please let me say, that I certainly have no need to convince you or any one else of anything regarding salvation. You get to choose. However, I also get to choose and I get to talk about my choice whether anyone else likes it or not.

And finally, although you are right again, it isn't a contest; but rest assured, there will be winners and losers.

Willow Bailey
20579
Points
Willow Bailey 09/03/13 - 09:51 pm
2
2
OJP, God's Word says we shall

OJP, God's Word says we shall be held accountable for every word we have uttered. And that makes me think of my own child when she was growing up. When she knew it had finally gotten down to the serious business, she would say to me, "I CAN MIND, NOW!!!" repeatedly.

I expect the Lord will hear a lot of the same. Unfortunately, it will be too late for mercy.

And, litte grouse, I'll just add you on to OJP, you do know enough to know that you are unpublished, right?

scoopdedoop64
2353
Points
scoopdedoop64 09/04/13 - 12:27 am
1
1
Not Much to say

Thanks Willow! There is not much to say in response to dichotomy. But in reference to the letter and the question posed to Mr. Miller, I do believe it is a valid question. I think it to be very valid in light of all we see about us everyday. First, there is the creation of earth, sky and man which makes it almost laughable to think we just happened to evolved with perfect DNAs as though there was no design. Second, there is the conscience of man to have some deep down sense of morals of right or wrong. Example: deep down most agree that killing one another is wrong. Where did that righteous moral come from? And how about the inherent knowledge that man is not "perfect" and makes mistakes and wrong choices...the gospel story of Jesus taking our place on the cross to pay the price for our sins to a holy yet loving God is the only truth that makes any real sense.
So the question is very valid Mr. Miller, what will happen if you are wrong? According to the Bible those who reject God's forgiveness through Jesus Christ must rest upon their own good works to get them to heaven and yet all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God and deserve death and hell. Mr. Miller, God doesn't want that for you. He is not willing that any should perish but that all come to repentance and Yes, that means you! But if you reject Him then your eternal destiny has been sealed by you and not Him.

WalterBradfordCannon
1378
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 09/04/13 - 05:00 am
2
1
@scoopdedoop64, it is

@scoopdedoop64, it is incredibly complex to have created a system CAPABLE of evolving, and billions of years is, well, an awful long time. On your second point, be careful, are you suggesting that morals are biologically intuitive to humans - that morals are human in origin? Or is your point that to a certain extent, most humans share the same moral intuition, which closely resembles that found in most religions? Does that beg the chicken and egg question? Faith, or lack thereof, is the only key criteria, not intelligent design or moral intuition.

scoopdedoop64
2353
Points
scoopdedoop64 09/04/13 - 12:47 pm
1
2
@walter, even billions of

@walter, even billions of year would not create such a map as the DNA does but that said the earth is only 10,000 at old at best and yes there is much scientific data that can back that up as well. Evolution is quite a laughable theory if it were not for so many people so gullible to believe it. But that's the whole point is it not? If you aren't ready to accept the truth then you cling to any false data that will give an escape. As to morals, yes I am saying that placed in the heart of every man and woman is a "God-given" conscience that validates an outside source. Only when we have our conscience seared to the point that we ignore it so long that we fail to have one anymore. So by creation and moral absolutes man is without excuse if he fails to acknowledge His creator and most importantly His Son, Jesus Christ.

WalterBradfordCannon
1378
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 09/04/13 - 04:12 pm
2
1
@scoopdedoop64, the

@scoopdedoop64, the scientific evidence supporting the age of the earth in the neighborhood of 10,000 years is non-existent and falsely marketed to people who are uneducated in geological science. They are bearing false witness against their neighbor intentionally because they feel it protects their churches, and there is no excuse for that. There are dozens of different lines of convergent evidence that the earth is in the neighborhood of 4.54 billion years old, and they all agree. These include more than a dozen different radioisotope ratios, as well as sonar based estimates of the age of the sun and thermal based estimates of the age of the earth. There has not been any evidence, since the mid 1800s, that the earth's age was under tens of millions of years old, and these estimates have become greatly refined in the intervening 150 years to converge around 4.5 billion years. The main point about the age of the earth is that such a period is certainly adequate to enable speciation detailed by scientists. It is clear that science does not support a 10,000 year old earth, even if some people feel scripture does.

On your other point, if people contain a moral intuition that encodes the same moral code that is carried in the world's religions, it begs the chicken and egg question. Did humans evolve to have such a moral code to create a stronger species and thus evolve the concept of God? Or did God place it there? Using such an argument to defend the existence of God is using circular logic.

The strong argument is your faith. But it will not stand to use faith to bear false witness against scientists - that is a sin.

scoopdedoop64
2353
Points
scoopdedoop64 09/04/13 - 04:59 pm
2
2
The Bible

my code is the Bible and according to it Adam and Eve were not made as babies that had to grow to a mature age. They were made as a Man and a woman. When God made the earth, He made it fully mature in all aspects so that it could sustain life. The genealogies in the Bible lead to about 6,000- 8,000 years. Yes, you are absolutely right about the fact that faith plays a big part as to what one chooses to believe. Your comment about faith and science makes it clear which one you trust. For my part I see that science can be a wonderful tool to learn and understand more about God. When I was in anatomy class in college I was overwhelmed by how the body was designed and how every cell and organ worked. I chose to believe that only God could do something so wonderful. So I am not opposed to science but I give greater value to scripture than I do to science. Thanks for sharing your views with me.

WalterBradfordCannon
1378
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 09/04/13 - 06:38 pm
2
0
@scoopdedoop64 you stated

@scoopdedoop64 you stated that there is "much scientific data" to back up the age of the earth being around 10000 years. There is not ANY scientifically accepted data to back up the age of the earth being around 10,000 years. Even 150 years ago, the leading theories on the age of the earth were 10s of millions of years, and the estimates have grown substantially since then in time and reliability of estimates to 4.5 billion years - and these estimates are backed by dozens of independent methods. And, again, repeating such lies (about what is supported by science) is bearing false witness against the scientists who have worked hard to produce reliable and repeatable data on the age of the earth. You can choose what you believe the age of the earth to be, but when you lie about what science has to say about it you have crossed the line.

scoopdedoop64
2353
Points
scoopdedoop64 09/04/13 - 07:20 pm
2
2
I haven't lied

I haven't lied and I have information to back it up. Just because I don't follow the secular scientist doesn't mean that there are not scientists that have evidence to support an early age of earth. If you want to know where I get my information you can check out the below link but it sounds you already have your mind made up and that is why you are so angry that I am belittling your love of science. Science won't get you to heaven. Expand your thinking and be challenged by Ken Ham and his group: answers in genesis. http://www.answersingenesis.org/ or specifically about our subject: http://www.answersingenesis.org/store/ken-ham-others/ken-ham/

scoopdedoop64
2353
Points
scoopdedoop64 09/04/13 - 07:24 pm
2
1
Here is my proof...you say there is none..read below

Some modern scientists who have accepted the biblical account of creation

Dr. William Arion, Biochemistry, Chemistry
Dr. Paul Ackerman, Psychologist
Dr. E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
Dr. Steve Austin, Geologist
Dr. S.E. Aw, Biochemist
Dr. Thomas Barnes, Physicist
Dr. Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
Dr. John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
Dr. Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
Dr. Kimberly Berrine, Microbiology & Immunology
Prof. Vladimir Betina, Microbiology, Biochemistry & Biology
Dr. Andrew Bosanquet, Biology, Microbiology
Edward A. Boudreaux, Theoretical Chemistry
Dr. David R. Boylan, Chemical Engineer
Professor Stuart Burgess, Engineering Design
Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
Dr. Rob Carter, Marine Biology
Prof. Sung-Do Cha, Physics
Dr. Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
Dr. Choong-Kuk Chang, Genetic Engineering
Prof. Jeun-Sik Chang, Aeronautical Engineering

WalterBradfordCannon
1378
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 09/04/13 - 08:43 pm
2
1
Again, just because there

Again, just because there exist scientists who accept creationism does not mean that "there is much science" to support the age of the earth at around 10,000 years. The people who contributed to the science on the age of the earth are the authorities, here, and the names on your list have not contributed to that science. Making such statements is fairly blatantly lying and bearing false witness about what science has to say about the matter. The "secular" scientists are not out to get religion. They are out to get truth, and there is a big difference. The nonsecular scientists, some of those on your list, are only pursuing answers that support their a priori agenda, and that is not science. It is not a religious act, either, to pursue lies that can be marketed to support an obviously false, in the literal sense, rendition of history in Genesis.

I ask you again, as a Christian and a scientist, to consider carefully the statements you make about what science supports, because nothing Jesus ever said suggested that you should try to save the church by lying about scientific truth. If you think that what you are doing is religious, then your church worships a different God than mine.

scoopdedoop64
2353
Points
scoopdedoop64 09/04/13 - 08:51 pm
1
2
Bye...be careful about how easily you use the word "lying"

I don't appreciate being called a liar...I provided sufficient proof to back up what I am saying. In the words of Forest Gump, "This is all I have to say about that". I am finished. Good tidings.

WalterBradfordCannon
1378
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 09/05/13 - 07:07 am
2
1
Christian Science is neither

Christian Science is neither science nor Christian - it is blasphemy, plain and simple, and I will explain. "Science" is a process for finding reliable and reproducible observations about physical phenomena. It conducts experiments to get at truth. It is secular.

Christian Science starts with the "facts" it wants to support, and tries to create observations that it feels will support those "facts". That is not science, because it is not the search for truth. In most cases, it is intentionally supporting something known NOT to be the truth. In as much as that constitutes bearing false witness against scientists who are actually concerned with seeking truth, it is highly blasphemous because it violates one of the commandments, making it not Christian at all.

This behavior is the worst sort of behavior Jesus warned of. The use of his name to persecute righteous others. The secular scientists are righteous in their pursuit of truth, and there is nothing wrong with that. The problem arises in undercutting them, and doing it in Christ's name. They should be ashamed of this practice, and so should you.

The real problem here is that some Christians assume the bible is inerrant, and science has shown that some of the observations in the bible, if assumed to be literally true, are inaccurate. The age of the earth and the story of creation are prime examples. Secular science is as concerned with what the bible says in as much as it is evidence of what the real story of the creation of the earth and our species is. But it is also concerned with all other evidence that bears on this issue, and science does not support creationism as literally written in Genesis. Neither, btw, does the Pope or most Christian denominations. And attempts to prop up the literal story in Genesis with Christian Science is really quite blasphemous.

Back to Top

Top headlines

Commission rejects tax jump

Seven commissioners nixed a proposed tax increase Monday that would cost a typical homeowner $70 a year, leaving the countywide millage unset with just a few days to meet state deadlines.
Search Augusta jobs