"going back to the Book of Revelations"
... ah, that would be Genesis.
I read the headline... and I thought that they discovered something in Serbia that disproved evolution.
I like the theory of evolution myself, but even I know it has some flaws when applied to complex species such as our own. At the lower levels, it makes a lot of sense, but when applied to our genetic ancestors... there had to be a breaking point where hominid intelligence stopped being operative and expanded to include intuition, logic, and reason.
Hmm...
Glad to see you made it. I had no electricity for 26 hours. My boss had three trees fall on his house. One was large enough to crush his garage.
No, Kansas is against open discussion and debate. The state will tell you what to think on this subject.
Serbia is becoming more Islamic in its biological theories.
If Christians would just decide that the Bible wasn't a science textbook, and that God has the power to create evolution, then there's no problem. Kid goes to college, see's evolution evidence, and says "Cool, look what God did".
Christians are shooting themselves in the foot on this issue.
Evolution is a theory, not a law. Creationism is a theory, not a law. Filling the major holes that exist in either theory with opinion is dogmatic, not science. I say they both deserve scientific scrutiny. I think that is all the minister is requiring.
Russia eliminates communism and establishes a flat tax, and now this. Sounds like the Slavic world might be passing us by.
Wipe Serbia from the list of educated societies.
Science obviously contains some measure or kind of truth, otherwise it would not have such formidable predictive power or generate such wonderful technologies. It has therefore been a natural and laudable quest on the part of educated Christians to try and find some way of resolving the apparent contradictions between science and Christianity. Indeed, this is a necessity of our faith. For if the universe is one and created by one God, we must believe that the truths of the faith and the final conclusions of science (if such there can ever be) are compatible. To believe otherwise leads to a kind of epistemological Manicheism postulating two kinds of mutually impenetrable universes which cannot be comprehended from a single viewpoint, or, alternatively, to atheism or a kind of solipsistic Buddhism according to which one of the two realms is considered to be illusory.
Thus Fr. Seraphim Rose writes: “Even though revealed knowledge is higher than natural knowledge, still we know that there can be no conflict between true revelation and true natural knowledge. But there can be conflict between revelation and human philosophy, which is often in error. There is thus no conflict between the knowledge of creation contained in Genesis, as interpreted for us by the Holy Fathers, and the true knowledge of creatures which modern science has acquired by observation; but there most certainly is an irreconcilable conflict between the knowledge contained in Genesis and the vain philosophical speculation of modern scientists, unenlightened by faith, about the state of the world in the Six Days of Creation.”
Even when we are not talking about “the vain philosophical speculation” of scientists, there is no reason why the major hypotheses of modern science have to be accepted uncritically. First, science is hypothetical in essence; it proclaims no certainties; what is declared to be a self-evident law of nature in one generation is denounced as only an approximation of the truth or (more usually) simply false in the next. Secondly, several of the major hypotheses of science appear to contradict each other, at least in the opinion of significant sections of the scientific community - for example, the time-reversible laws of quantum physics and the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Since this is the case, there is no need to concede to the scientific world-view more than it claims for itself (in the mouths of its more honest and intelligent spokesmen). Otherwise we fall into the trap which so many non-scientific Christians have fallen into of immediately accepting the latest scientific fashion and adapting one's faith to it, only to find that science has moved on and left their "modernised faith" as an out-of-date relic. This has been the fate of the "Christian Marxists" and "theist evolutionists", who in trying slavishly to adapt Christianity to the latest and least credible fashion in science show themselves to be neither Christians nor scientists.
When did schools start teaching Darwinism as gospel? I wonder what the history of it is.
As punishment, she was ordered on public tv to wear an archaeopteryx costume and write out a 1000 times: ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny
Yup.
Great news!