Why Are Some Scientists Continue To Discredit The Reputation Of God's Science?

There are those who believe in the big bang theory, that all this came about out of thin air, where's their evidence? there are those who believe that aliens visited this planet to colonize it and that's how life began on this planet. Where's their evidence? Then there are those of us who believe that God created the heavens and the earth and ordained science as a means to show us His creation and how He's made it all work. Fortunately some, through science, are coming around to realizing that all this can't come about on its own and that it was created by God. Science will always point to God regardless of what people may believe.

Those scientists, who would rather believe the lie of Satan, cannot discern their left hand from their right thereby ruining the reputation of science. They They make up all sorts of fairy tales for science to fit their agenda on evolution but can't do it. The Truth of God's science comes out every time. Some of these fallible scientists don't realize that, in order for the knowledge of science to grow, it has to have a source. Otherwise, it will not grow and rot away. Scientists are not infallible but God is infallible.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

LadyGrace · Best Comment

The best scientists can do is make a hypothesis based on: their own observations, existing theories, and information they gather from other sources. Scientists use their hypothesis to make a prediction, a testable statement that describes what they think the outcome of an investigation will be. They really have no proof that the Big Bang caused creation.

The Big Bang theory is the scientific explanation for how the universe began. That's just it. It's only a theory. Whereas, proof of God's existence is found in the experience.

ImperialAerosolKidFromEP · 51-55, M

@LadyGrace it's a shame it's only a theory. Proof of it would mean the fine-tuned universe theory

LadyGrace ·

@ImperialAerosolKidFromEP what are you referring to as being only a theory?

ImperialAerosolKidFromEP · 51-55, M

@LadyGrace I mean big bang and fine-tuned. are only theories. But without a big bang, the fine-tuned universe theory collapses

LadyGrace ·

@ImperialAerosolKidFromEP you seem to contradict yourself here. First you say big bang is just a theory and then you say without a big bang the fine-tuned universe theory collapses. Maybe I'm just not understanding your wording I don't know.

ImperialAerosolKidFromEP · 51-55, M

@LadyGrace they are both theories, but one depends on the other. If big bang was disproven, that would eliminate the fine-tuned universe theory. Which I would find a bit sad, because I find unity between my faith and the theory says that very (seemingly) arbitrary attributes are just perfect for sustaining life.