Mike, I think you just put forth a shining example of NHB's point.
mikedsjr wrote:Sexuality isn't complex. God made man and woman to be united as one. Sin makes sex complex. "I have my rights" makes sex complex.
Sexuality IS complex. Study it a bit. Expand your knowledge outside of your own personal experience. You cannot truthfully state otherwise. There are biological factors, emotional factors, cultural factors, chemical factors, legal factors, and likely factors that we don't even know about yet. If you want to roll all of that into a big ball and call it sin, then you're being egregiously simple-minded.
mikedsjr wrote:Christians and non-christians are not the same. One is an idolater and bound for hell. The other is serving the one true and living God. Atheist just happen to be idolaters of mankind.
NHB's comment about christians and non-christians referred to their equal devotion and zeal for their respective religions. I'd like to see you walk into a mosque or synagogue and tell the worshipers that they are engaged in idolatry. That would be a hoot.
mikedsjr wrote:And science has not proved evolution, except micro-evolution.
(buzzer sounding) Macro and micro, they are one in the same on different scales, and it is proved to the extent that the vast majority of the scientific community accept them as true. We have some nice parting gifts for you. BTW, I'm curious, do believe in microeconomics but not in macroeconomics?
mikedsjr wrote:Christian scientist are working hard to form a testable and falsefiable alternative method to evolution using the bible and science together. They've gone before scientist and come away with understanding they need more detailed information to make it legit. They are still working on it. But they are doing a remarkable job.
Your wording of this belies your misunderstanding of science. If Christian scientists want to present an alternative theory
to evolution, they first need to agree to abide by the same methods
that science uses. Once they have done this, they may present their hypothesis
to the scientific community, which will attempt to repeat and verify (or falsify) the process.
Furthermore, they don't need more detailed
information to make it legitimate, they need more testable
information. I look forward to the day that Christian scientists scientifically prove the existence of a creator deity. If nothing else, it would put an end to the fruitless theological debate and allow us to get on with it. Also, I would have a few things to drop in his suggestion box.
On second thought, your post, while spectacularly lacking in understanding of the scientific method, does reveal some of the issues with the way Christian scientists are approaching this battle. They are indeed working hard to force an alternative method (faith, presupposition, granting legitimacy and authority to a non-scientific text) for science. The trouble with that is, it's like trying to come up with an alternative method for living. There is only one alternative, that being death, which by its very nature IS NOT living. In the same way, trying to fit the square peg of Christianity into the round hole of science is a non-starter. Once you force that fit, science ceases to be the very thing which you would seek to make Christianity a part of.
EDIT, to make a comment on the subject of this thread: How do explain the preponderance of homosexual behavior and asexual reproduction in the animal kingdom? God sure did allow for a lot of sexual complexity among His creation, above and beyond the whole traditional male/female thing. Considering He is all-powerful, he sure has allowed for a lot of variance outside of His will.
Oops, I forgot. It's our fault.