G'day Notes,
I know this is getting really off topic guys, I apologise.

Quote:

<snip> To tell you the truth, I'm not really sure because the Science I believe in and the Religion I believe in don't always agree. It's confusing to this human's brain.<snip>



I'm happy to address this, but as stated, I do not want to get into a specific abortion debate - they always seem to degenerate into emotional bun fights and never actually address real issues.

IMHO the reason that science and religion don't seem to agree on points is basically down to interpretation. On the one hand we have bad science and on the other we have bad religion. A classic case in point is our friend Copernicus. He correctly identified good old Sol as the centre of our solar system, but the religious authorities of the day decided that didn't fit with their narrow understanding of what the Bible teaches - they erroneously decided that God must have made the Earth the centre of the universe - there is nothing in my reading of the Word that comes even close to supporting this.

On the other hand we have another highly emotive issue - evolution... I have followed the evolution debate over several decades and it is my opinion that it is at least as much a religion as my Christian beliefs - perhaps more so. It certainly requires a significant amount of faith to continue believing in atoms to man evolution when all the real evidence not only does not support it, but actually disproves it. Add to that the things we are told in support of evolutionary theory are so continuously obfuscated and misrepresented. I would take evolutionists far more seriously if they would simply be honest, with themselves as much as with the rest of us.

Another interesting example of interpretation being an important factor: Some time ago I saw part of a documentary where some interesting data relating to brain construction had emerged from autopsy results. It appeared that the brains of known homosexual men were more feminine in construction than they were masculine. The immediate deduction was that this was evidence that homosexuality was the result of a female brain in a male body. I have a problem with this... The part of me that likes to understand the "nuts and bolts" of things immediately asked the question; "What is cause and what is effect?" Were they homosexual because they had feminine brains or did their brains become feminised because of their homosexual lifestyle? This question was NOT asked by the researchers, yet it is known that lifestyle can have physical effects on the brain. Thus IMHO the research was incomplete. They assumed the brain data was evidence of "cause" and didn't even consider that it might be "effect". What I consider an obvious question was not even asked much less taken into consideration. IMHO this is bad science.

WRT the morality of killing... Something that seems to be commonly misquoted is the commandment "Thou shalt not kill". Actually, the commandment is "Thou shalt not MURDER". Now I know the difference is largely semantics, and the principle of not killing is a good one. In fact, it is one that I choose to live by. But I'll tell you this, threaten my family and I'll kill you as soon as look at you. And I won't turn a hair, as far as I'm concerned that is not murder, it's pest control... so long as the threat is real. IMHO there is no difference between abortion and killing adults or discarding fertilised ova. I do NOT support embryonic stem cell research - especially since there seems to be significant evidence that adult stem cell research is considerably more productive. But even if it weren't, it is immoral to create a human life in order to kill it and harvest cells just so someone else might benefit. I can choose to give my life, an embryo cannot.

When the WMD arguments were being first floated I confess to being gullible enough to accept them. That said, I also believe that something needed to be done about Saddam Hussein. It is unacceptable that dishonesty was used to make it happen. It is a reality that there are evil people amongst us. We have a responsibility to protects ourselves from them. But who are they??? E.G. Saddam Hussein's rise to power was facilitated by the US government some 30 years ago when they were fighting Iran - bad choice i reckon. Who were the evil people? Saddam Hussein & co. or the US government representatives who made the decision to support him - or both? Or neither? I suggest there is no doubt that Saddam was, from our perspective, an evil man - a proven murderer. But the West is not wholly innocent either.

There are no cut and dried answers. For myself, I try to live my life according to the precepts I've learned from the Bible. I believe Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour and do my best to live according to His commandments. He was a man of peace, I endeavour to be. He was a healer, I try to do what I can to help people heal. He truly loved, I do the best I can and try as hard as I can to not let hate and intolerance govern me. He is my example, but I am not perfect. When I fail He has purchased forgiveness for me provided I truly repent.

Sin is a concept that has many interpretations. Let me give the one I understand from the Bible: "Sin is disobedience to God". Nothing more, nothing less. It is not necessarily killing or stealing or beating people up or rape or any number of abhorrent things. These things are covered, and in Jesus new commandment "Love one another as I have loved you" we have a practical example of how to make it work. He loved us enough to put our lives before His own. It is a sad thing that the world cannot, and will not, live this way.

Last edited by Lawrie; 06/10/09 05:41 PM.
--=-- My credo: If it's worth doing, it's worth overdoing - just ask my missus, she'll tell ya laugh --=--
You're only paranoid if you're wrong!