Conference on Christianity and Science

The apparent conflict between Science and Christianity is the subject to be addressed at a day conference in Inverness which will bring together three expert speakers on the theme.

The WorldConference on Christianity & Science

Inverness East Church Hall,

 Margaret Street, Inverness IV1 1LU

Saturday, 28 August, 2010

Dr Murdo MacDonald:
Director of the Church of Scotland's Science, Religion and Technology Project.

The Rev Dr Alistair Donald:
Church of Scotland Minister currently serving as Chaplain to Herriot Watt University.

The Rev Dr Arthur Fraser:
Minister and a former University Lecturer.

10.30am - Registration and Tea/Coffee
11.30am - Murdo MacDonald
‘Science and Christianity: Friends or Foes?'
12.45pm - Lunch
1.30pm - Alistair Donald
'What is Intelligent Design?'
2.45pm - Coffee
3.15pm - Arthur Fraser
'Can Christians believe in an Old Earth?'
4.30pm - Finish

Conference Fee: £5                 Bring a Packed Lunch: Tea and Coffee provided

Further information: Tel. 01463 236695

East Church, Inverness, 14/08/2010

(page   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9)
Donald Boyd 03/09/2010 20:16
Alec, the global flood in Noah’s day included alteration in the Earth’s crust so that plate tectonics could have begun then.

Gen 7:11 says: “the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.” There are two processes at work.

You mentioned the Asian tsunami in Dec 2004. This short video has a comment on the aftermath of the tsunami which very few people consider:

Alec (Guest) 03/09/2010 21:17

The video in your link is to Richard Guy's idea that the Earth is expanding and the seas subsequently contracting

An interesting idea, to be sure. He claims in his book to have evidence for this. If such hard evidence existed, it would have quite serious implications for Earth Science - there are many disciplines that would be affected.

If he does have good evidence of this, then he should publish it in a proper peer-reviewed journal, not a book.

Yes, I am sceptical, not because I think the idea is a bad one, but because if this sort of "earth expansion" were happening, it would have been picked up by now by others who are workign in this field.

Modern GPS systems are highly accurate and would certainly show this happening. However, on the other hand, phenomena like sea floor spreading and oceanic crust being augmented at mid ocean ridges is a proven fact. The geodesic systems used to measure these phenomena would certainly pick up on earth expansion.

I think Mr Guy needs to check his research!
Donald Boyd 04/09/2010 01:06
How easy is it to get non-mainstream theories published in peer-reviewed publications?

Is a non-scientist not allowed to have ideas and promote them as best he is able?

Yesterday’s heresy can be today’s orthodoxy, and this is true of plate tectonics. One had only to mention it in an American university in the mid-20th century and job prospects were seriously curtailed.

When Alfred Wegener promoted it in the early 20th century, he didn’t have the science available to back it up. The hypothesis comes first, then the experiments. Richard Guy in these videos calls for proper scientific measurements and I suspect that he will be proven right.

Why should sea levels remain constant? Why should the mid-ocean ridges not open trenches big enough to lower sea level? It seems sufficiently reasonable to merit investigation.

“it would have been picked up by now by others who are working in this field.”

This series of videos suggests that it has been picked up – have a look at this:

Donald Boyd 04/09/2010 01:22
By the way, Alec,

Al Gore, who claimed that sea level will rise 20 feet, bought a $4million house on the sea shore in San Francisco, just feet from the ocean at fisherman’s wharf.

Have a look here:

It is a long video, but you will find the relevant section at 27’00 into the movie.

Albert Dawson (Guest) 04/09/2010 11:19
Julian Baggini's article in today's The Independent might be an interesting discussion point regarding religion and science. There may or not be a god but science has pretty much destroyed the god of the Christian bible. What do you think?
Duncan Tamsett (Guest) 04/09/2010 12:19
Alec and others

Surely it doesnt matter a jot whether Adam really existed in order for me to know:
1. I fall short of God's standard of Goodness (there's an understatement),
2. I need to be rescued from a lost eternity,
3. I need forgiveness,
4. Yeshua (God with us) at His expense, is my redeemer;
5. the One who made atonement;
6. the One thru whom is 'Salvation';
7. and the One by whom i (in spite of everything) have a place in God's Kingdom.

I am not a 'sinner' because of anything Adam did, but cos that's what i am (we are responsible for what we are not for what anyone else was or is).

The only 'Fall' mentioned as such in the Bible is the 'Fall of the Adversary' ('i saw Satan fall... etc.). Xtians bandy about 'The Fall' as though the phrase occurs all over the place in the Bible. It owes much more to Milton than the Bible.

It does matter that Yeshua is for real. Read the Healing of the Man Born Blind in John's Account. The account screams off the page as something that happenned. In contrast read the account of Adam and Eve in Gen 2. Is it not just as obvious, it didnt happen? It started as a folk story and for its parable truth content has a place at the head of the Bible. (Gen 1 to my mind is exciting. If interpreted as 6 nights of vision it really can be tied in an unforced way to 150yrs of science).

'God said "Let us make man in our image"'. This implies God can become No More than human whilst remaining No Less than God. That is who Yeshua claimed to be. The same idea working in the other direction suggests our ultimate potential destiny in God.

We humans became 'Spiritual' beings thru encountering God. That encounter gives 'Spiritual' Life. It is 'Spiritual' Life that is forfeited as a consequence of 'sin' (for want of a better word). (There has been 'normal' death from the start of 'normal' life long b4 there were humans.)

You do not need to be 'irrational' to take Yeshua's claim to be God seriously. It is not Science; but it could still very reasonably be True. This cld be God taking the initiative to do for us what Science (in principle) is incapable of.
Albert Dawson (Guest) 04/09/2010 18:26
b4 indeed!!. I timed the typing of before and then b4 = an opportunity cost of 1.1 seconds. Yes I understand the need to seize the day, but really...
Duncan Tamsett (Guest) 04/09/2010 19:23
Here is a pertinent comment: Adam (a person) is indistinguishable in the unpointed Hebrew from Adam (the human race). The pointing is not inspired but added much later as interpretation.
George Orr 04/09/2010 19:55

If sin and death is not brought about by 'the fall/choice' of the first Adam, then why did Jesus had to suffer the cross to pay the price to set us free from sin and death?

Alec (Guest) 05/09/2010 11:27
Just a couple of points to finish with (I am bowing out of this one)

Romans 5:12
[ Death Through Adam, Life Through Christ ] Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned.

1 Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

1 Corinthians 15:45
So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being" ; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.

1 Timothy 2:13
For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

These verses from the NT, taken literally, point to Adam being a real person, not a metaphor. Also, it is clear that there was no death before Adam and Eve. So even if the Fall isnt mentioned per se, the concept is a valid one - a state of perfection becoming fractured.

John Stott tries to get round a lot of the objections by refering to "Homo Divinus, but this is just limbo dancing round scientific objections and doesnt deal with the idea of no physical death before the fall.

I still cant see any concordance except through a special creation / YEC paradignm

Just one final point, Donald raises a good point about non-mainstream theories getting published. I would like to see a mechanism where independent researchers who have accumulated good data and a sound hypothesis would get some sort of opportunity to further their research.

Amateurs contribute enormously to several scientifdic fields -astronomomy is an excellent example and I suspect ornithology is another. Otherwise, one would porbabloy have to find a symapthetic ear at a University to help take it further, but I suspect this is a debate for another day!
(page   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9)

NOTICE: - The 'Response' facility on some articles may be restricted to CT site members. In these circumstances comments/questions from non-site members should be sent to the Editor by e-mail: editor<atsign>

Christians Together in the Highlands and Islands > Archive > Around the Region > Inverness Area > Conference on Christianity and Science