Science is the key/ Not Religion

The Big Bang Theory: such a controversy! (Half sarcasm half real.) Well, when I was talking of the Miller-Urey Experiment, my ONLY point and goal was to get across that, what we call "mainstream" science, isn't always the most reliable. The Big Bang is unrelated to this, yes. I don't know why you accused me of getting the two mixed up though. To begin, if I said 'combustion of the universe' and not 'commencement/origin of the universe,' MY BAD. You say: "It is not, as you say, thought of by most atheists to be a combustion of the universe. It is widely accepted by people with and without religion." I know that the Big Bang is widely accepted by religious people too, I was just pointing out how 99% atheists believe in the Big Bang as what started the universe. Secondly, you say my sources are too biased to be trusted. Sorry but I'm just trying to do my job, which is explain why religion is the key not science, and to do that you have to give websites that prove your point, especially if what's being said is true. How can a debater not ever be biased? From your first website listed, it was about what the BBT is. Quote: "The Big Bang Theory is the leading explanation about how the universe began. At its simplest, it talks about the universe as we know it starting with a small singularity, then inflating over the next 13.8 billion years to the cosmos that we know today." One quick thing, is this REALLY the only alternative to Creationism which--by the way--has been around for a longer time than the BBT (atheistic way of putting the origin of life)...? Scientists who don't want to believe in a Creator have searched for ways the universe could've commenced, always trying to compete with the theory of God, and this is what we have now?! "Because current instruments don't allow astronomers to peer back at the universe's birth, much of what we understand about the Big Bang Theory comes from mathematical theory and models." ...And it's a fact that Evolution AND the Big Bang model don't have any observable evidence, while religion such as Christianity, has mounds of it. I've actually sent letters to workers who teach evolution, at this state Science Museum, and I would ask for observable evidence. Response? "I can't tell you on a postcard." I got a website link which told me nothing. But I'm not the only one to say this, many people have done experiments. [1] My opponent: "It is also evident that you believe that because science changes over time it cannot be trusted. This is most certainly not the case. Science adapts as new discoveries are made, thus correcting any errors and paving the way to new knowledge." That sounds like an oxy moron (get it?). You're saying that science never changes but it corrects the errors science had earlier--this paves a way to new knowledge. So you admit, science does (and can and will) change. "Science manages to stay stable because of its evolving. Whereas the Bible refuses to change." The world may be becoming something different. But the science, in this world, that correlates with the Bible which never changes, proves the Book's truth and it shows how science alone is unstable and faulty. Lots of scientific evidence for Christianity's holy book is out there, just seek and you will find. [2] It's actually very amazing how the Bible doesn't need to adapt; science adapts to it. Yes I spent a lot of time talking about fossils. I enjoy laughing at evolutionism's faulty basis. Just kidding I don't do that, but my point in doing so was to prove evolutionism's faulty basis. My opponent says that I stated something about Precambrian and Cambrian period and it disproved my YEC belief. Did you know that the Cambrian Explosion can disprove Evolution? It's quite interesting. [3] The analogy-type, or dare I say 'parable' of a story my opponent showed that he thinks science and religion cannot work together at all, much less that religion is the "key" not science. "You go to the refrigerator, wishing for one of the cookies you had just baked. But upon your arrival, to your dismay, they are gone. Your initial thought is that your brother took them (because he loves cookies). However as you turn away, you see a trail of chocolate leading to the dog, who also has the rest of the cookies. In this care the initial thought of the brother represents Christianity. And the adaptation of knowledge once you see the dog represents science." Actually, the brother could also represent Evolution/science, because all atheists would agree: science is more logical and inviting than religion. The Bible, for example, has many evidences to hint it's truth, but it is not agreeable by most. "If you don't change your mind, though you have seen the dog eating the cookies, and confront your brother about it, he will deny he did it, thus "facts" observed do not agree. You had no evidence that your brother did it which is also a lack of observation. There is one question (who took the cookies) yet two ways to find the answer (going with your initial thought or adapting to the evidence). Likewise, science and religion cannot both be they key, just as two different keys cannot unlock one door." The key part is a bit misleading, and I had wanted to mention this during the whole debate but forgot. key (noun or adjective) 1. a small piece of shaped metal with incisions cut to fit the wards of a particular lock, and that is inserted into a lock and turned to open or close it. 2. each of several buttons on a panel for operating a computer, typewriter, or telephone. 1. of paramount or crucial importance [5] This is misleading because, the whole debate, you have been acting like 'key' meant the 'way.' But in response to your story, there IS an alternative method. That is the key to the kingdom. Matthew 16:19 says "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven." [4] Since you have changed the meaning keys, I can twist it a bit too: the verse says that anybody, with or without science, can get to heaven (through salvation with Christ). Would you rather have the keys to earthly, temporary things such as science, or to the everlasting, hopeful things such as our Creator's home called Heaven? In fact, many times in the Bible it says that earthly things will lead you in the wrong direction. Temporary things like drugs, partying, money, power, and even knowledge in science, can be tempting and give you happiness at the time, but when thinking long-term you never get anywhere with those items. This is why, not just religion, but a relationship with the Creator we talk about in Christianity, is so much more powerful and worth-while than science or any earthly object. The keys to life are not held in science. The keys to some knowledge are held in science, but not all. The keys to satisfaction are not held in science. Therefore science is not the key. I will run out of characters if I answer all my opponent's questions, but bear with me as I give a quick overview and answers to his interview :) By the way, it's pretty obvious my opponent copy/pasted the questions from a certain website he did not provide a source for... -Young Earth Creationism is not religion therefore is slightly irrelevant to this debate, but it is one example of why science and religion can work together. -Tradition (Adam and Eve) has eliminated many forms of skepticism, but as we all know there is evidence that supports both creationism and evolution and many people have fallen into the trap/temptation of mainstream, and secular science. Creationism teaches both earthly and religion-related science, unlike secular scientists. Evolution vs Creation is a completely different debate but I would've loved to answer those questions, maybe another time! Thank you truly for a intriguing debate though, and I'll pray for you and for the readers that you all would realize the significance in religion and a supernatural relationship. SOURCES [1] [2] http://www.livingwaters.com... [3] http://www.learnthebible.org.... [4] http://biblehub.com.... [5] http://www.google.com...