Science is hurting my faith.

[fResH]

Hello all. First i'd like to say that my name is Anthony. I'm a 16 year old Christian, in 10th grade, taking up Advanced Earth & Space Science.

So we are learning about the deep most known unknowns of space. As it turn's out (for those who don't know), the Galaxy we live in consist's of our Solar Systems. Now problems that come up.

1) There are about 100 Billion other Galaxies out there, probably JUST like us. So I question myself and God, asking what is the purpose of all these other galaxies? I believe that everything was made for a reason. Perhaps God had other, "Genesis" like worlds out there?

2) Our Galaxy, unfortunatly, has a big black hole in the middle. It is expected to consume all matter in the Milky Way.

3) Our sun is in a middle age stage, and has a life expectancy of 3-5 billion more years. The Earth is expected to rise in temperature by 10% in 1.1 billion years, meaning no more atmosphere, polar ice caps melted, eccentric global warming...etc.

4) While not neccesarely dealing with space, I find it hard to believe that we didn't evolve from monkey's, seeing how there is physical proof saying so.

All these are contradicting my faith in God, and it's driving me nuts! And the thing is, i'm forced to take Science, probably for the next 2 years of High School, and perhaps college (maybe, my goal in life is in the acting biz).

So can someone please help me out? Thanks very much, and may God bless all of you.

 

[Klee shay]

It's important to remember that everything in our world (as Christians) has two perspectives. One from God's perspective and one from man's.

What you are experiencing is a conflict of man's versus God's perspective. The bible teaches about God and your non-secular educational material will sometimes seem in competition. So what do you choose? God or an education?

Well, it's going to be a life-long experiment in finding out what is the right choice/balance for you. God won't compete with your time as much as an education will, that is required to take responsibility for yourself in this non-secular world. If you want to be a Christian and follow God then you will have to strike a balance between logic and belief. The purely logical mind cannot accept God because it's impossible to see God in all of His complexity. So it is attracted to tangible knowledge instead which is easily processed and digested.

Belief, on the other hand requires sight with the heart and spirit. It is the things which are processed that are not immediately tangible. You will not see belief to understand it. You have to experience it to understand it and that will happen over time by trial and error - just like scientists conducting scientific research to learn more about life.

While science may well compete with God as far as what you believe is concerned, bear in mind that God created the sceience which so attracts you to understanding it. While digesting the pure science and feeding your curiosity, hold a thought (if you so choose) that if God could have created all of that - what more does he know about YOU that He will reveal in your lifetime if you believe?

Your curiosity is not a threat to your belief if you respect God for giving man such a wonderous galaxy to explore in the first place. Take a little time to reflect on your bible, so that when you go back to the other books of knowledge, you will be inspired to discover more without feeling like God must not exist in order to accept the scope of science.

So it's a matter of striking a balance. God on His own without any means of understanding him invalidates His meaning to the individual - like science on it's own without any means of creation, invalidates its meaning to the individual as well. Facts on their own are nothing without a point of reference. Where you postion that point of reference determines what you are likely to discover in your life. If tangible knowledge is all that cuts the mustard for you then a life of science will consume everything you do. If spiritual growth is what cuts your mustard also however, then you will have to accommodate it in your scientific explorations.

Either way, bear in mind, what man in existence has ever known all the answers on a scientific or spiritual basis? You either strike a balance to be exposed to both or you cut one off in preference to pursue the other. A wise person will learn as much as they can for as long as they have.

All the best. :D

 

[Imagican]

Nice one Klee, sound advice for anyone allowing the doubts of this world to cloud their vision of the Creator.

Science is even beginning to re-explore ID, for much of what they have discovered points in that direction even for many that don't believe. Many of their findings point to the, IMO, fallacy of random order out of chaos.

And, as many that refuse to accept the love that God has offered, and HAS to offer find, our MAIN purpose in this life is to develope a personal relationship with our Creator in order to be fulfilled. Without this, ones life can ONLY have a 'small piece' of the fulfillment, (if any), that we were designed for.

 

[English]

Hi Anthony,

I hope you're still around because I have a couple of sermons which may interest you.

Before you read them however a few points. It's all "just doctrine". It is the Gospel of Christ which is the power of salvation to all who believe. You have heard of Jesus, yes? Of how he went about doing good healing those oppressed of the devil as God was with him?

The gospel which is proclaimed is that God raised him from the dead.

You see science has a slight problem with this. Dead people don't rise from the grave after 3 days thus they declare it foolishness. God does not fit in with many ideas of how people think the world ought to be.

Two sermons for you then, on prescription!

What really happened?

And

Knowing the Enemy and walking through walls

I hope you will see in both some points which address your very questions?

 

[WMD]

There are about 100 Billion other Galaxies out there, probably JUST like us. So I question myself and God, asking what is the purpose of all these other galaxies? I believe that everything was made for a reason. Perhaps God had other, "Genesis" like worlds out there?

100 Billion is a lot. How does anyone possibly know this? and who counted them all?

Our sun is in a middle age stage, and has a life expectancy of 3-5 billion more years. The Earth is expected to rise in temperature by 10% in 1.1 billion years, meaning no more atmosphere, polar ice caps melted, eccentric global warming...etc.

Only 3-5 billion more years? 1.1 until the temp goes up 10%? We better do something before it is to late! How do scientists come up with these figures? Again impossible to know.

While not neccesarely dealing with space, I find it hard to believe that we didn't evolve from monkey's, seeing how there is physical proof saying so.

Where is this physical proof? It has not been found nor proven. And if we evolved from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys.

I heard that the book Case for the Creator was a good read, that uses science to prove intellegent design.

All these are contradicting my faith in God, and it's driving me nuts! And the thing is, i'm forced to take Science, probably for the next 2 years of High School, and perhaps college (maybe, my goal in life is in the acting biz).

So can someone please help me out? Thanks very much, and may God bless all of you.

I don't understand why you blindly believe things that scientists tell us, or things published in science text books, but you are having trouble believing the Bible?

Having doubts in your faith is not always a bad thing. I recently question my faith and I am delving deep into it so that I can try to reaffirm, but you are making an argument against your faith that doesn't make sense.

 

[English]

No matter how hard you try some people just don't get it. Of course nobody bothers to read, but we try nonetheless.

 

[Novum]

There are about 100 Billion other Galaxies out there, probably JUST like us. So I question myself and God, asking what is the purpose of all these other galaxies? I believe that everything was made for a reason. Perhaps God had other, "Genesis" like worlds out there?

100 Billion is a lot. How does anyone possibly know this? and who counted them all?

Astronomers did. It's simple: point your telescope at some random point in the sky and count the number of galaxies you see. Then multiply by the rest of the visible sky and you've got your estimate of the number of galaxies that are visible from Earth. Using similar means, we can also estimate the number of galaxies in the entire universe, plus we also have fairly accurate estimates of the number of particles (atoms) in the universe.

[quote:2bc0f]Our sun is in a middle age stage, and has a life expectancy of 3-5 billion more years. The Earth is expected to rise in temperature by 10% in 1.1 billion years, meaning no more atmosphere, polar ice caps melted, eccentric global warming...etc.

Only 3-5 billion more years? 1.1 until the temp goes up 10%? We better do something before it is to late! How do scientists come up with these figures? Again impossible to know.[/quote:2bc0f]

Not at all impossible. We have observed other stars (G2 class stars, like our sun) in all stages of their lives. Since our sun is just an average G2 class star and because we know the age of our solar system, we know very, very accurately how long the sun's life expectancy is and how far along it is in that life.

[quote:2bc0f]While not neccesarely dealing with space, I find it hard to believe that we didn't evolve from monkey's, seeing how there is physical proof saying so.

Where is this physical proof? It has not been found nor proven. And if we evolved from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys.[/quote:2bc0f]

We didn't evolve from monkeys; that's a common misconception. We evolved from monkey-like creatures. The gorillas and monkeys around today also evolved from these creatures.

I don't understand why you blindly believe things that scientists tell us, or things published in science text books, but you are having trouble believing the Bible?

He's doing the opposite. He is accepting science because it cites its sources, provides evidence for its claims, and is independently verifiable - given the right equipment, you yourself can arrive at the same conclusions scientists do. He is having issue with the bible because none of the above are true for the bible.

 

[Klee shay]

Novum,

You used the word "estimate" several times to describe...

He is accepting science because it cites its sources, provides evidence for its claims, and is independently verifiable - given the right equipment, you yourself can arrive at the same conclusions scientists do.

An estimate is a scientific variable - it is not evidence to address specific claims. The best mankind can produce is various estimates based on current studies, until another scientific study can refute them with more estimates. The problem Anthonly is perhaps experiencing is the education system informing him of all the "theories" mankind has developed to date, and he's trying to rationalise them through faith.

He is having issue with the bible because none of the above are true for the bible.

The bible isn't an educational tool for understanding science. It is the key to understanding what is best for mankind. By understanding yourself through seeking God, you're at your best to pursue other interests - such as science, the arts (Anthony mentioned acting), communication, sociology, etc-etc; the list is endless.

The bible contains the answers to questions mankind forgets to ask. :wink:

 

[Novum]

An estimate is a scientific variable - it is not evidence to address specific claims. The best mankind can produce is various estimates based on current studies, until another scientific study can refute them with more estimates.

To be fair, the specific scientific claims referenced in the OP are all claims for which we only have estimates - either the age of the solar system, or the number of galaxies out there, or so on. For obvious reasons, it's hard to get exact numbers out of astronomy.

But that is not to say there are no things in this world that we know to a greater accuracy. The speed of light, or the speed of sound, or what happens when you drop a chunk of sodium in water, or how diamonds form come to mind.

It's just not right to claim that the best we can do is estimate.

The problem Anthonly is perhaps experiencing is the education system informing him of all the "theories" mankind has developed to date, and he's trying to rationalise them through faith.

I question whether such a rationalization is possible. I also detect a bit of disdain from you directed towards "the education system".

The bible isn't an educational tool for understanding science. It is the key to understanding what is best for mankind. By understanding yourself through seeking God, you're at your best to pursue other interests - such as science, the arts (Anthony mentioned acting), communication, sociology, etc-etc; the list is endless.

The bible contains the answers to questions mankind forgets to ask. :wink:

Take a (deceptively) simple case - ethics. The age-old Platonic practical question: "What ought I to do?", or what is right and wrong? I question whether the bible provides practical answers in this area; if it does, I question its effectiveness next to modern ethical theory. I think abortion and euthanasia serve as powerful, relevant examples.

 

[Klee shay]

It's just not right to claim that the best we can do is estimate.

Unless you know a person with all the answers to infinite knowledge, then you can bet an estimate is required to further understanding of any subject matter.

The best we can do is estimate; experiment on those estimates and put a label on those findings we call "fact" - until another experiment changes those previous findings we called "facts" and redefines them as misconceptons based on the information available at the time.

The problem Anthonly is perhaps experiencing is the education system informing him of all the "theories" mankind has developed to date, and he's trying to rationalise them through faith.

I question whether such a rationalization is possible. I also detect a bit of disdain from you directed towards "the education system".

LOL, is that based on an estimation I wonder? :wink:

My disdain (or lack of disdain) has nothing to do with the fact that the education system has to teach some form of curriculum which is based on the most current information known to man.

"What ought I to do?", or what is right and wrong? I question whether the bible provides practical answers in this area; if it does, I question its effectiveness next to modern ethical theory. I think abortion and euthanasia serve as powerful, relevant examples.

Can you tell me where the line between what the bible teaches and modern ethical theory begins?

Sorry if I sound hostile - not meaning to be, just in a hurry. :D

 

[Packrat]

fResH, I don't think that it's science that is hurting your faith - I mean, hard facts - but rather the interpretation of those facts that is hurting your faith. Here is a Christian out-look on it:

http://www.godandscience.org/

I would direct you to some secular websites as well, but I see that your faith is already being challenged and 2 vs 1 is not a fair match (especially at such an age when the majority of people in the world are older than you and more experienced). Don't reject your faith until you have heard both sides of the argument and are able to determine what is logically right. I think that the reason so many people reject Christianity around the highschool age is because that is the age that they open their eyes.

Before this age you likely accepted your faith as fact and were complacent in its comfort if you were brought up in it. By exposing yourself to logic and accepting other answers as possibilities (which is the right thing if they appeal to your reason), you open your faith up for attack. Remember this though: You are blind until you open your eyes. If you open your eyes at night, then you are still blind. Wait until enlightenment dawns before you make such a great and weighty decision.

And also remember that your faith is your armor and your logic and knowledge are your swords. They each need to pass through the fire to be tempered. Only then will they be strong.

Here are some of my findings:

1. A catholic priest played a large part in forming the Big Bang Theory into an acceptable theory.
2. There have been many hoaxes supposedly relating men to monkeys and vice versa that were accepted as fact for decades until they were found to be frauds. Do you think that some Christians lost their faith because of this? Probably. Do you think it was with good reason? Possibly during the time, but obviously not now.
3. The Genesis account, in my opinion, is highly symbolic. Research the historical context and culture of the period in which it was written before you decide on a Young Earth Stance which, yes, is contradicted by current science (as far as I know).

And be sure to read up like crazy on that site I listed. When your faith is strong, then check out some of the secular sites for it to be beaten down again until you need support once more and then repeat the cycle over and over again. I've found that it has only strengthened my faith but has also plunged me into deep conflict so that the two mutually create somewhat of a balance. The fact is though, in this age you're likely going to be 'plunged into deep conflict' at some point in your Christian life. It's up to you to be prepared for it.

 

[Novum]

Unless you know a person with all the answers to infinite knowledge, then you can bet an estimate is required to further understanding of any subject matter.

That's not what I said.

The best we can do is estimate; experiment on those estimates and put a label on those findings we call "fact" - until another experiment changes those previous findings we called "facts" and redefines them as misconceptons based on the information available at the time.

Even if "estimating" is all we'll ever do, you have not provided a reason why this is not "good enough" for the purposes of science and mankind.

Can you tell me where the line between what the bible teaches and modern ethical theory begins?

The bible is rather clear on such maxims as "Do not kill" and "Do not steal" - you know, the 10 commandments and all. Modern ethical theory, however, usually holds that there exists certain cases where these two would be permissible. I do not believe the bible's absolutist ethics, as a result, has much use in the modern world.

 

[Novum]

1. A catholic priest played a large part in forming the Big Bang Theory into an acceptable theory.
2. There have been many hoaxes supposedly relating men to monkeys and vice versa that were accepted as fact for decades until they were found to be frauds. Do you think that some Christians lost their faith because of this? Probably. Do you think it was with good reason? Possibly during the time, but obviously not now.

Have you evidence for either of these claims? I tried looking on your site but I wasn't able to find any support for these. But there's a rather large amount of information and I may have missed something. ;)

 

[Heidi]

Hello all. First i'd like to say that my name is Anthony. I'm a 16 year old Christian, in 10th grade, taking up Advanced Earth & Space Science.

So we are learning about the deep most known unknowns of space. As it turn's out (for those who don't know), the Galaxy we live in consist's of our Solar Systems. Now problems that come up.

1) There are about 100 Billion other Galaxies out there, probably JUST like us. So I question myself and God, asking what is the purpose of all these other galaxies? I believe that everything was made for a reason. Perhaps God had other, "Genesis" like worlds out there?

2) Our Galaxy, unfortunatly, has a big black hole in the middle. It is expected to consume all matter in the Milky Way.

3) Our sun is in a middle age stage, and has a life expectancy of 3-5 billion more years. The Earth is expected to rise in temperature by 10% in 1.1 billion years, meaning no more atmosphere, polar ice caps melted, eccentric global warming...etc.

4) While not neccesarely dealing with space, I find it hard to believe that we didn't evolve from monkey's, seeing how there is physical proof saying so.

All these are contradicting my faith in God, and it's driving me nuts! And the thing is, i'm forced to take Science, probably for the next 2 years of High School, and perhaps college (maybe, my goal in life is in the acting biz).

So can someone please help me out? Thanks very much, and may God bless all of you.

A lot of science does hurt our faith! So just remember that scientists are fallible human beings and when they agree with God they are always right and when they disagree with God they are always wrong.

 

[gingercat]

A lot of science does hurt our faith! So just remember that scientists are fallible human beings and when they agree with God they are always right and when they disagree with God they are always wrong.

Heide my girl!! so simple and so right!! amen!!!

 

[Relic]

.

Sad to say, your case is typical of many cases in which Christians have to attend Secular School :roll:


When I was in my early years of college, I disagreed with my psychology professors so much I felt like quitting the courses. It irked me to no end that they emphasized/treated religion as if it were a pseudo science and that they focused on the secular "science" of human behavior without much regard to biblical precepts and principals. Even though in some areas there was no clash, there was much to be debated in many other areas, such as coming to terms with how they diagnosed some behavioral conditions, and then, how they taught to go about the treatment of some of them.

But in order to get through the courses so that I could pursue my degree (at that time) , I had to button my lip oh so often. I hated those courses with a passion because it bent so much against what I was learning in the bible about human behavior.

These psychology courses had some value, but little to do with my main studies, but they WERE a requirement. All I could do was to keep my beleifs to myself and finish the course. (Secular schools... arrrgh! )

Sometimes, when in public school, you have to keep your beliefs to yourself. You may be able to share with a few, but really think about it.... it is a secular school. And these days, the secular schools are working adamantly to rid anything to do with "Christianity" and "christian teachings" from the schools curriculum. They even want to change the text books to get rid of any mention of God which many of our founding fathers included in their speeches.

Public schools will go against your grain with much of what goes on there!

Have you spoken to your parents about this? Is there any pastor in your area you can talk to?


You may be interested in reading some articles and in watching some clips from some of the John Ankerberg broadcasts.
Here is a link to the archives of articles on science from a Christians perspective You can also find video clips at his web site:
http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/archives-sc.htm
BTW, Just as a precaution, please, do not purchase anything over the internet unless your parents approve.




But please, do speak to your parents and a trusted pastor before you come to any conclusions.

If you are going to go to college after you graduate high school, I suggest you choose a "Christian" College instead of a secular one. In order to afford it, it would be wise for you to work toward a scholarship while you still have 2 years left in high school.


.

 

[thessalonian]

Packrat,

1. A catholic priest played a large part in forming the Big Bang Theory into an acceptable theory

Is it significant that he was a Catholic priest or are you just stating a historical fact?

 

[Packrat]

Have you evidence for either of these claims?

Sure.
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lemaitre
2. I withdraw the full validity of my second claim, but here is some evidence to demonstrate the point I was trying to get across: Piltdown Man & Nebraska Man. There is the odd story of the 'neanderthal knight' that I find interesting; a neanderthal in chainmail. I've ruled out including Peking Man because I think that there is a lack of evidence to prove or disprove the validity of this claim. I'm not sure what the deal with Lucy is. Could you clarify this for me?

I apologize for my second claim which was mostly sensationalism. Nevertheless, my point remains. Examine the implications for yourself. I'm not sure if Nebraska Man was a hoax, but it was still deception. I reiterate:

There have been deliberate or accidental false claims relating men to apes/monkeys and vice versa that were likely accepted as fact for years by the unwary (which is what my post is in response to - to the unwary) until they were found to be frauds. Do you think that some Christians lost their faith because of this? Probably. Do you think it was with good reason? Possibly during the time, but obviously not now.

But there's a rather large amount of information and I may have missed something.

I didn't say that the information I listed was on the site I listed, nor did I intend upon saying that this was so. Still, the information is out there. However, the site I mentioned is a good site to read up on. The articles have given me a good impression. One (that I know of) was refuting a claim put forth by a young earth creationist that the speed of light was slowing.

Is it significant that he was a Catholic priest or are you just stating a historical fact?

I don't know. Is it significant that he was a priest? :smt115

A lot of science does hurt our faith! So just remember that scientists are fallible human beings and when they agree with God they are always right and when they disagree with God they are always wrong.

In and of itself I would like support for that last sentence - articles and such. I'm aware of the issue with archaeology and Biblical support at any rate.

 

[ArtGuy]

Fresh, it seems that you've created a false dichotomy for yourself, which has unfortunately been reinforced by many of the posters here. You seem to be of the impression that you must choose between science and God; that either God is wrong, or else the phenomena we observe here on Earth are wrong. That's very far from the truth, and it's unfortunate that so many people see it that way.

It's not a choice between God and science, because science and God are in no way at odds. God left two things here for us to use to ascertain the truth about existence. He left us the Bible, which is a written account of events since the dawn of time; and he left us Creation itself. An honest and benevolent God would make sure that there were no contradictions between the two. He would not deceive us by making the world look one way, but have the Bible say something different.

Consider this: While the Bible may be the infallible Word of God, the interpretation of that Word as relayed to you throughout your life is very much a product of fallible man. How do you get your current understanding of the Bible? Did you sit in a vacuum and read the Bible and completely create your worldview on your own? Or did you, at least in part, develop your understanding based on what was told to you by others?

There is a way to reconcile everything we see around us with every word of the Bible. While everything in the Bible is true, it isn't necessarily a literal truth. One way to interpret Genesis, for example, is as a literal history book that exhaustively accounts for 4500 years of history. Another way, though, is as an allegory that communicates the fact that God created the universe for us, out of love, and that he created Man in His image. And that afterwards, man became corrupted, and there is now sin in the world. The former interpretation requires that we ignore what 99.5% of the people who make their living in the field of science have determined. The latter interpretation allows us to accept that these observations are true. And neither interpretation is necessarily more "true" than the other. Just as the tale of the Boy Who Cried Wolf is true in that it speaks honestly about the perils of deceit, even if there never existed a literal boy who literally cried wolf, the story of Genesis is true even if there never existed an Adam or a Noah or a Tree of Knowledge.

Now, it may be that after you read all the relevant literature, and study science, you decide that most scientists are on crack, and the YEC interpretation of the Bible is spot-on. That's fine. But you should only decide as such after a great deal of research of your own. Don't believe something because others tell you you must. Believe because it's what you feel to be the Truth. When someone tells you to discount science because it's the product of fallible men, recall that this instruction is being relayed to you by a fallible man. Men of faith are experts in faith, but not in science. Men of science are experts in science, but not in faith. You shouldn't accept the claims of either side as gospel, so to speak - you should do your own homework and decide for yourself what's true.

What you definitely shouldn't do - and the people who suggested as much should really be ashamed - as hide your head in the sand in fear of science because it may sway you. Ignorance is not a proper defense, and I can't see how a Christian strong in his faith would suggest as much. The best thing you can possibly do is to teach yourself as much as you can possibly can, and then make your own decision. Your mind is the second greatest gift that God has given you, right after mercy. It would be an act of tremendous ingratitude to not use it.

I wish you luck, and feel free to PM me if you have any questions. God bless.

 

[Klee shay]

Unless you know a person with all the answers to infinite knowledge, then you can bet an estimate is required to further understanding of any subject matter.

That's not what I said.

It might not have been what you "meant", but it is definitely what you said.

It's just not right to claim that the best we can do is estimate.

This statement is what I was addressing. Your claim is that we can do more than estimate, my counter-claim is that estimation is all we really use to further our knowledge. We estimate, research and then develop facts which are later disclaimed with more relevant facts, which come by further estimates and research.

The best we can do is ESTIMATE what is a probable hypothosis and then research and develop it through experiments. We do not start with infinite knowledge and it certainly doesn't end with infinite knowledge. While the human race will constantly develop their understanding of their enivronment molecule by molecule - DNA strand by DNA strand - we will never possess infinite knowledge. Thus we will always be forced to do our best and estimate further hypothosis's.

Even if "estimating" is all we'll ever do, you have not provided a reason why this is not "good enough" for the purposes of science and mankind.

Why should my "opinion" on what is good enough for mankind and science impact on what is actually taking place in mankind and science today?

What is good enough is what is currently happening because its the best we can do. I'm not about to turn back the clock and suggest people bury their heads in the sand over science. That is not my point at all, but please lets be realistic about how we achieve our best.

We do not possess infinite knowledge nor will we ever possess infinite knowledge on Earth - the best any generation can do is estimate a hypothosis and research and develop those estimates until a milestone of scientific understanding is reached. That milestone will always be overtaken by even bigger and better milestones however, but we will NEVER possess infinite knowledge on Earth.

Let's be realistic about how we come about our findings and how we change them with new findings.

The bible is rather clear on such maxims as "Do not kill" and "Do not steal" - you know, the 10 commandments and all. Modern ethical theory, however, usually holds that there exists certain cases where these two would be permissible. I do not believe the bible's absolutist ethics, as a result, has much use in the modern world.

Just becuase you do not believe it has much use in modern society, does that mean there is no cross-over at any point? Can you say that modern ethical theory NEVER picks up on what the bible suggests as proper conduct between fellow human beings at all?

If there is a cross-over between bible and modern ethical theory then how can you say there isn't much use for it in today's world? In effect you're saying that modern ethical theory has got it wrong also if you say the bible has not use either.

There are absolutes in the bible but then again, there is also free will. No one is forced to obey according to the Word of God. Sound familiar? Is modern ethical theory hung on certain absolutes as well, with the freedom to change them at will?

Just because a Christian stands up and says; "a person can't do this because the bible says they can't", doesn't mean the bible is rendered useless by their interpretation. It's like you coming in here saying "the bible is useless because Modern Ethical Theory says it is". Where's the difference? You persecute one for their beliefs while maintaining the rights to hold your own; based on a doctrine of heart you follow.

It is therefore impossible to draw a distinct line between where the bible ends and Modern Ethical Theory begins. To do so is to become a hypocrite.