Fluid Science?

In Hebrews 4, we can read that the Word of God is alive, it is active, and will work in our hearts to
produce fruit to the glory of God:
12 For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account.
14 Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.

God's Word, in partnership with the Spirit of God, will illuminate our path, and will illuminate our hearts.  We are told that the Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth.  He teaches us, and leads us in the way of the Lord.  When we compare our attitudes and behavior to the standards of the Word, as the Spirit convicts us, we can find that our ways are exposed to Him and we can make corrective action by His power.  God's Word is absolute reliable!

+++++

In Psalm 119, we can read about the authority and reliability of the Word of God.  Here is a section
from that Psalm:
32 I will run the course of Your commandments, For You shall enlarge my heart.
33 Teach me, O Lord, the way of Your statutes, And I shall keep it to the end.
34 Give me understanding, and I shall keep Your law; Indeed, I shall observe it with my whole heart.

The so-called March for Science took place recently, and it was just another in the seemingly endless string of protests against some real or perceived element of the current Administration.  The "March" was co-chaired by Bill Nye, also known as "The Science Guy."  But, wait, as sociology professor George Yancey, who has been a guest on The Meeting House program points out on Patheos.com, Bill Nye "is not a scientist. He’s an entertainer with one earned degree, a B.S. in mechanical engineering. He tries to act like a scientist, but often fails miserably to pull it off."

He takes Nye to task for dismissing the beliefs of others - he has done this in the debate on climate change.  Yancey writes:

...Nye is never shy about criticizing others’ lack of appreciation for science. But good science is done carefully. It is not a rush to judgment. Real scientists generally do not make the sort of pronouncements Nye sometimes makes because we are aware of the limits of our knowledge. Science is the constant striving to understand reality. We move closer to that understanding, but we never get there.Someone who really cares about science would understand this. I can expect my students to make the common mistake of talking about “settled science.” I should not expect that from someone who wants to be the spokesman for science.

And, Nye seems to have an obsession with gender fluidity, as he relates in his new Netflix series, Bill Nye Saves the World.  On the Washington Examiner website, Becket Adams states that: "viewers today are now treated to Nye's theories on gender fluidity and whether there ought to be a cap on the number of children that couples in developed countries should be allowed to have."  And, Adams reveals that:

Disney and Netflix officials said Friday they're not sure why references to chromosomes and gender were removed from a 21-year-old episode of "Bill Nye the Science Guy," which is available now for online streaming.

Disney dismissed the edit as a "clearance issue," whatever that means.  But, the article said that the Washington Free Beacon had reported that a key section of an episode was no longer available on streaming. The episode included this language:  "See, inside each of our cells are these things called chromosomes, and they control whether we become a boy or a girl,"and, "See, there are only two possibilities: XX, a girl, or XY, a boy."

Well, that certainly conflicts with Nye's shaky science about gender fluidity he is pushing on the new show. And, we of course know about Nye's dogged defense of the theory of evolution, which he debated with creationist Ken Ham on a stage, as well as at the Ark Encounter.  On the Answers in Genesis website, Ham wrote about his "encounter" with Nye:

Nye also claims that the exhibits inside the Ark encourage visitors to “trust faith over science.” Actually, our exhibits show quite conclusively that observational science in the fields of geology, genetics, and anthropology confirm biblical history concerning man, animals, and the Flood of Noah’s day. In reality, it’s Bill Nye who has the blind faith to believe that somehow life arose by natural processes. And his evidence? That DNA, including its information and language system, arising by natural processes, came about to the fact that “we’re here.” And Nye, who claims creationists are undercutting people’s “ability to engage in critical thinking,” wants to stop all children from being able to think critically about science. Instead, we are just to accept his word and his religion that life arose by natural processes. And Nye calls this “science!”

And, again, faith in God and belief in the validity of science are not mutually exclusive; I would contend that the study of science can lead to a greater appreciation of the work of the designer who is the Creator of the Universe.  Our application of critical thinking skills to the challenges of our world today can also help us to understand the ways of God.

You might say everyone's an expert these days. And, people are often driven by an agenda.  We can't just make up a story or concoct a theory and then attempt to manufacture or manipulate the evidence to prove it.  We start with the evidence and allow it to take us where it leads.  That is how great Christian apologists Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel came into a saving knowledge of Christ. The evidence of God's existence and the death and resurrection of Christ are so compelling; we have reliable truth that is found in God's Word, and we do well to build our lives on its foundation.

Again, I say: check your sources.  I am growing tired of these so-called "news" stories that try to push a certain agenda or outcome, using anonymous sources.  We saw this unfold yesterday afternoon - the overarching storyline: President Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election.  The Washington Post, using these loquacious sources, built a story about the President discussing highly classified information with Russian officials.  Later, the National Security Advisor, Secretary of State, and a Deputy National Security Adviser, who were all in the room, disputed the story.  As National Security Advisor McMaster is quoted as saying on Real Clear Politics: "Their on the record accounts should outweigh anonymous sources. I was in the room. It didn't happen."

I think this also teaches us a lesson about handling Scripture - don't make up your story and then attempt to use Bible verses to back it up...this is how we get errant ideas and doctrines.  Start with the Bible, and allow its words, God's Word, to lead you into His truth and discover His heart.