A Concern for Applying the Bible to the Natural Sciences

[Big Boy Stan Murf]

1 hour ago, Scott Free said:

The scientific method allows for the acknowledgement of errors and correction. A dogmatic researcher will eventually find there work outdated and irreverent toward the pursuit of understanding. Still, most "truth" today will be found lacking given enough time and is not something we can indefinitely lean on.

And here's the the thing... politics has high jacked science in a majority of topics such as so called climate change which is far from settled science!

The news media portrays science that is in lock step with liberal politics as being correct, right, and what the educated intelligent people believe and go by because that science is bought and paid for buy those seeking to control the narrative.

And then real scientists have different results due to not being bought and paid for, politicians and the news media seek to assassinate their charter and call them ignorant rednecks who are Trump voters and other various and sundry blah, blah, blah.

It would be quite comical if it were so sad.

[Scott Free]

19 minutes ago, Stan Murff said:

And here's the the thing... politics has high jacked science in a majority of topics such as so called climate change which is far from settled science!

The news media portrays science that is in lock step with liberal politics as being correct, right, and what the educated intelligent people believe and go by because that science is bought and paid for buy those seeking to control the narrative.

And then real scientists have different results due to not being bought and paid for, politicians and the news media seek to assassinate their charter and call them ignorant rednecks who are Trump voters and other various and sundry blah, blah, blah.

It would be quite comical if it were so sad.

Sad but true. Information has been weaponized against us. Subjective truth is a thing of the past as far as the world is concerned. Jesus on the Cross is the only beacon of truth in the gathering fog of uncertainty.

Edited September 11, 2023 by Scott Free

[teddyv]

2 hours ago, Scott Free said:

Subjective truth is a thing of the past

Did you mean "objective truth" here? We seem to be in a period of elevation of subjective or personal truths.

[Scott Free]

11 hours ago, teddyv said:

Did you mean "objective truth" here? We seem to be in a period of elevation of subjective or personal truths.

I redact the statement it was foolish talk. You said it best. I agree with you.

Edited September 12, 2023 by Scott Free

[Buzzard3]

On 9/10/2023 at 1:16 AM, Scott Free said:

The reason natural science and the Bible seem to differ is that the Bible is not an encyclopedia of modern knowledge

I agree, but the New Testament provides Christians with at least six very good reasons to believe that God did not use billions of years of evolution to bring human beings into existence, and to believe that Genesis 2:7 descibes a literal event - ie, God creating a living human being from inanimate matter in an instant of time:

1. Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (John 14).
2. Jesus raised the widow of Nain’s son from the dead (Luke 7).
3. Jesus raised Jairus’s daughter from the dead (Mark 5).
4. Jesus is raised from the dead.
5. Peter raised Tabitha from the dead (Acts 9:36-43)
6. Peter raised Eutychus from the dead (Acts 20).

Those six miracles, in effect, demonstrate God creating a living human being from inanimate matter (ie, a deceased human being) in an instant of time - which is, in effect, the very same miracle described in Genesis 2:7 ... God instantaneously creating a living human being from inanimate matter. 

 

Furthermore, the NT describes the dead being resurrected back to life (presumably in an instant) - another good reason to believe that Genesis 2:7 describes God literally and instaneously creating a human being from inanimate matter.

 

CONCLUSION:  In light of the aforementioned Scriptures, the claim that God brought humans into existence through billions of years of evolution seems ridiculously illogical.  Why would God use a slow, messy process like evolution to create human beings when he can do so in a miraculous instant?

[Scott Free]

1 minute ago, Buzzard3 said:

CONCLUSION:  In light of the aforementioned Scriptures, the claim that God brought humans into existence through billions of years of evolution seems ridiculously illogical.  Why would God use a slow, messy process like evolution to create human beings when he can do so in a miraculous instant?

Personally, I think having the ability to plan eons into the future and orchestrate infinite variables into an unfathomably complex environment is more impressive. Just plopping everything down ready made seems kind of lazy. 

[Buzzard3]

8 hours ago, Scott Free said:

Personally, I think having the ability to plan eons into the future and orchestrate infinite variables into an unfathomably complex environment is more impressive. Just plopping everything down ready made seems kind of lazy. 

In that case, God must have got kinda lazy and bored with tedious ol' evolution ... Jesus raised Lazarus to life from inanimate matter in an instant.

Edited September 12, 2023 by Buzzard3

[Buzzard3]

On 9/11/2023 at 1:39 PM, Stan Murff said:

Over the years I've seen numerous times when scientists were sure and positive about their findings... and then a few years later come out and say... er, we were wrong... here's the new truth we just found and this time we are really really sure it right!

I know most of these guys mean well, but some of this stuff is actually comical.

I think a lot of evolution so-called science is sadly "comical".  There's so much pseudo-scientific nonsense circulating around in that sphere of science, it's kinda disturbing.

And when it comes to genetics, that is a relatively new science - what is claimed as genetic knowledge today will be proven false in generations to come, so when geneticists make bold claims viz-a-viz evolution, I take it with a big grain of salt.

[Scott Free]

4 hours ago, Buzzard3 said:

In that case, God must have got kinda lazy and bored with tedious ol' evolution ... Jesus raised Lazarus to life from inanimate matter in an instant.

Well, I think it all started when God told Eve her offspring will crush the serpents head, how about Abraham and the nation of his offspring, or Moses and the prophets. All this needed to happen first for Jesus and Lazarus to manifest. Are all things possible to God? Yes. Does He take long convoluted paths to His goals? Yes.

[Scott Free]

6 hours ago, Buzzard3 said:

In that case, God must have got kinda lazy and bored with tedious ol' evolution ... Jesus raised Lazarus to life from inanimate matter in an instant.

By the way, Adam is compared to Jesus not Lazarus. Jesus did not just pop out of the ground to an unsuspecting audience. He was a special birth designed to create a new race of beings.