@DennisVenema, thanks for stepping in. I think @Christy has it right when she says that it is very difficult for laypeople, even well-read laypeople:-) to be able to discern which scientist is the more reputable and/or competent. I very much appreciate someone stepping in and giving their thoughts when a name is brought into a discussion as an expert.
In the young earth vs modern science debates, the literature gets convoluted because their are so many people with different backgrounds proclaiming themselves as experts. The field of science is so large that I find it difficult to keep up with the people who have specialized, much less give much attention to those who have more of an armchair philosophy about a subject.
Bringing this back to the OT, I think this is one very good example of why AIG can have the impact that it does. They can say they have scientists working for them, the scientists give enough of an explanation that the conclusion would be plausible to the average reader. Therefore, the science must be reliable.
Control the dissenting voices as well, and the potential for influence is quite strong.
This. I find that these questions are the ones that should get the bulk of my study time. If they start to come in second place, I use that as a heads up that I need to get my head back in my Bible:-)
bias in science means everything, if you are bias FOR evolution it will show! and like wise with creation,it will show. the difference is the evolutionist do NOT have God the creator on their side because they believe in evolution first and God second and argue that way.
thank you very much for the input you are welcome to speak at any time. i love all the voices that will speak up. it makes for interesting dialogue:grin:
Everyone experiences bias in some form. As humans, we donât see with Godâs eyes, so we have to rely on our own experiences, knowledge and insights. But, we can work to improve the validity of those things by increasing breadth and depth in each. We seek to experience more, in different ways, with different people. We reach out to others we may not agree with to see if their experiences may give us greater knowledge or insight. We read and study to increase our working knowledge of a subject. Then, we take all of that and sift and analyze and throw out the junk and rework and synthesize. By doing so, we reduce the risk of an illogical or invalid bias⌠As much as we ever can, of course:-)
As far as ID goes, I see that as a subset of philosophy, rather than science. It speaks to teleology, which is outside the realm of scientific purview. I donât personally speak to it often because it is something of a constantly moving target. I do understand the motivation behind it and that there are many bright people who hold to it as a philosophy. There is such beauty in creation, so much to be fascinated by. I, however, see that beauty and function as outcomes inherent in Godâs work, however He chose to do it. I think I have said before that I am very hesitant to assume Godâs motives. And even if I could, that wouldnât really speak to the science. I see a lot of âGod used this toâŚâ in ID, which feels too presumptuous in my view.
Thanks for sharing, @DennisVenema. I hadnât read that series yet. I could especially relate to the need for a unifying context to really bring biology to life. That big picture was what I needed as well to make biology compelling.
And learning not just the biology, but the theology. True it is. (Says Yoda:-)
back in 1987 it think it was, I was a christian and I was reading the national Geographic magazine, it had a 3D cover and an apelike skull on it in 3D. As i started to read it, it almost collapsed my faith in God. I thought this:"I guess they have figured out that evolution to be true and if that is so God did not make us as the Bible claims he did it is fairy tales and lies and God does not exist as I thought.I went on that way for about 2 years like this just sort of numb to God and the Bible. after quite a while however God reassured me that he was is and always will be and loved me very much. I really do believe that the reason I went through that valley experience I went through was because God wanted me to be tougher in my faith and not just simply fall prey to every tale that comes along. And it worked well I might add.And he wanted me to question those that claimed they had science truth as to if they really do or not or are they leading me down the âAlice in wonderland rabbit hole of liesâ Do they have my best interest at heart or not.Yes, God made me think and ask questions about claims and not just blindly believe those in science authority, and i do! God is Awesome!!
I am so very glad that your faith was strengthened through your experience. He works so brilliantly through our struggles. But, once again, it reinforces the influence of the false dichotomy of science OR faith. You felt as though you had to choose:-( Understanding evolutionary theory in no way requires anyone to turn their hearts from God.
to me if God used evolution then I would see some evidence of it today somewhere,I do not.claiming evolution with Gods creation is just âshape shiftingâ in your mind like the next generation Star trek show. You think by believing it it fixes everything but I think if God would have used it it would have said in the âBible that the birds over many years were createdâ and it does not. also evolution is Darwinâs idea that everything came from the same original animal millions of years ago {Darwinâs Tree of life}and it is very plain to see a goose and a moose though they rhyme have little in common. that is why I do not believe it.
I also thought, âAs for men, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals. Manâs fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless. All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. Who knows if the spirit of man rises upward and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the earth?â
There is voluminous evidence available to those who seek it. Youâre at the right place if youâre looking for it. Might I suggest that you read the excellent articles on biologos.org written by scientists, as well as hanging out with us here in the forum?
The problem in your sentence is those first two words: I think. Genesis was not initially revealed to you, or to me, or to TV evangelists; God revealed it to ancient, tribal Hebrews who had a radically different understanding of the structure and laws of the cosmos.
What do think of John Calvin? Pretty good Biblical scholar, no? Calvin taught that God accommodated His revelation to those who received it. And God focused on the important thing; Scripture is not a science textbook, but a means to encounter God and be transformed by Him.
Have a good day, my friend Martin. Hope your Tuesday is a good news day!
It is my view the the âevidence for evolutionâ is made up by staunch Darwinist who put it in museums with âfancy art workâ who do not want to believe in God in the least little bit but they wish to believe that Darwinism by naturalism is true and doubt that any God exist what so ever. And what believers that do not understand that very fact do when they âjump in bedâ with them they unknowingly are in 100% agreement with them and maybe not meaning to be. Just tacking God on to evolution does NOT make it âokâ in Gods Eyes.
Luke 23:43 just goes to make the same point as 2 Peter 3:8 and Psalm 90:4. Time in Godâs economy doesnât work the same way as in our own. I understand the days of Genesis 1 in the same way, which is why I donât have a problem with billions of years. Itâs also in the same vein as Isaiah 40:15 â âSurely the nations are like a drop in a bucket.â Itâs all a matter of perspective. Donât view billions of years as pushing God out of the picture, but instead start viewing it as showing God as being a far, far bigger part of the picture than even people of Bible times could ever have imagined. Did they even have a word for âbillionâ in ancient Israel? I donât think you even get the word âmillionâ until you get to the Book of Revelation.
My question about Ecclesiastes is actually a serious one. Weâre studying Ecclesiastes this week in my Bible study group and I was quite surprised to read this particular passage. Unlike the age of the earth, I have admittedly been wary of the theory of evolution, but this passage does seem to put a new twist on how I view itâŚ
I seem to recall reading somewhere that the JWs were starting to try other things rather than door knocking, because so many of their young people hate doing it. For example, in London itâs common to see them in strategic places near Victoria station and elsewhere handing out leaflets and Watchtower magazines.
Only problem with that is that there are plenty of other annoying characters handing out leaflets and magazines in the vicinity. The only ones I think deserve any respect are the Big Issue sellers.
Youâre saying the fossils, the geological dating, the astronomical observations of galaxies billions of light years awayâtheyâre all just fabricated?
Does the Bible really teach that learning the science of a culture hostile to God is wrong? If so, what are we to make of Moses?
âMoses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptiansâ - Acts 7:22
In any case, the concept of geologic time and millions of years predated Darwin by several decades. Furthermore, many of the geologists involved in proposing it were actually devout Christians.
The claim that millions/billions of years is a Darwinist fabrication to shore up evolution is simply not true.
Just tacking God on to evolution does NOT make it âokâ in Gods Eyes.