my understanding of the beliefs here is that we know God exists because we can see evidences of Him through science and that the complexity of what we observe around us is such that God must exist.
The trouble is, science tends to disallow almost everything in the bible related to God and also to salvation!
What does salvation by the grace of God have to do with quantum physics ?
How is palaeontology endangered by the conviction that God is the Creator of all things, visible and invisible ?
How is the cleansing of the soul by the Precious Blood of Christ negated by the facts of chemistry ?
Being finite, fallible, and fallen has everything to do with scientists, and much to do with science and observation. We do not know everything, we make mistakes, and we have biases, inclinations to favor what we want to be true, etc. Thus, if we want to know how something works physically, we have to go find out. We can’t trust our intuition about how we think it ought to work. It has to be verified. Similarly, it doesn’t particularly matter what I think God ought to be like; what matters is what God is like, so theology needs to look to the evidence of the Bible and of experience, not relying on what might just be wishful thinking on my part.
If being finite, fallible, and fallen had nothing to do with science, then there would be no reason for the conclusions of science to sometimes be inaccurate. But there is more than one way in which scientific claims might be inaccurate. Clarifying what is under consideration may help with communication. There are mistakes within science. I am trying to use DNA to sort out relationships in a group of clams. The existing data produce a big mess. But looking closely, some of those sequences don’t actually belong to this group of clams. Someone made a mistake, which can be fixed scientifically. But there are also mistakes of claiming to apply science when science does not actually address the particular question.
Whether this is true or not, it seems that, at least on this forum, such notions of inadequacy or fallibility are taken as offensive
It is all very well to be humble but it is another thing to impose that onto others.
The bible assumes both the existence of God and the desire/need to please, or at least mollify His wrath. it is a religious view that we then impose onto all, even those who do not share that desire or need.
It would seem that God has standards, but only for those interested in Him. He did not make us HIs slaves yet religion seems to think otherwise. IOW that He wants submissive slaves. Why? because Scripture says so? I am not convinced it does, although it would appear to be the gospel of Paul.
If God was litterally Hell bent on goodness He could have made us so. There has to be a reason for not doing so other than as a right of passage. it makes life pointless. It makes freedom of choice a fallacy. if the only choice is God then there is no choice!
Scripture is about God and His people, If we want to be His people we follow it as best we can, but even then we seem to think it impossible without is help! Even that is ludicrous on a logical scale. It makes god twisted and manipulative and downright unholy. It contradicts everything that God says. How can God be just and fair if the only way is for Him to take over for us!!
Does God believe in free will?
If He does then we have to be able to say no to Him. (With no punishment)
Otherwise it is not a free choice it is life in front of a loaded gun.
If we accept Scripture we try and follow it. if others do not we cannot force them to. You cannot argue , coerce or force faith. Such faith would be empty and meaningless.
I am a Christian because I think that is the right way to live… I might want others to follow God as well, but that must be their choice
You keep making the mistake that scientists accept evolution because someone just came up with it. That’s not how it works. The theory of evolution is accepted by theists and atheists alike because it explains what we observe in nature. Until you address the evidence or come up with a better explanation for that evidence you are just barking up the wrong tree.
I said that God was a part of my reality. A part you cannot identify with your methodology. It does not mean I cannot also use your methodology when it is appropriate.
All or nothing? No!
Scripture allows for that – but they have to conform to it.
It’s only the radical version of sola scriptura that is essentially nuda scriptura that came from the radical reformation that says nothing from outside is allowed – a silly position since we find in both Jesus and Paul that there can and will be more.
My contemplation denies Paul’s goal of Salvation and eternal life.
I am not comfortable with a view of God that is full of wrath for those who ignore Him. My understanding of God and the cross takes it beyond the chosen few who have succeeded the chosen race.
My view of Christianity is nt self seeking, or aiming for “the prize”. My view of this life is that God gave us a free choice, not an ultimatum, or a sword of Damocles
Paul’s whole gospel relies on the final prize or salvation, the Law is not enough, but faith will be rewarded. I am not looking for a reward. I am a Christian for its own sake, not mine, present or future. I do not beat myself or complain of my shortcomings. I know what I am, but I am sure that God does too, and has accepted that. I know because of what He allows me to do for Him. Unless you have stood in a pulpit without a script (having tried to write it for 3 weeks) and preached for 20 minutes you do not really understand faith and trust. I am nobody., but God uses me anyway. I am not perfect. I do not try and be perfect. I rest on the grace of God… Every now and then I receive that peace that passes all understanding and that is more Heaven on earth than anything in Revelation.
