No. You were talking about scientists who lie about their research in order to keep their job. I was just saying that doesn’t happen.
God gave us science so we could understand his general revelation. I don’t believe he placed a limit on the knowledge that science could provide. And how do you know how it got here? The Bible explains why God created but not how He created. Saying he just “poffed” everything into existence doesn’t match what his Creation tells us.
It is only by reason that we can make a point and those who claim that evolution needs no reason are as unreasonable as those who claim that Genesis is “unreasonable”. After all, “evolution” stands for “the unfolding of a plan” 
If you watch Carl Sagan’s explanation of the 4th dimension you will understand Jesus to be the projection of God into our material world, so seeing him allowed us to imagine God in the best way possible, as a projection into humans made in his image pure like the first Adam not a projection of himself but of God and true to that he stayed.
You have to ask yourself what makes him special to you, e.g. does his divinity come from his material origin, or from the love he projected? Is God’s biology not good / logic enough for you that you need an event that defies logos in order to accept the logos? It is somehow irrational to believe that God would have to declare his own invention not to be good enough to bring forward what he wants us to be, so we could only become his children again by coming intothis world without using his flawed concept of hardware
We all have our own understanding of reality and what we accept but if you accept that Jesus died for you, please do not see it as an act of Jesus appeasing a loving God to have a revenge killing for sin.That is not the concept of a loving God as Jesus projected it. He died for us so we could see that suffering and death can’t touch you any more if you are at one with the authority of God. If you look at people suffering physical death by any disaster and ask yourself where God was at the time without understanding from the crucifixion that he was with those who died (if they wanted him to be there) you may be fit to be an archbishop, but not a reasonable Christian.
Suffering death is not a punishment by God for being his flawed creation but a logical consequence of wanting to be a material self separate from God, who is eternal as material things can’t be. Jesu death on the cross is a projection of what death can feel like if you are with God, that you can have the guts to start citing a psalm in your final moments instead of complaining that you are going to die, thus to go in peace. Thus he died for us that we can know and reconcile with God by accepting his authority again by living in God in accepting his will and knowing that in his will we can live forever.
Actually, it says ‘formed,’ not ‘made’ or ‘created.’ ‘Formed’ is an interesting word because it specifically means there was pre-existing material Adam was formed out of, he was not ‘created’ de novo. God easily could have popped him out of nothing, but that’s not what the Bible says He did.
Fun fact: the word translated as ‘rib’ could equally well mean ‘side!’
And even if it all was suggestive as you say, suggestive does not mean fact. I asked you where it said Adam was the first human. But the story doesn’t say that. Indeed, it explicitly contradicts itself if you try to read Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 as the same event; or if not, then you have to conclude that the order of events isn’t necessarily the real order of events. Did God make the animals, then human men and women? Or did God make man, then animals, then woman? You can’t have it both ways. And trying to say that your interpretation has to be right and other (reasonable) interpretations are dangerous is, in my opinion, using the word of God for your own purposes and not His, which is what the second commandment was all about.
In my attempts to get to the heart of this topic of “human skull found in coal layer” - - the only articles I can find are those by creationist writers.
If we can CONFIRM that this is not a human skull, or that the skull intruded into the coal layer by natural means, will you release your death-grip opposition that Evolution, in principle IF associated with God’s guidance, is a valid application of natural lawfulness?
It should be obvious that the part of Evolution provided for by the miraculous hand of God should get us over the non-scientific rough spots, yes? After all, that’s pretty much definitional !!!
Well I am glad to hear from someone who takes Scripture interpretation seriously! Thanks for your input. Although I cannot agree with your idea that the language here is suggestive that there were men before Adam and Eve-especially judging by historical interpretation by Jews and Christians alike for thousands of years, I am glad for such reverence for the language of early Genesis-not suggesting this to be poetry etc. So then Genesis continues with the story of specific details on how God called Noah to build the ark out of gopher wood with pitch on the inside and out etc. Based on your reasoning of the specific language in Gen 1 and 2, the same standard should be held in the flood story.
In this “White Paper” a writer representing the rather ancient lineage of the Eastern Orthodox community of Massachusetts has no compunction about comparing the desire to interpret the Genesis account as a Non-Literal account of creation. He compares the process to the saintly efforts of St. Basil who wrote “On the Six Days of Creation”, in the 300’s CE, who incorporated the scientific information available to him in that period, to come to a more comprehensive understanding of the Jewish text!
Please see the pdf quoted below!
This is untrue. I learned about the issue in a secular science publication and followed this up with the CNN article that delved into science giving very scientific detail on the verification that this was indeed a human skull by a scientist from Taiwan. The only thing I have heard in response to the article I sent to this blog is that it is most likely “Fake News” I will try to track down these articles for you if you would like to see.
Details, please. Museums, libraries, colleges, books, etc.
No, I wasn’t there, and neither were you. The evidence is here. God made the world intelligible. Dates are always being adjusted in light of new evidence, and the same goes for drawing our family tree, so your idea that Conrad’s skull cap was hidden away is silly.
Which is what you should have done from the beginning Mr. @grog.
Is it really a CNN article? Or is it someone producing quasi-academic rhetoric in the COMMENTS section of a CNN article?
It is a CNN i-report article which is user-generated content.
the fact that creation exists and the fact that matter cannot come from nothing and the fact that energy cannot be created or destroyed suggests to me a pretty big “poff” This begs the question of such a Creator how many poffs did He perform in creation. Human observation cannot possibly tell for sure yet the language in textbooks is arrogantly confident about what occurred so so long ago.
I once saw an incredibly sophisticated animation of global movements and trends representing the last 5000 years of human history (more or less the RECORDED part of human history).
It was presented as a science article by a woman who typically does other scientific writings as well.
When I sent an email to the science author that this video - - as compelling as it was - - left out a vast chunk of human endeavor in Anatolia (I think it was Anatolia), she said she acknowledged that the video was not without its dramatic flaws.
But she stood by her decision to feature it to her regular audience.
If my email font could have, it would have used “Grumble Font” … as I thanked her for her time and appreciated her explanation and discussion.
If the day comes when we find human bones mixed up with T-Rex, I’d like to think that it will come from a legitimate writer (at least), even if the article is for the popular press and not for a science journal.
Articles submitted by writers who have no known body of work in the press/media send chills down my spine…
Museum of Natural History in Cincy for one. I discovered the Conrad’s skull story on a secular publication…live science or something (I read a lot of those). I followed that up with the science behind the skull being that of a human from a CNN article that did not give one single element of indication that it was fake news. Most would find that one boring because it was so scientific minded. I have read books like The Privileged Planet that I appreciate but don’t wholly agree with. I don’t like to read articles that are run by straight out young earth creationists and I don’t like to read articles from groups like theistic evolutionists. I try to get to the core of study then filter them through the Bible that says that we worship a God who is more beyond us than the universe’s bigness is bigger than my body.
Your presumption is that God thinks like a human being and indeed like you and me.
The Bible clearly demonstrates that this is not true. God does not think like you and me. Who of us would send our only child into a nasty rebellious world to be crucified for any reason?
The Bible shows us that we must learn about Who God is and how God acts not by assuming that God is like us, but assuming that God is not like us. That means that we must closely observe what God does as revealed through revelation (Bible) and through Creation (nature.) Only then can we begin to understand Who God is.
Some scientists want to ignore the revelation aspect of knowing God. Some believers want to ignore the nature aspect of knowing God. They are both WRONG. Maybe the believers more so, because unbelievers are not interested in knowing God, although they should be.
However, please, please do not take the stance that it is rational to believe that God thinks and behaves like a human being.
And how, exactly, would you “test” a fake news article for fakeness if you are only using clues from within the article?
Have you seen the giant skeletons on the internet … showing how truly tall early humans were compared to the Canaanites?
Pretty dramatic stuff… but completely faked … over and over again , referencing older (more impressive) faked news articles.
Perhaps the I.D. folks can help you? They are the ones that are always saying that it might not have been God who provided the intelligence… that skull could be an ALIEN skull !!! … just as long as it is an intelligent alien!
Not so. I pointed out a line in the article that clearly states the skull was not found in a coal seam but was found in a pile of rubble. I notice you didn’t comment on this part of my reply. “Very scientific detail” on a fossile that can not be dated is not very meaningful.
Would you please re-post the story?
Ever hear of the Big Bang? (energy to matter)
Ever hear of the atomic bomb? (matter to energy)
Yes it can. The evidence is quite plain that the earth is more than 6,000 years old.
If you just take a glance at the other posts by the same author you would see a big red flag that is yelling “fake news”. That and the fact that all of the supporting data appears to have gone away.
[quote=“grog, post:87, topic:30381, full:true”]
Well I am glad to hear from someone who takes Scripture interpretation seriously! [/quote]
I’m a total neophyte, most of those here responding to you have invested far more time into Scripture than I have!
The flood story: ok. Again, if we look at the ways specific words are translated, we can wind up with quite a different story. “The whole earth” or the “face of the earth” for example. In other places, this is translated as “the whole land” or even “the whole country.” It talks about the famine in Egypt the same way, for example, but in that case it is clearly understood not to refer to the whole world! There’s lots of places in the Bible where it doesn’t have our modern understanding of ‘globe’ attached to it.
What about covering the mountains? Well, the same word meant mountains and hills, so it could be talking about either. And even the way it’s phrased in Hebrew just meant that the flood was fifteen cubits deep, and covered the tallest hills in the area.
This article explains the reasons for this interpretation much more thoroughly than I can:
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/localflood.html
ETA: I don’t personally agree with the author that it had to have applied to all of humanity. This link summarizes a variety of different opinions and interpretations:
https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_666.cfm
And this link presents a very good examination of the flood story in light of the simple fact that sometimes, statements in the Bible are exaggerated, and that recognizing this is not the same as disbelieving the Bible.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.