You know my grandfather would always deny God…but when bad things happened, it was Gods fault (if God existed).
You argument sounds strangely familiar.
The point is, God tells us clearly that sin has corrupted this world. That is not some arbitrary spiritual corruption, its a physical corruption as well.
Everything you observe in science is being looked at through the eyes of sin AND is slso corrupted by sin (that is biblical fact btw not an interpretation).
Its a real shame people are blinded by a refusal to accept both miracles and the power satan has ro manipulate the world around us.
People here seem to think satan can only tempt. Id suggest reading the first chapters of the book of Job…what was it God initially said to satan in allowing the first test on Job? Was it not “Do not lay a hand on him!”? (The usual counter srgument to about the story of job is useless btw way…allegory or not, it illustrates satans power over the physical world is literal!)
One way EC differs from YEC is in concordism. EC is generally non-concordist, that is, the Bible does not address a scientific timeline or issues, but is theologic in what it affirms, but YEC, and OEC or progressive creationism is concordist in and holds that science is indeed addressed. ID is generally concordist as well.
And Walton takes what the original author meant very seriously.
Dear Christly, you are repeatedly changing between God Himself and His acts. I don’t think that that is a proper way of reasoning. The second point is, that the scientific method does not exclude that a phenomenon could have a supernatural cause. Why should it? The third point is that it is really difficult to distuinguish between natural and supernatural causes. Before Newton, things like Gravity seemed a bit spooky and supernatural. And nowadays with black energy and quantum. Should it have been dismissed ? And now it’s late. Good night and good Sunday blessing!
it could also be that the book of Revelation talks about FUTURE events…its prophetic for the time of the end. That time (Rev 20) has not arrived yet…you are jumping the gun my friend…or are you not aware of the war in Ukraine, the floods in the US, the loss of life in the Channel a few weeks ago? Satan is very much NOT bound in a pit where he cannot interract with the physical world around us.
It has occurred to me that ID is more or less stuck to only explaining God’s (erm, I mean the intelligent designer’s) past actions. So with respect to the question that kicked off the thread, it is perhaps because “the designer” is not currently active in the world.
do you have references to support such a claim? I ask this because we know Biblically that if God were to withdraw his hand from this world, Satan would immediately destroy all life in it.
It does. It lacks @St.Roymond’s Divinometer™, yet to be released. Science is based on methodological naturalism and has no way to measure or detect anything supernatural.
I reject the whole idea that “sin” is an agent with creative power that can manipulate DNA and turn carnivores into herbivores and initiate plate tectonics that cause volcanoes and earthquakes and other disasters. Sin is human rebellion against God’s moral design for the world, it isn’t some general corruptive force in nature.
“His acts” is just a nominalization of a verb and verbs require subjects. If you are trying to study what God did in the world, you are trying to study God. This is a distinction without a difference.
Yes it does. It’s called methodological naturalism and it’s the basis of the scientific method. We can certainly ask questions about supernatural causes and try to find answers using all the epistemological tools available to us, but asking questions isn’t doing science. Before Newton there was no scientific method, so what is your point?
I think the scientific method that scientists insist on today was solidified in the 1930s. If ID wants to “do science,” they have to play by the rules the scientific community has agreed on. If they want to have a think tank and publish articles full of deep thoughts about an intelligent designer and why the idea is compelling to them, no one would care. But no, they are fully invested in various culture wars and fighting with school boards and insisting that their metaphysical work is scientific research that challenges scientific consensus and schools need to “teach the controversy.”
This is false. Hebrew scholars back before Galileo, purely on the basis of the text of Genesis, concluded that the universe is ancient beyond human comprehension and the Earth is ancient beyond counting.
But it is – it didn’t appear until after the ideas of scientific materialism infected the church.
You mean the lie that the scriptures anywhere claim to teach science, which is the foundation of YEC.
Ah see now that is a position that is different from my ststement. I did not make the claim satan created life (nor do i believe that).
You are mixing the claim of creation of living things with interracting with them. It appears you do not believe satan has the power to control things like for example…the weather (read the first chapters of the book of Job)
Now that statement of yours leads me to a question for you…
Was dolly the sheep cloned by God or by men, who are according to biblical definition, sinners and corrupted by sin?
Do you now see the problem with your statement above?
If a sinful mortal human can clone a sheep by scientifically manipulating Gods creation, why is satan not also able to do this and a whole lot more in the physical world around us?
Are you making the claim an invisible spiritual being (to us) is unable to manifest himself physically?
For sin to be able to “corrupt” nature, it has to be an agent with power. Sin is not a force.
Correct, I do not believe any angels, which according to the Bible are created spiritual beings not all-powerful forces, can control the weather. Job is a drama and should be read as such. It’s not a theology textbook or a science textbook.
Cloning is a human action. People cloned a sheep. Whether they are sinners or not is irrelevant. If Dolly died prematurely, it was because of natural causes, not because her DNA was corrupted by sin.
This honestly makes no sense to me. Satan doesn’t have a lab for one. There is a huge difference between “being able to manifest physically” and “being able to control the weather.” Just because you can imagine something doesn’t make it rational or possible.
Yeah, the authors of the Bible speak in many figurative, unscientific ways.
Sin reigning in your body is a literary device called personification. Sin is not literally a reigning monarch, that is a metaphor. Romans 7 only goes up to verse 25.
I actually studied biblical Greek, and like I said, I’m a linguist. The fact that a word with a certian etymology was used in a sentence in the Bible about sin doesn’t get you to “sin is a force.” Did you even read that Corinthians verse, or just do a google search for sin and power? It says the power of sin is the Law. How that helps with the argument “sin is a corruptive force” is beyond me. Do you think God’s Law is a corruptive force on the natural world?
