Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What I have noticed about these debates...
zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 238 (25115)
12-01-2002 5:55 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by graedek
12-01-2002 3:20 AM


Unfortunately, the whole debate itself is unproductive. Atheists want theists to prove the existence of God. Occasionally, the tables are turned and the atheist is asked to prove the non-existence of God. Both are equally reasonable requests, and both are probably impossible as far as science is concerned.
What is left are (in the Christianity debate, as most of this site refers to) the Bible's claims as a theist's evidence of the existence of God and a particular atheist's assertions that these same claims are false as his or her proof of God's nonexistence.
The one has faith in the accuracy of the Bible and the other has faith in the fallacy of the Bible. So it is not really a scientific debate at all but a question of faith.
Which is why I can be a scientist and believe in God at the same time (just like Newton, Gauss, Einstein, and a number of other bright folks).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by graedek, posted 12-01-2002 3:20 AM graedek has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jcgirl92, posted 12-01-2002 9:48 PM zipzip has not replied
 Message 52 by nator, posted 12-05-2002 9:26 AM zipzip has not replied

  
zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 238 (25329)
12-03-2002 3:36 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by jcgirl92
12-01-2002 8:31 PM


Folks, here is my view as an informed Christian and a scientist (physician actively involved in basic medical science, sorry not geology). I think God gave us a mind because he meant us to use it.
Science is a great use of that mind and I think we can find out a great deal about the natural world and should make it a priority. I personally am fascinated by many areas of science and read widely. That said, I have never seen anything that contradicts the Bible, just some narrow interpretations of the Bible.
For this and other reasons I (like many Christians) welcome science and scientific discoveries ... the God of the Bible must also be the inventor of the natural world and all its laws. What we learn may change how I interpret certain parts of the Bible that are hard to understand in the first place, it is true. But that is because I realize that the Bible was written so that sheepherders who had no concept of what a dinosaur was could understand the sequence of creation (for example), and also so that a sophisticated scientific culture could also see a general outline.
So if by using the faculties God has given us, we learn deeper details of creation (chemical composition of early atmosphere, etc), I do not have trouble understanding that God had a hand in them. However, even though God is a true scientist and a brilliant engineer, many Christians aren't. That is why the Bible is not a scientific treatise and was never meant to be one.
Treating it as such and pontificating about the apparent inaccuracy of certain details written so that ancient sheepherders would be comforted in knowing they had a God who loved them is missing the mark.
Confront the real issue, whatever faith it is you are going to examine. In Christianity it is this -- humanity has rejected God, but he loves us enough that he has come here, lived as one of us in the person of Christ, and has died as ransom for our sins (willful disobedience of God) so that "whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life(John 3:16)."
His question is not -- how comfortable are you with the fact that Genesis does not mention [insert specific scientific detail] so that sheepherders would not be bewildered? Instead it is this: will you accept my gift of salvation and invite me into your life or will you reject me knowing that there is "no other name by which men may be saved?"
This is what makes Christianity a dangerous religion, as an atheist friend of mine warned me. I completely agree -- Christ makes tough claims and asks difficult questions. But give our God your intellectual honesty before you reject him, first knowing that Science cannot protect us from the ultimate (and inevitable) requirement that we answer his real question, either yes or no.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by jcgirl92, posted 12-01-2002 8:31 PM jcgirl92 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Mammuthus, posted 12-03-2002 5:27 AM zipzip has replied

  
zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 238 (25399)
12-04-2002 1:44 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Mammuthus
12-03-2002 5:27 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Mammuthus:
Hi zipzip,
Do you then also accept the evidence that the observed biodiversity today is a result of evolution or do you reject it as contrary to the bible? If you accept evolution I would say your view is fairly mainstream for a scientist as most are religious (believe in god/gods and accept evolution). But I am not entirely sure of your position (regarding evolution) from your post.
Best wishes,
M
[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 12-03-2002]

Hi there, Mammathus. Microevolution in the sense of natural selection and mutatgenesis are observable in the laboratory, and I accept these are reasonable (and intuitive) mechanisms by which species change over time.
Macroevolution appears to be a more complicated topic because nobody really understands it (that is why it is such fun for folks to argue), but the general premise that speciation occurs somewhere in the mix of microevolutionary processes and vast (and perhaps not so vast) distances of time is also reasonable. The actual tempo of speciation throughout time (as represented in the fossil record) is problematic for me in terms of making me question the actual (molecular) mechanism or set of events by which speciation occurs, however.
That said, yes, as a scientist I accept "evolution" as just another natural process in the world. What is germaine to this discussion, though, is that my belief has little to do with a main premise of the Bible, which is that God is the architect of the universe including its natural laws and including me. I think of evolutionary processes as the flow of a sort of computational automaton that has been set with simple rules that determines what complex patterns will develop.
For a God outside of time, how could we tell the difference? He creates every snowflake, snailshell and leaf by his authorship of rules that are embedded in the fabric of the universe. His timeless act of creation of these rules, and hence these objects, is as near to him every moment we see pass by as it was when (which it seems would always be *now* to him) he set them in motion by creating natural law. At the same time, we know from the Bible that God is (or wishes to be) our personal saviour and that he intervenes in the world actively as well, in the sense that he desires an interactive relationship with us and makes himself known to us in many ways.
Whatever the case, Christianity rises or falls on the specific claims of Christ, not on my imperfect scientific knowledge or my particular interpretation of Genesis. He claims that he is "the way the truth and the life." If he is right, then to reject him out of hand is the most dreadful mistake a person can make. In other words, we are wise to evaluate his claims seriously.
In the meantime, science is great fun and fascinating. I do not see the point in arguing with the Bible when it comes to the creation account because I know that the Bible was not designed so that I could validate my hypotheses about the early universe. If the Bible is right everything we learn about the natural world will all fit in the end.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Mammuthus, posted 12-03-2002 5:27 AM Mammuthus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Mammuthus, posted 12-04-2002 3:33 AM zipzip has not replied
 Message 57 by nator, posted 12-05-2002 10:25 AM zipzip has replied

  
zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 238 (25780)
12-06-2002 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by nator
12-05-2002 10:25 AM


Probability items with associated consequences:
1)Bible is true and I reject it -- I miss out entirely.
2)Bible is false and I reject it -- Big deal, probably no afterlife anyway.
3)Bible is true and I accept it -- Good, I'm saved.
4)Bible is false and I accept it -- Big deal, probably no afterlife anyway, also most other religions not exclusive.
From a strictly mercenary, probabilistic, gambler's viewpoint, the smart choice is to bet on the Bible being true. You could be a Christian and still wind up with 1,2, or 4 the same as anybody else. But a person who has rejected Christ's offer of eternal life won't get door #3.
God talks to Christians through the Bible, through fellowship with other Christians, and through the Holy Spirit (who Christ tells us indwells every Christian and is a source of wisdom).
[This message has been edited by zipzip, 12-06-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by nator, posted 12-05-2002 10:25 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Primordial Egg, posted 12-06-2002 8:38 PM zipzip has not replied
 Message 86 by doctrbill, posted 12-06-2002 8:43 PM zipzip has not replied
 Message 89 by nator, posted 12-09-2002 7:22 PM zipzip has replied

  
zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 238 (26641)
12-15-2002 6:34 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by nator
12-09-2002 7:22 PM


I think the answer hinges on free will. God loves us so much that he even gives us the free will to reject him and remain apart from him for eternity. He takes our decisions seriously, as we must. It does not seem to me to be a question of God's ego (or why would he submit himself to the most humiliating forms of torture and death by people he had first allowed to spit upon him, simply for our sake?).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by nator, posted 12-09-2002 7:22 PM nator has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024