If there is a God, His true bible exists in nature, not an ancient book that was written by people thousands of years ago.
Greetings, yenmor. Actually He exists(IMB) in both places!
Romans 1:18-20 writes:
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Of course, some otherwise intelligent men and women conclude (from the vantage point of this dust speck, no less) that there is no evidence for God and that human logic can explain the existence of this huge universe another way.
--A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions.
Of course, the critic would claim that science is never about opinion, unlike faith/belief. They would assert that they did not have opinions...they based their belief on evidence. Science itself became more comforting to them than a belief in a higher power that cares about humanity. I can see why some feel that way...Of course, the skeptic/critic concludes that the Bible is but a collection of human philosophy based on limited understanding and that now-a-days we have much better tools of logic, reason, and reality with which to form our belief. Sticking with scripture, (which the critic may suggest I am quote-mining)
we read in
1 Cor 3:18-20 writes:
Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile."
Does this suggest that God wants humans to remain ignorant and stupid? I don't think so...He just wants us to acknowledge Him and have a reverent fear...as it is good for us and keeps our human ego in check.
In closing, I use
Ps 34:9-10 writes:
Fear the LORD, you his saints, for those who fear him lack nothing. The lions may grow weak and hungry, but those who seek the LORD lack no good thing.
In my opinion, belief in God in a personal way is achieved through Jesus Christ and does not prevent an individual from learning and embracing science also. God created the entire universe and even multiverses if they exist. In other words, if it exists, He created it...even the thoughts of atheists.
Edited by Thugpreacha, : corrected myself a wee bit, since I think my train of thought need not be derailed.
Given our fallen nature, why would we be able to read written testimony better than we read nature?
This is actually a good question. If the theory were that the collection of 66 Books were in fact inerrant scripture, who wrote them? If, per argument, inspired humans wrote them, how could the audience--purportedly *uninspired* humans...be able to interpret what was important?
And I think Faith is trying to explain her theory of why the secular scientists are wrong...being fallen, they couldn't read nature any better than they can read the Bible.
If I understand Faith (and I wouldn't be surprised if I don't) she believes that she is fallen too but Jesus has helped her back up.
Lets take this and run with it. Our theory so far goes a little something like this:
1) God always existed. He wanted to commune/relate with we humans on dust speck known as earth in the middle of His vast created universe. 2) Early humans somehow knew this storyline, and attempted to write about it in the best manner with which their early evolved brains(created, if you prefer) could grasp. Perhaps the definition of what is human versus what is evolved animal is differentiated by the idea of a name.
Ravi is one of my favorite defenders of the faith, and in this video a decent discussion evolves. (did I just use that word? )
All I was saying was that God gave us the Bible BECAUSE Nature isn't readable. We'd see Him in Nature if it were. And yes this is because our minds are fallen, we're spiritually blind, and intellectually hindered as well. That's why we need a revelation from God to understand things rightly.
I'm not sure if I agree...although I might were I to understand you better.
How do we explain Romans 1:18-20?
Rom 1:18-20-- The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Is Paul talking of "saved" or "unsaved" men?
Does the scripture apply to all men?
The Chapter starts by clarifying his audience:
Rom 1:7 writes:
To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints..
The question now is this, among other things.
Do the ones in Rome who are allegedly not loved by God remain incapable of understanding this passage?
Does anyone else have any other possible explanations?(pertaining to the meaning of the scripture)