Jump to content

Primary: Sky Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Secondary: Sky Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Pattern: Blank Waves Squares Notes Sharp Wood Rockface Leather Honey Vertical Triangles
Welcome to Christianity Board!
Christianity Board is a thriving forum community for registered members to share, pray, and respectfully debate about the faith in Jesus Christ. We are a nondenominational Christian forum in that we welcome the diversity of Christianity and we are not attached to any one denominational group. Join today for access to posting on the forums, chatting in the shoutbox, creating a blog, private messenger, profile features and so much more. May your time here be blessed in the name of Jesus!
Login to Account Create an Account
Photo

DO WE BELIEVE GOD'S WORD OR SO-CALLED SCIENCE?


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1
StanJ

StanJ

    Lifelong student of God's Word.

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,838 posts
Bible tells us in Genesis 1 that God created the Earth in six days. According to the Bible that would make the Earth around 10,000 years old.
Now science tells us that the world is 4.5 billions years old and the universe is 14 billion years old.

So what we have here is a disagreement between science and the Bible. Which will you choose?
Personally I believe that the Bible as Paul stated, is the inspired/God breathed scripture. It's not meant to be a science book or a Geology book but it is true whenever its States but its states.

So the Dilemma that many Christians face is whether or not they will accept the Bible as fact in how the world was created or they will accept science as fact in how old the world and universe is.

What better place to start to explore this issue then at the beginning in Genesis chapter 1.

http://chalcedon.edu...in-genesis-1-2/

So after reading the info in the above-noted link, who do you think is right or is speaking the truth?

Does God through His written word speak the truth or does the geophysicist through scientific theory speak the truth?
  • 0

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:15 (NIV)

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. Col 4:6 (NIV)

 


#2
Angelina

Angelina

    Prayer Warrior

  • Super Moderator
  • 5,451 posts

I believe in God's word. Science should compliment the bible. If it does not then someone has drawn their own conclusion rather than truth....


  • 0
1 Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blog: http://www.christian...e-of-the-myths/


#3
River Jordan

River Jordan

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,878 posts

In my experiences serving as youth leader at our church, I can't tell you how many times I've seen middle schoolers, teenagers, and young Christians struggle with this issue.  Interestingly, it's almost exclusively the ones from conservative, fundamentalist households that have the most problems.  They've been raised and taught in exactly the "you have to pick one or the other" environment that Stan lays out in the OP.  And most often they've also been fed creationist talking points like "there are no transitional fossils", "evolution is never observed", "mutations can't add information", and the like, but when they start taking biology courses they quickly find out that those talking points are just flat out lies....transitional fossils exist by the thousands, we see populations evolve all the time, mutations adding information is as common as rain, and so on.  So now they're faced with a dilemma...a dilemma not of their own making, but one that's been forced on them.  Do they accept the reality around them, or do they deny reality and keep their faith?  Can't have both!

 

I can say with absolute certainty that this contrived dilemma has led a lot of young Christians to walk away from the faith.  They figure if everyone is telling them they have to choose between reality and Christianity, then they're going with reality.  As I've posted here before, this fundamentalist demand that Christians deny and reject science is one of the top reasons why young people are leaving Christianity en masse.  

 

Reason #3 – Churches come across as antagonistic to science.
 
One of the reasons young adults feel disconnected from church or from faith is the tension they feel between Christianity and science. The most common of the perceptions in this arena is “Christians are too confident they know all the answers” (35%). Three out of ten young adults with a Christian background feel that “churches are out of step with the scientific world we live in” (29%). Another one-quarter embrace the perception that “Christianity is anti-science” (25%). And nearly the same proportion (23%) said they have “been turned off by the creation-versus-evolution debate.” Furthermore, the research shows that many science-minded young Christians are struggling to find ways of staying faithful to their beliefs and to their professional calling in science-related industries.

 

 

 

And as other survey data shows, we are losing the youth in astounding, jaw-dropping numbers.

 

Throw in the outrageous and persistent dishonesty from creationist organizations (e.g., quote mining, the movie "Expelled") and you see the problem.  Kids today are quite savvy when it comes to spotting when someone is trying to put one over on them, and creationist organizations aren't very good at even pretending to be honest.

 

So that's one major problem with the either/or, black/white framework laid out in the OP.  Another problem is that the history of Christianity is chock full of debates over how to interpret the Genesis creation accounts (yes...there are 2 accounts).  We should all be familiar with St. Augustine writing about this very issue way back in the 4th and 5th century.  Origen of Alexandria, clear back in the 2nd century, noted that a literal reading of Genesis' days didn't make sense given that there wasn't a sun or moon during the first three days.  And since Genesis is a Jewish book, it's also worth noting that there are plenty of Hebrew scholars who didn't adhere to the literalist approach.

 

So I guess the question we have to ask ourselves is....is it worth driving people away from the faith, and making ourselves look ridiculous in the process, over an issue that's older than Christianity and has never been resolved?  I tend to think not.


Edited by River Jordan, 27 April 2016 - 12:59 PM.

  • 1

#4
StanJ

StanJ

    Lifelong student of God's Word.

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,838 posts

In my experiences serving as youth leader at our church, I can't tell you how many times I've seen middle schoolers, teenagers, and young Christians struggle with this issue.  


RJ, you are immediately off topic. Reread the OP and address the issue brought up in the OP.
FYI, we raised 4 Kids with the same understanding that I gave in the OP, and all of them are still following the Lord and have families that they are raising in the same way.
Either one trusts in God's word and what it says or one doesn't. It is that simple.
As Joshua said after taking over for Moses; "choose you this day whom you will serve, as for me and my family we will serve the LORD."
  • 0

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:15 (NIV)

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. Col 4:6 (NIV)

 


#5
River Jordan

River Jordan

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,878 posts

RJ, you are immediately off topic. Reread the OP and address the issue brought up in the OP.

 

????????????  The topic of the OP is whether we go with the Bible or science.  My post is about that question.

 

FYI, we raised 4 Kids with the same understanding that I gave in the OP, and all of them are still following the Lord and have families that they are raising in the same way.

 

 

I never said that every kid faced with this false dilemma chose to abandon Christianity.  But as the data shows, kids are abandoning the faith in staggering numbers and they're citing this issue as one of the reasons.

 

Either one trusts in God's word and what it says or one doesn't. It is that simple.

As Joshua said after taking over for Moses; "choose you this day whom you will serve, as for me and my family we will serve the LORD."

 

 

I trust God's word just as much as you do.  The difference is, I don't think my interpretive abilities to be infallible and from that basis conclude that everyone who disagrees with my interpretations must not read, believe, or trust the Bible.

 

Again, just because someone reads a part of scripture differently than you doesn't mean they reject it.


Edited by River Jordan, 27 April 2016 - 02:42 PM.

  • 0

#6
StanJ

StanJ

    Lifelong student of God's Word.

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,838 posts

 
The topic of the OP is whether we go with the Bible or science.  My post is about that question.


No the office about whether we believe the Bible or science in regards to the six days of creation. Did you actually go to the link and read it?

  
I never said that every kid faced with this false dilemma chose to abandon Christianity.  But as the data shows, kids are abandoning the faith in staggering numbers and they're citing this issue as one of the reasons.


I know nothing about the accuracy of the group taking up this data but I can tell you that based on what they said it is not true in my family alone so to say that 25% of kids are abandoning Christianity because of this apparent dilemma, which is not even proven to be a dilemma, is an issue I don't buy.

  
I trust God's word just as much as you do.  The difference is, I don't think my interpretive abilities to be infallible and from that basis conclude that everyone who disagrees with my interpretations must not read, believe, or trust the Bible.


First of all it's painfully obvious that you don't trust God's word as much as I do and I've never claim to be infallible I just no a lot based on having studied these issues for over 45 years. How long have you actually studied the Bible? In fact, how old are you?

  
Again, just because someone reads a part of scripture differently than you doesn't mean they reject it.


If one reads the Bible and doesn't see the truth in the Bible, as there is only one truth, then it does mean that they reject it because they don't see the truth. Now try dealing with the OP and stop bringing up your apologetics for evolution all the time.
  • 0

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:15 (NIV)

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. Col 4:6 (NIV)

 


#7
River Jordan

River Jordan

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,878 posts

No the office about whether we believe the Bible or science in regards to the six days of creation. Did you actually go to the link and read it?

 

Um.......that's what I just said.   :blink: 
 

I know nothing about the accuracy of the group taking up this data but I can tell you that based on what they said it is not true in my family alone so to say that 25% of kids are abandoning Christianity because of this apparent dilemma, which is not even proven to be a dilemma, is an issue I don't buy.

 

Again you exhibit sampling bias.  Here, you cite a mere 4 individuals as justification for waving away a much, much larger data set.  That's no different than someone, after being shown data that indicates the majority of players in the NBA are black saying "That can't be true because JJ Redick plays in the NBA and he's white".
 

First of all it's painfully obvious that you don't trust God's word as much as I do

 

 

Please explain how without assuming that your interpretive skills are superior to everyone who disagrees with you.

 

and I've never claim to be infallible I just no a lot based on having studied these issues for over 45 years. How long have you actually studied the Bible? In fact, how old are you?

 

 

Nice try.
 

If one reads the Bible and doesn't see the truth in the Bible, as there is only one truth

 

 

And you believe that your interpretation = the "one truth", correct?

 

then it does mean that they reject it because they don't see the truth.

 

 

Exactly as I've been describing.....since StanJ has the "one truth", anyone who disagrees with him is rejecting that truth.  How convenient for you.   <_<

 

 Now try dealing with the OP and stop bringing up your apologetics for evolution all the time.

 

 

Oh come on Stan....seriously?  You want to start a thread about choosing between science and your interpretation of the Genesis creation accounts, but you don't want anyone to bring up evolution?  You must really be terrified.


Edited by River Jordan, 27 April 2016 - 03:29 PM.

  • 1

#8
StanJ

StanJ

    Lifelong student of God's Word.

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,838 posts

Um.......that's what I just said.   :blink:


No, you said; "The topic of the OP is whether we go with the Bible or science"
Sadly you don't seem to see that that's not the same thing but then again I guess that's what you don't understand the issue.

Again you exhibit sampling bias.  Here, you cite a mere 4 individuals as justification for waving away a much, much larger data set.  That's no different than someone, after being shown data that indicates the majority of players in the NBA are black saying "That can't be true because JJ Redick plays in the NBA and he's white".


No, I said just my 4 kids alone show that the percentages in what you posted couldn't possibly be correct. I'm not saying this doesn't happen but it doesn't happen in the way you portrayed it and in the way that the article indicates. More than likely the dissolution teenagers are the ones that exist in a religiously conservative environment but not necessarily a true Christian environment. The Bible assures us that if we clean up our children in the way they should go when they are older they will not depart from it. I did exactly what the Bible taught me to do and my kids have never departed from it. As a matter of fact the older they get the closer they get to God which seems to be a normal human condition.

 

Please explain how without assuming that your interpretive skills are superior to everyone who disagrees with you.


Sorry but in your case that would be a waste of time. Do you know the saying about chasing after an untamed ornathoids?

Nice try.


Too bad I have to and that you just don't disclose it as a matter of openness and truthfulness. Do you go to church with a bag over your head?

And you believe that your interpretation = the "one truth", correct?


I know. None of you that I'm willing to prove it by proper exegesis which apparently you avoid at all costs.
 

Exactly as I've been describing.....since StanJ has the "one truth", anyone who disagrees with him is rejecting that truth.  How convenient for you.


John 8:32
 

Oh come on Stan....seriously?  You want to start a thread about choosing between science and your interpretation of the Genesis creation accounts, but you don't want anyone to bring up evolution?  You must really be terrified.


If you want to do a thread on Evolution go ahead but just as the thread that the Administrator started on Natural Theology that you waylaid right away, you're trying to do the same thing here. So what we see is your agenda at trying to bring Evolution into everything that you can even when it is not applicable. I don't really care how you feel about whether or not you're justified, the point is it's my OP and it's against the rules to do otherwise. I guess it is painfully obvious to us that you really don't want to get into a debate about the Bible being right or wrong because you know you'll be wrong.
  • 0

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:15 (NIV)

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. Col 4:6 (NIV)

 


#9
River Jordan

River Jordan

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,878 posts

Stan,

 

You're not making the slightest bit of sense.  Your OP begins with...

 

Bible tells us in Genesis 1 that God created the Earth in six days. According to the Bible that would make the Earth around 10,000 years old. 
Now science tells us that the world is 4.5 billions years old and the universe is 14 billion years old.
 
So what we have here is a disagreement between science and the Bible. Which will you choose?

 

 

But then when I say, "The topic of the OP is whether we go with the Bible or science", you say it's not.

 

When you figure out what your point is, let us know.


  • 0

#10
StanJ

StanJ

    Lifelong student of God's Word.

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,838 posts

You're not making the slightest bit of sense.  Your OP begins with...
But then when I say, "The topic of the OP is whether we go with the Bible or science", you say it's not.When you figure out what your point is, let us know.


I am to everyone but you so obviously that means you're the one with a comprehension problem. You've got the administrator telling you that you're off topic and I'm telling you you're off topic and you're ignoring both of us so that pretty much conveys how you refuse to cooperate with basic rules in this forum.
It doesn't matter what you say the topic of the OP is, it matters what I say it is, because I'm the OP.
If you want to be the one making the rules, then go start your own forum.
  • 0

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:15 (NIV)

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. Col 4:6 (NIV)

 


#11
River Jordan

River Jordan

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,878 posts

I am to everyone but you so obviously that means you're the one with a comprehension problem.

 

Um......look around Stan.  Only one other person has even commented on this thread (Angelina), and she seemed to think the topic was "science or the Bible" also.

 

You've got the administrator telling you that you're off topic

 

 

Where?

 

and I'm telling you you're off topic and you're ignoring both of us so that pretty much conveys how you refuse to cooperate with basic rules in this forum.

It doesn't matter what you say the topic of the OP is, it matters what I say it is, because I'm the OP.
If you want to be the one making the rules, then go start your own forum.

 

 

Then what is the topic of this thread Stan?


  • 0

#12
StanJ

StanJ

    Lifelong student of God's Word.

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,838 posts

Um......look around Stan.  Only one other person has even commented on this thread (Angelina), and she seemed to think the topic was "science or the Bible" also.


All that means is that other people haven't read this read or those that do agree with it. We have over 7,000 members here and not everybody post a response to an OP.

 

Where?
Then what is the topic of this thread Stan?


Feigning obtuseness doesn't really work with me.
  • 0

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:15 (NIV)

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. Col 4:6 (NIV)

 


#13
River Jordan

River Jordan

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,878 posts

What's the topic of this thread Stan?


  • 0

#14
StanJ

StanJ

    Lifelong student of God's Word.

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,838 posts

What's the topic of this thread Stan?


Why do you continue to feign obtuseness RJ? Stop wasting our time and either respond according to OP or go away.
  • 0

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:15 (NIV)

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. Col 4:6 (NIV)

 


#15
River Jordan

River Jordan

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,878 posts

You're hilarious Stan.

 

Stan:  You're taking us off topic!

 

Me: Oh....what's the topic?

 

Stan: I'm not going to tell you!

 

Me:  Seriously...if I'm going to stay on topic, it would help if I knew what the topic was.  So what is the topic?

 

Stan:  Stop wasting my time.

 

 

Well done Stan.   :rolleyes:


  • 0

#16
StanJ

StanJ

    Lifelong student of God's Word.

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,838 posts

You're hilarious Stan.
 
Stan:  You're taking us off topic!
 
Me: Oh....what's the topic?
 
Stan: I'm not going to tell you!
 
Me:  Seriously...if I'm going to stay on topic, it would help if I knew what the topic was.  So what is the topic?
 
Stan:  Stop wasting my time.



All this clearly demonstrates is that you can't even properly quote someone when the words are right in front of you. You're not fooling anybody RJ, except apparently yourself. I am not sure how you earned any kind of degree with those kind of comprehension skills?
  • 0

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:15 (NIV)

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. Col 4:6 (NIV)

 


#17
Deborah_

Deborah_

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 164 posts

Stan, on the subject of "science or the Bible", the creation/evolution issue is always the first example that comes to mind. You even began your OP with reference to it. How can it be "off topic"? "Science or the Bible" would be very difficult to discuss without bringing in specific examples.

 

Personally I would say that if God created the universe (as we all believe He did), and if science correctly describes the universe (as it endeavours to do), then they cannot be incompatible. Therefore we shouldn't have to choose between them. Science may be temporarily in error because it has insufficient evidence to work on (as new things are discovered, theories are modified or even re-formulated); we may be temporarily in error because we are interpreting Scripture wrongly (as the geocentric theologians did in the Middle Ages).


  • 0

"Just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in Him, rooted and built up in Him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness." (Colossians 2:6,7)

 

https://deborahsbibl...s.wordpress.com


#18
StanJ

StanJ

    Lifelong student of God's Word.

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,838 posts

Stan, on the subject of "science or the Bible", the creation/evolution issue is always the first example that comes to mind. You even began your OP with reference to it. How can it be "off topic"? "Science or the Bible" would be very difficult to discuss without bringing in specific examples.


Well that may be but in this thread I was speaking about creation in the sense of the age of the Earth and universe which geophysics Tells us vs the age of the Earth and the universe that the Bible tells us. Last time I looked geophysics and evolution are not the same science. I'm not sure how I could have made this any clearer in the OP?

 

Personally I would say that if God created the universe (as we all believe He did), and if science correctly describes the universe (as it endeavours to do), then they cannot be incompatible. Therefore we shouldn't have to choose between them. Science may be temporarily in error because it has insufficient evidence to work on (as new things are discovered, theories are modified or even re-formulated); we may be temporarily in error because we are interpreting Scripture wrongly (as the geocentric theologians did in the Middle Ages).


Well they do contradict one another in this regard so in my view the so-called geophysical evidence that the Earth is over 4 billion years old is wrong.
  • 0

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:15 (NIV)

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone. Col 4:6 (NIV)

 


#19
River Jordan

River Jordan

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,878 posts

Stan, on the subject of "science or the Bible", the creation/evolution issue is always the first example that comes to mind. You even began your OP with reference to it. How can it be "off topic"? "Science or the Bible" would be very difficult to discuss without bringing in specific examples.

 

Personally I would say that if God created the universe (as we all believe He did), and if science correctly describes the universe (as it endeavours to do), then they cannot be incompatible. Therefore we shouldn't have to choose between them. Science may be temporarily in error because it has insufficient evidence to work on (as new things are discovered, theories are modified or even re-formulated); we may be temporarily in error because we are interpreting Scripture wrongly (as the geocentric theologians did in the Middle Ages).

 

Very well put!   :D


  • 0

#20
shnarkle

shnarkle

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 284 posts

Bible tells us in Genesis 1 that God created the Earth in six days. According to the Bible that would make the Earth around 10,000 years old.


I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but I was reading something by some rabbi/ astrophysicist who postulated that "evening and morning a first day " doesn't necessarily indicate a 24 hour period. I'm not saying that I necessarily go along with this idea, but it is intriguing.

On the other hand, there is also this interesting tid bit of information that most seem to gloss right over: "the earth was formless and void". The problem with this translation is that there is no verb to be in Hebrew, and this isn't the verb to be. The word means "became". So it should read, "the earth became formless and void". This makes sense as the earth is a sphere and sphere's aren't formless and void. So it would seem to be indicating that the earth was destroyed. So how long would it take for the earth to get back into shape? Quite a while I would think. So the 10,000 year estimate is probably off by quite a bit.

Now science tells us that the world is 4.5 billions years old and the universe is 14 billion years old.

So what we have here is a disagreement between science and the Bible. Which will you choose?


In light of my previous comments, there is no need to choose.

Personally I believe that the Bible as Paul stated, is the inspired/God breathed scripture. It's not meant to be a science book or a Geology book but it is true whenever its States but its states.


It might not be a history book either. I do think that it contains nuggets of truth that will never be found in any textbook on any other subject.

So the Dilemma that many Christians face is whether or not they will accept the Bible as fact in how the world was created or they will accept science as fact in how old the world and universe is.


I think the critical question is which interpretation to go with. Christians can't even agree on this issue. Christians may agree that the bible is the truth, but who's interpretation of truth?

What better place to start to explore this issue then at the beginning in Genesis chapter 1.

http://chalcedon.edu...in-genesis-1-2/

So after reading the info in the above-noted link, who do you think is right or is speaking the truth?

Does God through His written word speak the truth or does the geophysicist through scientific theory speak the truth?


I'd just like to point out a couple interesting facts. There's a book out called "The Genesis Enigma" by an avowed atheist. He makes this one interesting remark. I'm paraphrasing: How do Iron Age goatherds come up with a chronology of events that mirrors the actual chronology of events for the creation of the universe? Coincidence? Dumb luck? Not likely.

A while back, Evolutionists concluded that there just isn't enough time for life to have evolved here on earth. The logical explanation is that it must have been brought here. They call it something like "the seed hypothesis". Richard Dawkins thought it could be aliens or a meteor. The interesting thing is that if you look at chapter two of Genesis, this is precisely what it says. It says that God created plants, but he didn't create them in the earth. So they weren't created here at all, but were created, and then planted in the earth. Could God be this alien that Richard Dawkins is referring to? Who knows?


  • 1

#21
heavenfold

heavenfold

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 80 posts

Bible tells us in Genesis 1 that God created the Earth in six days. According to the Bible that would make the Earth around 10,000 years old.
Now science tells us that the world is 4.5 billions years old and the universe is 14 billion years old.

So what we have here is a disagreement between science and the Bible. Which will you choose?
Personally I believe that the Bible as Paul stated, is the inspired/God breathed scripture. It's not meant to be a science book or a Geology book but it is true whenever its States but its states.

So the Dilemma that many Christians face is whether or not they will accept the Bible as fact in how the world was created or they will accept science as fact in how old the world and universe is.

What better place to start to explore this issue then at the beginning in Genesis chapter 1.

http://chalcedon.edu...in-genesis-1-2/

So after reading the info in the above-noted link, who do you think is right or is speaking the truth?

Does God through His written word speak the truth or does the geophysicist through scientific theory speak the truth?

I'm going with the bible here, since science is man made. Man made things are wrong from beginning to end, and only Gods word can be trusted.
  • 0
Diffrent rules for different fools.

#22
waterlilyoflife

waterlilyoflife

    Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

You are rejecting wisdom. Science was created by God.. In the bgeining, the earth was formless and void. It seems like there was a vast, soupy, marshy mess of dirt and water mixed together and God woke up and decided to create something out of it. It says God created the heavens and earth, so God created the soupy mess first, then he decied to make something useful and decent, something beautiful and good out of it. I am wondering if there could have been heaven, and then Lucifer rebelled, there was the war, God cast down the rebellious angels who followed Lucifer, they went into the center of the formless void, when God created earth, he put the fallen angels in the center of it, where there is heat, lava, liquid fire and caves. The center of the earth is fire, lava, liquid stone. The previous world had been destroyed, then God had to create it again, it could have been that during this re-creation it took only six days, but it could have been six thousand years, or six million years, the Bible says that a day is like a thousand years to God.

 

 

Then there is Noah and the great flood. The flood destroyed to earth, but after it dried, there would have been a bunch of dead bodies. What happened to the dead bodies? Did God put them down underneath the earth? Or perhaps in the oceans around the continents? May be the very deep dark abyss at the bottom of the ocean? maybe the sharks and other deep sea predators ate the bodies.

 

 

About science...some science is the study of nature. God created nature, and wants us to study it becasue then we learn about God's creation and about God. God wants us to have knowledge and wisdom. he does not want us to be dummies. For one thing, God helps scientists and doctors to discover new medicine, that will save the lives of children and adults, in the past there was very little scientific knowledge about medicine that could save lives. Now doctors have discovered all sorts of wonder drugs.Science can save lives and clean up the earth. It can make our lives cleaner and healthier. We can stop pollution, save trees in the forest, clean up air and water, create cars run on less fuel.   


  • 0

#23
bbyrd009

bbyrd009

    Groper

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,420 posts

ya, i don't think it's that hard to accept that we just tend to take Scripture literally, when It often speaks figuratively. And through a translation, to boot; it is possibly more likely that the earth "became void," with other Scripture taken into account, even though we read "was void." Etc.


  • 0

"Creation is continuous, and never stops."


#24
kepha31

kepha31

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,253 posts

"no real disagreement can exist between the theologian and the scientist provided each keeps within his own limits. . . . If nevertheless there is a disagreement . . . it should be remembered that the sacred writers, or more truly ‘the Spirit of God who spoke through them, did not wish to teach men such truths (as the inner structure of visible objects) which do not help anyone to salvation’; and that, for this reason, rather than trying to provide a scientific exposition of nature, they sometimes describe and treat these matters either in a somewhat figurative language or as the common manner of speech those times required, and indeed still requires nowadays in everyday life, even amongst most learned people"

 

"Methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things the of the faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are"

 

The truth of science cannot contradict the truth of faith.


  • 0
 
car·i·ca·ture
description of Church teaching which certain striking characteristics are exaggerated in order to create a comic or grotesque effect.

#25
bbyrd009

bbyrd009

    Groper

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,420 posts

i agree, but science runs on theories, and vested interests can subvert science for just that reason, so "truth" in science is often actually a chimera. It is the difference in "Camel cigarettes are good for you" and "More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette." So, science ends up being suspected, when it is the scientist that should be questioned. How can you get truth from someone who must acknowledge to knowing of less than 5% of what they know must exist, according to their own calculations? Of course a scientist will readily admit this, that science does not run on truth, or facts, but theories are only too easily presented as facts in order to serve an agenda. Iow a scientist will admit that, until you pay him enough. But a similar thing goes on with religion, of course; possibly to a greater (and more important) extent.


Edited by bbyrd009, 19 March 2017 - 06:36 AM.

  • 0

"Creation is continuous, and never stops."


#26
Mungo

Mungo

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,497 posts

Of course a scientist will readily admit this, that science does not run on truth, or facts, but theories .....

 

True and sometimes people forget that. Also theories are only based on the best available knowledge at the time.

 

I once had a very old "science" book (I wish I had kept it). One theory it had was on the age of sun (and therefore of the earth) based on the idea that the sun must be made of coal, since that was the hottest burning fuel that was known at the time, and I think the estimated size of the sun. Seems crazy now but it was probably considered reasonable at the time.


  • 1
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.

Prejudice is a great timesaver. It enables you to form opinions without bothering to get facts.

#27
kepha31

kepha31

    Advanced Member

  • Christian Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,253 posts

There are three different kinds of "sciences." The difference between them is the degree of abstraction that is involved. The mind might just focus on the physical by experimental observation. This science is called physics or natural science (this is what the modern mind knows as "science"). He can also move toward a higher degree of abstraction dealing with quantity and number which can be distinguished apart from the material things. This is called mathematics. The highest abstraction is when the mind deals with being or reality itself as being. This is called metaphysics.

 

What the modern mind needs to remember is this: all three sciences are different and one method of science cannot be the method of another. This has been the error of both the modern and the ancients. As Dr. Kreeft said, "the ancients used a philosophical method to do science and the moderns use a scientific method to do philosophy." One cannot say that since relativity is true in physics, morality and truth are relative. Physics is also mathematical. Does this mean we need a mathematical morality? If relativity is true in physics, does this mean that mathematics ought to be relative?

 

A new science does not necessitate a new religion or a new philosophy. To mix them is committing what the scholastics call the fallacy of uniform method of science. As Fulton Sheen said,

 

"Here we call it the 'Fallacy of the Uniform Method of Science' -- the fallacy of taking one science as the norm, and making it the measure, the guide, the interpreter, and the inspiration of every other science." (Philosophy of Religion, 185)

 

Physics should be treated as physics, mathematics as mathematics, and especially, metaphysics as metaphysics. One should not use a scientific or mathematical method to do metaphysics and vice versa. As Etienne Gilson said,

"Theology, logic, physics, biology, psychology, sociology, economics, are fully competent to solve their own problems by their own methods....no particular science is competent to either solve metaphysical problems, or to judge their metaphysical solutions." (The Unity of Philosophical Experience, page 249)

 

At the same time, we should not limit all knowledge to science. First, because it cannot be scientifically proven that everything should be scientifically proven or limited to science. It is self-contradictory. Second, because there are many things which are true but cannot be proven scientifically such as mathematics, love, aesthetics, morality, and the laws of logic.

 

To be faithful in science does not mean one ought to be an empiricist. A religious person ought not to look down upon science and a scientist ought not to look down upon a religion. Both persons need to look up and thank God for making a beautiful universe; so beautiful that it makes them wonder about that universe, especially their place and purpose in it.

Science and Religion by A.L.


  • 0
 
car·i·ca·ture
description of Church teaching which certain striking characteristics are exaggerated in order to create a comic or grotesque effect.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users