Science/Faith And origins Of Life!

Iconoclast

Excellent response to Crabtownboy.

 

I would like to understand this if possible. When you say you believe that God created the natural law in order to create but you don't believe He did so to violate them does this mean you do not believe in any of the biblical accounts of miracles because they all violate the natural laws?

 

freeatlast

People often exclaim about an event: "That is a miracle" when it really is not. I believe that your response to Crabtownboy correctly defines what constitute a miracle; God sets aside His natural law to accomplish His purpose!

 

Evolution has one over riding purpose, to explain away the truth of God as revealed in the Bible. They do this, I believe, because they will not accept the truth that man is accountable to God. In their mind man is the epitome of a mindless process called "natural selection. In truth man is the epitome of God's creative activity.

It is foolish to preach evolution and with the same mouth preach God's redemption through Jesus Christ. James, the brother of our Savior, aptly describes those who profess both Christ and evolution when he writes:

James 3:5-10, KJV
5. Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
6. And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.
7. For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind:
8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
9. Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.
10. Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.

So out of the same mouth the "so-called" theistic evolutionist will bless God and then deny His Revelation. As James says, "My brethren, these things ought not so to be."

The evolutionist organization "Bio Logos" claims that unless Christianity adopts evolutionist "faith" it is doomed to destruction, denying not only the Word of God but God Himself.

 

I'll grant you have no power to change a man's heart, and to give him a love for the truth, but the truth of God is evident in creation. It's proof enough to convince a rational man, and rational thought is as scientific as the precipitate in the bottom of a testube. God's eternal godhead and power are proven.

 

Again, a philosophical argument based wholly on the arbitrary presupposition of Naturalism.

And it's false.

 

What is your source for this idea that a majority of scientists hold to a totally naturalistic view? Do you really have a source, or is this opinion?

When you say "scientists" you cover an huge amount of territory. Do you really mean all, or certain scientific disciplines?

 

This is simply not true. Evolution attempts to deal with the process of how life developed on earth. It does not speak to a creator nor to no creator.

The "dip them and drop them" as well as the "once saved always saved" fold hold to those beliefs for primarily the same reason in different clothing. These beliefs give them an easy out without adding any responsibility for their actions.

Not if you believe God guided the evolution.

Not at all. Two different topics. Regardless of how mankind was created he still needs redemption through Jesus Christ.

You are quite wrong again. God revealed self slowly and we have a record of that revelation in the Bible. The greatest revelation is what God is like is Jesus Christ.

Their opinion and they are entitled to it. I do not agree.

 

I don't actually believe that God can or does violate any of His laws, natural or spiritual. To be a breaker of the law is very un-like God, who so fully kept His own laws that He sent Himself as the only possible solution to the law that states "he who sins, dies." But, God, who is the creator of those laws knows far better than we can ever imagine how they work, and how He as Necessary Being and First Cause can or could use them, including time, to accomplish His purpose.

If we consider that at the heart of the entire sub-atomic structure that makes up the cosmos is nothing more then information, it becomes rather easy to see how God could direct that information to serve His divine purpose thought he speaking of a (or His) word.

 

Substitute "inference" for "proof" and you are right on the money.

The concepts of "proof" whether in science (empirical) or testimony (evidential), or in philosophy (deductional), are similar. One must be able to say Q.E.D. at the end of a statement and have no potential for refutation by any means -- the argument is settled and the evidence, testimony, or deduction stands as vetted and finished -- it IS.

That there are yet so many arguments against God, whether serious or spurious, is evidence that no such proof exists for God save the one proof He offers us (based on His revelation), that His Spirit confirms with our spirit that He IS. That is considered a subjective evidence, and one we can hold individually but never prove in the life of any one else (God alone knows the heart...).

God requires faith to satisfy His call for us to glorify and worship Him. Difficult to get around that issue with science or theology.

 

You put the case very well and I agree with you. Mankind has a limited, probably very limited understanding of natural law. If we understood all natural law we would see that God does not violate the laws he created. If God will violate the laws that he himself created the result is that God would be untrustworthy. I do not believe this is the case at all. History has shown that man and his religion has committed serious error when they condemned some ideas that later proved to be, in fact, true ideas. A quick example is the Church and Galileo. What we do not understand we call supernatural. For God it is not supernatural, but his working in ways that man does not understand.

 

Actually, that argument stems directly from the Christian worldview that allowed the sciences to arise in the Christian world. It is only "lately" that Science has taken a turn toward a purely naturalistic bent as an established a priori presupposition required for science to happen.

Philosophical in nature? Of course. There is no harm in that. Philosophy is the search for wisdom, which can (and should) include God as the ultimate source of wisdom.

To paraphrase John's first epistle to fit this issue, one might say that the man who says that he has no philosophy is a liar and the truth is not in him. Disavowing philosophy as meaningless is in and of itself a philosophical thought.

 

In order to create God had to create natural laws. No laws, no creation, no framework within which to create.

The Biblical accounts are man's attempt to explain what he seen around him. They are not proofs. The important aspect is they say God created. This I believe and believe very firmly.

 

Yes indeed. With one caveat, we attribute to Science what Science still does not know, or in most likelihood can never know. Note that by my saying what I did above does not mean in any sense of the concept mean that I hold to macro-evolution or some "naturalistic" chance advent of life. The same God who created the cosmos and all the laws that govern its behavior or activity, also spoke into existence the life that resides within those boundaries.

That "natural processes" that can be described by laws occur in that creation is to be expected. Indeed, that is why Christians founded the study of Science! Science stems from a correct view of a Creator God, not the other way around, and it is "Science of the gaps" not "God of the gaps."

 

If you can tell me how Elisha made the axe head float then perhaps I will agree with you.

Are you trying to say that matter/energy does not exist?

 

Now I understand Crabtownboy. His understanding of God extends far beyond what God has revealed either in nature or His written Word, or even the Living Word. Folks I see that I have been missing much by my hiatus. Those who have persevered in sitting at the feet of Crabtownboy are to be commended. Like the patriarch Job I repent in sack cloth and asked. Another hiatus while I poke up the fire and find that sack cloth.

So you apparently don't believe in the inspiration of Scripture. Please enlighten all as to which Scripture are valid and which are simply man's imagination. I am sure you are qualified given your bold claim above!

 

I am never sure what a person means when they say inspired. But I do believe the writers of the Bible were inspired. However, inspired does not mean that God revealed everything there is to know to them. Why not? One major reason is that they would not have understood anything there were writing. For instance if God had revealed quantum mechanics to the writers of the Bible they would have had no idea what he was inspiring them to write.

Yes, the Bible was inspired. But not in the way that all was revealed. We can see this as God gradually revealed himself in the OT and gave his fullest revelation through Christ on earth.

I feel the following, from Merriam-Webster is a good definition of inspired.

 

Okay, I'll bite... Let's look at the passage to see if the Word gives us any clues worth investigating.

Oh, so the real miracle was that the stick thrown in the water made the iron head float. No need to set aside any natural law, but rather, it (could) appear that the true miracle was one of "aim" in that the stick thrown into the water precisely hit the eye of the axe and when the stick floated (perfectly natural) the man was able to retrieve the axe itself.

Again, this was a bona fide miracle of God, but it was not one where any natural law needed to be suspended, but rather the miracle was that the stick thrown actually hit the eye of the axe head and allowed for its retrieval.

As a side note, I am ALL FOR the super-natural actions of God and in no way do I disavow God's miracles. I just hold that God does not have to set aside or otherwise fail to honor any natural law to cause a miracle -- He is BETTER than that -- and also He knows the laws He created to govern the operation of the cosmos better than any of us, and so He can take them to His advantage in ways we can not yet even begin to fathom.

Not at all. But at the end of the day, everything created is nothing more than information FROM GOD that carries with it the divine instructions that cause energy, mass, matter, etc., to exist just as He deems.

If you will check the latest current theories that are being promulgated in the sub-atomic and cosmological disciplines you will soon find that science is finally starting to catch up to what God has known (and told us) all along.