The Cosmos

[Hekuran]

The velocity of the universe's expansion isn't a control issue; it's just physics; and scientists didn't invent it; they discovered it. The cosmic microwave background (CMB) isn't an invention either. It too is a discovery.

The Bible warns against false science (1Tim 6:20). But not all science is false. For example: science discovered that the Earth's orbit around the Sun isn't a perfect circle, rather, it's an ellipse. In contrast: the so-called Big Bang isn't a discovery, it's a theory; viz: the Big Bang is false science.
_

Hi. Could you give us a bit more on how you distinguish true from false science.

 

[Sue D.]

It's more a question of science agreeing with God's Word. God's Word being the foundation of creation. When science wants to stretch creation into eons of time or ignore the world-wide flood or other Biblical events simply because those events don't 'make sense' scientifically, Then I go with Bible and figure that scientists are merely people who have their agenda's.

And, yes, the Big Bang theory Is simply one of many theories that is false science.

 

[Hekuran]

Most scientists believe that the earth is a globe orbiting the sun, yet the Biblical authors consistently write of the earth as fixed, resting on pillars

For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's,
and on them he has set the world.

 

[Adziilii]

.

Biblical authors consistently write of the earth as fixed, resting on pillars

● Job 26:7 . . He hangeth the earth upon nothing.

When your reference to 1Sam 2:6-8 is examined with care, it's readily seen that the passage isn't talking about the science of the planet, rather; about the management of the planet-- it's politics.

● Dan 4:17 . .The living should know that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men, and gives them to anyone he wishes, and sets over them the lowliest of men.
_

 

[Sue D.]

Hekuran -- and in Scripture there Is the world of figurative speech. And you've included an example of such.

 

[Hekuran]

If you read the Bible to discern how the world is structured, you end up with a consistent scheme: the surface of the earth is a disc resting on immovable foundation, she old is below, the skies are stretched out above, and the sun, moon and stars move across it, God reigns above the skies.

That is very similar to what all other ancient peoples believed.

If the Bible is the final authority in science, we should all believe in a flat earth.

 

[Adziilii]

.
I've seen this kind of thing before. Wiseacres come on Christian forums with their misinterpretations hoping to stump the Bible thumpers and stir up perpetual bull sessions that never get to the bottom of anything.

Correcting their mistakes is futile. It's just a game with these people.
_

 

[Hekuran]

If that's referring to me, I've followed Jesus all my life, and I've been on the forum since before this thread on the cosmos started.

I think what you have written about the relationship between science and the Bible is very problematic. If you are not wanting to discuss further, that's fine. But you ought not go directly for a personal attack.

 

[Adziilii]

.

I've followed Jesus all my life

Webster's defines a Christian as somebody who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ.

According to that definition; it isn't necessary for people to actually believe in Christ's teachings in order to qualify as a Christian; it's only necessary for them to say they do.

People don't even have to know what Christ's teachings are; they only have to say they believe in them.

Nor is it necessary for people to put Christ's teachings into practice in order to qualify as a Christian; it's only necessary to say they believe in them.
_

 

[Hekuran]

If you want to start a thread headed 'let's question Hekuran's salvation', feel free.

Or you could respond - on topic - to the point I made on the nature of the cosmos and the relationship between the Bible and science.

 

[Sue D.]

If you read the Bible to discern how the world is structured, you end up with a consistent scheme: the surface of the earth is a disc resting on immovable foundation, she old is below, the skies are stretched out above, and the sun, moon and stars move across it, God reigns above the skies.

That is very similar to what all other ancient peoples believed.

If the Bible is the final authority in science, we should all believe in a flat earth.

Hekuran -- if you've ever been out in open waters -- or in a plane flying. The earth Does look flat. In fact -- a person needs to get way out in space in order to see a round earth. Otherwise it Does look like a flat spherical planet. A person can't look around a corner. Many years ago in schools, libraries, there was a round globe. Maybe there still Are. A person could turn it around and around and see all the countries, continents, etc. so 'we' knew the earth was like a ball.

I'm thinking it was in Magellen's time that the educated people 'knew' the earth was flat. Until he took off with his ship -- sailed around the world and came back in the opposite direction.

And, yes, God Does reign above the skies -- up in the 3rd heaven.

The 'flat earth' people are those who take a few verses from Scripture and base an entire false belief on them.

I could ask you -- do You believe in Genesis 1 and two regarding the creation? A literal 24 hr / 6 days of creation? Do you believe that the flood in Noah's day was world-wide? Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God ? that He rose again on the 3rd day? Do you believe in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Because most all of these beliefs go Against science. Especially the virgin birth. Do you believe that God is powerful enough to have spoken this world into existence? And the origin of Adam and then Eve. Again -- totally non-scientific.

For you , personally, who Is Jesus?

 

[Hekuran]

Jesus is my Lord and saviour.

I'm not getting any closer to understanding how you decide when to believe the scientist and when to trust the Bible.

+ Literal 6 day creation - trust the Bible
+ Dimensions of the earth - go with the scientist
+ God floods the whole earth in Noah's day - the Bible is authoritive

What criteria do you use?

 

[Sue D.]

Hekuran -- well -- for one thing John 14:6 Jesus Christ telling us that "I (Jesus Christ) am the Way, the Truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father, but by Me."

And Genesis 1;1 "In the beginning God..... created..."

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning, Through Him (not evolution)all things were made; with Him nothing was made that has been made."

And we have 2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."

And God gives us guidelines for living. God's created man and woman to 'be together' and probably have children together ie the next generation. Society says 'if it feels good Do it with whomever a person wants to as long as both are 18 or over. God says a man and woman are to be joined in marriage until one of the mates dies. Society says it doesn't matter -- live with whomever a person wants to for how ever long it's convenient. Society has no-fault divorce. God permits divorce upon adultery or if a believer is abandoned by an unbelieving spouse. God's Word says that a man and another man are Not to 'be together' nor are women to 'be together' with another woman the same way that a man and woman would 'be together' because God hates it -- it's an abomination to Him. So -- does a person follow Society or God's Word.

Do we follow theistic evolution because it's popular ? Or evolutionary thought because higher education pretty much requires it? Or do we follow the very unpopular belief of Genesis creation. Because it Has been suggested that any one with brains is going to believe the scientific world because of all the higher education that the scientists have in the various fields. Who are 'we' to question Them?!

Another question -- do you believe in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. That Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus Christ. Do you believe that? Why or why not.

 

[Hekuran]

Hekuran -- well -- for one thing John 14:6 Jesus Christ telling us that "I (Jesus Christ) am the Way, the Truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father, but by Me."

And Genesis 1;1 "In the beginning God..... created..."

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning, Through Him (not evolution)all things were made; with Him nothing was made that has been made."

And we have 2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."

And God gives us guidelines for living. God's created man and woman to 'be together' and probably have children together ie the next generation. Society says 'if it feels good Do it with whomever a person wants to as long as both are 18 or over. God says a man and woman are to be joined in marriage until one of the mates dies. Society says it doesn't matter -- live with whomever a person wants to for how ever long it's convenient. Society has no-fault divorce. God permits divorce upon adultery or if a believer is abandoned by an unbelieving spouse. God's Word says that a man and another man are Not to 'be together' nor are women to 'be together' with another woman the same way that a man and woman would 'be together' because God hates it -- it's an abomination to Him. So -- does a person follow Society or God's Word.

Do we follow theistic evolution because it's popular ? Or evolutionary thought because higher education pretty much requires it? Or do we follow the very unpopular belief of Genesis creation. Because it Has been suggested that any one with brains is going to believe the scientific world because of all the higher education that the scientists have in the various fields. Who are 'we' to question Them?!

Another question -- do you believe in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. That Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus Christ. Do you believe that? Why or why not.

I believe in the Virgin birth. Please respond to my question: how do you decide when to adopt scientific reasoning, and when to follow the Bible? If you've never given this any thought, or the question doesn't interest you, it's ok to say so.

 

[Sue D.]

I thought I Was answering your question. And I've given your question a lot of thought -- been on various other Forums where the subject has come up. And it's an important question.

The example I shared was with comparing 'scientific' evidence with Genesis creation. Theistic evolution is a compromise between macro evolution and Genesis creation.

Do you believe the Genesis 6 day 24hr days of creation? Or do you believe the day/age theory. As in the passage that says that a thousand years are as a day and a day as a thousand years? That passage is simply saying that there is no 'time' with God. God created 'time' for us / mankind.

There are lots of fields of science incorporated into evolution. The theory of evolutionary development says that over millions of years that sea / water life developed to be partly land and partly water and then entirely land. That somehow a single-celled ameba divided and became two cells which continued to divide and eventually became 'whatever'. Another theory is that there once was a mass of primordial 'soup' that had just the right combo of elements to develop.

Science says that the origins of life aren't known -- but only how 'life' developed into what we have 'today'. My question has always been -- How can 'something' develop without a known origin. The main 'problem' is that 'science' does Not want to give God the credit For starting creation. So People have tried to come up with 'something' to define the starting point.

If you or I all of a sudden found a baby in a blanket on our doorstep, we would not simply pick up that baby and start taking care of it. Because a woman somewhere gave birth to that baby. Maybe she doesn't know who the father is, but she still had help getting that baby. Her egg got mixed with male ***** and the baby on your / my doorstep was the result. So we call the police and they start investigating the source of that life.

The same thing with Our life. We are the result of our parents and going back in history we can trace our heritage. I'm part Swedish and German. People beget people. The same with animals -- they beget each other -- generation by generation. So for some 'experts' to try to go back a few million years to where there was a split in an animal tree. That hominoids were a break-off from a strain of chimps or whatever is plain foolishness. A person can Google evolution and find a great deal of info on how it all came to be. It all sounds / looks very professionally done / organized. And someone went to a lot of time and trouble to do all of that organizing. Which is kind of a shame when a person can go directly to Genesis and learn all about the first man and woman. The when , where's and how's of it all.

But lots of people would rather take the word of a lot of scientists than acknowledge a Being who is over mankind. 'We' tend to want to be our own 'god' , make our own decisions in life and whatever happens, happens. And when 'we' die -- either we simply decay back into nothingness -- which is correct. and that's all there is OR there is an afterlife where everyone ends up in 'heaven'. It's our 'soul' that lives on after our human body dies and goes back to being part of earth. God Did create Adam from the dust of the ground and breath life into him and he became a living soul. OR -- in that afterlife there is either heaven or Hell. And That lasts Forever.

Even in the Old Testament there are various gods and goddesses who are named and worshiped. That's why God told the people in Exodus -- if you're going to worship a 'god', worship the One who Created them. The very beginning of the Ten Commandments.

But getting back to the Bible -- there are many different kinds of literature in the Bible. Some poetry, some history, some stories, lots of symbolism with lots of truth.

There are lots of people , who, when reading, decide that 'that' can't possibly have happened -- so they disregard 'that' part -- or they don't like what another part says -- so, they disregard 'that'.

God has given us His Word for a Reason and 'we' need to be reading it with that mind-set. His Word is Alive and is Convicting which is what keeps some of us out of it.

 

[Hekuran]

Thanks. Here's a simple version of my view.

Good scientific enquiry works by gathering all the relevant observable data and finding the most consistent explanation for what happens.

Science has a fundamental assumption that the world is orderly and functions in predictable ways. Good scientists work hard to rid themselves of their own prejudices and inherited beliefs in order to concentrate purely on the data.

The Bible was written hundreds of years before modern scientific thinking, and the questions we have about nature of time, material and space were of little interest.

Trying to fit science around what the Bible says leads to warped conclusions all round.

I live under the authority of the Bible. The first three chapters of Genesis are the foundation for the whole of our understanding of the nature of God, his character, purposes, how humanity is created in his image and how we stand in relation to God.

Science can't address any of those issues, and Genesis doesn’t offer anything very useful to the scientific questions of and when the world came to be.

 

[Sue D.]

Hekuran -- I've been doing some researching -- I "Googled" evolutionary theory and one of the click into links was "timeline of the evolutionary history" Included in that was a list of Eons of time
Hadeon, Archeon, Proterozoic and Phanerazoic with three subheadings under that.

All of these Eons range in time from 66 million to 440 million years.

In another chart there are several ice ages listed.

There are several long lists of events.

So -- we have Genesis 1- 3 or so telling mankind / us / God's timeline of when various aspects of creation took place. In a matter of a week compared TO the information I've shared from the scientific authorities that present information on Google which give the time range that I've included.

You have access to "Google" to find this same information.

So -- which source is correct?

When scientific reasoning conflicts with God -- I go with God. Having said That -- all the various fields of science have given mankind a great deal in the world of medicine, outer space, technowledgy, etc. We'd be lost without science. But there's Also tremendous pressure in the world of academics to 'yield' to evolutionary thought.

We can look outside and see that 'we' are here. "here" can be beautiful where we can enjoy God's creation AND war-torn countries where there's not much beauty seen. There are countries that have been bombed and people are fleeing for their lives and their basic living is 'existing' in a setting we can't even imagine. But the point is that people and animals Are here. But when a person thinks about it -- evolutionarily speaking, there's no reason For anything To exist. Except that "In the beginning God ... created.

Your last sentence -- that Genesis doesn't offer anything very useful to the scientific questions Of. Well -- maybe think of it This way -- God in His omniscience (all knowledge) knew that people would come up with their theories and He chose to give us the information we Need to refute evolutionary thinking.

 

[Sue D.]

What happened to Adzillii ?

 

[Fragrant Grace]

What happened to Adzillii ?

He's still here @Sue D. Busy on his other threads

Come back here @Adziilii you are missed. :smile:

 

[Hekuran]

Comparing Genesis 1 with what science says about the history of the world ends up doing a disservice to either the Bible or science. They are trying to do completely different things.

Science is about the mechanics. Genesis is about the meaning and purpose of the world.

The creation/evolution debate always seems futile to me.