Posted on 09/30/2005 1:35:58 PM PDT by jb6
You are not getting my point. The point is that every one approaches science with a philosophy, i.e. with certain presuppositions that emanate from one's total worldview. A naturalist approaches science with the prsupposition that God doesn't exist and that neodarwinism is true, therefore that scientist will look at every single scientific experiment through that lens and only a naturalistic conclusion is possible. WORLDVIEW is everything. Not all science is created equal, and not all sciece is legitimate. Only a scientist who has the Christian worldview is capable of knowing true science. That excludes all neodarwinists.
You are not getting it. My point was that the big unifying scientific theories (gravity, laws of motion, cosmology) were all made by Christians. Gun powder is a small discovery.
Excellent article, jb6!!! Have just scanned it quickly, but will be meditating it further. Thank you so much for posting it!
Thank you so much for the heads up to this engaging article!
I am not on this thread to debate what science says, as it has no bearing on my philosophies or spiritual beliefs.
I've told you what I believe and how I came to believe the way I do. I would like to ask you who taught you about the Bible, and who told you it was true.
Ping for later reading
Scripture is true because the Holy Spirit tells me it is. However, Scripture confirms what the Holy Spirit says, and when it doesn't, then that voice may not be the Holy Spirit. In the case of theistic evolution, scripture confirms none of it.
So, if you ask God if the Bible is true and He says yes, then it is true. But if He says no, then it wasn't him. So why bother asking if you will only accept one answer? And how does that allow God the chance to correct possible misinterpretations of those that taught their understanding of the Bible to you?
Bottom line is you believe because someone else told you to, and you are not allowed to disbelieve them. You are either lazy or afraid. Either way you have no faith of your own.
That's the fundamental fallacy of the creationists. Evolutionary theory is not atheistic. Indeed, many of us practicing Christians are both Christian and scientists, namely we believe in the overwhelming evidence of evolution.
But, the canonical attack of the creationists is that everyone who disagrees with them is an atheist. (And you say you don't believe in ad hominen attacks)
I can only laugh at this.
The sheer arrogance and narcissism of such a statement is matched only by, well, many of the rest of the statements you have made on these threads. In your view, my Christianity is questionable because I don't subscribe to your particular view of it. Indeed, you have a rather undeveloped and puerile view of Christianity.
Such arrogance invites the very derision you seem to object to.
There are many on these threads that have argued both sides of this issue intelligently and well. You are simply not among them. But I might suggest that you read for a while and learn something.
If you want to believe in godless mindless undirected processes that uses natural selection and mutation -- and this is precisely what the leading evolutionists like Gould and others say it is.
That is just flat out FALSE! Tell that to Thomas Huxley (and his progeny), Gould, Crick, and almost any other renowned darwinist or materialist or naturalist (as opposed to SUPER-naturalist) who ever lived. Not only so, but Stalin, Hitler, Nietzsche, Mao Tse Tung, Castro, Pol Pot and all the other atheistic mass murderers who ever lived also believed it was a godless process.
The bible is true because it has proven to be true through the tests of prophecy, preserved manuscripts, archeological evidence, the life and death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, who also said the bible was the Word of God. If a Spirit told me the bible wasn't true, that spirit is obviously a liar and it is not the Holy Spirit. God's spirit NEVER disagrees with the Word of God. N-E-V-E-R.
I will say again: Any claim or teaching that does not jive with the bible IS A LIE.
In all fairness, I fully believe neither the Biblical authors nor those who follow its words ever literally meant it to mean the Earth was flat. But this brings up two points: first, that it is a mistake to expect every single word of the Bible to be completely literal. Second, the case that someone could perpetrate a misconception about the literal word in the Bible is the very reason why the Christian solution is to pray about the passage in question.
As a final note, please accept my apology if ever I gave the impression that I suggested praying to find out if the Bible itself was true. My only intent here was to suggest using prayer when the case of confusion regarding some specific passage may arise.
Have you seen this ping?
Way too long for me, MarMema. The jibberish I get is actually Russian text that is perfectly legible in the Preuivew window. At any rate, what does Orthodoxy have to do with creationism?
Too long for me too! In any event, I never felt I had a dog in this fight anyway.
The meaning of the biblical text should be interpreted is to be interpreted in the context the author intended. Sometimes the author intends metaphor, sometimes the author means it to be taken literally. When in doubt, a passage should be confirmed using other biblical passages. Any interpretation that does not agree with the internal confirmation of the bible itself is a false interpretation. It depends upon the context. Context, context, context. The creation story was not intended by the author to be allegorical. If you allegorize that, then where do you stop in Genesis? Is Noah and the flood story allegory (even though Jesus spoke of it in a literal sense?), how about Abraham and Isaac? What about Joseph? Tower of Babel?
NO, I am convinced that the author and people like him come up with this stuff because they believe that EVOLUTION must be true, therefore the bible must be interpreted to allow for it. That is called EISEGESIS. Here is a revealing fact: No one who has not been exposed to naturalism and evolutionary teachings would interpret the bible this way -- simply because there is not a HINT of evolution in there.
In order to make it happen, words and meanings have to be tortured and twisted, as we see the author do.
As I already explained, "literal" simply means one mus interpret the passage as the writer intended.
Mormons tell their newbies to read and pray about the book of Mormon and the truth of the book will be confirmed by a "burning in the bosom." According to your criteria then, the book of Mormon must be true. After all, they pray about it! Feelings are no confirmation of the truth of scripture. Any teachiing that contradicts scripture is false teaching. Period. Scripture is the confirmation of the truth of scripture.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.