Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When we take a look at Genesis, many debate whether we should take it as history or simply as a story teaching a specific lesson. As one who sees it as history, I agree there is a lesson there to be learned. That lesson is trusting God's command. Trusting Him and what He has told us. This is something we all can agree with. So when we dive into the story of Adam and Eve, we see the serpent come in and tell Eve something counter to what God told them. What is often missed in this story is what is written in Genesis 3: 6 stating.........
So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate............
There it is. The serpent introduced a word counter to God true enough, but Eve didn't immediately disobey at the suggestion. It was when she saw the tree with her eyes and began contemplating with her mind, that she reasoned within herself it was good to eat the fruit. This deception was one of the eyes, and doing what seemed good to her, and Adam followed suit.
All throughout the Bible we see this from Patriarch to Patriarch. There was victories and there was failure. No one was perfect in keeping God's commands. This was true right up until we get to Jesus. Jesus Himself was tempted by the rebel. The satan tried to get Jesus to doubt God's word that He was the Son of God, by getting Him to look at things. (food, self-preservation, and power) Jesus pushed the satan to the side and told him where he can go. Jesus was the first to fully follow and trust God with His whole heart! That is why He is the Master!!! This is the lesson I find that reverberates throughout Scripture.
So what does this have to do with observable science? That's just it, the lesson we learn is that Eve was deceived because she saw the fruit was good for food, and she probably asked within herself what was wrong with eating it? What is God hiding? Observable science is entirely derived from sight. Good science is about following the evidence where it leads. Because of this fact, I would say it is very likely we can be deceived with it. Let me know your thoughts on this. Do you agree, disagree?
Good science is about following the evidence where it leads. Because of this fact, I would say it is very likely we can be deceived with it. Let me know your thoughts on this. Do you agree, disagree?
Science is watching and recording the patterns of planets, our earth, its atmosphere and our bodies. So as God made the world, God made science - meaning our our physical world runs on regular patterns which can be recorded and predicted. Science is nothing more or less.
Science is generally positive and helpful. But many scientists don't catch their own biases, especially with potential spiritual matters. Instead of staying open and explorative - the very nature of science - they shut down chances to catch the more subtle and sublime matters of spirituality. Even if something might not be able to be shown or cataloged in the usual material ways, there could be insight gained that they won't even allow. In other words, they are selectively scientific.
I couldn't vote in the poll, because none of those options were quite right.
Science is watching and recording the patterns of planets, our earth, its atmosphere and our bodies. So as God made the world, God made science - meaning our our physical world runs on regular patterns which can be recorded and predicted. Science is nothing more or less.
What if the patterns can be misleading? For instance we see the process of how a child is born. And we see how a child grows into an adult. So based on our sight, for any adult we see in the world, we assume they were children at one point. However what if God created a person from scratch today? If we didn't see it, how would we know this particular adult was never a child? Unless God told us, we would assume this adult was a child and had a family like the rest of us. All of it would be false, but we couldn't tell based on observation alone.
Science is generally positive and helpful. But many scientists don't catch their own biases, especially with potential spiritual matters. Instead of staying open and explorative - the very nature of science - they shut down chances to catch the more subtle and sublime matters of spirituality. Even if something might not be able to be shown or cataloged in the usual material ways, there could be insight gained that they won't even allow. In other words, they are selectively scientific.
I couldn't vote in the poll, because none of those options were quite right.
I hear you. I would ultimately say concerning observable science, it is very limiting.
What if the patterns can be misleading? For instance we see the process of how a child is born. And we see how a child grows into an adult. So based on our sight, for any adult we see in the world, we assume they were children at one point. However what if God created a person from scratch today? If we didn't see it, how would we know this particular adult was never a child? Unless God told us, we would assume this adult was a child and had a family like the rest of us. All of it would be false, but we couldn't tell based on observation alone.
God made the laws of science - God made the process/creation of person.
Even Jesus was a baby, with a mother, a father (the Holy Spirit), and a stepfather in Saint Joseph.
Why do you think God would contradict or disregard His universe?
Do you think God is that fickle? Do you think God is willy nilly and changes the physical structure of His creation?
Science is generally positive and helpful. But many scientists don't catch their own biases, especially with potential spiritual matters. Instead of staying open and explorative - the very nature of science - they shut down chances to catch the more subtle and sublime matters of spirituality. Even if something might not be able to be shown or cataloged in the usual material ways, there could be insight gained that they won't even allow. In other words, they are selectively scientific.
I couldn't vote in the poll, because none of those options were quite right.
Science is not concerned with 'spiritual' matters. Science deals with the natural world only. Having said that, many scientists do have some sort of religious beliefs, including Christianity. But the field of science itself cannot be used for inquiring into matters of a spiritual nature. I doubt very much that any scientist would accept the Genesis creation stories as literal. And rightfully so because the creation stories are contrary to what we know to be true.
I don't know how any thinking person of reasonable intelligence could accept the creation stories as true in view of what science has shown regarding the universe and evolution.
God made the laws of science - God made the process/creation of person.
Even Jesus was a baby, with a mother, a father (the Holy Spirit), and a stepfather in Saint Joseph.
Why do you think God would contradict or disregard His universe?
Do you think God is that fickle? Do you think God is willy nilly and changes the physical structure of His creation?
I agree God is orderly, and there is order in what we see. Yet, I believe we have to ask ourselves, is this current creation really the same as God created it? Essentially is what we see actually a fallen creation? If we've learn anything concerning the faith, is that there is something very wrong about the world.
When I look at Jesus, I have another question. If He never went to the cross and took on our sin, would He have died a "natural" death eventually like the rest of us? According to observable science of the world, we see death as a natural process. Yet Jesus was sinless. So would He have died? If not, that would go directly against our science and the order of the world we can see.
So if the world is actually a fallen creation, then its not that God is not orderly, but creation has come out of order because of sin.
So what does this have to do with observable science? That's just it, the lesson we learn is that Eve was deceived because she saw the fruit was good for food, and she probably asked within herself what was wrong with eating it? What is God hiding? Observable science is entirely derived from sight. Good science is about following the evidence where it leads. Because of this fact, I would say it is very likely we can be deceived with it. Let me know your thoughts on this. Do you agree, disagree?
I think Genesis is true history.
Regarding the last paragraph quoted above...
Good science stems from observation.
Bad science stems from creating models and calling it observation.
Science is not concerned with 'spiritual' matters. Science deals with the natural world only. Having said that, many scientists do have some sort of religious beliefs, including Christianity. But the field of science itself cannot be used for inquiring into matters of a spiritual nature.
Well, that's a typical view from the so-called "scientific" community, to excuse and pardon their ways, and opt out of their typical exploring. If spirituality - for lack of better word - is of a cosmic and natural nature, tying in with the universe (as I predict), then it certainly should be in their "court", for review. Maybe spirituality isn't the best word to use, and part of the problem. But we shouldn't be getting hung up on words, as a roadblock to action.
They are obviously too scared and worried about pursuing that, so they put their tails between their legs and rely on lame and faulty excuses (like yours above). The openness and exploratory nature of true science crumbles into a cloud of superficial worries and fears. They're guilty of selective science; promoting it when it is easy, blocking it when it becomes inconvenient.
P.S. I said nothing about religion. Religion should play no role in science. Religion is dictated, maintained, and controlled by man. What I'm talking about is in nature, although it interfaces with us (just as we relate to gravity, radiation, sound, etc.) Maybe we don't have the tools - presently - to fully document and capture those details, but we do have the tools internally to pick up on them. That's at least 50% of the way there, and not to be overlooked and ignored.
Last edited by Thoreau424; 05-02-2024 at 10:53 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is the lesson I find that reverberates throughout Scripture.
