Why I believe God Created Life.

[Scimitar]

Outhouse. I feel it would be unfair to ask for scientific terms in a book when science wasn't even a done thing in that time in history. As for your claim that it's a bad interpretation... I would refute that with the fact that in all ages the interpretation actually makes sense given the context and the time frame the book was revealed in.

Are you playing ignorant to thus fact on purpose?

 

[Skwim]

so that people will fear him."

I find that as a terrible embarrassing excuse.

Considering that god created evil, I think wanting people to fear him is simply keeping in character.

 

[outhouse]

Outhouse. I feel it would be unfair to ask for scientific terms in a book when science wasn't even a done thing in that time in history

It is not about how it was interpreted when it was written.

It sbout those who pervert history and reality by using a literal interpretation, which is not the original context.

 

[outhouse]

Considering that god created evil, I think wanting people to fear him is simply keeping in character.

Sure.

Many read that into the whole picture.

The OT god is one of the most barabaric concepts I have ever read about. No man in history has come close to the evil he is said to have committed.

The NT goes into a differnet direction.

Its all in the interpretation

 

[rusra02]

Considering that god created evil, I think wanting people to fear him is simply keeping in character.

This is way off topic, but OK: Habakkuk 1:13 says of Jehovah "Your eyes are too pure to look on what is evil, And you cannot tolerate wickedness." Does it make sense that God would create something he cannot stand to look at, something he cannot tolerate? Rather, as Job 34:10 affirms:"It is unthinkable for the true God to act wickedly, For the Almighty to do wrong!" What is evil has been brought about by wicked creatures that turned to wrongdoing to satisfy their own selfish desires, IMO. (James 1:13-15) Much of the suffering today is caused by evil done by men and women.

 

[rusra02]

Not correctly.


Only if you choose to turn your back to credible science and use a bad interpretation.

I believe the Bible harmonizes with proven science. What it does not harmonize with is the unproven theory that so-called "natural selection" and gene mutations brought forth all the varieties of living creatures.

 

[rusra02]

Sure.

Many read that into the whole picture.

The OT god is one of the most barabaric concepts I have ever read about. No man in history has come close to the evil he is said to have committed.

The NT goes into a differnet direction.

Its all in the interpretation

You've been listening to Richard Dawkins again, haven't you?

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I believe the Bible harmonizes with proven science. What it does not harmonize with is the unproven theory that so-called "natural selection" and gene mutations brought forth all the varieties of living creatures.

What is proven science? And what experience do you have in science to discuss it?

 

[Skwim]

This is way off topic, but OK: Habakkuk 1:13 says of Jehovah "Your eyes are too pure to look on what is evil, And you cannot tolerate wickedness." Does it make sense that God would create something he cannot stand to look at, something he cannot tolerate? Rather, as Job 34:10 affirms:"It is unthinkable for the true God to act wickedly, For the Almighty to do wrong!" What is evil has been brought about by wicked creatures that turned to wrongdoing to satisfy their own selfish desires, IMO. (James 1:13-15) Much of the suffering today is caused by evil done by men and women.

Yeah, I know how your thinking goes: If it don't fit my theology

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."
(Isaiah 45:7)
​

ignore it.

Convenient to be sure, but hardly convincing, and far from impressive.

Moreover, the Bible expressly says to fear god:

Ecclesiastes 12:13 -
"Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this [is] the whole [duty] of man."​

 

[viole]

Much of the suffering today is caused by evil done by men and women.

And tsunamis.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Outhouse. I feel it would be unfair to ask for scientific terms in a book when science wasn't even a done thing in that time in history. As for your claim that it's a bad interpretation... I would refute that with the fact that in all ages the interpretation actually makes sense given the context and the time frame the book was revealed in.

Science is just a methodology to find out how things work. God does not need to be a scientist to explain how things work, since He created those things, allegedely. He can simply say how things are.

To say that Adam was the first man does not require any equations if you are God, does it?

In other word, saying that the Bible can be excused for lack of scientific knowledge at that time is equivalent to say it can be excused because whoever wrote it did not have a clue of what he was talking about,

Ciao

- viole

 

[rusra02]

Yeah, I know how your thinking goes: If it don't fit my theology

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."
(Isaiah 45:7)
​

ignore it.

Convenient to be sure, but hardly convincing, and far from impressive.

Moreover, the Bible expressly says to fear god:

Ecclesiastes 12:13 -
"Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this [is] the whole [duty] of man."​

Isaiah 45:7 has been discussed elsewhere in this forum. Those interested can do a search on Isaiah 45:7 to pull up those threads.

Yes, it is entirely proper and wise to fear the true God. He has limitless power and God has promised to use that power to save his people and destroy the wicked. (2 Thessalonians 1:6,7)Thus, a healthy fear of displeasing God, a reverential awe of him, is entirely appropriate. (Luke 12:4,5) At the same time, I believe an appreciation of his love, kindness, and mercy draws us to God, as to a loving Father we would never want to disappoint. (John 3:16)

 

[rusra02]

And tsunamis.

Ciao

- viole

Yes, and earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, etc.

 

[viole]

Yes, and earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, etc.

And viruses, which could not have been possibly evolved nor having been created.

Ciao

- viole

 

[rusra02]

Science is just a methodology to find out how things work. God does not need to be a scientist to explain how things work, since He created those things, allegedely. He can simply say how things are.

To say that Adam was the first man does not require any equations if you are God, does it?

In other word, saying that the Bible can be excused for lack of scientific knowledge at that time is equivalent to say it can be excused because whoever wrote it did not have a clue of what he was talking about,

Ciao

- viole

I believe the Bible is accurate in what it says; It is not a science book, true, but I believe it tells the truth, and thus is in agreement with proven scientific facts.

 

[viole]

I believe the Bible is accurate in what it says; It is not a science book, true, but I believe it tells the truth, and thus is in agreement with proven scientific facts.

You call Adam, a scientific fact?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Gordian Knot]

I believe the Bible is accurate in what it says; It is not a science book, true, but I believe it tells the truth, and thus is in agreement with proven scientific facts.

From my perspective, the problem with this statement is in how it starts: "I believe". Anybody can choose to believe anything they want. The rub is that a personal belief is not evidence when one is making a statement that can never be proven true or false.

This is the Grand Canyon sized gap between science and religion. Scientific statements can start with "I believe" but there has to be a following "because of evidence that has stood the test of scrutiny" clause.

Anyone who says "I believe" just because, even if it were a scientist, is not making a statement that can carry any credibility.

 

[starless]

Much of the suffering today is caused by evil done by men and women.

How about HIV, the Ebola virus, the Plague: all created by our beloved and benevolent Lord?

How about those parasitic worms, also created by our good god, whose life-cycle involves burrowing into the eyes of children in Africa and causing blindness?

How about babies born with fatal genetic defects, cancers or other terminal diseases?

 

[Ouroboros]

This is the Grand Canyon sized gap between science and religion. Scientific statements can start with "I believe" but there has to be a following "because of evidence that has stood the test of scrutiny" clause.

Anyone who says "I believe" just because, even if it were a scientist, is not making a statement that can carry any credibility.

Just wanted to interject something here. Not saying that you're totally wrong, but there are several parts to science.

One is the facts, the observations, evidence, etc. That's unquestionable.

Then we have conclusions from the evidence, and sometimes it's based on probability more than actual factual. So sometimes there's a bit of "I believe this to be the best explanation to this evidence." Something like that.

 

[outhouse]

I believe the Bible is accurate in what it says; It is not a science book, true, but I believe it tells the truth, and thus is in agreement with proven scientific facts.

:biglaugh:


Wow

There is nothing about the origins of humans in the bible that has ever been proven to be accurate scientifically.


Evolution is fact.

Let it be known.

Absense of evidence, is only an appeal to ignorance, and does not, nor can it, dictate what really happened for our human origins that is scientifically understood.

Faith does not replace science, or history or reality.

There has never been a place for any mythology or deity to be attributed, to any aspect of human origins with any credibility what so ever, with such clear scientific facts that leave no doubt about human evolution.

IAP - IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution

We agree that the following evidence-based facts about the origins and evolution of the Earth and of life on this planet have been established by numerous observations and independently derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines. Even if there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change, scientific evidence has never contradicted these results:

•In a universe that has evolved towards its present configuration for some 11 to 15 billion years, our Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago.
•Since its formation, the Earth – its geology and its environments – has changed under the effect of numerous physical and chemical forces and continues to do so.
•Life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago. The evolution, soon after, of photosynthetic organisms enabled, from at least 2 billion years ago, the slow transformation of the atmosphere to one containing substantial quantities of oxygen. In addition to the release of the oxygen that we breathe, the process of photosynthesis is the ultimate source of fixed energy and food upon which human life on the planet depends.
•Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin.