Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
If it's really the case that we cannot trust the eyes God gave us, then how can we know that the Bible is correct when we use the same eyes to read it?
BTW, you know that the depravity of man was one of Luther's biggest points, right? I see you are a Lutheran.
That's for another thread as well as the whole depravity point. However I was curious on people's take on the scientist or observer (whom ever may be observing and coming to conclusions) in the lens of what the Bible teaches about the depravity of man - if you don't agree with the depravity of man, then I guess it's not a question for you. (no offense)
BTW, you know that the depravity of man was one of Luther's biggest points, right? I see you are a Lutheran.
Yes, though he and I disagree on some points. I don't believe in geocentrism, for example. He was wrong when it came to concordance and the Bible.
That's for another thread as well as the whole depravity point. However I was curious on people's take on the scientist or observer (whom ever may be observing and coming to conclusions) in the lens of what the Bible teaches about the depravity of man - if you don't agree with the depravity of man, then I guess it's not a question for you. (no offense)
I would suggest that if our minds are truly useless and untrustworthy, then it should be impossible to converge on any one answer in science. No two conclusions would ever agree and instances of multiple attestation would be due to chance or non-existent entirely. The fact that this isn't so tells me that we can trust our brains, at least when it comes to the trivialities of science. The matter of salvation is something else entirely. That is something the human mind cannot work out on its own and must be given from God.
__________________ We can allow satellites, planets, suns, universe, nay whole systems of universes, to be governed by laws, but the smallest insect, we wish to be created at once by special act.
I still believe man is sinful, but I don't believe we're so corrupted that we cannot even trust our God-given eyes. Even the Bible doesn't teach that.
__________________ We can allow satellites, planets, suns, universe, nay whole systems of universes, to be governed by laws, but the smallest insect, we wish to be created at once by special act.
We have things like the pioneer spacecraft and the voyagers. Aren't they in deep space? So if light did behave differently there, wouldn't we expect things like getting their radio signals to us much faster or something?
Both Pioneers are unresponsive. The Voyagers seem to be experiencing parts of the heliopause, but haven't reached it yet.
Originally Posted by sfs
I thought of them, but counted them as still being in near space (not for any obvious reason).
Heliopause or Kuiper belt?
__________________ (The Library of Alexandria) questioned the permanence of the stars, but did not question the justice of slavery - Carl Sagan in Cosmos
Here's my summary of the situation from the perspective of a physicist:
On the one hand, we have a theory (or set of theories) that describe how electromagnetic radiation behaves. The theory predicts the behavior of light in the lab, including quantum entanglement and spooky action at a distance, to ridiculous precision, and is consistent with all observations of deep space. There are multiple lines of evidence supporting the idea that light shows the same behavior in deep space: a direct estimate of the speed of light from the SN1987a echo, the scattering of light from dust, spectral absorption lines in light that has passed through gas, the bending of light by massive objects, as well as a wide range of evidence that all of physics behaves the same for distant objects. According to this theory, light reaching us from deep space has taken thousands to billions of years to get here, depending on how deep the deep space is.
On the other hand, we have the idea that light behaves very differently in deep space, perhaps by speeding up enormously. Supporting this idea we have no theoretical description, no observational evidence whatsoever, no reason offered for the change in behavior between near and deep space, and no explanation for the deep space observations noted above.
As I said before, if you have specific questions about an observation or conclusion, ask them. Otherwise there doesn't seem to be much to talk about.
We have a theory about something about which no precise measurements can be made which uses assumptions that cannot be empirically verified. Versus the statement that I can live with the uncertainty of not knowing exactly how it's done.
The telescope is an aid to the eye but cannot see enough to make any conclusive theories from unless we start guessing what we should be seeing through it by applying our assumptions and earthbound theories to what we do see.
__________________ Great and small they rise and fall but the Lord, He is God forever!!! Ein Englander in Deutschland.
Last edited by mindlight; 3rd October 2009 at 04:15 PM.
If it's really the case that we cannot trust the eyes God gave us, then how can we know that the Bible is correct when we use the same eyes to read it?
I see stars with my eyes. Common sense says I see them in real time just as I see everything else in my experience in that way. It is physicists who tell me not to trust what I see and who suggest that some of those pinpricks of light may have supernovaed and disappeared in the time that it took for their light to reach me. They would probably have also told the Magi to distrust the star that led them to Jesus.
And now in a kind of double bind we are urged to trust what we see through a telescope observing effects of effects at trillions of miles distance as if these observations could ever be considered as reliable as what we see with our eyes each day.
__________________ Great and small they rise and fall but the Lord, He is God forever!!! Ein Englander in Deutschland.
Both Pioneers are unresponsive. The Voyagers seem to be experiencing parts of the heliopause, but haven't reached it yet.
Heliopause or Kuiper belt?
So we have no direct ways of making observations in deep space except for what we see through our various telescopes.
Physicists tell us that 96% of what is out there is not electromagentically visible and yet say we see enough to trust our eyes about what is out there.
__________________ Great and small they rise and fall but the Lord, He is God forever!!! Ein Englander in Deutschland.
Linear Mode
