calling those of science and religion - kind of a rant.

Status
Not open for further replies.

joelhall

Junior Member
Apr 18, 2009
60
3
aylesbury, buckinghamshire
✟15,197.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
'if they persecuted me, they will also persecute you.'

id like to know who else is in a similar circumstance - i find myself in a curious position. allow me to explain...

i am a desciple of jesus, i am also a man of science. i find myself increasingly isolated from both sides through closed-minded bigotry. the following represents just a tiny fraction of my knowledge and belief which i have been searching for virtually my whole life, and will continue to do for the rest of it.

for example, i find myself arguing with religious fanatics who will not except the age of the earth as 4.5 billion years, nor the theory of evolution... then i must be challenged to 'prove' go exists and that genesis doesnt contradict cosmological models of our universe.

why do these people lead lives of such closed-mindedness? why is it so hard for them to accept that greater understanding of both leads us into the same conclusions? it sometimes seems to me that there exists this division just for the sake of their personal human pride, which speaking theologically and psychologically is sinful.

i understand perfectly the principal of free-will, or as it is worded by the bma autonomy. humans do indeed have the right to accept or deny. this power is given to them from above - it is there trough divine will.

the most amazing things is whilst it is sometimes those of low knowledge it is more often those of low intelligence or low patience (which isnt intended as a slur), but always of those who do not see their own faith.

everything i have ever learned in science confirms gods presence. i dont just believe theres a god i know god exists. the worst part is the prejudice from other christians is often worst than that of the athiests (who often claim to believe in science or evolution, though when one delves they often have either an extremely poor understanding of it or its real-world applications). it seems as if both sides take things at face value so much that their pride is the discerning factor, refusing to allow them to believe they are wrong, rather than the system they put their faith in.

when i look around, whether it be the book of genesis, the works of schroedinger, the gospel of thomas, peering through my telescope, or looking at a diagram of a cell, the proof that god exists and lives is clear to see. so why is it people who like to think of themselves as rational or right cannot see beyond their own minds? i even have even read strong anecdotal evidence for the after-life and the near death experiece showing transcendentalism as the most likely cause. and these are not from your usual occult reading sources - from physicists, doctors, etc - the very people athiests claim to revere for their proof (the study carried out by cardiologist p van lommel et al was published in no less a journal as the lancet! 'near-death experiences in survivors of cardiac arrest: a prospective study in the netherlands, van lommel/van wees/meyers/elfferich, lancet, 2001, 358: 2039-45).

granted i left on a bit of a tangent there, though it is so difficult being trapped between two worlds whos only differences should really be admitted to be cosmetic. and so i find myself as the lost sheep who is trying to serve two masters in name only.

two quotes keep me certain of my path:

'seek and you shall find...' i imagine everyone here knows this quote. i do not just accept what men through aged and tainted texts tell us of jesus but i also seek for better understanding of him, his word and of everything that exists, and not only through ancient scripture.

however, the other quote is one not known by all christians:

'science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind'. these are the words of albert einstein, a jew. he is more famous for special and general relativity of course, as well as his refuting statement of principles underlying quantum mechanics: 'god does not play dice with the universe'.

what these two sets of words - knowledge - tell me is that science and religion are two sides of the same coin. not only that but to accept one and refute the other is a folly which prevents the person ever understanding what god has laid out in front of us.

the great architect, jehwah, god, cosmological constant, mother nature, allah, the quanta - the many names you could apply is large. but it all amounts to the same thing. there is a great power larger than any of us. under all these names we know it to be ever-present, all-powerful, all-knowing and the shaper of everything that is, was and will be. it is the defining element of all creation, yet many choose not to believe fully, only as much as suits them. it deserves love, and it deserves rspect. it is the life-force all around you whichever way you turn, wherever and whenever you might be. its presence is always felt, and always exists. in fact it exists in everything and nothing can break its divine laws. this is god.

'jesus said. 'if your leaders say to you 'look, the kingdom is in heaven,' then the birds will precede you. if they say to you 'it is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. rather, the kingdom is inside you and it is outside you.'
- the gospel of thomas.

to claim that the scriptures are not to be taken totally literally is called blasphemy, as is to refute scientific evidence. these two opposing churches of man will war between themselves for their own sakes, denying the other, like the hypocrites in the temples jesus spoke of. if you deny the other you are denying god, and to do so means one can never open their minds completely, therefore they can never open their hearts or souls to truth.

this is the persecution i face. neither side wants to hear beyond themselves, and to try to be on the dividing line is tough, though one cannot shrink from gods work, love and knowledge.

if youve stuck around this long, thanks for listening. i will no doubt continue to fly in the face of the fanatics. if you anyone else feels the same i hope its helpful at least to know you are not alone.

god be with you (god never leaves you).
 

JediMobius

The Guy with the Face
Jan 12, 2006
1,592
112
39
Beer City, Michigan
✟10,618.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
The way I reconciled the account in Genesis with cosmology is pretty simple, but not everyone will be able to grasp it. Not that I'm saying I'm some genius, it really should have dawned on me sooner. The relativity of time! It's so simple that evening and morning to God, before man was even created, could be any length of time relative to our perception of it. Further, the 24-hour cycle wouldn't have begun until the earth was actually created. I take the formless, void earth to mean the universe - the collection of all matter in that one mustard seed that God worked across those 6 days into creation as we know it. One of the crucial steps to interpreting a literal young earth is whatever verse it is that says "to God a thousand years is like a day" but that's the thing, it says "like" not that it literally is, God really just wants us to put it in perspective. A day to God is longer than any man has ever lived. For all we know, we're still in God's 7th day.

The other interesting thing about the relativity of time is that God's work could have taken much less than billions of years, but relative to our observation of those past events, it translates to a longer period of time. The higher velocity one travels, the less time goes by for that one, to the degree that an astronaut who traveled through space is actually younger than his brother who remained on earth. Imagine God and even the angels moving across our universe. A man's entire life goes by and yet, God hasn't even begun his day.
 
Upvote 0

joelhall

Junior Member
Apr 18, 2009
60
3
aylesbury, buckinghamshire
✟15,197.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
thank you for your reply :)

yes, this is correct, the yardstick by which we measure time is based simply from our own view. this observation is meaningless in events close to the big bang, therefore correct measurement of time is impossible. days, simply is an easy way to separate the different periods of creation. god (as yet un-named in science) did create the universe in seven 'days'; these are not earth days though. our days are of course based on the rotation of the earth.

the term 'day' is still used to refer to an era as a single period (as in 'back in my day', 'during henry the fifths day', etc).

as everyone knows (or has heard of), e=mc2 (squared), where e is energy, m is mass, and c is the speed of light. this equivication of mass and energy shows that as one approaches the speed of light, the mass of the body increases drastically, as it requires energy. the only exception to this is the photon (light). this mass in the particle (referred to as the higgs/higgs-boson/god particle, is still a matter of conjecture, and has not yet been discovered (though we are narrowing down where to look). this is the on of the great searches for god. whether the one who disovers this is the second christ we cannot say - we know not when nor where this event may happen, nor if this will definitely herald the 'big toe' (theory of everything).

there is also the dark matter/energy. this is of course the true energy of god, the unseen, always present fabric of our universe. we then have many other problems, such as black holes, anti-matter and so forth. to list them all here and their meanings would of course contradict the teaching to 'seek' the answers, it would also be vastly time consuming as i have not yet scratched the surface. however as time goes on we get closer to god, and closer to seeing his kingdom. soon this could all become apparent.

of course god is everywhere, no matter where we look!

the void you talk of, we often refer to as a singularity - single, dimensionless (i.e. shapeless), black hole, where the laws of our universe do not exist). time did also not exist prior to the big bang, it is linked to our physical universe. it truly was a void without form, a 'wave' of rippling energy (the basis of all matter as the model of the atom shows us). god is the mystery we still have not found.

after this and the formation of stars and space, light and dark, matter and dark energy, call it what you will - we then see the order of beginnings of life on earth, followed by the evolution of the first man (bi-pedal hominid/adam) to the first human being (homo sapiens sapiens/noah) and the ice-age which ensured this family of humans was the only to survive (great flood), along with a rough proportional time-line.

this is all in the bible in black and white, as it is in all my scientific books, journals and study texts. (needless to say i read the whole bible and those science books in this way).

this is also why i understand the greatest scientists as the prophets of our age, who teach us of god - men like einstein, hawking, bohr, schroedinger and darwin. and of course penzias and wilson, who it could be argued discovered the echos of gods true voice.

as an aside, from my other thread there are three very basic texts everyone should read, which are quite easy to understand (unless you study sciences in which case you will already have a grasp of this):

a brief history of time
schroedingers cat
the theory of evolution

i believe not just every christian, but everyone of faith should read these at the mnimum.

god bless you for accepting gods truth and may yahweh god always be with you.

joel.
 
Upvote 0

JediMobius

The Guy with the Face
Jan 12, 2006
1,592
112
39
Beer City, Michigan
✟10,618.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Oh, thanks for the reading list. . . I was planning on reading a brief history of time along with some other books of hawkings' but I guess I'll have to look into the other two as well. Time is the subject that intrigues me most out of all the mysteries science is shedding light on.
 
Upvote 0

joelhall

Junior Member
Apr 18, 2009
60
3
aylesbury, buckinghamshire
✟15,197.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
i think youll thoroughly enjoy it. sometimes it is claimed to be difficult to grasp, though i think this is rare and really down to how people read (i personally dont think many - if anyone - should have any difficulty). there are two revised illustrated ones however (the latest published last year) which have better information in (and updated of course) and the illustrations should help everyone understand it.

god be with you.
 
Upvote 0

SilverFire

Newbie
May 31, 2009
82
2
The Gothic South, U.S.A
Visit site
✟7,717.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
for example, i find myself arguing with religious fanatics who will not except the age of the earth as 4.5 billion years, nor the theory of evolution... then i must be challenged to 'prove' go exists and that genesis doesnt contradict cosmological models of our universe.

And the age is based upon Carbon-14 dating, which is not entirely accurate. Even more interesting, using other models of dating (say fluoride dating), render other dates. The thing to bear in mind is that you're basing age based upon the decay time of some radioactive isotope, which necessarily engenders a whole raft of guesses -- that we understand the process of decay completely; that we know how much was there to begin with; that other processes didn't cause decay, and on and on. In short, dates are by no means certain and are generally not a good hill to die on.

As for the theory of evolution, let's examine that phrase -- theory. Yes, everyone can agree that it is a theory. As for intermediate forms, where are they? Even Stephen Gould couldn't explain away the pre-Cambrian explosion, and "stairstep evolution" was the best that he could do. Sudden appearance and the stasis doesn't sound like anything evolved, to me.

As for the basic supposition that similarities must be the result of shared ancestors, are we to conclude that Picasso's works must necessary be derived from each other, or can we say that they all bear his signature? Let's not even go into the concept that random mutation of genes is how species obtained differing characteristics, when you have to face the innate and irreducible complexity of structures such as the human eye. If one thing is out-of-place in the eye, it doesn't work. There's no "partial working". It's all or nothing. Darwin, honestly, assumed that cells were a lot simpler than they actually are. He had no clue how complex even the basic structures of life are.

So, if you're looking for an answer as to why so many Christians are "ahem" closed-minded, it's because that the data doesn't fit the theory. The theory of evolution involves a lot of "Darwin's magic wand" and requires a lot of faith given the lack of evidence especially on a macro-evolutionary scale.
 
Upvote 0

Brad2009

Newbie
Feb 10, 2009
990
163
USA
✟9,437.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
And the age is based upon Carbon-14 dating, which is not entirely accurate. Even more interesting, using other models of dating (say fluoride dating), render other dates. The thing to bear in mind is that you're basing age based upon the decay time of some radioactive isotope, which necessarily engenders a whole raft of guesses -- that we understand the process of decay completely; that we know how much was there to begin with; that other processes didn't cause decay, and on and on. In short, dates are by no means certain and are generally not a good hill to die on.

As for the theory of evolution, let's examine that phrase -- theory. Yes, everyone can agree that it is a theory. As for intermediate forms, where are they? Even Stephen Gould couldn't explain away the pre-Cambrian explosion, and "stairstep evolution" was the best that he could do. Sudden appearance and the stasis doesn't sound like anything evolved, to me.

As for the basic supposition that similarities must be the result of shared ancestors, are we to conclude that Picasso's works must necessary be derived from each other, or can we say that they all bear his signature? Let's not even go into the concept that random mutation of genes is how species obtained differing characteristics, when you have to face the innate and irreducible complexity of structures such as the human eye. If one thing is out-of-place in the eye, it doesn't work. There's no "partial working". It's all or nothing. Darwin, honestly, assumed that cells were a lot simpler than they actually are. He had no clue how complex even the basic structures of life are.

So, if you're looking for an answer as to why so many Christians are "ahem" closed-minded, it's because that the data doesn't fit the theory. The theory of evolution involves a lot of "Darwin's magic wand" and requires a lot of faith given the lack of evidence especially on a macro-evolutionary scale.

Nope, Earth age is not based on C-14 dating.

Theory, in a scientific context, doesn't mean what you think it means, and people HAVE to stop saying that.

These things right here NEED to be researched before you say them, especially to unbelievers.

FWIW - I'm not sold on evolution entirely either, but there is definitely some merit to it. Wild conjecture - evolution by natural selection didn't exist before sin and death entered the world. Theistic evolution, IMO, agrees with the Genesis account.
 
Upvote 0

glass_heart

Seek, Serve and Follow Christ
Jun 5, 2009
34
2
United Kingdom
✟7,667.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
It's okay to be annoyed Joel; people really shouldn't just shut down your ideas just because they don't like them or can't undestand them. Unfortunately the world appears to be full of people like that. My advice is to let them get on with it.

In many cases these people are simply afraid to hear what you say, because their beliefs and yours differ so greatly. They are worried that they might have their beliefs challenged in a way that they might not be able to help. Others want you to see it their way and genuinely believe that they are trying to help you by telling you your wrong. I even met one man who reminded me that we (women) had stolen the apple from the tree of knowledge and (women) were therefore unworthy of trying to better ourselves- I haven't yet decided whether he had a point, though I am inclinded to consider him very sexist.

However there is no reason a man of science and a man of God can't be one and the same; as long as you can resolve the conflicts you find (if you find any) why shouldn't you be?
 
Upvote 0

mnphysicist

Have Courage to Trust God!
May 11, 2005
7,696
669
59
South East Minnesota (east of Rochester)
Visit site
✟57,148.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Democrat
Welcome to the middle... religious fanatics on one side, and fanatics who raise evolution to a religion on the other, been there done that. Usually I just step out of such discussions.... its not my gift, albeit if someone doesnt have a closed mind on either side, I'm glad to dialog, but much of the time... for closed minded folks, they built their entire faith structure on one or the other. Thus, to even consider science and faith could be harmonized is something they do not want to hear... its just too dangerous for them. Yet, God works on folks hearts over time, and I have seem folks change.
 
Upvote 0

ruperik

Newbie
Sep 15, 2008
32
5
✟7,677.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Nope, Earth age is not based on C-14 dating.

Theory, in a scientific context, doesn't mean what you think it means, and people HAVE to stop saying that.

These things right here NEED to be researched before you say them, especially to unbelievers.

FWIW - I'm not sold on evolution entirely either, but there is definitely some merit to it. Wild conjecture - evolution by natural selection didn't exist before sin and death entered the world. Theistic evolution, IMO, agrees with the Genesis account.

What is age based on then? I have seen evidence that C-14 is far from accurate (coming from a non-Christian no-less). Basically, this guy was digging for some fossils and found some trees that were between a few thousand years old and a couple hundred thousand. They were in the earth vertical, and the layers around them were dated with the top layer being a couple thousand and the bottom layer being several hundred thousand (not exact numbers, but you get the point).

I do not know what the truth is, but I do know that if God did not want things to be obvious (aka you have to go on faith, not empirical evidence), he is quite capable of creating things however he likes. He holds all the chips, so I choose to trust in the Bible and not evidence that relies on extrapolation to prove (I am aware of the mathematical problems with this as well).
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Brad2009

Newbie
Feb 10, 2009
990
163
USA
✟9,437.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
What is age based on then? I have seen evidence that C-14 is far from accurate (coming from a non-Christian no-less). Basically, this guy was digging for some fossils and found some trees that were between a few thousand years old and a couple hundred thousand. They were in the earth vertical, and the layers around them were dated with the top layer being a couple thousand and the bottom layer being several hundred thousand (not exact numbers, but you get the point).

I do not know what the truth is, but I do know that if God did not want things to be obvious (aka you have to go on faith, not empirical evidence), he is quite capable of creating things however he likes. He holds all the chips, so I choose to trust in the Bible and not evidence that relies on extrapolation to prove (I am aware of the mathematical problems with this as well).

Other radiometric dating methods are used for earth-age determinations. C-14 is an inappropriate method since the 1/2 life is relatively short. You can google this one real easy. C-14 is really only appropriate for dating fossils from the last 100k years or so.
 
Upvote 0
F

freeport

Guest
'if they persecuted me, they will also persecute you.'

id like to know who else is in a similar circumstance - i find myself in a curious position. allow me to explain...

i am a desciple of jesus, i am also a man of science. i find myself increasingly isolated from both sides through closed-minded bigotry. the following represents just a tiny fraction of my knowledge and belief which i have been searching for virtually my whole life, and will continue to do for the rest of it.

for example, i find myself arguing with religious fanatics who will not except the age of the earth as 4.5 billion years, nor the theory of evolution... then i must be challenged to 'prove' go exists and that genesis doesnt contradict cosmological models of our universe.

<snip>

Everybody has different perspectives. Pretty much everyone goes through this sort of thing. We live in diverse nations.

My viewpoints are downright alien compared to yours. I keep them to myself or with the very few who can understand. On many things.

Why would I would to argue with people or tell them things they couldn't understand? Does that mean something?

Truth always wins arguments. Jesus silenced all His enemies.

There is a verse:
'After that they dared not ask Him anymore questions'.

'Knowledge puffs up, love builds up' -- point being... and I am not getting at you, just explaining my perspective, that Paul was right. 'We never really know anything as we should'.

That can be confusing to someone who likes to study. I sure do. For me, knowledge of things are tools to use creatively, but I do not assume experts of any kind have everything right. I treat it like a detective would: I take in evidence and keep evidence as evidence. Sometimes evidence acquits. Sometimes evidence condemns. Some evidence is weightier then other evidence.

I never close doors on knowledge saying "I know, I know". Therefore. I listen to all opinions, not afraid to do so. Different people have different perspectives. They have different evidence. It can be critical to listen to all sides of every case.

Judges do not go into courtrooms and just know everything. They listen to evidence, there are attorneys on both sides. After presentations are made then they make their decision. In real life, we often just keep looking, not weighing evidence as "absolute" -- because apart from God and knowledge of God what is absolute?
 
Upvote 0

iarwain

Newbie
Feb 13, 2009
681
356
✟105,083.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
There are a lot of different ways that the Bible, and Genesis, can be interpreted. Given the scripture "A day is like a thousand years to God", I don't understand why some people so rigidly insist that the days talked about in Genesis are 24 hour periods.

I have my own ideas about Creation, but are they accurate? I always say "I don't know, I wasn't there". Proponents of both science and religion can get so caught up in insisting that their own viewpoint is right that they close their minds (as you say). It would probably be better to have a little humility about the subject and realize we don't know everything, as much as we would like to make it out that we do.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.