The Bible and Nature

[truthpls]

Not your god. The Greek gods perhaps.

The God who foretold Alexander and other kings and kingdoms. Proof positive.

 

[trophy33]

Not this nonsense again. Sigh. It's an ad dressed up as an essay.

Is there something wrong with my claims - "Our physical reality is a mental construct, we live in a quantum world. As colors, space or time we experience do not exist outside of our mind, so also the physical world. We live in a spiritual, non-physical reality."?

You just dismissed the provided article, calling it nonsense (not sure why), but said nothing about my post.

So far, it seems that the current scientific discoveries are much more compatible with the Bible than with the classic materialism.

 

[Estrid]

You know I belive in god, I belive because human DNA if it could be stretched out could reach sun and back to earth 4 times. Just the earth & humanity is to far complex to come about buy chance much less the Universe. Now there is wisdom in the bible...but if you take everything in the bible literally, the universe is less than 10.000 years old...we can prove that is not true. the flood happened 4300 years ago and the waters covered the earth by several miles. There was know world flood 4300 years ago...you can prove it. If the flood happened the pyramids would not be there, that by iteself is proof. Now have there been massive floods of almost biblical level...yeah. Were the black seas is today it was at one time a city, the ice from the last ice age melted and the water rushed in. Considereing human civilization started in the part of the world odds are that is the basis for the flood story. I swear if there was line in the bible that 2+2 = 100. Chrisitan would argue it, there is intellegent arguments for the existance of a higher force, god, aliens or whatever. I have know doubt that there is a higher power. But I am not a child anymore, just because I do not take everything in the bible litterally does not mean I do not belive

If it matters to you, the length of a human DNA
strand is less than three meters, and there is no
underwater city in the Black Sea. Some of your other
statements dont match known facts.

As to the "too complex" , or its evil twin "irreducible
complexity" / ID, thats not really very logically satisfactory.

Its employing the old argument from incredulity thing to
" prove" a predetermined conclusion.

Its up to you of course to work through the issues
that arise regarding "Faith" being no longer needrd.

I agree and heartilly aprove your approach of not
leaving rational thought and science at the church door,.

I wish a few more would. Though I am no Christian its
painful to see people besmitch and hold up for ridicule
what is in its corec a noble faith.

Im just thinking thoigh that if you wush to encourage
others away from ignorance, be careful not to lose them
through poor logic and garbled facts.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Is there something wrong with my claims - "Our physical reality is a mental construct, we live in a quantum world. As colors, space or time we experience do not exist outside of our mind, so also the physical world. We live in a spiritual, non-physical reality."?

There is no evidence in physics for *any* kind of spiritual anything. None.

You just dismissed the provided article, calling it nonsense (not sure why), but said nothing about my post.

I've had long and annoying conversations with the same Aussie about this and he has twice brought up this very essay. I'm rather sick of that discussion. (The essay appears in the opinion section of a popular science magazine. It is not a scientific argument and the author is clearly trying to sell a book that expands on his argument.)

So far, it seems that the current scientific discoveries are much more compatible with the Bible than with the classic materialism.

I detect a general non-awareness of basic science in addition to recent discoveries. No bibles are needed to understand any of them.

 

[Estrid]

I'm struggling to understand how what the Earth is telling us about itSelf is faith based. It's all right there. The Earth can not lie. All that's going on is reading what is right in front of us with in the Earth.

Too bad that so few can read.
And somehow confuse their ignorant lazy
illiteracy with faith.

Maybe its the appeal of being able-
by doing nothing at all- to be a good
soldier of god AND know more than
any scholar on earth.

 

[AV1611VET]

Maybe its the appeal of being able-
by doing nothing at all- to be a good
soldier of god AND know more than
any scholar on earth.

And who spearheaded that appeal?

Stephen Hawking was the most influential know-it-all. In his 1988 mega-bestseller A Brief History of Time, Hawking predicted that physicists would soon find an “ultimate theory” that would explain how our cosmos came into being. He compared this achievement to knowing “the mind of God.” This statement was ironic. Hawking, an atheist, wanted science to eliminate the need for a divine creator.

Maybe that's why you keep bringing up your disgust for those whom you think "know more than any scholar on earth"?

It's because scholars on earth are comparing themselves to knowing the mind of God.

 

[trophy33]

There is no evidence in physics for *any* kind of spiritual anything. None.

Its a well established truth in science that the nature of our reality is immaterial. Immaterial is called "spiritual" in the Christian vocabulary.

When we take any materia and divide it, we will get only probability waves and emptiness, after many steps.

I've had long and annoying conversations with the same Aussie about this and he has twice brought up this very essay. I'm rather sick of that discussion. (The essay appears in the opinion section of a popular science magazine. It is not a scientific argument and the author is clearly trying to sell a book that expands on his argument.)

OK, I just googled it a minute before creating my post. Its not important for my point. There are plenty of others, like:

Our Universe Isn’t Locally Real | Penn State - Presidential Leadership Academy (PLA)

sites.psu.edu

I detect a general non-awareness of basic science in addition to recent discoveries. No bibles are needed to understand any of them.

I did not claim that "bibles" (sic) are needed to understand scientific discoveries. I claimed that the current scientific discoveries are much more compatible with Bible than with the classic materialism.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Its a well established truth in science that the nature of our reality is immaterial. Immaterial is called "spiritual" in the Christian vocabulary.

When we take any materia and divide it, we will get only probability waves and emptiness, after many steps.

And if you think this has anything to do with the "spritual" you are just plain wrong.

 

[truthpls]

And if you think this has anything to do with the "spritual" you are just plain wrong.

You might have something there. When people die they are still who they are and meet parents and etc who are still who they are. Describing these eternal beings as a probability wave seems wrong.

 

[childeye 2]

There is no evidence in physics for *any* kind of spiritual anything. None.

What about brain chemistry? It's provable that what we believe as true creates an emotion. Compassion and wisdom are just as observable as cold-heartedness and foolishness.

 

[truthpls]

What about brain chemistry? It's provable that what we believe as true creates an emotion. Compassion and wisdom are just as observable as cold-heartedness and foolishness.

While the spirits affect the chemistry it seems strange to call the chemistry itself spiritual. The chemicals are seen, the spirit that affects them is unseen.

 

[Estrid]

What about brain chemistry? It's provable that what we believe as true creates an emotion. Compassion and wisdom are just as observable as cold-heartedness and foolishness.

What is "spiritual"?

 

[childeye 2]

While the spirits affect the chemistry it seems strange to call the chemistry itself spiritual. The chemicals are seen, the spirit that affects them is unseen.

What is "spiritual"?

I appreciate both of these posts.

In response to Estrid I would point out that in scripture the term "spirit" essentially carries the same meaning as "emotion", or a "disposition". The term denotes that which animates or moves a person internally in matters pertaining to what is heartfelt. Hence, scripture speaks of experiencing a spirit of joy or the spirit of wisdom.

In response to truthpls, I agree it's strange to think of spirits as chemicals or chemicals as spirits. I'm not saying heroin is happiness. I'm not sure it's always accurate to say that the spirits/emotions affect the chemistry and not the other way around, since the flesh is hardwired to avoid discomfort. But I could see how being around a cheerful person could have an affect on the mood of another person. In such an instance it could be said that the spirit of one person affected the brain chemistry of another person.

So, in my experience and for my intents and purposes in furthering the Gospel, it's more accurate to articulate it as what we believe to be true affects our brain chemistry, which we then experience as an emotion or spirit. While the chemicals can be seen, so also can the emotions be experienced and observed in body language and one's mental well-being.

 

[dlamberth]

What is "spiritual"?

I keep seeing mental concepts, and ideas brought up as "spiritual". I call that kind of thinking "pseudo-spirituality". For something to be spiritual, a person has to actually experience the phenomenon. With out that experiences, the best one can do is to roughly point towards some mental concepts or ideas they may have.

 

[truthpls]

I appreciate both of these posts.

In response to Estrid I would point out that in scripture the term "spirit" essentially carries the same meaning as "emotion", or a "disposition". The term denotes that which animates or moves a person internally in matters pertaining to what is heartfelt. Hence, scripture speaks of experiencing a spirit of joy or the spirit of wisdom.

Jesus was a spirit and physical when He rose from the dead. One would not say He was an 'emotion'. Paul (or a friend) went in the spirit to visit heaven. It was not a disposition or emotion that visited heaven. Angels are not 'ministering emotion'. Etc

In response to truthpls, I don't think it's an accurate depiction to say that the spirits/emotions affect the chemistry. I grant that subtextual exceptions could apply; For example, being around a cheerful person logically could have an affect on the mood of another person. In such an instance it could be said that the spirit of one person affected the brain chemistry of another person.

It also could be said the spirit that made them happy is what was contagious.

But in my experience, and for my intents and purposes in furthering the Gospel, it's more accurate to articulate it as what we believe to be true affects our brain chemistry, which we then experience as an emotion or spirit.

God lives in us. He affects us. Really.

While the chemicals can be seen, so also can the emotions be experienced and observed in body language as well as one's mental well-being.

The spirit cannot be seen it is unseen. It works through people. The cause is the spirit, not someone's mental powers.

 

[childeye 2]

Jesus was a spirit and physical when He rose from the dead. One would not say He was an 'emotion'. Paul (or a friend) went in the spirit to visit heaven. It was not a disposition or emotion that visited heaven. Angels are not 'ministering emotion'. Etc

It also could be said the spirit that made them happy is what was contagious.

God lives in us. He affects us. Really.

The spirit cannot be seen it is unseen. It works through people. The cause is the spirit, not someone's mental powers.

I sense you misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm saying that in Christianity the Eternal power is comprehended as a self-sacrificing Love witnessed to on the cross of Jesus. Therefore, I see God's Holy Character there as well as the power of the resurrection. So, what if Paul's spirit was caught up to heaven, that doesn't mean God's breath doesn't animate us.

 

[truthpls]

I sense you misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm saying that in Christianity the Eternal power is comprehended as a self-sacrificing Love witnessed to on the cross of Jesus.

No it was the Person of God who was Jesus. Not some quality.

Therefore, I see God's Holy Character there as well as the power of the resurrection. So, what if Paul's spirit was caught up to heaven, that doesn't mean God's breath doesn't animate us.

It shows that a person's actual spirit was brought far away. Not some mental vibes.

 

[childeye 2]

No it was the Person of God who was Jesus. Not some quality.

I don't see those as mutually exclusive. God is Spirit and according to scripture that which animates us, give us life/sentience. The point is that as a Christian I testify to an incorruptible Love that caused me to believe through the power of the cross. I believe Jesus sacrificed his flesh and blood out of a Love that is Eternal, and he is therefore trustworthy.

16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man;

17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,

18 May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height;

19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

20 Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us,

It shows that a person's actual spirit was brought far away. Not some mental vibes.

Well, I don't know what far away means. I picture Paul sitting somewhere and he had what some might call an out of body experience. "Mental vibes" definitely would not be a description I would ever use.

​

 

[truthpls]

I don't see those as mutually exclusive. God is Spirit and according to scripture that which animates us, give us life/sentience.

Right, chemicals do not do the animating and chemicals are not spirits or spiritual.

The point is that as a Christian I testify to an incorruptible Love that caused me to believe through the power of the cross. I believe Jesus sacrificed his flesh and blood out of a Love that is Eternal, and he is therefore trustworthy.

Yes

Well, I don't know what far away means. I picture Paul sitting somewhere and he had what some might call an out of body experience.

No more than John had some mental experience in Patmos. He was TAKEN to heaven.

"Mental vibes" definitely would not be a description I would ever use.

Then be clear, because talking about a state of mind, chemical reactions etc does resemble mental vibes.

spirit​

1 of 2

noun​

spir·it ˈspir-ət

Synonyms of spirit
1
: an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms

2
: a supernatural being or essence: such as
a
capitalized : HOLY SPIRIT

So chemical reaction is not a spirit or scientific evidence of the spiritual.

 

[Hans Blaster]

What about brain chemistry? It's provable that what we believe as true creates an emotion.

As you said -- chemistry.

Compassion and wisdom are just as observable as cold-heartedness and foolishness.

How is that relevant or spiritual?