Science sometimes proves Bible right but never wrong

[chaoschristian]

I have spare litmus paper if you need it.

 

[pastorkevin73]

3If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, 4he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions 5and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.



17Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18who have wandered away from the truth.

in both case the passages are specific admonitions to stay clear of teaching that Paul disapproves, and to keep within his teachings.

The first passage referenced is specifically talking about not being a part of a culture that abuses religion by taking advantage of others through the power of preaching and using that as a means of gaining wealth. Basically Paul is saying, don't be a tv evagelist.

The second passage referenced is specifically talking about teachings Paul considers false.

Through what leap of logic are we then to find it sound to apply these passages as an admonition against scientific knowledge in general?

If you really believe scripture is holy, please don't abuse it in this manner.

Paul doesn't state what Hymenaeus and Philetus were teaching. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you know what exactly H & P were teaching.

 

[pastorkevin73]

No it can't. It can provide evidence that fire burns paper, but you can't guarentee 100% that the paper will burn next time you put fire to it. Proof is defined only in mathematics because given a certain set of assumptions you CAN show that a conclusion is 100% true. In any other scientific context, what you end up with is a leading theory supported by evidence. You can look into it via google -- I'm not splitting hairs, this is a major misunderstanding that the general public generally has about science and the word "proof."

You say that only theories that seem to contradict the Bible are stupid, but you still haven't defined how the Bible should be interpreted. Martin Luther found it the height of stupidity to suggest that the Earth revolves around the sun because to him, the idea seemed to contradict the Bible. In reality, what you're calling stupid is a theory that seems to contradict YOUR understanding the of the Bible and as a human (like us all) you are prone to errors. Just because someone (anyone -- myself included) thinks a theory contradicts their understanding of the Bible does not immediately make the theory wrong because their UNDERSTANDING of the Bible might also be wrong.

 

[Carey]

Ah yes, just suggest that somebody who disagrees with you just doesn't have the Holy Spirit in them...

I read my Bible and pray daily for the holy spirit to guide me in my studies and in my daily life. I don't pretend that the Holy Spirit will guide me correctly in ALL matters of Biblical interpretation -- only in those that he (she/it?) feels I need guidance.

I would find it the height of arrogance for one to claim that the holy spirit guides them to perfect theological understanding of all matters pertaining to the Bible. In my opinion it is BECAUSE God doesn't really care what we think about origins or baptism or communion that there are such diverse understandings in Christianity. God values highly our continued loving relationship with him and while I'm sure the Holy Spirit guides many in many ways it's clear to me that unity in the church on such small doctrinal matters is a very low priority compared to our relationship with Christ and witness to the unbelievers!

Note that no theistic evolutionist would EVER claim that science has disproven the Bible. We do tend to claim that science can disprove a particular interpretation of scriptures though.

No I suggest anyone who in the least way thinks mans science or the Bible itself can contradict or prove the Bible ever falible does not have the Holy Spirits love and faith in Gods word and that it is obvious, is'nt it?

 

[Carey]

3If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, 4he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions 5and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.



17Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18who have wandered away from the truth.

in both case the passages are specific admonitions to stay clear of teaching that Paul disapproves, and to keep within his teachings.

The first passage referenced is specifically talking about not being a part of a culture that abuses religion by taking advantage of others through the power of preaching and using that as a means of gaining wealth. Basically Paul is saying, don't be a tv evagelist.

The second passage referenced is specifically talking about teachings Paul considers false.

Through what leap of logic are we then to find it sound to apply these passages as an admonition against scientific knowledge in general?

If you really believe scripture is holy, please don't abuse it in this manner.

those scriptures were not admonition against science in "GENERAL".

It is admonition agaiunst any and` all science that would contradict Gods Holy word the bible "specifically"

1 Timothy 6 :
1 Timothy 6 20Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, 21which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith.
Grace be with you.

 

[Carey]

And last I checked... neither one of us are the Holy Spirit.


Correct



Let's try an experiment... you and I both have an interpretation of the Bible... our interpretations disagree. Which one of us has the Holy Spirit dwelling in us, and which of us have turned from the faith?

The one that doubts the Bible(Gods Holy word)
I do not think would be showing the Holy spirits fruit.
So believing in any way the Bible is falible is doubting Gods power to keep it exactly what he wants it to be.




because he committed the unforgivable sin of disproving you?

That si rediculous why would you say that.

 

[chaoschristian]

those scriptures were not admonition against science in "GENERAL".

Correct. I did not claim this. I however hold that you are claiming this, despite your protestation otherwise.

It is admonition agaiunst any and` all science that would contradict Gods Holy word the bible "specifically"

Incorrect. I provided the context that helps one discern what the passages are talking about. However, you are taking the passages out of context and using them to justify your extra-scriptural position.

These passages aren't even talking about scripture at all, and not only do you attempt to claim that they do, but you also attempt to claim that these passages provide a foundation upon which to build an argument against the findings of science, specifically evolution.

Nonsense.

 

[chaoschristian]

Paul doesn't state what Hymenaeus and Philetus were teaching. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you know what exactly H & P were teaching.

Incorrect. I do not claim to know that Hymenaeus and Philetus taught. I only claim that whatever it was, Paul was against it. I base this claim on the passages I provided.

 

[Deamiter]

That si rediculous why would you say that.

Perhaps because when he cited a theologian who disagreed with you your first reaction was to question whether Luther had the Holy Spirit?

 

[billwald]

Thus farmers are foolish to "proof" their seed before planting because Jesus said that only dead seed can sprout, "Unless a seed fall to the ground and die . . . ."

 

[pastorkevin73]

Incorrect. I do not claim to know that Hymenaeus and Philetus taught. I only claim that whatever it was, Paul was against it. I base this claim on the passages I provided.

Okay, thanks for clarifing.

 

[Carey]

Correct. I did not claim this. I however hold that you are claiming this, despite your protestation otherwise.



Incorrect. I provided the context that helps one discern what the passages are talking about. However, you are taking the passages out of context and using them to justify your extra-scriptural position.

These passages aren't even talking about scripture at all, and not only do you attempt to claim that they do, but you also attempt to claim that these passages provide a foundation upon which to build an argument against the findings of science, specifically evolution.

Nonsense.

Well the csience of evolution has shown that species do Change.

Even humans on average are much larger in just the last few centuries.

But the rediculous theory that Humans evolved from another species contradicts the Bible and is stupid false knowlege. It contradicts the Bible.( this is an example)

This in context is where 1 Timothy 6 and 2 Timothy 2 apply.

 

[Carey]

Perhaps because when he cited a theologian who disagreed with you your first reaction was to question whether Luther had the Holy Spirit?

Well I know quite a bit about Luther.
There are many things avout him that lacked the fruit one would expect to see from the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Of course it is not for me to say for sure whether or not the Holy Spirit were in him though.

 

[Dannager]

But the rediculous theory that Humans evolved from another species contradicts the Bible and is stupid false knowlege. It contradicts the Bible.( this is an example)

It contradicts nothing but an interpretation of the Bible that is false. No amount of whining about how it doesn't jive with your own take on the Bible will make the massive amount of evidence for common descent go away.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Well I know quite a bit about Luther.
There are many things avout him that lacked the fruit one would expect to see from the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Of course it is not for me to say for sure whether or not the Holy Spirit were in him though.

curious statement.
if you decide to talk specifics about these things that you know about Luther that evidence his lack of faith. i'd be interested in following the conversation. so post this as a new thread somewhere on CF appropriate and either PM me the thread url or something similiar. it is a rather odd remark that would be worth pursuing. i've read a number of biographies on Luther and excepting the old RC ones i don't think i've seen this strong of a claim.....

 

[shernren]

Hmmm ... I get accused of lacking in the spiritual department for being an evolutionist all the time. I used to get very peeved about it. But if it puts me in the company of men like Luther, maybe that's reason to get a little less peeved.

 

[Carey]

It contradicts nothing but an interpretation of the Bible that is false. No amount of whining about how it doesn't jive with your own take on the Bible will make the massive amount of evidence for common descent go away.

You know you take the records of when ohhh lets say
anyone from Biblical history died and how old they were.


Ones we have record of the approximate timeline they died.

This can be done with secular methods and records.

Trace back and add the years of the patriarchs in the Bible all the way back to Adam and their ages at death.

This would rule out The whole stupoid theory of Cave men being anything other than an intelligent ape.

Mammoths were probably smarter than todays elephants as well.
All amals would have to be with giant carniverous lizards running around.
But after God wiped them of the earth and started fresh with adam and the garden of eden he planted who I call a test tube man Adam and his clone Eve made from Adams prototype dna.

This was all thought up by God in his UFO.( Heaven )

Revelations 21 : 2And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven
10 So he took me in the Spirit[b] to a great, high mountain, and he showed me the holy city, Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God.

15 The angel who talked to me held in his hand a gold measuring stick to measure the city, its gates, and its wall. 16 When he measured it, he found it was a square, as wide as it was long. In fact, its length and width and height were each 1,400 miles.[c] 17 Then he measured the walls and found them to be 216 feet thick[d] (according to the human standard used by the angel).


Can you imagine a structure this large breaking through the atmosphere?? Now that is what I call the mother of All UFO'S...LOL

 

[Carey]

curious statement.
if you decide to talk specifics about these things that you know about Luther that evidence his lack of faith. i'd be interested in following the conversation. so post this as a new thread somewhere on CF appropriate and either PM me the thread url or something similiar. it is a rather odd remark that would be worth pursuing. i've read a number of biographies on Luther and excepting the old RC ones i don't think i've seen this strong of a claim.....

Oh I will just give you one off the top of my head.

Did you know he celbrated Christmas and even put up a tree??

Do you know where this tradition came from??
Do you think Luther knew where the tradition originated??

The early true church never heard of Christmas. Centuries passed before the large, apostate church ever so gradually began adapting purely pagan practices and mythology to a time they originally called "the epiphany" (relating to Christ's baptism, which they erroneously believed occurred early in January). Later, some writers began urging a celebration at the same time as the pagan winter solstice observances. This was done for the simple reason that so many pagans were already accustomed to "joyous," sometimes "riotous" orgies of feasting at the time of the winter solstice.

Here is just one of many links on the subject.

http://www.mycog.com/christmas.htm

 

[Carey]

Hmmm ... I get accused of lacking in the spiritual department for being an evolutionist all the time. I used to get very peeved about it. But if it puts me in the company of men like Luther, maybe that's reason to get a little less peeved.

Don't be pieved. Love your bretheren.

You are young and have not had enough time to research all the bull you are force fed in school.

Yes there is irrefutable evidence that species mutate or "evolve" if you want to use that word.
But there is nota stitch of eveidence that they mutate into an entirely different species.
And guess what there will never be because it is in contradiction to the Bible.

 

[Mallon]

This would rule out The whole stupoid theory of Cave men being anything other than an intelligent ape.

Mammoths were probably smarter than todays elephants as well.
All amals would have to be with giant carniverous lizards running around.
But after God wiped them of the earth and started fresh with adam and the garden of eden he planted who I call a test tube man Adam and his clone Eve made from Adams prototype dna.

Don't be pieved. Love your bretheren.

You are young and have not had enough time to research all the bull you are force fed in school.

Yes there is irrefutable evidence that species mutate or "evolve" if you want to use that word.
But there is nota stitch of eveidence that they mutate into an entirely different species.
And guess what there will never be because it is in contradiction to the Bible.

I think someone could have used a little more force-feeding in school.
Don't insult shernren's intelligence, Carey. He may be young(er than you), but he's certainly old enough to think for himself. And spell properly.