Science and the Bible

[Jipsah]

-

​

The creation account is in Genesis 1 God gives what was created/made during the 6 days.

Little bitty world, then, wasn't it?

Good job that God didn't create any micro-organisms, then, innit? I mean, otherwise they've be swarming around making people get sick

 

[CoreyD]

What is worldly knowledge and beliefs. The discussion has to do with the evidence God gives us to study. LIke fossils and remains from the past that God has preserved for us to study. My son and I talk about this. When he took Biology there were people who wanted to fight and argue about what was written in their book. I told him to stay away from them. Just read the book and pass the tests. He simply did not have time for that sort of distraction. So now he has a degree in computer engineering and he graduated Cum laude ( "with praise" or "with honor".)

What has he accomplished? He worked for Smuckers in college on the cameras that monitor their machinery. He worked on robotics for Amazon warehouses. He is now working on building secure communication networks for drug companies and also a program to provide the FCC with the information on what ingredients go into a drug or the pills we buy from the pharmacy. My concern is pharmacy in the Bible is witchcraft. He believes this has to do with people who abuse drugs and not legal prescribed drugs.

Your son has accomplished much.
I hope it does not make him forget God, because many heads have grown large, causing persons to think they know everything they need to know.
I hope that does not happen to your son.
How does he feel about Christianity?

I wonder what contribution to society the people who want to argue against science. What have they accomplished with their life and how is this a better world because of their contribution? I like to argue about this as much as anyone. But there is a time and a place and people need to do their homework so they know what they trying to argue against. Science is all about objective and open discussion.

I know persons who have done a lot for society, which is unrelated to science, but they don't reject science.
Much good is accomplished without science, that has gone a long way in helping society.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

I constantly get asked about this. The general opinion is that science does not need the Bible and the Bible does not need science. That is not true. Science and the Bible are like our left and are right hand and they should fit together like a glove fits our hand. Science needs the Bible the most. Because everything is in the Bible, so we can verify the truth of what we believe with the Bible.

So the real question is: Does the Bible need science. Paul tells us that God has revealed Himself in HIs Creation. Science is the study of God's creation. God gives us lots of artifacts and lots of natural evidence like fossils. Through Science and the Study of God's creation, we come to know our Creator. God wants us to know what He is doing so that is why there is so much for us to study in Creation using Science and the evidence Science has gathered for us.

We need to do a study on what wisdom, knowledge and understanding is. Proverbs is loaded with teaching on this. For example Proverbs 1:7 "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction."

Science is about how. Religion is about why. And the bible is not going to impart 23rd century scientific knowledge within its pages. God lets us figure out the details ourselves.

BTW, "why" is the higher pursuit.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

-

​

The creation account is in Genesis 1 God gives what was created/made during the 6 days.

And the six days actually starts in verse 3. We have no clue how much time passed between verse 1 and 3, though science has given us insight.

 

[d taylor]

And the six days actually starts in verse 3. We have no clue how much time passed between verse 1 and 3, though science has given us insight.

_

​

Actually it is verse 2 where God begins restoring the earth He created in Genesis 1:1. But i believe science gives nothing (that is truthful) as to God's creation.

 

[d taylor]

Little bitty world, then, wasn't it?

Good job that God didn't create any micro-organisms, then, innit? I mean, otherwise they've be swarming around making people get sick

-​

Same size as today just spread out over the waters and not one piece of circular earth.
Sickness came with sin, these are simple truths, but they seem to escape you.

I mean i am having a discussion with someone who believes God created by evolution over millions of years. Who the creation account is nothing but a metaphor.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

_

​

Actually it is verse 2 where God begins restoring the earth He created in Genesis 1:1. But i believe science gives nothing (that is truthful) as to God's creation.

It gives us an understanding of the motion of the planets around the sun. It gave us an understanding of the programming used to create each biological machine (DNA)

Etc.

I do find it interesting that people believe scientific evidence regarding the earth and its relationship to the sun and all that that implies, but they often don't believe the scientific evidence regarding the actual age of the earth. My take is that the earth is very, very old, but the age of man discussed in the bible is roughly 6,000 years old. I think of it as a painting that was applied to an existing painting, that was also probably applied to an existing painting. And when you peel back each painting, you can find evidence of the painting beneath it. Stuff like dinosaur fossils. I'm not saying that is exactly what happened. What I'm saying is that the bible leaves room for such a belief and, in reality, it's dumb to argue any of the theories/hypotheses as though they are cast in concrete. That's not the point. Believing God created it is the point. And I believe He did. He didn't get into the specifics, and on purpose. It's one of those "need to know" things.

 

[Jipsah]

-​

Same size as today just spread out over the waters and not one piece of circular earth.

I don't see that in Genesis. Made up?

Sickness came with sin, these are simple truths, but they seem to escape you.

Then who created the bacteria and viri and such like that cause illness? T'weren't me. Scripture says "All things were made by Him...". Maybe they were benign until sin made them nasty, right? But then, Genesis doesn't say so, does it? Or maybe this simple truth has eluded you.

I mean i am having a discussion with someone who believes God created by evolution over millions of years.

Yeah, millions of years are just too long, aren;'they, and God Can't have done it that way. But you know me, I think that saying "God can't..." is always idiotic. God most assuredly can if that's His will. He won't bother to ask our opinion in the matter, even yours, either. And yeah, there's also Psalm 90:4 that says God doesn't keep time as we do, so your insistence on "six 24 hour days!" rings hollow as well. But then you don't believe that either, do you?

Who the creation account is nothing but a metaphor.

Hmmm... kinda like you are by the Words of our Lord Christ, "Take, eat this is My Body...", right? "Oh, but He can't really have meant that.", is that the automatic response from those who don't believe the words that God Himself spoke. Just a metaphor, Her didn't really mean it, right?

 

[d taylor]

I don't see that in Genesis. Made up?

Then who created the bacteria and viri and such like that cause illness? T'weren't me. Scripture says "All things were made by Him...". Maybe they were benign until sin made them nasty, right? But then, Genesis doesn't say so, does it? Or maybe this simple truth has eluded you.

Yeah, millions of years are just too long, aren;'they, and God Can't have done it that way. But you know me, I think that saying "God can't..." is always idiotic. God most assuredly can if that's His will. He won't bother to ask our opinion in the matter, even yours, either. And yeah, there's also Psalm 90:4 that says God doesn't keep time as we do, so your insistence on "six 24 hour days!" rings hollow as well. But then you don't believe that either, do you?


Hmmm... kinda like you are by the Words of our Lord Christ, "Take, eat this is My Body...", right? "Oh, but He can't really have meant that.", is that the automatic response from those who don't believe the words that God Himself spoke. Just a metaphor, Her didn't really mean it, right?

-
​

But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine

 

[Ace777]

I was/am an Electrical Engineer, and if I had to depend on the Bible

We depend on the God of the Bible for everything. Nothing can exist electrical or otherwise apart from God.

I wonder why there is so much in the Bible. Jesus said it all in the Sermon on the Mount What more do we need only I do not see anyone that follows the teaching of that sermon. Esp the Beatitudes.

 

[d taylor]

It gives us an understanding of the motion of the planets around the sun. It gave us an understanding of the programming used to create each biological machine (DNA)

Etc.

I do find it interesting that people believe scientific evidence regarding the earth and its relationship to the sun and all that that implies, but they often don't believe the scientific evidence regarding the actual age of the earth. My take is that the earth is very, very old, but the age of man discussed in the bible is roughly 6,000 years old. I think of it as a painting that was applied to an existing painting, that was also probably applied to an existing painting. And when you peel back each painting, you can find evidence of the painting beneath it. Stuff like dinosaur fossils. I'm not saying that is exactly what happened. What I'm saying is that the bible leaves room for such a belief and, in reality, it's dumb to argue any of the theories/hypotheses as though they are cast in concrete. That's not the point. Believing God created it is the point. And I believe He did. He didn't get into the specifics, and on purpose. It's one of those "need to know" things.

-

​

Well we do not believe in the same creation, so it will be hard to discuss God's creation.

 

[Strong in Him]

We depend on the God of the Bible for everything. Nothing can exist electrical or otherwise apart from God.

If people would just read things in context a lot of debate would be resolved.
The sentence was:

Well, if you're depending on the Bible for eny kind of engineering data you're up a stump. I was/am an Electrical Engineer, and if I had to depend on the Bible for info on how to build a simple tank circuit (or much of anything else, for that matter) it simply wouldn't get built.

In other words, there are many, many things the Bible does not give us information about.
And rightly so; that is not its purpose.
It tells us of God, his acts, plan and will, his love, his salvation and the relationship he wants with all of us.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

-

​

Well we do not believe in the same creation, so it will be hard to discuss God's creation.

I believe in the creation in which I live. YMMV.

And not to put too fine a point on it, I believe that the entire univers is basically empty space. i.e. nothing really exists as we experience it. Rather, we interpret forces as tangible and colorful, audible things. If you compacted everything on the earth into one single block of solid "matter", you could hold it in your hand - if it wasn't so heavy. I see matter as basically "coagulated energy". i.e. I wouldn't use that particular word for it, but I tend to agree with those who claim we live in a hologram. Everything is basically just a sort of projection of energy. And God can control it all to do or be anything in an instant. In fact, even time itself is merely an artifact.

But believing all that, I can still live in it as I have because, "as far as I'm concerned", it is how I perceive it. Or, as some say, perception really is reality.

 

[Ace777]

n other words, there are many, many things the Bible does not give us information about.
And rightly so; that is not its purpose.
It tells us of God, his acts, plan and will, his love, his salvation and the relationship he wants with all of us.

I wonder why the Bible is as big as it is. Seems like they could have condensed some of it down a bit.

 

[d taylor]

I believe in the creation in which I live. YMMV.

And not to put too fine a point on it, I believe that the entire univers is basically empty space. i.e. nothing really exists as we experience it. Rather, we interpret forces as tangible and colorful, audible things. If you compacted everything on the earth into one single block of solid "matter", you could hold it in your hand - if it wasn't so heavy. I see matter as basically "coagulated energy". i.e. I wouldn't use that particular word for it, but I tend to agree with those who claim we live in a hologram. Everything is basically just a sort of projection of energy. And God can control it all to do or be anything in an instant. In fact, even time itself is merely an artifact.

But believing all that, I can still live in it as I have because, "as far as I'm concerned", it is how I perceive it. Or, as some say, perception really is reality.

-
​

You believe what science has presented to you as God's creation. Now either that is a true account or a lie, but you personally have to take what science states on faith. Believing what they say is the creation is a true account.

 

[Ace777]

take what science states on faith.

We can study the evidence for ourselves. Science has to have something of substance to prove their theory's or hypothesis.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

-
​

You believe what science has presented to you as God's creation. Now either that is a true account or a lie, but you personally have to take what science states on faith. Believing what they say is the creation is a true account.

Basically, I agree with you.

 

[Ace777]

Everything is basically just a sort of projection of energy.

Everything is what it is, but you give no consideration into our limited ability to be able to perceive. I understand additive and subtractive color theory and I have read a little but about how the eyes work. But I have never looked into how the brain perceives or processes color.

1. Retina and Photoreceptors:
   • Special cells called rods and cones reside in the retina of our eyes.
   • Rods are responsible for low-light vision, while cones detect color.
   • Different cones react to specific wavelengths (colors) of light.
2. Color Detection:
   • When light hits the rods and cones, they send electrical signals to the brain via the optic nerve.
   • These signals encode information about the colors we see.
   • The brain combines and categorizes these signals to create our perception of color.
3. Visual Cortex:
   • The signals travel down the optic nerve to the visual cortex in the brain.
   • Here, the actual image begins to form, and our brain interprets the colors we perceive.

In summary, our brain processes color through a complex interplay of photoreceptors, neural pathways, and the visual cortex. https://www.amnh.org/explore/ology/brain/seeing-color

We think of the eyes as working like a camera but it is a little different than that.

 

[d taylor]

We can study the evidence for ourselves. Science has to have something of substance to prove their theory's or hypothesis.

-
​

How so. how can you study what science states.

 

[timewerx]

I strongly believe that science is essential in religion.

However, I also think current methods in science has major "holes and gaps" in it and IMO leading to a slower than otherwise faster progress of the expansion of knowledge and evolution of technology.

We think we are advancing fast in knowledge and technology. But the truth is that, we have no point of comparison. There are no nations using different standards, different methods of doing science as everything is managed globally with the same standards, same certifications, etc.

The general philosophy of our science is "nothing real or true until proven by science". This is how experts come up with even more unrealistic explanations for events that defy reality.

I'd think the better philosophy would be "anything is possible until proven false by science". I believe the philosophy will help encourage those in science fields attempt the improbable or even the impossible. This is how inventions are made.

You might notice no more great inventions are being made anymore. Great inventions like electric light, combustion engine, automobile, airplane, computer.

The anything is possible philosophy can also help bridge the gap between different camps in theoretical science - to bring people together instead of the different camps at odds with one another, at an unhealthy level of competition.

Because expansion of knowledge is severely slowed down if we're keeping secrets, withholding useful information form one another. Competition is good, even fun. But too much of it that we hide life-saving knowledge or even sabotage other people's efforts isn't going to do humanity any good but only divide us and make us hate each other.