Jesus vs science

Sabertooth

Repartee Animal: Quipping the Saints!
Site Supporter
Jul 25, 2005
10,509
7,068
62
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟961,092.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The only question is whether we got that way naturally or God created us in that state.
The literal model says that Man was created good and with a free will. (It actually took some external prompting to get [us] to consider otherwise.) And that external prompter was only able to revolt as a function of his free will.

The guided evolutionary model has us progressing from infantile/animalistic creatures to mature, fully-formed human beings. It would make sin to be the consequence of reaching evolutionary majority, restated, making said maturity inherently sinful. We got too big for our britches...? (That completely removes volition from the equation.)
 
Upvote 0

Sabertooth

Repartee Animal: Quipping the Saints!
Site Supporter
Jul 25, 2005
10,509
7,068
62
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟961,092.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
That is true for a number of literal, Biblical characters. Any character, historical or fictional, can be an archetype. The problem comes when you misconstrue a historical person as a fictional one, especially when they are Biblical and their correct distinction impacts fundamental doctrine. This is true for Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Moses (many, many others) and, ultimately, Jesus. About the only character I can think of (in the OT) where the issue of historical vs. fictional would be negligible would be Job. His story reads the same either way and has the same impact, either way. If not fictional, it would have to be, at least, prophetic since it includes dialog from both God and the devil (in Heaven).

Also, in the cases of Adam, Eve & Noah, why include in their respective family trees the names of descendants who had no historical impact? (They don't serve as archetypes, so all they can be is historical...)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

OrthodoxForever

Has been saved, Being saved, (LHM) WILL be saved
Nov 8, 2015
213
157
30
Midwest USA
✟16,761.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Oh boy, she's bought into the party line kept rolling by atheists and sadly even some church leaders. That Christianity and Evolution (what I'm guessing she means by science) are incompatible. There's a film that might help. It's called "Did Darwin Kill God?" the answer being no.
 
Upvote 0

Hoghead1

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2015
4,908
741
77
✟8,968.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I'm curious, Hedrick, are you claiming the Bible does not tech that the earth is flat? If so, why? If by chance you do and are using the notion that the Bible speaks about the circle of the earth, that does not mean the earth is round. Quite the contrary, it is referring tot he fact the ancient Hebrews though of the heavens as dome-shaped with God sitting at the top.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,567
New Jersey
✟1,148,608.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I should have said "that Christians believe that the earth is flat." That's not been a common Christian teaching, but now and then you'll see claims that Christians rejected the concept of a spherical earth.

It's likely that the Biblical authors believed that the earth is flat, and that the sky is a dome above the earth. But few Christians have taught that these beliefs are mandatory for Christians. In my own theological tradition (Reformed), Calvin taught that at times God wrote* according to the way things appeared, because it wasn't his purpose to teach astronomy. This was referred to as "accommodation."

--------

* Modern Reformed writers would speak of God's responsibility for Scripture in someone more indirect terms.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Butterfly99

Getting ready for spring break. Cya!
Oct 28, 2015
1,099
1,392
24
DC area
✟15,792.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Well tbh b4 I joined here I would have been really surprised that any teen would think it's Jesus vs Science. Cause I'm a Christian & I go to a magnet school for science & technology. It's never been a problem at all! My mom is a minister. I hadn't even known evolution was something you couldn't believe in cause it's just fact. Being here has shocked me for real. There's a lotta anti science folks here. The stuff they say is just totally untrue even though they're Christians. I think it's a shame for real. I think maybe if a teen thinks she's gotta pick between science & Jesus than she's been given some bad teachings & just needs some confusion to be cleared up. Then she'll be OK. Cause there's no reason to see the 2 as being against each other. They're not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dave-W
Upvote 0

Hoghead1

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2015
4,908
741
77
✟8,968.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I agree, Hendrick. Calvin and other Reformers largely avoided talking astronomy. As I recall, Luther made a crack one time about the earth being considered such a little sphere. However, nothing more was forthcoming on the matter from him. I think that because they had their hands so full with other problems, that they wanted to carefully avoid taking on any more. I am familiar with the concept of accommodation. However, I was wondering about the exact place in Calvin were he did say that about astronomy.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,567
New Jersey
✟1,148,608.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
One church historian I read (McGrath?) believed that Calvin's teaching of accommodation was a major influence in allowing the New Astronomy to be accepted by Protestants. Calvin may well mention this in more than one place, but the one I know is the commentary on Genesis. On Gen 1:16:

I have said, that Moses does not here subtilely descant, as a philosopher, on the secrets of nature, as may be seen in these words. First, he assigns a place in the expanse of heaven to the planets and stars; but astronomers make a distinction of spheres, and, at the same time, teach that the fixed stars have their proper place in the firmament. Moses makes two great luminaries; but astronomers prove, by conclusive reasons, that the star of Saturn, which, on account of its great distance, appears the least of all, is greater than the moon. Here lies the difference; Moses wrote in a popular style things which, without instruction, all ordinary persons, endued with common sense, are able to understand; but astronomers investigate with great labour whatever the sagacity of the human mind can comprehend. Nevertheless, this study is not to be reprobated, nor this science to be condemned, because some frantic persons are wont boldly to reject whatever is unknown to them. For astronomy is not only pleasant, but also very useful to be known: it cannot be denied that this art unfolds the admirable wisdom of God. Wherefore, as ingenious men are to be honoured who have expended useful labour on this subject, so they who have leisure and capacity ought not to neglect this kind of exercise. Nor did Moses truly wish to withdraw us from this pursuit in omitting such things as are peculiar to the art; but because he was ordained a teacher as well of the unlearned and rude as of the learned, he could not otherwise fulfil his office than by descending to this grosser method of instruction. Had he spoken of things generally unknown, the uneducated might have pleaded in excuse that such subjects were beyond their capacity. Lastly, since the Spirit of God here opens a common school for all, it is not surprising that he should chiefly choose those subjects which would be intelligible to all. If the astronomer inquires respecting the actual dimensions of the stars, he will find the moon to be less than Saturn; but this is something abstruse, for to the sight it appears differently. Moses, therefore, rather adapts his discourse to common usage.
 
Upvote 0

Hoghead1

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2015
4,908
741
77
✟8,968.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Beaucoup thanks, Hedrick. That is one totally fascinating quote to talk about. I am aware of Calvin's concept of accommodation, but only as used in regard to God, which, by the way, I strongly criticize. However, my point here is that it is interesting to observe the he also uses the accommodation concept in regard to matters other than the nature of God.
 
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

JAM2b

Newbie
Sep 20, 2014
1,822
1,913
✟93,117.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
Just wanted to say that I struggle with perceived science vs. Jesus in my home because my boys have doubt and have a string need for proof and explanations. I have gotten into watching documentaries, "Secrets of the Bible" and "Finding Jesus: Faith Fact Forgery."

These documentaries show the use of science, archaeology, and history to attempt to prove things that are talked about in the Bible and in Christian and Jewish traditional stories.

It's funny, my boys want to discuss these issues and tell me how wrong or foolish Christian beliefs are, but when I turn the shows on or try to talk about it they have nothing to say and make themselves scarce.
 
Upvote 0

ScottA

Author: Walking Like Einstein
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2011
4,305
657
✟33,847.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
My daughter and I were in the car and I was playing the Christian station. One song was about Jesus, the name of Jesus. Then she got a bit agitated and says she believes in science. Just what does that mean??

Months ago I told her, we enjoy science programs too...
By telling her you also enjoy science, you have told her that when it is appropriate, you too "render unto" science, what is science. But Jesus' kingdom "was" not of this world, and yet it is now...as He is now Lord of all. (For a better understanding, read about rendering unto Caesar and unto God)

So there is a scientific world, and there is a spiritual kingdom that is over it and in control of it. Thus, it is fine to refer to science "within" the natural world, but beyond that, science has no expertise. There is simply more to life than the realms of this world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sabertooth
Upvote 0

BlessedHeart

Member
Apr 4, 2016
10
6
Connecticut
✟7,661.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
My daughter and I were in the car and I was playing the Christian station. One song was about Jesus, the name of Jesus. Then she got a bit agitated and says she believes in science. Just what does that mean??

Months ago I told her, we enjoy science programs too...

Somehow, she's gotten ahold of the idea that Christians cannot believe in or accept science. Of course that idea is completely false, but it's perpetuated by extremists on both sides: some scientists, like Richard Dawkins, dismiss religion and religious believers entirely, and some Christian leaders claim science cannot be trusted, or is even intentionally falsified for some mysterious agenda. I'd just let her know that a person can be both a Christian and someone who embraces science. Avoiding some very specific topics of controversy, such as evolution, everyone believes in science. No one asserts faith over gravity, or says germ theory is anti-Christian. Maybe encourage her love of science by doing some fun experiments at home. There is a real dearth of women in the sciences, please jump at any chance to encourage your girls (and boys, of course) to get involved and develop an interest.
 
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