Science and the Neolithic Revolution

[Frank Robert]

The Bible is truth and Science can help us to properly understand our Bible.

I don't know what your point is. Religious belief is not truth and biblical beliefs cannot be tested, modified, or rejected by scientific means and thus cannot be a part of the processes of science.

In the history of biblical interpretation, four major types of hermeneutics have emerged: the literal, moral, allegorical, and anagogical. The debate over biblical truth is further muddled by the numerous Christian denominations which are estimated to be in the thousands.

Which version of the bible is true?

 

[Astrophile]

Matthew 2:23, says, "And he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene."

Matthew 2:22 says 'But when he (Joseph) heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee.'

This implies that Joseph and Mary had lived in Bethlehem, in Judaea, before Jesus was born (see also Matthew 2:1), and they only settled in Galilee in order to be out of Archelaus's jurisdiction. This contradicts the plain statements in Luke 1:26-27, Luke 2:4-5, and Luke 2:39 that Mary and Joseph lived in Nazareth, in Galilee, before Jesus was born and that they returned there after His birth.

In addition, Luke does not say anything about Mary and Joseph escaping into Egypt, about Herod killing the children of Bethlehem, or about Joseph being afraid to live in Judaea, under the rule of Archelaus.

 

[Frank Robert]

Would you say that, when adaptable science meets adamantine faith, friction is generated?

I don't know what your point is. Science is not theology and theology is not science. I see no reason why some people bend over backwards to conflate them. The mythologist, Joseph Campbell when asked, in an interview with Bill Moyers, "if God can be proven," he answered with a question: What would be the value of faith if you can prove God?

In the same interview he said "We want to think about God. God is a thought, God is an idea, but its reference is to something that transcends all thinking. I mean, he’s beyond being, beyond the category of being or nonbeing. Is he or is he not? Neither is nor is not." I think that sums up the thinking of many agnostics.

 

[dlamberth]

I don't know what your point is. Science is not theology and theology is not science. I see no reason why some people bend over backwards to conflate them. The mythologist, Joseph Campbell when asked, in an interview with Bill Moyers, "if God can be proven," he answered with a question: What would be the value of faith if you can prove God?

In the same interview he said "We want to think about God. God is a thought, God is an idea, but its reference is to something that transcends all thinking. I mean, he’s beyond being, beyond the category of being or nonbeing. Is he or is he not? Neither is nor is not." I think that sums up the thinking of many agnostics.

Or as the Sufi Ibn Arabi says: "God, Not God".

 

[Frank Robert]

Or as the Sufi Ibn Arabi says: "God, Not God".

I think that the mystic Sufis come closest to truth. My favorite Sufi poet is Rumi.

“I have lived on the lip of insanity, wanting to know reasons, knocking on a door. It opens. I’ve been knocking from the inside.”​

― Rumi

 

[Diamond7]

Which version of the bible is true?

The version and parts that science can verify. For example, Science can verify that grass is green and the sky is blue so we know that part of the Bible is true.

"if God can be proven,"

Yes, God can be proven using Quantum Physics. God is eternal and God is a singularity, so classical physics does not apply to him. Classical physics does not address the concept of eternity or singularities, which are more commonly associated with philosophy and theology.

Eternity refers to a timeless or infinite state, whereas singularities refer to points in space or time where physical quantities, such as density or temperature, become infinite or undefined. These concepts are typically explored in fields such as metaphysics, theology, and cosmology, rather than classical physics.

Classical physics does provide a framework for understanding many physical phenomena and has been highly influential in shaping our understanding of the natural world. So a lot of the Bible can be proven to be true using Classical Physics.

 

[Frank Robert]

The version and parts that science can verify. For example, Science can verify that grass is green and the sky is blue so we know that part of the Bible is true.

That is observable, no science needed

Yes, God can be proven using Quantum Physics. God is eternal and God is a singularity, so classical physics does not apply to him. Classical physics does not address the concept of eternity or singularities, which are more commonly associated with philosophy and theology.

It appears you are confusing science with apologetics. No physicist has shown that God has any role in quantum mechanics. If you have a testable and repeatable god hypothesis please state it so we can discuss it.

What God, Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness Have in Common​

Theories that try to explain the big metaphysical mysteries fall short, making agnosticism the only sensible stance.​

 

[Diamond7]

If you have a testable and repeatable god hypothesis please state it so we can discuss it.

God is a singularity and God is eternal. That is not classic physics, that is quantum physics. God is light and in him is no darkness. That means there is no darkness in a black hole. The light just cannot escape. When it does at the event horizon. Because days begin and end at the horizon, sun rise and sun set.

 

[Diamond7]

making agnosticism the only sensible stance.

Science is agnostic because science cannot prove God.
There is a lot in the Bible that science can prove is true.

 

[Frank Robert]

God is a singularity and God is eternal. That is not classic physics, that is quantum physics. God is light and in him is no darkness. That means there is no darkness in a black hole. The light just cannot escape. When it does at the event horizon. Because days begin and end at the horizon, sun rise and sun set.

You continue confusing apologetics with science. Therefore Zues is apologetics not science.
See: What God, Quantum Mechanics and Consciousnss Have in Common

Theories that try to explain the big metaphysical mysteries fall short, making agnosticism the only sensible stance.​

 

[Frank Robert]

Science is agnostic because science cannot prove God.

Agree!

There is a lot in the Bible that science can prove is true.

There are a few things that science might be able to verify regarding the lives and customs of the nomadic desert tribe in the OT.

The NT is a bit more difficult as there is only anecdotal evidence.

 

[Diamond7]

There are a few things that science might be able to verify regarding the lives and customs of the nomadic desert tribe in the OT.

When they were working on the drainage for the temple mount they found an arrowhead. That little tiny artifact tells us a lot. It can be traced to a time and a people that attacked Jerusalem. Every artifact reflects the person who made it. Most of the Bible can be confirmed by Science. But the most important part we have to accept by faith. Most everyone believes and follows the teaching of Jesus, esp the Golden rule. Esp Atheists, usually live better than believers. Believers think they can do what they want and be forgiven for it. Atheists do not have that luxury. There is always a chance that someone somewhere will hold them accountable for what they do.

 

[Frank Robert]

When they were working on the drainage for the temple mount they found an arrowhead. That little tiny artifact tells us a lot. It can be traced to a time and a people that attacked Jerusalem.

One arrowhead does not make a battle. Sorta like the exodus, 600,000 people roaming the Sinai for 40 years without leaving a trace.

Every artifact reflects the person who made it. Most of the Bible can be confirmed by Science. But the most important part we have to accept by faith. Most everyone believes and follows the teaching of Jesus, esp the Golden rule. Esp Atheists, usually live better than believers. Believers think they can do what they want and be forgiven for it. Atheists do not have that luxury. There is always a chance that someone somewhere will hold them accountable for what they do.

I find that best advice to live a productive life and not harm your neighbors can be found the TAO. Check out Chapter 19.

 

[Diamond7]

The NT is a bit more difficult as there is only anecdotal evidence.

Really all we need is the Sermon on the Mount. If we just read Moses and the Red Letters of Jesus we would have it all. Everything else is just commentary.

Sorta like the exodus, 600,000 people roaming the Sinai for 40 years without leaving a trace.

If that is what you are interested in then the book Walking the Bible may be for you. Or you can watch the PBS special on YouTube.

 

[Frank Robert]

Really all we need is the Sermon on the Mount. If we just read Moses and the Red Letters of Jesus we would have it all. Everything else is just commentary.

Which is anecdotal evidence.

If that is what you are interested in then the book Walking the Bible may be for you. Or you can watch the PBS special on YouTube.

Which is apologetics.

 

[Diamond7]

Which is anecdotal evidence.

What evidence do we need? Everyone knows God, He makes Himself known to everyone, so they are without excuse. They can deny Him if they want, but they know He is real.

 

[Diamond7]

Which is apologetics.

PBS is doing apologetics now? Bruce Feiler is a journalist and he goes to the places we read about in the Bible. God always leaves evidence for where He has been and what He has done. So people are without excuse.

 

[dlamberth]

That is observable, no science needed

It appears you are confusing science with apologetics. No physicist has shown that God has any role in quantum mechanics. If you have a testable and repeatable god hypothesis please state it so we can discuss it.

What God, Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness Have in Common​

Theories that try to explain the big metaphysical mysteries fall short, making agnosticism the only sensible stance.​

Good article, thanks for the link. I don't think the authors conclusion would change any, but God, Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness is the play ground of some of the Mystics. As I read, I couldn't help but wonder how the article itself might look with that trajectory also brought in.

 

[dlamberth]

What evidence do we need? Everyone knows God, He makes Himself known to everyone, so they are without excuse. They can deny Him if they want, but they know He is real.

No, not everyone knows God is real. That's how it should be. That's the result that comes from the diversity in Life...or of Creation if you will.

The ones I question are those who preach God, but don't "know" God.

 

[Frank Robert]

PBS is doing apologetics now? Bruce Feiler is a journalist and he goes to the places we read about in the Bible. God always leaves evidence for where He has been and what He has done. So people are without excuse.

No one is claiming that a book about a dysfunctional nomadic tribe is totally inaccurate. For myself I find the wisdom in the TAO a better practical, useful guide to living life.