Evidence for God from Science

RickD wrote:Starhunter,

Please stop saying that believers who hold to evolution, dishonor God.

If you want to argue for YEC that's fine. But do it without attacking believers who disagree with you.

Besides, your argument fails. If creation was immediate just as salvation and God's healing is immediate, then you wouldn't believe in a six 24 hour day creation, would you? You'd be arguing for an immediate creation.

If there is any dishonour to such god as there may be it is from
those who think they have the power to know for sure that the bible
is from The god, and the power to know for sure exactly how to interpret it

And all the time, ignore, reject, deny or see only what one chooses to see in the open
book of nature, straight from the purported maker.

Audie wrote:

RickD wrote:Starhunter,

Please stop saying that believers who hold to evolution, dishonor God.

If you want to argue for YEC that's fine. But do it without attacking believers who disagree with you.

Besides, your argument fails. If creation was immediate just as salvation and God's healing is immediate, then you wouldn't believe in a six 24 hour day creation, would you? You'd be arguing for an immediate creation.

If there is any dishonour to such god as there may be it is from
those who think they have the power to know for sure that the bible
is from The god, and the power to know for sure exactly how to interpret it

And all the time, ignore, reject, deny or see only what one chooses to see in the open
book of nature, straight from the purported maker.

Well said.
We must always remember that God has reveled Himself to us in 3 distinct ways:
The living Word of God, Jesus Christ
The written word of God, the various books and letters of the bible.
The universe we live in.

The bible points to Christ and in the risen Christ we see the fullness of God and His love and the universe speaks to us about the power and majesty of God.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:

RickD wrote:Starhunter,

Please stop saying that believers who hold to evolution, dishonor God.

If you want to argue for YEC that's fine. But do it without attacking believers who disagree with you.

Besides, your argument fails. If creation was immediate just as salvation and God's healing is immediate, then you wouldn't believe in a six 24 hour day creation, would you? You'd be arguing for an immediate creation.

If there is any dishonour to such god as there may be it is from
those who think they have the power to know for sure that the bible
is from The god, and the power to know for sure exactly how to interpret it

And all the time, ignore, reject, deny or see only what one chooses to see in the open
book of nature, straight from the purported maker.

Well said.
We must always remember that God has reveled Himself to us in 3 distinct ways:
The living Word of God, Jesus Christ
The written word of God, the various books and letters of the bible.
The universe we live in.

The bible points to Christ and in the risen Christ we see the fullness of God and His love and the universe speaks to us about the power and majesty of God.

Thanks!

Not that we are altogether on the same page, but I'm glad
you understand the idea of earth as a book or perhaps as Word.

Do you ever think of it as a sort of cross reference to apply
in checking the validity of various beliefs and interpretations
one might have of the Bible?

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:

RickD wrote:Starhunter,

Please stop saying that believers who hold to evolution, dishonor God.

If you want to argue for YEC that's fine. But do it without attacking believers who disagree with you.

Besides, your argument fails. If creation was immediate just as salvation and God's healing is immediate, then you wouldn't believe in a six 24 hour day creation, would you? You'd be arguing for an immediate creation.

If there is any dishonour to such god as there may be it is from
those who think they have the power to know for sure that the bible
is from The god, and the power to know for sure exactly how to interpret it

And all the time, ignore, reject, deny or see only what one chooses to see in the open
book of nature, straight from the purported maker.

Well said.
We must always remember that God has reveled Himself to us in 3 distinct ways:
The living Word of God, Jesus Christ
The written word of God, the various books and letters of the bible.
The universe we live in.

The bible points to Christ and in the risen Christ we see the fullness of God and His love and the universe speaks to us about the power and majesty of God.

Thanks!

Not that we are altogether on the same page, but I'm glad
you understand the idea of earth as a book or perhaps as Word.

Do you ever think of it as a sort of cross reference to apply
in checking the validity of various beliefs and interpretations
one might have of the Bible?

Yes, I believe that we should use what we KNOW of the universe to verify the validity of how we interpret the bible and the reason is this:
The bible was written FOR us, yes BUT it was NOT written TO us and because of that and because of our propensity to interpret things based on how WE perceive things NOW, we can come to incorrect interpretations and conclusions about what was written in the bible.

The bible is focused on theology and not science, it is focuses on the histographical history of a select group of people (Israel) and NOT about the history of the world or the people of the world.
It must be read and interpreted as such.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:

RickD wrote:Starhunter,

Please stop saying that believers who hold to evolution, dishonor God.

If you want to argue for YEC that's fine. But do it without attacking believers who disagree with you.

Besides, your argument fails. If creation was immediate just as salvation and God's healing is immediate, then you wouldn't believe in a six 24 hour day creation, would you? You'd be arguing for an immediate creation.

If there is any dishonour to such god as there may be it is from
those who think they have the power to know for sure that the bible
is from The god, and the power to know for sure exactly how to interpret it

And all the time, ignore, reject, deny or see only what one chooses to see in the open
book of nature, straight from the purported maker.

Well said.
We must always remember that God has reveled Himself to us in 3 distinct ways:
The living Word of God, Jesus Christ
The written word of God, the various books and letters of the bible.
The universe we live in.

The bible points to Christ and in the risen Christ we see the fullness of God and His love and the universe speaks to us about the power and majesty of God.

Thanks!

Not that we are altogether on the same page, but I'm glad
you understand the idea of earth as a book or perhaps as Word.

Do you ever think of it as a sort of cross reference to apply
in checking the validity of various beliefs and interpretations
one might have of the Bible?

Yes, I believe that we should use what we KNOW of the universe to verify the validity of how we interpret the bible and the reason is this:
The bible was written FOR us, yes BUT it was NOT written TO us and because of that and because of our propensity to interpret things based on how WE perceive things NOW, we can come to incorrect interpretations and conclusions about what was written in the bible.

The bible is focused on theology and not science, it is focuses on the histographical history of a select group of people (Israel) and NOT about the history of the world or the people of the world.
It must be read and interpreted as such.

Hard to disagree with that.

Do you see the bible as divinely inspired? If so, why?

How does one reconcile something like the flood account
with the obvious fact that it didnt happen? I know its not a science
book but does that not go to credibility of the whole?

Audie wrote:How does one reconcile something like the flood account
with the obvious fact that it didnt happen? I know its not a science
book but does that not go to credibility of the whole?

Audie, just a friendly word of caution that unless you can back up assertions you make I would stay away from words like 'obvious'. There's nothing 'obvious' about the flood not happening, especially when you consider it from an OEC and local flood angle. Unless perhaps you can back up your assertion, in which case my apologies, and I look forward to reading it.

Audie wrote:
Hard to disagree with that.

Do you see the bible as divinely inspired? If so, why?

How does one reconcile something like the flood account
with the obvious fact that it didnt happen? I know its not a science
book but does that not go to credibility of the whole?

Yes, the bible is divinely inspired.
Of course that doesn't mean the same thing to everyone, so...
The flood account is an account of a massive flood and the history of the world is full of accounts of floods of a huge magnitude and there is evidence that a massive flood did happen in the geogprahical are referenced in the bible.
The issue is was it a GLOBAL flood and does the bible actually CLAIM it was?
The debate goes on.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:
Hard to disagree with that.

Do you see the bible as divinely inspired? If so, why?

How does one reconcile something like the flood account
with the obvious fact that it didnt happen? I know its not a science
book but does that not go to credibility of the whole?

Yes, the bible is divinely inspired.
Of course that doesn't mean the same thing to everyone, so...
The flood account is an account of a massive flood and the history of the world is full of accounts of floods of a huge magnitude and there is evidence that a massive flood did happen in the geogprahical are referenced in the bible.
The issue is was it a GLOBAL flood and does the bible actually CLAIM it was?
The debate goes on.

So it does. Not among geologists, tho.

Understanding how God creates by His Word also gives insight into how He can change the world, to renew it or destroy it.
In 2 Peter 3:4-10 KJV we know that the old world perished by a flood as caused by the Word, and that the world is reserved by the same Word today, ready to burn the earth, even melting the elements.
The Word is a living and intelligent power you might say, which only needs to be spoken once and it will accomplish what God intends or thinks, regardless of how many days or years pass, and whatever else may transpire in between.
The illustration of time with God - about comparing a day with a thousand years, is not an invitation to speculate about the meaning of every other mention of the term "day" but simply saying that God's promises will come true regardless of time.

In burning up the earth the apostle uses the term "dissolved." This in ancient times was used to describe the consequence of an imbalance in the forces that make up matter, which will cause matter to either dissolve or melt.
To dissolve means to disappear from existence via the Light force, and to melt is to be destroyed or turned into heat energy via the Waters. So both background forces as mentioned earlier in the thread are involved in destroying the earth.

There are many details in the Bible, about the return of Christ and the subsequent destruction of the earth which we could discuss in another thread, which demonstrate what the effects are of such an imbalance in the forces of nature will cause.

But God governs the world and nature, by the Word, the same power which causes plants to grow, and animals to know what to eat. The entire universe depends on the Word for existence, as well as every provision. The same Word can be depended on for spiritual life, so that "man shall not live by bread alone..."

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:
Hard to disagree with that.

Do you see the bible as divinely inspired? If so, why?

How does one reconcile something like the flood account
with the obvious fact that it didnt happen? I know its not a science
book but does that not go to credibility of the whole?

Yes, the bible is divinely inspired.
Of course that doesn't mean the same thing to everyone, so...
The flood account is an account of a massive flood and the history of the world is full of accounts of floods of a huge magnitude and there is evidence that a massive flood did happen in the geogprahical are referenced in the bible.
The issue is was it a GLOBAL flood and does the bible actually CLAIM it was?
The debate goes on.

So it does. Not among geologists, tho.

Geologists are too busy arguing amongst themselves and changing their minds to be able to offer any credible assertions around what happened on Pangea billions of years ago.

For example…

“The megaflood that made Britain an island

The island that is now England, Scotland and Wales was severed from continental Europe by a cataclysmic flood during the last ice age, according to a group of researchers based in Britain.

"I had PREVIOUSLY thought the overspill would have been much more organized, more like a river than a deluge," says Philip Gibbard, a quaternary geologist at Cambridge University, UK. "But the assemblage of new observations is fully convincing. It will be very difficult to counter the evidence."

http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070716/ ... 16-11.html

Here below is an article that speaks to the long winded assumptions and speculations as to how a geologist may make headlines, call it 'evidence' that ‘would be difficult to counter’ from guesswork and long stories.

http://www.qpg.geog.cam.ac.uk/research/ ... formation/

Starhunter wrote:Understanding how God creates by His Word also gives insight into how He can change the world, to renew it or destroy it.
In 2 Peter 3:4-10 KJV we know that the old world perished by a flood as caused by the Word, and that the world is reserved by the same Word today, ready to burn the earth, even melting the elements.
The Word is a living and intelligent power you might say, which only needs to be spoken once and it will accomplish what God intends or thinks, regardless of how many days or years pass, and whatever else may transpire in between.
The illustration of time with God - about comparing a day with a thousand years, is not an invitation to speculate about the meaning of every other mention of the term "day" but simply saying that God's promises will come true regardless of time.

In burning up the earth the apostle uses the term "dissolved." This in ancient times was used to describe the consequence of an imbalance in the forces that make up matter, which will cause matter to either dissolve or melt.
To dissolve means to disappear from existence via the Light force, and to melt is to be destroyed or turned into heat energy via the Waters. So both background forces as mentioned earlier in the thread are involved in destroying the earth.

There are many details in the Bible, about the return of Christ and the subsequent destruction of the earth which we could discuss in another thread, which demonstrate what the effects are of such an imbalance in the forces of nature will cause.

But God governs the world and nature, by the Word, the same power which causes plants to grow, and animals to know what to eat. The entire universe depends on the Word for existence, as well as every provision. The same Word can be depended on for spiritual life, so that "man shall not live by bread alone..."

Hi there Starhunter.

"The Word" was with God and may have done the creating in that biblically mysterious way. However I like to look to the science behind 'how God creates'. God created the laws of physics that allowed this universe to come into being. It was not magic. There are physics behind 'the creation' and I think scientists are just starting their long journey into understanding.

Proving that a great source of light/energy can instantly create matter is a marvelous insight/discovery and perfectly in line with biblical creation!

Mazzy wrote:
Hi there Starhunter.

"The Word" was with God and may have done the creating in that biblically mysterious way. However I like to look to the science behind 'how God creates'. God created the laws of physics that allowed this universe to come into being. It was not magic. There are physics behind 'the creation' and I think scientists are just starting their long journey into understanding.

Proving that a great source of light/energy can instantly create matter is a marvelous insight/discovery and perfectly in line with biblical creation!

As you said, the universe is a physical thing God has created by the physical laws He has made, In John 1 it says that "all things were made by Him (Christ)" So Jesus as creator is a materialist, He makes real things, no magic.

One of the things He made is the invisible forces which are real physical things too, but just not visible. Like the Higgs particle I guess. A few years ago it did not exist according to the brains of the world, but now that they have found it...
Makes us wonder how many other things don't exist until they find them.

Audie wrote:Hard to disagree with that.

Do you see the bible as divinely inspired? If so, why?

How does one reconcile something like the flood account
with the obvious fact that it didnt happen? I know its not a science
book but does that not go to credibility of the whole?

Obvious fact hey...


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZrxogY9Pnc[/youtube]

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Audie wrote:
Hard to disagree with that.

Do you see the bible as divinely inspired? If so, why?

How does one reconcile something like the flood account
with the obvious fact that it didnt happen? I know its not a science
book but does that not go to credibility of the whole?

Yes, the bible is divinely inspired.
Of course that doesn't mean the same thing to everyone, so...
The flood account is an account of a massive flood and the history of the world is full of accounts of floods of a huge magnitude and there is evidence that a massive flood did happen in the geogprahical are referenced in the bible.
The issue is was it a GLOBAL flood and does the bible actually CLAIM it was?
The debate goes on.

So it does. Not among geologists, tho.

The debate is whether it was a global flood ( and what does that mean) or was it a massive local flood.
Scientists believe that there was a massive flood in the local area of the bible ( Mesopotamia) AND insistence also believe there there have been massive local floods ALL OVER the world at given points in history.

The issue is not a scientific one but one of textual interpretation.

The views of geologists are important in dating events and the magnitude of events ( from a geological POV) not in discussion of biblical interpretation.

That there is no evidence of a massive SINGLE EVENT global flood is clear.

The issue for bible interpreters is, how do they reconcile that based on WHAT the bible says BUT HOW it speaks about the flood.

Starhunter wrote:

Mazzy wrote:
Hi there Starhunter.

"The Word" was with God and may have done the creating in that biblically mysterious way. However I like to look to the science behind 'how God creates'. God created the laws of physics that allowed this universe to come into being. It was not magic. There are physics behind 'the creation' and I think scientists are just starting their long journey into understanding.

Proving that a great source of light/energy can instantly create matter is a marvelous insight/discovery and perfectly in line with biblical creation!

As you said, the universe is a physical thing God has created by the physical laws He has made, In John 1 it says that "all things were made by Him (Christ)" So Jesus as creator is a materialist, He makes real things, no magic.

One of the things He made is the invisible forces which are real physical things too, but just not visible. Like the Higgs particle I guess. A few years ago it did not exist according to the brains of the world, but now that they have found it...
Makes us wonder how many other things don't exist until they find them.

Science is of course just in its infancy, and for my opinion, anyway, the universe, the nature of reality is far more subtle and strange than we have the capacity to ever understand. My analogy is a cat trying to figure out the origin of catfood.