Evidence for God from Science

RickD wrote:Danny, I missed the point of the article you posted, because I always assume the bible is true. Just like I assume God exists. I just assumed all Christians use the bible in a complete, consistent, manner to defend itself. That's the only way to be sure we're not just pulling verses out willy-nilly to make an argument that the bible itself doesn't support.

Spoken like a true Reformed Christian, Brother.

I also believe nature and the bible to be in complete agreement with each other. I also have the witness of the Holy Spirit that confirms the bible to be true. Unbelievers can only see the things of God, If they are open, and the Holy Spirit opens their eyes.
Anyway, I'm not sure if that's what you are getting at.

What you say about unbelievers here is exactly my point to Paul.

And while nature and the Bible are in complete accord, this is *bound* to be the case since the Bible is the infallible word of God.

DannyM wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Allow me to play devil's advocate if I may:

The Bible makes good sense. It contains no contradictions, no errors, and no unsound principles. Anything that does contradict Scripture is untrue.

Gen 32:30 states "...for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
John 1:18 states, "No man hath seen God at any time..."

James 1:13 says "..for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."
Gen 22:1 says "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham..."

Gen 2:17 says "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eastest thereof thou shalt surely die [note: it doesn't say 'spiritual' death]
Gen 5:5 says "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died."

Lev 11:6: "And the hare, because he cheweth the cud..."
Hare do not chew the cud.

This is the typical response one would get from a skeptic/atheist.

Discussing scripture with the atheist is an exercise in futility, Paul. They need to believe in order to understand.

Of course, I agree 100%.
That is why the bible being it's own authority doesn't work with them and one needs to use other methods to show the bible as authoritive and THAT has always been my point.

Wow! We're already on the second page

Discussing scripture with the atheist is an exercise in futility, Paul. They need to believe in order to understand.

And that is why it is so important to be led by the Holy Spirit when witnessing to unbelievers. Only if they are open, will God speak to them through the Bible. If they're not open, arguing from scripture, is futile. The only solace I have in arguing from scripture with a close-minded unbeliever, is that maybe I'm planting a seed for the future, when perhaps, he will be more open.

Of course, I agree 100%.
That is why the bible being it's own authority doesn't work with them and one needs to use other methods to show the bible as authoritive and THAT has always been my point.

What other methods are you suggesting, Paul? I only see that God has to touch them in some way for them to be open. I really don't see any other way before that.

PaulSacramento wrote:Of course, I agree 100%.
That is why the bible being it's own authority doesn't work with them and one needs to use other methods to show the bible as authoritive and THAT has always been my point.

Paul, they'll never accept the Bible's authority unless and until they repent and believe. Do you think showing them an archaeology find with a Bible verse convinces them? How about a dozen finds with a dozen verses?

Danny and Paul,
I know both you know this, so I'm not speaking directly to you. The only way we can reach unbelievers is through prayer. God has to be the one to open them up to His message. That is the only way they can begin to understand anything of God. That is the only way any of us came to understand anything from God. That's the difference between making arguments through the guiding of the Holy Spirit, and making arguments through our own power. The power of the flesh.

RickD wrote:

Discussing scripture with the atheist is an exercise in futility, Paul. They need to believe in order to understand.

And that is why it is so important to be led by the Holy Spirit when witnessing to unbelievers. Only if they are open, will God speak to them through the Bible. If they're not open, arguing from scripture, is futile. The only solace I have in arguing from scripture with a close-minded unbeliever, is that maybe I'm planting a seed for the future, when perhaps, he will be more open.

Right. We don't abandon the truth to accomodate the atheist. How exactly is that 'helping' the atheist...

RickD wrote:

Of course, I agree 100%.
That is why the bible being it's own authority doesn't work with them and one needs to use other methods to show the bible as authoritive and THAT has always been my point.

What other methods are you suggesting, Paul? I only see that God has to touch them in some way for them to be open. I really don't see any other way before that.

Oh there is no way for US to convince ANY skeptic, that is God's place with His Holy Spirit.
I simply try NOT to be a "stumbling block" for any that have questions.
And for many skeptics, "circular logic" is just that ( regardless of we are or not).
One can show the validity of the bible by showing how it is in harmony with what we know of the universe and science, by explaining passages that are "colourful" as just that and those that are aimed at ancient man as being accomdating for ancient man.
AN example is the Hare" chewing it's cud, sure modern science tells us that hares don't do that, not like cows and goats, but for ancient man that based his view on observation, then it made sense for someone speaking TO HIM to state things as they were stated in that passage.

We use HOW the bible was written and to WHOM as a way of showing the authority of the bible, know what I mean?

DannyM wrote:

RickD wrote:

Discussing scripture with the atheist is an exercise in futility, Paul. They need to believe in order to understand.

And that is why it is so important to be led by the Holy Spirit when witnessing to unbelievers. Only if they are open, will God speak to them through the Bible. If they're not open, arguing from scripture, is futile. The only solace I have in arguing from scripture with a close-minded unbeliever, is that maybe I'm planting a seed for the future, when perhaps, he will be more open.

Right. We don't abandon the truth to accomodate the atheist. How exactly is that 'helping' the atheist...

Absolutely. God doesn't change. His word is still as important in today's culture, as it ever was. People still need Jesus. The real Jesus. Not some watered-down, politically correct, feel good, false gospel.

PaulSacramento wrote:

RickD wrote:

Of course, I agree 100%.
That is why the bible being it's own authority doesn't work with them and one needs to use other methods to show the bible as authoritive and THAT has always been my point.

What other methods are you suggesting, Paul? I only see that God has to touch them in some way for them to be open. I really don't see any other way before that.

Oh there is no way for US to convince ANY skeptic, that is God's place with His Holy Spirit.
I simply try NOT to be a "stumbling block" for any that have questions.
And for many skeptics, "circular logic" is just that ( regardless of we are or not).
One can show the validity of the bible by showing how it is in harmony with what we know of the universe and science, by explaining passages that are "colourful" as just that and those that are aimed at ancient man as being accomdating for ancient man.
AN example is the Hare" chewing it's cud, sure modern science tells us that hares don't do that, not like cows and goats, but for ancient man that based his view on observation, then it made sense for someone speaking TO HIM to state things as they were stated in that passage.

We use HOW the bible was written and to WHOM as a way of showing the authority of the bible, know what I mean?

Yes, Paul I understand what you're saying.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say that I don't see a disagreement at all between us here. I just think we're coming from different backgrounds, saying the same thing, in different ways.

RickD wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

RickD wrote:

Of course, I agree 100%.
That is why the bible being it's own authority doesn't work with them and one needs to use other methods to show the bible as authoritive and THAT has always been my point.

What other methods are you suggesting, Paul? I only see that God has to touch them in some way for them to be open. I really don't see any other way before that.

Oh there is no way for US to convince ANY skeptic, that is God's place with His Holy Spirit.
I simply try NOT to be a "stumbling block" for any that have questions.
And for many skeptics, "circular logic" is just that ( regardless of we are or not).
One can show the validity of the bible by showing how it is in harmony with what we know of the universe and science, by explaining passages that are "colourful" as just that and those that are aimed at ancient man as being accomdating for ancient man.
AN example is the Hare" chewing it's cud, sure modern science tells us that hares don't do that, not like cows and goats, but for ancient man that based his view on observation, then it made sense for someone speaking TO HIM to state things as they were stated in that passage.

We use HOW the bible was written and to WHOM as a way of showing the authority of the bible, know what I mean?

Yes, Paul I understand what you're saying.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say that I don't see a disagreement at all between us here. I just think we're coming from different backgrounds, saying the same thing, in different ways.

I agree Rick.
For a little background from my part:
I tend to debate atheists and JW's and former JW's that are atheists or at best, agnostics.

Katabole,

Excellent post! I want to pick two paragraphs. First, this almost forensic offering:

I, like Dan, cannot understand the position of those who assert and believe that many of the Bible's parts are myths, mistranslations and forgeries, while at the same time they continue to quote it, write commentaries upon it and accept endorsements and dignities for preaching or lecturing about it. The Bible simply claims to be the Word of God. It does not attempt to establish its claim, or seek to prove it. It merely assumes it and asserts it. It is for us to believe it or to leave it. But, by believing it, our aim then is to seek to understand what God has thus written for our learning.

Precisely! If anyone is in any doubt, read this paragraph carefully.

Unfortunately, the church in our generation is drifting from these fundamental convictions and has already begun to embrace postmodern ideas uncritically. Many churches do not teach the Bible anymore and so the sheep, starve. Evangelicalism is quickly losing its footing, and the church is becoming more and more like the world. Fewer and fewer Christians are willing to stand against the trends, and the effects have been disastrous. Subjectivity, irrationality, worldliness, uncertainty, compromise, and hypocrisy have already become commonplace among churches and organizations that once constituted the evangelical mainstream.

What is it with this ‘post-modernism’? As far as I’m aware it says that everybody is right and nobody is wrong. Can you clear this up for me?

PaulSacramento wrote:

RickD wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

RickD wrote:

Of course, I agree 100%.
That is why the bible being it's own authority doesn't work with them and one needs to use other methods to show the bible as authoritive and THAT has always been my point.

What other methods are you suggesting, Paul? I only see that God has to touch them in some way for them to be open. I really don't see any other way before that.

Oh there is no way for US to convince ANY skeptic, that is God's place with His Holy Spirit.
I simply try NOT to be a "stumbling block" for any that have questions.
And for many skeptics, "circular logic" is just that ( regardless of we are or not).
One can show the validity of the bible by showing how it is in harmony with what we know of the universe and science, by explaining passages that are "colourful" as just that and those that are aimed at ancient man as being accomdating for ancient man.
AN example is the Hare" chewing it's cud, sure modern science tells us that hares don't do that, not like cows and goats, but for ancient man that based his view on observation, then it made sense for someone speaking TO HIM to state things as they were stated in that passage.

We use HOW the bible was written and to WHOM as a way of showing the authority of the bible, know what I mean?

Yes, Paul I understand what you're saying.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say that I don't see a disagreement at all between us here. I just think we're coming from different backgrounds, saying the same thing, in different ways.

I agree Rick.
For a little background from my part:
I tend to debate atheists and JW's and former JW's that are atheists or at best, agnostics.

A little background on my part: I have no patience for anyone who comes to my door to sell me anything, especially a false gospel.
But seriously, God leads us to witness to those He has prepared for us. We all have different strengths, and gifts, that enable us to witness to certain people.

An interesting historical view, part 2 can be found there also.
http://biologos.org/blog/the-truthfulne ... ncy-part-1