Evidence for God from Science

hughfarey wrote:

Audie wrote:I got a pair of their leather platform sandals the other day. Yeah yeah, "short people" jokes.

Almost as funny as Huge Fairy jokes, wouldn't you say?

Who dat?

Philip wrote:

But a golden calf?

The ancient world universally worshiped objects made with their own hands - how deluded, that a god you made with your own hands has power (Romans 1:23 references this). But make no mistake, the Israelites were not unique in this. However, they had seen the power of God, trembled at it, saw Him lay utter waste to Egypt in miracle after miracle, and yet, how long was Moses out of camp before they were up to pagan practices, once again? In fact, the surrounding polytheistic peoples laughed at Israel, as did the Egyptians: "You mean, Israel has only ONE God???!!! Hahahahahahaha!!!" Except after that One God got through with their gods and land, they weren't laughing too much - to the point that many non-Israelites left with them in the Exodus from Egypt. As for idols then and now, the only difference is, today's idols that people are obsessed with, while they don't consider them to be gods, their idols nonetheless control them with so much of their time, efforts and money devoted to them - just like...a god.

That is a version of events. I got the idea when I read it.

"The ancient world universally worshiped objects made with their own hands." I don't think this is any more true than to say that present day Christians worship a crucifix. Ancient peoples worshipped power, as expressed in the forces of nature or the characteristics of animals, which they made less abstract by using models as expressions of that power, be they kings, crocodiles or golden calves. It is difficult to pray to a heatwave. Ancient people were certainly less knowledgable than we are today, but there is no reason to believe they were less intelligent.

hugh -- Lots of people worship a crucifix rather than the Savior who's resurrection is symbolized by it.
God gave us the Ten Commandments through Moses -- #2 "You shall not make for yourself a carved image -- any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. you shall not bow down to them nor serve them........."
We have been given those instructions for a reason. Because we Do / are tempted To do exactly That.

hughfarey wrote:"The ancient world universally worshiped objects made with their own hands." I don't think this is any more true than to say that present day Christians worship a crucifix. Ancient peoples worshipped power, as expressed in the forces of nature or the characteristics of animals, which they made less abstract by using models as expressions of that power, be they kings, crocodiles or golden calves. It is difficult to pray to a heatwave. Ancient people were certainly less knowledgable than we are today, but there is no reason to believe they were less intelligent.

Daniel 12:4 "But thou,O Daniel,shut up the words,and seal the book,even to the time of the end:many shall run to and fro,and knowledge shall be increased." Today we travel much faster and get around alot better than they did back then and knowledge has increased in these last days.

crochet1949 wrote:hugh -- Lots of people worship a crucifix rather than the Savior whose resurrection is symbolized by it.

Sorry, Crotchet, but I doubt if that's true. Have you any evidence for it?

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:

bippy123 wrote:

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:Why would God provide an allegory instead of going into detail... One needs to understand that the more systematic scientific way of thinking people possess now is a recent phenomenon. The state of the human psyche back then was more likely to assign meaning to coincidences, more prone to superstition, unable to fathom the regularities in nature, and incapable of abstract thought. In fact the idea that nature has a set of laws governing it was not at all obvious. Sure we knew things fell to the ground but it was believed heavier items fell faster than lighter things for millennia even though it would be so easy to test!!! So the question really should be how is it that you fail to appreciate that the way people experienced the world has not always been the way you experience it now?

Can you imagine God trying to explain it all to a simple goat herder ?
The herder just wouldn't understand and under think God would expect him to get it.

He tried explaining a little of it to job and job was humble enough to understand that he understood squat about the creation of the universe and everything in it.

I think God gave them as much as they could understand , and plus their salvation wasn't dependent on understanding it.
Everything lead to our lord and savior coming
That's what matters

Thanks for paraphrasing me, some seem to have missed my point.

Welcome , thanks for bringing Up the point .
I thought about this a lot when I was a teen (so I'm a geek, sue me lol )
But the main point is that God did it .
Why would it even matter to a goat herder how he did it lol

crochet1949 wrote:hugh -- Lots of people worship a crucifix rather than the Savior who's resurrection is symbolized by it.
God gave us the Ten Commandments through Moses -- #2 "You shall not make for yourself a carved image -- any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. you shall not bow down to them nor serve them........."
We have been given those instructions for a reason. Because we Do / are tempted To do exactly That.

Crochet I don't think that passage means what you think it means cause God commands images of things of heaven itself followers mg this passage

God commands the Israelites to make two golden statues of angels as part of the lid of the ark of the Covenant (Ex 25:17-19). That’s an image of something from heaven. Then, in 1 Kings 6, God commands that graven images of flowers and palm trees be made, as well as 15-foot tall statues of cherubim. And in Numbers 21, God commands that a bronze serpent be made and uses it to heal the Israelites. It was preserved for 800 years and then destroyed when some began to worship it (2 Kgs 18:4).

So either God Contradicts himself or that passage doesn't mean what you think it means

I think we both believe that God doesn't contradict himself

There's a difference between what I make for Myself for my personal worship -- and what God Tells me to make for His reasons.
The Exod 25 passage -- it was the angels hovering over the mercy seat and where God would be meeting with the people. Angels represent messengers from God.
God wants us to worship Him, Personally. Not the representative 'thing'. We do it so automatically, don't even think about it.

So what Does the passage in the Ten Commandments mean?

God is pretty good at explaining things in ways we Can understand them. How often do we not appreciate what He is telling us.

The trouble with worshipping attributes of power is that there are so many of them. There are fierce ones like storms or earthquakes, and gentle, but no less compelling ones, such as sunshine, spring or procreation. Common observation shows that these often appear to conflict, like a lamb being struck by lightning. Early people actualised these powers by making physical representations of them, which, being made in all good faith, were therefore assumed to be under the especial protection of the power for whom they were made. The objects were both ways of honouring the God (after all it's difficult to put a garland around 'procreation'), and a symbol of the God's relationship with the people. He or she might have had to be pacified, cajoled, thanked or simply noticed in order to maintain a harmonious relationship, although there was no knowing what the different Gods might get up to amongst themselves. Of course, if the God protecting your statue was not powerful enough to withstand the onslaught of the God protecting somebody else's statue, and yours was captured or defiled, that represented a serious crisis of confidence.

It was the unique gift of the Israelites to recognise that attributes of natural power are just that, attributes, and that the power itself was an overarching, all encompassing entity, and that the conflicts they observed in nature were part of the unity of that entity, not individual squabbles. But how to worship such a vast and amorphous God? Not by representing attributes of him as bulls, crocodiles, or even statues of people. That is why the Commandments forbid the making of 'graven images' (not just any representative object, of course, or dolls would be forbidden, but images supposed to be of God). The danger of falling into the 'my statue is better than your statue, so my God must be better than your God' fallacy had to be avoided.

In the end, of course, worshipping a God you couldn't see proved too much of a challenge for ordinary people, and the, again unique, solution of localising the object of their worship in a container with nothing in it was hit upon, firstly the Arc of the Covenant and later the Temple, much to the confusion of the Roman General Pompey, who marched in to capture the representation of the Jewish God, only to find nothing there.

Nowadays, orthodox Christian doctrine is happy to permit all kinds of representations of God, although these are far more commonly representations of Jesus rather than God the Father, who is still a bearded old man in a cloud. Jesus crops up as a baby and as a crucifix, and in various other manifestations, but it is (mostly) understood that any respect given to these images is to the whole God they represent, rather than to the particular attributes expressed in the image. I say mostly because I fear that in some places, particularly in South America, conflicting Corpus Christi processions very much suggest that a 'my statue is better than your statue so my God is better than your God' attitude still prevails.

RickD wrote:

PaulS wrote:

So the sons of seth are who the writers of Job and Deuteronomy and Psalms are referring too?
I don't think so and the only issue people have with the Sons of God being divine beings in Genesis 6 is the supernatural element, which no bible believer should have issues with.

I'd have to reread the verses in Job, Deuteronomy, and Psalms. I'm not familiar with them off the top of my head.

If I recall correctly, Jac put up an argument against the fallen angels belief, on the basis that it's not natural for angels to have sex.

Nowhere in scripture is there anything that says angels have the power to create.

And my main argument against, was that fallen angels aren't called sons of God anywhere in scripture. At least not anywhere that I'm aware of.

I agree that besides people being called sons of God, angels are too. But not fallen angels.

The only argument against divine beings mating with humans is Jesus' comment on angels not marrying in heaven.
Which has NO baring on what they can or can't do on Earth.
The writers at the time of those that wrote the OT, commented on the OT and the 1st generations of Christians, believed that divine beings were the Sons of God, that some did transgress.

It should be noted that the verse in Jude and Peter are almost per verbatim the same in 1Enoch.

hugh --people have all sorts of reasons for worshiping 'whatever' as a representation OF God. Because we Are visual people. But God wants us worship Him - Period He wants us to realize that He Did in fact create all the things that we find it easy To worship. Worship HIM, the real thing. Not the representation OF.

Yes, quite so. You asked for the meaning of a passage in the ten commandments. That was my interpretation.

PaulSacramento wrote:

RickD wrote:

PaulS wrote:

So the sons of seth are who the writers of Job and Deuteronomy and Psalms are referring too?
I don't think so and the only issue people have with the Sons of God being divine beings in Genesis 6 is the supernatural element, which no bible believer should have issues with.

I'd have to reread the verses in Job, Deuteronomy, and Psalms. I'm not familiar with them off the top of my head.

If I recall correctly, Jac put up an argument against the fallen angels belief, on the basis that it's not natural for angels to have sex.

Nowhere in scripture is there anything that says angels have the power to create.

And my main argument against, was that fallen angels aren't called sons of God anywhere in scripture. At least not anywhere that I'm aware of.

I agree that besides people being called sons of God, angels are too. But not fallen angels.

The only argument against divine beings mating with humans is Jesus' comment on angels not marrying in heaven.
Which has NO baring on what they can or can't do on Earth.
The writers at the time of those that wrote the OT, commented on the OT and the 1st generations of Christians, believed that divine beings were the Sons of God, that some did transgress.

It should be noted that the verse in Jude and Peter are almost per verbatim the same in 1Enoch.

There's at least one other argument. That angels are spiritual beings. Not physical. No sexual organs. No sperm. No nookie nookie.