Evidence for God from Science

i may be making a mistake here but i want to point something out concerning science.


the oxford dictionary (advanced learners) defines science as:

knowledge about the structure and behavior of the natural and physical world, based on facts you can prove, for example by experiments.

there are other definitions and it depends on whom you talk to which definition you get. dr. del ratzsch in his book, The battle of beginnings:why neither side is winning the creation-evolution debate, did a good job in outlining the different definitions applied to the field of science.

all omit God or the spiritual and this omission is the problem with science. once a person ignores data, omits it, or whatever, their theory, experiment and subsequently there conclusions have become corrupted.

which in turns leads the scientist and adherents down the wrong path and undermines or destroys any claim of objectivity, while headed to a wrong conclusion.

science in its limiting defined manner cannot find the answers it seeks because it refuse to acknowledge what it cannot see, touch, feel, or observe or prove. yet the proof is sitting right in front of them. now this may be good for the secularist who does not believe God and does not care to but for the christian it is wrong.

once the christian adopts the secular way, they have immediately left God's way which is not what God said to do. science is filled with non-believers who are being deceived by the evil one, christians cannot follow that because it leads to destruction.

this is not a natural world, nor was its origination natural. it was spiritually conceived, designed and created thus once you eliminate the spiritual from the equation you have corrupted your work and gone down the wrong path.

scientists have been given a lot of intelligence but if they hinder that intelligence by removing God, then they are no better than the secularist who denies the existence of the spiritual factors involved in the world. they DO play a part, a very influential one and they cannot be dismissed by limiting ones scope or investigation.

the true believer in Christ whois a scientist must divorce themselves from following secular ways, methods and guidelines if they want to find the truth and find out what God has really done.

do not ask me what those are because God hasn't told me to tell you, He wants christians to put off the secular and come to Him for guidance. also i do not know what scientists are involved in or where they are at in their work only He does thus you need to go to Him to change your directions. the fact is the world needs answers not more questions, not more studies that take people's eyes of God. inother words, you have to make a stand for the truth or your of no use.

this is not a scientific world and not all things can be defined by science alone, if it were so we would not need faith. science is a very limited field and is limited further by the omittance of the spiritual. these roadblocks can only be removed by getting back inline with God and His word.

one very clear verse says: "why do you call me Lord Lord and do not the things i say" this is not an empty charge.

case in point: when talking about the flood, people continually say, science says it can't be done--or something to that effect. well science is NOT the final authority in any theological matter and you need to learn that quickly. science does not know all the answers! it is not to be relied upon as such.

God does not give us all the information because the only way to please Him is by faith, thus science will never find all the answers. this is proven ovwr and over again,one just has to read the myriads of articles which keep saying 'i don't know', 'we think...' and so on.

it is not important or germane to salvation to determine the date of creation, you will never get the answer, it is important to believe and accept that took place as God said in His word. there are far-reaching ramifications when you do not.

nor is it important to know how Noah got the animals or debate whether or not it was big enough. God gave the dimensions, God helped Noah thus it was done and it was big enough.

any other thought has the same reprocussions as the previous creation point. if you disagree with God and deny His words, then REPENT for you are wrong, NOT GOD.

this does not mean we do not investigate for we need more information all the time to thwart the evil one, this does not mean we give up science or archaeology, or history and so on. IT MEANS you stop following the blind and turn back to the one who sees all, knows all, and who did all.

if you don't then you don't just hurt yourself, your hurt Christ and His purpose for coming to earth. this is not about you, your reputation, your looks or your work---IT IS ABOUT SALVATION & ETERNITY.

archaeologist wrote:the true believer in Christ whois a scientist must divorce themselves from following secular ways, methods and guidelines if they want to find the truth and find out what God has really done.

I have asked you to do this in yet another thread and you have still not provided an answer.

What do you consider PRACTICAL CHANGES to the process of science. You say a Christian scientist must divorce himself/herself from secular ways. How? Renounce the scientific method? Cease performing controlled experiments? Answer please

I am not a biblical expert. I don't know any Hebrew, i can only go off of what other experts say. But, it appears to me that much of the exacts about creation and the flood and a host of other items (which i agree are not important to salvation) are left out of the bible. I believe it is out job as Christians to study the world around us.

Einstein said something like, "The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is how comprehensible it is." I don't believe this was a cosmic accident but a clear mandate from GOd to study the world around us. I agree, however, that when that studying gets in the way of what is important, then it is bad.

That being said, it was my fascination with the natural world, and how it works, it was drove me to God. Without Science, i would be an atheist of some kin (perhaps not an atheist, but definately not a Christian). Most scientific discoveries are VERY in line with the bible (Those that are not either results from a lack of knowledge of science or a lack of knowledge of the bible).

Therefore, science (or the study of nature, whatever that means to anyone) WAS important to my salvation. Not as important as my savior (not even close) but still important.

Interesting testimony, Enigma. Thank God you found Christ (or He found you).

I think if you boil it down, it was ultimately your quest for the truth which led you to God and science was merely the vehicle God chose; which I find quite remarkable. Science, in general, has no power to lead anyone to Christ, in my opinion, because, by its very definition it cannot accept God, although the scientist may.

I think Arch is correct in one respect. If one attempts to explain anything without considering God's hand in it, the explanation will fall short. Nevertheless, science is the study of the physical universe which at best, can only give partial glimpses of God's nature, heart, mind and purpose.

archaeologist wrote:i may be making a mistake here but i want to point something out concerning science.


the oxford dictionary (advanced learners) defines science as:

knowledge about the structure and behavior of the natural and physical world, based on facts you can prove, for example by experiments.

there are other definitions and it depends on whom you talk to which definition you get. dr. del ratzsch in his book, The battle of beginnings:why neither side is winning the creation-evolution debate, did a good job in outlining the different definitions applied to the field of science.

all omit God or the spiritual and this omission is the problem with science. once a person ignores data, omits it, or whatever, their theory, experiment and subsequently there conclusions have become corrupted.

which in turns leads the scientist and adherents down the wrong path and undermines or destroys any claim of objectivity, while headed to a wrong conclusion.

I would agree in principle...However, unless we are all Christians, this will never change. In living within the world we are to be a light. This means interacting and debating.

THere are certainly problems with people using the method or experiments. We are all sinful. In the vast majority of cases they do not ignore data, omit, or change data. Omitting or ignoring data ususally self-corrects from other scientists. But I definitely agree that philosophy interfered with interpreting data. I think moreso philosophy interferes with the original question being asked.

Unfortunaltey, we all see through the glass darkly. This is the closest the secular world can get to seeing God. Sad.

archaeologist wrote: science in its limiting defined manner cannot find the answers it seeks because it refuse to acknowledge what it cannot see, touch, feel, or observe or prove. yet the proof is sitting right in front of them. now this may be good for the secularist who does not believe God and does not care to but for the christian it is wrong.

This is fine again in principle but when we actually apply science (ie, medicines, vaccines), we trust in what we OBSERVE and in the comparisons between contrl and experimental groups. In these applications, we are absolutely fine with limiting our conclusions to what we can touch, feel, observe, control, and repeat. Science is very LIMITED in what it can answer and unfortuately society has raised it to be on the same plane as God.

archaeologist wrote: once the christian adopts the secular way, they have immediately left God's way which is not what God said to do. science is filled with non-believers who are being deceived by the evil one, christians cannot follow that because it leads to destruction.

No here, I disagree. In fact, the CHristian scientist in indeed blessed because not only is he/she in communion with God but the wisdom and discernment that comes from this relationship could only enhance his/her work.

archaeologist wrote: scientists have been given a lot of intelligence but if they hinder that intelligence by removing God, then they are no better than the secularist who denies the existence of the spiritual factors involved in the world. they DO play a part, a very influential one and they cannot be dismissed by limiting ones scope or investigation.

It seems like it should read Christian scientists...
agree with the first, but a Christian scientist who is working on a heart medication must still use controlled experiments for testing.

archaeologist wrote: the true believer in Christ whois a scientist must divorce themselves from following secular ways, methods and guidelines if they want to find the truth and find out what God has really done.

do not ask me what those are because God hasn't told me to tell you

?!?!? do you know and just don't want to tell me? God didn't tell you to tell me? come on...

archaeologist wrote: He wants christians to put off the secular and come to Him for guidance. also i do not know what scientists are involved in or where they are at in their work only He does thus you need to go to Him to change your directions. the fact is the world needs answers not more questions, not more studies that take people's eyes of God. inother words, you have to make a stand for the truth or your of no use.

And Christian scientists do come for Him for guidance, just as Christian politicians come to Him for guidance, even though one could make an arguement that all politics are evil Christian scientists do make a stand. That does not mean they have to give up their experiments. Thank God for that.

archaeologists wrote: this is not a scientific world and not all things can be defined by science alone, if it were so we would not need faith. science is a very limited field and is limited further by the omittance of the spiritual. these roadblocks can only be removed by getting back inline with God and His word.

Agreed, but this can only happen with CHristian scientists.

archaeologists wrote: one very clear verse says: "why do you call me Lord Lord and do not the things i say" this is not an empty charge.

GUess we must then define what He means.

archaeologists wrote: case in point: when talking about the flood, people continually say, science says it can't be done--or something to that effect. well science is NOT the final authority in any theological matter and you need to learn that quickly. science does not know all the answers! it is not to be relied upon as such.

Sure, with God all things are possible...doesn't mean we can't investigate. Jesus showed Thomas His wounds...If Jesus was not willing to entertain our thoughts and doubts, then I think we would have seen a very different ending to that scene

archaeologist wrote: God does not give us all the information because the only way to please Him is by faith, thus science will never find all the answers. this is proven ovwr and over again,one just has to read the myriads of articles which keep saying 'i don't know', 'we think...' and so on.

Faith does not mean blind faith. We will never have all the answers. We should that stop us from seeking out How God made this universe.

archaeologist wrote: it is not important or germane to salvation to determine the date of creation, you will never get the answer, it is important to believe and accept that took place as God said in His word. there are far-reaching ramifications when you do not.

nor is it important to know how Noah got the animals or debate whether or not it was big enough. God gave the dimensions, God helped Noah thus it was done and it was big enough.

any other thought has the same reprocussions as the previous creation point. if you disagree with God and deny His words, then REPENT for you are wrong, NOT GOD.

But...if in reading the Hebrew there are multiple meanings to words...then we are not necessarily denying His words. In fact, the Gap theory depends on an alternate tranlation of the words in Genesis.

archaeologist wrote: this does not mean we do not investigate for we need more information all the time to thwart the evil one, this does not mean we give up science or archaeology, or history and so on. IT MEANS you stop following the blind and turn back to the one who sees all, knows all, and who did all.

If we are to investigate then we are to observe and observe carefully. This can only be done by carefully studying cause and effect. The method will not change between Christian scientists and secular scientists, the hearts are different.

Still unclear about what you mean. Are you wanting them to change their acceptance of some model? Reject local flood? Reject microevolution? Is this what you really mean? Please do not say that God has not told you to tell me. We as CHristians should always be willing to instruct one another.

No one undertakes a work without a purpose and I feel this strikes at the heart of the argument that science and most human endeavor is fundementally flawed in its purpose. What a different world this would be if all things were done to the glory of Christ and if all human endeavor was driven to bring praise to the Savior. If the goal of scientific investigation was to follow this mandate I suspect we would continuosly be rejoicing as God revealed new greatness to us.

Unfortunately, research money is given to those whose purposes serve secular interests and even Christian scientists need to eat.

However, unless we are all Christians, this will never change. In living within the world we are to be a light. This means interacting and debating

you are missing the point. Christians are instructed by God to follow Him. 'my sheephear my voice' which means we do not follow the principles of the secular world. they have oitted God's ways and actions from the equation and christians cannot follow suit. they need to listen to God's voice to get instructions on how to find the truth, and then stick to their answers when secularists oppose them.

no it does not mean interacting and debating, it means proclaiming that you have the answer and instructing others on how to get to the same point. The Bible tells us to stay away from vain arguments (i wish i could recall the verses right now) also in 2 Tim. 2:19 it says ---'everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness.'

which means turn from following secular ways and thought and listen to God. if you don't then you just advertised you donot believe the God you say you follow.

In the vast majority of cases they do not ignore data, omit, or change data. Omitting or ignoring data ususally self-corrects from other scientists.

yes they do. when the supernatural is eliminated from the beginning, then data is ignored and omitted. i see this in Hawkins work, Ryan & Pittman's work, and other scientists i have studied.

the peer review system is flawed and corruptible it is not of God. God is neither.

Unfortunaltey, we all see through the glass darkly. This is the closest the secular world can get to seeing God

NO. the closest secular man gets to see God, is by the behavior of the believers. if the believers do not follow God and His ways then, they will rarely see God. the responsibility lies with the follower of God for IF THEY do not follow God's leading then why should the unbeliever change thier ways?

This is fine again in principle but when we actually apply science (ie, medicines, vaccines), we trust in what we OBSERVE

God doesn't always allow people to test His ways tosee if they are correct. if God instructs a christian scientist to include certain ingredients, that scientist does not have the liberty to disagree but must act. observation will come when the subject is healed. one does not rely on secular methods but they rely on God's leading.
people love to make God subject to science and that is the wrong order.

No here, I disagree

i didn't say left God, i said left God's way and by disagreeing i see you disagree with God as well:
2 Timothy 3:13
while evil men and imosters will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.

christians are to NOT follow non-christians.

but a Christian scientist who is working on a heart medication must still use controlled experiments for testing.

in doing so, then, after receiving God's instructions and guidance, you would be doubting God. that is a lackof faith illustrated many tmes throughout the Bible.

sure if God has not given you instructions and guidance, then by all means do the tests but if you are sure God has done so, then use faith and trust in God.

when God instructed Moses to hit the rock to find water, moses did not test it out by hitting other rocks first then hitting the one God told him to hit.

do you know and just don't want to tell me? God didn't tell you to tell me? come on...

1. i am not talking specifically to you only. the original post is for everyone who has stopped listening to god and have been listening to secular ways.

2. everyone's situation is different. i cannot give blanket instructions as God has different purposes for different people. He knows what He wants individuals to do and only He can instruct them.

3. i was not given specifics for each individual only commanded to tell people to stop following those things that are not from God and to seek Him out. By succombing to secular thought, understanding, and ignoring what God has said, by changing what God has said and relying onscience instead, how do you expect to convert the non-believer to God? you are not following His ways but man's.

why do you think God had Gideon dismiss all but 300 men? so that the unbelieving world would know that God was above all their gods and the glory would go to Him not Gideon and his army.

then the time is right to reap the harvest but if all people follow secualr ways, then you are not only robbing God of Glory but of souls as well. our duty as believers is to point to God. as both John the Baptist and Paul, and others did.

...doesn't mean we can't investigate

i didn't say you don't investigate, i am saying that those who side with science and secular man over God's word and actions are wrong.

if in reading the Hebrew there are multiple meanings to words...then we are not necessarily denying His words. In fact, the Gap theory depends on an alternate tranlation of the words in Genesis.

'ye shall know the truth and the truth shallset you free.' a promise of God. i happen to side more with the gap theory than any other not as a compromise but as a possibility. it is also possible that God did it all 10,000 years ago. when is not the issue here.

If we are to investigate then we are to observe and observe carefully

not neccessarily. when God instructs to move and do certain things, you do not sit back and set up experiments and then observe. you act. you are not the one who gets to decide these things.

it sounds like you are trying tohold on to ways that you are comfortable with and are afraid to let God direct as He sees fit.

Are you wanting them to change their acceptance of some model? Reject local flood? Reject microevolution?

that is a start. it wasn't a local flood and evolution does not exist in any form. one cannot believe in creation adn then say evolution is at work also. the two thoughts are not complimentery but opponents. one is fact (creation) and the other is fiction (evolution) derived from the imagination of a deceived man.

who are you going to believe? God or darwin? that is the only choice avilable.

Is this what you really mean? Please do not say that God has not told you to tell me.

i did not address the original post to you, you must be nervous or vain to think i am only speaking to you. if you are feeling anything, it is highly possible there are things in your life that the Holy Spirit is trying to get your attention so you can deal with it.

this thread is for all those who have decided not to believe God and have decided to limit their thinking to following man's ways and understanding.

We as CHristians should always be willing to instruct one another

that is what i am doing. why do you think i was appalled when another poster said a certain article turned him away from what God had said. he let a poorly written, poorly thought out, poorly proven (no proof whatsoever, actually) illogical work influence his life.

he let a human help take his eyes off God and that is appalling. i came tothis site only to read and find new information but it turns out i was led here by God to say a few things as well.

i am not perfect but the message is getting said. in reading many posts, i amhoping they weren't written by people who call themselves christians because a lot of them are just against what God has said and done.

remember, it isn't just you that is involved in these debates, there is a biggerpicture and you need to see the ramifications if you go against what God has said.

archaeologist wrote:in doing so, then, after receiving God's instructions and guidance, you would be doubting God. that is a lackof faith illustrated many tmes throughout the Bible.

sure if God has not given you instructions and guidance, then by all means do the tests but if you are sure God has done so, then use faith and trust in God.

Whoa! Are you saying that all a Christian scientist must do is pray about a chemical and then give it to you?

Let me understand you

Suppose a devout CHristian Cardiologist researching a new heart medication receieves such a conviction about a certain chemical. This cardiologist has a growing relationship with CHrist and receives this conviction after much prayer.

Are you saying that to then test this medication is wrong?

archaeologist wrote: 1. i am not talking specifically to you only. the original post is for everyone who has stopped listening to god and have been listening to secular ways.

2. everyone's situation is different. i cannot give blanket instructions as God has different purposes for different people. He knows what He wants individuals to do and only He can instruct them.

3. i was not given specifics for each individual only commanded to tell people to stop following those things that are not from God and to seek Him out. By succombing to secular thought, understanding, and ignoring what God has said, by changing what God has said and relying onscience instead, how do you expect to convert the non-believer to God? you are not following His ways but man's.

But you claim that Christian scientists are out these needing to repent. there must be something FUNDAMENTALLY wrong and above you seem to imply that the very experiments they are working on are displaying disobedience, lack of trust in God.

archaeologist wrote: not neccessarily. when God instructs to move and do certain things, you do not sit back and set up experiments and then observe. you act. you are not the one who gets to decide these things.

OK, then let me show you what I am hearing. You are stating that a conviction from God that a certain vaccine will work should be enough to start giving to the entire population?

archaeologist wrote: Quote:
Are you wanting them to change their acceptance of some model? Reject local flood? Reject microevolution?


that is a start. it wasn't a local flood and evolution does not exist in any form. one cannot believe in creation adn then say evolution is at work also. the two thoughts are not complimentery but opponents. one is fact (creation) and the other is fiction (evolution) derived from the imagination of a deceived man.

who are you going to believe? God or darwin? that is the only choice avilable.

Ok, but we have already established that I disagree with you. YOu claim that I am in disobedience and must repent. Now you're the claivoyant one who knowd my heart.

Archaeologist wrote:you must be nervous or vain to think i am only speaking to you

So you get to assume I was addressing you with the death question but I don't get to asusme you are addressing me. Actually since you are addressing those Christian scientists whom you believe must reject secular ways, I must be included in that, so yes, I get to respond.

archaeologist wrote:i came tothis site only to read and find new information but it turns out i was led here by God to say a few things as well.

i am not perfect but the message is getting said. in reading many posts, i amhoping they weren't written by people who call themselves christians because a lot of them are just against what God has said and done.

So now, my post are misleading, poop, I am in need of repentance, and the Holy Spirit must be needing to address me. Did it eve occur to you that the Holy Spirit might be calling to you? How arrogant! YOu believe that you are here to save us all!!

Forum Monk wrote: What a different world this would be if all things were done to the glory of Christ and if all human endeavor was driven to bring praise to the Savior. If the goal of scientific investigation was to follow this mandate I suspect we would continuosly be rejoicing as God revealed new greatness to us.

Amen!!

Are you saying that all a Christian scientist must do is pray about a chemical and then give it to you?

did i say the word 'pray' or go to prayer? read the statement again, i said being given instructions.

Are you saying that to then test this medication is wrong

you are not understanding what i write, i said: sure if God has not given you instructions and guidance, then by all means do the tests

let me give an example; Jesus meets a blind man and when asked to heal, Jesus spits into the ground makes mud and applies it the eyes. The instruction is to go wash in the pool of water. does the blind man say--wait i must test this mixture first before doing that to see if it works OR does he follow instructions and go wash?

God guides you to do something without testing it--what would you do?

Are you saying that to then test this medication is wrong

i guess i am assuming you have more biblical knowledge than you do: He didn't tell you to go test it, but to go apply it thus if you disobey and test first what do you think?

moses was told by God to do something, he did not do it, same result but he died before entering the promised land. God is very clear on the reason why---Deut. 32:43.

lack of trust in God.

maybe i am being too general and give people more credit for thinking than i should. but i thought i had made it clear that it was following the secular ways and not God's ways. if God has you change experimental practices, what would you do?

You are stating that a conviction from God that a certain vaccine will work should be enough to start giving to the entire population

well maybe 'conviction' isn't the right word here or not. i used the words 'instructed', 'guided' in a manner which implied that the message was quite clear that it was from God. if you mean the same thing, then YES. yo are not privy to all of God's reasoning nor are you aware of the time factor involved and so on. if you stop to second guess God thenyou are going to have more trouble onyour hands than giving a vaccine which isn't secular approved.

but we have already established that I disagree with you

you don't disgaree with me, but what i am passing along. if you compromise, then you have lost already. no ifs, ands or buts. there is more to the situation than if you accept.

Actually since you are addressing those Christian scientists whom you believe must reject secular ways, I must be included in that, so yes, I get to respond.

i didn't say you couldn't respond, i said i wasn't addressing you specifically. big difference.

my post are misleading,

you assume a lot, don't you...along with jumping to many conclusions without the facts. that was a very general statement and you do not know how many different people i have read here. you certainly are not the only one.

Did it eve occur to you that the Holy Spirit might be calling to you? How arrogant! YOu believe that you are here to save us all!!

no. i am just delievering a message, and it is not arrogant when you obey what God wants you to do.

archaeologist wrote: well maybe 'conviction' isn't the right word here or not. i used the words 'instructed', 'guided' in a manner which implied that the message was quite clear that it was from God. if you mean the same thing, then YES. yo are not privy to all of God's reasoning nor are you aware of the time factor involved and so on. if you stop to second guess God thenyou are going to have more trouble onyour hands than giving a vaccine which isn't secular approved.

I used the word prayer because I wanted to establish that this scientist would be following GOd. Secular approved....don't see why an approval process is so secular. Thalidamide babies in the 60's were the result of giving medicine before good testing and approval processes. They rushed it. If we are to be good stewards here, then we should always test, and I would question a conviction, instruction, guidance that involves another person''s life and health. We are responsible.

Just don't like the idea of having of having a scientist, even a saved one, giving medications to people claiming to have heard the guidance of God.

If we are to be good stewards here, then we should always test,

no, that is not what a good steward does. a good steward obeys his master, is honest, fair , merciful, just and so on but he never distrusts his master.

and you are wrong.

I would question a conviction, instruction, guidance that involves another person''s life and health. We are responsible

you are responsible for what God tells you to do? NO, God is and you are responsible to God for obeying or disobeying His instructions. you may have freedom to choose to obey ornot but it isn't always wise to exercise it when God is involved.

Just don't like the idea of having of having a scientist, even a saved one, giving medications to people claiming to have heard the guidance of God.

that is why God made the provision to test the spirits so you would know and be sure it was of God. you assume way too much and know soo little.

I would question a conviction, instruction, guidance that involves another person''s life and health.

which makes it a good thing that you are not in charge.

Suddenly I am very thankful that YOU are not in charge.

What happens when two Christian scientists in the same field have convictions about two separate drugs. Each is convinced God is telling them about the correctness of the drug.

Now, They both claim they have been led by God, both claim that they have tested the spirits. Both claim that they should be obedient to GOd and that God has told them to use this drug now! We know that one of them may not be truthful, or is being mislead.

How are we to know? We cannot exmaine a man's heart, only God can do that. Internally one doctor may be given a true conviction. But from our perspective, how do we know?

We know that one of them may not be truthful, or is being mislead.

that is not the only option.

Hello? Keep going? Elaborate...

What is the other option? It might be that both are good drugs. But what is it isn't?

YOu would be willing to entrust a child to one of the scientists, both of which claim that God is telling them that this drug is right? YOu wouldn't know which one is true.

Even if we could....we need to work within the framework of this government's authority.

Hello? Keep going? Elaborate...

do your own thinking, i opened the door but i am not going to hold your hand.

YOu would be willing to entrust a child to one of the scientists, both of which claim that God is telling them that this drug is right? YOu wouldn't know which one is true.

there is sooooo much you do not know, your compromised state has clogged up your ability to think.

case in point:

we need to work within the framework of this government's authority.

what did paul and silas say--we obey God rather than man... doesn't look like there are limitations placed upon that. so if you want to listen to secular governments over God's direction you go do that.

this is not to say that we ignore all regulations, it is saying that when God directs you do not doubt and test. you do not say well the government said we can't...i was very specific but you seem to have a problem with comprehension.