Evidence for God from Science

Here is the disagreement I have with arches view (note: I actually agree with alot of what he has to say):

He believes that we shouldn't question how God did it (correct me if I am wrong arch), I disagree, since God gave us an intelligent brain, he is most likely overjoyed at the thought of knowing or discovering some of the God given elements of natural world. Since God created us in his image, we are likely to share and use some of Gods traits, am I wrong?
Secondly, as Christians....we already believe and know that God did it Arch, its that some like to know a bit more than that, is there a problem with trying to understand how God created, I understand we may never know or understand, but this does not mean we are exploiting God in any way.
Arch believes that whoever follows up on any secular science automatically disengages himself from Christian beliefs and disrespects or turns his/her back on God. Arch, I don't know about many christians, but me in particular, whenever I studied at a secular college, whenever I worked at a secular job, or whatever else... I believe God has always directed me on the right path and that God gave me the strength to overcome many tasks throughout my whole life. For all I care, the next person sitting beside me could be the devil himself, if God is in my heart, nothing the devil can say or do can affect me.

The bible is Gods word, I have no problem saying or telling anyone that Gods' word is the only truth that exists today. In my opinion, God's word should be taken and replaced with all the political non-sense out there, the government should be governed by Gods' word and the country should be governed by Gods' word. The question is, what can I do Arch, when ALL of us Christians are too busy fighting with one another instead of taking action on the important matters?

Here is the problem I am seeing with arches view

a thread dedicated to my views, feel free to dissect what i say imay clarify when someone misrepresents but remember i am not impressed. this is only 1 thread about me, http://www.captporridge.com/bb had between 13-20 such threads. i lost count feel free to check it out.

now i will go through the initial post and see what is misrepresented(in another post)

He believes that we shouldn't question how God did it

didn't say that--the Bible tells us to prove His words not add secular ways to them.

we already believe and know that God did it Arch, its that some like to know a bit more than that, is there a problem with trying to understand how God created

understanding how isn't the problem and i never said you couldn't understand how. the Bible tells us how. i said to stop adopting secular theories, methods, thinking, conclusions and hypothesis. BIG difference.

Arch believes that whoever follows up on any secular science automatically disengages himself from Christian beliefs and disrespects or turns his/her back on God

no, i did not say you disengaged your christian beliefs i said you were not listening to God and by adopting a different theory thanwhat God has said inthe Bible, you are calling Him a liar. you can follow up on secular science all you want, but you need to do it with God's ways, God's thinking because secular ways and thinking ARE NOT OF GOD. a believer must stick to what they believe.

Arch, I don't know about many christians, but me in particular, whenever I studied at a secular college, whenever I worked at a secular job

i never said you couldn't go to such places and God will keep you safe but if you allow yourself to compromise then you have hindered the work that God wants you to do.

The bible is Gods word

then why are you changing it? God gives a warning about adding to or taking from His word.

when ALL of us Christians are too busy fighting with one another instead of taking action on the important matters?

i am not here fighting but was sent to tell you that if you want to make an impact for God then you must get back to God's word and do it His way. using secular methods,etc., using a general definition, i.d., is not doing it God's way and undermines anything that God wants accomplished.

it is not what is comfortable for you--it is what God wants and How he wants it done.

I want to reply but i am hesitant to do so. I do not want a thread specifically to attack arch, since (although i disagree a lot with him) i want him here posting. I do not want us to 'gang up' on him in any way since he is a chistian like the rest of us and i appreciate his views. That being said...

it is not what is comfortable for you

Look at what happens to most of the scientists who agree with ID and tell me if you still think they do it because it is comfortable. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are not in line with God.

It seems to me that you think you know God's view better then everyone else.

Enigma7457 wrote:I want to reply but i am hesitant to do so. I do not want a thread specifically to attack arch, since (although i disagree a lot with him) i want him here posting. I do not want us to 'gang up' on him in any way since he is a chistian like the rest of us and i appreciate his views. That being said...

it is not what is comfortable for you

Look at what happens to most of the scientists who agree with ID and tell me if you still think they do it because it is comfortable. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are not in line with God.

It seems to me that you think you know God's view better then everyone else.

Excellent point....

My view of Arch - not directed toward anyone

The message is not GOD DID IT. That has never been the point. Any Christian who does not believe God did it is sadly deluded.

The message is, set yourself apart in order to have an impact for God. Do not conform to secular points of view, secular theories, secular thinking because they are definitely deluded. I think Arch is telling us: how can you distinquish yourselves as a unique creation, as renewed in mind, by continuing to think as the 'heathen' (unrepentent) think.

Imagine if the Christian scientist in all his/her intelligence took the point of view: Yes, in my wisdom and intelligence, I have examined the secular evidence and it is wrong. It rejects the hand of God and fails to glorify Him. Imagine being diametrically opposed to all which appears before your eyes because it is not conforming to God's Word. Imagine taking a stand for something so radical you will be hated for the sake of Christ.

I don't think Arch is condemning science, intelligence, logic or sound reasoning. He is not saying - do not look at what God as made. He is saying look at it but interpret it correctly.

One needs to think about what one is doing when one says (for example) "God used evolution to create". Evolution is a man-made theory. Secular, non-christian men, developed an idea on how all of this could happen without the requirement for a creator and what happens? Christians confiscate the idea and say - yes that how God did it. Why must this be done? Because the stronghold of evolution has be come greater than God so lets incorporate it? Because we as scientists, intellectuals and great thinkers are becoming ensnared by our own brilliance? Where is the beginning of wisdom? It is fear of the Lord.

No the message is NOT god did it. The message is use your wisdom wisely and dare to think differently than the rest of the world.

I agree with Monk for the most part. However...

In the 1600s, before gravity was discovered, they said God moved the planets around, holding them in place. Then it was discovered God set them in motion and let Gravity do the rest. Christians of the time freaked out. THey thought it was taking God out of the equation.

I am not an evolutionist and i think the theory, in large, is rediculous. HOWEVER, i don't see the problem with, God used Evolution (again, i do not believe that, but only because evolution fails as a theory, not because it demeans God). We do not know how God did it. And i agree the issue isn't God did it (we all agree there).

Evolution is a man-made theory

There are a lot of man-made theories. Like gravity (and others, can't think of them now...) Are we to not trust in them? When God said, let there be, he left the door open. In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth (my favorite verse ever). How? Who knows. I don't. But, i do say we try to figure it out. Christian scientists working with science is the only way i see it (apart from direct revelation from God, but i think that kind of takes the fun out of it).

Read the privileged planet. Very interesting book. The authors believe one of our 'purposes' is to study the world around us. We all agree science cannot tell us anything about the spiritual, cannot help us find truth, cannot, in itself, save us. But it is still fun, isn't it? It's exciting. It can be awe-inspiring. The wallpaper on my computer is constanting changing, but it is always an image of something God created (usually astronomy, since galaxies and such are really cool looking). I just love to sit there and look at God's work and go, wow.

Now, i know i went off subject a little, and i may have missed some of Monk's points or appeared to agree and then talk about something else. This wasn't meant as a direct reply to that, since i kind of went off on a rabbit trail. Sorry

The message is, set yourself apart in order to have an impact for God. Do not conform to secular points of view, secular theories, secular thinking because they are definitely deluded. I think Arch is telling us: how can you distinquish yourselves as a unique creation, as renewed in mind, by continuing to think as the 'heathen' (unrepentent) think.

Agree one-hundred percent. One-hundred and ten. However, if we are to be light to the world, how can we shine unless we go to them (i think i heard that in a song). Not saying we conform to them, but the only way to penetrate the secular way of science is for Christian scientists to enter the scientific field. Let them start to be the ones who make all of the important discoveries. Let them show the atheists how it is done. After all, that's how it started. Galileo was a christian. Most other ancient scientists were christians. IT wasn't until recently that atheists began to dominate the field. Lets take it back. And the best way i see it is to send some Christians in there to do the job right.

The message is, set yourself apart in order to have an impact for God

Agree again. In all you do, do it for his glory. Can't we do that through science?

Again, apologize for the rabbit trails. This post is a little hit or miss here and there. Just started to type and it all came out.

Forum Monk wrote:My view of Arch - not directed toward anyone

The message is not GOD DID IT. That has never been the point. Any Christian who does not believe God did it is sadly deluded.

The message is, set yourself apart in order to have an impact for God. Do not conform to secular points of view, secular theories, secular thinking because they are definitely deluded. I think Arch is telling us: how can you distinquish yourselves as a unique creation, as renewed in mind, by continuing to think as the 'heathen' (unrepentent) think.

Imagine if the Christian scientist in all his/her intelligence took the point of view: Yes, in my wisdom and intelligence, I have examined the secular evidence and it is wrong. It rejects the hand of God and fails to glorify Him. Imagine being diametrically opposed to all which appears before your eyes because it is not conforming to God's Word. Imagine taking a stand for something so radical you will be hated for the sake of Christ.

I don't think Arch is condemning science, intelligence, logic or sound reasoning. He is not saying - do not look at what God as made. He is saying look at it but interpret it correctly.

One needs to think about what one is doing when one says (for example) "God used evolution to create". Evolution is a man-made theory. Secular, non-christian men, developed an idea on how all of this could happen without the requirement for a creator and what happens? Christians confiscate the idea and say - yes that how God did it. Why must this be done? Because the stronghold of evolution has be come greater than God so lets incorporate it? Because we as scientists, intellectuals and great thinkers are becoming ensnared by our own brilliance? Where is the beginning of wisdom? It is fear of the Lord.

No the message is NOT god did it. The message is use your wisdom wisely and dare to think differently than the rest of the world.

But what if I do examine the secular evidence and believe some of it is true? I am still just as hated because I am still opposing their philosophy. To think that atheists somehow change their view towards us simply because we agree with some of the observations is laughable.

Why must this be done? Because some of us have examine the observations and have come to different conclusion. The data doesn't change, Our conclusions are different.

The stronghold of evolution has never become stronger than GOd. We "incorporate" the data simply because we examine it and find it to hold up to what scripture says.

Our own brilliance? COme on, we still fear God....Good grief, any Christian who understands the awesome complexity of the world must bow down before Him. Unraveling the mysteries of the world should make us even more astounded, more stunned, more humble.

Again, Enigma

well said

Enigma wrote: There are a lot of man-made theories. Like gravity (and others, can't think of them now...) Are we to not trust in them? When God said, let there be, he left the door open.

I don't recall when Isaac Newton proposed a theory for gravity, that he proclaimed a naturalistic cosomology, nor did he adopt and existing one. Newton was an example of a Christian scientist and apologist.

God opened the door when he said let there be? To what? Any theory that makes sense to our limited understanding and observational skills?

zoegirl wrote:But what if I do examine the secular evidence and believe some of it is true?

What if I examine Rastafarianism and believe some of it is true? Can I now claim to a "Progressive Rastafarian" or a "Christian Rastafarian"? Glimpses of truth are everywhere but one should not adopt the name nor the philosophy for obvious reasons.

We "incorporate" the data simply because we examine it and find it to hold up to what scripture says.

Then why must we "invent" Intelligent Design? We can't have it both ways.

In the 1600s, before gravity was discovered, they said God moved the planets around, holding them in place. Then it was discovered God set them in motion and let Gravity do the rest. Christians of the time freaked out. THey thought it was taking God out of the equation

the problem here is--gravity is not man made theory. it is a discovery of what God had done to maintain life on earth the former is not usurped by the latter because God still held them in place, He just created and used a force still not understood by secular scientists.

read: the final theory by mccutcheon.

We do not know how God did it.

but we do know how God did it, it is throughout the pages of the Bible and in the genesis account. do the words 'God spoke and there was...' tell you he used evolution? no.

evolution is not of God nor would he use it. WHY is it so hard for you to let go of evolution?

Christian scientists working with science is the only way i see it

why is science the only valid field here? especially since it is too limited and ignores data?

Not saying we conform to them, but the only way to penetrate the secular way of science is for Christian scientists to enter the scientific field

that doesn't mean you do it their way, with their regulations and so on. you are to follow God not man.

Can't we do that through science

didn't say you couldn't, i just said to remove secular thought, secular beliefs and so on from when you do it. if science says to ignore the spiritual, you as believers cannot dothat for the spiritualplays an integral part.

man wants God out of the picture and to compromise and say that God used evolution is denying the Bible, which then denies God.

But what if I do examine the secular evidence and believe some of it is true

evidence is evidence and normally it is the interpretation, the theorizing, the hypothesis and the conclusions that lead them astray. for example, i used ryan and pittman in another thread and they discovered evidence for what may be Noah's flood. they went left and attributed it to an ice age melt down instead of pointing to God.

we as believers can take the same evidence, throw out the misdirection and say 'wait a minute, this looks like evidence for a global flood'. we have clues they don't have which we can use to help determine the truth.

gravity doesn't change because a christian is looking at it, the theory, the result changes, pointing to God not some alternative.

The stronghold of evolution has never become stronger than GOd. We "incorporate" the data simply because we examine it and find it to hold up to what scripture says

that is the problem. you can't incorporate anything that disagrees with the Bible. if you do, then you have been derailed. and have done what the evil one wants take God out of the picture or reduce what He said to lies.

COme on, we still fear God

then why do you incorporate what is not of Him into your beliefs? if you fear God, then you stick to what He says and discern what isn't of Him and throw it out.

discernment is neccessary here because you can't take all of science and claim it right when it claims God is wrong.

I don't really know what you're fighting in your post, so forgive me if i miss it completely.

God opened the door when he said let there be? To what? Any theory that makes sense to our limited understanding and observational skills?

If it fits with scripture, yeah. All we have is 'our limited understanding and observational skills'. That's what we use when we interpret scripture. Should we not try to do that for fear of messing up and coming up with beliefs that are untrue? Why shouldn't we inspect the world and come to our own conclusions. If we're wrong (and science is usually wrong at least partially) we'll figure it out later. Since science isn't going to make or break Christianity, and if some Christians can enter the secular arena and throw down the gauntlets, why stop them. If Behe (who is catholic, if i read correctly) thinks he has it right, and it doesn't interfere with his worship, why criticize. He's a perfect example of a christian scientists doing what he can. ID may not stand the test of time, but then again neither will very many theories.

What if I examine Rastafarianism and believe some of it is true? Can I now claim to a "Progressive Rastafarian" or a "Christian Rastafarian"? Glimpses of truth are everywhere but one should not adopt the name nor the philosophy for obvious reasons.

Okay, i don't know what rastafarianism is. I can't really reply directly to this. But, wherever there is truth, we should cling to it. If the buddhists hit some kind of truth, we should accept it. Not saying we should be "Buddhist Christians". If it is truth, it will be in the bible as well (or at least not directly opposed in the bible), so we can continue on as Christians. But now we can say, "Hey, those buddhist are getting close. They see some of the truth." I believe every other religion (mayby not every) have some aspect of the truth. Christianity has the whole truth.

Then why must we "invent" Intelligent Design? We can't have it both ways.

Any theory proposed by science is "invented" by us. But, if Christian scientists do the inventing, it will be (theoretically) in line with Christ.

Any theory proposed by science is "invented" by us. But, if Christian scientists do the inventing, it will be (theoretically) in line with Christ

not neccessarily, many christians make mistakes. you need to be discerning and know what is right and wrong. just because a christian says something doesn't make it right, which is why i say you need to follow God's leading.

Hey, those buddhist are getting close. They see some of the truth." I believe every other religion (mayby not every) have some aspect of the truth.

yes but its purpose is to deceive not to bring people to Christ. be careful, there is only one way to salvation and if they deny Christ then they will not make it no matter how much truth they have.

All we have is 'our limited understanding and observational skills'

WE have God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit.

Why shouldn't we inspect the world and come to our own conclusions.

who says your own conclusions are right? if it disagrees with the Bible then ...

If we're wrong (and science is usually wrong at least partially) we'll figure it out later.

do you think you have the time to do that? what of those who believe your wrong conclusion? what will happen to them? this is not a game.

If Behe (who is catholic, if i read correctly) thinks he has it right, and it doesn't interfere with his worship, why criticize

worship isn't the key here, it is not the path to salvation anyone can worship, so i would adjust your point.

ID may not stand the test of time, but then again neither will very many theories.

then i.d should not be proposed by the christian. it removes God from the picture and allows anyone to put anything into the role as 'creator' it is a very dangerous game and does not lead people to God.

ROund and round we go...

WHY is it so hard for you to let go of evolution?

As i've said, i do not believe in evolution...

that doesn't mean you do it their way, with their regulations and so on. you are to follow God not man.

How fast do you drive? I bet you follow the speed limit. Everything from man is not opposed to God.

didn't say you couldn't, i just said to remove secular thought, secular beliefs and so on from when you do it. if science says to ignore the spiritual, you as believers cannot dothat for the spiritualplays an integral part.

We all agree science cannot tell us about the spiritual, so why shouldn't we use it when we are trying to discern the natural? A christian scientists is not taking God out of the equation. He (or she, sorry zoe) is relying on God in all they do, including research. Newton is a perfect example. He said "Gravity" and the Church went "No" They fought him, saying he was taking GOd out of the equation. He wasn't. (Sorry if you're getting tired of Gravity, but it is a very similar situation).

evidence is evidence and normally it is the interpretation, the theorizing, the hypothesis and the conclusions that lead them astray. for example, i used ryan and pittman in another thread and they discovered evidence for what may be Noah's flood. they went left and attributed it to an ice age melt down instead of pointing to God.

So we look at the evidence and say "Flood". We all agree science cannot tell us the spiritual, which is why science stops at ID. Now, as Christian taking into account other avenues besides science, we say, God done it. But we cannot say God Done It only using science, which is where we all agree science falls short.

discernment is neccessary here because you can't take all of science and claim it right when it claims God is wrong.

WHAT? No one is taking 'all of science'.

We "incorporate" the data simply because we examine it and find it to hold up to what scripture says.

Hold up to scritpure. If it didn't hold up to scripture, we would throw it out. Now, the problem is everyone doesn't agree on what holds up to scripture. And, as Monk said:

our limited understanding and observational skills?

I apologize that the above quote is taken completely out of it's context, but the point is made that we have limited understand and observational skills. That means that we are limited in our ability to interpret scripture (hence a hundred million different denomonations all worshiping the same god in a slightly different way).

Enigma7457 wrote:I don't really know what you're fighting in your post, so forgive me if i miss it completely.

Sorry if I seem like I'm fighting - I'm debating.

If it fits with scripture, yeah. All we have is 'our limited understanding and observational skills'. That's what we use when we interpret scripture.

True but we also have the witness of the Spirit and the testimony of the believers.

Should we not try to do that for fear of messing up and coming up with beliefs that are untrue? Why shouldn't we inspect the world and come to our own conclusions. If we're wrong (and science is usually wrong at least partially) we'll figure it out later.

If you are strictly talking science here I can agree for the most part. I would caution about interpreting theology anyway we want.

Since science isn't going to make or break Christianity, and if some Christians can enter the secular arena and throw down the gauntlets, why stop them. If Behe (who is catholic, if i read correctly) thinks he has it right, and it doesn't interfere with his worship, why criticize. He's a perfect example of a christian scientists doing what he can. ID may not stand the test of time, but then again neither will very many theories.

Good for Behe or anyone that wants to do it but in my opinion it comes with enormous responsibility at some point. The things some people say reflect on Christians at large and especially in the scientific arenas. Recently there have been a series of debates featured on national television as sort of Christianity vs. Atheists over evolution theory. Kurt Cameron is representing the Christian side. God bless Kurt, a beautiful, God fearing Christian and good example, but clearly out of his league in this debate. It tends to hurt our cause rather that help it.

But, wherever there is truth, we should cling to it. If the buddhists hit some kind of truth, we should accept it. Not saying we should be "Buddhist Christians". If it is truth, it will be in the bible as well (or at least not directly opposed in the bible), so we can continue on as Christians. But now we can say, "Hey, those buddhist are getting close. They see some of the truth." I believe every other religion (mayby not every) have some aspect of the truth. Christianity has the whole truth.

I agree in some respects, but again I caution. Be very careful about what is truth. I am sure you know it must be tested. "For there is a way which seems right to a man, but the end thereof is death." {poor paraphrase}

Any theory proposed by science is "invented" by us. But, if Christian scientists do the inventing, it will be (theoretically) in line with Christ.

ID is an example that this statement is not true. ID does not acknowledge the living God.