Evidence for God from Science

So thankful for those who have set up this site. Thank you for your efforts and time.

I have also set up a website called Big Bible at https://big.bible. I am trying to explain Old Earth Creationism (OEC) in as simple and understandable way as possible, although I have a ways to go. That is one reason I wanted to post here - to get feedback about ways that I can improve the site. I didn't see anything in the terms of service that prohibited posting this link, as I am not trying to sell anything or spam or anything. But I am a big believer in OEC of the day-age variety (e.g., Reasons to Believe) and it seems some people on this forum are like-minded. I am of the opinion that if more people understood it, then it would be more acceptable to people. So, I am just focusing on two points - the point of view given in Genesis 1:2 (the Spirit was hovering over the face of the deep) and the allowable meaning of yom as a period of time. I think with these two points, the sequence of events in Genesis 1 dovetail beautifully with the descriptions from science. And if that is the case, then this becomes a very strong case for the inspiration of the Bible. As I state on the Big Bible website, how could it be that a document (i.e., Genesis 1) written over 3000 years ago could be in synch with the science that we have only discovered in the last few hundred years unless that document had as its source the Creator of the universe. It seems like it is obvious, but it also seems relatively few people either know about it or have grasped how profound this is. At least that is the way that I think about it. But I would love to hear other opinions and feedback. That is why I am so excited to be a part of this forum with other believers or at least those who are respectfully curious about Christianity.

If someone wants to check out my latest thoughts about how OEC relates to Young Earth Creationism what I believe to be a very positive way, you can check out the page at the following URL. https://big.bible/a-time-for-rejoicing ... and-peace/, Thanks for your time in reading this.

bkudrle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 13, 2023 1:35 pm So thankful for those who have set up this site. Thank you for your efforts and time.

Hello, Bill and welcome to GodandScience! I also got your private message. I took a brief look at your site and I'm glad you've started a site. I've been intensely studying Creationism for about 34 years now. Of course, I and most people who have been part of this site lean towards Old Earth Creationism. Some are YECs, a few are Theistic Evolution Creationists. And I've been studying Hugh Ross' and RTB's materials for just as long a period.

There are some cautions about some things Hugh and Co. have asserted. Hugh reads science into much of the Bible - but the caution about this is, the Bible wasn't written to a modern scientific audience, but an ancient, pre-scientific one. And when Moses wrote Genesis, he was writing to a new nation that had just absorbed nearly 4 centuries and the ancient Mesopotamian / Egyptian religious mythologies Israel absorbed while in Egyptian bondage. The wording and phraseology of Genesis is VERY similar, in structure and feeling to those mythologies. And God inspired Moses to respond so for good reason. These ancient Israelites didn't understand ANY science beyond what they could physically see. What God was concerned most about, in Genesis, was correcting their false mythological beliefs relating to the system of Egyptian gods. In fact, the plagues that freed them each targeted key Egyptian gods, to show they were false and powerless / demonic. Now, none of this means that there is not science to be gleaned - clearly there is. Also, God wasn't merely inspiring writings for the ancient audience, as we today, in the scientific age are ALSO part of God's intended audience. So, BOTH things are going on, with some cross-over, and some parts not meant to address the science of things. Here are a few threads on that:

viewtopic.php?p=235303&hilit=In+the+Beg ... od#p235303

viewtopic.php?p=235730&hilit=In+the+Beg ... od#p235730

Lastly, I did take a gander at your website. Great stuff and start. I would suggest that you included an "About Us" link explaining your key theological stances (on God, the Trinity, Salvation, Jesus, etc.) - as that will give people confidence or understandings as to the integrity of your ownership. This site is to be re-vamped as soon as I can find time - I've got to update it from the old, pre-Wordpress site. When I took it over, I couldn't just put all of the articles back with the new hosting platform. God willing, I'll get to it soon!

If you'd like to discuss anything, please post and comment under whatever section, but I'd also be glad to communicate privately about your site or give input / advice, etc. - just click on my name and then "private message."

Thanks and welcome!

Philip

Thanks so much Philip for your warm welcome. You have a big head start on me in your familiarity with OEC and the day-age perspective. I vaguely recall reading RTB materials many, many years ago but for some reason it didn't click with me at that time. Then about 7 or so years ago I read some RTB materials again and it became extremely profound for me. I am in a Bible study and we recently read together Navigating Genesis by Hugh Ross. It seems so profound to me that Genesis 1 can be read to be harmony with science. To me it essentially proves the inspiration of the Scriptures and so should be a rallying point for evangelism and apologists in today's world. Yet when, for example, I look at the number of subscriptions to the RTB YouTube channel versus other creationist ministries, then it is obvious that many people don't see it the same way.

Your point that BOTH things are going on - the harmony of Genesis with present day science as well as a message for the time that it was written (to not believe in Egyptian gods or other false mythologies) is so to the point also, I believe. The God who created language, logic, and everything about mankind and nature is certainly intelligent enough to write on many levels for many different times and peoples in the same text. I think that you are the first person I have read who has articulated this with this much clarity.

I hope to have more time to read through more discussions on this site and glean more insights. Thank you for your suggestion about an "About Us" page to explain beliefs and so forth for my site. I will think about how to do that. On the one hand, I would like to just say "read the book", because obviously it was inspired by the Creator, so what more can we say than we believe the Bible to be the Truth. But on the other hand, men have gotten the interpretation wrong about God's message so many times, as was pointed out in the book that you referenced in one of the threads that you mentioned at https://www.amazon.com/Beginning-We-Mis ... 0825439272. I often think about the fact that the people who got their understanding of the Bible wrong in the worst way were the Pharisees, who knew the words of the book probably more than anyone - but they didn't know the Creator of the book. So, I guess it is important to say more than "the Bible is inspired" in my "About Us" page. Thanks for the advice.

Well, this is a bit rambling so I had better quit. But thanks again for setting up this site and for your warm welcome and advice and your invitation for further dialog. I do greatly appreciate it and will look forward to more fellowship in the future with you and others on this site.

Bill