Scientific Evidence & The Bible
Posted By: Daryl
Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 06:15 AM
Does science give evidence of the existence of God?
Does science also prove that what is in the Bible is true?
Posted By: Darius
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 06:19 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Daryl Fawcett:
Does science give evidence of the existence of God?
Does science also prove that what is in the Bible is true?
Since God is the Creator of all that is scientific it stands to reason that science provides overwhelming evidence that God exists. However, because the Bible consists of the thoughts of ancient men who were growing in their knowledge and understanding of God and nature, science proves that some of what the biblical writers believed to be true in their time needs some revision.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 06:24 AM
Darius,
You certainly answered quickly to this new topic in this new forum.
![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif)
Can you give us some examples of what you posted here?
NOTE: This can also serve as a springboard for discussing specific examples/cases as separate topics here in this forum.
Posted By: Darius
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/26/03 07:00 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Daryl Fawcett:
Darius,
Can you give us some examples of what you posted here?
The premier tool of the scientific method is goodness of fit testing, or coherence. Reproduction consists of the strongest evidence that a Supreme Being exists. It does not tells us what He is like but that is not the crucial issue. Here is how it works. Observation, which is the bread and butter of science, reveals that in all of nature only living things produce. Observation also reveals that successful processes continue. Based on our observations, it is illogical to conclude that the diversity we are a part of was produced by a non-living entity.
Under ordinary circumstances all scientist would accept that fact. Christians spoiled it all with their insistence that the Bible is God's manual for life or that He commissioned it. Thinking people can note the misinformation that is in the Bible and that stance by Christians raised serious doubts about their religion.
Everybody knows that the passing of time on earth is the result of the earth's rotation, not the sun's rotation. Yet, Joshua requested that the sun stand still. This is clearly due to lack of understanding of how the solar system operated. If we insist that the Bible is 100% accurate we find ourselves in the untenable position of claiming that the supreme intelligence who created the universe does not know how it works.
Posted By: byron s
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 01:54 AM
My local newspaper prints a daily sunrise and sunset chart. Am I being given misinformation? Is it possible that the editor does not know how the universe works?
Posted By: Darius
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 02:00 AM
quote:
Originally posted by wolfepuppy:
My local newspaper prints a daily sunrise and sunset chart. Am I being given misinformation? Is it possible that the editor does not know how the universe works?
Sunrise and sunset are names that spilled over from the ancient misunderstanding that the sun revolved around the earth. When you ask questions like that it only serves to make people who are scientifically minded more skeptical. Too often we make smart alecky remarks and do not realize the tremendous damage they cause.
Posted By: Edward F Sutton
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 03:27 AM
If the sun rose or set because the Earth moved was irrespective of each of these texts and the passages and prophecies and histories . Their thrust was what was to happen, was happening, or was to happen. The fact that the sun did rise and set was visually demonstrated since Earth began to revolve after Earth was only a few days old. The star rose and set not because it circled Earth, but because Earth circled it.
Does Scripture ever state that the sun revolved around Earth ? It talks about it’s circuit in the heavens (Psalms 19:1-6), but does it ever explain the physics of it ?
Numbers 2:3 And on the east side toward the
rising of the sun shall they of the standard of the camp of Judah pitch throughout their armies: and Nahshon the son of Amminadab shall be captain of the children of Judah. (Simply a word picture of geographic location - with symbolic reference to the East for Judah. )
Joshua 12:1 Now these are the kings of the land, which the children of Israel smote, and possessed their land on the other side Jordan toward the
rising of the sun, from the river Arnon unto mount Hermon, and all the plain on the east: (Simply a word picture of geographic location.)
Psalms 50:1 <
> The mighty God, even the LORD, hath spoken, and called the earth from the rising of the sun unto the going down thereof. ( Did God not call, because of Astro-physics dispute over which solar system body orbited which ? God did call. )
Psalms 113:3 From the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same the LORD’S name is to be praised. (Is there no One to be grateful to, because the word picture does not suit ? God is still there. The rising of the sun is an optical determination arrived at by what was seen from the planet’s surface, the mechanics of it’s accomplishment was never offered in any explanation of Scripture.))
Isaiah 41:25 I have raised up one from the north, and he shall come: from the rising of the sun shall he call upon my name: and he shall come upon princes as upon morter, and as the potter treadeth clay. ( a prophetic reference to time, how soon He would daily and all through His life, call upon God, from whence His authority would issue, the servant of Isaiah ch 42.)
Isaiah 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. ( An extreme East to extreme west comparison to show He has no equals anywhere.)
Isaiah 59:19 So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him. ( The righteous’s whole day is spent in “fearing” [see Bible’s definitions of the words used in English to fear] God.)
Malachi 1:11 For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts. (Time & prophecy reference.)
Mark 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. (If the idea is true that the sun did not “rise” we have no resurrection of Jesus & no weekly cycle - for the sun setting anchors the start of each day.)
Those who play word games and insinuate error in Scripture display the attitude of being critical of the work of the Holy Ghost, Whom they are commanded not to grieve or insult because He is the One who seals them unto the day of redemption. If they decide to be verbally irreverent of His work, how then can they enter into His sealing work ? That sealing work represents a voluntary cooperation.
Is it possible to please God by insinuations that deny faith. Seeds sprout best in their native elements. Would planting doubt in anyone who reads be a work of faith or deliberate doubt ?
The longest journey begins with a single step, both faith and doubt are a journey.
To say one thing and mean another is too easy at best, but to even hint of doubt of the validity of Scripture will weaken someone's hold on eternal life through Jesus. Perhaps word pictures that are "givens" of understanding ought not be so painted as to hold the least tendency of sowing seeds of doubt in Scripture. Because it is not Scripture's hold on humanity that is weak, it is human hold upon Scripture that too often trembles.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 04:07 AM
![[Thank You]](graemlins/thanks.gif)
Very well said Brother Ed.
Who are we to question what God says in His Holy Word?
If God said it, that settles it.
This topic, this forum is not about tearing down the Bible but building it up, therefore, let us focus our posts and topics in this forum in that direction.
Posted By: Wendy F
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 04:22 AM
Darius- First of all, this is Howard, Wendys husband. I would have to say that th bible is God breathed and God used man ( a flawed being) to write it. If there seems to be any discrencies in the bible, it is because man is giving a testimony from his perspective as well. Think of the four gospels, there are several "discrepencies" there but you have to realize that at each event there weren't just the four gosples witnessing it. There hundreds sometimes thousands of witnesses and these four gospels were seeing the event from many different angles even to the point of having their view obscured by these people. It doesn't make the event any less true. Secondly, You must understand that old testament people were very ignorant compared to our knowledge and God unsterstood that. So when Joshua asked that the sun stand still, God didn't say no because he didn't asked the right question. God said yes because He knew of Joshuas ignorance. This,like the sunrise and sunset really is just a part of semantics. As God does, the learned should wink at the ignorant.
Her husband the servant.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 04:34 AM
Amen, Brother Howard!
God works with man where he is at in his knowledge of things.
I am reminded though where man once believed that the world was flat, whereas the Bible said that the world was round. I can't think of how it reads, however, when I find it I will post it here.
![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif)
It is good to see you posting here, even if it is under Wendy's name.
Posted By: Wendy F
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 05:21 AM
quote:
Everybody knows that the passing of time on earth is the result of the earth's rotation, not the sun's rotation. Yet, Joshua requested that the sun stand still. This is clearly due to lack of understanding of how the solar system operated. If we insist that the Bible is 100% accurate we find ourselves in the untenable position of claiming that the supreme intelligence who created the universe does not know how it works.
So Darius. Do you have scientific explanations to explain away all of the miracles in the Bible? Or just a few? Did Jesus perform miracles, or just sleight of hand?
Wendy ![[Reading]](graemlins/reading.gif)
Posted By: Darius
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 05:26 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Wendy:
It doesn't make the event any less true. Secondly, You must understand that old testament people were very ignorant compared to our knowledge and God unsterstood that. So when Joshua asked that the sun stand still, God didn't say no because he didn't asked the right question. God said yes because He knew of Joshuas ignorance. This,like the sunrise and sunset really is just a part of semantics. As God does, the learned should wink at the ignorant.
Why is it that whenever someone points to clear discrepancies that God allowed to be in the Bible Christians immediately jump to the conclusion that the individual is trying to weaken the faith of others in the Bible? Why are we of such little faith that we are more inclined to deny what we know to be true in order to bolster a cherished view? I don't care if you could prove the Bible were completely false today, it would not have any effect on the fact of God's existence. When it was proven that Irving's (I think it was) Hitler diaries were a forgery no one concluded from that fact that Hitler did not exist. If God had intended to give us a book would He have allowed it to come to us the way it did. The Bible began its life as oral history and thousands of years passed before it was reduced to writing. Do you really wish to believe that the pre-biblical patriarchs did not have the word of God? Then we have Paul admitting that he did not always have a word from God. Can we seriously claim that God told Paul to write, "Hey, I have nothing from God on this, this is my opinion?" Finally, "all scripture is given by inspiration of God." Where does this text claim that the Holy Bible is the only book that qualifies to be scripture, or that the scriptures are the only books that are given by inspiration from God. If we are to rightly divide the word of truth we need to admit where have embellished what has been written.
If anyone cares, without knowing me personally, to accuse me of attacking the Bible (and you have NOT done that Wendy), then they are free to go ahead and join the accuser of the brethren.
Let me admit, that much of this post is really a reaction of what I have experience before rather than what has actually happened in this thread, but I thought it important to express these ideas here.
I do not have faith in the Bible; I have faith in Jehovah.
Posted By: Darius
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 05:31 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Wendy:
So Darius. Do you have scientific explanations to explain away all of the miracles in the Bible? Or just a few? Did Jesus perform miracles, or just sleight of hand?
They were only miracles to humans. To God they were what He did everyday. Only God understands all the laws of the universe. Take the miracle at Cana. Why is it a miracle for God to do in a second what He makes the vine do in a few months? I do not understand this tendency to reduce God to a magician. You speak of scientific explanations as if man is the inventor of science. God is the one who put science into motion, or have we all forgotten that.
Posted By: Darius
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 05:33 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Daryl Fawcett:
If God said it, that settles it.
This topic, this forum is not about tearing down the Bible but building it up, therefore, let us focus our posts and topics in this forum in that direction.
I hope the goal of this forum is to elevate the God of the universe. Books are human productions, and the Bible is only a book, though one with a special message about God.
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 04:04 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Daryl Fawcett:
Does science give evidence of the existence of God? Does science also prove that what is in the Bible is true?
ABSOLUTELY! There is a ton of material produced nowadays by creation scientists that supports the FACT that a Creator exists and there is no other way this Universe got here, nor was it possible for life to "evolve" by itself and form itself into massively complex cells, etc.!
It seems that the evidence of "science" can put itself into two categories -- one category is where the evidence is just generic with no noticable link to proving that God exists (like being able to build an automoble or a refridgerator using "scientific principles"), and the second category is when the scientific evidence leads a person to the one and only possible conclusion that GOD EXISTS and He is the ONLY possible answer to our existence!
Just before it all ends, God will have shared enough "scientific evidence" that no human being on this planet will be able to say that God did not show them enough evidence to believe in a Creator God!
Posted By: Ron Henderson
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 05:02 PM
Hi, Folks,
I wish I had more time to make replies. But let me take this opportunity to say something since this touches an area I am working on.
The question we need to ask is whether science and the Bible are in disagreement, not from a literary, coloquial manner, but from a scientific perspective? When we weed out all literary expressions like sunset, Jacob's understanding of how animals became speckled, etc., we find that there is no contradiction between the Bible's message to humanity and science. The Bible is not a book on science. It has to deal with God's plan of redemption primarily. I would say every scientist today speaks of the "sunset" today in either talks, or in writing. Does this make them unscientific?
Because the Bible writers use the expression sunset (like us today), does this make the Bible unscientific? We must first understand how to separate the writers' views from the overal Biblical message. The onus would be on people to show clearly where the Bible contradicts facts of science if these people think that the Bible contradicts science. After that we must next study these apparent contradictions, if any, to see whether it's a matter of faulty interpretation or actual contradiction.
These are just a few thoughts. By the way, anyone knows when the sun sets this afternoon?!Take care.
Ron.
Posted By: Sandra P
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/28/03 06:00 AM
At the risk of a lot of negative feed-back, I'll refer people to the
Pinkoski and the
Wyatt Museum Wyatt Museum web sites -- these sites offer archaeological evidences gathered to substantiate various discoveries including the cities of the plain (i.e., Sodom & Gomorrah), the Red Sea crossing site, the location of Mount Sinai (in Arabia), etc. The
Wyatt Museum web site shows the latest excavation and scientific data gathered to verify the discoveries.
Recently the discoveries have been promoted on Prophecy in the News television show and have been featured on Dateline NBC. There have been some scientists who have taken a hard look at the evidences and agree that there is enough there to take the discoveries seriously.
[Since I've had many negative experiences putting out the above information I would like to close with the following: It would not be appropriate to clutter this thread with denegrating remarks about the man whose field work is featured on the web sites. For those kinds of remarks, I suggest you start another thread.]
Posted By: Gregory
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/28/03 06:33 AM
Sandra:
I have no intention of getting into a discussion of Ron Wayatt, his work, and what he has left the world after his death. Over the years that this discussion has gone on, I have largely kept out of it.
However, you raised the issue of Ron, his work and ministry. You did so in a general area of MSDAOL that is open to the general public. You did so in an area deveoted to scientific evildence for the Bible.
As you have done this, it is very appropriate for others to comment on their perception of whether or not Ron Wyatt's work provides scientific evidence to support the Bible. That is appropriate, and it is appropriate to do so in this thread.
Again, I have largely stayed out of this ongoing (for years) discussion. But, I will simply say that there are many who do not believe that Ron Wyatt has been able to provide secientific evidence to support the Bible. It is appropriate for me to say that as you has stated that there are those who beleive that he has provided scientific evidence to support the Bible (you mentioned those who support him).
Once you make your comment, it is then appropriate to state the other view. That is only fair, and informative to those posting here who may not be aquainted with the issues.
Posted By: Anonymous
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 07:50 PM
Gregory, it's true that there are both supporters and critics of Ron Wyatt's work -- but to a large degree the critics have not completely researched Ron's material. This thread is for the discussion of "scientific proof" for the Bible, and that is exactly what the Swedish scientist Lennart Moller has done regarding his evaluation of Ron's discoveries! Approximately 2 years ago Lennart Moller published a 320-page hardcover book entitled "THE EXODUS CASE" wherein he closely investigated and tested Ron's claims -- Lennart Moller is a Christian who works at the Karolinska Institute at the Medical University of Stockholm, and the only reason that his book was printed is that all of Ron Wyatt's claims HAVE been verified by scientific testing and logical exogesis of the Bible!
Lennart Moller has also prepared a video entitled "THE EXODUS REVEALED" wherein he has used an underwater sub camera to film the coral-covered chariot wheels in the Gulf of Aqaba, and this video was produced by the CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST organization and has been promoted by several ministries including THE FRIENDS OF ISRAEL GOSPEL MINISTRY and the PROPHECY IN THE NEWS television ministry -- so the current fact of the matter is that Ron Wyatt's discoveries ARE being investigated by diligent and intelligent scientists and believeres and these people are seeing Ron's material as being a total blessing!
I myself worked with Ron for 10 years and I managed his 1st museum that was located in Gatlinburg Tennessee from 1994-1996 -- and I have personally discussed this material with thousands of people, and my website contains an overview of the evidence for the discoveries and the latest updates, etc.
Posted By: Gregory
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 09:14 PM
Jim:
I have personally spent much time in reading websites favorable to Ron Wyatt. As I said, I have said very litle as to what I think.
My point is that when you and your wife make statement here in reard to Ron's discoveries scientifically supporting the Bible, it is only fair to allow others to challenge this. It is only fair to allow others to challenge this in the same thread where you have made those statements.
I do not say this because I want a forum where I can post my opinion. If I had wanted to do that, I would have done it a long time ago. I prefer to let you and your opponents "Duke it out", and I do not mean that in a critical way.
I personally think that you are articulate enough that you can state your position well. I think the same for many of those who oppose your conclusions. My comments are not generally needed as something that would throw additional light on the subject, and has not generally been said by others.
But, I do think that when you come to this thread, and make your comments, you can expect others to challenge you. It is only fair to allow them to psot their challenges in the same thread where you have made your comments. It is not fair to expect them to go to another thread.
That is the focus of my comment. My focus is not whether or not Ron Wayatt was correct in his claims.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/27/03 09:32 PM
I agree that anything that is stated here or elsewhere to be evidence should be examined to determine whether or not it is proven evidence, however, it must be based on publically written stated evidence either from a book or a web site, and must stay focused on the proposed evidence itself and not on the person(s) behind the evidence, unless it can be proven that the person(s) are knowingly and purposefully producing falsified evidence, if you know what I mean by that.
Posted By: byron s
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/28/03 05:52 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Darius:
quote:
Originally posted by wolfepuppy:
My local newspaper prints a daily sunrise and sunset chart. Am I being given misinformation? Is it possible that the editor does not know how the universe works?
Sunrise and sunset are names that spilled over from the ancient misunderstanding that the sun revolved around the earth. When you ask questions like that it only serves to make people who are scientifically minded more skeptical. Too often we make smart alecky remarks and do not realize the tremendous damage they cause.
You have jumped to the wrong conclusion based on insufficient evidence. It is often difficult to ascertain a person's intentions by only reading his words. Sometimes intonation is essential to clarity.
My point was merely to ask if a modern newspaper uses expressions that every thinking person knows are not physically accurate, is that in and of itself misinformation? If the Bible uses similar expressions, does that mean the Bible is misinforming us?
I'll try to be less ambiguous in my future replies to avoid any further confusion.
Posted By: Darius
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/28/03 08:17 PM
quote:
Originally posted by wolfepuppy:
My point was merely to ask if a modern newspaper uses expressions that every thinking person knows are not physically accurate, is that in and of itself misinformation? If the Bible uses similar expressions, does that mean the Bible is misinforming us?
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
My purpose was not to say that the Bible misinforms us, but that the presence in the Bible of information that is clearly not precise should affect the way the we view the Bible. Even if we agree that God commissioned the Bible it is obvious that He did not interfere with the influence of cultural factors on the writers. Popular approaches to the Bible overlook that fact.
Posted By: Learning
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/29/03 04:39 AM
Daryl, I think most people here would say a very big AMEN to your comment: "If God said it, that settles it."
The problem seems to be that people disagre as to what God said, and how it is to be applied to one's life.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/29/03 05:10 AM
Learning,
People disagree as to what God said?
What do you mean by that?
Posted By: Boblee
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/29/03 05:51 AM
Daryl,
As for the problem that "People disagree as to what God said," consider the words of God in Genesis 3:16: "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."
Is this a "curse" on all females, a curse on Eve, or is this a prediction of the conditions Eve and her daughters would find in the world outside the Garden of Eden? Disagreement on the interpretation of this one text has caused unending problems throughout history and today the debate goes on even in our own church.
There is a similar point I want to address in regard to "mis-information." Many authors of scripture use idiomatic expressions in their writings just as we do today. Some of these expressions we recognize such as "God's wrath" which is probably unrelated to either God or His temper and "in the spirit" which probably is unrelated to anything God's Spirit does. There are probably many other idioms in scripture which we haven't recognized. Every one of them is a potential source of misinformation. Because of this alone, we should be careful about criticizing another persons understanding of scripture.
Bob Lee
Posted By: Gregory
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/29/03 06:18 AM
Daryl:
Boblee has made an excellent post to your question to Learning.
I would add a second part to the response. Leaning mentioned application to life. The Bible tells us that we are to remember to keep the Sabbath holy. Within Adventism there are large differences as to what that means--i.e. how one should practice the keeping of the Sabbath.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/29/03 04:14 PM
But is it misinformation, or misinterpretation, or a combination of the two?
Posted By: Gregory
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/29/03 05:44 PM
Daryl:
For the point that Learning made, it is not important whether or not it is missinformation of a difference in intreptation. The reality is that even with what God has said, it is often not settled, and it is often not settled among those who take the word of God as authorative.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/30/03 06:13 AM
Then is that why we have so many denominations to add to the confusion?
![[Confused]](images/icons/confused.gif)
It isn't the misinformation of the Bible that is the main problem. It is man's own misinterpretation without the aid of the Holy Spirit who's functikon is to guide us into all truth.
Posted By: Darius
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/29/03 08:42 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Daryl Fawcett:
It isn't the misinformation of the Bible that is the main problem. It is man's own misinterpretation without the aid of the Holy Spirit who's functikon is to guide us into all truth.
Of course, you believe that the Holy Spirit has guided you in your interpretation. You may be surprised that so do all other people believe. The reason this illogical situation can be maintained even where both sides are diametrically opposed is because Christians continue to insist that theology is not subject to logical reasoning. Consequently, everyone holds to what is right in his own eyes.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/29/03 09:06 PM
And you know what happens to those who "holds to what is right in his own eyes."
That is where much needed prayer enters into the picture.
If you ask not then you receive not.
The truth or the evidence is there, however, you must earnestly seek for it as a person seeks for hidden treasure.
Posted By: Darius
Re: Scientific Evidence & The Bible - 05/29/03 10:43 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Daryl Fawcett:
And you know what happens to those who "holds to what is right in his own eyes."
That is where much needed prayer enters into the picture.
If you ask not then you receive not.
The truth or the evidence is there, however, you must earnestly seek for it as a person seeks for hidden treasure.
Far too many are seeking diligently but seeking in the wrong place. We have tried so hard to "protect" God that we have disfigured Him almost beyond recognition.