Scientists are not trained to recognize how creationists are distorting biblical texts. Thus, Jerry Coyne’s Faith v. Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible (2015) does an excellent job of explaining scientific theory and methods, but one will not find any discussion of how most creationists are misreading Genesis 1-3.
Creationists in the pews tend to shrug off arguments about DNA, radioactive dating, and other technical subjects because they are not familiar with them. But one need not even go into these scientific intricacies if the Bible does not even say what creationists claim.
Creationists are not the ones distorting the biblical facts. How can you distort, in the beginning God created? Nor are we misreading Genesis 1-3, as the only people who have promoted science to be an authority on origins are those who do not believe Moses. We consider the source– secular science which is blind, deceived, corrupted fallible or God who is holy, incorruptible, knew what he did and is not deceived.
Obviously we go for the latter as the former has no clue.
I recently had a troll on the blog claiming to be well-versed in science and yet not understanding what “theory” means in the natural sciences, I thought I ought to share it.
Until secular science starts producing the truth and real answers there is no need to take it seriously or give it any credibility. Obviously we need to know what secular scientists are saying so we can refute them but they do not have the truth and no true Christian should even listen to what they claim. Redefining words like theory doe snot help the secular scientist’s cause, it just makes them look more foolish especially since they do not understand gravity at all. That item remains a mystery to them, which is another reason for #1 and why we reject what scientists say–they do not know.
In working through these categories, Brown shows where Jesus is at times ignorant and at times displays superhuman/extraordinary knowledge, at times clear and at times uncertain, and at times expressing himself in terms of common expectations of the day.
Was he ignorant or was he testing people to see their honesty and faith? Peter Enns does his readers an injustice by not placing specific scripture references pointing to where supposedly Jesus did not know something. i wonder when alternative believers will ever be honest in their attacks on Jesus and the Bible?
The article looks at an important and perennial issue in Christian theology: the always complex and often tense relationship between the historical study of scripture and scripture as the source of Christian theology.
It is not that complex. Anyone who uses a historical context is using criteria either not approved by God or is missing vital information or applies the wrong ideas to the passages of scripture. our historical knowledge is spotty at best and anyone who relies on that to help them understand the Bible is asking to be deceived. Human history is in the hands of the historian, the Bible is in the hands of God who is the one who is going to misrepresent facts, leave information out because it doesn’t fit their personal beliefs about the past or religious nature or input their personal spin on events?
Historically speaking, the Bible we have presents us with some very serious challenges. Good theology will accept the challenge and understand that simple answers are often wrong and that sometimes, whether we are comfortable with it or not, resolutions will elude us.
Since God does not lie so by extension the Bible contains no lies or errors, then the problem lies with history and those who write it.
In recent months Franklin Graham, son of evangelist Billy Graham, has been in a downward spiral that continually seems to generate a lot of buzz around the internet.
I wouldn’t say he is in a downward spiral but I really wish he would use discretion and pick better things to say. Sometimes, one’s position in life leads believers to say things they should not and we need to be careful about that as James said
2 For we all stumble in many ways. If anyone does not stumble in [b]what he says, he is a perfect man, able to bridle the whole body as well. 3 Now if we put the bits into the horses’ mouths so that they will obey us, we direct their entire body as well. 4 Look at the ships also, though they are so great and are driven by strong winds, are still directed by a very small rudder wherever the inclination of the pilot desires. 5 So also the tongue is a small part of the body, and yet it boasts of great things. (ch. 3)
Having the truth and having freedom to speak does not mean we just open our mouths, let her rip and let the chips fall where they may. We need to be wise and cautious before we speak.
America is no different. The powerful influence of American culture has, for quite some time, seeped into the Christian faith to the point where we have an entirely new product. Instead of Christianity as it was passed onto the disciples and early church, we have a uniquely American version– and one we’d do well to dissect until we’ve found freedom from it, and freedom to return home to the life and message of Jesus.
This may happen to many people but the owner of that website is in no position to fix the problem. His faith is probably as American as any he accuses and if not it isn’t Spirit-led.His ten points are his subjective human ideas and have nothing to do with God or the Bible.
Jesus, the second member of the trinity and the one who created the entire universe, needed a community of close friends with whom to share his burdens.
The owner of that website doesn’t understand one thing about Jesus and gets it wrong every time.
The big headline arising from a decision handed down by a federal appeals court on Wednesday is that abortion rights in North Dakota are saved. The court struck down the most stringent abortion ban in the nation — a restriction so stringent that significant numbers of pregnant women would find it impossible to exercise their right to choose in North Dakota if the provision had gone into effect.
Yet, while the three members of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit that heard MKB Management Corp. v. Stenehjem — all of whom are George W. Bush-appointees — reluctantly concluded that existing Supreme Court precedent requires them to strike down the North Dakota law, they devoted the bulk of their opinion to an extended attack on what remains of Roe v. Wade.
I am sorry but we need a better way to stop abortion than using the law. Knowing what women and families go through when one has to use illegal abortionists I cannot agree with making the procedure illegal again. We need to think about everyone here not just the unborn and we need to think of what God wants as he did not say use the law to fight sin.
There are better ways to solve this issue than subjecting women and families to procedures that equal torture.