How has science impacted your perspective on the Hebrew Bible?

[TruthDefender]

If evolution were true then a creature begins at a state of complete innocence and evolves into a state more advanced in understanding eventually reaching a state of strength and understanding that it requires no salvation, only patience in that it will eventually evolve into a completely sinless creature if left alone to evolve to that point.

Yes, and if it were true, based on the old theory of evolution— humans evolving from primates, why do we still have monkeys and big primates (sasquatches) all over the world?? I never got an answer to this question, ever. Lol
Swiss cheese!

 

[TruthDefender]

Do you understand how science uses the term "theory" or are you ignorant on that subject? If you know then you are intentionally misusing it, aka deliberately being deceitful or bearing false witness, if you are ignorant, perhaps you should keep quiet until you learn more.

Do you know what I’m referring to, or are you being willfully ignorant?? This tell me you’re just a “Christian” on paper.

 

[rewriter]

Do you know what I’m referring to, or are you being willfully ignorant?? This tell me you’re just a “Christian” on paper.

I can read your arguments and see how you display what is either vast ignorance or willful deception, although your statements do not make it clear as to which you are engaging in.

 

[TruthDefender]

Unfounded assumptions. Broken logic. We know evolution is true.

No it’s not! Plz provide Scripture.

Evolution, never teaches that God spoke everything into existence. Yet God did this!

We use it everyday just by the food we eat. The undefined issue is this: are we created by God or by a system of randomness? I have no problem understanding natural science from an evolutionary point of view. I have no problem believing humans were in some important way created by God. These two perspectives are not in conflict.

One is a study of creation and the other is the power behind creation. One of the defining characteristics of the God of the Bible is that truth is sacred. Truth is about what is both real and what is important. Science, on its best day can only approximate what is real.

The processes of evolution to me demonstrate that God is not done with His creation or His creative processes. If science was anti-God, it would not exist. It is not. It is just the desire of mankind to deal with the natural world. Hypotheses come and go. There is no static "truth" in science. It is a voyage of discovery. So too are our spiritual lives. We are invited by God to evolve from who we were to who God wants us to be. It too is a voyage of discovery. The power of the converted life and its requirement shows we too must evolve into a people closer to the heart of Jesus. The fact that there are thousands of theories about how that is done does not negate the fact that God's call for the evolution of our souls remains.

Perhaps this forum should pay more attention to the evolution God in Christ is demanding of us. Or would we rather divert the conversation away from our holy evolutionary requirement to focus instead on why our understanding of the natural world is wrong.

Biblically, our spiritual, emotional, financial and ethical evolution is the entire story of the bible. We were once A but after our connection to Jesus we now must evolve to B. Is it possible that we resist science based evolution because we also reject Christian evolution? "Jesus loves me just the way I am...." Jesus, "You must take up your cross daily." The entire New Testament details the evolution we are all called to make from our former sinful nature to toward the sinless nature of God.

Here are some waypoints on our daily evolutionary path:

God's call to us is not so much about details of beliefs, but the content of our hearts. If anyone says, “I love God,” but hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. And we have this commandment from Him: Whoever loves God must love his brother as well.

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a ringing gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have absolute faith so as to move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and exult in the surrender of my body, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no account of wrongs. Love takes no pleasure in evil, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be restrained; where there is knowledge, it will be dismissed. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial passes away.

When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I set aside childish ways. Now we see but a dim reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

And now these three remain: faith, hope, and love; but the greatest of these is love.

If you love Me, you will keep My commandments

Jesus replied, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. Whoever does not love Me does not keep My words.

Thus, we are called to evolve into the kind of human beings Jesus has called us to be. Not on the 1st day but over a lifetime....but change we must.

Yes, but this has nothing to do with evolution.

 

[rewriter]

Too funny. I have read the bible for over 70 yrs. I can read it in numerous native languages. More importantly, I have studied the Bible in its Protestant (66 books), Catholic (73 books) and Coptic (75) versions. I have been a baptised Christian for 72 yrs. I attend a non-denomination church were I serve regularly. I am the ultimate Christian insider.

As a bible student I realized long ago that to find the full contextual environment of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament that a much deeper understanding of history is super helpful. I also recognize the compelling narrative of the entire corpus of the entire bible has several critical priorities that modern Christianity rejects in reality while pretending to accept it intellectually. Generally this is called lip service.

Lip service is enabled by a process of biblical obfuscation. In the library of over 700,000 words, someone long ago extracted and gave priority to those that define our predetermined dogmas. People have been using the bible a weegie board for thousands of years. World class chefs are in awe of the fact were can treat the bible as a massive library of meal components...a little clip from the old testament, sprinkle in a little 16th century anxieties, mix with our ancient assortment of proof texts and stir with the spoon only a few know how to use to get the "obvious" result desired. Each passing generation gets their secret copy of the holy recipe. Their job is to defend it to the point of animosity the criticality of maintaining our unique biblical recipe because it is "The Truth." Our ancient "Truths" are used not against pagans but against other so called Christians who use the same 700,000 words to evolve an entirely different set of ancient "Truths." Christians have been fighting these "Truth" wars for about 1,760 yrs. However, the one common denominator of virtually all these truth recipes is that they are all designed to convince us that Christianity is all about having the right truths.

Here's a scary thought. What if Jesus was not "only kidding" in all of Matthew 25? I don't believe that any of our viciously fought over "truths" seem to count for much. We also put pillows around Paul's statements in 1 Cor 13, that says it does not matter what ancient truths you profess or how deeply you believe in them, if the result in real life is not the creation and growth of a loving heart, you are just making noise.

So my biblical scholarship leads me to one clear unpopular conclusion. Christianity is about who you once were in word, through and deed and how through the power of God in Jesus how your life is now day by day taking up your cross and following in the servant leadership role Jesus exemplified. Jesus made is clear in His parable of the Good Samaritan that piety and biblical holiness are inadequate without your seeking and finding the wounded, needy, impoverished, hungry and addicted on life's roadside an delivering God's love through you to them. Perhaps that is why everyone would rather see a sermon than hear one.

Jesus was not the first messenger from God attempting to demonstrate to mankind that our mission is not intellectual "biblical" piety but to be part of God's people who deliver the love of God to their generation. All the prophets railed against the treatment of the poor, the widow and orphan, the needy victimized by and insulated from their plight by the "highly religious" quest for both piety and wealth.

What if Christianity was all about what you do for others and faith is the motivation but not the objective? Each generation gets to choose. Faith is either the endpoint or the beginning point of our lives.

I will concede that you seem to have a few years of serious bible study on me, I can only claim 50+, but I have also delved deeply into that the original hearers of the various parts of the Bible would have heard, and it does not always match what we are taught to hear today.

But have you ever been able to determine if TruthD... is simply ignorant or if they deliberately distort what they do not like to hear? I have read Darwin and have a copy somewhere that I could dig out for an exact quote, but TruthD distorts what is said.

 

[TruthDefender]

I will concede that you seem to have a few years of serious bible study on me, I can only claim 50+, but I have also delved deeply into that the original hearers of the various parts of the Bible would have heard, and it does not always match what we are taught to hear today.

But have you ever been able to determine if TruthD... is simply ignorant or if they deliberately distort what they do not like to hear? I have read Darwin and have a copy somewhere that I could dig out for an exact quote, but TruthD distorts what is said.

What specifically am I distorting?? Scriptures need to back up your opinion.

 

[rewriter]

What specifically am I distorting?? Scriptures need to back up your opinion.

You do not seem to understand science nor what it says. You instead present a perverted view of science. I believe the relevant scripture is "You shall not bear false witness".

 

[Lovette]

Science has no "answers" especially about causes for our reality. It has no motive other than the collection of data, the analysis of that data, conducting experiments to validate that data and were appropriate completely discard previous conclusions.

IMHO there is no legitimate conversation in which religion and science are at odds. They address entirely different frameworks. There is not ethic or moral component to science...thus nuclear weapons and germ warfare.

That leaves religion to deal with it own internecine wars. Church's are splitting, the younger generation is increasingly disinterested in the Christian wars they see. They find that a large swath of Christianity has been co-opted by one political party or the other. The see multimillion dollar budget that bring no help for the poor, the widow, the orphan and those addicted and despondent. The see all white or black churches composed of middle to upper middle class people who made any other dress or perspective subject to my way or the highway from a purely cultural perspective.

They see people in church and leading the church significantly and widely doing corrupt and often illegal things. They see that the average size of Christian church is 60 people most over 50 yrs old and that thousands permanently close their doors every year. They see multi millionaire Pastors "selling Christian prosperity and health promises" for $$$$$. They see a Christianity self destructing over dogmas while exhibiting nothing of the love which is the single validation of Christian authenticity.......

And we have determined it is all the fault of "science." Perhaps the most effective witness for Christian conversion would be to install large mirrors in the churches. Some see the ongoing splitting, fracturing and open hostility between former loving friends as as sign that something deeply inauthentic is at play. They see a vicious tendency to wreck unity over "issues" that have not been resolved for 2,000 yrs. What they see is a Christianity, writ large, that hate each other and especially those who they once claimed to love.

IMHO the single unifying and underlying reality is that we demand a Christianity configured to our needs, wants, economics, politics, ethics and comfort and we will do anything to achieve it. We want Jesus to stay on His cross and stop claiming He is in control of our day to day lives. We justify keeping Jesus in His lane by claiming "instantaneous salvation" to keep Him from claiming more than perhaps 4 hrs out our 168/wk. As a very deep level, many know they are not living any kind of biblical Christian life so we elevate our "righteousness" by claiming we "believe right" and that our preferred dogmas protect us from the converted hearts and lives God wants and requires.

Good science is like real Christianity. They both require constant changes in our lives.

Yeah, one is God's special revelation through his incarnation, the other is God's GENERAL revelation through all his creations.

 

[TruthDefender]

You do not seem to understand science nor what it says. You instead present a perverted view of science. I believe the relevant scripture is "You shall not bear false witness".

You already directed your statement to someone else that I was false; sowing discord. All you want to do is belittle people for not believing in your false theories.

It doesn’t make any difference if I understand science, which I do. I understand the “Theory of Evolution”, which you so disparately want to twist into Scripture. I dismiss it!! God’s word does NOT teach this this man made theory.

 

[DeanM]

Do you understand how science uses the term "theory" or are you ignorant on that subject? If you know then you are intentionally misusing it, aka deliberately being deceitful or bearing false witness, if you are ignorant, perhaps you should keep quiet until you learn more.

Compared to you everyone on this site is ignorant. Isnt that right bubba?

 

[TruthDefender]

You do not seem to understand science nor what it says. You instead present a perverted view of science. I believe the relevant scripture is "You shall not bear false witness".

It would seem you do not understand Scripture!

 

[biblestudent78]

I will concede that you seem to have a few years of serious bible study on me, I can only claim 50+, but I have also delved deeply into that the original hearers of the various parts of the Bible would have heard, and it does not always match what we are taught to hear today.

But have you ever been able to determine if TruthD... is simply ignorant or if they deliberately distort what they do not like to hear? I have read Darwin and have a copy somewhere that I could dig out for an exact quote, but TruthD distorts what is said.

I am here to ask and listen... to everyone.

 

[rewriter]

You already directed your statement to someone else that I was false; sowing discord. All you want to do is belittle people for not believing in your false theories.

It doesn’t make any difference if I understand science, which I do. I understand the “Theory of Evolution”, which you so disparately want to twist into Scripture. I dismiss it!! God’s word does NOT teach this this man made theory.

As soon as you claimed the false information you obtained from someone else, there are many possible sources, you acknowledged the error as your own. That is why scholars cite their sources, so that if a source is lying, their only sin is to accept and share the lie, but they can avoid owning it.

If you do not truly know what the term "theory" means in science, which your statements imply that you do not, nor know just what the entire "theory of evolution" states, which again your statements imply that you do not, you are willfully spreading lies and disinformation, an approach commonly used by an entity called "Satan".

As for understanding scripture, I know the traditional interpretations of it, and also the points deemed "clearly irrelevant" by tradition. Many of those points undermine the traditional understanding and thus, for the sake of tradition, NOT SCRIPTURAL UNDERSTANDING, must be ignored.

 

[rewriter]

I am here to ask and listen... to everyone.

My arguments about scripture are long and complex as they almost always involve information that is ignored even in graduate and post graduate levels of instruction. One example is that King Herod sought to find a balance between two competing powers, both of whom interfered (attempted to control even) with Jewish politics, while still supporting Jewish independence. He allied with, and rejected, and various times, both sides and actually also both sides in the Roman succession conflict (fir Narc Anthony before he was against him). He was, for much of his life, a skillful dancer floating between partners without stepping on anyone's toes until likely shortly before he lost his status as a "friend of Rome" in 4 BCE, likely four years before his actual death, yet retained his popularity with the Jews until it weas politically expedient for him to have alienated the Jews circa 70 CE.

 

[biblestudent78]

My arguments about scripture are long and complex as they almost always involve information that is ignored even in graduate and post graduate levels of instruction. One example is that King Herod sought to find a balance between two competing powers, both of whom interfered (attempted to control even) with Jewish politics, while still supporting Jewish independence. He allied with, and rejected, and various times, both sides and actually also both sides in the Roman succession conflict (fir Narc Anthony before he was against him). He was, for much of his life, a skillful dancer floating between partners without stepping on anyone's toes until likely shortly before he lost his status as a "friend of Rome" in 4 BCE, likely four years before his actual death, yet retained his popularity with the Jews until it weas politically expedient for him to have alienated the Jews circa 70 CE.

Attempting to understand the "settings" surrounding biblical events is at most an educated guess. There are sources frequently used but are decades to centuries later than the events they describe. Working with the maxim that the absence of facts is not prove their absence and that religious commentaries all begin to one degree or another with a dogma that drives conclusions, it still possible to craft coherent frameworks for stories coming from the bible both historically and textual. If anyone has ever seen the artistic reproductions that arise from historical data, the Jerusalem Temple Herod built in Jerusalem was one of the wonders of the ancient world, but we tend to see him as it relates only to the Christ narrative. Today, he would have been diagnosed as a inauthentic jew and a schizophrenic paranoid murderer. He got some grace because he followed the popular Hasmonean Dynasty, so he got some credit for being half Jewish. The Essenes, a Jewish sect living in the Qumran area, had a peaceful relationship with King Herod who seemed to admire them and appreciate that they stayed out of Judean politics.

 

[TruthDefender]

As soon as you claimed the false information you obtained from someone else, there are many possible sources, you acknowledged the error as your own. That is why scholars cite their sources, so that if a source is lying, their only sin is to accept and share the lie, but they can avoid owning it.

To back up your claim, please do tell us what specifically you’re claiming to be false, since you’re mouthing off a great deal of hot air??

If you do not truly know what the term "theory" means in science, which your statements imply that you do not, nor know just what the entire "theory of evolution" states, which again your statements imply that you do not, you are willfully spreading lies and disinformation, an approach commonly used by an entity called "Satan".

I can say the exact same for you!! Again you’re mouthing off and not saying anything here worth listening to.

Plz do be specific in your accusations, try for once in explaining yourself, instead of belittling people for not believing in your theories.

As for understanding scripture, I know the traditional interpretations of it, and also the points deemed "clearly irrelevant" by tradition.

So you say, because Scripture counters your theories; so you’re lashing out with anger. Real Christian like!!

Many of those points undermine the traditional understanding and thus, for the sake of tradition, NOT SCRIPTURAL UNDERSTANDING, must be ignored.

No, it’s Scripture that dictates many early traditions, which you ignore.

 

[rewriter]

Attempting to understand the "settings" surrounding biblical events is at most an educated guess. There are sources frequently used but are decades to centuries later than the events they describe. Working with the maxim that the absence of facts is not prove their absence and that religious commentaries all begin to one degree or another with a dogma that drives conclusions, it still possible to craft coherent frameworks for stories coming from the bible both historically and textual. If anyone has ever seen the artistic reproductions that arise from historical data, the Jerusalem Temple Herod built in Jerusalem was one of the wonders of the ancient world, but we tend to see him as it relates only to the Christ narrative. Today, he would have been diagnosed as a inauthentic jew and a schizophrenic paranoid murderer. He got some grace because he followed the popular Hasmonean Dynasty, so he got some credit for being half Jewish. The Essenes, a Jewish sect living in the Qumran area, had a peaceful relationship with King Herod who seemed to admire them and appreciate that they stayed out of Judean politics.

I understand your point about records being written well after the facts. Josephus is often cited for some points, but he has been shown to be less than honest at times. However, one of the "clearly irrelevant" sources I have used, while it has an obviously fictional account in it, can have that account removed without trouble and then the narrative flows very logically, and references an event datable to the period of 35-7 CE, most likely 35 or 6 and which makes some other interesting observations that also fit that time period.

Part of the issue with the later Hasmonean era was external politics. The Romans intervened to appoint a king, then Parthians deposed that king and appointed their own. Herod came in at the end of those two events and tried to play to both sides while his numismatics suggest that he was anticipating the imminent coming of the "Day of the Lord" in which both the Parthians and the Romans would be kneeling to the Jews.

 

[rewriter]

To back up your claim, please do tell us what specifically you’re claiming to be false, since you’re mouthing off a great deal of hot air??


I can say the exact same for you!! Again you’re mouthing off and not saying anything here worth listening to.

Plz do be specific in your accusations, try for once in explaining yourself, instead of belittling people for not believing in your theories.

So you say, because Scripture counters your theories; so you’re lashing out with anger. Real Christian like!!

No, it’s Scripture that dictates many early traditions, which you ignore.

Interesting that you make such statements. Now for a bit of a lesson to you. Science has a set of standards that it applies to knowledge. Solid scientific knowledge must meet three criteria, and very little does. Usable science usually must meet two of the three, and technology reliant on that level of certainty is abundant and includes television, microwave ovens, cell phones and computers. Now if you use any of those items you are affirming that you trust science that meets two of the three criteria. Other science that meets two of the three criteria has been used to save hundreds of million, if not billions of people's lives over the course of the 20th century as it eliminated all deaths from the leading cause of death in the 20th century on a worldwide basis. Today that cause of death is unheard of any more it is a historic problem. Now a third item that meets two of the three criteria, and should thus also be acceptable to you, unless you are a hypocrite, is evolution. Are you a hypocrite or have you just been listening to snake oil salesmen telling you lies about evolution and then you repeat them?

I challenge traditional understandings of scripture because I dug deeply into unresolved issues in scripture (lots of conflicting explanations, including some with no factual basis) to determine what answers would actually fit. What I found did not make me comfortable or happy, but it resolved all the issues with a very few assumptions that applied across all the problems, unlike the traditional multiple assumptions. often tailored to address only one issue without regards to any other issues or overall consistency.

Now do you prefer a multitude of assumptions, some with no supporting factual basis and no interconnection to resolve issues in the supposedly connected NT or a few, supported assumptions that resolve all the issues and connect them? Personally, I follow Occam's Razor that the fewer assumptions required to solve an issue or collection of issue, the more likely the approach is to be the correct one. Now you can posit 20 or 30, sometimes conflicting, reasons for why the chicken crossed the road but I will go with just "to get to the other side".

 

[mailmandan]

You are correct about this being a spiritual war that has been going on for generations. Here is a summary I gleaned from various sources:

How We Got Here: A Summary of USA History

After declaring independence from England in 1776, winning it in the Revolutionary War and defending it in the War of 1812, slavery caused the Civil War in 1860 and then struggles for equality and the right for all citizens to vote threatened our unity. In the 1900s, dictators attacked freedom, provoking World War I in 1914, WWII in 1940 and the Korean War in 1950. Then the high cost and eventual loss of both the Vietnam War in 1973 and the War on Islamic Terrorists from 9-11-91 until 2019 divided and damaged our country. Today (2022) our nation that began as a republic established by the U.S. Constitution appears to be in danger of becoming an authoritarian socialist state.

While the history of wars against external threats to our liberty is fairly well known, what is only recently becoming apparent is the threat our disunity will end in socialism, which now governs most of the world and almost every aspect of our society–education, entertainment, news, social media, banking and monopolistic businesses–corrupting politicians and elections.

The main cause of this corruption is that following WWII America allowed subversive educators to infiltrate universities, including Herbert Marcuse and Marxist Saul Alinsky, whose book Rules for Radicals was dedicated to Satan and whose rules included deception and violence (the end justifies the means). The teachings of such radical professors has influenced many college students (including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama) to favor socialist policies. (See The War for America’s Soul by Gorka, p. 59-65.) Many Americans are oblivious to the slow disintegration of the Constitutional consensus, because the owners of most news media were similarly educated and sympathetic.

A main financier of the socialist movement has been George Soros, who became a billionaire, established a network called the Open Society Foundation to promote a global government, and since 2003 has been financing numerous socialist groups in the U.S. (See "The Shadow Party" by Horowitz & Poe, p. 78-95 & 177-82.) Another leader of the globalist cabal or “new world order” is Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum in 1971, which meets annually in Davos, Switzerland. He envisions a technological revolution that transforms the world (including America), converting humans who freely worship God into drones coerced by a fascist-communist state as in China. A prominent American participant in the WEF is Bill Gates. (See "The Great Reset" by A. Jones, p. 4-7, 28 & 95.)

The globalists began to conspire with communist China (the CCP) in 1978, when the Trilateral Commission befriended Chinese leaders and sought a New International Economic Order. Since then the CCP has pursued a clever strategy that has steadily weakened the U.S. as China gained power, currently on display as its military buildup, the COVID-19 pandemic, aggression against Taiwan and the “One Road One Belt” policy. It aims to surpass the U.S. and dominate Eurasia by the year 2049. (See "Reset", p. 40-44 & War, p. 136.)

Recently, authoritative Biden administration dictates weakened the U.S. and attempted to banish conservative Constitutionalist opposition. Much of the news media fail to report this truth, so that many people remain ignorant of the dissolution of the American dream of liberty for all (like frogs being boiled alive because the water temperature is raised slowly). President Trump and the MAGA party are trying to reverse the destructive tide, but Dems continue to be financed by Marxist billionaires, so the war continues.
Where will we go from here?

The war continues indeed! President Trump has tried to reverse the destructive tide but the swamp is just too deep. If the tide doesn't turn, then from here, we eventually degenerate into totalitarianism.

 

[DeanM]

The war continues indeed! President Trump has tried to reverse the destructive tide but the swamp is just too deep. If the tide doesn't turn, then from here, we eventually degenerate into totalitarianism.

View attachment 290952

Whats odd is. If Trump were what they say he is the communist party would be arrested and tried for treason.