science/theology

[sniper762]

i have read and pondered the biblical scriptures several times. in my latest endeaver, i have begun to expound on the subjects and events therin by furthering my knowledge by use of this information age's computer internet entitling me access to other 's viewpoints about these subjects and events. please understand that my faith in the bible and the inspiration of its words have not faltered nor been compromised. however, subjects written about by moses in the book of genisis pertaining to the creation of the earth, sun, moon, stars and man can be interpreted so as to contridict science's explanation, modern astrological discoveries and geological findings. i have prayed about this diligently and i am comfortable with the understanding and the relationship between the scriptoral and scientific aspects that i have concluded. nevertheless, i am very much intereste in the viewpoints of others. does anyone care to share their views on these matters ?

dean driggan3@nc.rr.com

[Tanakh Keeper]

OK.

A person can believe in both the bible and modern science without contradiction, I do. The bible is not a science book, it is a book of ethics. While science explains the HOW, the bible explains the WHY. Consider that observations and examinations of the scientific theory of evolution fills so many books that you can fill dozens of libraries with them. On the other hand, the bible discusses the origin of life in just half of one chapter. It isn’t important to our ethical understanding how G-d created the universe, so G-d didn’t put His explanation and descriptions of it into the bible. Actually, from what little there is, the bible supports the Theory of Evolution. G-d describes that simpler life preceded more complex life forms.

The bible uses poetic language, allegories, and metaphors. This is hardly the language of science. Too often, I’ve seen people put science and religion in opposition. They are different types of thought. As often as they appear to contradict, they also align.

[sniper762]

yes, but through my bible study and research i have concluded through direct geneological records recorded in the bible that adam was created just over 6000 years ago. since he was made on the 6th day of god's creative 6 days as recorded in genesis, then its still a far cry from the age of man and the earth as explained scientifically. so, how do es one believe or try to explain the differences and not presume or suggest additional ideas not written in the scriptures?

[LostSheep]

sniper, I shouldn't speak for the mods here or for forum policy (not being a staff member myself), but the Admissions forum is not really meant for theological discussion.

If you have a question you would like to discuss, you should open a thread in one of the debate forums with your question. The question you asked in your immediately previous post would fit in Apologetics or less possibly, in Natural Science maybe.

[Kelp]

Or Cosmogomy 201 which is specifically meant for Scripture vs. science descussions among believers, if I recall.

:hi:, Sniper. Welcome to Tweb.I hope you enjoy your time posting here. LostSheep is right. This Admissions forum is primarily for discussing site membership and account issues, I believe.

One of the moderators will post in this thread shortly to give you an official welcome and to tell you more about how to use this site and some of its features. And if you ever have any questions, be sure to ask one of the moderators (identifyable by their colored names in their posts) or any other member. We'd all be happy to help you out.

[Little Shepherd]

Moving to general theistics.

[shunyadragon]

i have read and pondered the biblical scriptures several times. in my latest endeaver, i have begun to expound on the subjects and events therin by furthering my knowledge by use of this information age's computer internet entitling me access to other 's viewpoints about these subjects and events. please understand that my faith in the bible and the inspiration of its words have not faltered nor been compromised. however, subjects written about by moses in the book of genisis pertaining to the creation of the earth, sun, moon, stars and man can be interpreted so as to contridict science's explanation, modern astrological discoveries and geological findings. i have prayed about this diligently and i am comfortable with the understanding and the relationship between the scriptoral and scientific aspects that i have concluded. nevertheless, i am very much intereste in the viewpoints of others. does anyone care to share their views on these matters ?

dean driggan3@nc.rr.com

I recommend that you review the threads in Apolgetics and Natural Science to better understand the problems with being comfortable with a literal interpretation of the Bible and a good understanding of Science. Just saying your comfortable adds little to the table when trying to justify a Creation in a week ~6000 years ago and a world flood when there is no scientific basis or evidence for such a conclusion.

[Tladatsi]

"The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go."

This quote is, I am told, from Cardinal Ceasar Baronius, which may be a paraphrase of something St. Augustine said

"The Spirit of God who spoke through [the biblical writers] did not choose to teach about the heavens to men, as it was of no use for salvation"

(Thanks to Rogue 6 for that).

The BIble is about spirtual matters, not issues of matter. After all, if we took the BIble literally, the earth would be flat and inside a round metal shell surrounded by water. That is why the sky is called the "firmament" in Genesis, because the sky was "firm". During the flood, the doors of the metal sky opened up and the water above flowed down.




i have read and pondered the biblical scriptures several times. in my latest endeaver, i have begun to expound on the subjects and events therin by furthering my knowledge by use of this information age's computer internet entitling me access to other 's viewpoints about these subjects and events. please understand that my faith in the bible and the inspiration of its words have not faltered nor been compromised. however, subjects written about by moses in the book of genisis pertaining to the creation of the earth, sun, moon, stars and man can be interpreted so as to contridict science's explanation, modern astrological discoveries and geological findings. i have prayed about this diligently and i am comfortable with the understanding and the relationship between the scriptoral and scientific aspects that i have concluded. nevertheless, i am very much intereste in the viewpoints of others. does anyone care to share their views on these matters ?

dean driggan3@nc.rr.com

[Tanakh Keeper]

yes, but through my bible study and research i have concluded through direct geneological records recorded in the bible that adam was created just over 6000 years ago. since he was made on the 6th day of god's creative 6 days as recorded in genesis, then its still a far cry from the age of man and the earth as explained scientifically. so, how do es one believe or try to explain the differences and not presume or suggest additional ideas not written in the scriptures?

Because the Days of Creation were not 24 hour days. The Hebrew word used in the Tanakh is better translated as Eon rather than Day.

[Parmly]

I used most of my 11th-12th grade years of high school arguing for and advocating the creationist position because it was simply all I knew and being in the Bible belt I hadn't realized that evolution could be associated with anything other that atheism. However during my first year of college I started to become fascinated with the subject of evolution during biology class and...it actually made sense? After reading "The Language of God" by Dr. Francis Collins I considered myself an evolutionist. Suddenly I found a new beauty and respect for the creation of God.

Philosophical questions challenge my faith now much more than science.

[Tladatsi]

Because the Days of Creation were not 24 hour days. The Hebrew word used in the Tanakh is better translated as Eon rather than Day.

The word Yom means day. Why would we read it as anything other than day? It is true it can be read is a more vague as in the "the days of King David". However there is nothing in the text of Genesis to suggest that Yom means anything other than the time between sunset to sunset, i.e. 24 hrs.

[shunyadragon]

The word Yom means day. Why would we read it as anything other than day? It is true it can be read is a more vague as in the "the days of King David". However there is nothing in the text of Genesis to suggest that Yom means anything other than the time between sunset to sunset, i.e. 24 hrs.

When this was compiled from different traditional creations stories between ~900 and ~600 BCE, the view of the writers at the time may have been age or day, but that does not necessarilly make it literally true that creation took place in seven days 6 to 10,000 years ago. Other quotations in the OT refer to the time and and age of the mountains and hills as olam or olam! olam! (sp) which would be considered ancient without measure.

[Tanakh Keeper]

However there is nothing in the text of Genesis to suggest that Yom means anything other than the time between sunset to sunset, i.e. 24 hrs.

You are entitled to your opinion. I'm not going to present proofs, as that discussion would detract from the subject of this thread. Suffice it to say, that many learned Jewish sages and scholars disagree with you.

Regarding this thread, Judaism has no trouble with science and religion. For us, the two complement, they don't contradict.