Hi Bangalore,
Many thanks for posting the link.
Isomam and those of similar interests may also be interested in the following British scientist who was involved in finding the quark:
http://www.polkinghorne.net/qanda.html#ID
blessings
Derek
Hi all,
You may find this discussion at:
The Veritas Forum: The language of God
(I had some trouble with the link but the above googles ok.)
Dr Francis Collins, the head of the human genome project, discusses his Christian faith and science in a quite detailed video of a discussion with uni students.
Derek
Found it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjJAWuzno9Y
Warm Christian Love
Bangalore
Hi all,
Dr Francis Collins believes God spoke a self-ordering universe into being.
He prefers the term biologos rather than 'theistic evolution'.
A very telling point he made was that a literal approach does not fully appreciate the awesomeness of creation of the God who 'spoke matter' (and life as a consequence) into being.
If we see God as continually having to tweak the created order to produce new forms of life it implies he could not create life in a much more 'joined up' way without the gaps.
There is certainly some merit in his view and he will never have to retreat under an onslaught from science, as creation literalists have had to, when assertions are shown to be incorrect.
Hi all,
Dr Francis Collins believes God spoke a self-ordering universe into being.
He prefers the term biologos rather than 'theistic evolution'.
A very telling point he made was that a literal approach does not fully appreciate the awesomeness of creation of the God who 'spoke matter' (and life as a consequence) into being.
If we see God as continually having to tweak the created order to produce new forms of life it implies he could not create life in a much more 'joined up' way without the gaps.
There is certainly some merit in his view and he will never have to retreat under an onslaught from science, as creation literalists have had to, when assertions are shown to be incorrect.
6 Day Creationists have NEVER had to retreat on any point of verified science, period.
I should not have to use the word verified as all true Science is as such, but much of today's 'science' is called science without any verification whatsoever.
Hi Truthpaste,
Who mentioned six day creationists?
We have had these discussion before with 'six twentyfour hour day creationists'.
Is that what you mean?
It is my personal opinion that their scientific knowledge contains masses of hogwash. What is more they have no comprehension of the marvelous nature of our world that was spoken into existence by the Logos, who in whom was life.
However, if six literal day believers have this view purely as a result of their personal understanding of Scripture, I think they are merely mistaken believers of archaic concepts like the Flat Earth Society. :).
Derek
Hi Truthpaste,
Who mentioned six day creationists?
We have had these discussion before with 'six twentyfour hour day creationists'.
Is that what you mean?
It is my personal opinion that their scientific knowledge contains masses of hogwash. What is more they have no comprehension of the marvelous nature of our world that was spoken into existence by the Logos, who in whom was life.
However, if six literal day believers have this view purely as a result of their personal understanding of Scripture, I think they are merely mistaken believers of archaic concepts like the Flat Earth Society. :).
Derek
Given your confidence, it shouldn't take you long to correct this 6-day creationist! Why not start by telling me why God needed more than 144 hours to create all things?
For those who may be wondering why an almighty God took a full 6 days to create everything when He could have done it instantly, I would suggest you take a look at Exodus 20 where the Lord sets a pattern for us regarding work and rest.
Go for it Del' :whistle:
Hi Truthpaste,
Who mentioned six day creationists?
We have had these discussion before with 'six twentyfour hour day creationists'.
Is that what you mean?
It is my personal opinion that their scientific knowledge contains masses of hogwash. What is more they have no comprehension of the marvelous nature of our world that was spoken into existence by the Logos, who in whom was life.
However, if six literal day believers have this view purely as a result of their personal understanding of Scripture, I think they are merely mistaken believers of archaic concepts like the Flat Earth Society. :).
Derek
Hi Derek,
There will always exist literalists who cannot discern the recurring 'figure of speech' phenomena in scripture.
Hence when Genesis 2:4 says "This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day (not seven) that Jehovah God made earth and heaven," they are forced to accept the hyperbolic "one day" but they are unwilling to accept all seven as being understated. Understanding the Bible is all about reconciling figures of speech.
sw
Hi Truthpaste,
Who mentioned six day creationists?
We have had these discussion before with 'six twentyfour hour day creationists'.
Is that what you mean?
It is my personal opinion that their scientific knowledge contains masses of hogwash. What is more they have no comprehension of the marvelous nature of our world that was spoken into existence by the Logos, who in whom was life.
However, if six literal day believers have this view purely as a result of their personal understanding of Scripture, I think they are merely mistaken believers of archaic concepts like the Flat Earth Society. :).
Derek
Hi Derek,
There will always exist literalists who cannot discern the recurring 'figure of speech' phenomena in scripture.
Hence when Genesis 2:4 says "This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day (not seven) that Jehovah God made earth and heaven," they are forced to accept the hyperbolic "one day" but they are unwilling to accept all seven as being understated. Understanding the Bible is all about reconciling figures of speech.
sw
SW,
The Hebrew word Yom (Day) is used in exactly the same fashion as the English word for day within that language as I will now illustrate:-
Let me give you this sentence, "In my fathers day, it took 10 days to cross England during the day"
You already know that the red day means era, the blue days means a 24 hour day and the green day means the daylight portion of a day.
How did your brain know immediately that those 3 days were immediately different? Also how they were different to each other?
Like the "day that God created" in Genesis 2 we have the red day, why? Well there is no number, morning or evening or reference to time passing. Yet what do we have on every occasion day is mentioned in Genesis 1? A number or evening or morning!
NB: Outside Genesis 1, every single time the OT uses YOM with a number or evening or morning, it always means an ordinary day - so if you wish to change the rules of Hebrew in Genesis 1 to fit what you have been taught then Jehovah gives you the freedom to do so for now, but you like everyone else will give account to Him for that conclusion and for those you lead into the same opinion (as explained in Hebrews 9v27).
Hi Truthpaste,
You wrote:
so if you wish to change the rules of Hebrew in Genesis 1 to fit what you have been taught then Jehovah gives you the freedom to do so for now, but you like everyone else will give account to Him for that conclusion and for those you lead into the same opinion (as explained in Hebrews 9v27).
So if I don't believe in your literalistic view of Creation it is implied it becomes a salvation issue?
I thought this thread was about the science behind creation that leads to different strands of understanding on the nature of the creation process?
We just beg to differ,Truthpaste, you think it is cut and dried, I believe the way the Creator prepared this planet is far more complex than simplistic understandings would have us believe and is by no means fully understood. It may never be understood fully. That's where some of the awe comes in!
What is more I know why I do not believe in six literal days of creation.
Knowing what I do and becoming a six 24hour day literalist would make the Creator God, in my eyes, the Great Celestial Con-Entity. I certainly cannot believe that about the Father and his act of biologos through his Son!
Do you want me to believe that God is a liar?
Derek
NB: Outside Genesis 1, every single time the OT uses YOM with a number or evening or morning, it always means an ordinary day - so if you wish to change the rules of Hebrew in Genesis 1 to fit what you have been taught then Jehovah gives you the freedom to do so for now, but you like everyone else will give account to Him for that conclusion and for those you lead into the same opinion (as explained in Hebrews 9v27).
Except you neglected to mention there was no evening or morning for the seventh day. Sometimes even the WT gets it right.
sw
Following Christ isn't synonymous with an accurate understanding of Genesis, or an accurate understanding of the natural sciences. Knowledge of this kind should always be a supplement to our faith - not the reason for it.
If evolution is true, then i see it as Gods way of supplying an almost infinite amount of creativity and variation to the created order - it's always changing!
Eitherway,
God rocks!:thumbsup:
So if I don't believe in your literalistic view of Creation it is implied it becomes a salvation issue?
Of course, it does, in their eyes.
Just look at all the recurring threads about the trinity, or the soul, or creationism.
In several posts, in several threads, the thought has been expressed or implied that one accepts their version of truth on the subject in question, or one faces Divine retribution.
In this respect, the mentality of these folks is no different from the Watchtower's...
They would love to shove all humanity in a box of their making (while claiming it's God who made it) and damn to hell (Or, die at Armageddon) those who refuse to jump in, or ask too many questions.
Sound familiar.
The contents of the boxes differ doctrinally, but they're still boxes.
Anyone here, experience the fulfillment of 1 Corinthians 13:12?
Didn't think so.
"two lepta", as of this moment, still gazing through a hazy mirror.
Love to All,
John
Anyone here, experience the fulfillment of 1 Corinthians 13:12?
Great verse. The one after it is great too, for coping with other people's notions about hazy matters.
Anyone here, experience the fulfillment of 1 Corinthians 13:12?
Great verse. The one after it is great too, for coping with other people's notions about hazy matters.
Greetings Brendan,
So true.
What you said so eloquently in 18 words, I blathered for about 1000 of them, in another thread :blush: :whistle::
http://www.paradisecafediscussions.net/s...7#pid52677
Many have simply not yet reached the point, where it becomes clear that the Master is not looking in individuals, for a particular set of doctrines that define them as being acceptable, in His sight and that of his Father.
Several times I quoted 1 Corinthians 13:12, in hopes that those hung up on doctrine, would understand.
12 Now we see only a dim likeness of things. It is as if we were seeing them in a mirror. But someday we will see clearly. We will see face to face. What I know now is not complete. But someday I will know completely, just as God knows me completely.
Others, have come to the realization, that there are things greater than what we perceive to be, "knowledge".
This is what follows the above verse:
13 The three most important things to have are faith, hope and love. But the greatest of them is love.
-1 Corinthians 13:13
This is the criterion the Master uses.
It is my hope, our brothers and sisters in Christ, will realize what (faith, hope and love) really trumps "knowledge", and prayerfully examine the motives that drive their obsession, in attempting to push upon their fellow Christians, something lesser (incomplete knowledge) in the eyes of God and Christ.
"two lepta"
Love to All,
John
Hi Truthpaste,
You wrote:
so if you wish to change the rules of Hebrew in Genesis 1 to fit what you have been taught then Jehovah gives you the freedom to do so for now, but you like everyone else will give account to Him for that conclusion and for those you lead into the same opinion (as explained in Hebrews 9v27).
So if I don't believe in your literalistic view of Creation it is implied it becomes a salvation issue?
I thought this thread was about the science behind creation that leads to different strands of understanding on the nature of the creation process?
We just beg to differ,Truthpaste, you think it is cut and dried, I believe the way the Creator prepared this planet is far more complex than simplistic understandings would have us believe and is by no means fully understood. It may never be understood fully. That's where some of the awe comes in!
What is more I know why I do not believe in six literal days of creation.
Knowing what I do and becoming a six 24hour day literalist would make the Creator God, in my eyes, the Great Celestial Con-Entity. I certainly cannot believe that about the Father and his act of biologos through his Son!
Do you want me to believe that God is a liar?
Derek
Seems I am too late to see that. :(
Hi John,
I wrote a plagiarised summary of your post – shame on me! :blush:
What struck me as interesting when I read your last post on this thread was the new way 1Cor 13:13 looked in this context of right belief. If the apostle Paul had intended his words to be understood this way, I had missed his point. Looking at the whole chapter again, I see he does include knowledge, although partial even then, as a blessing that would disappear over time, along with the other gifts.
I’m sure I had always only looked at the last verse in a doctrinal way, taking no other meaning from it than the reduction of many gifts to three. When I read it yesterday to get the meaning of your post, it hit me for the first time as a coping mechanism – our own faith and our own hope to sustain us, and love to cope with all our different takes on the complex issues.
So thanks for the opportunity to look at 1Corinthians 13 again. It really does hammer home the conclusion that, in the balance between knowledge and love, scripture rates love far, far higher than knowledge.
Regards,
Brendan.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12