[_ Old Earth _] Christianity in Science?

[Barbarian]

If God wanted to make Himself obvious to every rational creature, He could have easily done it in a variety of ways.

But He did not, since many people quite honestly don't see any reason to believe in Him.

I think it's because free will is important to Him. Understanding His creation, from which so many wonderful things evolve with such simple rules, certainly enriches my faith. But it would not be so, if I didn't have faith in Him first.

Have some faith in faith. It's greater than you might suppose.

 

[Barbarian]

Now what would you think if I told you this entire complex system just formed itself, slowly over time. [/quote]

Wouldn't make much sense. It's obviously an artifact, not a natural object. Artifacts are obviously designed, not created.

That would be silly. In order for it to work at all as required, it needed to be fully assembled and ready to go, otherwise the sink would drain water on the floor and be useless.

One clue that it's not created, and instead the design of a creature.

Paley, when he first proposed this argument, used a watch. He had to resort to an artifact, not a natural object, because if he used anything from nature, no one would have gotten the point. Which should be a clue for anyone wanting to use Paley's argument.

Let's consider natural plumbing. The heart is an amazing irreducibly complex mechanism. But every step in the evolution of the heart, from a simple tube to the complex four-chambered heart we have, is known form other living things. Not at all like watches and plumbing.

Would it not be more logical to assume that this plumbing system had a master plumber design and build it?

On the other hand, hearts clearly evolved from master Creator. And that makes all the difference.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Then delete post 32.
I'm not a mod in here, but you called into question someone's walk with the Lord -that is a TOS violation as well as NOT a Christian thing to say.

Too late for me.
But I give you permission to do it.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I changed my mind Pizza.
I do not think I said anything wrong to Doulos.
I do not want you to delete it.

Please take this conversation somewhere else.

You've ceased to contribute substance to this thread and now you're disagreeing with a mod publically which actually is against the TOS.

You are welcome to address the substance of my remarks about the nature of science and how it relates to Christianity.

 

[Paloma]

I think we all see design...the question always begs where is the origin of the design. One group says the origin is intelligent and in that camp there are two views, one who sees no natural explanations allowed and the other who sees them as the way the design comes about. Likewise I see in the naturalist camp those who strive adamantly to deny design in nature all together and those who see design as a matter of natural development. The two latter camps IMHO are much closer to each other and to the truth than either wants to admit.

But I have wondered about the origin of the laws of physics and chemistry? There are in the universe 117 different elements, each with its own properties as a solid, liquid or gas. There are also forms of energy, some I am sure we have not even discovered yet. There is in addition the dimension of and effect of time. It may be said that all forms of matter and energy are governed by the laws of physics and chemistry, which govern their formation, their structure, and their behavior.

For example, the rules governing the number of electrons in each electron cloud (no matter what model we assume), determine the properties of these elements and their ability to combine with other elements to form compounds. As I see it, the lawfulness governing these factors had to exist before any complex atoms manifesting those behaviors had ever come into existence. It simply cannot be said with any scientific credence that the laws somehow “evolved” simultaneously with the “evolution” of the material structures that demonstrates those laws, because (also IMO) the changes and processes producing the results could not have taken place if those laws and guiding principles were not already imposing their effect on the matter/energy to begin with. The highly specific laws of electron valence are inherent everywhere in the universe that we can detect. IMHO laws do not create themselves for they would already have to be there to do so and again IMHO this idea that they do is scientifically (as well as logically) absurd and irrational.

The laws that govern the formation of the complex elements and compounds must pre-exist and govern even the formation of those elements and compounds. So where or how did those laws exist prior to the existence of elements and compounds? They are non-material in nature thus clearly demonstrating that the non-material reality precedes and effectually shapes the material reality.

Thoughts?

Interesting thoughts, here’s my take for what’s it worth. As a Christian, I would hold that God is the ultimate architect to the design. If we akin Creation to a building, God was chief architect of the whole project being a master in all trades. Once the building is built, all systems operate according to specifications...air circulation, electrical systems, plumbing etc… as long as someone is there to maintain the systems, they work fine. Once the systems have been designed and built, they operate under their own “laws”, so to speak. Some are self-operating, like a toilet, others need constant (security) or intermittent (widow washing) attention. Some elements, like the landscaping, are self-generating and sustaining for the most part. But looking backwards, all elements of the building and grounds needed intelligent input from an original source.


I see the Creation in basically the same light. God created everything, including the elements and even the “laws” that govern the behavior of the elements. Some, once built, like the sun, run its course with probably little input after Creation. Managing the great migrations of wildlife are probably managed by God. If he knows every sparrow, I am sure he fine tuning our “building” every seconds of every day.


Finally due to our sin, God has cursed this planet as outlined in Genesis, for our disobedience. Why should the inhabitants of the “building” have everything if they refuse to acknowledge the builder and don’t follow the rules of the building?

 

[Paloma]

We know the plumbing system was designed by man, because we have seen that. This is different than biology as you have the capacity for the introduction of new traits and function within their genetic makeup.

The reason why the design argument is so weak is that it must appeal to mystery when really there are great natural explanations. "Look how complex this is, it must have been designed." Is not a scientific hypothesis, it is the end of science. It is the assertion of an assumed conclusion when one stops looking or doesn't want to look for natural explanations.

This is why religious dogma has little place in doing the actual science, it is short on evidence and big on conclusions.

The point of the plumbing analogy was to show that we would never think that the plumbing job could come about via natural explanations, as it is too complex and screams design. So, we can use the same logic with the rest of creation, its far too complex & intertwined to arise from natural explanations. We see the “processes” that God created and assume they are “naturally occurring” This is also an assumption. (that defies what we know of complex mana made systems.)

The Design argument is not weak. If you feel it is, then it is you who are at odds with scripture, via Romans 1. God makes it very clear that you can tell He is there based on the Creation alone!

It is the assertion of an assumed conclusion when one stops believing the Word of God and looks for alternate explanations, when God makes the answer crystal clear.

This is why humanistic assumptions have little place in interpreting Gods science, it is short on evidence and big on conclusions.

 

[Paloma]

Now what would you think if I told you this entire complex system just formed itself, slowly over time.

Wouldn't make much sense. It's obviously an artifact, not a natural object. Artifacts are obviously designed, not created.
.
Paley, when he first proposed this argument, used a watch. He had to resort to an artifact, not a natural object, because if he used anything from nature, no one would have gotten the point. Which should be a clue for anyone wanting to use Paley's argument.
.[/QUOTE]
The earth and us are Gods "artifacts". You assume just because something is appears or is "natural" its not created. That quite the leap there. To God, the earth is an "artifact" of a different type, just one that happens to be able to support life. Its the "ultimate artifact." No problem whatsoever. I could make a "natural" looking "artifact" does that mean it was not created?

Just because Paley did not better articulate the teleological argument better, does not mean he's wrong.

Besides, Romans 1 settles the matter.

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

 

[Barbarian]

Romans 1 doesn't support Paley.

And his faulty argument shows why he's wrong. There's an essential difference between artifacts made by man, and nature created by God.

 

[Paloma]

Romans 1 doesn't support Paley.

And his faulty argument shows why he's wrong. There's an essential difference between artifacts made by man, and nature created by God.

Not quite sure how you don’t see the connection Barbarian, its pretty clear... but hey, each to their own…

FROM WIKI: The teleological or physico-theological argument, also known as the argument from design, or intelligent design argument is an argument for the existence of God or, more generally, for an intelligent creator "based on perceived evidence of deliberate design in the natural or physical world".[1][2] It is historically closely associated with the concept of Natural Theology…. Later, William Paley, in his 1802 work on natural theology, published a prominent presentation of the design argument with his version of the watchmaker analogy and the first use of the phrase "argument from design".[7]

ROMANS 1 18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

 

[Sinthesis]

Not quite sure how you don’t see the connection Barbarian, its pretty clear... but hey, each to their own…

FROM WIKI: The teleological or physico-theological argument, also known as the argument from design, or intelligent design argument is an argument for the existence of God or, more generally, for an intelligent creator "based on perceived evidence of deliberate design in the natural or physical world".[1][2] It is historically closely associated with the concept of Natural Theology…. Later, William Paley, in his 1802 work on natural theology, published a prominent presentation of the design argument with his version of the watchmaker analogy and the first use of the phrase "argument from design".[7]

ROMANS 1 18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Romans 1 doesn't support intelligent design. The term 'clearly seen, being understood from what has been made' doesn't apply to intelligent design because the mystery, or ignorance, of creation is what intelligent design uses to appeal for the necessity of a miraculous intervention by the creative hand.

 

[Barbarian]

Not quite sure how you don’t see the connection Barbarian, its pretty clear...

As you saw, there's an essential difference between artifacts, which are made by creatures, and natural objects, which are created by God. The key is that "design" people always use an artifact as an example, because natural things show no evidence of design.


Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Here, St. Paul is showing that creation itself is authoritative evidence of God. It's one of the reasons most Christians reject "sola scriptura"; scripture itself denies that new doctrine. However, it supports creation, not design.

edit: Ah, Sinthesis beat me to it.

 

[Paloma]

I repectfully disagree. How do you have a Creation without design? The two are connected - differect yes - but still connected. Romans 1 says that the Creation shows Gods invisible qualities - eternal power and divine nature - I am quite content to beleive that design could be found under the umbrella of "eternal power". When you look at the Creation, (Rom 1) what qualities of God come to mind? Perhaps Organization?, Creativness?, Balance?, Providence?, Justice? Love?

 

[Doulos Iesou]

The point of the plumbing analogy was to show that we would never think that the plumbing job could come about via natural explanations, as it is too complex and screams design.

Do plumbing devices have the ability to self-replicate and adapt like animals do? Nope.

Fallacy of the weak analogy.

So, we can use the same logic with the rest of creation, its far too complex & intertwined to arise from natural explanations.

This ultimately results in the God of the Gaps fallacy.

ID appeals to mystery, when really the mystery is simply just a gap in our knowledge. It is an ever shrinking argument.

We see the “processes” that God created and assume they are “naturally occurring” This is also an assumption. (that defies what we know of complex mana made systems.)

In one way it is an assumption, because all scientists including Christian ones use methodological naturalism. In another way it is not an assumption because of the reason why scientists use methodological naturalism in the first place. Note that I said methodological not ontological, it is not that all scientists are naturalists, but it is because all scientists study is the NATURAL universe. Scientists are not philosophers or theologians who delve into the metaphysical, they deal with observing and explaining naturally occurring phenomena.

And guess what, it works pretty well. What amazing scientific discoveries has the ID camp come up with recently?

The Design argument is not weak. If you feel it is, then it is you who are at odds with scripture, via Romans 1. God makes it very clear that you can tell He is there based on the Creation alone!

Your assumption lies in the fact that you assert that the reason why you think Paul said this in Romans 1:19-20 is based on design. He doesn't say that people are without excuse because clearly the universe is designed. All Paul says is that his divine power and invisible attributes can be seen in God's creation. I have no problem with that, I just disagree that Paul says this because of some kind of intelligent design.

You're not exegeting the passage, you're reading your assumed and biased position onto the text. Paul isn't extremely specific on the particulars, the purpose of the text is to argue that mankind is without excuse because we all have within us the sense of the divine because of God's nature being in a way imprinted on the universe. Could it be because everything was specially created and designed by God? Yes. Does Paul say that? No.

It is the assertion of an assumed conclusion when one stops believing the Word of God and looks for alternate explanations, when God makes the answer crystal clear.

This is why humanistic assumptions have little place in interpreting Gods science, it is short on evidence and big on conclusions.

Yes, modern science is short on evidence and big on conclusions. A rather ironic statement.

 

[Barbarian]

I repectfully disagree. How do you have a Creation without design? The two are connected - differect yes - but still connected. Romans 1 says that the Creation shows Gods invisible qualities - eternal power and divine nature - I am quite content to beleive that design could be found under the umbrella of "eternal power".

From Oxford Dictionary, (US version)
design
Syllabification: de·sign
Pronunciation: /dəˈzīn/
noun
A plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a building, garment, or other object before it is built or made: he has just unveiled his design for the new museum

The art or action of conceiving of and producing a plan or drawing: good design can help the reader understand complicated information the cloister is of late-twelfth-century design

An arrangement of lines or shapes created to form a pattern or decoration: pottery with a lovely blue and white design
More example sentences Synonyms
2Purpose, planning, or intention that exists or is thought to exist behind an action, fact, or material object: the appearance of design in the universe

Decide upon the look and functioning of (a building, garment, or other object), typically by making a detailed drawing of it: a number of architectural students were designing a factory [as adjective with submodifier]: (designed) specially designed buildings
More example sentences Synonyms

Do or plan (something) with a specific purpose or intention in mind: [with object and infinitive]: the tax changes were designed to stimulate economic growth More example sentences

As you see, the word requires some sort of mental process in figuring things out. This is inconsistent with an omnipotent God. Only if you weaken "design" to mean no more than mere "intent", does "design" apply to God. An omnipotent creator has no need for design. I object to the word applied to Him, because it is disrespectful. You are quite correct that one can set all the science aside, look at creation, and see His power and wisdom it it. The science can help you appreciate it, but it won't show you His touch.

When you look at the Creation, (Rom 1) what qualities of God come to mind? Perhaps Organization?, Creativness?, Balance?, Providence?, Justice? Love?

I am in awe of a God Who could produce a universe in which such wonderful things appear as the consequence of a few basic rules that He established at the beginning. So much more amazing than the little "space alien" designer of the ID guys.

 

[Randy]

It can't be. Science is intrinsically limited to the physical universe. By its very methodology, it is unable to investigate God.

True
The Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.

 

[Corn Pop]

True
The Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.

Yea. God is Spirit so the God debate will go on forever because spirit is invisable, in this realm anyhow.

 

[Randy]

Yea. God is Spirit so the God debate will go on forever because spirit is invisable, in this realm anyhow.

Why debate the timeline? Genesis takes pain to state Gods hand was in every aspect of creation. Isn't that where any importance lies?

This is where faith comes to play. We accept these things by faith.
However how can anyone have the Spirit of Christ in them and not know Jesus lives?

Randy

 

[Barbarian]

Whatever natural processes God used in producing living things, they only happened because He created nature to do it. And His hand is in every thing nature does.

 

[Pizza]

Why debate the timeline? Genesis takes pain to state Gods hand was in every aspect of creation. Isn't that where any importance lies?

This is where faith comes to play. We accept these things by faith.
However how can anyone have the Spirit of Christ in them and not know Jesus lives?

Randy

Whatever natural processes God used in producing living things, they only happened because He created nature to do it. And His hand is in every thing nature does.

Agreed. I've never learned anything in science, math or physics that troubled me in my faith at all, not one bit.

 

[Randy]

Whatever natural processes God used in producing living things, they only happened because He created nature to do it. And His hand is in every thing nature does.

God is Spirit - Why some of what you state might have weight the other does also as in the Spirit was over the waters in the beginning. Gods abilities as you have implied can't be measured and studied by man. We don't know the details but to me it would be unreasonable to think God didn't also use His great power and abilities to create.

Can these bones live is a metaphor but I think it shows God can create by His abilities.

The hand of the Lord was on me, and he brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and set me in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. 2He led me back and forth among them, and I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry. 3He asked me, “Son of man, can these bones live?”

I said, “Sovereign Lord, you alone know.”

4Then he said to me, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! 5This is what the Sovereign Lord says to these bones: I will make breath enter you, and you will come to life. 6I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.’ ”

7So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I was prophesying, there was a noise, a rattling sound, and the bones came together, bone to bone. 8I looked, and tendons and flesh appeared on them and skin covered them, but there was no breath in them.

9Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Come, breath, from the four winds and breathe into these slain, that they may live.’ ” 10So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army.

Randy