Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Perfect Sense, Science and Genesis

This post was originally a comment-response posted by myself on my blog post, Perfect Sense. This post has been edited compared to my original comment, but if you want to see the full unedited version of my response; plus the whole comment discussion, check out the comments in my Perfect Sense post--FYI: for the comments on Perfect Sense--before I changed to Forward Thought, I was Anthony Mason.

I am not closing out science altogether. I understand and believe that science helps to explain what most of us cannot explain. I understand that because of science great things like hospitals and medicine derived, but what I am saying is science cannot explain everything and never will--there are some things that even science cannot touch, so why do we just stop at the point where some state that science is something that cannot be completely unfalsified because eventually you have to get to there with science, but by then the meaning of science would no longer exist. So what then, what is there to accept?--Theories that have no scientific relevance? I believe we were created to be intelligent beings. So, what ever spectrum you come from, creation or evolution, it is hard for me to accept that as intelligent creatures we must accept everything up to the point of nothing or “in flux,” as some say; which are all theories with no scientific relevance. I guess then the Creation theory is one of those “lack of science” theories as well, but it is the one I choose to believe in and put my faith in.

A person asked me one time, “What if you are wrong about the whole God thing?” My response to that person was, “Well, what if I am right?” I get a kick out of that question because you might as well ask a fish, why does it swim. I have faith in God because I just do, the belief is so deep and strong it can be hard to explain, but to believers it is as simple as 2+2=4.

The Concise Bible Commentary by Don Fleming is a great book that splices historical accounts with Biblical accounts book by book in The Bible. In the first chapter, Genesis, the author writes:

Science may investigate the physical world and suggest how something happened, but it cannot say who made it happen. Believers may therefore hesitate to dismiss a scientific theory simply by saying “God did it”, because the theory may have been the way God has done it. When scientist tell us how rain falls or how the grass grows, we do not contradict him by saying, “God makes the rain and the grass grow.” We accept both.

It is interesting that some state The Bible should not be considered a factual based book to teach science and should only be considered a book of allegorical value, I agree, but not completely. Though The Bible does not explain in detail everything about accepted scientific principles--that was not God‘s intention for The Bible; though, it does explain some accepted scientific principles used today.For example, in Isaiah 40:22 (written 2800 years ago) it says, “It is He that sits upon the circle of the earth.” During the time that the book of Isaiah was written, the accepted philosophy was that the world was flat. It was not until Christopher Columbus (2300 years later), whose voyage was inspired by this verse, set out to falsify the “world is flat” theory, sounds like a scientific experiment to me and guess what, it was falsified. If you want to see more examples, hit link.

Genesis is an account of how God made the formless to the formed, and with His almighty power made everything out of nothing, not in flux, not by chemicals reaction--NOTHING and as a believer I can easily believe that, “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God‘s command, that what we see did not come from anything that can be seen.” Hebrews 11:3

“All scripture is inspired by God…” II Timothy 3:16, that even includes Genesis.

1 comments:

Cap'n Fatback said...

Another text that presents a point in depth, FT.