Science And The Bible

[DavidLeon]

The clash between science and religion began in the sixth century B.C.E. with the Greek mathematician and philosopher Pythagoras, whose geocentric view of the universe influenced ancient Greeks like Aristotle and Ptolemy. Aristotle's geocentric concept as a philosophy would have an influence in on the powerful Church of Rome. It was adopted by the church due to the scientist Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) who had great respect for Aristotle.

Galileo's heliocentric concept challenged Aquinas' geocentric philosophy, and Galileo had the nerve to suggest that his heliocentric concept was in harmony with Scripture, a direct challenge to the Church itself, and so bringing about the Inquisition in 1633. It was Galileo's figurative, and accurate, interpretation of Scripture against Aquinas' and the Catholic Church's literal and inaccurate interpretation. For being right Galileo stood condemned until 1992 when the Catholic Church officially admitted to their error in their judgment of Galileo.

So the static between religion and science was caused by philosophy and religion wrongly opposed to science and the Bible.

For debate, what significance does modern science bear upon an accurate understanding of the Bible? How important is science to the modern day Bible believer and where is there a conflict between the two?

[DavidLeon]

The New English Bible reads: "Faith . . . makes us certain of realities we do not see." I don't know if that helps. Seems the same to me. I don't think there is a difference between the way I use faith and Hebrews 11:1. If I see a car screeching around a corner and weaving erratically that is the evident demonstration. The car crashing up on the sidewalk is the unseen reality. Faith moves me. Literally.

Where and how does your analogy with the car apply to the way the word "faith" is used in Hebrews 11:1? What would be the Biblical equivalent to the evidence provided by the car screeching around the corner and weaving erratically?

The car screeching is data to interpret much as reading the Bible is data to interpret. If I have no experience or personal knowledge of the screeching car or Bible I can't predict what is likely to happen from that data, but such a prediction isn't certain knowledge, it's just a prediction.

Faith is like a hypothesis, interpretation like theory.

If that doesn't make any sense it is far more likely due to lack of sleep than any possible error on my part I would like to think.

[brunumb]

Faith is like a hypothesis, interpretation like theory.

Faith is more like uncritical acceptance that an hypothesis is correct.

[DavidLeon]

Faith is like a hypothesis, interpretation like theory.

Faith is more like uncritical acceptance that an hypothesis is correct.

Deus Ex Machina: faith must always be critical to avoid the trap of creating a god of one's own design.

[bluegreenearth]

Faith is like a hypothesis, interpretation like theory.

Faith is more like uncritical acceptance that an hypothesis is correct.

To be fair, it is my impression that DavidLeon was trying to describe how he defines faith and not necessary endorsing how other Christians define it. However, I agree that your objection does apply to the way many Christians seem to describe faith.

[bluegreenearth]

The car screeching is data to interpret much as reading the Bible is data to interpret. If I have no experience or personal knowledge of the screeching car or Bible I can't predict what is likely to happen from that data, but such a prediction isn't certain knowledge, it's just a prediction.

Faith is like a hypothesis, interpretation like theory.

If that doesn't make any sense it is far more likely due to lack of sleep than any possible error on my part I would like to think.

Would you agree that maybe reading a story about a car screeching around a corner would be more analogous because, unlike a direct observation of the described event, we are receiving someone else's claimed observations when reading the Bible? Also, because the Bible makes a variety of extraordinary claims, would the story about the car be more analogous if the vehicle was a flying saucer rather than an automobile?

[DavidLeon]

Would you agree that maybe reading a story about a car screeching around a corner would be more analogous because, unlike a direct observation of the described event, we are receiving someone else's claimed observations when reading the Bible?

Certainly, but keeping in mind that both are simply data to interpret. Both are eyewitness testimony which is notoriously unreliable.

Also, because the Bible makes a variety of extraordinary claims, would the story about the car be more analogous if the vehicle was a flying saucer rather than an automobile?

Yes, but it is still data to interpret. One may be inclined to believe or disbelieve either testimony but that shouldn't stop them from collecting the data and interpreting it with a fair and objective perspective.

For further explanation of where I'm coming from a relatively quick description of my becoming a believer. . .

So, for example, at 27 I started out as vehemently irreligious. Born and raised in the Bible belt by an atheist and agnostic and disgusted with the obvious hypocritical, self righteous and judgmental fundamental Christians I decided to investigate the Bible, assuming that it was as ridiculous as those who allegedly represented it. I was only vaguely aware that the JWs provided an alternative but didn't expect it was much better based on the illustrations of Armageddon peppering their frightful tomes. Fear mongering. So, what did I do and what did I find?

I started with Genesis, reading each chapter and then immediately going back highlighting, taking notes, writing down questions and comparing the two Bibles I had with one another. For the most part I was looking for reasons to doubt it.

Problems I had: The supernatural I set aside. I didn't really have a problem with it because to me it was like contemplating the possibility of highly advanced, intelligent beings doing things that we wouldn't be accustomed to. Creation, the flood, giants, talking animals and bushes, writing on the wall, the stopping of the sun etc. were all events that I could attribute to the supernatural. I didn't necessarily believe any of it but I was looking for more mundane anomalies and discrepancies.

The genealogies bored me to tears because I didn't understand at the time their significance, but still, they didn't present any anomalies or discrepancies I was looking for. At least not that I could gauge. Likewise, with the poetry for the most part. I have always disliked poetry. An unnatural servitude to words. To quote Frank Herbert; "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty."

The parts I thought really problematic were the accounts of Job and Samson and Delilah. They read like fables to me. The rest of it, aside from the supernatural aspect, read to me like real people and real events. It all fit harmoniously together which impressed me thoroughly because the Table of the Books of the Bible in the NWT lists authors, where the book was written, when completed and the time covered. Multiple authors from various places during a pretty big slice of time managed to present a harmonious narrative throughout.

Also impressive to me was the honesty. These weren't priests or storytellers. They were real flawed people caught up in something they didn't quite understand.

I hadn't wanted the JW literature I had accumulated from my mom who had been left their stuff since I was a kid so I had waited for questions and doubts to arise before I consulted it. Before I finished the Hebrew / Aramaic scripture I prayed one night to Jehovah to send the JWs to me if they had the truth. I lived in a secluded are where they never did their door to door preaching. The next morning I prayed again and in the middle of it a JW showed up at the door. I was so shocked I didn't say anything but later decided to call them. Someone happened to be at the Kingdom Hall but she thought it was a joke. I called again and started a home Bible study.

[bluegreenearth]

For further explanation of where I'm coming from a relatively quick description of my becoming a believer. . .

So, for example, at 27 I started out as vehemently irreligious. Born and raised in the Bible belt by an atheist and agnostic and disgusted with the obvious hypocritical, self righteous and judgmental fundamental Christians I decided to investigate the Bible, assuming that it was as ridiculous as those who allegedly represented it. I was only vaguely aware that the JWs provided an alternative but didn't expect it was much better based on the illustrations of Armageddon peppering their frightful tomes. Fear mongering. So, what did I do and what did I find?

I started with Genesis, reading each chapter and then immediately going back highlighting, taking notes, writing down questions and comparing the two Bibles I had with one another. For the most part I was looking for reasons to doubt it.

Problems I had: The supernatural I set aside. I didn't really have a problem with it because to me it was like contemplating the possibility of highly advanced, intelligent beings doing things that we wouldn't be accustomed to. Creation, the flood, giants, talking animals and bushes, writing on the wall, the stopping of the sun etc. were all events that I could attribute to the supernatural. I didn't necessarily believe any of it but I was looking for more mundane anomalies and discrepancies.

The genealogies bored me to tears because I didn't understand at the time their significance, but still, they didn't present any anomalies or discrepancies I was looking for. At least not that I could gauge. Likewise, with the poetry for the most part. I have always disliked poetry. An unnatural servitude to words. To quote Frank Herbert; "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty."

The parts I thought really problematic were the accounts of Job and Samson and Delilah. They read like fables to me. The rest of it, aside from the supernatural aspect, read to me like real people and real events. It all fit harmoniously together which impressed me thoroughly because the Table of the Books of the Bible in the NWT lists authors, where the book was written, when completed and the time covered. Multiple authors from various places during a pretty big slice of time managed to present a harmonious narrative throughout.

Also impressive to me was the honesty. These weren't priests or storytellers. They were real flawed people caught up in something they didn't quite understand.

I hadn't wanted the JW literature I had accumulated from my mom who had been left their stuff since I was a kid so I had waited for questions and doubts to arise before I consulted it. Before I finished the Hebrew / Aramaic scripture I prayed one night to Jehovah to send the JWs to me if they had the truth. I lived in a secluded are where they never did their door to door preaching. The next morning I prayed again and in the middle of it a JW showed up at the door. I was so shocked I didn't say anything but later decided to call them. Someone happened to be at the Kingdom Hall but she thought it was a joke. I called again and started a home Bible study.

Thank you for sharing a summary of your religious experience with me. Although it is anecdotal, having some background on your personal journey towards theism helps me to understand your perspective and epistemology a bit better. Would you be receptive to some critical thinking questions I have about your personal experience?

[DavidLeon]

Thank you for sharing a summary of your religious experience with me. Although it is anecdotal, having some background on your personal journey towards theism helps me to understand your perspective and epistemology a bit better. Would you be receptive to some critical thinking questions I have about your personal experience?

Not at all. I encourage it. I enjoy seeing things through new perspectives. Don't pull any punches, I can take it.

[bluegreenearth]

Not at all. I encourage it. I enjoy seeing things through new perspectives. Don't pull any punches, I can take it.

As you are probably aware, the type of personal experience you've described is not uncommon. Because these seemingly miraculous coincidences occur with some frequency, I understand why a collection of such extraordinary events would seem to serve as compelling evidence in support of the religious belief associated with them. However, if i am to presume the supernatural explanation you've inferred from your personal experience with an extraordinary event is justifiably believed, am I then obligated to grant the same presumption to all similar supernatural claims when they are accompanied by an equivalent quantity and quality of evidence? If so, how do I resolve the contradictions that necessary emerge from the presumption that all similarly supported extraordinary claims from competing religious traditions are justifiably believed?

[DavidLeon]

Not at all. I encourage it. I enjoy seeing things through new perspectives. Don't pull any punches, I can take it.

As you are probably aware, the type of personal experience you've described is not uncommon. Because these seemingly miraculous coincidences occur with some frequency, I understand why a collection of such extraordinary events would seem to serve as compelling evidence in support of the religious belief associated with them.

Collection of extraordinary events that aren't uncommon? I point this apparent contradiction out but I know what you mean and that you didn't mean it in that way and you are absolutely right. I take it the event of which you speak is the allegedly answered prayer. This was just a beginning. I still had much work to do. I could have been deceived by by demons. I know that isn't acceptable to you but it is a possibility I needed to consider. I could have been deceiving myself. It could have been a coincidence, I could have been deluded, it could have been some sort of illusion caused by some previously unknown illness.

However, if i am to presume the supernatural explanation you've inferred from your personal experience with an extraordinary event is justifiably believed, am I then obligated to grant the same presumption to all similar supernatural claims when they are accompanied by an equivalent quantity and quality of evidence?

If you are inclined to do so, yes. That doesn't mean get out the prayer beads and head down to the airport, but why should you feel compelled to dismiss it with some logical answer that might not apply or at the least might not be the only explanation. No need to forget the airport and schedule a lobotomy or Thorazine either. Keeping in mind that the person asked for it so, it could be a self induced illusion but if the person hadn't asked for it in prayer they would have a choice to ignore it. Choosing to go no further and if necessary keeping an eye out for any other possible indications they may need medical or psychiatric attention.

If so, how do I resolve the contradictions that necessary emerge from the presumption that all similarly supported extraordinary claims from competing religious traditions are justifiably believed?

There are many possible reasons for that, some of them mentioned above, as well as the possible choices one has in responding or not responding. Before becoming a believer I had three such events, all of which baffled me but I chose to ignore. Those weren't so easy to explain or wave away. I could give you examples of how the Bible indicates those sorts of delusions happen and what to do or not do about them, but I don't think you would be interested in hearing that, but you are absolutely right. Those sorts of events, real or perceived, are not and should not be immediately given into.