Comment on Educate Truth’s purpose and goals by Lydian.
“Sean Says”
“In other words, science and empirical reasoning are not enemies of true religion–but it’s base. These are gifts of God which, rightly used with sincere motives and an earnest heart, are the only rational options we have to appreciate God and worship Him in the “intelligent” and thoughtful manner that He wants us to realize–a religion that goes beyond mere emotions.”
I really appreciate you putting this back on this web site again. I didn’t get involved at the beginning because I didn’t know anything about it until one of my daughters sent it to me after it had been up for a while. I have
really appreciated knowing about it and have enjoyed following the information you and others have provided.
As I have said many times, though I am a college graduate I am not a scientist. My field of interest was just along a different line so much of the scientific discussion simply goes over my head–especially when two of you scientist get to sharing your different points of view! However, I am a firm believer in Scripture and have learned a lot from the creation discussion.
Yes, I do believe that true science and the Bible are fully compatible and that the honest seeker for truth can find plenty of proof for creation in true science. However, this is also an area in which Satan has been allowed to bring in a lot of confusion and error and it takes a person who has a truly converted “scientific mind” (which my husband had before his death) to intelligently dialog with another “scientific mind” along this line. (Meanwhile the rest of us peons sort of get “lost in the shuffle!”)
I may be wrong but I question that the average “man/woman on the street” has the educational background to really understand the science behind it.
So, I’m sorry but I can’t fully agree with you when you say, “These are gifts of God…which are the ONLY rational options we have to appreciate God and worship Him in the “intelligent” and thoughtful manner that He wants us to realize–a religion that goes beyond mere emotion.”
To me anyway, Bible prophecy is the best answer to the confusion about origins as well other issues we are confronted with today–you don’t need a college education to understand it–and it certainly goes beyond “mere emotions!” Rightly presented, it can be understood and believed in a much shorter time by folks like me that can get completely lost in the scientific creation-evolution discussions. (Amazingly enough–even by people with very little education.)
This is not to say that scientific discussions between scientists who understand it cannot be productive and soul saving. It surely can be,but even they need the Bible and the Bible prophecies to go along with it–at least that is the way I see it.
For this reason (among others)I am so grateful that God included prophecy in the Bible! This is something no other so called “Holy Book” can duplicate and one of the few things Satan cannot touch with his outright lies. To me it gives irrefutable evidence that God IS God and that His Word can be absolutely trusted and believed! When a person really learns and believe this the subject of origins is forever settled regardless of what evolution may or may not do or say. We need to get back to being the “people of the Book!”
Sean, Science IS important–but Bible knowledge is even more important. Science is NOT “the only rational option we have to appreciate God and worship him in the “intelligent” and thoughtful manner that He wants us to realize–a religion that goes beyond mere emotion.” Bible study–including prophecy–is a very vital necessity for everyone–and I seriously doubt that any of us will go though successfully until Jesus comes back for His people without a clear understanding of it.
I wish there was someway this point was being brought out on this site but so far I have seen nothing along this line presented. I’m not sure how to go about doing it myself because prophecy just isn’t something you can fully present in a few paragraphs. (And I guess that’s not really the “theme” of this site anyway is it.)
(Thanks for listening!)
Lydian
Table of Contents
Lydian Also Commented
Educate Truth’s purpose and goals
I think I need to add just a bit more about Bible prophecy–of which there is a lot of in the Bible.
The Bible claims that God has given chosen individuals (prophets) glimpses of real future events that will take place here on earth–some are thousands of years in the future. So far, every prophecy that He has given (and the time has come for their fulfillment) has been fulfilled down to the tiniest detail. To me, that says that the God who gave these predictions is truly “God” and you can trust Him completely regardless of what any human,or groups of humans, may say to the contrary–and regardless of how many degrees they may have behind their names. (Yes, God has given us minds–and He does expect us to use them. And He has also given us many evidences of His divine wisdom–which we ignore to our own peril.)
The prophecies in the Bible have, so far, been absolutely fulfilled down to the most minute detail and there is, in my mind, not the slightest doubt but what the still unfilled ones will also come to pass in their time. Not another book in the whole world has this “track record.” For this reason, to me anyway, if God says it we can put complete confidence in every word He has seen fit to send us by His prophets.
And He warns us to be careful what we accept and believe. In Isaiah 8:20 He says this: “To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” This is the “yardstick” by which I measure everything that I accept and believe. For me, it is the only safe guide through this world of sin and suffering.
And when God says He created the world and everything then on it in six days (just like the 24 hour days we now have) and rested on the seventh I have no question but what that is truth! And I also have no question but what there is ample evidence out there to confirm it–even if I’m not smart enough to find it for myself.
Believe me–I am NOT against true science–but when “science” denies what God has said in His Word I simply reject it out of hand. Call Me an “ignorant old lady’ if you want to but there is where I stand and there is nothing on this earth that can budge me from that position!
Lydian
Recent Comments by Lydian
A New Endowment Program for Adventist Education
So here I sit–a “very old lady”–totally confused and not having a clue as to whether to donate or not–or where to donate if I should.
As things stand now I think I will just continue putting my own little amount to my current “missionary out reach” of buying “Steps to Christ” and “Who Do You Think You Are?” and passing them on to the clerks in the stores where I shop or other people I meet that I think would like them.
If and when you folks decide on what, how and where to help in this very worthy project let me know and I’ll do what I can then.
A New Endowment Program for Adventist Education
I just noticed that there is such a program in place in northern California but I would want one that is nation wide. After all, if our kids aren’t already in danger here in the southern union also (as well the rest of the US) it’s most likely only a short matter of time till they will be.
A New Endowment Program for Adventist Education
I am far from a wealthy person who could and gladly would donate large sums of money to such a program but I could and would gladly donate some if such assurances were solidly in place. I’m sure there are many “old folks” like me “out there” who feel the same way. (Is there already such a program in place? If so please post all needed information.)
The God of the Gaps
While browsing my rather voluminous file of articles to “save” I ran across this jewel—I think it is worth saving and thinking about–especially the last statement by Darwin himself:
**************************
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
While Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a relatively young archetype, the evolutionary worldview itself is as old as antiquity. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man from animal. Charles Darwin simply brought something new to the old philosophy — a plausible mechanism called “natural selection.” Natural selection acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Suppose a member of a species developed a functional advantage (it grew wings and learned to fly). Its offspring would inherit that advantage and pass it on to their offspring. The inferior (disadvantaged) members of the same species would gradually die out, leaving only the superior (advantaged) members of the species. Natural selection is the preservation of a functional advantage that enables a species to compete better in the wild. Natural selection is the naturalistic equivalent to domestic breeding. Over the centuries, human breeders have produced dramatic changes in domestic animal populations by selecting individuals to breed. Breeders eliminate undesirable traits gradually over time. Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time.
\
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution – Slowly But Surely…
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process. Darwin wrote, “…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps.” [1] Thus, Darwin conceded that, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” [2] Such a complex organ would be known as an “irreducibly complex system”. An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If even one part is missing, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. [3] Thus, such a system could not have evolved slowly, piece by piece. The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: a catch (to hold the bait), a powerful spring, a thin rod called “the hammer,” a holding bar to secure the hammer in place, and a platform to mount the trap. If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not work. Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex. [4]
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we’ve made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist
Michael Denton wrote, “Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world.” [5]
And we don’t need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin’s day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” [6]
Footnotes:
1. Charles Darwin, “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life,” 1859, p. 162.
2. Ibid. p. 158.
3. Michael Behe, “Darwin’s Black Box,” 1996.
4. “Unlocking the Mystery of Life,” documentary by Illustra Media, 2002.
5. Michael Denton, “Evolution: A Theory in Crisis,” 1986, p. 250.
6. Charles Darwin, “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life,” 1859, p. 155.
****************
I don’t think Sean could have said it better himself!
Walla Walla University: The Collegian Debates Evolution vs. Creation
Sean, I guess I “bit off more than I can chew” when I subscribed to some of your other options.
All I can handle is the ^way it used to be”–like this column still is. Please put me back to this mode of information and I will be very happy. Thanks.
