The Fool and the Heretic - another book that may spark interest

Why can’t we use the same method to research our natural history that we use to research medical advancements? The theory of evolution is no more godless than the science that supplies the medical advancements you praise.

If we can’t depend on our reason and logic to determine what our natural history is, then how can we rely on that same reason and logic when reading the Bible? You seem to be arguing against the very use of science which indicates that the scientific evidence does support evolution and an old Earth. All scientists have done is apply the scientific method to the facts, and the result is the modern theory of evolution.

Perhaps you forgot that the KKK was filled with christians.

If materialism is true then I don’t see how it leads to racism. If our emotions and empathy are derived from our physical bodies that doesn’t make them less real, nor does it change how we derive our morality. Our morality is derived from our ability to take our own views of how we want to be treated and applying that to other people. We don’t want to be discriminated against because of our skin color, so we know that this is true of other people. From that, we can conclude racism is morally wrong.

However, if you believe that a deity has commanded you to discriminate against someone, then you may very well subdue your own personal sense of morality and obey what you think this deity is commanding. That’s dangerous.

1 Like

The difference is that one studies what is living and in current complex existence. The other makes an attempt to define how this complex existing entity with nervous systems, olfactory and vision sense receptors and reproductive qualities gains status as living and arrived at the state they are in. Medical science engages the scientific method. Historical science makes guesses. Science witnesses the perfection of the rotation of the planets in our solar system. Science is a stuterring dimwit in trying to explain from a materialist philosophy how it came into existence and perform in such an exacting way.
. [quote=“T_aquaticus, post:102, topic:4357”]
If we can’t depend on our reason and logic to determine what our natural history is, then how can we rely on that same reason and logic when reading the Bible?
[/quote]

The Bible contains quite unexplainable events and speaks of mysteries too complex for the rational mind to truely understand. Jesus resurrection is, according to good historical analysis,an event very hard to comprehend the actions within history surrounding it if it did not really occur. And then we have mysteries about God’s existence that transcends time such as the fact that He has always existed and knows the future. It is many of the things that are confounding to human reason that were the best apologetic to me for accepting its legitimance. If what was written was following the same human rationalistic and humanistic patterns seen in almost all other religions, i promise you, i’d reject it. [quote=“T_aquaticus, post:102, topic:4357”]
Perhaps you forgot that the KKK was filled with christians.
[/quote]

And there are many who call themselves “Christian” who practice sexually immoral lifestyles not approved of by God. They are decidedly not Christian. In fact, the church is called to deal rather strongly with the folks who want to say they are representative of God but who ignore Biblical precept on the majors of the faith such as sexual moral issues. (It is a fully different issue about how the church is called to communicate to someone who admits no faith in Christ.
)

As far as racism, i would venture to say that in the history of mankind there would be some legitimate born again Christian in Americas past who were so ignorant that they thought enslaving other humans was ethical. And those may have made it to heaven but would have been quite ashamed of their actions before the judgement seat of Christ. There is nothing in Scripture that justifies making a person the unwilling participant of forced labor to enrich the slave owner. Jesus main criticism of the pharisees was that they followed the letter of the law but ignored the OT precepts of being just, caring and loving to neighbor. These precepts are exactly opposite of a history of slavery and it sickens me to even think about the miserable failures of our country in this respect. Sometime look up how Christian faith of two men in the political arena of their time confronted the enslavement of men. John Adams in America and William wilberforce in England. In our country, i believe our forefathers made a great plan for our country, and much of the fabric is founded upon principles of Scripture. But you can still find a distinct difference between the actions and attitudes of the true Christ followers such as Adams and deists such as Jefferson.

If history has anything to say in response to the principles derived from this statement (and history is cyclical) it would say that it is simple minded at best. On one hand your statement is quite Biblical. (Luke 6:31) But the roots feeding this tree called the golden rule are following the truths in a wordview acceptable of Jesus and the ethics He defines. (Luke 6:22,23) My ethic is unchanging. I am forever subject to an ethic that says obey God and love enemies who may want to disregard those commandments. You take this same golden rule and attempt to apply it into a relativistc worldview. What if one had an addiction to alcohol. It feels good to them to drown out the difficult realities of the day with the bottle. So, following the logic of the golden rule in this person is to suggest that they will be approving of such behavior in their peers and even children and expect no one to discriminate you them in things like being chosen for hire when such behavior is apparent. And that is just a small example. I dont follow ethics from a deity who is speaking new info into my ear, i follow the one already spoken. The ethic that is already spoken, when i last checked, is steering clear if drunkeness, helping orphans in Mexico, digging wells for clean drinking water in Africa, and sharing goodnews of living water that cleanses us of the sin that is bearing massive amounts of rotten fruit as clearly reported on all the news outlets.

Why can’t we use the same scientific method to study both?

The same scientific method is used for both.

If human reason is not capable of determining what happened in the past, then it isn’t capable of using that same reason to reach the conclusions you have made here.

Then God’s ethic has changed over time.

Or not.

corechristianity.com/resource-library/articles/11-false-assumptions-about-christianity?utm_content=buffer2ca21&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

What evil did those babies commit?

1 Like

In your own words?

Sorry I didn’t reply sooner… :slightly_smiling_face: I’ve been struggling with a snowblower, shear bolts, worn-out skids, the concrete apron on the garage and two round trip passes on a three-tenths of a mile gravel driveway (which runs pretty much east and west, but thankfully didn’t drift in for the two appreciable snowstorms we’ve had the last four days… and another storm is forecast to start Friday p.m., with wind :roll_eyes::slightly_smiling_face:) So maybe after I get thawed out, eat and watch some news and shower…

First, we cannot presume to fit God into the finite boxes we build, and then exclude him from reality if he doesn’t follow our predefined acceptable parameters.

The fact that the Bible includes things like that, the apparent genocide, is remarkable in itself. Sometimes I wonder if the Bible, its sources and troublesome parts, is not a test of our humility.*

We also learn from it that he is trustworthy, and that if something like that puzzles us, it just means that our understanding is where the problem lies and not with him.

*“God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.”

More briefly, “Shut up,” he explained.

Haha. I don’t think that is an adequate paraphrase of my reply. It doesn’t mean that our understanding cannot improve. It is possible to know God’s heart.

Actually I find John’s paraphrase perfectly adequate for the way you described.

Actually, I’ll also add, “do as I say, not as I do.”

Keep in mind, I’m a Christian. Although, your and mine beliefs, dogma and even idea of what God is are probably like night and day.

1 Like

It’s an adequate paraphrase of God’s reply to Job, though, which is more or less what I was going for. Or of the “God moves in mysterious ways, his wonders to perform” thing.

There is the trust in a Father thing going on, true. But maybe we know more about his motivations than you care to recognize.

Do tell. How do we learn about his motivations? I’m especially interested in why he killed all the firstborns in Egypt, for example, or why he killed all the people and animals except those on the ark.

1 Like

You already have more than a clue.

Perhaps I’m not very good at clues and you could just come right out and tell me.

I would start by suggesting that we all should be thankful that we’re here at all. An excellent book on thankfulness is One Thousand Gifts (an Iraqi Muslim man became a Christian through reading it, and it starts with her toddler sister being killed in their farmyard by a delivery truck when the author was only five, so she knows a little about children dying):

Then I would refresh your memory that…

…if it were not for God’s patience through the love of Christ, wanting to adopt more into his family, the earth would have been a cinder long ago, so to speak. Why anyone is still alive is the real question.

“Because of the LORD’s great love we are not consumed, for his compassions never fail.”
Lamentations 3:22 Because of the loving devotion of the LORD we are not consumed, for His mercies never fail.

And then put it in perspective, paying particular attention to the just preceding. He doesn’t owe any of us anything, and in fact it is his love and patience that keeps any of us alive at all.

Sounds like Stockholm syndrome to me. So you’re saying that he can rightfully massacre any of us at any time because we deserve it, and we should be very appreciative at such times as he refrains.

1 Like

Of course it does, to you – your worldview and confirmation bias rather demand it. But if you could get out of that for a minute, though – I’m sure I’m saying this awkwardly – and see that being free is not taking the goldfish and putting it on the floor so that it does not have its glass and water constraints. Rather, being free is being adopted back into the proper Father/child relationship by the Creator of the universe.