Why does a scriptural explanation of science never include math and physics?
Whenever I hear folks state that they are absolutely certain of their scriptural explanations for scientific issues (Quran, Bible explanations for physical observations) I always ask for something - anything - that anyone with a science or math education can use to understand what they are talking about. I always get no response or some fuzzy wuzzy words discussing philosophical stuff. To a scientist or an engineer looking for logic, such talk is meaningless.
My conclusion is that the ones that are the most certain and self - assured about their scriptural versions of science and mathematics do not understand science or mathematics. Interesting.
2009-04-30T15:04:46Z
Frst - Ha! Close enough if you don't know what a wheel is. David - True, but I'm referring to people today. Eddie - My problem is that I do not see how your detailed explanation differs from those of the fundamentalists that you claim to disagree with. david - I agree. Lika - My God does not think that 2+2=5. AstroGeek - Good quote. You might also like Dr Jacob Bronowski Boatman - I frequently say the same thing. seed - Not sure what you meant. What about the "unsure about what they know about physics" type? Matt - spent a half hour on his website on your recommendation. Sadly still heavy on the words of the ancient prophets and light on the math. His twisting of Einstein's work on time dilation to justify a six day Creation made no sense at all. Sgt. - Please do not misinterpret my words as a condemnation of faith. That is the farthest thing from my intent. Al - I agree with your first statement. Not sure everything is in lock step yet, though. ron - I wish it were that simple.
Anonymous2009-04-30T10:30:16Z
Favorite Answer
Speaking as a Christian (but NOT a fundamentalist or evangelical) one of my favorite quotes is by Martin Luther King:
"Science investigates; religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge, which is power; religion gives man wisdom, which is control. Science deals mainly with facts; religion deals mainly with values. The two are not rivals."
Now, if only we could get all Christians to accept that, then the world would be a much better place.
Personally, I reconcile it this way: Science is the investigation of the universe, looking for the truth. How can a search for the truth be anything but Godly?
When your belief is that "the Bible is the Word of God and contains the Truth, all of the Truth, and nothing but the Truth, and is the sole method by which God talks" to me, math, physics, geology, astronomy, paleontology, history, and anything else goes out the window unless it absolutely fits with with something in the Bible.
Because they believe that the Bible is literal in everything that it says, they fear anything that could undeniably contradict anything that is said in the scriptures, such as a six day period of creation or a 6000 year old earth. Thus the convoluted efforts to ensure that data and evidence are twisted to fit whatever they say that the Bible says, such as human footprints side by side with dinosaur footprints, the "flood flipped older rocks on top of newer rocks, not plate tectonics", etc.
If they believed that the Bible was absolutely true in a "spiritual" sense, which is what matters most in a religion, rather than in a literal sense, they wouldn't have to endure such emotional agony from the wealth of evidence on how the Earth and everything on it was formed over the last 4.6 billion years.
Larry, how about reading The Science of God by Gerald Schroeder? His science is sound, not even Richard Dawkins can refute him, yet Dr. Schroeder makes a compelling argument for the Genesis account as being scientifically accurate. It just takes a deeper look at Scripture, Schroeder even uses ancient Jewish wisdom that already confirmed what Scientists are only discovery today. The problem comes with English translations of the Genesis account and English (not specifically the British people but people who use the English versions in general) believers who haven't got a clue as to what the original Hebrew says, hence they often make serious errant interpretations even from simple passages.
The reason is likely to be that those people educated in such matters were few and far between. Only the wealthy had educations, and not all had educations in Natural Philosophy (that's what science was called in those days). Also, people 2,000 years ago had much less knowledge than do we, and so many things were just taken for granted.
For example, when people of that time found fossil sea shells on the tops of mountains they had no reason to believe they did not live there at a time when "the whole world" was flooded.
You need to read this. I believe this presents the Bible's viewpoint in a logical way. While this does not address all sciences and mathematics, it is just one (large) example of "Biblical logic". That is the example of The Creation Account.
*Does Science Contradict the Genesis Account?***
"Many people claim that science disproves the Bible’s account of creation. But the real contradiction is between science and, not the Bible, but the opinions of so-called Christian Fundamentalists. Some of these groups falsely assert that according to the Bible, all physical creation was produced in six 24-hour days some 10,000 years ago.
The Bible, however, does not support such a conclusion. If it did, then many scientific discoveries over the past hundred years would indeed discredit the Bible. A careful study of the Bible text reveals no conflict with established scientific facts. The following shows what the Bible really teaches.
When Was “the Beginning”?
The Genesis account opens with the simple, powerful statement: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) Bible scholars agree that this verse describes an action separate from the creative days recounted from verse 3 onward. The implication is profound. According to the Bible’s opening statement, the universe, including our planet Earth, was in existence for an indefinite time before the creative days began. Geologists estimate that the earth is approximately 4 billion years old, and astronomers calculate that the universe may be as much as 15 billion years old. Do these findings—or their potential future refinements—contradict Genesis 1:1? No. The Bible does not specify the actual age of “the heavens and the earth.” Science does not disprove the Biblical text.
How Long Were the Creative Days?
What about the length of the creative days? Were they literally 24 hours long? Some claim that because Moses—the writer of Genesis—later referred to the day that followed the six creative days as a model for the weekly Sabbath, each of the creative days must be literally 24 hours long. (Exodus 20:11) Does the wording of Genesis support this conclusion?
No, it does not. The fact is that the Hebrew word translated “day” can mean various lengths of time, not just a 24-hour period. For example, when summarizing God’s creative work, Moses refers to all six creative days as one day. (Genesis 2:4) In addition, on the first creative day, “God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night.” (Genesis 1:5) Here, only a portion of a 24-hour period is defined by the term “day.” Certainly, there is no basis in Scripture for arbitrarily stating that each creative day was 24 hours long.
How long, then, were the creative days? The wording of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved.
Creations Appear Gradually
Moses wrote his account in Hebrew, and he wrote it from the perspective of a person standing on the surface of the earth. These two facts, combined with the knowledge that the universe existed before the beginning of the creative periods, or “days,” help to defuse much of the controversy surrounding the creation account. How so?
A careful consideration of the Genesis account reveals that events starting during one “day” continued into one or more of the following days. For example, before the first creative “day” started, light from the already existing sun was somehow prevented from reaching the earth’s surface, possibly by thick clouds. (Job 38:9) During the first “day,” this barrier began to clear, allowing diffused light to penetrate the atmosphere.
On the second “day,” the atmosphere evidently continued to clear, creating a space between the thick clouds above and the ocean below. On the fourth “day,” the atmosphere had gradually cleared to such an extent that the sun and the moon were made to appear “in the expanse of the heavens.” (Genesis 1:14-16) In other words, from the perspective of a person on earth, the sun and moon began to be discernible. These events happened gradually.
The Genesis account also relates that as the atmosphere continued to clear, flying creatures—including insects and membrane-winged creatures—started to appear on the fifth “day.” However, the Bible indicates that during the sixth “day,” God was still in the process of “forming from the ground every wild beast of the field and every flying creature of the heavens.”—Genesis 2:19. Clearly, the Bible’s language makes room for the possibility of some major events during each “day,” or creative period, to have occurred gradually rather than instantly, perhaps some of them even lasting into the following creative “days.”