Has anybody seen the laugh button remote? I need to mute the darn thing. Why? Some knucklehead went on record asking for ‘peer reviews’ of the biblical writers, as if their words are not good enough. Am I serious? Oh yeah, but no surprise, people have been playing this act since theatre school began so many thousands of years ago. Drama abounds on the internet as infidelity and rage against scripture increases.
Right, like a man needs to hear from somebody who is more credible and reliable than the scripture writers. And who pray tell would this be? Who would have a more accurate and truthful account of David standing before that rather large idiot, a goliath of sorts, than the scripture writers who were only to be loaded with fidelity to the text, whether they liked it or not. (continued here)
Of course,
About four years ago I wrote WHY ARE POLITICS AND RELIGION LOST SUBJECTS IN AMERICA? That post includes this section: “Is Religion Beyond Logical Proof?” In this section I suggested that we do have excellent reasons to believe the Bible.
Consider these proofs.
- Without the inspiration of God, men would not have written the Bible. No other book is like it. The Bible doesn’t flatter us; the Bible holds up a mirror and shows us as we are. The Bible also gives us hope; it explains how God redeemed us from sin. There are about 40 authors, and these tell a coherent story in a book whose writings span 1500 hundred years. Moreover, in spite of the violence and travails of human history, believers have preserved the Bible virtually unchanged for thousands of years. Again I ask, other book is like that?
- Without the God of Israel, the history of the Jews makes no sense. After all that has been done to destroy them, after all they have suffered, the Jews still exist as a nation. No other people has a story so strange and remarkable, not even close.
- Without Christ Jesus — without the man who was also the Son of God — the formation of Christianity makes no sense. After His crucifixion, hundreds saw Him — alive. Rather than deny Christ, many accepted death. That includes all but one of His apostles. Only John died of old age. Why? What for? These people had nothing material to gain. In court the testimony of a dying man holds great weight? What is the testimony of a Christian martyr? Is it not the testimony of someone who knows his death, lies just before him?
- Christianity makes a difference. As a way of life, loving God and ones neighbors cannot be beat. That’s why 2000 years after the birth of Christ men and women still speak of being born again. Each Christian knows that when they were born again, that birth was real and substantial, not a delusion.
Are these scientific proofs? No. They depend upon faith. Yet so does science, and many, not well enough grounded in philosophy, don’t appreciate that.
Is the following statement subject to the scientific method?
Cogito, ergo sum, (Latin: “I think, therefore I am). — French philosopher René Descartes (from here)
Any structure of knowledge rests upon certain largely untestable assumptions. We keep the assumptions, rely upon them, because we have faith in them. Experience, not scientific proof, has demonstrated their validity. Hence Christians believe the Bible because:
- We understand that men on their own could not/would not have written the Bible.
- We believe the martyrs.
- The Bible answers so many questions.
- The Bible’s wisdom is trustworthy. It works in application.
- And so forth.
Do secularists practice a similar kind of faith? Yes, and that makes it all the odder when secularists ridicule faith. Here is an example, the Theory of Evolution. Secularists insist that the Theory of Evolution is proven science, but that is not true. Because we don’t live long enough, we cannot substantially “evolve” anything; we cannot test the Theory of Evolution with the scientific method. Yet most scientists assume the Theory of Evolution is correct. Why?
- The theory fits the data, the fossil record.
- They believe other scientists who say the theory is true.
- The theory answers so many questions.
- It appears to work in application.
- And so forth.
Whether the Bible is true, of course, has much more significance than the Theory of Evolution. Christians must decide every day to pick up their cross and follow Jesus. The Theory of Evolution has largely become just a tool some use to discredit the Bible or what they call Christian fundamentalism. In fact, few spend much time worrying about the Theory of Evolution.
What is the point to take from this discussion? Truth does not depend upon science. Whether we know the truth depends primarily upon the soundness of our assumptions. That is why a wise man once said this.
The unexamined life is not worth living. — Socrates (from APOLOGY By Plato translated by Benjamin Jowett) (to view the quote in context see INCOMPATIBLE VIEWS ON GOVERNMENT — PART 1)
If we want to live as close to the truth as we can, we must examine our lives. How have we chosen to live? What do we believe? Why?
Citizen Tom 
Understanding of The Bible is closed to the unregenerated. If a person is going to understand anything at all about The Word of God, they have to come into a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Jesus spoke in parables for a reason. The Bible is a mystery to the unrepentant and the unsaved. And as to the Atheists and their insistence on either receiving some kind of proof that God exists, let me say this: “The best evidence that God exists is the fact, the unimpeachable face, that Mankind has been searching for Him since the beginning of time.” — https://limingprayertabernacle.wordpress.com/
Reproducible evolution is happening, and it can be observed. This is an indisputable biological fact confirmed by research and documented studies rather than experimentation as these examples below identify.
“Many people think evolution requires thousands or millions of years, but biologists know it can happen fast. Now, thanks to the genomic revolution, researchers can actually track the population-level genetic shifts that mark evolution in action—and they’re doing this in humans.” (ref Molly Przeworski, an evolutionary biologist)
“Tibetans live in the Himalayan mountains, and their ability to handle the low-oxygen levels up there is not due to mere hardiness — it’s coded into their genes.”
“Italian Wall Lizards – These lizards were taken to an island and left there to see any changes that occurred. They shifted their diet and ate more vegetation, causing a change to their head size, giving them a stronger bite. They also developed cecal valves in their intestine which gives bacteria more time to break down the vegetation.”
“Another source of evidence for recent human evolution cited by biologists is the Framingham Heart Study, the longest-running multigenerational medical study in the world. Framingham is a small town in Massachusetts, and in 1948, a study of the town’s female population began; scientists wanted to understand what causes heart disease. Scientists say that the Framingham data demonstrate that natural selection influenced the Framingham population by reducing height, increasing weight, lowering cholesterol levels, and lowering systolic blood pressures.”
I think these scientific people are a little more clued up on biological evolution than all of us put together. To argue with them about the decades of work regarding these issues would normally be pointless unless you were at their level of expertise.
Challenging the results is what science expects, science seeks challenges, find someone who is qualified as a biologist and understands these issues and document a serious challenge.
@sklyjd
When we set about proving a hypothesis, we have to first define the hypothesis.
What the task involves is demonstrating that the complex lifeforms we see about us today, especially humans, “evolved” from simple molecules. Do you really think you have proof of that or just some interesting data points?
Calling an unproven theory one of the fundamental keystones of modern biological theory is kind of weird, but we human beings do love believing we have it all figured out. We don’t. Truth seems to be that God has some surprises in store for us.
I hope you like surprises.
😀
“What the task involves is demonstrating that the complex lifeforms we see about us today, especially humans, “evolved” from simple molecules. Do you really think you have proof of that or just some interesting data points?”
From as far back in time as is scientifically possible, scientists have determined what life forms existed on our planet due to many unearthed artefacts, and thousands of fossils, including tools, footprints, paintings and structures and by using many dating techniques to piece together what is the evolutionary sequences to our present day.
Of course, we have genetics that reveals in detail how natural selection works and show how closely related we are to other primates. The current observable evolutionary events on Earth have also reinforced these theories, therefore they cannot just be data points.
The first life forms on Earth are not currently known but there is much speculation.
“Calling an unproven theory one of the fundamental keystones of modern biological theory is kind of weird,”
In the context of science, the word “theory” is not unproven.
“A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not “guesses” but reliable accounts of the real world.” (ref Google)
“Truth seems to be that God has some surprises in store for us.” “I hope you like surprises.”
It is the world that surprises and excites me more than any ancient gods ever could with everything we have learnt just during my lifetime alone.
“The first life forms on Earth are not currently known but there is much speculation”
So you think that much speculation constitutes scientific data?
Truly your faith is amazing
I’m constantly amazed by the wisdom of evolution! To hear Sklyjd talk, evolution knows exactly what high altitude monks need, what lizards need and what females in Framingham need. Evolution is a timeless, immaterial, omniscient, omnipotent benefactor that makes God unnecessary!
The evolutionary process does not think, it is the process of natural selection where the life forms adapt to the environment, move somewhere else or die out.
It is quite simple, the Tibetan Sherpas that live in the Himalayan mountains have after centuries of living at high altitude evolved to master the ability to survive in this atmosphere. Don’t believe me, read more about it here.
https://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/11/health/sherpas-superhuman-mountaineers/index.html
It appears your priority is making God necessary rather than understanding the real facts of evolution. There is no denying that the biological evidence is overwhelming and the reason Pope Francis, the head of the Roman Catholic Church, said that Darwinian evolution is real, and so is the Big Bang.
@sklyjd
So now you have faith in the pope?
Science is established by rules of evidence. The Theory of Evolution was not established by following those rules; it was established by consensus. What obtaining such consensus involved was ridiculing the opposition until it shut up or agreed. Nothing honorable about such ridicule or giving in to the pressure to conform.
You want to believe in the Theory of Evolution? Your choice. You want to call your beliefs scientific? Pardon me while I roll my eyes.
🙄
Last I checked, the Pope wasn’t an atheist.
You have tremendous faith, albeit blind, in the power of natural selection.
@John
Sklyjd is making the process of evolution sound sort of intelligent, despite his denials. Even Darwin never did that.
I think Darwin remembered his theory had to account for parasitism too. Survival of the fittest always is not a pretty thing. The gods of the ancients were scary. I suspect Darwin found his godless explanation even more so. Sklyjd most likely cannot handle it.
I don’t believe in atheists. Humans are drawn to “God” (however the term is defined). Evolution and Science take the place of all-mighty God in the atheist’s theology. I believe this is what the Bible calls “a form of religion” but it lacks power.
Notice Skyljd’s first comments are emphatic statements that evolution drives life to adapt perfectly to radically differing circumstances. When I suggested that is a sign of intelligence, he emphatically stated that evolution “doesn’t think”. There may be people who truly do not believe in God, but I haven’t encountered one of them yet. The atheists I know are just modern day Pharisees.
@John
Pharisees? I suppose many of them are. What was it that Jesus condemned about the Pharisees? Their pride. Seems to be a common human failing.
The Pharisees had taken the Bible and made it about the wonder of the works that they were doing. Yet the Bible is about what God has done for us.
When the Pharisees manipulated the Law, made it all about them, they turned God’s gift to the people of Israel into something painful. Hence Matthew 23.
It amazes me the number of evolutionists who tout the scientific method as the salvation of the world, and gladly abandon it with glee when it fails to support their void and incoherent worldview. They are people of much faith. Oh, the irony of it all.
I am ashamed to say it, but their faith in what they believe does seem to be greater than my faith in what I believe. 😞
Ha…..you know that’s a point there, Tom.
Well CT, if you needed a nickname, I dub thee Barnabas, as it suits you. You have a gift, and not only do you use it, you share it and make people better. A rare and true art form. How you consistently piece these things together to make better music is amazing. Many agree.
‘A son of consolation,’ and one who aids, an advocate, a paraclete of sorts, as that gift of ‘helps’ is so often neglected and underappreciated.
But your idea of God having having no peer made me laugh too, for which of us owns registered trademarks for a tree, any tree? Or as you say, martyrs, or Israel itself. And btw, I really love our friends observation above that ‘we the people’ have peer reviewed it as well! Good people agree. For thousands of years we have agreed, for we know fresh bread when we see it, and know it even more when we taste it.
But it needs repeating too, that if many would give God the courtesy of the benefit of the doubt consider the POSSIBILITY that the scriptures are true, like we did, rather than bow to the world’s pressure and the whispers of infidels.
@ColorStorm
Barnabas? Well, that’s certainly a much greater compliment than I deserve, but I enjoy it. Thank you, and thank you for the opportunity to play off your most excellent post. Following the example of Isaac Newton, my “secret” is stand upon the shoulders of giants so that I might see farther.
You stand tall on your own CT, 😉
Amen,Tom! I really enjoy reading Colorstorm’s words. I also liked your “proofs” for the bible. I reached some similar conclusions myself. Chuckling here, but I think you and I and a few million others all coming into agreement is the very definition of “peer reviewed.”
Agreed! It is the best kind of “peer reviewed”. Like you it seems to me best to follow the example of people who are content with and firmly resolved upon their choice.
Very well done.
Love the Socrates quote. Indeed, “The unexamined life is not worth living.”
“Secularists insist that the Theory of Evolution is proven science, but that is not true. Because we don’t live long enough, we cannot substantially “evolve” anything; we cannot test Theory of Evolution with the scientific method. Yet most scientists assume the Theory of Evolution is correct. Why?”
Evolution is happening, I have listed a handful of the many websites that will answer this question for you.
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/05/humans-are-still-evolving-and-we-can-watch-it-happen
https://www.businessinsider.com/recent-human-evolution-traits-2016-8?IR=T
http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-evolution.html
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/321942.php
“If we want to live as close to the truth as we can, we must examine our lives. How have we chosen to live? What do we believe? Why?”
Excellent question, we all should examine what we believe to the last detail, starting with, what exists in real life, and what does not. Why we should not believe in mythology and why do some people do believe it.
@sklyjd
What your articles illustrate is exactly what I said. The data appears to conform to the theory. That is not the same as using the scientific method to prove the theory. That involves reproducible experiments.