Religion and scuba

[drrich2]

Ok Richard, how do you reconcile the fossil record, both that it shows evolution and divergence of species, and for the relative age of the earth it suggests?

IIRC the number Christian fundamentalists throw around is somewhere between 6,000 and 10,000 years

Not knowing the just how literal vs. metaphorical to take parts of Genesis, I don't know that I have to, but I've learned over time that sometimes what we think we know in terms of time frame proves later to be off. Yes, there are layers of sediment & fossils which scientists have studies & created a frame of reference that presumes vast millions of years in which this theoretically formed. But I wasn't here 10,000 years ago, and they weren't here 200 million...

Recently, in one of the multiple medical/psychiatric-related e-mails I get, somebody was dissing the paleo diet, on the grounds that human evolution is now thought by some to be capable of moving much faster than previously thought, and that's also true for the microflora in our gut. In other words, it wouldn't take millions of years for us to move past being designed for the diet of paleo man. So, will we someday learn that formation of sedimentary rock strata & fossilization may occur faster than previously thought? This is God we're talking about; just out of speculation, if He wanted to 'fast forward' evolution in the process of creation, why can't He? Man was formed from the dust; a lot of soil content is bacteria, fungi, etc... I don't know how this all went down.

One of Science's strengths is the willingness to accept that today's best understanding of the available data may still harbor some misconceptions. When one is uncovered, we don't 'throw out the baby with the bath water' - tossing out the scientific method & the available body of knowledge as a whole. When a Christian thinks that way, he's often seen as rationalizing to maintain belief in a myth. Jesus' time on earth ran greatly contrary to what the religious people of His day expected the prophesied Messiah to be & do. With that in mind, it's not shock to me that my understanding of the exact course of God's methods & time frame is shaky.

Richard.

 

[Zeagle Eagle]

Certainly not in a forum entitled "Non-Diving Related Stuff"

The thread is titled Religion and Scuba.

 

[JohnN]

Not knowing the just how literal vs. metaphorical to take parts of Genesis, I don't know that I have to, but I've learned over time that sometimes what we think we know in terms of time frame proves later to be off. Yes, there are layers of sediment & fossils which scientists have studies & created a frame of reference that presumes vast millions of years in which this theoretically formed. But I wasn't here 10,000 years ago, and they weren't here 200 million...

Recently, in one of the multiple medical/psychiatric-related e-mails I get, somebody was dissing the paleo diet, on the grounds that human evolution is now thought by some to be capable of moving much faster than previously thought, and that's also true for the microflora in our gut. In other words, it wouldn't take millions of years for us to move past being designed for the diet of paleo man. So, will we someday learn that formation of sedimentary rock strata & fossilization may occur faster than previously thought? This is God we're talking about; just out of speculation, if He wanted to 'fast forward' evolution in the process of creation, why can't He? Man was formed from the dust; a lot of soil content is bacteria, fungi, etc... I don't know how this all went down.

One of Science's strengths is the willingness to accept that today's best understanding of the available data may still harbor some misconceptions. When one is uncovered, we don't 'throw out the baby with the bath water' - tossing out the scientific method & the available body of knowledge as a whole. When a Christian thinks that way, he's often seen as rationalizing to maintain belief in a myth. Jesus' time on earth ran greatly contrary to what the religious people of His day expected the prophesied Messiah to be & do. With that in mind, it's not shock to me that my understanding of the exact course of God's methods & time frame is shaky.

Richard.

Thanks Richard, but to draw gross generalizations between the "creationist" and the "evolutionist", the later is willing to examine any new evidence and compare it to what was previously believed. Whereas the former has a fixed viewpoint and evidence is either discarded or ignored if it doesn't fit. Your "I wasn't here 10,000 years ago" is quite close to the creationist hardline. So lets talk about 10,000 years. The half-life of C-14 is about 5600 years. It's relatively easy to find carbon that dates > 10,000 years (C-14 dating is generally considered accurate to about 50,000 years).

As for Petersburg, KY, that is the home of the Creationist Museum that proudly displays men and dinosaurs co-existing (I personally think they must have watched too many episodes of the Flintsones).

 

[drrich2]

Whereas the former has a fixed viewpoint and evidence is either discarded or ignored if it doesn't fit.

In some elements of Christianity, that's true. I think there comes a point in a person's life when he or she has to make 2 key decisions:

1.) Is there some sort of 'supernatural' element to existence? Whether you interpret this to mean the existence of a human soul, an afterlife, miraculous healing (legit, not psychosomatic), psychic phenomena in its various forms (again, legit, not charlatans), ghosts or what-have-you, do you believe that you have either personally experienced or heard accounts of events from sources you consider sufficiently credible to trust?

Even someone raised with Christianity or another religious form 'because Mom & Dad said so,' is likely eventually going to start paying attention to that angle. And there are different types of evidence a person might find persuasive, not all of which falls under the 'reproducibly demonstrated via lab experimentation' approach. Of course, many historical events were recorded prior to video, aren't reproducible & we believe them, so not even everything the scientific community believes is demonstrable thus.

Some people will conclude 'no.' Some will conclude 'yes.' If yes, proceed to question 2.).

2.) What is the best explanation for this supernatural aspect to existence? The Bible? The Koran? What?

At some point a person will likely delve into at least one of these, and become convinced of its wisdom & inherent truth. For me, that's the Bible. For one of my good friends whom I admire, that's the Koran.

Even in 'Biblical' times, there was a lot of trouble with false religions (i.e.: idolatry) amongst the Hebrews/Israelites. In fact, the Bible is so critical of the misbehavior of the Jews that I think if they'd written it themselves, they'd have made themselves look a whole lot better.

Richard.

 

[JohnN]

In some elements of Christianity, that's true. I think there comes a point in a person's life when he or she has to make 2 key decisions:

1.) Is there some sort of 'supernatural' element to existence? Whether you interpret this to mean the existence of a human soul, an afterlife, miraculous healing (legit, not psychosomatic), psychic phenomena in its various forms (again, legit, not charlatans), ghosts or what-have-you, do you believe that you have either personally experienced or heard accounts of events from sources you consider sufficiently credible to trust?

Even someone raised with Christianity or another religious form 'because Mom & Dad said so,' is likely eventually going to start paying attention to that angle. And there are different types of evidence a person might find persuasive, not all of which falls under the 'reproducibly demonstrated via lab experimentation' approach. Of course, many historical events were recorded prior to video, aren't reproducible & we believe them, so not even everything the scientific community believes is demonstrable thus.

Some people will conclude 'no.' Some will conclude 'yes.' If yes, proceed to question 2.).

2.) What is the best explanation for this supernatural aspect to existence? The Bible? The Koran? What?

At some point a person will likely delve into at least one of these, and become convinced of its wisdom & inherent truth. For me, that's the Bible. For one of my good friends whom I admire, that's the Koran.

Even in 'Biblical' times, there was a lot of trouble with false religions (i.e.: idolatry) amongst the Hebrews/Israelites. In fact, the Bible is so critical of the misbehavior of the Jews that I think if they'd written it themselves, they'd have made themselves look a whole lot better.

Richard.

Richard,

You're doing the bob-and-weave. Is the world 6,000 / 10,000 years old as maintained by the Christian fundamentalists? Did men walk with dinosaurs?

As a man of science, is the Bible a collection of stories and allegories, or the literal word of God?

I must observe that the comparing the camps of Fundamentalist Christians and Atheists/Agnostics that the latter are much better educated (as a group). I draw an obvious conclusion from that (although as Groucho Marx observed: "I wouldn't want to be the member of any club that would have me".)

 

[drrich2]

I simply don't know the age of the world. I consider different possibilities, but I don't know which is accurate. I consider the Bible the word of God, and accept that Jesus taught with parables, and there's a lot of metaphorical teaching (which makes Psalms hard for me; by nature I'm a literalist).

As for the education base on average, thought there's doubtless a wide range amongst both camps, it stands to reason it would be some of the people who have the most education for the time to take the 'leap of faith' to rule out a Creator, based on what they know. After all, they must figure they know the most.

 

[JohnN]

I simply don't know the age of the world. I consider different possibilities, but I don't know which is accurate. I consider the Bible the word of God, and accept that Jesus taught with parables, and there's a lot of metaphorical teaching (which makes Psalms hard for me; by nature I'm a literalist).

As for the education base on average, thought there's doubtless a wide range amongst both camps, it stands to reason it would be some of the people who have the most education for the time to take the 'leap of faith' to rule out a Creator, based on what they know. After all, they must figure they know the most.

OK so then how do you reconcile the danger of action (here I'm assuming you try to express your faith in actions) based on a small sample set (N=1 for most of the Bible). I'll highlight the recent debacle that has occurred when that flawed British study (N<10) was embraced that linked autism to childhood vaccines. This seems like a troubling contradiction you must have reconciled.

And what about that Creationist Museum? To you support it, or is it an embarrassment to you?

 

[drrich2]

I haven't been to the Creationist Museum yet. I'd like to go someday. I have elsewhere heard Christians whom I think were blowing their own credibility attempting to provide explanations for things that we just don't know. I've never been to seminary. I am no authority whom people should turn to in seeking to reconcile their beliefs and potentially set the course of their immortal souls. James 3:1: "Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly." I am neither fit for the task nor to be judged to a higher standard. I speak as best I may in the hope of providing help, not harm.

I’ve been re-thinking some of this topic. I get the frustration some atheists & agnostics feel; they want God to participate in an experimental setup, preferably one with a ‘no God influence’ control group & one in which He intervenes, with a design ruling out potential confounding variables, statistically powered to demonstrate that a ‘positive result’ is under 5% likely to be due to random chance. This outcome would then be published in a peer reviewed professional/scientific journal, and would subsequently be performed repeatedly at other sites by other researchers, eventually supporting a consensus theory by the scientific community.

Hey, a lot of Christians would welcome that. But we don’t get that. So, how does that ‘look’ from a Christian standpoint? Probably nothing that’s going to compel an atheist to change his position, but this is a point of curiosity so let’s take a look at it.

1.) Establishing God’s existence alone isn’t sufficient. James 2:19 NIV: “You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder.”

2.) Whatever we learn, our understanding of God is always incomplete (reminds me of the 5 blind men trying to describe an elephant; it was too vast for anyone to fully comprehend without sight). Isaiah 55:8: “"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD.”

That’s going to drive an atheist nuts, coming across as ‘shut up & believe.’ I know.

3.) There will always be an element of faith in the Christian life, not full scientific resolution. 2 Corinthians 5:7: “For we live by faith, not by sight.”

Doesn’t mean we don’t think. Wisdom is highly spoken of & endorsed in the Bible. Some people, such as Daniel and Solomon, were famous for their wisdom. A Christian does not abandon his reason; he accepts some limits of it.

4.) God is the judge of what an adequate case is, and in Romans 1:20, His position appears to be plain: “For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”

Basically, we don’t have a Godless control group to compare against. Yes, God has displayed His power by convincing proofs repeatedly. The 10 plagues of Egypt, the overt miracles of the Exodus, Elijah’s showdown with idolatrous priests on Mt. Carmel, and of course Christ’s miracles to establish who He was. Yes, He healed people, but in performing miracles He showed Himself to have power. It made his testimony compelling. Even cultures not Christians often were moved to worship something.

5.) God is our Lord, not our genie. This comes through when critics point out we ought to be able to get whatever we ask in prayer. No, the apostles intensely dedicated to Christ and living as fully as one could in His name & for His purpose had access to divine help to get what they needed to do His will in their lives. Much as Christ did in this life. As one person put it elsewhere, when asked to teach the disciples to pray, Jesus taught ‘give us this day our daily bread,’ not give us this day our Mercedes Benz!

6.) The manner in which God introduces Himself is His to decide, not necessarily what we would pick. In John 13:35, Jesus told us “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

Not your amazing foreknowledge of scientific facts & principles that’ll be established in a couple of thousand years. One of the legitimate criticisms of self-proclaimed Christians is that we do not reflect the light of Christ as we should. Gandhi said it well - “[FONT=.HelveticaNeueDeskInterface-Regular]I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”[/FONT]

7.) Jesus at birth was not delivered into the hands of the ‘elites’ - either religious, political or intellectual. 3 ‘Magi’ came to attend Him, so He came to the attention of some prominent people early, but God’s message is for all, not just the societal elite.

8.) God’s approach will frustrate many of us, as it may be a reaction to human nature & history. In 1 Corinthians 1:21: “For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.”

The history of the Hebrews/Israel shows us that people who directly observed miracles and had direct detailed instruction still didn’t worship/obey God as they should in many cases. The golden calf was far from the only idolatry. I said earlier that even if God unequivocally demonstrated His existence by show of power, what would it prove? That some powerful extraterrestrial intelligence popped up one day & decided to lord it over us? We still wouldn’t know this was the Creator of all things. Just because someone is powerful beyond our comprehension doesn’t mean he’s all-powerful.

9.) The alternatives might be worse than you think. Imagine a world where God makes Himself as blatant in our lives as some think He should. You think about sinning in some way, & thunderclouds form in the sky. You still think about it, there’s thunder. Actually do something wrong, lightning might hit you, or your hand fall off, or your neighbors are ordered to stone you, etc… The Hebrews had a taste of direct interaction with God. Their response is recorded in Exodus 20:19 “and said to Moses, "Speak to us yourself and we will listen. But do not have God speak to us or we will die.”

Isaiah had some sort of direct encounter; a ‘man of God,’ by our standards, his response is recorded in Isaiah 6:5 “"Woe to me!" I cried. "I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the LORD Almighty.”

Not ‘Hey, look! He’s real!’ A direct encounter with God is so overwhelming that expecting to turn it up in the lab may be unrealistic.

10.) God’s perspective may differ from ours. I was confused by this from Genesis 2:17 “but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

But Adam lived for many years afterward. Bible contradicts itself, right? Perhaps not. The Bible later makes reference to letting the dead bury their dead, and people being dead in their sins. It’s my understanding a ‘living’ relationship with God is ‘life,’ rather than biological existence in this respect. Basically, Adam got ‘cut off’ immediately. Dead in sin. But what we think of as life went on a long time. This, and other examples where seeming contradictions turn out to have viable explanations, remind me that I simply don’t know it all.

As for social issues such as slavery, the issue of slavery to sin separating us from God endangering our eternal destiny vastly outweighs earthly concerns. But be mindful that true Christ followers who love their neighbor as themselves would likely be moved toward abolition eventually. As an example of what that can do, consider the example of William Wilberforce, a Christian whose faith moved him to oppose slavery with such dedication that per one course I heard Britain may have been spared a civil war in part by his crusade, unlike the United State's bloody course.

11.) The Bible was provided for God’s purpose, communicating an amazing array of ideas to vast numbers of people across millennia and cultures and walks of life. Scriptures speaking to an Ethiopian eunuch, to St. Augustine, to me, to those impoverished people in Africa mentioned in an earlier post, the mind boggles.

And remember that purpose involved establishing a relationship with people. Even people who believe He exists often react badly; some of the letters to the 7 churches in Revelations record that (e.g.: the churches at Sardis and Laodicea).

As a parting note, I know quoting Scripture often does little to persuade atheists, as they do not credit the source. As a Christian, the Bible is my source, popular or not, and I was recently reminded of that by a daily devotional at Truth For Life ministries when referencing an instruction that an alter to God was to be made of unhewn stones (no human workmanship), it is often tempting for would-be Christians to 'spin' or distort the message of Scripture for whatever reason - to make it palatable, to 'sell' it, etc... But we risk our manipulations defacing the very truth. So I direct those who 'have an ear,' as the Bible puts it, Scripture.

No matter how many pages this thread goes on, none of us with 'force' the other(s) to believe/disbelieve anything. But the testimonies have been presented. May God be pleased with the work.

Richard.

 

[JohnN]

I haven't been to the Creationist Museum yet. I'd like to go someday.
Richard.

So help me out. I'd like to go to Graceland. But more as a been-there-done-that than any deep significance.

Personally I think the premise behind the Creationist Museum is so f**ked up, going there would be like watching an Elvis show in LV, really fun, but totally unreal, and nothing do do with any core values.

I'm guessing by all of this that you really buy into the whole package, and you would embrace rather than be embarrassed by the venue.

Awesome! Whatever floats your boat. Remind me to never seek medical care in your particular part of the world.

 

[Freewillow]

Thank you richard for the long explanation.

As ou said it yourself : "As a parting note, I know quoting Scripture often does little to persuade atheists, as they do not credit the source.".

The old testament is a crazy mixtures of summerian and egyptian myths . And I am not an Atheist .