Modern Christianity, the bible and God's laws

Pinball1970 said:
The OT biggest crime today is verses putting very bad ideas in people's heads about science, homosexuality, witches and racism/slavery.

Jesus seemed to be peaceful but at no point did he renounce any of those verses.
Click to expand...

Why would he? No one asked him.

Most of the greatest scientists were bible believing Christians.

EDIT: Jesus' commandment to love thy neighbour didn't exclude anyone.
 
davewhite04 said:
Why would he? No one asked him.

Most of the greatest scientists were bible believing Christians.

EDIT: Jesus' commandment to love thy neighbour didn't exclude anyone.
Click to expand...

Jesus said to follow the (mosaic) law and not leave out one iota.

So all the stuff in the OT.

Agreed Jesus was a progressive too, including everyone regarding brotherhood. Love ones enemy, love ones neighbour.

I am not a Christian hater I used to be one. Fundamentalism and anti science is my issue today.

Most scientists are not religious today. Newton and the like were but they were pre Darwin.

Plus being an atheist in the 17th century would have got you killed for blasphemy in England.
 
davewhite04 said:
Do you really think Darwin would have changed Newton's mind?
Click to expand...
Also before the enlightenment. Newton in the 18th or 19th century would have been a different animal.

If he read Darwin he would have been convinced in my opinion. He was a man of science and was very good at assessing evidence.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Also before the enlightenment. Newton in the 18th or 19th century would have been a different animal.

If he read Darwin he would have been convinced in my opinion. He was a man of science and was very good at assessing evidence.
Click to expand...
You've got no idea what faith is.
 
Pinball1970 said:
I had it till I was 23.
Click to expand...
Imagine the faith Newton had?

He spent most of his time reading the bible, if he dedicated more time to science, who knows what other discoveries he would of come up with. To him God was more important.

Arguably the leading chemist in the world James Tour is a Messianic Jew(Christian), he accepts evolution but still believes in Jesus, how would Newton be any different, or the rest of the genius Christian scientists?

When I lost my faith I became less inspired.
 
davewhite04 said:
Imagine the faith Newton had?
Click to expand...

You have no idea what my faith was like. Perhaps it was very strong?

I broke it with study and counting up contradictions in the Bible, history and science.

I am absolutely certain that his intellect was greater than mine. Why would he not use the same evidence I did to break it?
 
Pinball1970 said:
You have no idea what my faith was like. Perhaps it was very strong?

I broke it with study and counting up contradictions in the Bible, history and science.

I am absolutely certain that his intellect was greater than mine. Why would he not use the same evidence I did to break it?
Click to expand...

True I had no idea how strong your faith was.

Because Newton was one of the lunatics you refer to.
 
Pinball1970 said:
James Tour is a lunatic. An anti science nut job.
I am not even sure he accepts Evolution.

There are reasonable Christian scientists but he is not one of them
Click to expand...
He is perhaps the leading chemist in the world today.

Who gives a monkey if he accepts macro evolution(which he does).
 
Last edited:
Pinball1970 said:
In what way?
Click to expand...

When I was younger, like 18, I knew God existed but paid no attention whatsoever, over the years up until 27 I had forgotten about God and I was thriving confidence, job, money etc. then I had a breakdown. I didn't turn to God... until after I read the bible when I was 32(and after two or three spiritual experiences). I had tremendous faith in myself and God for years. Four years ago I simply lost faith overnight, it was weird, faith in myself and God. Life after that was sorta on autopilot, I felt less alive and less inspired to reach my goals. I'm slowly getting it back now, it like weight, it's easy to put on(lose faith) it's a pain in the ass to lose(get faith back).

Science hasn't turned me away from God, I have had too many personal experiences in the bank to give up on Him. His book is pretty damning evidence too.

Because evolution explains change over time, you lost faith in God? Or was it physics?

EDIT: You do know that we have no idea how life started?
 
Last edited:
davewhite04 said:
EDIT: You do know that we have no idea how life started?
Click to expand...
That's not actually true. We do have some ideas about how life might have started.

We know that lifeless chemical processes can and do produce some of the molecules necessary for life. For instance, the base chemicals of RNA and DNA have all been observed in lifeless environments, meaning that life is not needed to form them.

It seems highly likely that, with all the basic chemical ingredients available, along with a suitable energy source (such as the sun, or perhaps a geothermal vent), all it takes for life to form from non-life is lots of time. The chemical precursors of life might start by coming together randomly, but in the right environment it is likely that at some point a chemical evolutionary process would have contributed to further development. Eventually, by some lucky accident, the earliest forms of life started.

It is true that human beings have not yet managed to create life in the lab from non-life. However, that might just be a matter of time. The point is: we know what the building blocks of life are and we know they can all form by natural processes alone. There's no good reason to suppose that a supernatural Creator is needed to give things the spark of life, or something like that.
 
James R said:
That's not actually true. We do have some ideas about how life might have started.

We know that lifeless chemical processes can and do produce some of the molecules necessary for life. For instance, the base chemicals of RNA and DNA have all been observed in lifeless environments, meaning that life is not needed to form them.

It seems highly likely that, with all the basic chemical ingredients available, along with a suitable energy source (such as the sun, or perhaps a geothermal vent), all it takes for life to form from non-life is lots of time. The chemical precursors of life might start by coming together randomly, but in the right environment it is likely that at some point a chemical evolutionary process would have contributed to further development. Eventually, by some lucky accident, the earliest forms of life started.

It is true that human beings have not yet managed to create life in the lab from non-life. However, that might just be a matter of time. The point is: we know what the building blocks of life are and we know they can all form by natural processes alone. There's no good reason to suppose that a supernatural Creator is needed to give things the spark of life, or something like that.
Click to expand...

Which scientist(s) do you use for this conclusion James?
 
davewhite04 said:
He is perhaps the leading chemist in the world today.

Who gives a monkey if he accepts macro evolution(which he does).
Click to expand...
Because of his publications?

I would check his channel that is connected with the discovery institute. It is anti scientific garbage.
He insists Abiogenesis is not a serious field even though he understands nothing about it.
His channel and a debate I watched illustrates this.
What his peers think of him is seen in his Harvard round table discussion.
In terms of his publications you should check out claims from former colleagues.

If you want a banner for Christianity in science he is not it, seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top