|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: On The Limits of Human Talent | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
Shalamabobbi and I were having a discussion in this thread on my refusal to accept the many scientific claims that the Bible is wrong because of scientific evidence. I referred to the Biblical instruction of "leaning not on our own understanding", mainly in the way science tries to reduce supernatural acts into something that must comply with current scientific knowledge. I also made this statement;
quote: shalamabobbi writes: If you don't mind, would you mind starting a thread in the faith and belief forum to elaborate on the merits of refusing to use our minds to think (leaning upon our own understanding) or why you believe it is something worthy of reward in the hereafter. From my recollection this doesn't sit well with the parable about the talents. This is the proposal for the thread he asked for. In regard to the parable of the talents, there are actually two, one in the book of Matthew, and one in Luke. They are similar, but not identical, and were told by Jesus at different times for different reasons. The Matthew one was the only one that used the term "talent", and it's important to note that it meant something different from its meaning today. Talent in those days was a measurement of money, not talent as we use the word today. But his point is noted, and to save time and space I don't feel it important to analyze all the writings and opinions on the above two areas of scripture, at least in this O/P. I agree with anyone who claims that God intends for us to apply ourselves, to do the best we can do, be the best we can be. By "lean not on our own understanding", I don't think that means to stop short of attempts to learn all we can about the natural world. It means to stop short of using what we learn to put God (or God's word) to the test. To acknowledge that there are some things that humans will never be able to figure out, to the extent to be able to challenge anything the 66 book Bible says. Faith and belief forum, or "great debate" with shalamabobbi, his or moderators choice.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPhat Inactive Member |
Thread copied here from the On The Limits of Human Talent thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Well, the obvious problem with this is that you had to use your own limited understanding to decide what is God's word, to decide that it was the Bible, to decide that it should be, as you specify, the 66-book version of the Bible rather than one of the others. You are in fact "leaning on your own understanding" to tell you that.
Having used your frail fallible human intellect to decide to do that, there are certain questions you may never have to think about ever again. But you did have to decide those questions once. Someone (for example) adhering to a Holy Book saying that the sky is green may indeed ignore reason, which tells him it isn't. "Look!" he cries, "I am not leaning on my understanding! I am using this book rather than my brain! I am not reasoning in the slightest!" --- and indeed no-one could accuse him of presently employing reason or using his brain. But at some point in the past he must have had a reason, good or bad, for deciding to adhere to that book, and must have used his brain, well or badly, to reach that conclusion. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
marc9000 writes: By "lean not on our own understanding", I don't think that means to stop short of attempts to learn all we can about the natural world. It means to stop short of using what we learn to put God (or God's word) to the test. To acknowledge that there are some things that humans will never be able to figure out, to the extent to be able to challenge anything the 66 book Bible says. As a Christian I see two obvious problems with this. Firstly, instead of making Jesus, the actual incarnate Word of God as confirmed by the resurrection, the primary revealed truth of God as being central to our Christian understanding, you are deciding that a book compiled by many authors in many cultures over many centuries as being the central revealed truth even though the two are often in contradiction. Where there is contradiction it is my contention that we should go with Jesus. Secondly by choosing faith in Biblical inerrancy over reason, you are left with a theology of salvation by works which again is in contradiction to the teachings of Jesus. Belief in a specific doctrine as a means to salvation is no different that what Jesus criticized the Pharisees for. The Gospel message is about serving God by reflecting His love into the world.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 349 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined: |
To acknowledge that there are some things that humans will never be able to figure out, to the extent to be able to challenge anything the 66 book Bible says. That is a difficult position to support given that so many of the things attributed to God in the bible are in direct and obvious conflict with what we have learned about nature. If there is a God then surely his intent is revealed without the possibility of error by the nature of the universe. Giving precedence to the words of the bible over the revelations of nature is like using a compass that has a magnet stuck to it's underside. It is only when we stop our investigations that we meet the limits of our ability to understand.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
marc9000 writes: It means to stop short of using what we learn to put God (or God's word) to the test. To acknowledge that there are some things that humans will never be able to figure out, to the extent to be able to challenge anything the 66 book Bible says. Just using ICR as an example, aren't Henry Morris, Duane Gish, Andrew Snelling and Steve Austin all examples of Christians arguing that God's word has been put to the test and found true? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
By "lean not on our own understanding", I don't think that means to stop short of attempts to learn all we can about the natural world. It means to stop short of using what we learn to put God (or God's word) to the test. ... ... and when it does put "God's word" to the test, then we should shut down our god-given brains and ignore god-given evidence. Why is the earth in specific and the universe in general not the "book" of god's creation?
... To acknowledge that there are some things that humans will never be able to figure out, to the extent to be able to challenge anything the 66 book Bible says. Certainly you will "never be able to figure out" anything you don't investigate. This is iconic cognitive dissonance behavior -- ignore anything outside your personal bubble of belief and knowledge that challenges those beliefs. Because if you ignore them then you can pretend that they are not true. Is your belief so weak that you fear to put it to the test? Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
When Proverbs 3:5 says, "Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding," I don't think it means we should deny scientific observations. The context has to do with keeping God's commandments, being truthful and merciful, etc.
Proverbs in general is common sense, not an excuse for any nonsense about Bible inerrancy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
It means to stop short of using what we learn to put God (or God's word) to the test. We are charged and given the capability to test God, Gods word and Gods behavior and morality. That is the great Raising and gift found in the blessing mankind acquired when they ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 349 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined:
|
It is not the word of God that is wrong because that is impossible. If good science appears to conflict with the word of God then it must be your understanding of the word of God that is wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shalamabobbi Member (Idle past 2849 days) Posts: 397 Joined:
|
By "lean not on our own understanding", I don't think that means to stop short of attempts to learn all we can about the natural world. It means to stop short of using what we learn to put God (or God's word) to the test. To acknowledge that there are some things that humans will never be able to figure out, to the extent to be able to challenge anything the 66 book Bible says. I read a passage in the bible. It's the verse about Eve created from the rib of Adam. I think, (leaning upon my understanding), that this is a wonderful metaphor describing the companionship between husband and wife. She is not taken from his foot to be treated as an inferior partner, but from his side. Someone else reads that same passage and thinks, (leaning upon their understanding), that a literal interpretation is necessary otherwise we can't trust what the bible says and we're heading down a slippery slope. (I'm not implying this is your interpretation.) The point is that there is no understanding in the bible itself. Understanding resides in the mind not the book. All we have is understanding. We choose to project it onto the book as we please. And then we get to assert things like, it was given to me of the spirit. I'm not really interested in traveling down that rabbit hole. I'll just note that even if that were true you still lean upon your understanding to arrive at that conclusion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
Surely you don't disregard science because of 6 words in Proverbs!? That's just crazy talk.
Even further, the same Proverb also has this to say:
quote: and:
quote: Science *IS* understanding.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
As a Christian I see two obvious problems with this. Firstly, instead of making Jesus, the actual incarnate Word of God as confirmed by the resurrection, the primary revealed truth of God as being central to our Christian understanding, you are deciding that a book compiled by many authors in many cultures over many centuries as being the central revealed truth even though the two are often in contradiction. Where there is contradiction it is my contention that we should go with Jesus. Hi GDR, I was referring to things that are proclaimed by secular science, mainly that the book of Genesis is wrong. Jesus never said that Genesis was wrong. What examples do you have where Jesus would agree with something today's scientific community says, as they challenge what the Bible says?
Secondly by choosing faith in Biblical inerrancy over reason, you are left with a theology of salvation by works which again is in contradiction to the teachings of Jesus. You're equating faith with works? I don't see any similarity. I also don't see Jesus promoting comprising the Bible with human endeavors. Do you have some scripture to correct me with?
Belief in a specific doctrine as a means to salvation is no different that what Jesus criticized the Pharisees for. The Gospel message is about serving God by reflecting His love into the world. The "world" goes to a lot of trouble to downplay everything about Christianity, including all of Jesus' teachings. If you believe Jesus would favor just shrugging it off, continuing to love them, and condone what they do, well, I think much of his teachings suggest otherwise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
Just using ICR as an example, aren't Henry Morris, Duane Gish, Andrew Snelling and Steve Austin all examples of Christians arguing that God's word has been put to the test and found true? --Percy I'd have to see some exact quotes, in their related context, before I could comment on that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
marc9000 Member Posts: 1509 From: Ky U.S. Joined: Member Rating: 1.4 |
marc9000 writes: By "lean not on our own understanding", I don't think that means to stop short of attempts to learn all we can about the natural world. It means to stop short of using what we learn to put God (or God's word) to the test. ... ... and when it does put "God's word" to the test, then we should shut down our god-given brains and ignore god-given evidence. No, we should take a second look, ask ourselves who found this evidence, what their motives were, and what use the evidence actually is.
Why is the earth in specific and the universe in general not the "book" of god's creation? Because it wasn't created in the same way it is sustained. When we try to use the laws that it is sustained by to explain how it was created, we start making small errors that quickly snowball into really big errors.
Certainly you will "never be able to figure out" anything you don't investigate. A lot of things humans go to a lot of trouble to investigate are a complete waste of time. Life is short, there are a lot of important things to do that go undone because the scientific community is so busy chasing reinforcement to prop up its atheism.
This is iconic cognitive dissonance behavior -- ignore anything outside your personal bubble of belief and knowledge that challenges those beliefs. Because if you ignore them then you can pretend that they are not true. Like the scientific community does with Intelligent Design. Like global warming alarmists do with economic knowledge of the catastrophe that will happen if their brand of 'licence, regulate, restrict, prohibit' is put into place?
Is your belief so weak that you fear to put it to the test? No, it's strong enough that I don't have to test it, the same way you're afraid to test yours with something other than Darwinism.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024