Many of the questions we received at our recent God and science forum don’t have much to do with science so they aren’t on the docket to be answered. Although this next question fits the “non-science” criteria, I thought it deserved some attention anyway because it can be seen as remotely scientific in nature.
How should Christians regard things such as the Mayan calendar? What are your thoughts on the 2012 theory?
To be honest, although this theory based largely on the Mayan calendar has many scientific elements to it, this is more a question about religion than science. Because the final cycle of the Mesoamerican long count calendar ends in December of the year 2012, and because of some strange things set to happen in our solar system around the same time, many believe that the year 2012 will either bring the end of the world, or will do the opposite, and bring some massive level of advancement to the human race.
The reality is this. Most of the thoughts brought forth in the various 2012 theories are more metaphysical than scientific – having their roots in the New Age movement, and scientists are downplaying the events causing change in the solar system of that year as fairly normal and harmless occurrences (normal except for the extreme rarity in which they occur, every 225 million years or so). If you’re looking for extensive info on this theory and all it entails simply Google “2012”. But as far as how we as Christians should regard this theory, I say not at all.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Friday, March 6, 2009
Close encounters of the third kind!
Is life possible on other planets, if so would God have created this as well?
Yes it’s possible. Is it likely, I’m not sure? I think I’m much more open to the idea of little green men than most Christians are, but the universe is 98 billion light years across. Since God is about his glory, then I just don’t see any reason to rule out the possibility that he has other intelligent life forms on other planets in the distant universe worshiping him. The reality is its speculation. The Bible doesn’t address the possibility in any fashion, so there isn’t much point in putting energy into it from a theological perspective. From a scientific perspective I agree with the spending of money to search for other life as this serves as a way for us to understand God’s universe better.
There is an interesting hypocrisy I find in many Christians regarding this issue. When it comes to our own testimony about God we say things like “always tell your testimony”, or “no one can deny what God has done in your life”, or “your testimony is your great witnessing tool”, so that we build up testimony about a God no one can see as a valid argument to others as to why we believe in him. Then when we hear people give testimony of alien encounters we think they are crazy, superstitious, or making it up. What’s the difference? Our testimonies often sound just as crazy to people who don’t believe as those people preaching about aliens sound to us. Now I certainly believe that there are a ton of other reasons to believe in God than a person’s testimony, but when we close ourselves off to possibilities that God has not closed off himself, I think there is something contradictory about that.
Yes it’s possible. Is it likely, I’m not sure? I think I’m much more open to the idea of little green men than most Christians are, but the universe is 98 billion light years across. Since God is about his glory, then I just don’t see any reason to rule out the possibility that he has other intelligent life forms on other planets in the distant universe worshiping him. The reality is its speculation. The Bible doesn’t address the possibility in any fashion, so there isn’t much point in putting energy into it from a theological perspective. From a scientific perspective I agree with the spending of money to search for other life as this serves as a way for us to understand God’s universe better.
There is an interesting hypocrisy I find in many Christians regarding this issue. When it comes to our own testimony about God we say things like “always tell your testimony”, or “no one can deny what God has done in your life”, or “your testimony is your great witnessing tool”, so that we build up testimony about a God no one can see as a valid argument to others as to why we believe in him. Then when we hear people give testimony of alien encounters we think they are crazy, superstitious, or making it up. What’s the difference? Our testimonies often sound just as crazy to people who don’t believe as those people preaching about aliens sound to us. Now I certainly believe that there are a ton of other reasons to believe in God than a person’s testimony, but when we close ourselves off to possibilities that God has not closed off himself, I think there is something contradictory about that.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Rapid Fire!
Today I’m going to answer a few of the questions from the God and science forum on one blog because there were many questions that require very short answers.
Q. Did Adam and Eve have belly buttons?
A. This is impossible to know and I’m not sure that the answer matters much. If they had them then God created them that way, but obviously they would not have received them in the way that the rest of us did.
Q. Are you saying that Jesus evolved from an amoeba?
A. No, in fact at the forum we said the opposite. We all made it clear that we do not believe in large scale evolution which would teach that all living things had a common ancestor evolved from a single cell organism. We all believe in smaller scale evolution which includes mutations within kinds, and that natural selection and speciation are common occurrences. We all believe however that humans are a unique creation by God as are “kinds” of animals.
Q. Is the behemoth in Job actually a dinosaur?
A. I don’t think we can know the answer to this question because the Bible isn’t clear about exactly what the behemoth was. But it is clear that dinosaurs existed and that they were really cool.
Q. How does the Bible explain the ice age?
A. It doesn’t. This is one of many occurrences that happened on earth that does not get discussed in the Bible. The Bible is not a history book looking to catalogue all that has ever happened, it’s a story about God redeeming his people. The ice age doesn’t fit the criteria for what God was trying to accomplish in Scripture.
Q. What about shape shifters?
A. I have no idea.
Q. Did Adam and Eve have belly buttons?
A. This is impossible to know and I’m not sure that the answer matters much. If they had them then God created them that way, but obviously they would not have received them in the way that the rest of us did.
Q. Are you saying that Jesus evolved from an amoeba?
A. No, in fact at the forum we said the opposite. We all made it clear that we do not believe in large scale evolution which would teach that all living things had a common ancestor evolved from a single cell organism. We all believe in smaller scale evolution which includes mutations within kinds, and that natural selection and speciation are common occurrences. We all believe however that humans are a unique creation by God as are “kinds” of animals.
Q. Is the behemoth in Job actually a dinosaur?
A. I don’t think we can know the answer to this question because the Bible isn’t clear about exactly what the behemoth was. But it is clear that dinosaurs existed and that they were really cool.
Q. How does the Bible explain the ice age?
A. It doesn’t. This is one of many occurrences that happened on earth that does not get discussed in the Bible. The Bible is not a history book looking to catalogue all that has ever happened, it’s a story about God redeeming his people. The ice age doesn’t fit the criteria for what God was trying to accomplish in Scripture.
Q. What about shape shifters?
A. I have no idea.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
God and science answers begin!
Well everyone, last Sunday was fun for me. I love talking theology and science at the same time. I hope it was informative. We received about four times as many questions as could be answered in one night, so Jordan and I are going to try and tackle these questions on our blogs over the coming weeks. Please keep checking back until your question is answered.
Here is the link to Jordan’s blog – www.faithfulreason.wordpress.com.
My first question is this – After Cain is sent away, who is his wife if only Adam, Eve, and Abel existed?
First of all – JOIN A SMALL GROUP! Sorry for the shameless plug, but this topic was addressed in every small group last week and I love to see people in small groups, so please get in one so you can get answers to questions like this. But I will still give the short answer here.
Adam, Eve, and Abel were not the only people on earth. The Bible discusses these few people, but the Bible rarely gives the entire story surrounding many issues because this is not the Bible’s purpose. It is widely believed that Adam and Eve had had many children, grandchildren, and maybe even great grandchildren by the time Cain killed Abel and was sent into exile. Cain most certainly married one of his sisters, which sounds bad now but would not have been an issue in his time. The reason – because genetic defect is why marriage of close relatives today is so vile. In Cain’s day their genetics were still too pure to be an issue. Now lets get this strait, God himself bans incest in the Scripture. But the vile nature of incest was a later development that Cain did not have to worry about, and God did not ban it until later. To populate the earth, sibling marriage was necessary.
Here is the link to Jordan’s blog – www.faithfulreason.wordpress.com.
My first question is this – After Cain is sent away, who is his wife if only Adam, Eve, and Abel existed?
First of all – JOIN A SMALL GROUP! Sorry for the shameless plug, but this topic was addressed in every small group last week and I love to see people in small groups, so please get in one so you can get answers to questions like this. But I will still give the short answer here.
Adam, Eve, and Abel were not the only people on earth. The Bible discusses these few people, but the Bible rarely gives the entire story surrounding many issues because this is not the Bible’s purpose. It is widely believed that Adam and Eve had had many children, grandchildren, and maybe even great grandchildren by the time Cain killed Abel and was sent into exile. Cain most certainly married one of his sisters, which sounds bad now but would not have been an issue in his time. The reason – because genetic defect is why marriage of close relatives today is so vile. In Cain’s day their genetics were still too pure to be an issue. Now lets get this strait, God himself bans incest in the Scripture. But the vile nature of incest was a later development that Cain did not have to worry about, and God did not ban it until later. To populate the earth, sibling marriage was necessary.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Movies...
I know, my last post promised a blog every Friday. I forgot. But here it is a few days late. And for the first time, this blog has little to do with spirituality. As many of you know I am a movie freak. I have a movie pod cast on itunes called filminfocus that I co-host with Jason Spencer, so check it out, its free. Also, I post movie reviews on a website flixster.com, username sanjurosamurai. I’ve seen most major films released in 2008, and I wanted to recommend my top 10.
1) Changeling
2) The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
3) The Dark Knight
4) Burn After Reading
5) Kung Fu Panda
6) Gran Torino
7) Vicky Christina Barcelona
8) Defiance
9) Revolutionary Road
10) Doubt
Keep in mind, some of these are rated R, but there is some great commentary in these films on the human condition and important philosophical themes – well – except Kung Fu Panda that’s here just because its fun.
1) Changeling
2) The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
3) The Dark Knight
4) Burn After Reading
5) Kung Fu Panda
6) Gran Torino
7) Vicky Christina Barcelona
8) Defiance
9) Revolutionary Road
10) Doubt
Keep in mind, some of these are rated R, but there is some great commentary in these films on the human condition and important philosophical themes – well – except Kung Fu Panda that’s here just because its fun.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Im Back!
Hey everyone! I’m back. I know I know, it’s been like 3 months since I’ve blogged. But here’s the thing, I have decided to rededicate myself to blogging by keeping myself on a very strict schedule. From now on, at a minimum, I will be posting something new (and hopefully interesting) each and every Friday. I could do more through the week, but Friday will be the standard day for the blogs.
This time, I’m back with purpose. I’m helping Harvey answer some of the questions that were texted in during the service last weekend. Here are some of your questions and my answers.
Q: Does the tree of life, as well as the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, maybe refer to an analogy of some sort?
A: First I have to be sure that I understand the question. If you are asking if the tree’s are not actual but analogous in nature – then the easy answer is no. The trees are real, and we know that because the text gives us no reason to believe otherwise. Many have said that these trees sound mythological so they must be, but the Great Wall of China doesn’t sound realistic either and we all know that it exists. Come on, a wall that big that can be seen from space, I don’t believe it!
If you believe that the trees are real but are asking if they double as analogous to something else – Maybe, but that’s surely not the point of the trees. They are actual trees that serve an actual purpose in the designed plan of God, and their purpose is very clear in Scripture.
Let’s look at another one.
Q: If man has a sense of God in them, then doesn’t that contradict total depravity?
A: I’m not sure how it would. By “sense” I assume you’re referring to the image of God in man. The image is broken by the fact that we are born totally depraved, but the image is not removed completely. Keep in mind, there is a difference between “total depravity” and “utter depravity”. We are born totally depraved in that we are not righteous on our own because of sin and we need God’s righteousness (Romans chapter 3). But we are not born utterly depraved, which is the idea that man can do nothing good. We do things that are good as an extension of being made in God’s image even thought the image is broken.
Next question.
Q: Adam and Eve’s kids have to have sex with each other to multiply the population?
A: Yes. It is repulsive today to marry siblings, but God did not make a law against it until the time of Moses. The issue of deformities of the children would have been a non issue because the reason that some children of sibling parents have deformities is because those siblings have the same genetic defects that they received from their parents, and the defects then become magnified and passed on. This early in the line of this family genetic defect would not be an issue because Adam and Eve didn’t have any. It takes many generations for defects to gain potency.
It is impure today to have such incest – but since there were no moral, legal, or genetic problems in the days of Adam and Eve, and since this was the only option, this has to be what happened.
This time, I’m back with purpose. I’m helping Harvey answer some of the questions that were texted in during the service last weekend. Here are some of your questions and my answers.
Q: Does the tree of life, as well as the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, maybe refer to an analogy of some sort?
A: First I have to be sure that I understand the question. If you are asking if the tree’s are not actual but analogous in nature – then the easy answer is no. The trees are real, and we know that because the text gives us no reason to believe otherwise. Many have said that these trees sound mythological so they must be, but the Great Wall of China doesn’t sound realistic either and we all know that it exists. Come on, a wall that big that can be seen from space, I don’t believe it!
If you believe that the trees are real but are asking if they double as analogous to something else – Maybe, but that’s surely not the point of the trees. They are actual trees that serve an actual purpose in the designed plan of God, and their purpose is very clear in Scripture.
Let’s look at another one.
Q: If man has a sense of God in them, then doesn’t that contradict total depravity?
A: I’m not sure how it would. By “sense” I assume you’re referring to the image of God in man. The image is broken by the fact that we are born totally depraved, but the image is not removed completely. Keep in mind, there is a difference between “total depravity” and “utter depravity”. We are born totally depraved in that we are not righteous on our own because of sin and we need God’s righteousness (Romans chapter 3). But we are not born utterly depraved, which is the idea that man can do nothing good. We do things that are good as an extension of being made in God’s image even thought the image is broken.
Next question.
Q: Adam and Eve’s kids have to have sex with each other to multiply the population?
A: Yes. It is repulsive today to marry siblings, but God did not make a law against it until the time of Moses. The issue of deformities of the children would have been a non issue because the reason that some children of sibling parents have deformities is because those siblings have the same genetic defects that they received from their parents, and the defects then become magnified and passed on. This early in the line of this family genetic defect would not be an issue because Adam and Eve didn’t have any. It takes many generations for defects to gain potency.
It is impure today to have such incest – but since there were no moral, legal, or genetic problems in the days of Adam and Eve, and since this was the only option, this has to be what happened.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Peter and Paul
If Peter is the “rock” upon which the church is built, why is it that Paul wrote most of the New Testament?
I guess this is sort of an odd question because it assumes that the writing of the New Testament is the role of the person on whom the church is built. Peter did write sections of the New Testament, but it’s true that Paul wrote more than Peter, as did John and Luke. In actuality, I don’t believe Paul wrote most of the New Testament. The other books make up more writing than Paul’s works, and although Paul wrote more letters I believe Luke’s writings take up more actual space despite the fact that he only wrote two books.
But I digress. Paul was simply in a better place to write the things that were necessary for the New Testament by virtue of the fact that he was the traveler of the two and did more missionary work. Paul’s letters covered a lot of ground. Peter being a foundation for the church had nothing to do with literature; it had to do with his actions as recorded in the first twelve chapters of the book of Acts. Peter was the preacher at Pentecost in Acts 2, which is the moment that most people believe the church itself was born. Peter then went on to lead the early church as other leaders were brought up in the faith.
I guess this is sort of an odd question because it assumes that the writing of the New Testament is the role of the person on whom the church is built. Peter did write sections of the New Testament, but it’s true that Paul wrote more than Peter, as did John and Luke. In actuality, I don’t believe Paul wrote most of the New Testament. The other books make up more writing than Paul’s works, and although Paul wrote more letters I believe Luke’s writings take up more actual space despite the fact that he only wrote two books.
But I digress. Paul was simply in a better place to write the things that were necessary for the New Testament by virtue of the fact that he was the traveler of the two and did more missionary work. Paul’s letters covered a lot of ground. Peter being a foundation for the church had nothing to do with literature; it had to do with his actions as recorded in the first twelve chapters of the book of Acts. Peter was the preacher at Pentecost in Acts 2, which is the moment that most people believe the church itself was born. Peter then went on to lead the early church as other leaders were brought up in the faith.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
