Origins Session 1: It's Not Science vs. God
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 сен 2024
- When it comes to the history of the universe, many believe that science and faith are mutually exclusive. In this six-session video companion to their book Origins, professors Deborah and Loren Haarsma explore what God’s Word and God’s world teach us about creation, evolution, and human origins.
Designed especially for small groups and discussion groups, these videos and accompanying study guide help participants reflect on the important issues raised in Origins and gain perspective on the ongoing conflict between Christians over how the universe began.
These films were made possible through the support of a grant from the Evolution and Christian Faith program by BioLogos. Learn more about BioLogos at biologos.org.
Excerpted from Origins: Christian Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design by Deborah B. Haarsma and Loren D. Haarsma. Used with permission. Copyright © 2011 Faith Alive Christian Resources. To order a full copy of this resource please call 1-800-333-8300 or visit FaithAliveResources.org/Origins.
this is honestly one of my favourite videos ever. it's so well done and its message is fantastic. thank you for all you and BioLogos do, Dr. Haarsma!
May God bless you both. It's an eye opening. Amazing Revelation.
Please keep teaching so many of us blinded by not knowing God and science.
7:06. Every artist would understand this. Creatives use laws and randomness to work. God is Great!
9:15. God bless you for the conclusion.
The opposite of Faith isn't Doubt. It's False Certainty.
I needed to see this, more people need to watch these videos.
Jesus is Lord
What is the evidence that the bible is the authoratative word of God? Or does one believe that through faith only?
The Bible doesn't say the earth is 6,000 years old. It doesn"tsay how old the earth. PEOPLE made this up centries ago by "deduction."
No, it is not *"science"* that rejects religion but some scien *_tists_* that reject religion. I would think that if you are in such a position as to be teaching on this subject, you would have long ago given up the false conflation of "science" with "scien _*tists*"._
------------
(08:16) - _"Loren and I recently met a young man who I'll call Nathan. Nathan grew up in a church that taught very strongly that the Earth was young, and that science was wrong."_
_"... science is wrong ..."??_ No, scien *_tists_* are wrong. Sinful, corrupt human beings are wrong, not the faceless, non-person "science." Do you even recognize that scien *_tists_* sometimes say false things? Sometimes even a majority of scien *_tists_* can come to a consensus about a false idea. (Think of the "steady-state theory" as an example.)
Theistic evolution is a different Jesus.
blind allegiance to text that was not meant to be literal hurts all Christians
Sure science and religion can coexist, if you take every claim in the bible about the universe and reality completely figuratively.
You might be surprised at what you can learn by reading Genesis 1 for true statements. It may require looking at the original Hebrew to understand why some translations choose words with different meaning, and the translations are each correct.
Genesis chapter one can be read from a "Big Bang" cosmological view, when viewed from God's chosen viewpoint of "hovering over the waters upon the surface of the Earth." The words typically translated "evening and morning" also translate as "chaos then order." The word typically translated as Earth also translates as earth and ordinary matter.
Furthermore, these alternate translations and interptretations predate the scientific revolution. St. Augustine of Hippo in 330AD argued that based upon scripture alone that it was impossible to tell whether Genesis one was 24hr solar days or long ages. In 1250AD talmudic writer Moses ben Nachmanidies described God's creative acts in terms reminiscent of "Big Bang" cosmology. All three talmudic commentators describe Yaweh speaking creation into existence and Yaweh's Word writing the creation with black fire. This is not unlike Stephen Wineberg's view of the Big Bang beginning with a tremendous burst of information, or as the scriptures puts it "logos." The energy burst was some form of extremely hot plasma that was so gravitationally dense that light could not escape during the early inflationary period.
Again, I think it is important to stress the use of prescientific revolution writings when interpreting scripture in light of modern science to ensure the interpretation has not been tainted by modern science.
It seems perhaps more than coincidental that modern Big Bang theory was birthed out of the larger church through George LeMaitre a Jesuit preist in 1931 or earlier, and taught in writing by three greatest of the three talmudic rabbinic commentators Moses ben Nachmanidies in 1250AD.
Its also worth noting the talmud is a written preservation of a millennia older oral teaching.
The term Big Bang was a purely derisive term used be Nobel laurette Sir Fred Hoyle in 1952 on BBC in ridicule of LeMaitre's theory of the Primeval Atom that was a modification of his early Cosmic Egg theory.
Scientist generally agree that the early inflationary period of universe exceeded the speed of light, even though science has no good hypothesis to explain how such a rapid expansion occured.
I suggest judging the Bible and secular naturalistic explanations based upon their power or effect in society. Those that believe the Bible to a degree of practicing its doctrines as evidenced by paying tithe, attending church at least weekly, reading or studying scripture daily, and praying as a family daily have substaintially better outcomes in physical health, mental health, financial stability, graduation rates, criminality, STDs, and divorce than those that embrace naturalistic science apart from God.
Well not everything, mainly the Creation story in Genesis.
and conversely when you finally start seeing science for what it is. Explaining the mechanism but not the why or the who.