New Christian here, question about God's methods

[Jezuzfan777]

So it came to my attention that most Christians believe that God actively answers prayers. My question is, how exactly does he do that? For example, if a person found a dollar bill and it was God's deed, than God must have blown the wind so the dollar will fall on that exact spot. But lets look further into this. Where did the energy come from? Energy cannot be 'invisible', that goes against fundamental metaphysics. It must come from an observable force. But with over 200 years of scientific development, shouldn't we have already found this kinda force that actively works around people's lives 24 hours a day? Or is God playing tricks on our mind? Or are scientists the devil's work? I'm just trying to think with logic, so correct me if I'm wrong.

[dead2self]

God is sovereign over every molecule in existence. He sustains the very existence of everything and His sovereign will governs all. We must learn to accept that our science is flawed in places and woefully incomplete in others. Just becasue we have had a few centuries of rapid advancement does not mean we are all that advanced. We do not even know the full depth of the knowlege we seek to attain never mind how much of it we have discovered.

God's ways are so much higher than our understanding of science that hoping to catch Him in the act of reigning so to speak is rather presumptuous of us.

[Jezuzfan777]

You didn't really answer me question, you know. Science can virtually explain every single event with natural phenomena. There is no absent, there are no supernatural metaphysics for us to wonder about at this point. We know that every single molecules, every quanta acts upon predictable, even deterministic, forces. And I'm not thinking with my imagination here, because that's a sign of insanity.

[dead2self]

Ok then. Answer me this.

Explain how life is created. How exactly does the force we know as life come into being, scientifically speaking?

How is mass created from nothing?

How did time come into being?

How did a dead man come back from the dead? What scientific principles where involved pray tell.

How was Jesus fully man and yet fully God? I would love a scientific explanation of how on being can be absolutely and completely 2 things at once, and not half and half.

While we are on interesting math, explain how 1+1+1=1 As in the trinity. How exactly do the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit exist as three in one?

There are a multitude of things we cannot begin to explain. Science is far from all knowing. And by the way, my first sentence answered your question.

You asked how exactly God answers prayer. I answered that He does so by being sovereign over every moleule in existance and being the sustaining force for everything. I then said that science cannot begin to even know how far away from that knowlege that we are nevemind actually knowing how it happens.

You are looking for an answer that does not exist. You place far too much faith in science. Only God knows all and is infallible.

[Jezuzfan777]

Now that we're no longer on the subject of this thread, I'm going to answer your unnecessary questions just for personal satisfaction.

*Life - using energy to cause chemical reactions to form more energy, in a constant circle. All our bodily systems are there either to support or to protect this process. Guess what happens when you die.

*Gravity is a natural force, so it is certainly not a design. But if you really want to know, there are many different interpretations, whole library of books about the subject. General and special relativity try to explain how mass works in correlation to other natural forces, while the quantum mechanics theory tries to explain what physical integration makes those natural forces work.

*Time is not a physical thing. It's a measurement of space.

*That's just ridiculous.

*Moreso.

*Not even going to try.

You don't get it, do you? I'm not going to continue this argument until you realize how illogical your claims are. Are you thinking about what you're saying? I have reason, logic, science behind me. All you have is imagination. Isn't it easy, to just say "God doesn't need physics, He controls everything"?

[dead2self]

I thought I was conversing with a new Christian. You just do not see the point and have not faith in God, but in the science of man. When you come to the realisation that God is larger than we are and no amount of our science can begin to explain him or his ways there will be a point for discussion.

Your answers are ludicrous and do not begin to get to the root of anything. Not to mention I did not even ask about gravity. So much for your vaunted reason.

As for the resurrection of Christ being ridiculous and His dual identity moreso, that is heresy. You are most certainly NOT Christan and I wonder why you are even here. You might try the forum for General apologectics of Questions by Non-Christians.

[Jezuzfan777]

I thought I was conversing with a reasoning person. You just do not see the point and have not faith in science and the study of nature through our senses, but in an invisible man in the sky that fully contradicts everything known to us. When you come to the realization that you're taking imagination for granted there will be a point for discussion.

My answers are ludicrous? Don't blame your ignorance on me. I'm surprised you don't even know the relativity theories.

I said that is ridiculous because people do not use religious claims to counter science, but if anything, people use scientific claims to counter religion. You got it backwards there. Also, for the record, I AM a new Christian. All I need are some answers to help me integrate religion into my view of this world, but so far you provided none.

[dead2self]

You know, I was in fact trying to answer you. You are simply very hostile towards religion and overly defensive about science. Now obviously I set that hostility and defensiveness off, and you did the same for me. I get very defensive when I smell heresy or people exalting science above God. If we can agree to both cool down and talk rationally I would like to present a rebuttal. Can we both simply be objective and civil?

First of all, you never did answer a single question of mine. I was looking for the root cause of life, not the circle of life. If you like, how did the circle start? If science can answer it all it can answer that. Simple fact is we do not know and cannot reproduce it. Life has never been created from nothing except by God.

You are right that I do not have as much faith in science and the reasoning power of man as in God. Why would I. Scientifc theories are proven worng or modified all the time. Science is not an exact science if you will. God, on the other hand does not change and has never been wrong.

Also, God is not an invisible man who contradicts everything we know. You need to accept that His ways are not our ways if you are going to be a Christian. He cannot be measured or explained by our little science. He is so far above us. If you cannot accept that, you will never move along in faith.

About you use of ridiculous. My apologies, I thought you were saying the resurrection was ridiculous. But your argument here makes no sense either.
People don't use religious claims to counter science??? Well, the resurrection hapended. If science cannot explain how, which it cannot, then science obviously cannot explain everything. Just becasue the resurrection is part of religion does not measn it was not a real physical event. Please sir, use reason here. It really, physically hapened and is therefore a valid question to ask science to explain it.
And how about your assertion that science is supposed to be used to counter religion? You are simply giving modern fallacy. The purpose of science was never to refute religion, but to learn about creation. You, my friend have it backwards I am afraid.

The truth is that science and religion are not supposed to be at odds. Science is merely the study of what God has created. Much baad science and a hatred of God in many scientists has perverted science from the quest for truth to an attempt to debunk God.

You simply cannot hope for a scientific answer to exactly how God does things. I never said God doesn't need physics. Do you not see? God is the very SOURCE of physics. He wrote the laws we have only begun to discover. I am not using my imagination here. This is purely Biblical. God created everything. If you apply your logic and reason to this you may just see it.

[Natural1]

If/when you decide to become a Christian, you somewhat have to throw out old preconceptions and logics about how the universe is run.
As a new Christian, I'm starting to find God works for us, but He doesn't interfere too much. I've prayed for things which I felt were needed immediately, but didn't come my way till later and I saw the wisdom in His lesson from it.
Science in general is the attempt by humans to explain the unexplainable. The same could be said for God, sure, but when one decides to put their faith in God, one accepts He created everything and for a reason. The very fact our limited brain capacity cannot fully comprehend God also leads to we can never fully comprehend God's power.
So while some may see "energy being invisible" as illogical because it has not yet been proven by science, believers find it logical because God made it happen. Before oxygen was discovered to be the essential gas we breathed in for life, we still took it for granted despite not having it scientifically proven at that point, yes? Same goes for most everything else we know in life. Just because it has not yet been proven by human science, does not mean it does not exist.

[Radiata]

Prayer...
When you pray, don't expect to receive because prayer isn't about receiving. It's about becoming. One of the leaders at a camp that I went to said that when he was still an atheist, he asked God for rest. Then he got sick and had to take time off of everything. After a while when he was better he said to himself: "I'm well rested!" It freaked him out. This is the same thing that you should be looking for. Instead of looking for an answer to your problems, God will provide you with the means to tackle your problems head on. I hope that you are able to continue on and endure with God's help.

[suzybeezy]

So it came to my attention that most Christians believe that God actively answers prayers. My question is, how exactly does he do that?

1 John 5:14- "Now this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us."

Prayer is not an exact science. But we can be assured that God hears us, wants to answer our prayers, and truly cares for us.


Where did the energy come from? Energy cannot be 'invisible', that goes against fundamental metaphysics. It must come from an observable force. But with over 200 years of scientific development, shouldn't we have already found this kinda force that actively works around people's lives 24 hours a day? Or is God playing tricks on our mind? Or are scientists the devil's work? I'm just trying to think with logic, so correct me if I'm wrong.

The Bible shows an understanding of medicine and science that pre-dates man's understanding of medicine and science, we can only conclude that there is a Mind out there who is way ahead of us. Scientific discoveries are merely observing, understanding and using systems that He has already designed. Theories attempting to discredit God's existence (like evolution from species to new species, as an attempt to explain life apart from God) are merely rabbit trails which lead to unanswered questions like, "why then don't fossil records show transitionary species?" What God has told us in the Bible about Himself, our world and our purpose, is a great starting place to understanding this life.

Romans 15:4 - "For whatever things were written before were written for our learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope."

[morningstar2651]

So it came to my attention that most Christians believe that God actively answers prayers. My question is, how exactly does he do that? For example, if a person found a dollar bill and it was God's deed, than God must have blown the wind so the dollar will fall on that exact spot. But lets look further into this. Where did the energy come from? Energy cannot be 'invisible', that goes against fundamental metaphysics. It must come from an observable force. But with over 200 years of scientific development, shouldn't we have already found this kinda force that actively works around people's lives 24 hours a day? Or is God playing tricks on our mind? Or are scientists the devil's work? I'm just trying to think with logic, so correct me if I'm wrong.The world we live in is governed by laws, such as Boyle's Law, Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle, etc. Science is our method of understanding how the world works. Using the scientific method, we build and refine our understanding of how stuff works.

When we roll a die, the result isn't random - the result is determined by gravity, friction, velocity, etc. However, the variables and their interactions are too complex for us to know the result before the die stops rolling. To us, the roll of a die may appear random, but it isn't. Which raises the question: Is anything truly random?

Early philosophers noticed that every effect has a cause (or multiple causes), and posited a first cause or first mover. Metaphorically, this first cause is the butterfly that caused a hurricane through chain reaction by flapping its wings. It's as if our world is a giant Rube Goldberg machine.

[Jezuzfan777]

The world we live in is governed by laws, such as Boyle's Law, Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle, etc. Science is our method of understanding how the world works. Using the scientific method, we build and refine our understanding of how stuff works.

When we roll a die, the result isn't random - the result is determined by gravity, friction, velocity, etc. However, the variables and their interactions are too complex for us to know the result before the die stops rolling. To us, the roll of a die may appear random, but it isn't. Which raises the question: Is anything truly random?

Early philosophers noticed that every effect has a cause (or multiple causes), and posited a first cause or first mover. Metaphorically, this first cause is the butterfly that caused a hurricane through chain reaction by flapping its wings. It's as if our world is a giant Rube Goldberg machine.

First intelligent reply in this thread.

Well, although the issue of determinism is interesting, the issue of scientific naturalism is even more. When thrown against supernaturalism, it boils down to the question "Who should we trust more - our senses or our imagination?". While any reasonable thinking person would choose the first, Christians often consider their imaginative entities superior to senses, which is why this argument is dull.

I'm trying to put more "senses" in "imagination", you know, make this a more logical religion.

[Natural1]

Perhaps it doesn't need to be more logical to please the likes of yourself.

[Jezuzfan777]

Perhaps it doesn't need to be more logical to please the likes of yourself.

Christian position: Truth ≠ pleasing own self

My position: Truth = pleasing own self

Respect it.

[Natural1]

Christian position: Truth ≠ pleasing own self

My position: Truth = pleasing own self

Respect it.

Christianity is not about self-pleasure, we aim to please God. You are taking the incorrect approach.

[Jezuzfan777]

Christianity is not about self-pleasure, we aim to please God. You are taking the incorrect approach.

Funny, your previous comment implied it is. You were saying that something doesn't need to be logical, or correct, to please own self's mind. This is true for religious people. I however please myself through the study of the truth. Do you understand what I'm saying?

[Natural1]

Yea, I think I get what you mean....still I'd go back to my original post where our logical minds and concepts of truth only go so far, as we are only human. Our minds can barely wrap around the concept of God 'him'self...but alas my response wasn't considered up to par.

[morningstar2651]

First intelligent reply in this thread.

Well, although the issue of determinism is interesting, the issue of scientific naturalism is even more. When thrown against supernaturalism, it boils down to the question "Who should we trust more - our senses or our imagination?". While any reasonable thinking person would choose the first, Christians often consider their imaginative entities superior to senses, which is why this argument is dull.

I'm trying to put more "senses" in "imagination", you know, make this a more logical religion.Have you studied Spinoza (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spinoza/)? You might be interested in his writings.

I'm also reminded of a good quote from Frazer's The Golden Bough (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Bough). I've quoted the full paragraph for context, and underlined the part I was reminded of.

The Meaning of Taboo
THUS in primitive society the rules of ceremonial purity observed by divine kings, chiefs, and priests agree in many respects with the rules observed by homicides, mourners, women in childbed, girls at puberty, hunters and fishermen, and so on. To us these various classes of persons appear to differ totally in character and condition; some of them we should call holy, others we might pronounce unclean and polluted. But the savage makes no such moral distinction between them; the conceptions of holiness and pollution are not yet differentiated in his mind. To him the common feature of all these persons is that they are dangerous and in danger, and the danger in which they stand and to which they expose others is what we should call spiritual or ghostly, and therefore imaginary. The danger, however, is not less real because it is imaginary; imagination acts upon man as really as does gravitation, and may kill him as certainly as a dose of prussic acid. To seclude these persons from the rest of the world so that the dreaded spiritual danger shall neither reach them nor spread from them, is the object of the taboos which they have to observe. These taboos act, so to say, as electrical insulators to preserve the spiritual force with which these persons are charged from suffering or inflicting harm by contact with the outer world.

Christianity is not about self-pleasure, we aim to please God. You are taking the incorrect approach.Ultimately, one should derive pleasure from their religious practices.

Happiness isn't a goal - it's the consequence of obtaining a goal. ;)
Proverbs 3:13-18 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%203:13-18;&version=9;)

[Jezuzfan777]

Yea, I think I get what you mean....still I'd go back to my original post where our logical minds and concepts of truth only go so far, as we are only human. Our minds can barely wrap around the concept of God 'him'self...but alas my response wasn't considered up to par.

As I said in a post earlier. "Imaginative entities > human cognition and logic". It's a way of thinking - a faulty one, perhaps - but I can understand why many people would stick to it.

[dead2self]

Jezuzfan777,

You hide a lot of anti-Christian thought behind the wisdom of man. Perhaps if you actually put your faith in God some of these issues would be cleared up for you. You profess to be Christian, but to be Christian you must trust Chirst. I must ask if you do. Trusting Him involves believing His words.

[Jezuzfan777]

Sums it up pretty well. It doesn't need to make sense, it doesn't need to be compatible with the new age of human development, it doesn't need anything. All you need is to trust Christ. Yes. Trust Christand you will be able to counter every reasonable argument by spouting religious nonsense. Trust Christ and you can spend your entire life, with no worries about the future, just sitting in a happy spot waiting for heaven to come.

I wish I could.

[Criada]

I know how you feel.. I spent many years trying to reconcile faith and intellect, before I realised that my intellect could never grasp God!
Have you read Kierkegaard? I found his concept of the 'leap to faith' very helpful when I was at the 'wish I could believe' stage of things...

Ultimately, faith is a gift of God.. it's not something we can argue our way into.
But it is a gift that He promises to give if we truly seek it.
I am praying that He will show you something of Himself.... because all the 'rational thought' in the world can never compare with the knowledge that you have encountered the divine..

[Jezuzfan777]

It's a shame. Why are we wasting time on this?

[dead2self]

Friend I feel your pain. I fought against religion as well. But I was blessed in that God granted me faith. That is really the only way. Faith is the evidence of things unseen. Only God can grant that faith. Please pray that He grants you that gift. I'll pray for that as well.

[Rindicella]

I thought I was conversing with a reasoning person. You just do not see the point and have not faith in science and the study of nature through our senses, but in an invisible man in the sky that fully contradicts everything known to us. When you come to the realization that you're taking imagination for granted there will be a point for discussion.

My answers are ludicrous? Don't blame your ignorance on me. I'm surprised you don't even know the relativity theories.

I said that is ridiculous because people do not use religious claims to counter science, but if anything, people use scientific claims to counter religion. You got it backwards there. Also, for the record, I AM a new Christian. All I need are some answers to help me integrate religion into my view of this world, but so far you provided none.

Most of your argument is a strawman, so I'm not going to address that. It's designed by you, and phrased in such a way, as to be unanswerable and we can all quit pretending otherwise.

I will address your last statement.
Science seeks to address the mechanics of the Universe, and it does this extremely well. In fact, when it comes to the mechanics of the Universe, how the thing works, there is nothing better.


Religion, any religion, seeks to answer "why" the Universe was created and by whom since human beings have traditionally believed that order is created by intelligence. Religion does not attempt to answer any other question. Religion is not a scientific exercise. It is an exercise in philosophy and human experience. Nothing else.

If you lack knowledge or expertise in philosophy and human experience, that is no one's problem but yours. Figure it out. But do not come to people of any faith, and demand that they solve your existential problems. It's rude and it lacks intellectual depth.

Edited to add an afterthought:
The Universe is simply the vehicle in which we ride. "Scientists" such as yourself, would do far better to ask "where" it is. The question of "what" and "how" the Universe is, is pretty well answered by today's scientific standard. So please, come up with something new. We'd love to hear it. Instead, you're here picking on people who have nothing to do with your course of study. It's harassing literature majors for not being math majors. How illogical.

[heymikey80]

So it came to my attention that most Christians believe that God actively answers prayers. My question is, how exactly does he do that? For example, if a person found a dollar bill and it was God's deed, than God must have blown the wind so the dollar will fall on that exact spot. But lets look further into this. Where did the energy come from? Energy cannot be 'invisible', that goes against fundamental metaphysics. It must come from an observable force. But with over 200 years of scientific development, shouldn't we have already found this kinda force that actively works around people's lives 24 hours a day? Or is God playing tricks on our mind? Or are scientists the devil's work? I'm just trying to think with logic, so correct me if I'm wrong.
I like your initial question -- but I think the conversation has diverged in directions I'd also like to address, if I may?

God being infinite and the Sole Creator has complete control over how the universe works out. God is also a Person, and so He can be appealed-to through prayer, even though He knows what our wishes and desires are.

Force isn't observable -- your physicist friend will point out that only phenomena are observable.

All that said, individual outcomes are not easily tracked by science -- and they're easily suppressed as being irreproducible. Just ask a meteorologist where that dollar-blowing wind came from, and you'll see from the response that individual results are not well-described there. Science attributes to "randomness" a variety of phenomena that are within the possible outcomes, but aren't directly understood as to their cause. Humanity also attributes to "miracles" a variety of phenomena that aren't within the possible science outcomes. These things science can't analyze. They're not reproducible.

Physics and chemistry do far better with prediction of physical phenomena, but only when those phenomena are engineered or controlled. That's because these disciplines are at the human extent of human ability to predict and control phenomena. They can get out of control, too. There are limits to the human discipline of science.

God doesn't work this way. So expect the rules to change, when interacting with God.

===================================================
As for the rest of the conversation ...

Look, our culture has actually spent about 500 years trying to find this physical influence that does metaphysical things.

It's not happened.

It's not likely to happen.

That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are plenty of things that physical sciences have tried to establish, but have been unable to. Things like ethics and metaphysics, issues of life and right and love. There are clear philosophical reasons why science is unable to come up with anything overarching about these ideas. Immanuel Kant wrote an essay on one with "Prolgeomena to any Future Metaphysics", which serves as the standard for qualifying any attempt by science to probe the depths of metaphysics. Alasdair MacIntyre recently wrote "After Virtue", forming an argument why science has essentially failed in organizing ethics, and forms quite interesting limits around psychology as well.

Science failed in these subjects. It's high time our culture began checking into why it failed, and why science and its disciplines are not an arbiter of all truth.

As for the recommendation of Spinoza, I'd highly recommend him too: The "Theologico-Political Treatise" is a good start. "Ethics" will be difficult.

You might also try "Rumors of Another World" by Philip Yancey for an overview.

Ultimately, though, trying to organize all this will mean that some things change, and some things get thrown out -- for good reasons.

[paperneck]

firstly, dead to self, i don't know what you think gives you the right to hold your understanding and interpretation of God above other people's. Like you said, God is vast beyond our understanding. I'm not sure why you act as though you are an authority on God beyond others, but you have a real knack for pushing people away from Christianity because they associate it with hard line narrow mindedness like the kind you brew.


As far as the original question goes this is how i look at it:
As far as things like science, or math, or nature i think of these things as tied to the way of god, the way in which things are held together and the way they continue to move. people separate christianity and science but it seems to me that they fit together quite nicely.

now let us suppose God did intend to answer a prayer through physical happening, we can assume if god is all knowing and exists outside of time that he is capable of setting events into action at the very dawn of existence. so if for instance someone prays for something and it comes to them by the wind we can assume that the wind has been on the path to moving that object since the universe was created. that to me is a true testament to how amazing God is.

along with the way of God there is also the Will of God. it can be assumed that God is capable of moving within himself, and within his own structures. this is my belief behind miracles.


then there is jesus who is both the way and the will of God, only he is god brought down to a single point(a human body) and while enclosed in that body God surrendered to many of the limitations and conditions of being human (hunger, pain, fear, etc) so we may be forgiven, and shown how a human ought to live.

[AshenMan]

What a coincidence... or was it by design? I just came to this forum see what people felt the nature of existance was.

I believe God is playing a very big game of four dimensional billiards with every particle in the Universe. Unfortunately what that might mean is that one way or another we all may get bank shot into black holes in the end game. Just like a pro pool player can avoid a snooker, God is omnipotent, and while we have free will, he already knows where we'll decide to roll and whether God is or isn't what happens to us.

[morningstar2651]

What a coincidence... or was it by design? I just came to this forum see what people felt the nature of existance was.

I believe God is playing a very big game of four dimensional billiards with every particle in the Universe. Unfortunately what that might mean is that one way or another we all may get bank shot into black holes in the end game. Just like a pro pool player can avoid a snooker, God is omnipotent, and while we have free will, he already knows where we'll decide to roll and whether God is or isn't what happens to us.Have you ever read Good Omens by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman?

God moves in extremely mysterious, not to say, circuitous ways. God does not play dice with the universe; He plays an ineffable game of His own devising, which might be compared, from the perspective of any of the other players, [ie., everybody.] to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch-dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a Dealer who won't tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.

[AshenMan]

I like that analogy. It sounds like the story of my life.

It's like in Brief History of Time, where Albert Einstein is quoted as saying "God does not play dice", to which Steven Hawking replies: maybe God does play dice, and he sometimes throws them where we can't see them.

Life is like a black box. You never know what goes on inside but what you put in is somehow related to what you get in return.

Yeah, I'm a bit Gump.

[morningstar2651]

I like that analogy. It sounds like the story of my life.

It's like in Brief History of Time, where Albert Einstein is quoted as saying "God does not play dice", to which Steven Hawking replies: maybe God does play dice, and he sometimes throws them where we can't see them.

Life is like a black box. You never know what goes on inside but what you put in is somehow related to what you get in return.

Yeah, I'm a bit Gump.
Yeah, I was reading that and thought "Life's like a box of chocolates...you never know what you're going to get."

If you liked Gump, you might like to know that it's based off of a novel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrest_Gump_%28novel%29), and that there is a sequel titled Gump & Co. The movie deviated quite a bit from the novel.

There is also a Bubba Gump Shrimp Cookbook, with 75 shrimp recipes. I don't know about you, but I love shrimp. My mouth was watering every time Bubba would start rattling off different ways of preparing shrimp. :P

Woo, tangent. Anyways, have you ever heard of emergence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence)? It's something I find fascinating. Alone, a single ant is boring and stupid. However, a colony works as a community and can accomplish great tasks. Ant behavior follows simple rules that result in complex behaviors. This has even resulted in an algorithm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant_colony_optimization) to mimic the simple behavior of the ants to be used by computer scientists.

[dead2self]

firstly, dead to self, i don't know what you think gives you the right to hold your understanding and interpretation of God above other people's. Like you said, God is vast beyond our understanding. I'm not sure why you act as though you are an authority on God beyond others, but you have a real knack for pushing people away from Christianity because they associate it with hard line narrow mindedness like the kind you brew.

If there is something that is true, I am going to defend it. The truths I defend are those held by historical protestant Christianity. I have no time for heresy and will not abide by it. I will not equivocate on historically accepted truths to accomodate apostate "Christians" have new and improved interpretations. If you would be so kind as to show me where I have held up an interpretation above all others that is not historically well founded then I will apologise for the error. If I claim any authority, it comes from the word of God, as interpreted by hundreds of years of godly men and not from myslef. I would never propose to hold up a personal interpretation above those of others. I simply have not studied for long enough for that.

As for hard line narrow mindness, I am sorry to say that Jesus called the gate we are to enter narrow, as is the path we are to walk. That is not interpretation, it is what He actually said. Christianity simply is not a broad religion allowing for loose interpretation. It is a hard road to follow, and requirres that we close our minds off to the lies of this world. If I am pushing people from something, I pray that it the weak, powerless and false Christianity that so pervades modern society. When the truth is spoken, God will work and call His elect. Even when I err in what I say, I cannot stand in His way or interfere with His calling. I am simply not important enough for that.

Now to everyone else, my apologies for this derail, but I felt the need to address that.

[JTLauder]

I love this one scene in Star Trek: Voyager where Captain Janeway is standing on a hill talking with Leonardo Da Vinci. I forget the storyline of how this comes about, but that's not the point. Anyway, Janeway is trying to get Da Vinci to trust her for some task she needs to do. Da Vinci demands Janeway explains to him how something is possible before he will follow her. Now Janeway respects Da Vinci to be an enlighted man always wanting to know and understand the answers, but knows the future science is beyond Da Vinci's grasp, or perhaps she didn't have the time to go into a really long teaching lesson at that moment. She poses to Da Vinci, if he would try to rationalize and teach some concept that is common to man (I forget the subject) to a mouse. Da Vinci replies of course not because the mouse lacks the capacity to understand the concepts. In the same way, Janeway asks if he can accept the fact that there are concepts beyond Da Vinci's ability to grasps, and Da Vinci reluctantly agrees to this fact.

But being the highest evolved mammal on this planet with all our accomplishments, achievements, and discoveries, have we become so arrogant to think that there is nothing beyond our own understanding that we demand that God explains his every action before we will say we believe in him? Do we really believe we have reached the pinnacle of all understanding and knowledge that we refuse to accept that there may just be some things we do not have the capacity to fathom?

I always find it funny whenever people get into this science vs. belief debate, as if they were polar opposites and threatened by the other. There is nothing wrong with studying something to discover how something works. And if there is something we have not yet discovered the "mystery" behind, that does not negate that fact that something exists and works and we can just trust that something to behave consistently that way.

There is nothing wrong with understanding how something works and still realize that God is the creator that made that possible. One does not necessarily contradict the other. The essence of faith is that while we can and should have our understanding God (The Bereans in the Bible were praised for testing and seeking out the truth for themselves), we can trust what we don't understand by taking God at his word.

[paperneck]

If there is something that is true, I am going to defend it. The truths I defend are those held by historical protestant Christianity. I have no time for heresy and will not abide by it. I will not equivocate on historically accepted truths to accomodate apostate "Christians" have new and improved interpretations. If you would be so kind as to show me where I have held up an interpretation above all others that is not historically well founded then I will apologise for the error. If I claim any authority, it comes from the word of God, as interpreted by hundreds of years of godly men and not from myslef. I would never propose to hold up a personal interpretation above those of others. I simply have not studied for long enough for that.

As for hard line narrow mindness, I am sorry to say that Jesus called the gate we are to enter narrow, as is the path we are to walk. That is not interpretation, it is what He actually said. Christianity simply is not a broad religion allowing for loose interpretation. It is a hard road to follow, and requirres that we close our minds off to the lies of this world. If I am pushing people from something, I pray that it the weak, powerless and false Christianity that so pervades modern society. When the truth is spoken, God will work and call His elect. Even when I err in what I say, I cannot stand in His way or interfere with His calling. I am simply not important enough for that.

Now to everyone else, my apologies for this derail, but I felt the need to address that.

You equivocate historically accepted truths the same way it used to be held that the earth was flat, and the earth was the center of the universe.

you are telling someone that they are anti christian in their heart for considering science, as though science was not the work of God. The bible tells us nothing about how we should consider science, that is the interpretation of men, and historically many men have held many positions. For you to hold one higher than the other and condemn another for holding a interpretation you disagree with you have not brought them any closer to truth but taught them dogma. Jesus said in mathew:"you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition." How you can imply that holding historical positions of certain men makes you humble before God i do not understand.

As for the narrow pathway into heaven, i agree the path to heaven is narrow, however i don't see that as an advocation for narrow mindedness. I realize that the word narrow is in both of those sentences, but that does not make them related. that isn't even a p therefor q arguement. Maybe if there were something remotely evil about physics i could agree, but you treat it like pornography and i can't fathom why.

i'd appologize for responding but i think this conversation contributes to the question initially asked.

[dead2self]

Rather than reply point for point to your vague accusations based upon a faulty reading and/or understanding of previous posts I will simply drop it. I have no desire to discuss Biblical truths with yet one more person who feels the need to demonize anyone who stands for truth and would rather weaken theology to make it palpable. Goodbye sir.