NationStates Jolt Archive

John 3:12

"I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?"

Seems like Jesus supported science why can't fundementalist christians?

John 3:12

"I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?"

Seems like Jesus supported science why can't fundementalist christians?

Now that is a stretch.

John 3:12

"I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?"

Seems like Jesus supported science why can't fundementalist christians?

My guess is there's 2 verses that goes against that and four more that go against those 2. That's how the bible works.

Now that is a stretch.
not as bad as when they quoted jesus standing in a circle as an arguement for a flat world. but it seems to point out that in order to comprehend heaven you must understand the world. which would indicate that science is important to understanding god.

Or, we just see the bible for what it really is, and then it doesn't matter whether or not it "supports" evolution!

Or, we just see the bible for what it really is, and then it doesn't matter whether or not it "supports" evolution!

Seems like the best way to get about it.

however you can't fight beliefs unless you use their beliefs against them. most peoples beliefs system are so baseless but at the same time beliefs can't be argued with unless you turn them against themselves.

however you can't fight beliefs unless you use their beliefs against them. most peoples beliefs system are so baseless but at the same time beliefs can't be argued with unless you turn them against themselves.

Well, as far as the Bible goes that's not too difficult, virtually every verse has an opposing verse to it...

John 3:12

"I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?"

Seems like Jesus supported science why can't fundementalist christians?
Got good run so far!
How 'bout a quote or two ...

however you can't fight beliefs unless you use their beliefs against them. most peoples beliefs system are so baseless but at the same time beliefs can't be argued with unless you turn them against themselves.
"A man should remind himself that an object of faith is not scientifically demonstrable, lest presuming to demonstrate what is of faith, he should produce inconclusive reasons and offer occasion for unbelievers to scoff at a faith based on such ground." - Thomas Aquinas

also ...

"Clearly the person who accepts the Church as an infallible guide will believe whatever the Church teaches. "
-same guy

Well, as far as the Bible goes that's not too difficult, virtually every verse has an opposing verse to it...
are they opposing or are they merely poetic in nature or mistranslated. it wasn't to long ago they found out that the supposed coat of many colors was mistranslated and was in fact just a coat with long sleeves.

are they opposing or are they merely poetic in nature or mistranslated. it wasn't to long ago they found out that the supposed coat of many colors was mistranslated and was in fact just a coat with long sleeves.
Again ... Thomas Aquinas ...

"Because philosophy arises from awe, a philosopher is bound in his way to be a lover of myths and poetic fables. Poets and philosophers are alike in being big with wonder."

coupled with

"Wonder is the desire for knowledge. "

John 3:12

"I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?"

Seems like Jesus supported science why can't fundementalist christians?

Way to talk about something that has nothing to do with evolution, and use it to support evolution. Ever heard of a thing called CONTEXT?

are they opposing or are they merely poetic in nature or mistranslated. it wasn't to long ago they found out that the supposed coat of many colors was mistranslated and was in fact just a coat with long sleeves.

Either way, you can find a verse to support any side of an arguement.

John 3:12

"I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?"

Seems like Jesus supported science why can't fundementalist christians?

Well?

As one who argues from the evolution side; I am finding that to be a kind of a stretch on the interpretation.

Well?

As one who argues from the evolution side; I am finding that to be a kind of a stretch on the interpretation.

I think the quote fits. He seems to imply that if you don't understand the world you can't understand heaven. Yet alot of fundementalist/evangicals stick their head in the sand and don't try to understand the nature of science.

Yea, that's a stretch. It really only works if you want it to - otherwise its just too vague to be seriously used in an argument.

I think the quote fits. He seems to imply that if you don't understand the world you can't understand heaven. Yet alot of fundementalist/evangicals stick their head in the sand and don't try to understand the nature of science.

Still that is a stretch as to the meaning of the day when it was written. Genetics, biology, genome were unknown.

Even on the philosophical side. If we understand the earth can we understand heaven? Or is it if we don't understand ourselves; we can't understand heaven?

Ooh! Ooh! I found one that contributes to Creationism :P

Genesis 1
In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth

Ooh! Ooh! I found one that contributes to Creationism :P

Genesis 1
In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth
THIS IS A "stretch".
But at least it involves the source material *shrug*

John 3:12

"I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?"

Seems like Jesus supported science why can't fundementalist christians?

Interesting...too bad that relates in no way to evolution.

Ooh! Ooh! I found one that contributes to Creationism :P

Genesis 1
In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth

No it merely inflects that God had a hand in creation. He could have just as easily did it throughg the big bang.

Interesting...too bad that relates in no way to evolution.

indirectly it does at I thought it alluded to the need to understand the way things are before you get all religiously

indirectly it does at I thought it alluded to the need to understand the way things are before you get all religiously

The Bible doesn't support or contradict evolution.

Why does it matter?
Science and the various world religions are two separate ways of explaining the world. They follow different and often conflicting rules. One would expect them to disagree on certain things. It isn't really that big of a deal until one view starts trying to force its rules on the other.

I didn't even understand how this verse was being stretched the way it was until I read this thread, but just because people say evolution is how the world works doesn't mean that verse is proof positive that Jesus was telling the world about evolution, it just seems to appear like an example of an argument by people trying to support their works with the Bible, rather than the Bible supporting people's works :/.

I think it supports scientific theorems such as (but not limited to) evolution. He implies that an understanding of the forces at work in the universe are necessary if one is to understand the complexities of heaven. Part of this understanding is evolution, although it was not specifically mentioned.

Of course, then we can get into semantics all day about whether evolution is true or not, and then get into more semantics about what definition we're using, but anyway, Jesus never spoke about scientific theories and why we shouldn't doubt Darwin when he gets born, He was speaking about morality, faith in Himself to gain eternal salvation, I don't see how evolution fits into this quote taking that in mind either :/.

Or, to cut to the core of the matter - if the Son can use parables, then why can the Father not do the same?

I think it supports scientific theorems such as (but not limited to) evolution. He implies that an understanding of the forces at work in the universe are necessary if one is to understand the complexities of heaven. Part of this understanding is evolution, although it was not specifically mentioned.
wow someone finally got the idea...thank you

I think that the whole creation story in Genesis supports evolution. It certainly reads like a primitive step in the process of scientific inquiry... attempting to list the order in which things came into being.

And, of course, they didn't get it all right, but it is not a bad allegory for the way things really happened, considering who wrote it and what evidence they had to go on. Nothing, light, earth, oceans, plants, animals, man...

I'm what I call a theo-evolutionist myself. Why the hell couldn't God have used evolution to do what He did and if He didn't why would he leave so much evidence for an old Earth? I for one don't believe that God is in the business of decieving anybody. (after all that would kinda destroy the credibility of my religion ;) ) Anyway in the Hebrew of Genisis the first 11/12 'chapters' are poetic in nature where as the rest of the book is not. Ergo what is important in the creation story is that God did it and not how He did. From then on the Bible in not in any perseivable conflict with Science and it meshes with History quite nicely. (Cited Archeological Finds: the Merneptha Styla, the Cyrus Cyllinder, various Assyrian, Canaanite and Ammorite records mentioning the actions of the various kings of Israel and Judah, and also the many mentions of the 'Haribru' in ancient Egyptian writing and the fact that the refferences stop durring the reign of Ramses II [Kings and Pharohs arn't in the habit of detailing their screw-ups])

yes I know I blew some of that spelling to Hell and gone, sorry :p .

I think that the whole creation story in Genesis supports evolution. It certainly reads like a primitive step in the process of scientific inquiry... attempting to list the order in which things came into being.

And, of course, they didn't get it all right, but it is not a bad allegory for the way things really happened, considering who wrote it and what evidence they had to go on. Nothing, light, earth, oceans, plants, animals, man...

The order isn't even right. Earth precedes light. And animals in the sea and sky are contemporary and precede animals on land.

I'm what I call a theo-evolutionist myself. Why the hell couldn't God have used evolution to do what He did and if He didn't why would he leave so much evidence for an old Earth? I for one don't believe that God is in the business of decieving anybody. (after all that would kinda destroy the credibility of my religion ;) ) Anyway in the Hebrew of Genisis the first 11/12 'chapters' are poetic in nature where as the rest of the book is not. Ergo what is important in the creation story is that God did it and not how He did. From then on the Bible in not in any perseivable conflict with Science and it meshes with History quite nicely. (Cited Archeological Finds: the Merneptha Styla, the Cyrus Cyllinder, various Assyrian, Canaanite and Ammorite records mentioning the actions of the various kings of Israel and Judah, and also the many mentions of the 'Haribru' in ancient Egyptian writing and the fact that the refferences stop durring the reign of Ramses II [Kings and Pharohs arn't in the habit of detailing their screw-ups])

yes I know I blew some of that spelling to Hell and gone, sorry :p .

I am an anthropology major and I can tell you that there is no evidence that the Jews were ever enslaved by the Egyptians.

Of course, then we can get into semantics all day about whether evolution is true or not, and then get into more semantics about what definition we're using, but anyway, Jesus never spoke about scientific theories and why we shouldn't doubt Darwin when he gets born, He was speaking about morality, faith in Himself to gain eternal salvation, I don't see how evolution fits into this quote taking that in mind either :/.
Well the semantics aren't going to be about whether evolution is true or not, the semantics are going to be about the differences between the people who have a basic knowledge and understanding of its functions and principles, and the people who don't like to have their little world-views caved in by big ideas and realities that don't rely on rhetoric, tautology, spin and emotional manipulation to get the point across.
But, a lot of your post seems reasonable.

Doesn't it say in the bible it was all created 4004 B.C.?

Doesn't it say in the bible it was all created 4004 B.C.?
It might ... there's an awful lot of numbers and names and pissed-off people and angry vengeful gods and sand and people doing stupid sh*t to each other, so somewhere in there it might say something along those lines.

I think the quote fits. He seems to imply that if you don't understand the world you can't understand heaven. Yet alot of fundementalist/evangicals stick their head in the sand and don't try to understand the nature of science.

Anyone consider that the science described in the quote is not specifically evolution. Maybe Christ is telling us if we can't comprehend the intricate beauty of the world God created for us then how can we ever hope to comprehend that of His kingdom. It's not asking about evolution, or for that matter any specific part of science at all. Trying to read between the lines of divine inspiration is a dangerous path.

Anyone consider that the science described in the quote is not specifically evolution. Maybe Christ is telling us if we can't comprehend the intricate beauty of the world God created for us then how can we ever hope to comprehend that of His kingdom. It's not asking about evolution, or for that matter any specific part of science at all. Trying to read between the lines of divine inspiration is a dangerous path.

by taking it to mean science then naturally you have to accept evolution too...until someone disproves it and we get a new theory to replace it..at which point you should accept that one:P