RE: Science vs. Theology

From: Don Perrett <>
Date: Wed Apr 13 2005 - 13:31:43 EDT

Thanks for the input. Please note however that I did NOT say there was
science in the bible. If so please feel free to "clip" that phrase from my
earlier post. What I did say was that the bible can give us meaning and
purpose of the creation. As for any form of scientific knowledge, sociology
contained within the bible. Whether one would consider that science is
another matter. While the bible most definitely does NOT contain every
element of science, whether physics, etc, there are some scientific
tendencies. That is why I mention the idea that man has and will always
continue to pursue understanding of the universe that God has created. If
God did not want us to understand his creation, then the bible does not
reflect that. Our origins must have had some importance to us for someone
to have written it down. Whether ancient science or modern does not matter.
What does matter is that God inspired man to respect and appreciate his
past. If not then we would not read any book let alone the bible. One
cannot read of the future for the future is not certain, except for God
alone. Our past is however because it has past. When one considers what it
has taken to bring man to this current day, then one can appreciate and be
thankful for those who brought us here, including God. If we are to Love
all mankind, as is written, then we must also love those of the past. To
honor and love them is to try and understand them. To understand them
requires one know them. The only way to know them is to study them. And to
do this one must use science and theology. One or the other is not enough.
If the bible alone is sufficient then one must concede that the bible holds
all the answers of the past, thereby admitting that science, and everything
else is contained in it. Feel free to read again the number of times, in
both postings, I stated that both are necessary. If I believed that all
scientific answers were in the bible, like a YEC, then I wouldn't need

Sorry if any thing is unclear. Reconciliation does not mean that they must
match to the letter. I'll leave that for the YECs. But stating that there
are no answers in the bible except theological, sounds like psychology but
with a deity. Reducing the bible to philosophy, psychology and/or sociology
alone does not befit the purpose of God. If God just wanted us to reach
some "esoteric" goal of enlightenment and nothing more, he would not have
had to make us corporeal. He could have made us dogs, atoms or any
limitless thing he chose. There is a reason he chose this form for us. It
is up to us to understand it. Science is not the answer, but it does help
one to understand the process by which we were created and thus "together"
with the bible, WHY.

As a former intelligence analyst, I will state that conducting analysis
requires not only that one analyzes the facts, but also the mind set of the
target. The facts alone may tell you what "they" are doing, have done, or
will do, but it will rarely tell you why. That is the current dilema in the
intel community. Of course understanding the mind set without knowing what
is going on will not achieve anything either. One must have both.
Theologically, one needs both science and bible. Until one understands
both, one cannot find the full truth, unless graced by the holy spirit.

Don P
  -----Original Message-----
  From: []On
Behalf Of Jan de Koning
  Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 09:55
  Subject: Re: Science vs. Theology

  At 08:09 AM 4/13/2005, wrote:

    In a message dated 4/13/05 12:07:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, writes:

      And for

      those wishing to save others from the failings of modern atheism, we

      find a way to reconcile the bible with science.

      Don P

    The only parts of the bible you can reconcile with today's science are
those having to do with the psychology and anthropology of man. Reconciling
the bible with geology or physics misses the point entirely. By doing that
you are saying that God himself wrote the bible so it must be scientifically
right, but God revealed himself to (through) men who wrote the Bible and
though the geological and physical science of those ancient men to whom
Biblical truths were revealed is now superceded, the psychological and
anthropological truths they recorded in the Bible that cause communities of
men to survive and prosper are still as constant and reliable now as they
were in ancient times. I would stop wasting my time working the creation
account which has nothing to do with human perfection and understand the
practical efficacy of the beliefs and practices we find in the Bible which
have everything to do with human perfection in the face of God.


  Even psychology and anthropology should be excluded, since we read the
Bible then as if bible writers knew modern psychology and anthropology. God
did speak a language people could understand. Teaching any science in the
Bible was not the intention of God, I believe. God wants us to change our
hearts, change our outlook on life. That is not only written for scientists
but for all men, regardless of schooling. To try to fin any scientific
knowledge will not work in the long run. Another difficulty is that none
of us know the written language of the Bible as it was understood by the
first hearers of the gospel. To think that the gospels will be able to
teach us modern science will fail in the long run.

  Jan de Koning
Received on Wed Apr 13 13:33:24 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 13 2005 - 13:33:27 EDT