Mysteries of the Kingdom
The story of Noah is a familiar one and one that is challenged in many ways. Today I would like to focus on one particular aspect of the story, Noah's age. How could Noah live to be 950? How did any of the early patriarchs of the Bible live to their incredible ages?
Imagine waking up one morning and sitting down for breakfast, clicking on the radio or television, only to see that thousands of people in Rhode Island are declaring that God appeared to them at a Christian concert and instructed them to spread His word. Fire engulfed the audio system, the sun was eclipsed, and God spoke to the audience. Would you believe them?
Evolution is something that has troubled a great deal of Christians and swayed a many people from accepting the possibility of a Biblical God. I think the biggest reason for this is that theologians have historically had a certain way of interpreting the Bible and are not strongly convinced by the evidence for evolution. This lack of conviction in the scientific theory causes people either question science or question their faith. I think that this is a mistake.
Makugutu, a naturalist blogger over at this site, disagrees with some of my reasoning regarding evil in the world. The quote below is from my article here. I think it is interesting to note that when we began to elaborate on this topic, the conversation moved very quickly away from the nature of God and more towards human perspective.
If God knows everything that we will ever feel, think, say, or do, then do we have free will? It is certainly hard to imagine how we might be capable of freely deciding anything if all of our decisions are already known. But it may be possible to reconcile free will and "destiny" or "fate". Let's unpack the titular question and see where it leads.
In this article I hope to make a sound argument for how the biblical story of creation can align with modern scientific theory. I suppose, in order to accomplish this goal, there is no better place to start than with Genesis 1:1.
The burden of proof is the idea that a person or party making any particular claim has to provide sufficient evidence that their claim is true. While this sounds a good idea conceptually, just how difficult is it to provide proof for simple, everyday actions. Lately, in an effort to find out, I have been disputing claims made by my friends in an effort to establish whether or not it is reasonable to put the burden of proof on the individual making the claim.
He has inscribed a circle on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness -Job 26:10 What sort of imagery does the verse above cause in your mind? For me, it causes me to envision the planet earth from space, mostly blue, circular, surrounded by darkness. Does that image seem familiar to you? It should, I am describing earth as it appears from space. This is one example of the way that language can be interpreted depending on the context of our preexisting notions. If I believed in a flat earth, for example, I may interpret it more like this:
Ah, infinity. The ultimate childhood one-upper. The ace in the hole for when you really need to out do someone... times infinity. We all know what the word represents, but can it be practically applied? Let’s take a look at a few examples.
Can God create a rock so big that even He cannot lift it? I am sure we have all heard that question before. I certainly remember having long conversations about it as a child. We would argue that if God could not make a rock that He couldn’t lift, then He wasn’t omnipotent, or if He could make a rock that He couldn’t lift then He wasn’t omnipotent. It seemed like an unsolvable quandary and could certainly leave you feeling as though your are stuck between a rock and a hard place.. See what I did there?
Canon Of Reason 
You must be logged in to post a comment.