Board index ‹ Science and the Bible

[Bombs Away]

Are there any physical or scientific basis for the truth of the bible?

I used to attend church and at that time, I believed the bible completely because everyone else did as well.

Now that I've taken a step back, I think it's silly to simply trust a book of text without any evidence that can be tested. Sure, there are some texts in history that people take the word for without actually witnessing it but they do not affect your life the way a religion like Christianity does.

Is there any reason for you to believe the bible, apart from what to a non-believer might seem like blind faith or herd mentality?

[jimwalton]

I'm trying to grasp what you're asking, since you seem to be wanting scientific basis for historical things, which are two different disciplines. So after I write a little, you'll have to let me know if I touched on what you were asking or missed it completely.

There are hundreds upon hundreds of material or documentary corroborations for things the Bible talks about. Maybe thousands. A bulla with King Hezekiah's name on it. An inscription in Assyria telling of a battle the Bible also tells about. There are hundreds or thousands of these. Is that what you're asking?

The Bible is very evidentiary. God gave Moses evidence before He expected Moe to believe in Him. He gave evidences to the Israelites before He expected them to believe in Him. In the Bible, evidence always precedes belief. Look at the ministry of Jesus. He did miracles, and then He taught about faith. Because He healed people, others came to be healed because of the evidence. That's the way it always is. There's never any notion of blind faith or herd mentality. Is that what you're asking?

But then you mention "scientific basis" for truth. What are you asking—if science can prove theology? It can't, just as it can't prove philosophy or math. Those are different paths to truth.

If you want to talk about science, there is an organization of Christian scientists—some of the top scientists in the world, such as Francis Collins or Jennifer Wiseman (an astrophysicist in charge of the Hubble telescope). They have articles at http://www.biologos.org. Is that what you're asking?

My faith is based on evidence. That's the nature of faith, and the nature of my belief. I guess we need to talk more.

[Rogue One]

> My faith is based on evidence. That's the nature of faith, and the nature of my belief.

The evidence leads you to the conclusion that the God of the bible exists.

Since your witness testifies that God exists based upon the evidence you have examined, how does that necessarily lead you into a rightful relationship with Him? Does the evidence of His existence and acceptance of such automatically gain you a place in eternity with Him?
Thanks.

[jimwalton]

> Since your witness testifies that God exists based upon the evidence you have examined, how does that necessarily lead you into a rightful relationship with Him?

Evidence doesn't lead to relationship, it only may open doors to consider a relationship, or it may break down barriers that create opportunities to think differently about a relationship with God. With my witness I hope to create a window the Holy Spirit can use to speak to someone's mind or heart.

>Does the evidence of His existence and acceptance of such automatically gain you a place in eternity with Him?

No. The obvious example is James 2.19. Other examples would be the Pharisees. They accepted the existence of God, but their hearts were far from Him.

[Rogue One]

Romans 10:2 speaking of the Jews, Paul says

For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.

How can you have zeal for God but not according to knowledge. What is knowledge in this sense?

Thanks.

[jimwalton]

"Knowlege" in this verse is ἐπίγνωσιν. It's a deeper, fuller knowledge than the one described by the term *gnosis*. The zeal of the Jews was based on partial knowledge, not the full knowledge brought by Jesus Christ in fulfillment of the law and prophets.

The knowledge Jews based their zeal on was knowledge of external practices, of rules and rites, of forms and the letter of the law. In the process they missed the reality, the heart, and the Spirit. They were zealous for the Law so much that they missed God!

Since their knowledge was partial, it led them astray. Paul talks about his misguided zeal in Acts 22.3, Gal. 1.14, and Phil. 3.6. It was a zeal based on knowledge, for sure (Phil. 3.4-6), but it was knowledge that was essentially empty because it didn't lead to Christ as it should have (Phil. 3.7-9).

Real knowledge is in the truth. With the Jews, their knowledge stopped at a certain point and actually became a barrier to move on to see and accept the fulfillment of all their Messianic hopes.

[Rogue One]

> They were zealous for the Law so much that they missed God!

What was the motive behind the zeal if it was not in accordance with God's will?

Would they not have known this scripture?

Hosea 6:6 (ESV)

For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.

What was preventing them from understanding this very simple to interpret verse?

Thanks by the way. I always appreciate the thoroughness with which you answer.

[jimwalton]

> What was the motive behind the zeal if it was not in accordance with God's will?

Judaism was a faith system based in adherence to the Sinaitic law and the traditions of explanation and enforcement that had grown up around that law. It was their perception that their zeal was in accordance with God's will—their works showed their commitment and devotion. For Jews, the tighter they held to the Law, the more God was honored.

When Jesus came, He gave a different analysis. Jesus told them that their zeal had actually subverted what the Law was all about (Matthew 23 et al.). They were so intent on following the Law they became abusive to people (uncompassionate), ignoring real human needs (both physical and spiritual), got caught up in the power and wealth that could be had, and became the paragons of hypocrisy in a system that despised hypocrisy (ironically enough), among other things. They became so focused on strict adherence to a code that they missed the idea that the code was given to create a living relationship with the living God (the covenant).

Paul also gave a different analysis, and one similar to Jesus. Their originally well-intentioned zeal blinded them to further insights and deeper knowledge. Their zeal actually interfered with understanding the Scriptures properly. In other words, they became so narrow-minded, they now saw the Scripture through the lens of their worldview rather than objectively (a problem we must all be wary about). Paul said their knowledge of Scripture had actually become an obstacle rather than an asset, and their thinking was now futile.

> Hosea 6.6

They would most certainly have known this verse. They were astute readers and memorizers of Scripture. But remember that Hosea 6.6 was originally spoken to Jews who had committed exactly the same mistake. Merrill Tenney wrote, "Any religious system which demands of its followers a strictness that transcends the average moral performance of humanity is likely to have adherents who will pretend to be what they are not in order to maintain a favorable impression among their compatriots."

[Rogue One]

Great response (as always). Thanks!