Which side are you in?

Use this forum to discuss the March 2021 Book of the month, "The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God’s Plan" by Daniel Friedmann, Dania Sheldon
Post Reply
User avatar
Sushan
Posts: 4088
Joined: 04 May 2018, 19:13
Currently Reading: The Borders of Normal
Bookshelf Size: 289
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sushan.html
Latest Review: The Deadly Five by Raymond Maher
Reading Device: B0794JC2K5

Which side are you in?

Post by Sushan »

When you consider the origin of the universe, the emergence of life on Earth, and the future of humanity, the chances are you do so from one of three perspectives. Perhaps you’re educated in the sciences and are convinced that current scientific theories and data explain our origins and enable us to exercise some control over future events; yet you also have a knowledge of the Bible and its seeming incompatibility with science. Alternatively, you might believe that God created the world and that the scriptures contain all of the answers about our origins and future; at the same time, you understand the basics of the scientific theories and can see their apparent incongruity with some of the teachings of your religion. Then again, you may be familiar with the fundamentals of biblical religions and of science, not feel committed to one or the other perspective, yet be curious about whether their apparently disparate explanations and timelines for our origins and outlook on the future are reconcilable.
As per the author, there are three kinds of humans when it comes to the discussion regarding origin of the solar system and life.

1. Those who believe in scientific theories and see the incongruity of the biblical teachings with the scientific evidence.

2. Those who believe in God and the creation, yet with the basic scientific knowledge seeing that what science says does not go along with what bible says.

3. Those who have a fairly good knowledge about science as well as the bible, but not taken any side, yet thinking over whether these two can go hand in hand.

Are these the only groups that we can divide all humans regarding this topic of discussion? In which group are you in (or mostly fit in)? Why do you say so?
User avatar
VernaVi
Posts: 1050
Joined: 30 Sep 2018, 00:36
Currently Reading: Scandal, Heartbreak, and Deceit
Bookshelf Size: 151
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-vernavi.html
Latest Review: Poartry by Doug Kiburz

Post by VernaVi »

I would be in group three. I believe in the Bible as well as Science. I think they can and do go hand in hand, and that one proves the other because there have been so many proofs presented regarding the Bible by scientists over the years that exemplify the way this world is made, created, growing and evolving and prove out the Bible’s claims as well as its historical events over the many years.
Latest Review: Poartry by Doug Kiburz
User avatar
Sushan
Posts: 4088
Joined: 04 May 2018, 19:13
Currently Reading: The Borders of Normal
Bookshelf Size: 289
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sushan.html
Latest Review: The Deadly Five by Raymond Maher
Reading Device: B0794JC2K5

Post by Sushan »

VernaVi wrote: 01 Mar 2021, 23:52 I would be in group three. I believe in the Bible as well as Science. I think they can and do go hand in hand, and that one proves the other because there have been so many proofs presented regarding the Bible by scientists over the years that exemplify the way this world is made, created, growing and evolving and prove out the Bible’s claims as well as its historical events over the many years.
What I see in the attempts of proving biblical teachings through science, it has been quite a reconciliation rather than an actual proving. The scientists who wanted to say that the bible is true have shown that some of the biblical events can be related to scientific facts amd events, but we can't understand them by merely reading the bible because of the riddle-like ways that they are written. The author of this book is trying to do the same, to reconcile the two, which I see as an attempt just to strengthen the bible.

At the same time, we have to keep in mind that some scientists have shown that the biblical events does not co-relate with the scientific evidence.
User avatar
VernaVi
Posts: 1050
Joined: 30 Sep 2018, 00:36
Currently Reading: Scandal, Heartbreak, and Deceit
Bookshelf Size: 151
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-vernavi.html
Latest Review: Poartry by Doug Kiburz

Post by VernaVi »

Sushan wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 00:35
VernaVi wrote: 01 Mar 2021, 23:52 I would be in group three. I believe in the Bible as well as Science. I think they can and do go hand in hand, and that one proves the other because there have been so many proofs presented regarding the Bible by scientists over the years that exemplify the way this world is made, created, growing and evolving and prove out the Bible’s claims as well as its historical events over the many years.
What I see in the attempts of proving biblical teachings through science, it has been quite a reconciliation rather than an actual proving. The scientists who wanted to say that the bible is true have shown that some of the biblical events can be related to scientific facts amd events, but we can't understand them by merely reading the bible because of the riddle-like ways that they are written. The author of this book is trying to do the same, to reconcile the two, which I see as an attempt just to strengthen the bible.

At the same time, we have to keep in mind that some scientists have shown that the biblical events does not co-relate with the scientific evidence.
I'm not sure which scientific evidence to which you are referring that does not corroborate the bible, but I do know that science and archaeology have proven the bible true repeatedly with historic artifacts and evidence that is inarguable. It's amazing how history, science, and faith are so tied together.
Latest Review: Poartry by Doug Kiburz
Sam Lauren
Posts: 53
Joined: 15 Feb 2021, 07:43
2021 Reading Goal: 100
Favorite Author: Anne Rice
Currently Reading: The Dovekeepers
Bookshelf Size: 23
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sam-lauren.html
Latest Review: To love in vain by Pedro Merchant
fav_author_id: 2444

Post by Sam Lauren »

I think there's a fourth group: people who are on both sides and believe that there is just more to it than we can possibly know as humans.
User avatar
Sushan
Posts: 4088
Joined: 04 May 2018, 19:13
Currently Reading: The Borders of Normal
Bookshelf Size: 289
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sushan.html
Latest Review: The Deadly Five by Raymond Maher
Reading Device: B0794JC2K5

Post by Sushan »

VernaVi wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 02:00
Sushan wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 00:35
VernaVi wrote: 01 Mar 2021, 23:52 I would be in group three. I believe in the Bible as well as Science. I think they can and do go hand in hand, and that one proves the other because there have been so many proofs presented regarding the Bible by scientists over the years that exemplify the way this world is made, created, growing and evolving and prove out the Bible’s claims as well as its historical events over the many years.
What I see in the attempts of proving biblical teachings through science, it has been quite a reconciliation rather than an actual proving. The scientists who wanted to say that the bible is true have shown that some of the biblical events can be related to scientific facts amd events, but we can't understand them by merely reading the bible because of the riddle-like ways that they are written. The author of this book is trying to do the same, to reconcile the two, which I see as an attempt just to strengthen the bible.

At the same time, we have to keep in mind that some scientists have shown that the biblical events does not co-relate with the scientific evidence.
I'm not sure which scientific evidence to which you are referring that does not corroborate the bible, but I do know that science and archaeology have proven the bible true repeatedly with historic artifacts and evidence that is inarguable. It's amazing how history, science, and faith are so tied together.
Those things are tied together when you look at them from a religious perspect. In this book, the author has philosophically suggested that the biblical time lines can be fit into scientific time lines if we assume them in such ways. But why should we assume things when we have clear evidence which says something else?
User avatar
Maddie Atkinson
Posts: 368
Joined: 13 Nov 2020, 05:30
2021 Reading Goal: 12
Favorite Author: Malorie Blackman
Favorite Book: A Secret History of Witches
Currently Reading: The Five: the untold lives of the women killed by jack the ripper
Bookshelf Size: 36
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-maddie-atkinson.html
Latest Review: Wilderness Cry by Hilary L Hunt M.D.
fav_author_id: 18342

Post by Maddie Atkinson »

VernaVi wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 02:00
Sushan wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 00:35
VernaVi wrote: 01 Mar 2021, 23:52 I would be in group three. I believe in the Bible as well as Science. I think they can and do go hand in hand, and that one proves the other because there have been so many proofs presented regarding the Bible by scientists over the years that exemplify the way this world is made, created, growing and evolving and prove out the Bible’s claims as well as its historical events over the many years.
What I see in the attempts of proving biblical teachings through science, it has been quite a reconciliation rather than an actual proving. The scientists who wanted to say that the bible is true have shown that some of the biblical events can be related to scientific facts amd events, but we can't understand them by merely reading the bible because of the riddle-like ways that they are written. The author of this book is trying to do the same, to reconcile the two, which I see as an attempt just to strengthen the bible.

At the same time, we have to keep in mind that some scientists have shown that the biblical events does not co-relate with the scientific evidence.


I'm not sure which scientific evidence to which you are referring that does not corroborate the bible, but I do know that science and archaeology have proven the bible true repeatedly with historic artifacts and evidence that is inarguable. It's amazing how history, science, and faith are so tied together.
I agree with you! Science has proved many of the stories in the Bible through archaeology and history corroborates it through this evidence. Anything that science disproves just removes the false information that we have been taught! So I believe that science and religion/the Bible go hand in hand too!
"I decided a while ago not to deny myself the simpler pleasures of existence" - Augustus Waters (The Fault in Our Stars)
User avatar
Sushan
Posts: 4088
Joined: 04 May 2018, 19:13
Currently Reading: The Borders of Normal
Bookshelf Size: 289
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sushan.html
Latest Review: The Deadly Five by Raymond Maher
Reading Device: B0794JC2K5

Post by Sushan »

Sam Lauren wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 06:42 I think there's a fourth group: people who are on both sides and believe that there is just more to it than we can possibly know as humans.
That is a valid point. We have not found all the scientific data regarding history of the world or why certain things are happening. And also we have not understood each and every aspects that the religions have described.

There are many things that we cannot explain in either way and yet to be researched on. So, indeed, there is a fourth group that believe we have a lot more to find both scientifically and religiously
User avatar
Sushan
Posts: 4088
Joined: 04 May 2018, 19:13
Currently Reading: The Borders of Normal
Bookshelf Size: 289
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sushan.html
Latest Review: The Deadly Five by Raymond Maher
Reading Device: B0794JC2K5

Post by Sushan »

Maddie Atkinson wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 07:33
VernaVi wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 02:00
Sushan wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 00:35

What I see in the attempts of proving biblical teachings through science, it has been quite a reconciliation rather than an actual proving. The scientists who wanted to say that the bible is true have shown that some of the biblical events can be related to scientific facts amd events, but we can't understand them by merely reading the bible because of the riddle-like ways that they are written. The author of this book is trying to do the same, to reconcile the two, which I see as an attempt just to strengthen the bible.

At the same time, we have to keep in mind that some scientists have shown that the biblical events does not co-relate with the scientific evidence.


I'm not sure which scientific evidence to which you are referring that does not corroborate the bible, but I do know that science and archaeology have proven the bible true repeatedly with historic artifacts and evidence that is inarguable. It's amazing how history, science, and faith are so tied together.
I agree with you! Science has proved many of the stories in the Bible through archaeology and history corroborates it through this evidence. Anything that science disproves just removes the false information that we have been taught! So I believe that science and religion/the Bible go hand in hand too!
What science disproves removes the false information that people are taught! Do you suggest that the bible has false information too? So what we can believe is only what is scientifically proven?

In that case, we are well aware that even scientific data and researches can be altered according to various personal agendas. So what guarantee that we have to say what are already proven by science are actually true? What I believe is that the scientists who proved the biblical facts scientifically are the ones who wanted to believe those facts. But the ones who did not want to believe has disproved those facts
User avatar
Maddie Atkinson
Posts: 368
Joined: 13 Nov 2020, 05:30
2021 Reading Goal: 12
Favorite Author: Malorie Blackman
Favorite Book: A Secret History of Witches
Currently Reading: The Five: the untold lives of the women killed by jack the ripper
Bookshelf Size: 36
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-maddie-atkinson.html
Latest Review: Wilderness Cry by Hilary L Hunt M.D.
fav_author_id: 18342

Post by Maddie Atkinson »

Sushan wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 08:48
Maddie Atkinson wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 07:33
VernaVi wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 02:00



I'm not sure which scientific evidence to which you are referring that does not corroborate the bible, but I do know that science and archaeology have proven the bible true repeatedly with historic artifacts and evidence that is inarguable. It's amazing how history, science, and faith are so tied together.
I agree with you! Science has proved many of the stories in the Bible through archaeology and history corroborates it through this evidence. Anything that science disproves just removes the false information that we have been taught! So I believe that science and religion/the Bible go hand in hand too!
What science disproves removes the false information that people are taught! Do you suggest that the bible has false information too? So what we can believe is only what is scientifically proven?

In that case, we are well aware that even scientific data and researches can be altered according to various personal agendas. So what guarantee that we have to say what are already proven by science are actually true? What I believe is that the scientists who proved the biblical facts scientifically are the ones who wanted to believe those facts. But the ones who did not want to believe has disproved those facts
I mean that many stories in the Bible are just that, stories. Science helps prove the actual events that happened. Yes scientific data can be altered, but science is objective, that thing becomes fact until otherwise disproved and a new more widely accepted theory is put forward. If a fact is disproved, it is disproved, you can't argue with that if you're a scientist. I believe science and the Bible can go hand in hand and therefore facts that are proved solidify my beliefs further, and ones that are disproved allowed me to get rid of the beliefs that are false. But that's just my opinion. People can believe what they want to believe, whether it has been scientifically proven or not. As long as your opinions are not harmful then I really don't think it matters!
"I decided a while ago not to deny myself the simpler pleasures of existence" - Augustus Waters (The Fault in Our Stars)
User avatar
Sushan
Posts: 4088
Joined: 04 May 2018, 19:13
Currently Reading: The Borders of Normal
Bookshelf Size: 289
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sushan.html
Latest Review: The Deadly Five by Raymond Maher
Reading Device: B0794JC2K5

Post by Sushan »

Maddie Atkinson wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 10:04
Sushan wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 08:48
Maddie Atkinson wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 07:33

I agree with you! Science has proved many of the stories in the Bible through archaeology and history corroborates it through this evidence. Anything that science disproves just removes the false information that we have been taught! So I believe that science and religion/the Bible go hand in hand too!
What science disproves removes the false information that people are taught! Do you suggest that the bible has false information too? So what we can believe is only what is scientifically proven?

In that case, we are well aware that even scientific data and researches can be altered according to various personal agendas. So what guarantee that we have to say what are already proven by science are actually true? What I believe is that the scientists who proved the biblical facts scientifically are the ones who wanted to believe those facts. But the ones who did not want to believe has disproved those facts
I mean that many stories in the Bible are just that, stories. Science helps prove the actual events that happened. Yes scientific data can be altered, but science is objective, that thing becomes fact until otherwise disproved and a new more widely accepted theory is put forward. If a fact is disproved, it is disproved, you can't argue with that if you're a scientist. I believe science and the Bible can go hand in hand and therefore facts that are proved solidify my beliefs further, and ones that are disproved allowed me to get rid of the beliefs that are false. But that's just my opinion. People can believe what they want to believe, whether it has been scientifically proven or not. As long as your opinions are not harmful then I really don't think it matters!
It is okay for people to have their own opinions regarding religious beliefs as well as scientific theories. Devotees can strengthen their beliefs based on scientific evidence, and also they can just neglect scientific evidence and believe what they want. After all, even the God has let humans to have free will and there is nothing wrong in utilizing that, unless you are harming anyone.
User avatar
VernaVi
Posts: 1050
Joined: 30 Sep 2018, 00:36
Currently Reading: Scandal, Heartbreak, and Deceit
Bookshelf Size: 151
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-vernavi.html
Latest Review: Poartry by Doug Kiburz

Post by VernaVi »

Maddie Atkinson wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 07:33
VernaVi wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 02:00
Sushan wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 00:35

What I see in the attempts of proving biblical teachings through science, it has been quite a reconciliation rather than an actual proving. The scientists who wanted to say that the bible is true have shown that some of the biblical events can be related to scientific facts amd events, but we can't understand them by merely reading the bible because of the riddle-like ways that they are written. The author of this book is trying to do the same, to reconcile the two, which I see as an attempt just to strengthen the bible.

At the same time, we have to keep in mind that some scientists have shown that the biblical events does not co-relate with the scientific evidence.


I'm not sure which scientific evidence to which you are referring that does not corroborate the bible, but I do know that science and archaeology have proven the bible true repeatedly with historic artifacts and evidence that is inarguable. It's amazing how history, science, and faith are so tied together.
I agree with you! Science has proved many of the stories in the Bible through archaeology and history corroborates it through this evidence. Anything that science disproves just removes the false information that we have been taught! So I believe that science and religion/the Bible go hand in hand too!
I agree, that is so true. We always love to see when something gets weeded out that may have been superfluous to begin with but the amazing thing is, science proves out the bulk of biblical history and stories. Books like this keep people interested and wanting to learn more.
Latest Review: Poartry by Doug Kiburz
User avatar
Sushan
Posts: 4088
Joined: 04 May 2018, 19:13
Currently Reading: The Borders of Normal
Bookshelf Size: 289
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sushan.html
Latest Review: The Deadly Five by Raymond Maher
Reading Device: B0794JC2K5

Post by Sushan »

VernaVi wrote: 03 Mar 2021, 09:07
Maddie Atkinson wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 07:33
VernaVi wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 02:00



I'm not sure which scientific evidence to which you are referring that does not corroborate the bible, but I do know that science and archaeology have proven the bible true repeatedly with historic artifacts and evidence that is inarguable. It's amazing how history, science, and faith are so tied together.
I agree with you! Science has proved many of the stories in the Bible through archaeology and history corroborates it through this evidence. Anything that science disproves just removes the false information that we have been taught! So I believe that science and religion/the Bible go hand in hand too!
I agree, that is so true. We always love to see when something gets weeded out that may have been superfluous to begin with but the amazing thing is, science proves out the bulk of biblical history and stories. Books like this keep people interested and wanting to learn more.
When you initially has the belief and when you try to prove it, you can see and find enough evidence to support your argument. But when someone needs to do the opposite, he also can see amd find evidence for his argument. So a philosophical argument or an agreement that might be made at the end cannot really prove or disprove things, but it can comfort some members who belong to some of my three groups, and for the rest it will cause discomfort
User avatar
Maddie Atkinson
Posts: 368
Joined: 13 Nov 2020, 05:30
2021 Reading Goal: 12
Favorite Author: Malorie Blackman
Favorite Book: A Secret History of Witches
Currently Reading: The Five: the untold lives of the women killed by jack the ripper
Bookshelf Size: 36
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-maddie-atkinson.html
Latest Review: Wilderness Cry by Hilary L Hunt M.D.
fav_author_id: 18342

Post by Maddie Atkinson »

Sushan wrote: 03 Mar 2021, 10:53
VernaVi wrote: 03 Mar 2021, 09:07
Maddie Atkinson wrote: 02 Mar 2021, 07:33

I agree with you! Science has proved many of the stories in the Bible through archaeology and history corroborates it through this evidence. Anything that science disproves just removes the false information that we have been taught! So I believe that science and religion/the Bible go hand in hand too!
I agree, that is so true. We always love to see when something gets weeded out that may have been superfluous to begin with but the amazing thing is, science proves out the bulk of biblical history and stories. Books like this keep people interested and wanting to learn more.
When you initially has the belief and when you try to prove it, you can see and find enough evidence to support your argument. But when someone needs to do the opposite, he also can see amd find evidence for his argument. So a philosophical argument or an agreement that might be made at the end cannot really prove or disprove things, but it can comfort some members who belong to some of my three groups, and for the rest it will cause discomfort
The process of proving or disproving something is about finding evidence to support your hypothesis. If you can't prove it, then you have to accept that your hypothesis was wrong, that is just how science works. Proving events that happened in the Bible is the same. You cannot argue with historical artefacts and evidence that have been found to prove something. Unless your agenda is specifically to go about disproving something and you have an agenda, the end result is usually something that can be trusted.
"I decided a while ago not to deny myself the simpler pleasures of existence" - Augustus Waters (The Fault in Our Stars)
User avatar
Sushan
Posts: 4088
Joined: 04 May 2018, 19:13
Currently Reading: The Borders of Normal
Bookshelf Size: 289
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sushan.html
Latest Review: The Deadly Five by Raymond Maher
Reading Device: B0794JC2K5

Post by Sushan »

Maddie Atkinson wrote: 03 Mar 2021, 12:02
Sushan wrote: 03 Mar 2021, 10:53
VernaVi wrote: 03 Mar 2021, 09:07

I agree, that is so true. We always love to see when something gets weeded out that may have been superfluous to begin with but the amazing thing is, science proves out the bulk of biblical history and stories. Books like this keep people interested and wanting to learn more.
When you initially has the belief and when you try to prove it, you can see and find enough evidence to support your argument. But when someone needs to do the opposite, he also can see amd find evidence for his argument. So a philosophical argument or an agreement that might be made at the end cannot really prove or disprove things, but it can comfort some members who belong to some of my three groups, and for the rest it will cause discomfort
The process of proving or disproving something is about finding evidence to support your hypothesis. If you can't prove it, then you have to accept that your hypothesis was wrong, that is just how science works. Proving events that happened in the Bible is the same. You cannot argue with historical artefacts and evidence that have been found to prove something. Unless your agenda is specifically to go about disproving something and you have an agenda, the end result is usually something that can be trusted.
Well, if something needs scientific approval, the hypothesis should undergo testing, and at the end it will be either accepted or rejected. If a hypothesis cannot be tested, it is not a hypothesis at the first place. And you cannot test it does not mean that you have to accept it.

Anyway, arguing over a point and proving it based on various speculations is not very much scientific. So what this author tries to do is more philosophical than scientific
Post Reply

Return to “Discuss "The Biblical Clock" by Daniel Friedmann, Dania Sheldon”