Do you think the stories in the Old Testament are fairy tales? The producers of Nova do. It's a interesting article about a Nova special that premiers this week (it's on at 7 on Tuesday here, but PBS channels are funny so it might be different for your local area.) I'll be watching, sounds interesting. I won't say anything more until I actual watch the show.
Best,
Brett
6 comments:
Nova producers are pretty much text book materialists. They have always shown contempt for the Bible. They have no lense for seeing the miraculous except it is a hoax. I always thought a precursor of something being a miracle was that it was physically impossible under normal circumstances. The something supernatural is what pushes these events out of the norm and a closed material world view into an area of metaphysical discussion. Nova's closed world view naturalists, humanists, and materialist scientists would by definition have no ability but to percieve the OT as a fairy tale. Still it is always advisable to watch and make up your own mind. Anyone who has studied Biblical history or archeology knows from past Nova specials that they often ignore or misrepresent facts which don't fit with their preconceived theories. It helps sharpen your own beliefs if you can accurately comprehend not only your own beliefs, but what those disagree with you believe.
-Steve
LOL! I was waiting for that! Materialistic just means they deal with the material word. A world we actual have proof for.
No 'miracle' has ever been proven, there has never been any evidence for the exodus. There are books upon book giving evidence that the bible's 'history' is false. I will give you the Spiderman answer, just because you find a comic book 2000 years from now with New York in it does not mean that Spiderman is real.
If the 'miracle' lens actual showed miracles were real then we wouldn't be having this conversation. In science, you try to disprove what you are studying, if you can't then it's proven true. THAT is why 'scientists/materialists/naturalists' try to disprove things... You never seem to get that.
Your religion is being attacked with evidence to the contrary so you go on the attack instead of actually examining it with unbiased eyes. I had hoped you might have seen that science isn't your enemy, the same science that gives you medicine and airplanes and mars rovers and microwaves and your computer must be applied to your religion to prove it out for some people, like scientists and sadly your religion is looking more and more like a fantasy, an old tale told by shepherds to explain their world. No shame in that, they didn't have access to modern technologies. Your religion appears to be false, that doesn't rule out some sort of creator god (not a special creation god, but a god that sparked the universe), just the biblical god. You should be happy, no need for all that guilt anymore:)
AS I said I haven't seen it so I can't really comment on the show. So after tonight (I have it set to record) I can get more into what this specific show said.
Best,
Brett
I enjoy Nova. I currently have 3 Nova dvds from the library to watch at home.
No science is not my enemy, but science (at least as Nova here is trying to apply it) also is not the criteria for testing historical evidence.
You can't prove George Washington's life works with science.
Most court cases utilize science, but evidence is balanced against motive.
Marriages aren't evaluated using scientific criteria.
Science is a handy tool and sometimes the best tool, but it is not the fix it all tool-much of life falls outside the boundaries of scientific proof.
When I say materialism I mean the unprovable philosophical view that matter is all there is and that is all that does or ever existed. You can believe that, but you must do so on faith.
-Steve
Steve,
Yes science IS how we test history. It's called archeology and historians, they are scientists. They are the ones that look at older civilizations and try to see if the stories match the physical evidence. Oral history has a way of modifying what actual may or may not have happened.
Actual you strive for reasonable doubt. Reason being the key word there. It is now know that eyewitnesses are usually wrong, not on purpose, but stress and the mind do funny things. Facts are what SHOULD win a case but people's own views will sometimes skew that.
I guess all those studies about Marriage and family are what.... just peoples ideas? Come on, think these things through! And in fact a a study in Denmark says gay marriage is GOOD for regular hetero marriage.
Your right science is only good for the physical, the real, all that other 'supernatural' stuff falls in the lap of charlatans and swindlers. And since they have yet to produce any evidence to the contrary... it seems that's all there is.
I believe what you said and what I said about materialism is the same thing.;)
Best,
Brett
Maybe we are saying the same thing. I thought you were trying to apply materialistic principals as the test for validity of historical facts. Since historical and archelogical proofs are dependent on totally different scientific disciplines than those used to test the material world; ie the Scientific Method.
It's like King Solomon's Mines which used to be cited as proof against the Bible now is found exactly where it is supposed to be.(http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/10/28/solomon.mines/)
And I hope you understand the point I was making about the difference between materialistic science and socialogical studies like those which evaluate marriage. Totally different areas of study and obviously you can't apply the same testing methods you do for the physical world as you do in the psychological areas of study.
And my point about motive in court cases is more about why people do something, not necessarily anything at all to do with the validity of eye witnesses.
As always thanks for listening. I know we don't agree, but at least you hear me out.
Steve
Actually, no Steve. The same basic scientific method is applied to historical archeology as to, say, paleontology or Mathematics. It's all based on evidence and facts. The problem with History and Paleontology is that not everything preserves so we do have to make some 'guesses' based on facts and logic. These are not considered facts, until they can be proven. The same basic scientific principle is applied to ALL the sciences, even social sciences... thus the name. Your wanting to make humans special again when in fact we are just the same as any other animal, a bit smarter perhaps but the same otherwise.
As I have said before, just because some historical facts of the bible are true does not MEAN IT ALL IS. In fact the Israelites are just the Canannites who rebelled against their leaders in Israel and changed their name. Your god come from Middian, they had a god called YHW. The Israelites changed him to YHWH, I guess they liked him, because their Canannite rules were polytheists and they basically tried to do the opposite. Everything up until David is just made up stuff, taken from here and their. The Israelites aren't even mentioned in history until 1250 BC. And even then they were still Idol worshiping Baal and other 'gods'.
I did watch the first hour and half of the special, then I fell asleep. As I said all the stuff before David turns out to be made up, but what they did piece together was pretty interesting. Once they got to David and Solomon, it just got boring.. Althought some scientists/historians think David palace and Solomons building are sightly older than David, I tend to agree with the rest that they are in fact the same age. David existed, but I doubt Goliath was a real person;)They started to get into pottery and my eyes glazed over. I'll try to watch the rest this weekend.
I understand what you are trying to do Steve, I just disagree with you completely;)
Sorry this took so long, as I said I fell asleep and sometimes the back and forth just tires me out:)
Best,
Brett
Post a Comment