Resource Question

His clay

New member
Over the past year and more I've been working on the relationship between Christianity and Science. Since this is the apologetics forum, it makes sense to post a resource question over that topic. Do you have any books in particular that deal especially well with the relationship between Christianity and science?

I'll give a little more context to couch the meaning of my question. Often people are told that Christianity and science are at odds, and the "warfare" approach to the relationship between the two is promoted. What kind of apologetic resource(s) have you found to be especially helpful in dealing with this issue?
 

civic

Active member
Books I have and can recommend are:

Signature of the Cell by Meyer
The Biblical basis for modern science by Morris
The case for the Creator by Strobel
Undeniable by Douglas Axe
Creation Science by Morris
 

Gary Mac

Member
Over the past year and more I've been working on the relationship between Christianity and Science. Since this is the apologetics forum, it makes sense to post a resource question over that topic. Do you have any books in particular that deal especially well with the relationship between Christianity and science?

I'll give a little more context to couch the meaning of my question. Often people are told that Christianity and science are at odds, and the "warfare" approach to the relationship between the two is promoted. What kind of apologetic resource(s) have you found to be especially helpful in dealing with this issue?
Science cannot prove Spirit in that science cannot comprehend something they cannot prove. Our churches are in constant trying to prove Gods Spirit by the laws they have established to regulate Him and in fact have changed that what they cant comprehend to something they can understand and made their god flesh a man instead of Spirit.
 

His clay

New member
Velikovsky.
Is there anything in particular you are pointing to of his? I did read some of the wikipedia page on him, and it was not good. However, I do like reading some of the Russian literature, since they know full well where Communism and atheism leads.
 

His clay

New member
Science cannot prove Spirit in that science cannot comprehend something they cannot prove. Our churches are in constant trying to prove Gods Spirit by the laws they have established to regulate Him and in fact have changed that what they cant comprehend to something they can understand and made their god flesh a man instead of Spirit.
Thanks for trying to try.
 

e v e

Active member
Is there anything in particular you are pointing to of his? I did read some of the wikipedia page on him, and it was not good. However, I do like reading some of the Russian literature, since they know full well where Communism and atheism leads.
Worlds in Collision.

I wouldn’t believe Wikipedia.

His work was to see where different events in hebrew scripture are confirmed by research in difference sciences. He was scoffed at, true. But some of his work such as the idea of planetary migration, is now commonly accepted. There are other examples.
 

His clay

New member
Worlds in Collision.

I wouldn’t believe Wikipedia.

His work was to see where different events in hebrew scripture are confirmed by research in difference sciences. He was scoffed at, true. But some of his work such as the idea of planetary migration, is now commonly accepted. There are other examples.
Thank you.
 

Stephen

Active member
Isn't it odd that the expectation is that religion be certain about everything while science is OK with some doubts?

I would suggest "Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions" as a tactical resource for framing any discussion. It doesn't address your specific agenda, but gives you a tactical guide for how to approach things.
 

e v e

Active member
Stephen, that is what I like about Velikovsky... he was not attempting to be certain...but looking for parallels and connections between ancient texts, hieroglyphs, scripture etc., to see how those writings supposed as myth, correlated to events recorded by biology, archeology, astronomy etc. I'd not say he was ever dogmatic though. Which is how things have gotten but in the wrong way in which souls are closed to even listening to God, since to do so would violate the script they were trained... and it's a shame. Anyway, that's my two cents, not that anyone here listens to me. I was told over and over, and just yesterday (because I'm not following the popular script) that I'm not christian.
 

e v e

Active member
Isn't it odd that the expectation is that religion be certain about everything while science is OK with some doubts?

I would suggest "Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions" as a tactical resource for framing any discussion. It doesn't address your specific agenda, but gives you a tactical guide for how to approach things.
What did you perceive as my agenda? I think Velikovsky's interest to me is his cosmological angle about the fall (possibly). That the fall was not just into a system but that this entire cosmology is fallen and not God's. That I have been told is gnostic..however it is not at all imo.
 

Stephen

Active member
What did you perceive as my agenda? I think Velikovsky's interest to me is his cosmological angle about the fall (possibly). That the fall was not just into a system but that this entire cosmology is fallen and not God's. That I have been told is gnostic..however it is not at all imo.

Hi Eve,

I don't know anything about Velikovsky, however I do think that Jesus came to save the world, meaning the creation project as a whole, and not just mankind. I don't know how that correlates to "this entire cosmology is fallen".

As for the agenda comment, that is in regards to the goals of the opening post in the thread.
 

e v e

Active member
Hi Eve,

I don't know anything about Velikovsky, however I do think that Jesus came to save the world, meaning the creation project as a whole, and not just mankind. I don't know how that correlates to "this entire cosmology is fallen".

As for the agenda comment, that is in regards to the goals of the opening post in the thread.
Thank you Stephen. I think I got my thread mixed up! i had a book post about Velik. earlier. Oops. Christ did come to save us... but I think there is a cosmological meaning to the fall, so the word Cosmos is not just system. I will reread your op and try again. Thank you.
 

His clay

New member
Isn't it odd that the expectation is that religion be certain about everything while science is OK with some doubts?

I would suggest "Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions" as a tactical resource for framing any discussion. It doesn't address your specific agenda, but gives you a tactical guide for how to approach things.
Thank you for taking the time to comment. I already own a few of the books mentioned in the thread thus far. I've read a large portion of the book you have recommended, and I own it.
 

His clay

New member
Hi Eve,

I don't know anything about Velikovsky, however I do think that Jesus came to save the world, meaning the creation project as a whole, and not just mankind. I don't know how that correlates to "this entire cosmology is fallen".

As for the agenda comment, that is in regards to the goals of the opening post in the thread.
With respect to the agenda of the opening thread, I wrote it transparently. I'm looking for resources; I've been studying the subject for some time now. I'm checking with others just in case I missed something important.

I'll probably answer my own question in the opening post, if others would like to see some of the items I have read.
 
Top