How society survives the world after the Truth is set on fire

[bullethead]

Hats off to Davies and anyone else who is unwilling to forfeit their integrity for the sake of defending their beliefs and thank you for calling a spade a spade.

Upon death Christians say they become eternal also, so is an eternity claim really that special?

 

[SemperFiDawg]

@ambush80 the quoted in post 180 was my reply to your post 126. Due to attempting to use my phone while preoccupied is at least partially to blame for why it looks like it does. If I tried to fix it I would probably just make it worse, but consider then entirety of 180 the reply.

 

[oldfella1962]

I’m just asking who decided what was defective and what was normal?

As far as birth defects…….you mentioned something about the cosmic trains…..

His work being manifest only consist of one thing and that’s you trusting in Him or not.

Your brain isn’t wired wrong - this Bible that you say is wrong tells you exactly why you don’t believe.

I don’t know why people have birth defects. You’re seriously going to use that as your facts to justify a no God? He did say He’d cause them to believe a lie………and be “blinded” and ……so His works can be manifest……..the puzzle coming in a little more clear?

So the Bible authors were experts on the human brain/mind and the related psychology/psychiatry/behavior/learning & developmental problems/neurological deficits/etcetera? The same Bible authors who didn't even understand germ theory yet and didn't know where the sun went at night? Color me skeptical.
As for the puzzle coming in a little more clearly, no such luck. If anything, the puzzle box got flipped over and pieces are scattered six ways from Sunday.

 

[oldfella1962]

I’m trying to find the logic in this. You aren’t 100% sure the God of the Bible exist, and if He did…..maybe Christians don’t know as much as they claim…… I get all the skepticism. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with being skeptical but until you can you you know for a fact He isn’t there………do es sarcasm justify anything for you? What if He’s there and exactly the way the Bible says He is?

I can joke about Bigfoot because I can say with 100% certainty that he ain’t out there.

And I can joke about the Biblical god because I can say with 100% certainty that he ain't out there. The Bible itself is IMHO all the evidence I need to convince me of that. Could "a god" be out there? I have no idea, but I won't rule it out. I am fairly certain if there is a real god, it knows where the sun goes at night and has no interesting in eternally torturing humans nor even "smiting" humans nor flooding an entire planet.

 

[Spotlite]

So the Bible authors were experts on the human brain/mind and the related psychology/psychiatry/behavior/learning & developmental problems/neurological deficits/etcetera? The same Bible authors who didn't even understand germ theory yet and didn't know where the sun went at night? Color me skeptical.
As for the puzzle coming in a little more clearly, no such luck. If anything, the puzzle box got flipped over and pieces are scattered six ways from Sunday.

You do realize you’re hanging your hat on terms that are created after the Bible was written????

The writers of the Bible didn’t know airplanes, either. But, they did write about a few things

With no science book they knew things like….

Gravity - He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.


Water Cycle - He draws up the drops of water, which distill as rain to the streams; the clouds pour down their moisture and abundant showers fall on mankind.

Draws up drops of water - evaporation
Distill as rain to the streams - precipitation
Clouds pour down their moisture - condensation.

Thou shalt be visited of the LORD of hosts with thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and tempest, and the flame of devouring fire.

When did science first tell you about those things? Who told the Bible Writers?

 

[bullethead]

I’m just asking who decided what was defective and what was normal?

As far as birth defects…….you mentioned something about the cosmic trains…..

His work being manifest only consist of one thing and that’s you trusting in Him or not.

Your brain isn’t wired wrong - this Bible that you say is wrong tells you exactly why you don’t believe.

I don’t know why people have birth defects. You’re seriously going to use that as your facts to justify a no God? He did say He’d cause them to believe a lie………and be “blinded” and ……so His works can be manifest……..the puzzle coming in a little more clear?

The birth defects are but one example among 100s of examples as to why many people can justify that there is no god as described by man in holy books. The results don't meet the claims.

 

[bullethead]

You do realize you’re hanging your hat on terms that are created after the Bible was written????

The writers of the Bible didn’t know airplanes, either. But, they did write about a few things

With no science book they knew things like….

Gravity - He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.


Water Cycle - He draws up the drops of water, which distill as rain to the streams; the clouds pour down their moisture and abundant showers fall on mankind.

Draws up drops of water - evaporation
Distill as rain to the streams - precipitation
Clouds pour down their moisture - condensation.

Thou shalt be visited of the LORD of hosts with thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and tempest, and the flame of devouring fire.

When did science first tell you about those things? Who told the Bible Writers?

No science book would be needed when someone is supposedly getting information from an all-knowing being.
Everything you described above are observable natural conditions described as best they could with a low level of expression.
All of those examples do not point to a god or all-knowing higher power that was feeding his people the most advanced knowledge and undertandings. The Romans and Greeks, Egyptians, Chinese and other cultures had much more detailed science and engineering throughout their writings at that period and long before.
You are trying to justify your position by using natural observable occurrences an examples of knowledge that could only come from a god, when the reality is that the "gods" of other cultures had them already figured out. The hits look good on a highlight reel when the errors aren't shown.

 

[oldfella1962]

You do realize you’re hanging your hat on terms that are created after the Bible was written????

The writers of the Bible didn’t know airplanes, either. But, they did write about a few things

With no science book they knew things like….

Gravity - He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.


Water Cycle - He draws up the drops of water, which distill as rain to the streams; the clouds pour down their moisture and abundant showers fall on mankind.

Draws up drops of water - evaporation
Distill as rain to the streams - precipitation
Clouds pour down their moisture - condensation.

Thou shalt be visited of the LORD of hosts with thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and tempest, and the flame of devouring fire.

When did science first tell you about those things? Who told the Bible Writers?

Some questions & concerns: how would anyone else living on the planet when the Bible was written know about such things as the water cycle? I would venture to say that some civilizations were just as advanced - or even more advanced - than the Bible authors who were "inspired by/guided by" God himself. My point being advancements in irrigation/construction/engineering are generally indicative of advanced knowledge in these areas & disciplines.

I'm not seeing the connection between "He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing" and understanding/explaining gravity. Granted I am certain that the Bible authors - and almost every person on the planet at the time - understood that things fall to the ground. But nothing in your "He spreads" quote seems (to me) to indicate any deeper understanding of gravity such as why things fall to the ground or why the Earth seems to be "suspended"
when we now know that it's actually hurtling through space because it's in orbit around the sun because of gravity (and other factors).

If the Bible authors - or the Biblical God himself - had an advanced understanding of the water cycle why would God (Yahweh at the time or maybe El) tell Job that he keeps snow & hail in heavenly storehouses for times of war & trouble? Yahweh started out as a storm/war god so it would be in his character to use snow & hail as a weapon (he did use large hailstones as a weapon on at least one occasion) but is keeping snow & hail in a storehouse an example of understanding the water/weather cycle? Any thoughts?

 

[oldfella1962]

No science book would be needed when someone is supposedly getting information from an all-knowing being.
Everything you described above are observable natural conditions described as best they could with a low level of expression.
All of those examples do not point to a god or all-knowing higher power that was feeding his people the most advanced knowledge and undertandings. The Romans and Greeks, Egyptians, Chinese and other cultures had much more detailed science and engineering throughout their writings at that period and long before.
You are trying to justify your position by using natural observable occurrences an examples of knowledge that could only come from a god, when the reality is that the "gods" of other cultures had them already figured out. The hits look good on a highlight reel when the errors aren't shown.

okay bullet head I have a new rule (for myself to follow). I won't comment on any new post until I read what you said about it first. Every time I comment it's like you "read my mind" and said nearly exactly what I was going to say - except better.

 

[bullethead]

okay bullet head I have a new rule (for myself to follow). I won't comment on any new post until I read what you said about it first. Every time I comment it's like you "read my mind" and said nearly exactly what I was going to say - except better.

On the contrary. When multiple rebuttles are given by separate sources which use similar and identical examples as the basis for their replies, they aid in validating each other.

 

[Spotlite]

No science book would be needed when someone is supposedly getting information from an all-knowing being.
Everything you described above are observable natural conditions described as best they could with a low level of expression.
All of those examples do not point to a god or all-knowing higher power that was feeding his people the most advanced knowledge and undertandings. The Romans and Greeks, Egyptians, Chinese and other cultures had much more detailed science and engineering throughout their writings at that period and long before.
You are trying to justify your position by using natural observable occurrences an examples of knowledge that could only come from a god, when the reality is that the "gods" of other cultures had them already figured out. The hits look good on a highlight reel when the errors aren't shown.

No my point is you’re comparing something science discovered 500 years ago to a book that was written 2000 years ago to justify why you don’t believe in God because “Bible writers would have known if they got their words from a God that knew”

Y’all act like nothing is there until science tells you it is. It’s not a justification of God, it’s a statement that we don’t need science to prove things. Facts are there are things in the Bible that are written well before science discovery regardless if you call it a basket ball or a round ball.

I saw an airplane and someone else saw a portion of it and calls it a ufo. We both saw a flying object. Y’all need science to discover it for you.

 

[Spotlite]

Some questions & concerns: how would anyone else living on the planet when the Bible was written know about such things as the water cycle? I would venture to say that some civilizations were just as advanced - or even more advanced - than the Bible authors who were "inspired by/guided by" God himself. My point being advancements in irrigation/construction/engineering are generally indicative of advanced knowledge in these areas & disciplines.

I'm not seeing the connection between "He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing" and understanding/explaining gravity. Granted I am certain that the Bible authors - and almost every person on the planet at the time - understood that things fall to the ground. But nothing in your "He spreads" quote seems (to me) to indicate any deeper understanding of gravity such as why things fall to the ground or why the Earth seems to be "suspended"
when we now know that it's actually hurtling through space because it's in orbit around the sun because of gravity (and other factors).

If the Bible authors - or the Biblical God himself - had an advanced understanding of the water cycle why would God (Yahweh at the time or maybe El) tell Job that he keeps snow & hail in heavenly storehouses for times of war & trouble? Yahweh started out as a storm/war god so it would be in his character to use snow & hail as a weapon (he did use large hailstones as a weapon on at least one occasion) but is keeping snow & hail in a storehouse an example of understanding the water/weather cycle? Any thoughts?

Let’s just stick to your point first. An all knowing God would know these things before science found it. You tell me how they knew?

You’re attempting to prove the Bible was strictly man and no God involved. Tell us how these folks knew before science told you. And then tell us why science takes the credit if these folks (advanced civilizations) already knew and passed on information.

When they find out they believe the earths core was hot? That’s “observable” as mentioned above? What does Job say about it? Yea we can kick it off with observable things but there’s more, a lot more.

 

[Spotlite]

On the contrary. When multiple rebuttles are given by separate sources which use similar and identical examples as the basis for their replies, they aid in validating each other.

So two blind men tell why they can’t see the sky validates the sky isn’t there??

lol I’m going to work

(I’ll catch up later)

 

[bullethead]

No my point is you’re comparing something science discovered 500 years ago to a book that was written 2000 years ago to justify why you don’t believe in God because “Bible writers would have known if they got their words from a God that knew”

Y’all act like nothing is there until science tells you it is. It’s not a justification of God, it’s a statement that we don’t need science to prove things. Facts are there are things in the Bible that are written well before science discovery regardless if you call it a basket ball or a round ball.

I saw an airplane and someone else saw a portion of it and calls it a ufo. We both saw a flying object. Y’all need science to discover it for you.

Science is a way of learning about what is in the natural world, how the natural world works, and how the natural world got to be the way it is. It is not simply a collection of facts; rather it is a path to understanding.
Science focuses exclusively on the natural world and does not deal with supernatural explanations.

What you are describing in the Bible is science. It is the authors interpretations within that particular cultures early understanding of what they have observed.
If a god had anything to do with it, there could not possibly be any misunderstandings or inaccuracies.

If the authors wouldn't know such things by getting their information from god then how do you determine what they actually have correct regarding every other matter?

 

[Spotlite]

Science is a way of learning about what is in the natural world, how the natural world works, and how the natural world got to be the way it is. It is not simply a collection of facts; rather it is a path to understanding.
Science focuses exclusively on the natural world and does not deal with supernatural explanations.

What you are describing in the Bible is science. It is the authors interpretations within that particular cultures early understanding of what they have observed.
If a god had anything to do with it, there could not possibly be any misunderstandings or inaccuracies.

If the authors wouldn't know such things by getting their information from god then how do you determine what they actually have correct regarding every other matter?

I’m trying to keep us in the context of the comment, or idea of using science verses God - “this term isn’t in your Bible” as “justification” of no God verses “the Bible was written before science discovered”

I’m aware there are ancient “ideas” or theories that trace back to the Greeks concerning some of this.

I find no reason to believe there are misunderstandings and inaccuracies - the benchmark to determine that is the science that looks at the natural and not the supernatural as you mentioned, they’ll never line up and should not be expected to - one is faith and one is tangible.

 

[oldfella1962]

On the contrary. When multiple rebuttles are given by separate sources which use similar and identical examples as the basis for their replies, they aid in validating each other.

oh I see - that makes sense. Sort of like "convergent evolution" in a way.
I just didn't want to make it seem like I was "dogpiling" on any individual members.

 

[bullethead]

I’m trying to keep us in the context of the comment, or idea of using science verses God - “this term isn’t in your Bible” as “justification” of no God verses “the Bible was written before science discovered”

I’m aware there are ancient “ideas” or theories that trace back to the Greeks concerning some of this.

I find no reason to believe there are misunderstandings and inaccuracies - the benchmark to determine that is the science that looks at the natural and not the supernatural as you mentioned, they’ll never line up and should not be expected to - one is faith and one is tangible.

The problem is that some terms that are in the bible are inaccurate or wrong. That opens the door to criticize the source of those words. If those are supposed to be the written words of an all-knowing being, then the claims do not match the contents.
There is definitely some science that is attempting to explain the natural in the bible that is wrong. How can that be since god said it?

 

[Spotlite]

The problem is that some terms that are in the bible are inaccurate or wrong. That opens the door to criticize the source of those words. If those are supposed to be the written words of an all-knowing being, then the claims do not match the contents.
There is definitely some science that is attempting to explain the natural in the bible that is wrong. How can that be since god said it?

Wrong according to who?

Give me an example.

 

[oldfella1962]

No my point is you’re comparing something science discovered 500 years ago to a book that was written 2000 years ago to justify why you don’t believe in God because “Bible writers would have known if they got their words from a God that knew”

Y’all act like nothing is there until science tells you it is. It’s not a justification of God, it’s a statement that we don’t need science to prove things. Facts are there are things in the Bible that are written well before science discovery regardless if you call it a basket ball or a round ball.

I saw an airplane and someone else saw a portion of it and calls it a ufo. We both saw a flying object. Y’all need science to discover it for you.

Sorry but the scientific method/scientific processes in general are a very reliable & consistent way to "prove" things. Yes there are things in the Bible that are written before modern science had a way to actually explain them. But when things in the Bible that are pretty much direct quotes from God are demonstrably false that is (to me) a red flag that humans were speaking on God's behalf. If something isn't fully explained I can understand that.
But when it is blatantly & obviously false/contradictory how the universe works, that is something else entirely.

I would be impressed & astounded if the Bible came right out and said clearly and unmistakably that planets orbit suns and that the Earth is one of countless planets orbiting countless suns. Or that there are countless tiny living things that cannot be seen with the human eye and some of these things can harm us, and to be cognizant of these things.

But as far as I know there are no holy scriptures from any religions that got their start many centuries ago that have any knowledge nor offer a detailed description of anything that people in general didn't know about when these scriptures were written.

 

[Spotlite]

Sorry but the scientific method/scientific processes in general are a very reliable & consistent way to "prove" things. Yes there are things in the Bible that are written before modern science had a way to actually explain them. But when things in the Bible that are pretty much direct quotes from God are demonstrably false that is (to me) a red flag that humans were speaking on God's behalf. If something isn't fully explained I can understand that.
But when it is blatantly & obviously false/contradictory how the universe works, that is something else entirely.

I would be impressed & astounded if the Bible came right out and said clearly and unmistakably that planets orbit suns and that the Earth is one of countless planets orbiting countless suns. Or that there are countless tiny living things that cannot be seen with the human eye and some of these things can harm us, and to be cognizant of these things.

But as far as I know there are no holy scriptures from any religions that got their start many centuries ago that have any knowledge nor offer a detailed description of anything that people in general didn't know about when these scriptures were written.

Oh yeah they’re reliable because all scientists agree on everything and consistent because they never change their theory.

Science is just as biased as religion.