Scientific Facts of the Bible...

**Awaken4e1** · 12-10-2005 03:28 AM

Scientists are now finding that the universe in which we live is like a diamond studded Rolex, except the universe is even more precisely designed than the watch. In fact, the universe is specifically tweaked to enable life on earth.

The entire history of science is nothing more than an attempt by finite man to understand God's works in creation! It takes years of countless research and experimentation by many individuals to uncover even the most minute examples of the wonders of God's creation! See Evolution

"Many scientists do believe in both science and God, the God of revelation, in a perfectly consistent way." Richard Ferriman. (Nobel prizewinner in physics in 1965)

Does modern-day science prove the Bible is false?
Many today seem to think so. But an even a more pertinent question is, "CAN science prove the Bible is false?" A study of the history and nature of science is needed to answer these questions. Science and the Bible
Compiled from Scientific Facts In The Bible
(By Living Water Publications) and Examples of Scientific Accuracy in the Bible By David Pyles)

Jeremiah 33:22 (written 2500 years ago): "As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured."

The Bible claimed that there are billions of stars ("host of heaven" is the biblical term for the stars). When it made this statement, no one knew how vast the numbers of stars were as only about 1,100 were observable. Now we know that there are billions of stars, and that they cannot be numbered.

(The Bible asserts that the stars are innumerable (Gen 15:5, Gen 17:7, Heb 11:12). This does not necessarily mean that we are incapable of mathematically expressing their number. It means that no human has the ability to count them individually so as to achieve their sum. It is claimed that there are 100 billion stars in our galaxy alone. If stars were counted around the clock at one star per second, then it would take over 3000 years just to count these. Add to this the fact that there are as many as 100 billion galaxies. However, there were many scholars prior to Galileo who believed that the stars could be counted, and several attempts were made to do so. Many of these counts arrived at around 1000 stars. Examples of Scientific Accuracy in the Bible By David Pyles)

Job 26:7 (written 3500 years ago): "He stretches out the north over the empty place, and hangs the earth upon nothing."

The Bible claimed that the earth freely floated in space. Science then thought that the earth sat on a large animal. We now know that the earth has a free float in space.

(The first scientist having this understanding would appear to be Copernicus around 1500. Examples of Scientific Accuracy in the Bible By David Pyles)

Hebrews 11:3 (written 2000 years ago): "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

The Bible claims that all creation is made of invisible material. Science then was ignorant of the subject. We now know that the entire creation is made of invisible elements called "atoms."

Leviticus 17:11 (written 3000 years ago): "For the life of the flesh is in the blood."

The Scriptures declare that blood is the source of life. Up until 120 years ago, sick people were "bled", and many died because of the practice. We now know that blood is the source of life. If you lose your blood, you will lose your life.

Leviticus 15:13 (written 3000 years ago): "And when he that has an issue is cleansed of his issue; then he shall number to himself seven days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be clean."

The Bible said that when dealing with disease, hands should be washed under running water. Up until 100 years ago doctors washed their hands in a basin of still water, resulting in the death of multitudes. We now know that doctors must wash their hands under running water. The Encyclopedia Britannica documents that in 1845, a young doctor in Vienna named Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis was horrified at the terrible death rate of women who were dying after giving birth in hospitals. As many as 30% of those giving birth died. The Doctor noted that doctors would examine the bodies of those who had died, then, without washing their hands, go straight to the next wards and examine expectant mothers. This was their normal practice, because the presence of microscopic diseases was unknown. Doctor Semmelweis insisted that doctors wash their hands before examinations, and the death rate immediately dropped down to 2%.

Job 38:35 (written 3,500 years ago. God Himself speaking): "Can you send lightnings, that they may go and say unto you, Here we are?"

The Bible here is saying a scientifically ludicrous statement -- that light can be sent, and then manifest itself in speech. But did you know that radio waves move at the speed of light? This is why you can have instantaneous wireless communication with someone on the other side of the earth. Science didn' t discover this until 1864 when "the British scientist James Clerk Maxwell suggested that electricity and light waves were two forms of the same thing" (Modern Century Illustrated Encyclopedia, Vol. 12).

Isaiah 40:22 (written 2800 years ago): "It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth."

The Bible informs us here that the earth is round. At a time when science believed that the earth was flat, it was the Scriptures that inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world. He wrote: "It was the Lord who put it into my mind. I could feel His hand upon me . . . there is no question the inspiration was from the Holy Spirit because He comforted me with rays of marvelous illumination from the Holy Scriptures . . ." (From his diary, in reference to his discovery of "the New World").

(Other statements in the Bible also indicate that God revealed this truth long ago. For example, David said that God has removed our transgression from us as far as the east is from the west (Ps 103:12). On a spherical surface, east and west are infinitely separated in the sense that one can travel indefinitely in either direction without ever attaining the other. However, Solomon described the wind as blowing in circuits, first towards the south and then turning toward the north. North and south are not infinitely separated as east and west, because a southward traveler on a spherical surface will be heading north after crossing the south pole. Examples of Scientific Accuracy in the Bible By David Pyles )

Job 38:19 (written 3500 years ago). "Where is the way where light dwells?"

Modern man has only just discovered that light (electromagnetic radiation) has a "way," involving motion traveling at 186,000 miles per second.

Genesis 1:1,3 (written 3,450 years ago): "In the beginning God created the Heaven and the earth . . . And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."

Science expresses the universe in five terms: time, space, matter, power and motion. "In the beginning (time) God created (power) the Heaven (space) and the earth (matter) . . . And the Spirit of God moved (motion) upon the face of the waters."

Psalm 8:8: "And the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passes through the paths of the seas."

What does the Bible mean by "paths" of the seas? The sea is just a huge mass of water, how then could it have "paths?" Man discovered the existence of ocean currents in the 1850's, but the Bible declared the science of oceanography 2,800 years ago. Matthew Maury (1806- 1873) is considered to be the father of oceanography. He was bedridden during a serious illness and asked his son to read a portion of the Bible to him. While listening, he noticed the expression "paths of the sea." Upon his recovery, Maury took God at His word and went looking for these paths. His book on oceanography is still considered a basic text on the subject and is still used in universities.

Job 38:16 speaks of springs in the sea. It is now known that there are indeed such springs on the ocean floor.

The earliest literature indicating an understanding of hydrological cycle was apparently around the third or fourth century BC. However, the essential details of this cycle were all revealed in the Bible well before this time. This may be seen from the following texts:

The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits. All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again. - Eccl 1:6,7

For he maketh small the drops of water: they pour down rain according to the vapour thereof: which the clouds do drop and distil upon man abundantly. - Job 36:27,28

It is he that buildeth his stories in the heaven, and hath founded his troop in the earth; he that calleth for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth: The LORD is his name. - Amos 9:6 (Examples of Scientific Accuracy in the Bible By David Pyles))

Jonah 2:6 (written 2,800 years ago): "I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me for ever: yet have you brought up my life from corruption, O LORD my God."

When Jonah was in the depths of the ocean, he spoke of going down to the "bottoms of the mountains." Only in recent years has man discovered that there are mountains on the ocean floor. The greatest ocean depth has been sounded in the Challenger Deep of the Mariana's Trench, a distance of 35,798 feet below sea level. Mount Everest is 29,035 feet high.

(Genesis 10:25 speaks of one Peleg whose name means division. The text then explains that he was so named because in his days the earth was divided. It is now commonly believed that all continents of the earth were once combined into a single continent called Pangaea. This belief is based upon the fact that present continents appear somewhat as pieces out of a puzzle. There are also other evidences, including several geological similarities on matching continental edges. {Examples of Scientific Accuracy in the Bible By David Pyles})

Amos 9:6 (written 2,800 years ago): "He . . . calls for the waters of the sea, and pours them out upon the face of the earth; the Lord is His name."

The Mississippi River dumps over six million gallons of water per second into the Gulf of Mexico. Where does all that water go? That's just one of thousands of rivers. The answer lies in the hydrologic cycle, something that was not fully accepted until the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, 2500 years after the Bible said that God takes the waters of the sea, and pours them upon the face of the earth.

Job 38:12, 14, (written 3500 years ago) God Himself says: "Have you commanded the morning since your days; and caused the dayspring to know his place; that it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? It [the earth] is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment."

Modern science has come to understand that the earth's rotation on its axis is responsible for the sun's rising and setting. The picture here is of a vessel of clay being turned or rotated upon the potter's wheel -- an accurate analogy of the earth's rotation.

Psalm 19:4-6: "In them has He set a tabernacle for the sun, which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoices as a strong man to run a race. His [the sun's] going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof."

Bible critics have scoffed at these verses, saying that they teach that the sun revolves around the earth. Science told them that the sun was stationary. Then they discovered that the sun is in fact moving through space at approximately 600,000 miles per hour. It is traveling through the heavens and has a "circuit" just as the Bible says. It is estimated that its circuit is so large, it would take 200 million years to complete one orbit.

Job 38:22 (written 3,500 years ago). God says: "Have you entered into the treasures of the snow?"

It wasn't until the advent of the microscope that man discovered that each and every single snowflake is uniquely a symmetrical "treasure."

Genesis 2:1 (after creation): "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them."

The Hebrew word used here is the past definite tense for the verb "finished," indicating an action completed in the past, never again to occur. The creation was "finished" -- once and for all. That is what the First Law of Thermodynamics says. It states that neither matter nor energy can be either created or destroyed. There is no "creation" ongoing today. It is "finished" exactly as the Bible states.

Hebrews 1:10,11 (written 2000 years ago): ". . . And, You, Lord, in the beginning have laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of your hands: They shall perish; but you remain; and they all shall wax old as does a garment."

The Bible tells us that the earth is wearing out. This is what the Second Law of Thermodynamics states. This wasn't discovered by science until comparatively recently.

Genesis 17:12: "And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed."

Why was circumcision to be carried out on the eighth day? Medical science has discovered that the eighth day is the only day in the entire life of the newborn that the blood clotting element prothrombin is above 100%.

Genesis 3:15: "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."

This verse reveals that a female possesses the "seed of life." This was not the common knowledge until a few centuries ago. It was widely believed that the male only possessed the "seed of life" and that the woman was nothing more than a glorified incubator.

Isaiah 40:12 (written 2,800 years ago): "Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand . . ."

We are told that God has measured the waters and set a proper amount of water on the earth. Modern science has proved that the quantity of water on earth is just enough for our needs. If the sea became three meters deeper, the water would absorb all the carbon dioxide and nitrogen, and no creature could live any longer.

Job 26:7 (written 3500 years ago): "He stretches out the north over the empty place . . ."

Less than 200 years ago, through the advent of massive telescopes, science learned about the great empty space in the north.

Isaiah 40:22 (written 2,800 years ago): "It is He that . . . stretches out the heavens as a curtain, and spreads them out as a tent to dwell in."

Scientists are beginning to understand that the universe is expanding, or stretching out. At least seven times in Scripture we are clearly told that God stretches out the heavens like a curtain.

The Dinosaur (There is reasonable evidence that the scriptures speak of dinosaurs. As should be expected, this evidence comes from Genesis, the book of origins, and from the book of Job, generally believed to be the oldest book in the Bible.

First, Gn 1:21 speaks of God creating whales on the fifth day of creation. The Hebrew word translated here as whales is generally translated dragons. It is translated as monsters once, whale(s) twice, serpent(s) thrice, and dragon(s) 21 times.

Second, Job's statements concerning the behemoth (Job 40:15-24) might be referring to dinosaurs. Its tail is compared to a cedar tree. Its strength, and apparently its bulk, is in its loins. It is said to be the chief of the ways of God, and is described as having the ability to drink up a river. No modern animal meets this description in all points.

Third, Job's description of the leviathin (Job 41) very much resembles a dinosaur. Some would dismiss this description as fictitious because the leviathin is described as breathing fire; however, some creation scientists believe this could have happened. The creature would merely need glands to produce a chemical which would combust when exposed to air. The bombardier beetle does in fact have this ability. The fact that nearly every major culture of the world has traditions about such dragons lends yet further credibility to the possibility of their existence in the past. Examples of Scientific Accuracy in the Bible By David Pyles)

Why did the dinosaur disappear? This is something that has modern science mystified, but the Bible may have the answer (written 3500 years ago. God Himself is speaking):

"Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eats grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moves his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. He lies under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. Behold, he drinks up a river, and hastens not: he trusts that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. He takes it with his eyes: his nose pierces through snares. (Job 40:15-24).

This was the Largest of all creatures He made.

Job 40:15 Lo, I pray thee, Behemoth, that I made with thee: Grass as an ox he eateth.
Job 40:16 Lo, I pray thee, his power is in his loins, And his strength in the muscles of his belly.
Job 40:17 He doth bend his tail as a cedar, The sinews of his thighs are wrapped together,
Job 40:18 His bones are tubes of brass, His bones are as a bar of iron.
Job 40:19 He is a beginning of the ways of God, His Maker bringeth nigh his sword;
Job 40:20 For food do mountains bear for him, And all the beasts of the field play there.
Job 40:21 Under shades he lieth down, In a secret place of reed and mire.
Job 40:22 Cover him do shades, with their shadow, Cover him do willows of the brook.
Job 40:23 Lo, a flood oppresseth--he doth not haste, He is confident though Jordan Doth come forth unto his mouth.
Job 40:24 Before his eyes doth one take him, With snares doth one pierce the nose?

It was plant-eating (herbivorous).
It had its strength in its hips.
Its tail was like a large tree (a cedar).
It had very strong bones.
Its habitat was among the trees.
Drank massive amounts of water.
His nose pierced through snares.

Then Scripture says, " . . . He that made him can make his sword approach to him." In other words, God caused this, the largest of all the creatures He had made, to become extinct.

The Rev.

**Tsen** · 12-11-2005 02:59 AM

It's amazing how much religious nutjobs think they can pick and choose. So SOME of your religion's standpoints can be interpreted to be a scientific fact. If you go four nights without sleep, spin in circles for a few hours, then squint REALLY hard, anyways.
The fact is, thousands of verses in the Bible go AGAINST science, but you'd never think of using them as propaganda to convert people.

I'll grant you that some of those verses do correspond with scientific fact if you interpret them the right way, but those interpretations are incredibly unlikely

And not all of them are correct. Or even close.

Isaiah 40:22 (written 2800 years ago): \"It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth.\"

The Bible informs us here that the earth is round. At a time when science believed that the earth was flat, it was the Scriptures that inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world. He wrote: \"It was the Lord who put it into my mind. I could feel His hand upon me . . . there is no question the inspiration was from the Holy Spirit because He comforted me with rays of marvelous illumination from the Holy Scriptures . . .\" (From his diary, in reference to his discovery of \"the New World\"). [/b]

Science, at the time, knew quite well that the world was round. The ancient Greeks proved it, and even estimated the size of the world, to an astonishing accuracy. And Christopher Columbus was the recipient of a magnificent amount of luck. He was remarkably unprepared for his journey because he'd underestimated the distance he'd be travelling. If he'd listened to science, he would've known that the world was much larger than he thought, and while he could travel around the other way to go to India, it would be longer.

Genesis 1:1,3 (written 3,450 years ago): \"In the beginning God created the Heaven and the earth . . . And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.\"

Science expresses the universe in five terms: time, space, matter, power and motion. \"In the beginning (time) God created (power) the Heaven (space) and the earth (matter) . . . And the Spirit of God moved (motion) upon the face of the waters.\" [/b]

This is just crap. Just because the elements are there doesn't mean it's correct. It's a meaningless correlation drawn from too much time spent staring at the same verse. I can tell you that I'm wearing cotton clothing right now, but clothing isn't the only thing made of cotton.

What does the Bible mean by \"paths\" of the seas? The sea is just a huge mass of water, how then could it have \"paths?\" Man discovered the existence of ocean currents in the 1850's, but the Bible declared the science of oceanography 2,800 years ago.[/b]

Again, too much time looking at the same verse. It's far more likely that the \"paths of the seas\" were referring to trade routes on water, rather than ocean currents.

When Jonah was in the depths of the ocean, he spoke of going down to the \"bottoms of the mountains.\" Only in recent years has man discovered that there are mountains on the ocean floor. The greatest ocean depth has been sounded in the Challenger Deep of the Mariana's Trench, a distance of 35,798 feet below sea level. Mount Everest is 29,035 feet high.
[/b]

Again, more likely interpreted to mean that he was going down, likely in reference to ABOVE sea mountains. Especially considering that Jonah was supposedly in the mouth of a fish at the time. I don't quite see how he could be observing passing underwater mountains while in the belly of a fish. He COULD know that he was going down, or at least suspect it, but to know how far he'd gone, or to know what was outside the fish, would be beyond him.

(Genesis 10:25 speaks of one Peleg whose name means division. The text then explains that he was so named because in his days the earth was divided. It is now commonly believed that all continents of the earth were once combined into a single continent called Pangaea. This belief is based upon the fact that present continents appear somewhat as pieces out of a puzzle. There are also other evidences, including several geological similarities on matching continental edges.[/b]

AND again. Most likely referring to an earthquake, NOT the division of the continents. Especially considering that Pangaea split over a LONG period of time, far longer than the human lifespan.

Job 38:22 (written 3,500 years ago). God says: \"Have you entered into the treasures of the snow?\"

It wasn't until the advent of the microscope that man discovered that each and every single snowflake is uniquely a symmetrical \"treasure.\" [/b]

Again, interpretation based, and an unlikely interpretation at that.

Genesis 2:1 (after creation): \"Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.\"

The Hebrew word used here is the past definite tense for the verb \"finished,\" indicating an action completed in the past, never again to occur. The creation was \"finished\" -- once and for all. That is what the First Law of Thermodynamics says. It states that neither matter nor energy can be either created or destroyed. There is no \"creation\" ongoing today. It is \"finished\" exactly as the Bible states. [/b]

Amazing how science need only apply to you when it furthers your cause. If you were truly going to go by science, that matter couldn't be created by God in the first place.

Isaiah 40:12 (written 2,800 years ago): \"Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand . . .\"
We are told that God has measured the waters and set a proper amount of water on the earth. Modern science has proved that the quantity of water on earth is just enough for our needs. If the sea became three meters deeper, the water would absorb all the carbon dioxide and nitrogen, and no creature could live any longer. [/b]

Cause and effect. Yeah, humans couldn't live if the sea was significantly higher, but that doesn't mean that all of life would have been extinguished. Life would've grown and multiplied, and probably would've been just as prosperous and plentiful as it is here and now. Life would've evolved differently, and would take advantage of other elements. The life on earth HERE and NOW requires those elements to live BECAUSE they were there. If other elements were there, life could've adapted to use them instead. The abundance of Nitrogen, Carbon Dioxide, and Oxygen CAUSED us to evolve as we did. If our atmosphere was sulfrous, we would've evolved to use it instead.

Job 26:7 (written 3500 years ago): \"He stretches out the north over the empty place . . .\"

Less than 200 years ago, through the advent of massive telescopes, science learned about the great empty space in the north. [/b]

Now you're contradicting yourself. Earlier you used the same verse with a completely different interpretation.

Then Scripture says, \" . . . He that made him can make his sword approach to him.\" In other words, God caused this, the largest of all the creatures He had made, to become extinct. [/b]

First, you're contradicting all of organized religion throughout the 1800s. During that period, they believed that God has never and will never destroy any of the creatures that he has created. That was the primary argument that they used against Darwinism.
But that's irrelevant. Again, you're in the wrong time period. Dinosaurs didn't exist during that time frame. Period. And the dragon thing is an irrelevant bit of fluff. So some scientists said that it IS possible for a creature to spew fire. That doesn't prove the existence of said creature.

**R.Carter** · 12-11-2005 03:27 AM

Holy Crap Tsen ! I can't believe you read the whole thing !

**Tsen** · 12-11-2005 04:17 AM

I must admit, it was hard after the first few paragraphs. But it was also somewhat humorous how far-fetched some of the "interpretations" were, so I kept going. That, and I had a point to prove, and when I'm in that sorta mood I get pretty riled up, even to the point where I'll read a whole bloody page of bullcrap just to get back at the person who put it there.

**Alucinor Architecton** · 12-12-2005 05:44 AM

If God did not create that matter, what did?

**spoon** · 12-12-2005 05:48 AM

If everything needs to be created, what created god?

**Awaken4e1** · 12-12-2005 07:10 AM

Originally posted by spoon
If everything needs to be created, what created god?

What is the source of the assumption that every thing has to be created?

That which is 'eternal' is not created, or it would not be Eternal?

God is not Created, He is the Creator, all things come from Him.

**Rakkantekimusouka** · 12-12-2005 07:47 AM

Gotta love the "eternal" OT-ness.

Why god? Why not someone, something else? Why not the Big Bang?

Beggars can't be choosers.

And what proof of god do you have? And DON'T give me a quote from the Bible. If god is in everything, then why not use something else as proof for a change?

Like my old twelfth grade Physics textbook said, "Science gives the "how". Religion gives the "why"." Religion does not give the "how", tomodachi.

**♥Mark** · 12-12-2005 07:56 AM

Originally posted by spoon
If everything needs to be created, what created god?

Now that is a good question. If you don't mind, I'm going to ask this very thing to anyone who asks me the \"who created matter\" question.

Originally posted by Awaken4e1

What is the source of the assumption that every thing has to be created?

That which is 'eternal' is not created, or it would not be Eternal?

God is not Created, He is the Creator, all things come from Him.

Do you not see the inherent double standard of that viewpoint? You're saying that matter cannot simply have existed forever, so the only explanation is that it was created by a being who has existed forever. What kind of nonsense is that?

**Awaken4e1** · 12-12-2005 08:09 AM

Originally posted by Mark75

Do you not see the inherent double standard of that viewpoint? You're saying that matter cannot simply have existed forever, so the only explanation is that it was created by a being who has existed forever. What kind of nonsense is that?

Anything temporal is by nature is limited, not self-sustaining... as God is.

**spoon** · 12-12-2005 08:24 AM

Originally posted by Awaken4e1
Anything temporal is by nature is limited, not self-sustaining... as God is. .

If god is not temporal then god could not have created anything. Creation is a move from two seperate states. Hell - even deciding to create something, implicit in creation, is a move from state A (status quo) to B (having made a descision).

So if god was outside of time the concept of god creating the universe is irrational.

But if god wasn't outside of time, the concept of god is irrational, because who created god? god mk-2? Then who created god mk-2? Ad infinitum

Hmm... irrational or irrational.

-spoon

**Darkmatic** · 12-12-2005 04:23 PM

One must ask themselves , if God exists outside of space and time , dow did he manage to create nothing with nothing . If space and time were created , then all the other dimensions were created too , so your running out of places for God to be hiding for all eternity before creation . Creation still does not solve this , though they make out that since God created everything , its all sorted . If God created everything , including the heavens , where was he before all this ? He wasnt in heaven , he wasnt in space , or time , or the 7 other dimensions string theory proposes . So where was he ? He cant have been anywhere .

So the big bang may not solve this problem , but it doesnt claim to know about before the big bang anyway . The bible claims to have everything under wraps , and it may for a person back in the dark ages that didnt think about time and space and all the other dimensions also being created , but there are so many questions it cant anser today that science poses that a creationist will simply say , the bible is the truth , the direct word of God so it must be true .

**Awaken4e1** · 12-12-2005 07:28 PM

So if god was outside of time the concept of god creating the universe is irrational. [/b]

Bing, Bing, bing...What do got for him Johnny?

**InTheMoment** · 12-12-2005 08:30 PM

Originally posted by Awaken4e1

So if god was outside of time the concept of god creating the universe is irrational.

Bing, Bing, bing...What do got for him Johnny?[/b]

A t-shirt that says "I debunked your entire argument."

**Awaken4e1** · 12-12-2005 08:46 PM

I have noticed, that those who hold to the belief of ‘no God’ do continue under the premise that the accumulation of knowledge is as complete as it can be, under the present understandings of the scientific community. This brings an entirely xenophobic belief to that cumulative knowledge, of which is only understood within a very limited capacity, i.e. the human mind, but which is assertively presented by the scientific community as the ‘exhaustive completion of that knowledge’ which is used to attained to formation of their belief in ‘no God’.

This is a total dismissal of every substantial procedural law of research ever established. They have deduced their scientific conjecture, to fit their own intolerant belief that no knowledge is greater than man himself. And, that man is the ‘be all end all’ of any given attained understanding, that he is the origin of it. And until the admission of faulty research practices by those who try to disprove the existence of God, there will be no true understanding of ‘Science in its truest sense. Because the scientific community fails to concede their deceptive practices they will not be taken seriously by those who understand that all knowledge come from a much higher source than man’s own mind, from God himself.

The Rev.

**InTheMoment** · 12-12-2005 08:55 PM

Originally posted by Rev
Because the scientific community fails to concede their deceptive practices they will not be taken seriously by those who understand that all knowledge come from a much higher source than man’s own mind, from God himself.

Damn 'dem heathen scientist and all of 'dar smart-alecky smartness!

**bradybaker** · 12-12-2005 11:32 PM

Originally posted by Awaken4e1
I have noticed, that those who hold to the belief of ‘no God’ do continue under the premise that the accumulation of knowledge is as complete as it can be, under the present understandings of the scientific community. This brings an entirely xenophobic belief to that cumulative knowledge, of which is only understood within a very limited capacity, i.e. the human mind, but which is assertively presented by the scientific community as the ‘exhaustive completion of that knowledge’ which is used to attained to formation of their belief in ‘no God’.

This is a total dismissal of every substantial procedural law of research ever established. They have deduced their scientific conjecture, to fit their own intolerant belief that no knowledge is greater than man himself. And, that man is the ‘be all end all’ of any given attained understanding, that he is the origin of it. And until the admission of faulty research practices by those who try to disprove the existence of God, there will be no true understanding of ‘Science in its truest sense. Because the scientific community fails to concede their deceptive practices they will not be taken seriously by those who understand that all knowledge come from a much higher source than man’s own mind, from God himself.

The Rev.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Quit putting words in our mouth buddy. No atheist here has ever claimed that we have everything figured out, or that 'our accumulation of knowledge is as complete as it can be".

In fact, I've conceded numerous times that God could exist. It's just as likely as the invisible pink unicorn theory. Hell, there could be a '67 Mustang orbiting Jupiter right now, how the fuck would I know?

Furthermore, 99.999999% of science has NOTHING to do with religion. You don't see Stephen Hawking running around trying to disprove the existence of God, he just happens to like black holes. So who exactly are you pointing your finger at? The 0.000001% out there who actually believe they can prove wrong an argument that has been specifically tailored to be unfalsifiable?

As atheists, we simply draw on established science and logic (ie. physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics and psychology, which were not developed with the purpose of attacking religion) and apply the same principles to the topic of discussion in hopes revealing to you the silliness of your ways. History has shown that the number one weapon against faith is education, call us The Faithbusters.

What we (and by 'we' I mean the group of atheists involved in discussion with theists about the existence of God) are claiming is that the chances of God existing are so infinitesimally minute that belief is wholly unjustified, regardless of what you think has been revealed to you or what has been taught to you since you were a young lad in the priest's bed...err, I mean service?

Now, you are free to disagree, but don't go around spewing conspiracy theories about the evils of science (it's been a few hundred years since that's worked for the church).

**Tsen** · 12-13-2005 12:01 AM

History has shown that the number one weapon against faith is education, call us The Faithbusters.[/b]

Love that 'Faithbusters' part, Brady. Hope you don't mind if I take it as my custom title?

Anyway, if the dear Rev. would kindly take a look at this thread: Let's Pretend

I said the same thing Brady did: God hasn't revealed himself yet. Leastwise, no reliable observation of God has been made. (Just a note for Nirvana: That still means that NO God has revealed itself. Including the Oneness thingamajig you're always spouting about) Until a reliable observation is made, we have no reason to go back and erase all of our previous hard work and investigations into the workings of the universe just to write them all back again in a way that allows a God in the system. When we have evidence of a God being in the system, we'll change that. But as time progresses, the chances of a God revealing itself become ever smaller. So miniscule it's not worth noting. That doesn't disprove God, since God is impossible to disprove. A sentient (assumably, anyways) being who is omnipotent could evade our observations for an infinite amount of time. But if that's the case, there's no point in acknowledging said God. He isn't bugging us, we're not bugging him, etc.

**Genjyo** · 12-13-2005 12:23 AM

Originally posted by Tsen
It's amazing how much religious nutjobs think they can pick and choose. So SOME of your religion's standpoints can be interpreted to be a scientific fact. If you go four nights without sleep, spin in circles for a few hours, then squint REALLY hard, anyways.
The fact is, thousands of verses in the Bible go AGAINST science, but you'd never think of using them as propaganda to convert people.

I'll grant you that some of those verses do correspond with scientific fact if you interpret them the right way, but those interpretations are incredibly unlikely

In all fairness, I don't think anyone is suggesting that the Bible is purely a scientific journal, just that it is not scientifically flawed. You mentioned thousands of verses that do go against science. Care to share a few, I've been studying the Bible for some time now and frankly the verses mentioned in the original post is what helped me conclude the scriptures were valid in that regard. Overall, the most important thing for me is how it speaks to people of all walks of life and of different periods of the timeline.

**Awaken4e1** · 12-13-2005 12:27 AM

Originally posted by Genjyo

In all fairness, I don't think anyone is suggesting that the Bible is purely a scientific journal, just that it is not scientifically flawed. You mentioned thousands of verses that do go against science. Care to share a few, I've been studying the Bible for some time now and frankly the verses mentioned in the original post is what helped me conclude the scriptures were valid in that regard. Overall, the most important thing for me is how it speaks to people of all walks of life and of different periods of the the timeline.

Very good post!

**Awaken4e1** · 12-13-2005 12:32 AM

I said the same thing Brady did: God hasn't revealed himself yet. Leastwise, no reliable observation of God has been made. [/b]

(There have been recorded and documented eye witness accounts of the manifestation of God in this world, witnessed by thousands, and recorded for all of history to see. Weather or not He has revealed Himself too is matter receptiveness.)

Until a reliable observation is made, we have no reason to go back and erase all of our previous hard work and investigations into the workings of the universe just to write them all back again in a way that allows a God in the system.[/b]

(How it is that scientist can look deep within an organism to find the smallest unknown life forums, but with not look deep within them and find God. There would be nothing to investigate without God, because nothing would exist without Him, including, but not limited to you.)

When we have evidence of a God being in the system, we'll change that.[/b]

(The mathematical perfection of the Super-verse could not coalesce into the magnificent creation that is now here for all to see.)

But as time progresses, the chances of a God revealing itself become ever smaller.[/b]

(God is not governed by time so that is a nullified statement conjecture unworthy of process.)

So miniscule it's not worth noting. That doesn't disprove God, since God is impossible to disprove. A sentient (assumable, anyways) being who is omnipotent could evade our observations for an infinite amount of time. [/b]

(God has no desire to evade man, on the contrary He is calling-out to man ‘Adom where art thou’ but with no response, because man tries to response in the natural to a spiritual summons.)

But if that's the case, there's no point in acknowledging said God. He isn't bugging us, we're not bugging him, etc. [/b]

(That is not the case, God can not ‘bug us’ but we do bug Him because of our disobedience.)

The Rev.

**bradybaker** · 12-13-2005 01:04 AM

The funniest part of your post is the part where you completely ignore what I wrote.

I'd like to see a written apology to the scientific community. Especially since you're involved in this discussion through the use of a COMPUTER. Study the Bible all you want, I doubt you'll find out how to build one.

**kimpossible** · 12-13-2005 02:02 AM

Originally posted by Tsen

History has shown that the number one weapon against faith is education, call us The Faithbusters.

Love that 'Faithbusters' part, Brady. Hope you don't mind if I take it as my custom title?

[/b]

I'm in too!

**Tsen** · 12-13-2005 02:05 AM

Rev, please refer to my last post:

Originally posted by Tsen
no reliable observation of God has been made

Eyewitness accounts made by ONE person or a small group of persons, esp. people already members of religions are NOT reliable. People who are 'upstanding' members of religions tend to be more than a tad bit biased, and eyewitness accounts aren't usually considered reliable evidence. I could tell you I saw a purple pixie this morning, and you wouldn't believe me. Mostly because I'm ONE person testifying with nothing backing my claims.

**spoon** · 12-13-2005 04:27 AM

Originally posted by Awaken4e1+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Awaken4e1)</div>

Originally posted by spoon@
So if god was outside of time the concept of god creating the universe is irrational.

Bing, Bing, bing...What do got for him Johnny?[/b]

I'm confused, are you agreeing here? Doesn't this kind of invalidate your personal creator?

<!--QuoteBegin-Genjyo
You mentioned thousands of verses that do go against science. Care to share a few, I've been studying the Bible for some time now and frankly the verses mentioned in the original post is what helped me conclude the scriptures were valid in that regard

From Dennis McKinsey's excellent Biblical errancy site:

Those believing the Bible to be scientifically precise and wise beyond its years should read, digest, and remember the following assertions contained within its covers:

* (a) the bat is a bird (Lev. 11:19, Deut. 14:11, 18);
* (b) Some fowls are four-footed (Lev. 11:20-21);
* © Some creeping insects have four legs. (Lev. 11:22-23);
* (d) Hares chew the cud (Lev. 11:6);
* (e) Conies chew the cud (Lev. 11:5);
* (f) Camels don't divide the hoof (Lev. 11:4);
* (g) The earth was formed out of and by means of water (2 Peter 3:5 RSV);
* (h) The earth rest on pillars (1 Sam. 2:8);
* (i) The earth won't be moved (1Chron. 16:30);
* (j) A hare does not divide the hoof (Deut. 14:7);
* (k) The rainbow is not as old as rain and sunshine (Gen. 9:13);
* (l) A mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds and grows into the greatest of all shrubs (Matt. 13:31-32 RSV);
* (m) Turtles have voices (Song of Sol. 2:12);
* (n) The earth has ends or edges (Job 37:3);
* (o) The earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1);
* (p) Some 4-legged animals fly (Lev. 11:21);
* (q) The world's language didn't evolve but appeared suddenly (Gen. 11:6-9; and
* ® A fetus can understand speech (Luke 1:44).[/b]

Available directly from this link.

The OT is a ~3000 year old religious text, of course it will have scientific errors. It was written by people with no scientific knowledge.

-spoon

Thread: Scientific Facts of the Bible...

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Scientific Facts of the Bible...

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions