Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Secularly Verifiable Evidence for Biblical Inerrancy
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 16 of 99 (152143)
10-22-2004 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by SirPimpsalot
10-21-2004 7:59 AM


Re: The Science of the Bible
SPAL
There are many instances in the Bible where scientific fact is spoken before science discovered them to be fact.......for instance, the first thing God created was light. The Bible makes it clear that when God said "Let there be light", he was not speaking of the sun or moon or any luminous body. It's now known to be scientific fact that light is what governs the flow of spacetime and that the first thing that existed after the Big Bang, from an anthropological point of view, was light.
What do you mean it "governs the flow" of spacetime?In what way does spacetime flow?Also what are you defining as light in this instance?

[W]hen people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 7:59 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2004 5:49 AM sidelined has not replied
 Message 22 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 7:43 AM sidelined has replied

  
fnord
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 99 (152204)
10-23-2004 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by PaulK
10-22-2004 6:52 PM


Re: The Science of the Bible
4) I didn't realise that I was talking to a Flatlander. In the three dimensional world I exist in spheres are not circles.
And even for a Flatlander spheres aren't cirles. Just because a Flatlander can't imagine what a sphere looks like doesn't mean s/he can't grasp the concept. Just like we can apprehend at least some of the properties of a hypersphere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by PaulK, posted 10-22-2004 6:52 PM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by arachnophilia, posted 10-23-2004 5:47 AM fnord has not replied
 Message 90 by LinearAq, posted 11-17-2004 3:53 PM fnord has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 18 of 99 (152209)
10-23-2004 5:47 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by fnord
10-23-2004 5:01 AM


Re: The Science of the Bible
Just like we can apprehend at least some of the properties of a hypersphere.
yeah, but after that my head starts to hurt.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by fnord, posted 10-23-2004 5:01 AM fnord has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 19 of 99 (152210)
10-23-2004 5:49 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by sidelined
10-22-2004 9:47 PM


Re: The Science of the Bible
What do you mean it "governs the flow" of spacetime?In what way does spacetime flow?Also what are you defining as light in this instance?
last i checked, it's the other way around. spacetime governs the flow of light.
proving this is part of what verified relativity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by sidelined, posted 10-22-2004 9:47 PM sidelined has not replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 99 (152215)
10-23-2004 7:31 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by crashfrog
10-22-2004 5:52 PM


But that's not your claim, now is it? You're not claiming that the Bible says things that are true if you look at them a certain way - you're claiming the Bible contains scientific facts.
No, I'm making the claim that the Bible speaks scientific truth from an anthropological point of view.......as EVERYTHING in the Bible is from an anthropological point of view......
If spheres were circles, the what would a cylinder be? And yes, ancient Hebrew has both a word for "circle" and a word for "sphere."
So does English, but you ask the average guy on the street what shape the Earth is, he'll say "round" (which can define many non-spherical shapes) or "a circle".
The Tigris and Euphrates rivers are not in Africa; they're in the Middle East. I don't know what your FYI guys are basing their view on, but it's not the Bible.
Yes, let's just ignore half the rivers mentioned because it's more convenient........not to mention that I'm sure aspects of those rivers have changed over the last several thousands of years.
Which didn't flood the Earth.
Um, yeah, world wide floodings occured during the glacial meltings............
Nor was an Ark constructed.
Riiiiight, no one ever built a boat........
I don't see how glacial meltwater proves your point, except in the loosest sense of "flood".
I'd say a lake turning into the black sea would fit ANYONE'S definition of "flood".........
Yeah, if you wanted, you can interpret the Bible so that it says whatever you want.
This is valid with some of the points I raised........but not others, such as "And God said, 'Let there be light', and there was light." How many different ways can that be interpretted?
Which you, ever so coincidentally, I'm sure, didn't comment on........
This message has been edited by SirPimpsalot, 10-23-2004 06:47 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by crashfrog, posted 10-22-2004 5:52 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 7:40 AM SirPimpsalot has not replied
 Message 25 by fnord, posted 10-23-2004 8:50 AM SirPimpsalot has replied
 Message 74 by crashfrog, posted 10-23-2004 3:41 PM SirPimpsalot has not replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 99 (152216)
10-23-2004 7:40 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by SirPimpsalot
10-23-2004 7:31 AM


BTW, another couple of things I remembered.........man is stated to have been made in God's image. Man is the only animal on Earth for which there aren't a multitude of cousins and closely related species.
Also, I read in a Stephen Baxter book that the human brain could theoretically contain 1000 years of memories, before it filled up like a hard drive.........if man once lived to almost a 1000 years, that would explain why we'd need 90% of our brains free for storing info. Such long life spans could also account for how the world became populated in just a few thousand years (now, I don't believe in YEC, but I believe that maybe human beings were only created a few thousand years ago).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 7:31 AM SirPimpsalot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by DrJones*, posted 10-23-2004 8:16 AM SirPimpsalot has replied
 Message 27 by fnord, posted 10-23-2004 9:26 AM SirPimpsalot has replied
 Message 51 by Coragyps, posted 10-23-2004 11:13 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 99 (152217)
10-23-2004 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by sidelined
10-22-2004 9:47 PM


Re: The Science of the Bible
What do you mean it "governs the flow" of spacetime?In what way does spacetime flow?Also what are you defining as light in this instance?
Ummmm, there's more than one definition for light?
As for light and the flow of space time, I don't really understand special relativity.......all I know is that light and the flow of space time are closely correlated.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by sidelined, posted 10-22-2004 9:47 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by sidelined, posted 10-23-2004 8:44 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 23 of 99 (152221)
10-23-2004 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by SirPimpsalot
10-23-2004 7:40 AM


Man is the only animal on Earth for which there aren't a multitude of cousins and closely related species.
What are the apes and other current primates if not our cousins?

*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 7:40 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 10:06 AM DrJones* has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 24 of 99 (152223)
10-23-2004 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by SirPimpsalot
10-23-2004 7:43 AM


Re: The Science of the Bible
SPAL
In physics light refers to any wavelength of the electromagnetic spectrum. As applying the normal idea of light to mean that part of the EM spectrum that we can percieve then light was not immediately viewable in the initial stages of the universe but some 400,000 years after the big bang.
Light can be be forced to take a curved path in the presence of a large gravitational field but it does not dictate the shaping of spacetime but relays information about spacetime.

[W]hen people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 7:43 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 10:31 AM sidelined has replied

  
fnord
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 99 (152225)
10-23-2004 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by SirPimpsalot
10-23-2004 7:31 AM


So does English, but you ask the average guy on the street what shape the Earth is, he'll say "round" (which can define many non-spherical shapes) or "a circle".
Probably, but the Bible isn't supposed to have been written by regular Joe's, but by God-inspired people. Seems to me like God doesn't know elementary math.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 7:31 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by CK, posted 10-23-2004 9:26 AM fnord has not replied
 Message 36 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 10:20 AM fnord has replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 26 of 99 (152226)
10-23-2004 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by fnord
10-23-2004 8:50 AM


quote:
Also, I read in a Stephen Baxter book that the human brain could theoretically contain 1000 years of memories, before it filled up like a hard drive.........if man once lived to almost a 1000 years, that would explain why we'd need 90% of our brains free for storing info.
I'm sorry to say this sirpimpalot, but your debating style is becoming pretty clear, you just throw random things into the conversation once your previous points have been discredited.
Let's take this stage by stage:
quote:
I read in a Stephen Baxter book that the human brain could theoretically contain 1000 years of memories
Now unless I am mistaken, Stephen Baxter is a Science-fiction writer. Before we even consider the ramifications of this - can you provide any proof this is true from a science-FACT book?
quote:
that would explain why we'd need 90% of our brains free for storing info.
That idea would seem to based upon the myth that we only use 10% of our brains - one that occurs in much popular fiction such as "flight of the navigator" - again, any proof from a book of science that this actually occurs?
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 10-23-2004 08:28 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by fnord, posted 10-23-2004 8:50 AM fnord has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 10:14 AM CK has replied

  
fnord
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 99 (152227)
10-23-2004 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by SirPimpsalot
10-23-2004 7:40 AM


if man once lived to almost a 1000 years, that would explain why we'd need 90% of our brains free for storing info.
In fact, there is no scientific evidence for the story that we use only 10% of our brains. The usual answer to people quoting this popular myth is: which 90% would you have removed?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 7:40 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by CK, posted 10-23-2004 9:33 AM fnord has not replied
 Message 30 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 10:09 AM fnord has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 28 of 99 (152228)
10-23-2004 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by fnord
10-23-2004 9:26 AM


quote:
In fact, there is no scientific evidence for the story that we use only 10% of our brains.
I'm pretty sure we can say a bit more than that - the use of modern imaging techniques have proved that this is bunk.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by fnord, posted 10-23-2004 9:26 AM fnord has not replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 99 (152229)
10-23-2004 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by DrJones*
10-23-2004 8:16 AM


What are the apes and other current primates if not our cousins?
Distant relatives, removed by more than 4 million years of evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by DrJones*, posted 10-23-2004 8:16 AM DrJones* has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by DBlevins, posted 10-23-2004 8:29 PM SirPimpsalot has not replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 99 (152230)
10-23-2004 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by fnord
10-23-2004 9:26 AM


In fact, there is no scientific evidence for the story that we use only 10% of our brains. The usual answer to people quoting this popular myth is: which 90% would you have removed?
There have been instances in which over half of a person's brain has been removed and they retained full memory and mental capacity........and, given enough time, it's believed they can regain all motor function as well, and be a perfectly normal person with only half a brain.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by fnord, posted 10-23-2004 9:26 AM fnord has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by CK, posted 10-23-2004 10:10 AM SirPimpsalot has not replied
 Message 33 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-23-2004 10:17 AM SirPimpsalot has not replied
 Message 37 by AdminJar, posted 10-23-2004 10:23 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024