Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 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: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Where Science And The Bible Meet
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 46 of 208 (397239)
04-25-2007 5:58 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by ArchArchitect
04-24-2007 2:59 AM


Make Your Case
quote:
I am showing that the Bible does have some points that can be scientifically backed up.
Unfortunately you haven't shown anything yet. For this discussion to move forward, you need to provide the evidence that supports your contention.
What in Matthew 24:29 was proven by science to be accurate?
That the sun can be darkened?
That the moon can be darkened?
That stars can fall from the sky?
That heavenly bodies can be shaken?
The accuracy value of Matthew 24:29 is not whether each separate action can be associated with a recognized natural action, but whether all these natrual events have or can happen together as described.
As I said in Message 26: There is a difference between creative writing and scientific writing.
The OT authors routinely used cosmic upheaval language when describing God's judgment on man.
Isaiah 13:10 (Judgment against Babylon)
    Isaiah 34:4 (Judgment against all Nations)
      Ezekiel 32:7
      Joel 2:10, 2:31, 3:15
      Haggai 2:6 & 21
      The goal of extreme imagery such as the above verses is to generate fear. I say that because to the best of my knowledge the cosmic upheaval described in the above verses did not happen as described.
      The creative rendition of the natural world isn't meant to match up with the scientific description of the natural world. One evokes emotion and the other provides facts.

      "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 30 by ArchArchitect, posted 04-24-2007 2:59 AM ArchArchitect has not replied

        
      ICANT
      Member
      Posts: 6769
      From: SSC
      Joined: 03-12-2007
      Member Rating: 1.5


      Message 47 of 208 (397255)
      04-25-2007 8:34 AM
      Reply to: Message 1 by ArchArchitect
      04-18-2007 7:47 PM


      Re-Matt. 24.29
      read Matthew 24:29.
      First off this is a future event it has not taken place yet.
      Therefore it cannot be proven or disproven by any method.
      But it is possible that we will be alive to see it happen.

      "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 1 by ArchArchitect, posted 04-18-2007 7:47 PM ArchArchitect has not replied

        
      ICANT
      Member
      Posts: 6769
      From: SSC
      Joined: 03-12-2007
      Member Rating: 1.5


      Message 48 of 208 (397261)
      04-25-2007 9:02 AM


      Re-Science and Bible
      iceage writes:
      Consider this: Not one a single scientific revelation of the nature of reality has come about by the literal or inspired reading of the bible - not one.
      When did man discover that life was in the blood?
      Retired Site | PBS
      It wasn't until well into the 19th century that people began to question the value of bloodletting. Scientists such as Louis Pasteur, Joseph Lister, and Robert Koch showed that germs, not humors, were responsible for disease. Furthermore, medical statisticians tracking case histories began to collect evidence that bloodletting was not effective. Eventually the practice died, although it continued in some parts of rural America into the 1920s.
      From what I can find it could not have been very long ago.
      But had they read the Bible:
      Levi 17:11 (KJS) For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.
      The life of the flesh is in the blood: That was written a long time ago.

      Replies to this message:
       Message 49 by jar, posted 04-25-2007 9:12 AM ICANT has not replied
       Message 50 by PaulK, posted 04-25-2007 9:13 AM ICANT has not replied
       Message 53 by iceage, posted 04-25-2007 2:04 PM ICANT has not replied
       Message 54 by clpMINI, posted 04-25-2007 4:44 PM ICANT has not replied
       Message 119 by Force, posted 12-29-2007 5:17 PM ICANT has replied

        
      jar
      Member (Idle past 394 days)
      Posts: 34026
      From: Texas!!
      Joined: 04-20-2004


      Message 49 of 208 (397264)
      04-25-2007 9:12 AM
      Reply to: Message 48 by ICANT
      04-25-2007 9:02 AM


      Re: Re-Science and Bible
      When did man discover that life was in the blood?
      Of course, not only is that not Science, it is also false.
      Is a bag of blood alive? Is a pool of blood alive? Do jellyfish and trees live? Is an amoeba alive?
      The Bible is a great book, but on many things it is just plain wrong.

      Aslan is not a Tame Lion

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 48 by ICANT, posted 04-25-2007 9:02 AM ICANT has not replied

        
      PaulK
      Member
      Posts: 17822
      Joined: 01-10-2003
      Member Rating: 2.2


      Message 50 of 208 (397265)
      04-25-2007 9:13 AM
      Reply to: Message 48 by ICANT
      04-25-2007 9:02 AM


      Re: Re-Science and Bible
      quote:
      When did man discover that life was in the blood?
      To the extent that that is true (and it certainly isn't literally true) they probably discovered it as soon as they saw a human or animal die of blood loss. Probably long before recorded history.

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 48 by ICANT, posted 04-25-2007 9:02 AM ICANT has not replied

        
      Equinox
      Member (Idle past 5142 days)
      Posts: 329
      From: Michigan
      Joined: 08-18-2006


      Message 51 of 208 (397306)
      04-25-2007 12:40 PM
      Reply to: Message 11 by ArchArchitect
      04-22-2007 1:52 AM


      Re: The verse in question is supposed to be the words of Jesus
      AA wrote:
      ________________________________________
      In both translations, the light is specifically attributed to the moon itself
      The people who were seeing the visions did not know how to explain it. The science of that time said that the moon gave its own light. He saw in his vision that the Sun got dark, and AFTER that, the moon not longer was bright. According to the science of that time, the moon stopped giving its light.
      AA, this verse is something that Jesus himself is saying. By saying that Jesus doesn’t know how to explain it, or that Jesus is just saying what he sees without understanding it, you are saying that Jesus isn’t the omniscient God. If you want to convince people that Jesus was just some bloke in the wilderness, you are welcome to do so, but to first claim that the Bible predicts science and then to call Jesus ignorant when you are challenged really doesn’t support your claim.
      Take care-

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 11 by ArchArchitect, posted 04-22-2007 1:52 AM ArchArchitect has not replied

      Replies to this message:
       Message 52 by jar, posted 04-25-2007 12:56 PM Equinox has not replied

        
      jar
      Member (Idle past 394 days)
      Posts: 34026
      From: Texas!!
      Joined: 04-20-2004


      Message 52 of 208 (397308)
      04-25-2007 12:56 PM
      Reply to: Message 51 by Equinox
      04-25-2007 12:40 PM


      Re: The verse in question is supposed to be the words of Jesus
      AA, this verse is something that Jesus himself is saying. By saying that Jesus doesn’t know how to explain it, or that Jesus is just saying what he sees without understanding it, you are saying that Jesus isn’t the omniscient God. If you want to convince people that Jesus was just some bloke in the wilderness, you are welcome to do so, but to first claim that the Bible predicts science and then to call Jesus ignorant when you are challenged really doesn’t support your claim.
      It would take us too far off topic to fully address that here, but for Jesus message to make any sense, he had to be ignorant. I would love to see you start a thread on that though.

      Aslan is not a Tame Lion

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 51 by Equinox, posted 04-25-2007 12:40 PM Equinox has not replied

        
      iceage 
      Suspended Member (Idle past 5915 days)
      Posts: 1024
      From: Pacific Northwest
      Joined: 09-08-2003


      Message 53 of 208 (397325)
      04-25-2007 2:04 PM
      Reply to: Message 48 by ICANT
      04-25-2007 9:02 AM


      Leviticus Science
      iceage writes:
      Consider this: Not one a single scientific revelation of the nature of reality has come about by the literal or inspired reading of the bible - not one.
      ICANT writes:
      When did man discover that life was in the blood?
      Life is not in the blood. The blood is but one of components required by blood borne life.
      Is life in Bile? for surely you cannot live without Bile.
      Nevertheless ICANT you are doing a fine job of illustrating the point that the Bible reveals nothing beyond the contemporary state of knowledge at the time of writing.
      Homer wrote the following...
      Homer writes:
      Achilles glared at him and answered, "Fool, prate not to me about covenants. There can be no covenants between men and lions, wolves and lambs can never be of one mind, but hate each other out and out an through. Therefore there can be no understanding between you and me, nor may there be any covenants between us, till one or other shall fall and glut grim Mars with his life's blood.

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 48 by ICANT, posted 04-25-2007 9:02 AM ICANT has not replied

        
      clpMINI
      Member (Idle past 5165 days)
      Posts: 116
      From: Richmond, VA, USA
      Joined: 03-22-2005


      Message 54 of 208 (397366)
      04-25-2007 4:44 PM
      Reply to: Message 48 by ICANT
      04-25-2007 9:02 AM


      Blood & Life
      I may be mistaken, but can't you have all of your blood and still be very much dead?
      And I wonder who, in those rural areas of the US in the 1920s, were the ones who ignored the germ threory and continued to think that sickness was caused by evil spirits? I wonder who?
      Edited by clpMINI, : stupid keyboard!

      I mean, this is America. Everybody loves seeing lesbians go at it, as long as they are both hot and not in a monogamous, legally sanctioned relationship.

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 48 by ICANT, posted 04-25-2007 9:02 AM ICANT has not replied

        
      ArchArchitect
      Member (Idle past 6181 days)
      Posts: 58
      From: Pasadena, CA
      Joined: 04-16-2007


      Message 55 of 208 (397570)
      04-26-2007 4:03 PM
      Reply to: Message 25 by Dr Adequate
      04-23-2007 6:58 AM


      Matthew 24:29 proves that the author didn't know what a star is or how gravity works. Hence, the passage cannot be divinely inspired, because God would know these things.
      So what good would it do for God to speak scientifically to the people of the time when this was written? They would not have a clue what He was talking about.

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 25 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-23-2007 6:58 AM Dr Adequate has replied

      Replies to this message:
       Message 56 by Coragyps, posted 04-26-2007 4:25 PM ArchArchitect has not replied
       Message 57 by purpledawn, posted 04-26-2007 5:02 PM ArchArchitect has not replied
       Message 58 by Equinox, posted 04-26-2007 5:07 PM ArchArchitect has not replied
       Message 59 by iceage, posted 04-26-2007 5:38 PM ArchArchitect has not replied
       Message 60 by nator, posted 04-26-2007 9:44 PM ArchArchitect has not replied
       Message 61 by Zhimbo, posted 04-26-2007 10:55 PM ArchArchitect has not replied
       Message 62 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-26-2007 10:58 PM ArchArchitect has not replied

        
      Coragyps
      Member (Idle past 734 days)
      Posts: 5553
      From: Snyder, Texas, USA
      Joined: 11-12-2002


      Message 56 of 208 (397575)
      04-26-2007 4:25 PM
      Reply to: Message 55 by ArchArchitect
      04-26-2007 4:03 PM


      They would not have a clue what He was talking about.
      So you're happy to have God mislead his Chosen People?

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 55 by ArchArchitect, posted 04-26-2007 4:03 PM ArchArchitect has not replied

        
      purpledawn
      Member (Idle past 3457 days)
      Posts: 4453
      From: Indiana
      Joined: 04-25-2004


      Message 57 of 208 (397580)
      04-26-2007 5:02 PM
      Reply to: Message 55 by ArchArchitect
      04-26-2007 4:03 PM


      Creative Writing
      I know you're getting many responses and have probably missed mine, but could you read Message 46 if you haven't and respond accordingly.
      Thanks

      "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 55 by ArchArchitect, posted 04-26-2007 4:03 PM ArchArchitect has not replied

        
      Equinox
      Member (Idle past 5142 days)
      Posts: 329
      From: Michigan
      Joined: 08-18-2006


      Message 58 of 208 (397581)
      04-26-2007 5:07 PM
      Reply to: Message 55 by ArchArchitect
      04-26-2007 4:03 PM


      You are making the common assumption that modern people are smart, and ancient people were stupid. They were as smart as us, but didn't have the previous learning and toys we have. They certainly could have understood a giant sphere of glowing gas if God had said it. The ancient Hindus understood the idea of the earth being billions of years old, and ancient jews could certainly have understood that that stars are billions of miles away, and are like our sun, much larger than the earth. They could have understood that the bodies moved in orbits, or that there was nothing between them in space, etc....

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 55 by ArchArchitect, posted 04-26-2007 4:03 PM ArchArchitect has not replied

        
      iceage 
      Suspended Member (Idle past 5915 days)
      Posts: 1024
      From: Pacific Northwest
      Joined: 09-08-2003


      Message 59 of 208 (397587)
      04-26-2007 5:38 PM
      Reply to: Message 55 by ArchArchitect
      04-26-2007 4:03 PM


      Where Science And The Bible Meet
      Arch writes:
      So what good would it do for God to speak scientifically to the people of the time when this was written?
      Arch why did you start a topic on the alleged insight of the Bible concerning the natural world?
      If you can honestly answer that question, I think you will have answered your other question above.

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 55 by ArchArchitect, posted 04-26-2007 4:03 PM ArchArchitect has not replied

        
      nator
      Member (Idle past 2170 days)
      Posts: 12961
      From: Ann Arbor
      Joined: 12-09-2001


      Message 60 of 208 (397616)
      04-26-2007 9:44 PM
      Reply to: Message 55 by ArchArchitect
      04-26-2007 4:03 PM


      quote:
      So what good would it do for God to speak scientifically to the people of the time when this was written? They would not have a clue what He was talking about.
      Well, it would have given them a huge leg up on the technolology of the region, that's for sure.
      I mean, if they were just going to unquestioningly believe whatever God said, then he could have told them the truth in basic scientific terms, right?
      And think of how many people today would be astonished and convinced of the divine origin of a 2000 year old text that plainly and very explicity explained the workings of the internal combustion engine, for example, or the Krebs cycle, or cell division.
      Those are a couple of reasons God might have for putting modern science into an ancient book.

      This message is a reply to:
       Message 55 by ArchArchitect, posted 04-26-2007 4:03 PM ArchArchitect has not replied

        
      Newer Topic | Older Topic
      Jump to:


      Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

      ™ Version 4.2
      Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024