Why I believe Creation is factually accurate – The Reality!

reply to post by Quickfix

The Bible can be dated and is dated. Proven by carbon dating. The Bible was man made so it is adherent to the time span of man. It was not created by "God."

I don't disagree at all. In fact here's what I said in the OP:

”And it is on these basis that I stand by the FACT that the Bible although penned by men, is Divinely Inspired.”

So yes – it's man made – but the messages therein are “inspired by God”, that is the 44 writers were guided by God.

As for the age – the last books were written by the last apostle of Jesus – John – they are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd John. They were written around 98 C.E. Revelation (Apocalypsis) was written in 96 C.E. So the Bible was completed around 2000 years ago. the original manuscripts written by the Bible writers were long gone – but copies of them survived. These are the ones we see in museums and other institutions. Radio Dating should not be that difficult to determine their ages as the accuracy of C14 is within the range of the established half-life.

So I have no problem with it.

The Earth and man were created a few days apart like the book Genesis says...7 days remember? So the Bible time span does not meet the earth time span, which is a contradiction on its own. And you already admitted in your post that the earth and universe is a few billion years old....no going back on that one...

How long have you been studying the Bible and at what rate? I'm just curious to know.

As for me I've been studying it since 1984 – 4-5 times a week and still learning more (different subject matter – from science to humanity to prophecy to archeology to etc). And I can honestly say, I've prolly just scratched the surface. There's so much to learn.

So do you mind telling me how long you've been studying the Bible to be very confident at what you said above? How you arrived at a conclusion that “the Bible time span does not meet the earth time span, which is a contradiction on its own.”? Can you please explain with factual evidence?

Just to test your knowledge – how far does the Bible's message goes into future events?

As for: “you already admitted in your post that the earth and universe is a few billion years old....no going back on that one...”

Why do I need to back out of it? Here's let me please repeat it again:

Note: The Bible itself does not set any such time limit on the days of creation. Based on known scientific... facts the earth is around 4byo and the universe around 13byo (for now – might change). Gen. 1:1 does not disagree with the established facts. But the 6000 to 10000 year old earth does not fit these well known facts...”

I think you're confusing the message of the Bible with the age of the actual manuscripts dated by whatever method. The messages written goes back way further back – back when civilization started. But it even goes further back - back to when the universe was created - and to let you know it goes further way back even before the physical universe was created. Are you aware of that?

I answered the C14 dating question in my last post. on page 7 I believe and Included a link.

– the link gave me a headache after reading the links upon links upon links – there's so much information to figure out but I got to the bottom line.

And that funny story you didn't link, has no real standing, it doesn't prove anything. It just proves that the oil she used could of been very old. Oil has been in use for the last 2,000 years when Jesus was around, it even has a spot in the Bible where it mentions its use.

just mainly pointing that if the person was not aware where the specimen came from – its origin – the result of the c14 dating will be obscured.

There is just too many holes in the Bible for it to be factual. It has a few things in there that are useful to know, but should only be taken with a grain of salt...

Like what I said – how long you've been studying the Bible to be able to confidently say that “There is just too many holes in the Bible for it to be factual.”? 'just wanna know.

Last but not the least, what's your reply to my questions in the OP?

That is:

Since the Genesis account was written some 3500 years ago (according to Biblical chronology and factual events surrounding its writing), here's the question that I want you to answer:

How did Moses, a “goat herder” (as referred to here on ATS) get the facts right? How did he knew that the universe (heavens) and the earth had a beginning whereas these amazing scientific facts were known just recently (1900s)? How could a man 3500 years ago be able say, write what science just recently discovered? Think also of the amount of time, money, knowledge and technology to conclusively show that the universe had a beginning. Yet a “goat herder” knew the facts! How was it possible?

Please provide evidence - not just talk.




Ty,
edmc2

reply to post by Sigismundus

I take it your paleoHebrew is a little rusty from your overrly convoluted and ultimately non-sensical posting which is neither 'here nor there' in terms of clarifying your position.

do you mind slowing down? You're really at a very fast pace that it's hard to figure out what you're really saying.

In actuality - a lot of it are as you say "non-sensical posting which is neither 'here nor there' in terms of clarifying your position." How do i know that what you're saying are factually accurate and not just made up? You have no evidence to back up your claims but just your words, while I back-up mine (and you belittle them).

For example - your timeline is way off. Here's what I mean:

you said:

you seem to be blissfully unaware that that the opening verses in Gen 1:1 to 2:4a (i.e. the 1st creation myth of the Jews) which include a mention of the 'Req'iak' ('beaten dome') are written in stanzaic paleo-Hebrew (i.e. liturgical poetic) form - albeit with several Babylonian 'loan words' post 550 BCE;

How could Moses the writer of Genesis/Job copy a "post 550 BCE" writing ("loan words") if he already finished his books around 1500 B.C.E. / 1400 B.C.E?

As for the rest of your post - it's the same as madness and MrXYZ's - I've already answered them.

ty,
edmc2

reply to post by randyvs


I meant this:

You have the book and if you had any interest in it, you'd also know the signs are happening. The predicted end is very close. You have many ways to see the truth. But you simply will not.

I guess it's because I once thought your truth was as true as you believe it to be and now I feel it's not. This has made me see that I may have responded to someone like me in the past in that same way and now I see how arrogant it is to think you have the truth while ignoring others beliefs or lack thereof and the reasons behind them.

The bible describes only one thing: What people BELIEVED to be true 2,000 years ago.

It is NOT an accurate description of reality. So the entire discussion is kinda pointless if you expect the bible to be accurate

Clearly it states there was water before the earth...which is complete and utter nonsense

reply to post by MrXYZ


Same q to you - how long have you been studying the biblle and at what rate and intensity?
Also how many times you 've read it from cover to cover?

Did you study each book of the biblie to be fully confident to make a conclusion that what you said in your post is the correct answer? If can I ask you this very simple q :

Can you please explain briefly the meaning of the Lord's prayer at Matthew 6:9-12 in relation to Genesis 1?

Ty,
edmc

reply to post by edmc^2


What the bible says doesn't matter as it isn't objective evidence. All it proves is what people believed 2000 years ago. Hell, in many cases the claims in the bible go directly against scientifically established facts...like the whole water was there before earth thing, or that some mythical creature for which we have ZERO objective evidence somehow "parted these waters"

If you best shot is using the bible as evidence, I pity you, as this is clearly not objective evidence...just like someone looking at Harry Potter in 2000 years shouldn't take it as objective evidence of how London looked during this time.

Common sense really...

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by edmc^2

What the bible says doesn't matter as it isn't objective evidence.

Of course to atheists, evolutionists and non-believers it doesn't matter - no mystery in that one. But billions of people believe that it does.

All it proves is what people believed 2000 years ago.

Of course to atheists, evolutionists and non-believers it proves nothing of importance - no mystery in that one. But millions upon millions of people believe that even though the Bible was written thousands of years ago - it's teachings are very much applicable ESPECIALLY TODAY.


Here let me give you just one example: The Golden Rule

Here's the origin of the rule:

“‘You must not take vengeance nor have a grudge against the sons of your people; and you must love your fellow as yourself. I am Jehovah.” (Leviticus 19:18) - written in 1512 B.C.E


“And you must not oppress an alien resident, as YOU yourselves have known the soul of the alien resident, because YOU became alien residents in the land of Egypt.” (Exodus 23:9) -- written in 1512 B.C.E.



Here's what Jesus said:

“The second, like it, is this, ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets.”” (Matthew 22:39-40) -- written around 41 C.E.

“All things, therefore, that YOU want men to do to YOU, YOU also must likewise do to them; this, in fact, is what the Law and the Prophets mean.” (Matthew 7:12)
-- written around 41 C.E

Do you think and believe that these simple, very practical commands ARE NO LONGER VALID, applicable today in the 21st Century?

Tell me this please if you really have any idea of what your talking about: what would happen if ALL applied the Golden Rule namely:

“All things, therefore, that YOU want men to do to YOU, YOU also must likewise do to them".?

This is just one of the hundreds of practical commands that when applied results for the betterment of all.

Every time it's applied the result is always good.

Also, you seem to forget - that even though we are living in the 21st Century - the problems that mankind is facing today are as old as the Bible. We mourn, we get sick, and we die. People are losing hope for a bright future. The family unit is breaking apart and morality is no longer a prime importance. The science and technology that you worship as gods don't have the answers to these problems.

But the BIBLE does.

- here's just one of the promises from the Creator that he will do in the coming future.

“. . .With that I heard a loud voice from the throne say: “Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them. 4 And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.”” (Revelation 21:3-4)

THE BIBLE TEACHES THAT GOD WILL BRING ABOUT THESE CHANGES ON THE EARTH.

“He will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore.”—Revelation 21:4

“The lame one will climb up just as a stag does.”—Isaiah 35:6

“The eyes of the blind ones will be opened.”—Isaiah 35:5

“All those in the memorial tombs will . . . come out.”—John 5:28, 29

“No resident will say: ‘I am sick.’”—Isaiah 33:24

“There will come to be plenty of grain on the earth.”—Psalm 72:16

So do you still think that the message of the Bible are obsolete?

You have no idea about these things huh?

Hell, in many cases the claims in the bible go directly against scientifically established facts...like the whole water was there before earth thing,

Because your understanding of the Bible imh is still lacking or because the influence of others.

or that some mythical creature for which we have ZERO objective evidence somehow "parted these waters"

MrXYZ - where's your commons sense and logic (but I might be wrong). Just because we're not (YET) able to explain something like "parting of the red sea" - doesn't mean that it's impossible to occur.

Here let me give you an example:

What would happen if you take an simple Ipad/Iphone to a remote place on earth today where the inhabitants were never exposed to the modern world? What do you think their reaction will be? Normal reaction?
But how would you react though if you see something that seems to be impossible to occur?

Our knowledge and technology although advance as we know it, it is still on it's infancy in comparison to events written in the Bible. But little by little we are getting there.

Think of a superconductor - floating on mid air - to us it's normal, but 500 or 1000 years ago - they'll consider it as a "phenomenon" a "miracle". Yet in the Bible such "phenomena" is normal.

But I'm quite surprised for a person like you who hold science as godlike will missed this this simple logic.



Is it because it VIOLATES THE LAWS OF NATURE? Is that the reason why you popoo the Bible? So it's IMPOSSIBLE to happen - thus the Bible is "mythical".


Here's another simple question for you:

Is possible to go against the LAWS of NATURE? Impossible, plausible? Is it impossible to travel in the speed of light? Plausible?

Do black holes bend the laws of nature or not?

If you really know your science, you should be able to answer this elementary question.


ty,

Hi edmc -

You're joking, right? 'Moses' wrote the book of Genesis? and the rest of the Torah? even Genesis cchapter 1:1 to 2:4a which is clearly written in a very late paleo-Hebrew style and with a clearly Babylonian accent (post-Exilic, i.e. post 587 BCE) ) to boot?

Didn't you know there are at least 5 (count em, FIVE) different wrirting styles in the Torah of the Jews, each with its own particular grammar, spelling, syntax, sentence length, favourite expressions, distinctive vocabulary, Weltanschauung and theology?

No serious scholar to-day would hold to that belief - in fact 99% of serious modern biblical scholarship has long given over any notion that 'Mosheh' (whoever he was) had anything to do with most of what we read in the Torah today (except for a few cultic laws in Exodus and Numbers), compounded by the fact that the Hebrew Scriptures (especially since the discovery of the much earlier and more 'textually fluid' Dead Sea Scroll copies) are a manuscript nightmare with several competing versions having come down to light over the past 200 years -- and you can see a glimpse of the textual fluidy if you bother to compare them very closely (like Origen did with his old Greek copies of the OT set into comparative line by line columns in his Hexapla) - all you have to do is consult the Masoretic consonantal or even pointed text (MT - a late MS copied from a single document in Leningrad, dated c. 960 AD) and compare it word by word (and consonant by consonant !) with the much older consonantal paleo-Hebrew text of the Samaritan Pentateuch (SamPent, dating from at lweast 400 BCE), and lay those two alongside all the differing Hebrew Consonantal Vorlagen (textual underlays) to the Greek Old Testament copies of the Septuaginta (LXX) or Theodotion, or Symmachus, or Aquila, or any of the contradictory Hebrew Dead Sea Scroll versions found after c. Nov 1946 (esp in Qumran caves 1-11) - none of which match letter for letter by the way - the Torah of 'Mosheh' is largely a product of the revisions of 'Ezra the scribe' after 450 BCE - even Spinoza knew that back in the 17th century.

It is curious that you think I am making all of this up - haven't you ever heard of the source critical textual studies in the last century of Mssrs Graf & Wellhausen, which have been refined over the last 80 years but still holds the field in general approach?

Well google it if you must.

Even if you cannot read paleoHebrew and are stuck with all those paltry American English translations in the wild, you should be able to see at once that the book of 'Deuteronomy' (the 5th book of the supposedly ancient Torah) is written by the same author who wrote the 'genocidal' Book of Joshua - which continues the narrative of the 5th book of the Torah without a break - using the same post-exilic 'Deuteronomist' ('D') style, same late paleo-Hebrew vocabulary, same sentence lengths, same distinctive vocabulary, same gross syntax, same phraseology, same Weltanschauung, same bad spelling, same grammatical constructinos, samee nickname for the post exilic clan god of Yisro'el (YHWH Eloeheka - 'the Lord your god...') which are not found say in the book of Genesis which was from another set of writers altogether (the so-called southern Jerusalemite Priestly or P writer with his late paleo hebrew Babylonian loan words, and the pre Exilicc so-called Elohist ('E') writer from Shechem (located northern Kingdom, and containing a northern-Israelite accent) and the socalled J (Yahwist) writer with his distinctive 8th century BCE 'southern Israelite' Hebronite accent....and of course Ezra's sticky fingers as the Redactor and his scribes (R-1, R-2 andd R-3) that pop in and out of the text.

You will be surprised what you might learn if you dig a little deeper about the textual mess of the Torah (you can begin by a 'close reading' of the the 2 mutually contradictory Genesis creation myths, Gen 1:1 to 2:4a and 2:4b to 4:25)- also check out the book written for the non-specialist general audience entitled, WHO WROTE THE BIBLE? by Robt. Elliott Friedman

grammarman.50megs.com...

Friedman was a student of the great Frank Cross of Harvard a couple of decades ago - you can get it in paperback via Amazon.com fairly cheaply - by which he means the Hebrew Bibile not the so-called New Testament- it outlines in layman's terms the JEPD Graf-Wellhhausen source material research over the past 200 years and lays to rest any fantasies about 'sole Mosaic' authorship. It just did not happen - linguistic studies have proven that beyond any shadow of a doubt - and of course no where in the text does it actually say that 'Mosheh' wrote any of it - it is merely conventional to speak of Mosaic authorship of the Torah to give the collection 'authority' -

Also please do yourself a Big Faovor and check out the very helpful modern Commeentary on the Torah put out in the 1990s in the Anchor Bible Series ('The Pentateuch') which ssupports the modern revisions to the basic Graf-Wellhausen soutce documentary hypothesis (which like Darwinism, is still evolving clarifications of detail !!)

yalepress.yale.edu...

This book was ably written by the eminent scholar Joseph Belnkinsopp, the professor Emerritus from Notre Dame University (he's just one of more than 20,000 serious biblical researchers whose writings still hold the field to-day, despite all the facile garbage floating around on the Internet - all emanating from a comparatively few right wing fundamentalist preacher types who havee flooded the Net to block out the serious researchers on the subject (most serious biblical scholars to-day still tend to write BOOKS) - and these pro-Mosaic anti Graf-Welhausen boobies ('net flooders') almost without exception do not possess the requisite training in Hebrew and Aramaic (or even Greek) to look at the primary evidence but write 'from faith'.. much less to comment upon it..)

Please don't tell me any of this is NEWS to you !!

reply to post by Sigismundus


Ok Sigismundus - more reading for me I guess. I'll need to read the links you've provided and be back later.

But in the meantime can I leave you just these simple questions?

Based on what you said as I understand it - you're point is, the Bible is an amalgamation of different documents from older manuscripts because of the styles of writing and even prose. Fair enuff, as I'm very aware of the changing of writing styles and prose implemented by the writer.

For example - the used of God's name: sometimes YHWH (Jehovah/Yahweh - depending on version) and sometimes the Hebrew word for "God".

This theory is widely believed.

But my Qs are:

1) Can you explain why Moses could not refer to the Creator both as God and as YHVH (Jehovah? Is there like a concrete writing rule that's restricting the writer not to be able to do this?

2) Can you prove that Moses (Musa) the writer could not write in different styles if he was treating different subjects, writing at different times in his life, or using earlier sources (for example Gen 2/ Job)?


A basic assumption of many Bible critics is explained by McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia:

“Investigators . . . start from the assumption that the facts of history which lie behind the narratives are purely natural facts, similar in nature to other facts known to us. . . . Does a writer state as fact an event which lies outside the range of known laws of Nature? Then . . . the alleged event [did] not happen.”

So what say you?

Can a person's writing style and prose change throughout his lifetime? Or does it remain the same until he/she dies?

ty,
edmc2

Posting the rest of Creation evidence.

Fact 7) Creation fits Reality because “life comes only from life.” Of Jehovah God/Yahweh (YHWH), it is written: “With you is the source of life.”—Ps. 36:9.

Misconceptions against Facts

History shows that when ancient Egyptians saw scarab beetles suddenly appear out of the ground, they believed they were self-produced.

But evidence shows that female beetles lay their eggs in balls of dung and bury them, and viola the offspring later emerged.

Then in the 5th century B.C.E. the Greek philosophers Anaxagoras and Empedocles taught spontaneous appearance of life and a century later Aristotle thought that worms and snails were products of putrefaction. Then centuries more later right around the 17th century C.E. scientists Francis Bacon and William Harvey taught spontaneous generation. This philosophy is now known as abiogenesis theory.

Interestingly in the same (17th) century Redi debunked the misconception by proving that maggots appeared in meat only after flies laid eggs on it. But then bacteria were discovered and was hailed as proof of spontaneous generation of life only to be disprove a century later Spallanzani. Then finally Pasteur settled the issue once and for all. He established the ULTIMATE FACT that “life comes only from life.” A fact that is so widely accepted that to deny it is laughable.

What about now in this 21st century of ours – so far noone has CREATED life from NON-Living. Confirming the incontrovertible Biblical and scientific fact again that “life comes only from life.”


Next:

Fact 8) Psalm 139:13-16: says: “For you yourself produced my kidneys; you kept me screened off in the belly of my mother. I shall laud you because in a fear-inspiring way I am wonderfully made. Your works are wonderful, as my soul is very well aware. My bones were not hidden from you when I was made in secret, when I was woven in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw even the embryo of me, and in your book all its parts were down in writing, as regards the days when they [the body parts] were formed and there was not yet one [distinct body part] among them.”

What does the scientific evidence show?

→ The genetic blueprint in the fertilized human egg cell contains programs for all the bodily parts, before any hint of their presence.

Through The Human Genome Project we are able to unlock the secrets of the human “embryo” and are now attempting to read our whole genetic code. Thus indeed confirming the fact that the codes with “all its parts were down in writing” as if in a “book” - a genetic book that is.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/64f1218645d4.jpg[/atsimg]


Amazing indeed! All this information is in a substance called DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), most of which is located in a small compartment in the cell known as the nucleus.

Here's the question that I need you to answer:

How did the Psalmist knew millenniums of years ago that our “embryo”, “all its parts were down in writing, ... when they were formed and there was not yet one among them.”? How did the Bible writer knew such facts thousands of years in advance? That the “parts were down in writing” where as the DNA codes (“writings”) were just recently been discovered?

Wild guess, coincidence, luck or did he copied it from other writings as some may say?

All or any of the above? In any case whatever your answer is, one thing is clear the Psalmists (David) got it right, do you agree? If so what about the rest of his statements? Are they all wild guesses too?

Whether you admit it or not, to me the only obvious, clear and logical answer is:

King David got the information from someone who has knowledge of the human embryo. From someone who knows the “formation” of man – The Creator of life himself Jehovah God.

What say you?

But like what I said – there are hundreds more evidence to prove that we, the earth and the universe are products of an Intelligent, all powerful yet loving Creator – Jehovah God/Yahweh. Time and space will not allow me to include more (to this OP).


So Why Believe in a Creator

Because the evidence shows overwhelmingly that Life and the Universe were CREATED!Many experts in various scientific fields agree and perceive intelligent design in nature. And that based on sound evidence it is illogical to think that the intricate complexity of life on earth and the universe came about by chance or unguided process. Hence, a number of scientists and researchers believe in a Creator. Simply put, Creation is supported by an undeniable irrefutable facts – and not by a flimsy ever changing theories.

In conclusion – as we increase our knowledge of the universe, the more we will learn about its Grand Creator Jehovah God. And the more we advance in our knowledge of space and time the more we will understand that in reality, we are just catching up on what the Bible already stated millenniums of years ago.

In reality we've only touched a very small, a minute part of his Creations – just the “Fringes of his ways”.


New International Version (©1984)

"And these are but the outer fringe of his works; how faint the whisper we hear of him! Who then can understand the thunder of his power?"
New Living Translation (©2007)

"These are just the beginning of all that he does, merely a whisper of his power. Who, then, can comprehend the thunder of his power?"
English Standard Version (©2001)

"Behold, these are but the outskirts of his ways, and how small a whisper do we hear of him! But the thunder of his power who can understand?”

Many more wonderful Creations lay ahead to discover for those who will inherit his Kingdom!
New American Standard Bible (©1995)

"Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.


I hope that the evidence presented leaves you with no doubt that we, the earth and the universe itself are products of a loving Almighty God and Creator.

“For with you is the source of life” (Psalm 36:9)

So what say you ATS?

Thx,

reply to post by edmc^2

Of course to atheists, evolutionists and non-believers it doesn't matter - no mystery in that one. But billions of people believe that it does.

And majority opinion is not an accurate way to assess reality. In ancient times the majority believed the earth to be flat, they were wrong

Of course to atheists, evolutionists and non-believers it proves nothing of importance - no mystery in that one. But millions upon millions of people believe that even though the Bible was written thousands of years ago - it's teachings are very much applicable ESPECIALLY TODAY.

Actually, the number of people who believe religion got the answers is dropping...dropping FAST!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8e4e59e27281.gif[/atsimg]

Here let me give you just one example: The Golden Rule

I hope you realize the golden rule doesn't have its origin in Christianity or the bible: Source

Do you think and believe that these simple, very practical commands ARE NO LONGER VALID, applicable today in the 21st Century?

Of course there might be good stuff in the bible...like the not killing part. But that doesn't automatically validate all the rest. Not unless there's objective evidence supporting it. "Not killing" makes sense in our society, but other stuff like not eating shrimp is a bit stupid. And neither prove a deity exists

Also, you seem to forget - that even though we are living in the 21st Century - the problems that mankind is facing today are as old as the Bible. We mourn, we get sick, and we die. People are losing hope for a bright future. The family unit is breaking apart and morality is no longer a prime importance. The science and technology that you worship as gods don't have the answers to these problems.

Oh really? Science is helping a lot more people than religion. And it's REAL HELP, feeding people, and curing them from disease...not false hope. LINK

HE BIBLE TEACHES THAT GOD WILL BRING ABOUT THESE CHANGES ON THE EARTH.

And people have been saying that for hundreds of years...and it's always supposed to happen soon(TM).

Yet there's still people starving, we still have wars, and so on. At least science was able to cure dozens of deadly diseases, increase the lifespan of humans significantly, and develop ways to feed billions.

MrXYZ - where's your commons sense and logic (but I might be wrong). Just because we're not (YET) able to explain something like "parting of the red sea" - doesn't mean that it's impossible to occur.

I wasn't talking about that...I was talking about parting the waters to create the firmament. Complete and utter nonsense

Think of a superconductor - floating on mid air - to us it's normal, but 500 or 1000 years ago - they'll consider it as a "phenomenon" a "miracle". Yet in the Bible such "phenomena" is normal.

Yeah, and comets were a sign of god, and people lived in the stomach of wales...again, complete and utter nonsense.

But I'm quite surprised for a person like you who hold science as godlike will missed this this simple logic.

There's no logic in what you claim...you just choose to believe in something that has zero objective evidence as backup. You can't call that logic

Is possible to go against the LAWS of NATURE? Impossible, plausible? Is it impossible to travel in the speed of light? Plausible?

Do black holes bend the laws of nature or not?

Elementary questions, huh? We have no means to overcome the laws of nature. Sure, our planes fly, but they do so in line with physical laws. We might find a way to travel faster than light eventually, but it will still be based on physical laws. So yeah, it might be possible, we don't know. But in the absence of objective evidence showing that we can, it would be silly to claim "we can travel faster than light".

Black holes obviously affect physical laws and have properties other than "normal space". But there's still a ton of questions to be answered, so scientists don't have all the answers.

But at least they admit not having all the answers instead of making up a magical being for which they have zero objective evidence.

reply to post by edmc^2

Fact 7) Creation fits Reality because “life comes only from life.” Of Jehovah God/Yahweh (YHWH), it is written: “With you is the source of life.”—Ps. 36:9.

We don't know how life started in the first place, so that claim hasn't even been proven

Your entire point is nonsense and a good example of "god of the gaps".

reply to post by MrXYZ


Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by edmc^2

And majority opinion is not an accurate way to assess reality. In ancient times the majority believed the earth to be flat, they were wrong

Just pointing the facts! As for the flat Earther's - they should have trusted the Bible more than their doctrines.

Actually, the number of people who believe religion got the answers is dropping...dropping FAST!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8e4e59e27281.gif[/atsimg]

-- thanks for the graph.

No disagreement there - that's a fact according to statistics. But the subject is NOT religion but the Bible.


Here's what I said again - let me quote it - yellow -bold/underline:

Of course to atheists, evolutionists and non-believers it proves nothing of importance - no mystery in that one. But millions upon millions of people believe that even though the Bible was written thousands of years ago - it's teachings are very much applicable ESPECIALLY TODAY.

And that's a fact.

But you said:

I hope you realize the golden rule doesn't have its origin in Christianity or the bible: Source

you're really good at this slight of hands. here's the point of what i said:

"...even though the Bible was written thousands of years ago - it's teachings are very much applicable ESPECIALLY TODAY."

So i take it that YOU AGREE THEN that the Golden Rule is "very much applicable ESPECIALLY TODAY."

here again - "Do you think and believe that these simple, very practical commands ARE NO LONGER VALID, applicable today in the 21st Century?

Tell me this please if you really have any idea of what your talking about: what would happen if ALL applied the Golden Rule namely: "

“All things, therefore, that YOU want men to do to YOU, YOU also must likewise do to them".?

This is just one of the hundreds of practical commands that when applied results for the betterment of all.

Every time it's applied the result is always good.

Am I right?

Yet somehow you ignored my point and tried to change the subject.


But OK - let's go there:

Here's what was said from your source:

Examples of statements that mirror the Golden Rule appear in Ancient Egypt, for example in the story of The Eloquent Peasant which is dated to the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (c. 2040–1650 BCE): "Now this is the command: Do to the doer to cause that he do."[

“Do to the doer to cause that he do."

Compare it with what Jesus said. Can you see the difference?

“All things, therefore, that YOU want men to do to YOU, YOU also must likewise do to them".?

Here's another:

Rushworth Kidder states that "the label 'golden' was applied by Confucius (551–479 B.C.), who wrote a version of the Silver Rule: 'Here certainly is the golden maxim: Do not do to others that which we do not want them to do to us.'"

“Do not do to others that which we do not want them to do to us.'

Compare it with what Jesus said. Can you see the difference?

“All things, therefore, that YOU want men to do to YOU, YOU also must likewise do to them".?

If no – please let me know and I'll explain.

Do you think and believe that these simple, very practical commands ARE NO LONGER VALID, applicable today in the 21st Century?

--not eating shrimp and other prohibited stuff eaten by the nations were command given to the Israelites for a reason - and it's not for "stupidity" - besides God abolished these commands eventually in the Christian era.

Also, you seem to forget - that even though we are living in the 21st Century - the problems that mankind is facing today are as old as the Bible. We mourn, we get sick, and we die. People are losing hope for a bright future. The family unit is breaking apart and morality is no longer a prime importance. The science and technology that you worship as gods don't have the answers to these problems.

you said:

Oh really? Science is helping a lot more people than religion. And it's REAL HELP, feeding people, and curing them from disease...not false hope. LINK

Science has it's place in human society – but there are areas is which it's not able to satisfactorily address. But the Bible does – like the total elimination of death in the future.

But in the meantime – we can use science and technology to better our lives – nothing wrong with that! I myself is involved in designing new things. Trusting on it as though as if it is a god is a “false hope”.

But since you don't believe in the Bible or for that matter Jesus Christ then I can understand why your hope lies ONLY in science (man-made).

HE BIBLE TEACHES THAT GOD WILL BRING ABOUT THESE CHANGES ON THE EARTH.

And people have been saying that for hundreds of years...and it's always supposed to happen soon(TM).

Hopefully you'll be there to witness it, but....

Yet there's still people starving, we still have wars, and so on. At least science was able to cure dozens of deadly diseases, increase the lifespan of humans significantly, and develop ways to feed billions.

Because we're still under man's imperfect dying rule – so it's limited.

MrXYZ - where's your commons sense and logic (but I might be wrong). Just because we're not (YET) able to explain something like "parting of the red sea" - doesn't mean that it's impossible to occur.

I wasn't talking about that...I was talking about parting the waters to create the firmament. Complete and utter nonsense :

Either way you will still not believe – so what's the difference.

Think of a superconductor - floating on mid air - to us it's normal, but 500 or 1000 years ago - they'll consider it as a "phenomenon" a "miracle". Yet in the Bible such "phenomena" is normal.

Yeah, and comets were a sign of god, and people lived in the stomach of wales...again, complete and utter nonsense.

Just because we're not (YET) able to explain something doesn't mean that it's impossible to occur or it didn't happened.

But I'm quite surprised for a person like you who hold science as godlike will missed this this simple logic.

There's no logic in what you claim...you just choose to believe in something that has zero objective evidence as backup. You can't call that logic :

Of course there is! You just refused to see them.

Is possible to go against the LAWS of NATURE? Impossible, plausible? Is it impossible to travel in the speed of light? Plausible?

Do black holes bend the laws of nature or not?

Elementary questions, huh? We have no means to overcome the laws of nature. Sure, our planes fly, but they do so in line with physical laws. We might find a way to travel faster than light eventually, but it will still be based on physical laws. So yeah, it might be possible, we don't know. But in the absence of objective evidence showing that we can, it would be silly to claim "we can travel faster than light".

Black holes obviously affect physical laws and have properties other than "normal space". But there's still a ton of questions to be answered, so scientists don't have all the answers.

Exactly my point! Just because we're not (YET) able to explain something doesn't mean that it's impossible to occur or it didn't happened.

But at least they admit not having all the answers instead of making up a magical being for which they have zero objective evidence.

They don't have answers because they can't admit the obvious logical ANSWERS!

So back to the Golden Rule – see any difference?

Ty,
edmc2

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by edmc^2

 

Fact 7) Creation fits Reality because “life comes only from life.” Of Jehovah God/Yahweh (YHWH), it is written: “With you is the source of life.”—Ps. 36:9.

We don't know how life started in the first place, so that claim hasn't even been proven

Your entire point is nonsense and a good example of "god of the gaps".

Because you refuse to see the undeniable facts!

ty

Originally posted by edmc^2

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by edmc^2

 

Fact 7) Creation fits Reality because “life comes only from life.” Of Jehovah God/Yahweh (YHWH), it is written: “With you is the source of life.”—Ps. 36:9.

We don't know how life started in the first place, so that claim hasn't even been proven

Your entire point is nonsense and a good example of "god of the gaps".

Because you refuse to see the undeniable facts!

I think the problem is that what you keep holding up as facts are not seen as facts by others. Not by me in any case.

Fact #7 “life comes only from life.” Well life has been synthesized in a lab: artificial life created in a lab for the first time so scratch that one.

Fact #8 I don't even know what this one is about. Of course if someone creates something he would know what all the parts are. I don't see how you make a leap from a recipe in a book to DNA. The text you underlined says nothing about the genetic code being in the embryo but in the creators book. And once more you ask:

Wild guess, coincidence, luck or did he copied it from other writings as some may say?

It doesn't even really coincide unless it's forced the way you are doing it.

Hi edmc –

With regard to seeing all the different writing styles in the Torah’s various redactions over time (and the literary evidence points to it having been redacted regularly many times over several centuries by different editors including but not limited to Ezra - following the basic tenets of Graf-Wellhausen) it does require detailed knowledge of the ancient (now dead) language of the texts as we have them which experts in the field have been examining for more than 200 years. To make matters worse, the text contains few expressed vowels, and is written in paleoHebrew that is called unpointed (i.e. few or no written vowels, with consonants expressed only) .
Perhaps an easier way to explain these stylistic differences would be to take some examples in what is known as ‘English’ :

Chaucerian English (c. London, 1380) - ‘But y ne kann ne bolte yt to the Brenne’ (modern American English = ‘But I for one I cannot make heads or tales of it’)

Shakespearean English (c. London c. 1590) – I Prythee, Sirrah, suffer me fyrste to compleat thys Chare (modern AmericanEnglish = ‘Let me finish what I’m doing first, if you don’t mind….’)

ValSpeak – (with high Rising terminals) -Valley Girl’ - late 20th century American English (Encino, CA c. 1982) –‘ It’s like, oh m’god ! grody to the Max, I’m soe shurre—it’s like galg me with a spoon, Gross !!’ (=modern American English ‘I didn’t like it at all…’)

Ask yourself, could the same person have penned all three of these ‘styles of utterance’ at the same time say as far back as c. 1200 AD even if some ‘tradition’ just happened to claim that it came from a single pen ?

Obiously not :most American English readers to-day would see at a glance that this cannot be a text from c. 1200 AD but that the text is in fact a kind of a literary collaboration / compilation / hotchpotch from over widely spaced and different periods of English and American language usage as it evolved over time and place.

So it is with the compilation of the Torah from discrete literary (oral and written) sources and literary styles of utterance from over a 500 year period with at least 5 separate writing styles and contradictory theologies….
Besides the ‘implausibility of Moses writing about his own death’ in Deuteronomy’ (part of the supposedly ancient ‘Torah’ and something that worried the Rabbis as early as the time of Spinoza), we see throughout phrases like ‘which exists to this day’ which indicates the scribe is writing LONG AFTER the event.

Also, internal textual evidence of different strands of paleo-text which can be shown to come from different periods and different places and NOT from a single hand writing from Gen through the end of Deuteronomy – also the book of Joshua is written by the same hand/editors as the Book of Deuteronomy which continues the narrative without a break with its own unique sentence structure, syntax, vocabulary, content, Theology, Weltanschauung, spelling, grammar –

Again, you will have to look at a book that breaks this don for you e.g. the one for the general reader compiled by Robt Elliott Friedman, in his 1997 book "Who Wrote the Bible?"

He lists some of the reasons why ‘Moses’ could not have been the sole author of the Torah as we have it today in any of the various versions (whether you take the Sam Pent, Heb. Vorlag-to the Greek texts of LXX, Symmachus, Aquila and Theodotion, the consonantal text of the later MT, or any of the much older and more fluid Dead Sea Scroll versions etc. – NB none of which are exactly the same iff you count every consonants - Jewish scribes did not start counting ‘middle letters’ on a page or column of Hebrew text until after 300 AD – after the period when the Torah was consolotated into a single and now familiar proto-Masoretic text version – )

Some cogent literary Arguments against any idea of a single Mosaic Authorship of the Torah

There are (2) Contradictory Creation Myths in Genesis viz. Gen 1:1 – 2:4a and 2:4b to 4:25.

There are (2) different stories descriptions of the AbrahamCovenant. There are (2) different stories of the naming of Yitza’ac - Isaac.

There are (2) different stories of Abraham deceived a king by introducing his wife Sarah as his sister.

There are (2) different stories of Yakkov/Jacob traveling to Mesopotamia

There are (2) different stories of a revelation at Beth-el to Yakkov /Jacob.

There are (2) different versions of how Elohim (version 1) or YHWH (version 2) changed Yakkov’s name to Yiro’eel – Israel

There are (2) different versions of where ‘Moses’ extracted water from Meribah – with two different rocks at two different locations both called Meribah… etc. etc.

These 2 version stories are called DOUBLETS – which are in fact two competing versions of an older oral tradition - neither of which was able to supplant the other by the time Ezra came around to re-write the Torah using the new Aramaic ‘square letters’ having switched from the older pointed ‘horned’ Phoenecian lettering system which existed before 500 BCE – the situation is a little like 2 legislative versions of the same bill in the US congress = the Senate and the House that no ‘committee’ was able to conflate or reconcile into a single passable bill/document.

Here are some others which bothered more open minded thinkers like the Italian Jewish philosopher Spinoza (who by the way was rudely excommunicated by his own Synagogue for daring to open his mouth about them !)

Genesis 7:15: In the story of the Flood, these verses have Noah collecting two of each species of animals -- one male and one female . yet Genesis 7:2-3 specifies 7 pairs of clean animals and birds and 1 pair of unclean animals. Which one is the real one?

Genesis 7:11 describes water coming from the heavens and from below the ground to generate the worldwide flood. However, Genesis 7:4 describes ALL of the water falling as rain. Again which one?

Compare the contradctions in Genesis 7:11, 7:17, 7:24 and 8:3 specify different intervals for the flood duration which have no apparent resolution. 11

Genesis 14:14: refers to Abram pursuing some surviving kings of Sodom and Gomorrah to the city of Dan. However, that place did not exist until a long time after Moses' death.

Other locations are also identified in the Pentateuch by names that were invented long after the death of Moses.

Genesis 22:14: The verse states: "And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day..." There are many verses in the Torah that state that something has lasted "to this day". That appears to have been written by a writer who composed the passages long after the events described, and long after Moses' death.

Genesis 36 contained a list of Edomite kings which included some monarchs who were in power after Moses' death. R.E. Friedman wrote: "In the eleventh century, Isaac ibn Yashush, a Jewish court physician of a ruler in Muslim Spain, pointed out that a list of Edomite kings that appears in Genesis 36 named kings who lived long after Moses was dead. Ibn Yashush suggested that the list was written by someone who lived after Moses. The response to his conclusion was that he was called "Isaac the blunderer."

Exodus 33:7 describes Moses entering the Tabernacle. Yet, the Tabernacle had not yet been built; its subsequent construction is described in Exodus 35.

Numbers 12:3: This verse states "Now the man Moses was very humble, more than all men who were on the face of the earth." (NKJ) If Moses were that humble, it is unlikely that he would have described himself in these glowing terms. Numbers 25:1 which describes the rebellion at Peor referred to Moabite women; Numbers 25:6 14 refers to Midianites.

Deuteronomy 34:5-9: These verses describe the death, burial, age at death, physical condition at death, and mourning period for Moses.

You ask why couldn’t a single author like Moses change his mind about ELOHIM and YHWH in any given story? Scholars have discovered (painstaking research can sometimes bear fruit) that in many key (i.e. dead giveaway) sentences within the Torah, when the term YHWH is used (sometimes called the J strand), the text continues in one peculiar ‘literary style’ complete with its own unique sentence structure, syntax, vocabulary, content, Theology, Weltanschauung, spelling, grammar clearly favouring the southern Kingdom of Judah (grammatically it is also also written in a Hebronite southern paleo-Hebrew ‘accent’);

And in 'give away' sentences when the term ELOHIM is used (called the E strand), the text continues in another paleo Hebrew style with its own unique sentence structure, syntax, vocabulary, content, Theology, Weltanschauung, spelling, grammar another theology altogether (with different spelling, syntax, grammar, sentence length, vocabulary, phraseology, Weltanschauung etc. which ‘politically’ favours the northern Kingdom of Israel (with a ‘Shechemite’ accent).

There are other sub-strands (e.g. P strand, responsible for setting out Gen 1:1 to 2:4a) ) which uses ELOHIM before it comes to Exodus chapter 3 (the Burrning Bush story( and uses YHWH after Exodus Chapter 3, but its existence is known by its own ‘late Babylonian accent’ which closely resembles the writer of the Scroll of the Book of the Prophet Hezekiel c. 550 BCE – the language is far later than that of the time of ‘Mosheh’ (c. 1350 BCE) – so the P writer gives himself away with his favourite words and phrases which he uses over and over.

I'll break down the FLOOD narrative into the two coherent stories if you wish on another post so you can clearly see that there are 2 flood stories with different content, vocabulary, distinctive style of utterance and theolgy - stay tuned !

I'll leave this short and sweet for you Mr. Simpleton...


If "creation" is "factually accurate" how then do you explain the dinosaurs?

Originally posted by FlawlessVictory
I'll leave this short and sweet for you Mr. Simpleton...


If "creation" is "factually accurate" how then do you explain the dinosaurs?

Just curious, what exactly do you think needs to be explained? In what way do you believe the existence of dinosaurs in prehistoric times contradicts creation?
Perhaps I am a simpleton also, but your question seems to be nonspecific and lacking a point

reply to post by Sigismundus


Sigismundus - that was a lot of reading, but I'm sorry to say this - the information you've presented are so convoluted, out of sync in time and full of error. The main basis are due to the difference in writing styles, prose, even spelling, etc. Bottom line what you're trying to say as I understand it - is the the Bible was a copy of post 500-550 BCE manuscripts.

But I'm curious if you know you're history - let's pick a pivotal date that can be traced back in time.

Jerusalem and Mount Zion came to symbolize the nation of Israel and its people. But in the space of less than 500 years that people became apostate, and wicked kings “filled Jerusalem with innocent blood.” (2 Kings 24:4) They refused to heed the warning of God’s prophets, so that finally the Sovereign Lord Jehovah pronounced judgment on Zedekiah, the last king to reign in Jerusalem, saying: “Lift off the crown. . . . A ruin, a ruin, a ruin I shall make it. As for this also, it will certainly become no one’s until he comes who has the legal right, and I must give it to him.” (Ezekiel 21:26, 27)

When was this prophecy fulfilled according to historical facts? This is very important as it's tied to your post 500-550 BCE era.

That's is the destruction and the restoration.

ty,
edmc2

Originally posted by FlawlessVictory
I'll leave this short and sweet for you Mr. Simpleton...


If "creation" is "factually accurate" how then do you explain the dinosaurs?

Well Mr. FlawlessVictory,

Don't forget the pterosaurs too.

If your question is why they exist?

Simple answer is they were created possibly in the 5th era of the Creative “DAY” (epoch) listed in the Genesis, when the Bible says that God made “flying creatures” and “great sea monsters.” maybe some also in the 6th Creative “DAY”.These different types of dinosaurs with their huge appetites* would have been appropriate considering the abundant vegetation that evidently existed in their time. —Genesis 1:20-24.

*Note:

Herbivorous dinosaurs--which included sauropods, ankylosaurs, stegosaurs, hadrosaurs, pachycephalosaurs, ornithopods, ceratopsians and titanosaurs--vastly outnumbered meat-eaters in prehistoric times. Here's a complete, A to Z list of every herbivorous dinosaur that ever lived in the Mesozoic Era.

dinosaurs.about.com...

Why did they disappear?

So many theories proposed and still more being formulated. So far none is satisfactory as it opens more questions rather than answers. More questions more theories.

To me the only logical and simple answer is:

When they fulfilled their purpose the Creator simply put them to sleep (how or when the Bible is silent). I call it "selective extinction" because it appears that they selectively died. It’s like precision surgery where other gentle animals and equally other powerful ones remained to continue living and flourish (rhinoceros, alligators, elephants even the mighty mammoth, etc).


Of course you're free to believe all of the “flawlessvictory” theories you want to believe but 'that's my story and i'm sticking to it' (until the true reason comes out - if there's another).


===

Btw – here are the different theories so far….

Take ur pick…

“Authors with varying competence have suggested that dinosaurs disappeared because the climate deteriorated . . . or that the diet did. . . . Other writers have put the blame on disease, parasites, . . . changes in the pressure or composition of the atmosphere, poison gases, volcanic dust, excessive oxygen from plants, meteorites, comets, gene pool drainage by little mammalian egg-eaters, . . . cosmic radiation, shift of Earth’s rotational poles, floods, continental drift, . . . drainage of swamp and lake environments, sunspots.”—The Riddle of the Dinosaur.

====

Ty,
edmc