Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

Reply to topic
bluethread
First Post
PostPosted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:53 pm  Scientifc accuracy in the Scriptures. Reply with quote

Based on the concept of omniscience, many claim the plain language of the Scriptures should be scientifically accurate. So, if there were a verse that said that the Sun is the center of the solar system, would that make it acceptable on that basis?
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 61: Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:33 am
Reply
Re: Scientifc accuracy in the Scriptures.

Like this post
bluethread wrote:


Well, there are many on this site that think that such a requirement of you would constitute proof that a deity does not exist. So, if a deity speaks directly to a particular group of people, that shows the it can't be a deity. Yet, if the revelation is written in the context of a time and culture that is far removed from them, it can't be a deity either.

No. In fact just the opposite would be true. Obviously a deity wishing to communicate with humans would have to use language the humans would understand, but it would not pretend to be ignorant just to ingratiate itself with an ignorant people. No, it would teach wisdom and knowledge that would surprise that people, and then teach them why the surprising information is true.

Jesus did this on a moral/ethical level, tho' not on a scientific one. Jesus taught that one should love one's enemies and actually help them.

Regarding an example of revealing knowledge that is unknown and even surprising, one need look no further than your local college campus where professors on a daily basis teach Freshmen things they do not know and frequently resist learning. Smile

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 62: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:36 am
Reply

Like this post
rikuoamero wrote:

[Replying to post 55 by evilsorcerer1]

Quote:
how many days did it rain for? 40 days and nights;


Actually...we don't know for sure how long there was rainfall in the story. In Genesis Chapter 7, we have verse 12 "And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights." and verse 17 "For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth"
Then we have verse 24 which muddies the waters (no pun intended) a bit
"The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days."

Basically the story is unclear. Now of course, if this were an event that happened in real life, we could use science to determine the course of events...


To me, it rained 40 days and nights. Then the earth was flooded for 150 days. And Noah waited an additional 7 after the doves came back. So, somewhere around 197 days. Long time to float around and survive. But I digress.

The OP was about scientific accuracy in the scripture. I believe their is some. But, i remember that we define science.

Why would God have to follow science?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 63: Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:55 am
Reply

Like this post
brianbbs67 wrote:

Why would God have to follow science?

So, is it your position that the claims of acts of God may contradict science and be completely absurd or impossible yet we should accept them as verities?

In that case, what separates the myths of the Bible from the thousands of other myths?

What is fundamentally different from the story of a serpent beguiling Eve and the story of Raven creating the world* or of the Islamic story of man being created from a clot of blood? If science matters not, what limit is there to our analysis of one myth or story from another?

_________________________________
* "Raven is taught by his father, Kit-ka'ositiyi-qa, to be a creator, but Raven is unsatisfied with the result. He creates the world but is unable to give it light or water. On hearing that light could be found hidden in a far-off land, Raven decides to travel there and steal it. In the house of light, he finds a young woman living with her father and plays the first of many tricks. He turns himself into a small speck of dirt, slips into her drinking water, and is swallowed. The daughter becomes pregnant and she gave birth to an unusual and fussy child who cries constantly and demands to touch one of the bundles which has been stored hanging from the walls. The child is given one of the bags to quiet him, but when he tires of playing with it, he lets it go, and it floats away from him and disappears through the smoke hole. Once it reaches the sky the bundle comes undone and scatters stars across the sky. When the child cries to have it back again he is given the second bundle to play with and lets it float away through the hole in the ceiling, thus releasing the moon. It all happens again with the third and last bundle, which flies away and becomes sunlight. After bringing light to the whole world, he too flies out through the smoke hole."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven_Tales

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 64: Thu Jan 04, 2018 2:03 am
Reply

Like this post
[Replying to post 63 by Danmark]

No, what i say is, we only know the "science" we have learned. Wouldn't a creator have all knowledge? Since He created it? And some of it would(judging by the weather for one) defy our Theorems and Laws of nature, as we don't know how it works. Yet. Not, magic. Just knowledge, we don't know, yet.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 65: Thu Jan 04, 2018 2:21 am
Reply

Like this post
brianbbs67 wrote:

[Replying to post 63 by Danmark]

No, what i say is, we only know the "science" we have learned. Wouldn't a creator have all knowledge? Since He created it? And some of it would(judging by the weather for one) defy our Theorems and Laws of nature, as we don't know how it works. Yet. Not, magic. Just knowledge, we don't know, yet.

What is the difference between 'magic' and stories that 'do not follow science?'
From our human perspective, how are we to distinguish between what seems like utter 'magical' nonsense, and what a God does?

According to Christianity a god created the world from nothing, called it good, then called it bad and destroyed 99% of it after a snake talked to a woman. Then the god sent himself as his own son to be killed and rise from the dead and float off in the clouds where he will return 'soon,' tho' 'soon' means more than 2000 years. How is this scenario more reasonable than the Tales of Raven or the story of Muhammed or the Mormon idea that Jews were the first native Americans, having come to America 4 to 5 thousand years ago and God turned the skin of half of them black? All this without leaving a trace of their civilization.

Once we abandon science and history, how does one determine the validity of one myth versus the thousands of false ones?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 66: Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:25 am
Reply

Like this post (1): William
Danmark wrote:


What is fundamentally different from the story of a serpent beguiling Eve and the story of Raven creating the world* or of the Islamic story of man being created from a clot of blood? If science matters not, what limit is there to our analysis of one myth or story from another?


The lesson that is taught is the difference. Not knowing the history, culture or language of the people to whom the raven mythology was given, I can not speak to that. However, the history, culture or language of the people to whom the story of Havah is given involves a chaotic universe of independent conflicting forces(deities), that are only restrained by the cycles of nature(encircling serpent). This is the knowledge of ra'(translated evil). Havah already had the knowledge of tov(translated good), that she and Adam received as they walked in the evening with Adonai. A concept of a universe of order and linear time, where things progress from inanimate to animate and one is able to name things(understand their nature) and tend the garden(predictably organize ones surroundings). By partaking of the tree of both tov and ra', they became exposed(naked) to the enslavement of the concept of a universe of nothing but randomness and conflict, where one's only hope is to repeat the same year over and over again. Now, the raven story may be just as rich, in context. However, neither of them make any sense, if they are read as 20th century science text books.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 67: Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:03 pm
Reply

Like this post
bluethread wrote:

Danmark wrote:


What is fundamentally different from the story of a serpent beguiling Eve and the story of Raven creating the world* or of the Islamic story of man being created from a clot of blood? If science matters not, what limit is there to our analysis of one myth or story from another?


The lesson that is taught is the difference. Not knowing the history, culture or language of the people to whom the raven mythology was given, I can not speak to that. However, the history, culture or language of the people to whom the story of Havah is given involves a chaotic universe of independent conflicting forces(deities), that are only restrained by the cycles of nature(encircling serpent). This is the knowledge of ra'(translated evil). Havah already had the knowledge of tov(translated good), that she and Adam received as they walked in the evening with Adonai. A concept of a universe of order and linear time, where things progress from inanimate to animate and one is able to name things(understand their nature) and tend the garden(predictably organize ones surroundings). By partaking of the tree of both tov and ra', they became exposed(naked) to the enslavement of the concept of a universe of nothing but randomness and conflict, where one's only hope is to repeat the same year over and over again. Now, the raven story may be just as rich, in context. However, neither of them make any sense, if they are read as 20th century science text books.


To me this speaks clearly enough to the maturing of an idea of GOD. Biblical I see the clues are there - but are also hidden behind the guise of names and inevitable clinging to traditions which have the affect of hindering/retarding the maturing process.

They do serve to preserve the idea of GOD in a protective response against godlessness - against the state of contemplating no idea of GOD whatsoever.

But if that protective response cannot evolve in alignment with human society and scientific knowledge it becomes a hindrance rather than a help and in that, strengthens the argument for godlessness.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 68: Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:22 pm
Reply
Re: Scientifc accuracy in the Scriptures.

Like this post
bluethread wrote:

Based on the concept of omniscience, many claim the plain language of the Scriptures should be scientifically accurate. So, if there were a verse that said that the Sun is the center of the solar system, would that make it acceptable on that basis?


Unless you knew better. There is no such verse though. How about if science said we were beasts, or that the universe sailed out of a hot pepper sized speck o soup- would we believe that?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 69: Fri Jan 05, 2018 8:49 pm
Reply
Re: Scientifc accuracy in the Scriptures.

Like this post (1): H.sapiens
dad wrote:
How about if science said... the universe sailed out of a hot pepper sized speck o soup...?

In that case science would be in agreement with the kind of thing you claim.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 70: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:53 pm
Reply
Re: Scientifc accuracy in the Scriptures.

Like this post
Danmark wrote:

dad wrote:
How about if science said... the universe sailed out of a hot pepper sized speck o soup...?

In that case science would be in agreement with the kind of thing you claim.
I do not support the big bang fable, sorry.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Hymn Lyrics Apps
Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version