The bible is scientifically accurate, check the proof

[Nightfall]

These debates are so dumb.

Lets get something straight here...

Trying to make others believe that your beliefs are all true and theirs are false won't succeed.

Please take a look at this site.

Site for Religious Tolerance

Taken from the front page...

---

You, and I, and everyone else have two options:
Religious tolerance --accept the right of other people to freely follow different religions without hindrance, or.

To continue living in a world saturated with religious intolerance, religious-based terrorism and religious-based hatred. We will then experienced more religiously-based wars, terrorism, and civil disturbances, as we have seen recently in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Cyprus, India, Kosovo, Israel, Macedonia, Nigeria, New York City, Northern Ireland, Pakistan, Palestine, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Washington DC, etc.


It's your decision to make. What kind of a world do you want you and your children to live in?

----

 

[docmanhattan]

<< That still doesn't explain why God destroyed those cities. If they were sich bad sinners, why not simply wait 'till they die a natural death, and then send them to hell to be eternally tortured. Surely god could wait few years it takes for those people to die? What is there to gain to kill them in this life, if they will be punished for the rest of eternity when they die? >>



No one can understand Gods will, but from the Jude 1:7-8 verse (which i editted while you were probably typing your message ) my best guess is to serve as an example of how not to be a good Christian.

EDIT: nightfall, i'm actually enjoying the discussion. it's given me an opportunity to dig through some Old Testament stuff that i rarely do. if it's not interesting enough for you, you don't need to read it.

 

[CTweak]

Hey Arkitech, you counting your time here?

 

[Bluga]

some ppl look into things too much

 

[CTweak]

<< So basically my point in posting this is if the bible is just fiction or contradiction how is it possible for it to be so scientifically accurate on all those different occasions? >>



This argument is pretty funny, it's like me making 200 assertations, out of which, 4-5 of them prove to be (arguably) accurate - hence my entire 200 assertations are then proved true? Ha ha.

Even fictional books contain technically accurate stuff - ever read a Tom Clancy book? I mean, he wrote about a terrorist crashing a jumbo jet into a building - does that mean he's now Mr Prophet and all his words are a holy book? ha ha ha ha!!!

 

[d1abolic]

<< How would you explain the fact the archaeologists have found a variety of seashells on several different mountains? >>

Of all the possible explanations for this, you assume that the least likely one is true. Ever seen The Messenger? It has a rather interesting chapter about this. And as someone already mentioned, it's just techtonics.

 

[Passions]

How about these other inconsistencies....

a talking snake (Genesis 3:4-5)


That's such an ignorant and peon minded thing to say. Why don't you actually research and look things up a bit before you actually make such a lame argument, okay? If you had any intelligence, you would know that the Bible is full of metaphors and parables. Did Satan appear to Eve in the form of a snake? Maybe, but probably not.

...

The Hebrew word translated "serpent" in the above passage is nachash (&eth;&ccedil;&ugrave. In addition to "serpent," this Hebrew root word has three other possible meanings. It can be used as a noun to mean (1) "one who practices divination," or (2) "shining brass." However, nachash can also be used as a verb to mean (3) "to shine" or "to glow."

In Genesis 3, it is possible that nachash is used in the verbal form as a noun. If that is the case, the proper translation of hanachash in Genesis 3 would be "the Shining one." This understanding of nachash fits in very well with Paul's description of Satan appearing as an "angel of light" (II Cor. 11:14).


Satan probably appeared to Eve in a glowing light, as most angels do when appearing before men. Could he have appeared as a snake? Yeah, that is possible too. It would take some faith to believe that, but I don't assume half-assed people like you to possibly have a bit of that.

 

[MrDingleDangle]

SAVE ME JEEBUS!

 

[Optimus]

I think that the Bible taken literally (verbatim) will always yield apparent inconsistancies and difficult to understand passages and meanings.

Thats why we Catholics believe the Bible is a non-literal text, meant to be interpreted. When one considers the sheer scope of mankind's development, culture, and understanding the Bible had to speak to, it makes sense that it would not be literal in its writing.

Not trying to knock anyone else's views, just presenting mine.


BTW, luv2chill - that is indeed one of the greatest pieces of writing mankind has. Whatever one believes, they should be able to see the truth and beauty in that passage.

 

[oLLie]

Yay for religious tolerance!
I'm not a Christian myself, but I think there are some good lessons about morality and social teachings in many religious texts.
I don't appreciate trying to be converted...



<< some ppl look into things too much >>

Is that an argument against thinking things through? Research? Logic? Reason? Science? It sounds like it...

 

[dpk777]

The Bible isn't a science book nor a medical book.
Don't make irrelevant arguments.

 

[MacBaine]

<< But just because you don't beleive does'nt mean it did'nt happen. >>



Just because you do believe doesn't mean it did.

 

[TheDeadlyBulb]

I have never read the bible nor am I religious. Guess you could say I'm agnostic.

Anyways this is why the bible is WRONG (scientifically) from what I know.

God created the universe, what 4,000- 10,000 Years ago? If this is correct then we could not yet see the stars, even today. Some are millions of light years away, some of the light we are seeing is from stars which have gone out thousands of years ago. Us being able to see all of the stars that we see proves that the universe has been around for more than 10,000 years.

Dinosaurs... Someone once said to me that the bible mentions them. However if the world/universe was created only 10,000 years ago then the bible cannot be talking about the same dinosaurs we know. Carbon 14 dating has PROVED that dinosaurs were around more than 65 million years ago.

Also we cannot forget the talking snake and Adam and Eve. If the story of Adam and Eve were true. Then they lived in an age of massive orgies where incest was rampant, and genetics did not apply. By the time the population rose to about 100 even a minor cut would never stop bleeding!


This is why the bible is wrong. It holds many great things to believe in and live by, however most of it never happened.

 

[Optimus]

<< This is why the bible is wrong. >>



Or this is why the Bible isn't literal.

 

[TheDeadlyBulb]

Wrong, Literal. Same thing either way.

If someone thinks that they decend from Adam and Eve and that the world was created in 7 days, that's taking it literally as well as thinking it is right

 

[djs1w]

what throws me off are the religious people that like to pick and choose which part of the Bible they believe in. Like my girlfriend doesn't think that Satan exists, but believes whole heartedly in God and goes to church every Sunday. WTF? If you can pick and choose what you believe from the Bible, how the hell do you know the stuff that you do choose to believe in is right?! Gives me a headache.

 

[docmanhattan]

<< what throws me off are the religious people that like to pick and choose which part of the Bible they believe in. Like my girlfriend doesn't think that Satan exists, but believes whole heartedly in God and goes to church every Sunday. WTF? If you can pick and choose what you believe from the Bible, how the hell do you know the stuff that you do choose to believe in is right?! Gives me a headache. >>



Unfortunately a lot of people who claim to be Christians do pick and choose what they want to believe. It;s not like that though. Christianity isn't an alacarte where you can select from what looks good to you. The flip is that the only thing a person has to do is accept Jesus as their Savior. Whatever, right, but once you have that then the rest follows.
To quote Verbal: "The greatest thing the Devil did was to convince the world that he does not exist."

 

[DaLeroy]

<< I have never read the bible nor am I religious. Guess you could say I'm agnostic.

Anyways this is why the bible is WRONG (scientifically) from what I know.

God created the universe, what 4,000- 10,000 Years ago? If this is correct then we could not yet see the stars, even today. Some are millions of light years away, some of the light we are seeing is from stars which have gone out thousands of years ago. Us being able to see all of the stars that we see proves that the universe has been around for more than 10,000 years.

Dinosaurs... Someone once said to me that the bible mentions them. However if the world/universe was created only 10,000 years ago then the bible cannot be talking about the same dinosaurs we know. Carbon 14 dating has PROVED that dinosaurs were around more than 65 million years ago.

Also we cannot forget the talking snake and Adam and Eve. If the story of Adam and Eve were true. Then they lived in an age of massive orgies where incest was rampant, and genetics did not apply. By the time the population rose to about 100 even a minor cut would never stop bleeding!


This is why the bible is wrong. It holds many great things to believe in and live by, however most of it never happened. >>



/Sarcasm We all know how reliable carbon dating is /Sarcasm

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

oh not again!!!!

*runs and hides

I HATE AT!

:|

nik

 

[csiro]

<< How about these other inconsistencies....

a talking snake (Genesis 3:4-5)


That's such an ignorant and peon minded thing to say. Why don't you actually research and look things up a bit before you actually make such a lame argument, okay? If you had any intelligence, you would know that the Bible is full of metaphors and parables. Did Satan appear to Eve in the form of a snake? Maybe, but probably not.

...

The Hebrew word translated "serpent" in the above passage is nachash (&eth;&ccedil;&ugrave. In addition to "serpent," this Hebrew root word has three other possible meanings. It can be used as a noun to mean (1) "one who practices divination," or (2) "shining brass." However, nachash can also be used as a verb to mean (3) "to shine" or "to glow."

In Genesis 3, it is possible that nachash is used in the verbal form as a noun. If that is the case, the proper translation of hanachash in Genesis 3 would be "the Shining one." This understanding of nachash fits in very well with Paul's description of Satan appearing as an "angel of light" (II Cor. 11:14).


Satan probably appeared to Eve in a glowing light, as most angels do when appearing before men. Could he have appeared as a snake? Yeah, that is possible too. It would take some faith to believe that, but I don't assume half-assed people like you to possibly have a bit of that. >>



So you are saying that the scientifically explaination is that Satan did not appear as a snake. Point taken. I wonder if it's possible for you to go on down the list and give reasonable scientific explaination for the rest of the points. Please do not use faith into this as goes against the basic principles of science.

 

[Nocturnal]

DoOd, NaRt!

 

[mundania]

I'm as non-religious as they get, but I find that the Bible has conveyed some universal truths that still hold true despite all the mis-translations and mis-interpretations that have stricken the text throughout the ages.

As a scientific publication, you can debate all you want about it, but I think that the premise of such a debate does not lend itself to productive, conclusive arguments.

But as a couple people have mentioned, there are many lessons in the Bible about love, life, business, respect, loyalty, etc. etc that need be heeded, and it doesn't really matter who or what you believe is the source of that information.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

<< DoOd, NaRt! >>

 

[conjur]

I just love reading discussions on a book (or books) written out of a fear of the unknown.

 

[BlueApple]

Make up your mind?
Heaven is hotter than hell