Pope: There Is No Hell

#726
#726
Roustabout said:
Truly amazing. The Bible isn't a science book. And, trying to make that claim is bull crap. And, then trying to impugn my faith because I won't submit to this nonsense is a class A dick move.
Click to expand...

Just stating the obvious.
 
#727
#727
What the hell do people mean when they say "The Bible is scientifically accurate"?

First, in just a very pure sense, science is the process in which we seek to discover laws, such that we can make deductive inferences from those laws, and those inferences reliably predict something. The Bible is not scientifically accurate in this sense.

Second, we sometimes say science is accurate when, in using those laws we have discovered which are used to make reliable prediction, we are able to give explanations of past events. If the Bible says that plants came before fish and fish before land animals and land animals before persons, it is giving an accurate account of the chronology of the development of life (at least in terms of the sequence, though not even close in terms of the time-scale). But, since it is not doing so on the basis of some law we have discovered and is, thus, in the scientific canon, it is not giving a scientific explanation. As such, it is not giving a scientifically accurate explanation. At best, it is giving an explanation that conforms with and is consistent with the scientific explanation.

Third, observations are not scientific. If the Bible says the sun appeared in the sky yesterday, that is no more a scientifically accurate explanation than my saying, "the sun appeared in the sky yesterday". These are merely historic observations. Now, as historic observations, insofar as they are facts, they can be used to discover new scientific laws. But, the observation is not scientific. The description of the observation is not scientific.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#728
#728
therealUT said:
What the hell do people mean when they say "The Bible is scientifically accurate"?

First, in just a very pure sense, science is the process in which we seek to discover laws, such that we can make deductive inferences from those laws, and those inferences reliably predict something. The Bible is not scientifically accurate in this sense.

Second, we sometimes say science is accurate when, in using those laws we have discovered which are used to make reliable prediction, we are able to give explanations of past events. If the Bible says that plants came before fish and fish before land animals and land animals before persons, it is giving an accurate account of the chronology of the development of life (at least in terms of the sequence, though not even close in terms of the time-scale). But, since it is not doing so on the basis of some law we have discovered and is, thus, in the scientific canon, it is not giving a scientific explanation. As such, it is not giving a scientifically accurate explanation. At best, it is giving an explanation that conforms with and is consistent with the scientific explanation.

Third, observations are not scientific. If the Bible says the sun appeared in the sky yesterday, that is no more a scientifically accurate explanation than my saying, "the sun appeared in the sky yesterday". These are merely historic observations. Now, as historic observations, insofar as they are facts, they can be used to discover new scientific laws. But, the observation is not scientific. The description of the observation is not scientific.
Click to expand...

Wrong, the bible makes many scientific statements.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#731
#731
Job 38:24 (KJV)
24 By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth?

That is a scientific statement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#733
#733
Job 38:35 (KJV)
35 Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are?
Telephones? That is a scientific statement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#737
#737
Oooooh, Dinosaurs, how's that for science? They lived when man did.

Job 40:15-19 (KJV)
15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#739
#739
Exodus 20:11 (KJV)
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

How about creation? is that scientific enough for you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#741
#741
Proverbs 30:33 (KJV)
33 Surely the churning of milk bringeth forth butter, and the wringing of the nose bringeth forth blood: so the forcing of wrath bringeth forth strife.

Ooooh, that's a scientific statement. You can try, observe and repeat. The wringing of the nose bringeth forth blood.
Turning milk to butter, science you can eat!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#742
#742
BigO95 said:
Proverbs 30:33 (KJV)
33 Surely the churning of milk bringeth forth butter, and the wringing of the nose bringeth forth blood: so the forcing of wrath bringeth forth strife.

Ooooh, that's a scientific statement. You can try, observe and repeat. The wringing of the nose bringeth forth blood.
Click to expand...

What in the ****ing bluest of blue hells are you babbling about?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#746
#746
BigO95 said:
With the history of the bible that I have studied, I have come to the conclusion that the KJV Bible is in fact the word of God. And the bible itself proclaims that is indeed preserved. I was merely pointing that out.
Click to expand...

The KJV is only one version among many where scholars have striven to develop an honest translation. So it is 'the Word of God'.

If one reads any of these versions, the same story of God's dealing with mankind culminating in the Gospel of Jesus' is told. They are also the word of God.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


In fact, comparing them often gives one a more complete sense of a passage's meaning.

As for the KJV, it is 17th century English. And, while one can surely get the intended meaning from the KJV, what about Spanish speaking people, Portugese, French, Dutch, German, Polish, Magyar, Chinese, Swahili, ... well, you get the picture. Have you ever talked to a Wycliff translator? You know, the folk who develop old and new testament translations for language groups around the world for whom no translations yet exist?

In light of the many languages around the world, and that so many versions in each major language exist, and that folk everywhere still understand the doctrine of God's redemptive love as developed throughout the bible, holding onto the KJV is the only true word of God is untenable. The KJV is one among many where scholarly men took the ancient texts and translated them into a 'modern' language, and God's word suffuses them all. Even when there are discrepancies here and there, the totality of so many authors is amazing.

Question: Does the KJV you use include the intertestamental Apocrypha as the original KJV-1611 did. Does it also include Bishop Usher's calculations of dates for age of the world in page notes? Usher lived in 1611, not during Christ's life. Should his calculations on the age of the earth be included as if it were scripture in every KJV? Even though many contemporaries had differences with him?

I'd tend toward the KJV is one among many, all pretty good, some better.
 
#748
#748
Orangedogsrule said:
The KJV is only one version among many where scholars have striven to develop an honest translation. So it is 'the Word of God'.

If one reads any of these versions, the same story of God's dealing with mankind culminating in the Gospel of Jesus' is told. They are also the word of God.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


In fact, comparing them often gives one a more complete sense of a passage's meaning.

As for the KJV, it is 17th century English. And, while one can surely get the intended meaning from the KJV, what about Spanish speaking people, Portugese, French, Dutch, German, Polish, Magyar, Chinese, Swahili, ... well, you get the picture. Have you ever talked to a Wycliff translator? You know, the folk who develop old and new testament translations for language groups around the world for whom no translations yet exist?

In light of the many languages around the world, and that so many versions in each major language exist, and that folk everywhere still understand the doctrine of God's redemptive love as developed throughout the bible, holding onto the KJV is the only true word of God is untenable. The KJV is one among many where scholarly men took the ancient texts and translated them into a 'modern' language, and God's word suffuses them all. Even when there are discrepancies here and there, the totality of so many authors is amazing.

Question: Does the KJV you use include the intertestamental Apocrypha as the original KJV-1611 did. Does it also include Bishop Usher's calculations of dates for age of the world in page notes? Usher lived in 1611, not during Christ's life. Should his calculations on the age of the earth be included as if it were scripture in every KJV? Even though many contemporaries had differences with him?

I'd tend toward the KJV is one among many, all pretty good, some better.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying, But I haven't changed my mind on the subject one little bit. Why don't these new bible translators leave off the copy rights if they are interested in getting the word of God out to the people?
 
#749
#749
Sciences very definition doesn’t prove the beginning of civilization however it does prove the biblical version. Because God was there to observe and his experiment was successful. Good night all and God bless
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#750
#750
BigO95 said:
Oooooh, Dinosaurs, how's that for science? They lived when man did.

Job 40:15-19 (KJV)
15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
Click to expand...

Oh honey
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top