-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Just a bit of sharing from me and the rest of the brethren
- Thread starter enton
- Start date
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
I'm a thiest, I'm in line to become a Sceintist... I don't believe in the bible, I'm not a Christian.
wa:do
wa:do
Feathers in Hair
World's Tallest Hobbit
I'm afraid that might've been my fault.Scott1 said:
I wasn't very clear.
Let's put it this way: all supporters of Genesis are theists, but not all theists are supporters of Genesis. Does that make sense?FeathersinHair said:
If I were a Hindu theist, and a Christian theist asked me if I supported Genesis, the conversation would go something like this:
He: Are you a theist?
Me: Yes I am.
He: Do you support Genesis 1, then?
Me: Absolutely not.
He: Why not?
Me: Genesis 1 is a monolog of a deity named Jehovah talking about how he created the universe.
He: That's correct. So what's the problem?
Me: Brahma created the universe.
He: Don't you believe in Jehovah?
Me: Let's put it this way, I don't disbelieve him, but if you're gonna claim he created the universe, you can take your Genesis 1 elsewhere. It was written just to bash Hindus, anyway.
Feathers in Hair
World's Tallest Hobbit
Back to the topic at hand, then, you don't think all scientists are out to bash theism, right? If that's the case, I apologize for trying to reassure you that they aren't.
1. Biblically speaking, Earth is old for man but not for God.Deut. 32.8 said:
2. Creation is not scientifically wrong. Would I mind to collect data from you why you say Science conlflicts Creationism.
3. Deluge you mean. If you can find available video tapes from Pro-deluge and anti-deluge, view them and compare their findings. Why do I recommend this? Because they are archaeologists: one is proving the truth about deluge and the other is trying to disprove deluge.
4. Science don`t conflict the "Opening of the sea." I guess you have known about the Tsunami Phenomena. It sufficed to tell.
5. Science conflicts with...what?
Hi, Enton! Nice to meet you. Nice post, too!enton said:
In your point nr. 1 above, I contend that God created the Earth with age imbedded in it, just over 6000 years ago. Does that make any sense to you?
Yes, there are good tapes and such on the Deluge.
I hope you enjoy this forum. It can get intense, sometimes!
JerryL said:the - God
ist - conjugit of "ism"
ism - belief or movement
a thiest has a believe in a god or gods.
... trying to stay on topic but having no idea what the topic is
Christians view tha science and religion have no conflict with each other.
But because someone here wants to know about theism. Then, lexicographically speaking, 1st century Jews are not theists.
Theism - belief in God or Gods.
Well true christians believe there are gods biblically speaking.
Okay. Jesus Christ walked in water biblically speaking. Now if one scientist tries to deny that, he needs to have a reliable historical proof.
JerryL
Well-Known Member
1. Physical evidence (say, for example, fracture dating of the Atlantic basin) gives an age to the Earth entirely inconsistant with the Biblical Creationist position of <10,000 years.
2. Physicial evidence (for example, that the Earth is a globe in a timespace without "up and down"), conflicts with the Biblical account (in this case, that there is a layer of water above heaven.
3. There is no evidence supporting a global flood. There is strong evidence supporting a local flood of what is now the black sea around 5500 BCE (the waters of the Medeteranian, which were rising as the last ice-age receeded, caused the Bosphorous portal to burst flooding the [now former] lake.) The people living on the shores of the lake fled the rising flood and many settled in what is now Iraq. This is the land of the Babylonians, who authored the flood of Gilgamesh. The Babylonian myth is not only set about the correct time for the flooding of the Black sea, but contains unusual details in common with the story of Noah's flood (wickedness of men, saved arc, rainbow.. though Giglgameh's makes more internal sense).
4. I'm not sure which portion of Exodus he is refuting. He could be pointing out that none of the metioned plagues show up anywhere in Egyptian history, or indeed that the Jews captive never shows up in Egyptian history (I suspect that it's a sotry brought by people who came into the Hittites, and when the Jews seperated from the Hittites, the story got incorporated into the new mythology). Of course, he could simply be disputing the supernatural claims.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Hey now... I've walked on water.
Granted it was winter and the surface was frozen over, but I walked on water. :bounce
wa:do
Granted it was winter and the surface was frozen over, but I walked on water. :bounce
wa:do
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
and now back on topic...
for me religion and science are not incompatable...
I realize that my culture is rich with metaphorical stories and lessons to be learned, if they don't always sync with science does that lessen the value of the message?
NO... to me it does not.
wa:do
for me religion and science are not incompatable...
I realize that my culture is rich with metaphorical stories and lessons to be learned, if they don't always sync with science does that lessen the value of the message?
NO... to me it does not.
wa:do
Now that's what I call an open mind; well said PW.painted wolf said:and now back on topic...
for me religion and science are not incompatable...
I realize that my culture is rich with metaphorical stories and lessons to be learned, if they don't always sync with science does that lessen the value of the message?
NO... to me it does not.
wa:do
JerryL
Well-Known Member
Which would be the definition of "claim", and not evidence.
How many witneses can you get? How credible are they and how well can your verify their credability?
A religion which makes false claims of fact is incompatable with reality. If these claims are falsifiable, then it is at odds with science.
Anyway, AV1611, this earth had been caused by. And one thing is for sure: though man sees this earth as very olden matter, God sees this earth by man's acts, not by age, because where shall God base an age when in fact he is inhabiting eternity?AV1611 said:
This earth is more or less 5 billion years old (as scientists estimated it to be). Anyway, the color of the skins of the first parents (Adam and Eve) could not have been providing multi-color races right now if this earth is just 6,000 years old by human standard.:jiggy:
Anyway, it's your problem if your science contradicts with the Biblical truths. For me, the whole globe had sunk in water. In fact it is the water cycle which evidenced the Biblical declarations like this:JerryL said:
Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Genesis 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Genesis 1:7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
It is very clear:
1. Clouds bear water.
2. There are waters under the earth.
Is the deluge true? Of course!
Genesis 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. (NOAH'S time only)
Exodus plagues? How about today's plagues?