• 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!

The New System

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
If that's what you want to believe, you do you and I'll do me. I don't agree with that, but who cares, eh?

Ummmm... not really. It's not a matter of belief. It IS a matter of FACT.

The DNA in Humans, proves definitively, there never was a genetic bottle-neck, proving once and for all, that humans did NOT descend from a single breeding pair.

Never happened. It's not belief-- the facts are plain enough, if you study human genetics at any length.

But there's far more evidence proving Genesis false, than just the DNA story.

Just the outline of the story has it all wrong; the Sun, which is literally responsible for all life on Earth? Wasn't made until some time after .... green plants! And the very Earth itself!

That's wrong on so many levels, it proves Eden was just as Story, not remotely connected to reality.
 

Earthling

David Henson
Ummmm... not really. It's not a matter of belief. It IS a matter of FACT.

The DNA in Humans, proves definitively, there never was a genetic bottle-neck, proving once and for all, that humans did NOT descend from a single breeding pair.

Never happened. It's not belief-- the facts are plain enough, if you study human genetics at any length.

But there's far more evidence proving Genesis false, than just the DNA story.

Just the outline of the story has it all wrong; the Sun, which is literally responsible for all life on Earth? Wasn't made until some time after .... green plants! And the very Earth itself!

That's wrong on so many levels, it proves Eden was just as Story, not remotely connected to reality.

Bull****
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Ummmm... not really. It's not a matter of belief. It IS a matter of FACT.

The DNA in Humans, proves definitively, there never was a genetic bottle-neck, proving once and for all, that humans did NOT descend from a single breeding pair.

Never happened. It's not belief-- the facts are plain enough, if you study human genetics at any length.

But there's far more evidence proving Genesis false, than just the DNA story.

Just the outline of the story has it all wrong; the Sun, which is literally responsible for all life on Earth? Wasn't made until some time after .... green plants! And the very Earth itself!

That's wrong on so many levels, it proves Eden was just as Story, not remotely connected to reality.

You will recall that something about no
interest in science.

More likely, it is an actual dread.

It is not safe to go too far, learning
outside the lines.

For lo, to delve therein it would be
worse than seeing a video of a trusted
partner stealing from and cheating on.

Look what happened to poor Dr Faustus!

Fantasy illusion can only be maintained
thro' a strict regimen of maintained ignorance.

A person might find a way to love again
after betrayal, but maybe not so much
when a person discovers he's betrayed himself.
 
Last edited:

Earthling

David Henson
Do you pray to your god with that mouth! LOL!

Yes.

What you said about science, is irrelevant. Science is always wrong.

What you said about the Bible was wrong.

[Genesis 1:1] The Hebrew verb consists of two different states. The perfect state indicates an action which is complete, whereas the imperfect state indicates a continuous or incomplete action.

At Genesis 1:1 the word bara, translated as created, is in the perfect state, which means that at this point the creation of the heavens and the Earth were completed. Later, as in verse 16 the Hebrew word asah, translated as made, is used, which is in the imperfect state, indicating continuous action. The heavens and Earth were created in verse 1 and an indeterminate time later they were being prepared for habitation, much the same as a bed is manufactured (complete) and made (continuous) afterwards.

[Genesis 1:3] Here the Hebrew verb waiyomer (proceeded to say) is in the imperfect state indicating progressive action. This first chapter of Genesis has more than 40 cases of the imperfect state. The creative "days" were a gradual process of making Earth habitable.

The light was a diffused light which gradually grew in intensity. Some translations more clearly indicate the progressive action:

A Distinctive Translation of Genesis by J.W. Watts (1963): "Afterward God proceeded to say, 'Let there be light'; and gradually light came into existence."

Benjamin Wills Newton's translation (1888): "And God proceeded to say [future], Let Light become to be, and Light proceeded to become to be [future]."

The Hebrew word for light, ohr, is used. This distinguishes the light from the source of the light. Later, on the fourth "day" the Hebrew word maohr is used, signifying that the source of the light only becomes visible then through the swaddling band.

[Genesis 1:14] The light in verse 14 is different from that in verse 3. In verse 3 the Hebrew word ohr is used, meaning the light from the source. Light in a general sense, whereas the light in verse 14 the Hebrew word maohr is used, signifying the source of the light is now
visible. See [Genesis 1:3]

The sun, moon and stars are set as a sign of the seasons, days and years. A most accurate timepiece. The use of the term "sign" is often mistaken as a reference to astrology, which is incorrect.

[Genesis 1:16] The Hebrew waiyaas (proceeded to make), from asah, in verse 16 is different than bara (create) in Genesis 1:1,21,27. Asah is the imperfect state indicating progressive action. The luminaries as part of the heavens had already been completed in verse 1, but now they were visible on Earth and prepared for their intended use. Asah can mean make, or appoint (Deuteronomy 15:1), establish (2 Samuel 7:11), form (Jeremiah 18:4), or prepare (Genesis 21:8). See [Genesis 1:1]

The creative days, each of which may have lasted thousands or even millions of years, and had taken place an indeterminate period of time after the creation was complete in verse one, are not indicative of any speculation regarding the age of the Earth and universe.
The Bible simply doesn't say.

Period 1 - Light; a division between night and day (Genesis 1:3-5)
Period 2 - The Expanse; a division between waters above and beneath. (Genesis 1:6-8)
Period 3 - Dry land and vegetation. (Genesis 1:9-13)
Period 4 - Heavenly luminaries become visible from Earth. (Genesis 1:14-19)
Period 5 - Aquatic and flying creatures. (Genesis 1:20-23)
Period 6 - Land animals and man. (Genesis 1:24-31)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
Yes.

What you said about science, is irrelevant. Science is always wrong..

And here? We part company: You to your Fantasy-Delusions, and me to actual Reality.

What you said about the Bible was wrong..

Nope. Unlike you? I can read the words-in-a-row without using a Magic Decoder Ring what came in a box of Jesus Breakfast Cereal.

[Genesis 1:1] The Hebrew verb consists of two different states. The perfect state indicates an action which is complete, whereas the imperfect state indicates a continuous or incomplete action..

Translation: Apologizing for the silly bible's Failure To Be Clear, ahead.

In other words? Translating the Bible using the Magic Decoder Ring.... *sigh*

At Genesis 1:1 the word bara, translated as created, is in the perfect state, which means that at this point the creation of the heavens and the Earth were completed. Later, as in verse 16 the Hebrew word asah, translated as made, is used, which is in the imperfect state, indicating continuous action. The heavens and Earth were created in verse 1 and an indeterminate time later they were being prepared for habitation, much the same as a bed is manufactured (complete) and made (continuous) afterwards.

[Genesis 1:3] Here the Hebrew verb waiyomer (proceeded to say) is in the imperfect state indicating progressive action. This first chapter of Genesis has more than 40 cases of the imperfect state. The creative "days" were a gradual process of making Earth habitable.

The light was a diffused light which gradually grew in intensity. Some translations more clearly indicate the progressive action:

A Distinctive Translation of Genesis by J.W. Watts (1963): "Afterward God proceeded to say, 'Let there be light'; and gradually light came into existence."

Benjamin Wills Newton's translation (1888): "And God proceeded to say [future], Let Light become to be, and Light proceeded to become to be [future]."

The Hebrew word for light, ohr, is used. This distinguishes the light from the source of the light. Later, on the fourth "day" the Hebrew word maohr is used, signifying that the source of the light only becomes visible then through the swaddling band.

[Genesis 1:14] The light in verse 14 is different from that in verse 3. In verse 3 the Hebrew word ohr is used, meaning the light from the source. Light in a general sense, whereas the light in verse 14 the Hebrew word maohr is used, signifying the source of the light is now
visible. See [Genesis 1:3]

The sun, moon and stars are set as a sign of the seasons, days and years. A most accurate timepiece. The use of the term "sign" is often mistaken as a reference to astrology, which is incorrect.

[Genesis 1:16] The Hebrew waiyaas (proceeded to make), from asah, in verse 16 is different than bara (create) in Genesis 1:1,21,27. Asah is the imperfect state indicating progressive action. The luminaries as part of the heavens had already been completed in verse 1, but now they were visible on Earth and prepared for their intended use. Asah can mean make, or appoint (Deuteronomy 15:1), establish (2 Samuel 7:11), form (Jeremiah 18:4), or prepare (Genesis 21:8). See [Genesis 1:1]

The creative days, each of which may have lasted thousands or even millions of years, and had taken place an indeterminate period of time after the creation was complete in verse one, are not indicative of any speculation regarding the age of the Earth and universe.
The Bible simply doesn't say.

Period 1 - Light; a division between night and day (Genesis 1:3-5)
Period 2 - The Expanse; a division between waters above and beneath. (Genesis 1:6-8)
Period 3 - Dry land and vegetation. (Genesis 1:9-13)
Period 4 - Heavenly luminaries become visible from Earth. (Genesis 1:14-19)
Period 5 - Aquatic and flying creatures. (Genesis 1:20-23)
Period 6 - Land animals and man. (Genesis 1:24-31)

NONE of the above? Actually matches the words in the bible.

How about THAT? Must be that Magic Decoder Ring again.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
"Science is always wrong".

Quote that next time someone complains that
creationists are delusional.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I can't wait to see the technological advances in the new system! Imagine, instead of having to imagine what the future will bring all you will have to do is wait for it. Imagine how much more we could do learning, not from imperfect men, but the Creator of the universe, Jehovah God! We won't have to guess how old the universe is or where life came from, we will know. From someone who was there and made it all happen. Instead of working on something for 40 years or so you could work on it for 1,000 or more. Not to mention our intelligence will be remarkably superior to what it is now. In the new system.

Nudge, nudge.

If our intelligence will be remarkable superior to what is now, why should I take seriously anything you are saying in this OP?

Ciao

- viole
 

Earthling

David Henson
Interesting, but somewhat disappointing to hear.

Neither interesting nor disappointing. The science I taught at school was the best we had at that time. You wouldn't want to go back to that, now would you. You would have to be completely stupid to think that the science promoted as solid fact today won't be complete rubbish in the same amount of time or sooner.

The science minded atheist is so desperate to have some concrete, infallible (though they won't admit it) "evidence" that there is no God, which science actually has no means whatsoever of determining, that they arrogantly promote it as fact when it is far from it, and they will defend it to the death, obviously being wrong.

It's a mental illness, I do believe, unfortunately. There's nothing we can do to help them see the truth.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
Neither interesting nor disappointing. The science I taught at school was the best we had at that time. You wouldn't want to go back to that, now would you. You would have to be completely stupid to think that the science promoted as solid fact today won't be complete rubbish in the same amount of time or sooner.
So your school was bad and you had teachers with silly ideas they promoted. Probably in the US? That's fine, but you said science is always wrong.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Neither interesting nor disappointing. The science I taught at school was the best we had at that time. You wouldn't want to go back to that, now would you. You would have to be completely stupid to think that the science promoted as solid fact today won't be complete rubbish in the same amount of time or sooner.

This shows a total lack of understanding of how science changes. The old versions of advanced science are NOT rubbish. For example, we know Newtonian Mechanics is wrong in certain domains, but it gives quite excellent results when applied to things not moving at close to the speed of light, not at the atomic level, and not in very strong gravitational fields. So, it is used by most engineers today because it is accurate and easier to use than the more refined descriptions of modern physics.

So, even though Newtonian Mechanics is 'wrong', it is very far from being rubbish. Don't use it for things going 99% of the speed of light, or inside of an atom, or around a black hole, and the results are perfectly good.

So, yes, old descriptions are *modified* when we find more information, but old results that worked and were tested continue to work to that level of accuracy.

I wouldn't want to 'go back' to Newtonian physics if I am studying an atom, but I'm perfectly good with it when studying cars , airplanes, or planets.

The science minded atheist is so desperate to have some concrete, infallible (though they won't admit it) "evidence" that there is no God, which science actually has no means whatsoever of determining, that they arrogantly promote it as fact when it is far from it, and they will defend it to the death, obviously being wrong.

It's a mental illness, I do believe, unfortunately. There's nothing we can do to help them see the truth.

Somewhat how I feel about those who believe in the Bible. There is no way to get them out of their shell to see the reality around them. This holds double if they deny science, which is simply using reason to understand the world around us via testing our ideas.

But, you get it wrong in another way. Science is a *method* for discovering facts about the universe. It isn't compelled to demonstrate no deity exists. But it can, and does, show some mythologies are inconsistent with the facts.
 
Top