Archeaological evidence for the Bible

[sandy whitelinger]

"Winning one for the Gipper" is not evidence that you won the game because you were the most worthy to win it, or because you were on the side of God, or because God's own hand protected you and ensured your success.

So you really have a problem with the idea that God might favor one group of people or person over another or with the whole concept of God partaking in the affairs of man? Or is it with the concept of a God in particular?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

In every case "heavens" is plural in Hebrew.

so in the first verse of Genesis did God create more than one heaven?

I don't understand how you mix what you think the universe is with "waters" and "heavens" in Genesis.

Could you explain what you mean by this a little further. I've answered what I think you mean.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

so in the first verse of Genesis did God create more than one heaven?

I'm not the one reading it literally. You tell me.

Just curious if your understanding of the universe is hinged on the singular or plurality of a Hebrew noun. It is "heavens" instead of "heaven" and many English translations render it correctly, including the New King James version.

Could you explain what you mean by this a little further. I've answered what I think you mean.

You haven't explained how you know for sure that the heavens and waters mentioned in Genesis correlate to a post-Galelio cosmology. Is the water literally water, and the heavens literally heavens as understood by modern or ancient cosmology?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So you really have a problem with the idea that God might favor one group of people or person over another or with the whole concept of God partaking in the affairs of man? Or is it with the concept of a God in particular?

No.

The story of David and Goliath is one where the positive aspects of David being on the side of God can be reaonably inferred as applying to the people and the culture that was responsible for recording and preserving the story.

The fact that the story is very self-serving for those who kept it is not in and of itself direct evidence of any fraud or fabrication, but it does suggest that a greater level of scrutiny and skepticism is appropriate than would be warranted for a story that is neutral or negative for those along its "chain of custody", all else being equal.

 

[Autodidact]

Yes. Yet as physics advances and begins to consider things like folding space and moving throught in order to travel great distances it might be concieved as to how water cound move from outside space to earth. I just don't believe that we will understand the mechanics of Heaven by applying the rules of this dimension to another.

Great, O.K., that's what I thought. It's miracles. Science would not detect it--it's outside the realm of science, right? So "Creation Science" makes no sense, right?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I'm not the one reading it literally. You tell me.

Just curious if your understanding of the universe is hinged on the singular or plurality of a Hebrew noun. It is "heavens" instead of "heaven" and many English translations render it correctly, including the New King James version.

In general I would say that it is the Heaven where God resides and the use of the plural is similar to the use of the plural for Elohim, or Heaven is a singular place with a plural heierarchy, ie. "In my fathers house are many mansions."
I could also accept that God created both the heaven where He resides and the "open firmament of heaven" (the sky) since there is no clear scripture as to when He created the sky. Neither changes my view that Heaven is beyond space.
That space (the firmament of heaven) is between earth and the heaven where God resides is still clear. It was placed between the waters from above and the waters below.

You haven't explained how you know for sure that the heavens and waters mentioned in Genesis correlate to a post-Galelio cosmology. Is the water literally water, and the heavens literally heavens as understood by modern or ancient cosmology?

I'm short on time and will get back to this later...after I've had a chance to go over the link you offered.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Great, O.K., that's what I thought. It's miracles. Science would not detect it--it's outside the realm of science, right? So "Creation Science" makes no sense, right?

You paint with a broad stroke, yet what little I've delved into "Creation Science" has left me baffled and unwilling to sort through that facts vs. the fiction.

As I said before concerning the ability of water to travel through space may ultimately be dicovery by physics. Also what I have been trying to say is that the rules of science that apply to this dimension are, in all likelyhood, inaplicable to another dimension. It's not that science can't elucidate on the concept of miracles but most certainly can't by using the wrong set of understandings.
I also do not discount the ability of the God of the Bible to perform miracles, ie: things that violate the rules of this dimension.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I'm short on time and will get back to this later...after I've had a chance to go over the link you offered.

It's been almost 5 years.