Lucky Guesses???

[Walkntune]

I am curious how you would react if this claim had been made on behalf of another religion or a different holy book. How would you respond for example if someone claimed that Hinduism or Taoism had made claims about the nature of the world that are only now being confirmed by advanced physics? Would such arguments make you more likely to believe that these religions are true or valid?

Actually I am very open to the idea of other religions and don't try to conform God to a little box.I am even open to to science being on a the path as well! Should say certain aspects of metaphysics.Yes I am a string junky!


God blessed Isac and Ismael and I ponder on that sometimes.

 

[fantome profane]

Actually I am very open to the idea of other religions and don't try to conform God to a little box.I am even open to to science being on a the path as well! Should say certain aspects of metaphysics.Yes I am a string junky!


God blessed Isac and Ismael and I ponder on that sometimes.

If you are interested I recommend the "Tao of Physics An Exploration of the Parallels between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism". It is fascinating book, I have read it three times*.

Tao of Physics (amazon)

Tao of Physics (pdf) (I don’t know if the pdf is complete or not, it looks a little small)

Don’t misunderstand me, I am not going to claim that this proves that eastern mysticism is true or adds any more validity to it. But I will say that reading this book gave me much greater insight into both modern physics and of eastern mysticism.

Has anything that you read on that web page honestly given you any greater insight into the Judeo/Christian tradition? Or has it helped you to understand any scientific concept. As for myself I have to say that the springs of the seas is mildly interesting, but when taken together with all of the blatant scientific errors in the Bible it could be a lucky guess. And the other examples are even less impressive, the result of overly generous translation, selection bias and even some examples of truths that were known at the time through simple observation.



(this of course reflects my limited mental capacity as much as anything else)

 

[Walkntune]

H

as anything that you read on that web page honestly given you any greater insight into the Judeo/Christian tradition? Or has it helped you to understand any scientific concept. As for myself I have to say that the springs of the seas is mildly interesting, but when taken together with all of the blatant scientific errors in the Bible it could be a lucky guess. And the other examples are even less impressive, the result of overly generous translation, selection bias and even some examples of truths that were known at the time through simple observation.

To be honest I am a self thinker and a gain a lot of knowledge from science and go into areas not really covered deeply.
I am not a scientist but a self thinker.
If science would even probe more into introverts and extroverts it would understand a lot more about human nature, different mind sets and opinions and the difference between logical thinkers and intuitive thinkers.
You see the differences in every school yard in the world and how different people attract and yes it's a lot more than personality. There is an energy transfer between people and relationships.
The closest most people get is chemistry or vibes but there is a science behind it.
Right now science studies 4 dimensions of reality but I do believe there can be 11 or so dimensions.

 

[skydivephil]

if the bible wanted it to be accurate why didn't it say the earth was an oblate spheroid, kept in its orbit by the gravity of the sun?
If you want to retro fit meaning on to the bible go ahead, but dont expect anyone to take it seriously

 

[Alceste]

Job 26

7 He spreads out the northern skies over empty space;
he suspends the earth over nothing.

I don't read the scriptures for what the appear on the surface.
What you wrote mentions the foundation of the earth and Job 26 says God hangs the earth on nothing. Obviously foundation has a different meaning then a structure holding up the earth.

You're missing the point entirely. I'm trying to get you to have a close look at the thought process that brought you to this wrong interpretation, so that in the future you can get more out of the text by understanding it correctly.

Answer me this: Where are the doors of the sea? I've asked you several times now. Is this some scientific fact in the bible that science simply has yet to confirm? Do you believe there are doors in there somewhere, holding back flood waters and one day science will discover them?

The bit about springs is not sensational. Not even a lucky guess - just a bit of poetry, exactly like the doors.

Anyway, underground rivers were not "discovered" in 1913. Ever heard of the Styx, Phlegethon, Acheron and Cocytus? Lethe? Eridanos? Alpheus? Where do you think people got water from before 1913? Do you think they walked to the nearest surface water they could find, or do you think they dug wells? Why would they do that, do you think, if they were not aware there was water down there?

I think you've been had. There's plenty of magic in the very fact of your existence without having to superimpose magical qualities on some dusty old boring book.

 

[Jose Fly]

Same thing I always ask upon seeing these threads from Christians and Muslims promoting the amazing science facts found in their holy books....

....if the Bible really did talk about atomic theory, why weren't at least some Christians running around telling everyone about the atomic theory of matter before it was developed by science? Funny how these things always come up after the fact.

And if you're going to interpret poetic, metaphoric prose as scientific, then you also have to accept that the Bible teaches that the earth sits on pillars.

Sam 2:8 For the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s and he had set the world upon them

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Same thing I always ask upon seeing these threads from Christians and Muslims promoting the amazing science facts found in their holy books....

....if the Bible really did talk about atomic theory, why weren't at least some Christians running around telling everyone about the atomic theory of matter before it was developed by science? Funny how these things always come up after the fact.

I'll give Walkntune or any other Christian who feels like taking up the challenge the same one I gave in a "Quran is science!" thread way back when:

Provide one example of scientific knowledge in your scriptures that meets the following criteria:

- the scientific community once thought it was false.
- despite this, at the time, Christians upheld it as true based on scripture.
- since then, it's been scientifically demonstrated to be true.

 

[Autodidact]

Rom.1:20 explains Atoms. Tells us that things seen are made from the invisible things.

Romans 1:20 (New International Version)

20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Now just for a moment try to imagine that you haven't been indoctrinated into this book. You pick it up for the first time, and your eye falls on this passage. Are you honestly trying to tell me that this passage explains atoms? That before scientists discovered atoms, we could know from this passage that all matter is composed of sub-microscopic particles? Seriously?

btw, this stuff is just as lousy when Muslims do it. They pick some random vague passage from the qur'an and say see, the qur'an foresaw quantum theory, or whatever, and it's just as bogus as yours.

If the Bible told us all this stuff 2000 years ago, why did we have to wait for scientists to discover it?

 

[Jose Fly]

Also, since when are atoms invisible?

 

[tumbleweed41]

And why search for hidden scientific "evidence" in the Bible while ignoring the completely unscientific plain statements? Such as Bats as birds, four legged insects and the value of pi = 3.

 

[Mister_T]

Also, since when are atoms invisible?

Well to play devil's advocate, they're invisible to the naked eye unless you have a microscope. But, that still doesn't translate into Romans 1:20 defining atoms, IMO. The term "invisible things" seems fairly broad.

 

[AxisMundi]

Looking for some opinions on whether some of these are lucky guesses or why they may or may not be true?


Biblical evidences for Science

It is attempting to shoehorn reality into fantasy, apologetics at it's finest.

A few examples, though I love how they merely mention the more ambigious passages that are really far fetched, such as Job 26:10...

A circle is a TWO dmensional figure, it is, indeed, flat. It is not a globe.

No do "dust particles in the air make light".

The rest is just as laughable, but I'm giving myself a headache rolling my eyes at the absurdity.