jump to last post 1-18 of 18 discussions (148 posts)

Science and the Bible

  1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago

    The Bible is not a science book, yet it is scientifically accurate. We are not aware of any scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible. We have listed statements on this page that are consistent with known scientific facts. Many of them were listed in the Bible hundreds or even thousands of years before being recorded elsewhere. 

    -Their are statements in the bible Consistent With Paleontology,

    -Statements that are Consistent With Astronomy

    - Also statements Consistent With Meteorology

    -Statements that are Consistent With Biology

    -Statements that are Consistent With Anthropology

    -Statements Consistent With Hydrology

    -Statements Consistent With Geology

    -Statements Consistent With Physics

    -Also things In The Bible That Science Can Not Explain

    If you ask me how and where in the bible these scientific things listed above are proven- I will answer and tell you!

    1. Paul Wingert profile image78
      Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Really, how about some examples?

      1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
        heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Statements Consistent With Paleontology-

        Dinosaurs are referred to in several Bible books. The book of Job describes two dinosaurs. One is described in chapter 40 starting at verse 15, and the other in chapter 41 starting at verse 1. We think you will agree that 1½ chapters about dinosaurs is a lot—since most people do not even realize that they are mentioned in the Bible. (Actually reading the Bible would help, though

        Statements Consistent With Astronomy-

        The Bible frequently refers to the great number of stars in the heavens. Here are two examples.

        Genesis 22:17
        Blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies.

        Jeremiah 33:22
        “As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand of the sea measured, so will I multiply the descendants of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me.”
        Even today, scientists admit that they do not know how many stars there are. Only about 3,000 can be seen with the naked eye. We have seen estimates of 1021 stars—which is a lot of stars.[2] (The number of grains of sand on the earth’s seashores is estimated to be 1025. As scientists discover more stars, wouldn’t it be interesting to discover that these two numbers match?)

        1. profile image0
          Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Only 1025 grains of sand?  That would barely fill a teacup. 
          Dinosaurs in bible?  I don't recall any dinosaurs, just several mythical dragons/serpents.
          Plenty of unscientific stuff in bible - like the bizarre methods for breeding speckled goats & sheep by mating them in front of a branch

          1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
            heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I don't know what measurement system is used by scientists to figure sand grains- all I know is the number 1025 has the 25 positioned  a little higher than the 10. Not good with all math- sorry. But if anyone can tell us what that measurement equals in sand = to it would be nice.

            Dinosaurs- Job 40:15Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
            behemoth means:
            Something enormous in size or power.
            often Behemoth A huge animal-dinosaurs

            Job 41- the whole chapter is about dinosaurs>
            http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se … ersion=KJV

            Leviathan (English pronunciation: /lɨˈvaɪ.əθən/; Hebrew: לִוְיָתָן, Modern Livyatan Tiberian Liwyāṯān ; "twisted, coiled"), is a sea monster referred to in the Bible. In Demonology, Leviathan is one of the seven princes of Hell and its gatekeeper (see Hellmouth). The word has become synonymous with any large sea monster or creature.

            1. Cagsil profile image59
              Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              10 to the 25th power?

              1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
                heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                that's what I was thinking but what's it add up too?

                1. profile image0
                  Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  the people in the bible never referred to such large numbers & I doubt any of them knew what 10 to the power of 25 meant.

            2. Randy Godwin profile image93
              Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Elephants eat grass and are large.  Whales are large.  Who in the hell is "we"?  You are correct about only one thing in your statement.  You stink at math!  Your comprehension of science is dismal also.  Even for a believer.  smile

              1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
                heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Astronomy and the Bible- explained better than I am explaining it. smile

                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcBu38IpybI

                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jjq3G9JR … re=related

            3. Paul Wingert profile image78
              Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              The average dinosaur was the size of a chicken. The Bible description is open and very vegue.

              1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
                heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Dinosaurs' size

                Only a tiny percentage of animals ever fossilize, and most of these remain buried in the earth. As a result, scientists will probably never be certain of the smallest and largest dinosaurs. Few of the specimens that are recovered are complete skeletons, and impressions of skin and other soft tissues are rare. Rebuilding a complete skeleton by comparing the size and morphology of bones to those of similar, better-known species is an inexact art, and reconstructing the muscles and other organs of the living animal is, at best, a process of educated guesswork.
                While the evidence is incomplete, it is clear that, as a group, dinosaurs were large. By dinosaur standards the sauropods were gigantic. The smallest sauropods were larger than anything else in their habitat, and the largest were an order of magnitude more massive than anything else that has walked the Earth since.

                The tallest and heaviest dinosaur known from a complete skeleton is the Brachiosaurus, which was discovered in Tanzania between 1907–12. It is now mounted and on display at the Humboldt Museum of Berlin and is 12 m (38 ft) tall and probably weighed between 30,000–60,000 kg (33–66 short tons). The longest complete dinosaur is the 27 m (89 ft) long Diplodocus, which was discovered in Wyoming in the United States and displayed in Pittsburgh's Carnegie Natural History Museum in 1907.

                There were larger dinosaurs, but knowledge of them is based entirely on a small number of incomplete fossil samples. The largest specimens on record were all discovered in the 1970s or later, and include the massive Argentinosaurus, which may have weighed 80,000–100,000 kg (88–121 tons); the longest, the 40 m (130 ft) long Supersaurus; and the tallest, the 18 m (60 ft) Sauroposeidon, which could have reached a sixth-floor window.

                Dinosaurs were the largest of all terrestrial animals. The largest elephant on record weighed 12,000 kg (13.2 tons), while the tallest giraffe was 6 m (20 ft) tall. Even giant prehistoric mammals such as the Indricotherium and the Columbian mammoth were dwarfed by the giant sauropods. Only a handful of modern aquatic animals approach them in size, most notably the blue whale (which reaches up to 190,000 kg (209 tons) and 33.5 m (110 ft) in length).

                Not including modern birds like the bee hummingbird, the smallest dinosaurs known were about the size of a crow or a chicken. The Microraptor, Parvicursor, and Saltopus were all under 60 cm (2 ft) in length.

                Average size

                The meaning of "dinosaur average size" is debatable. However it is defined, current evidence suggests different values for average size in the Triassic, early Jurassic, late Jurassic and Cretaceous periods. According to Bill Erickson, "Estimates of median dinosaur mass range from 500 kg to 5 metric tons, Eighty percent of the biomass from the Late Jurassic Morrison formation of the western United States consisted of stegosaurs and sauropods; the latter averaged 20 tons. The typically large size of the dinosaurs, and the comparatively small size of modern mammals, has been quantified by Nicholas Hotton. Based on 63 dinosaur genera, Hotton's data yield an average generic mass in excess of 850 kg (about the size of an average grizzly bear) and a median generic mass of nearly 2 tons (which is comparable to a giraffe). This contrasts sharply with extant mammals (788 genera) whose average generic mass is 863 grams (a large rodent) and a median mass of 631 grams (a smaller rodent). The smallest dinosaur was bigger than two-thirds of all current mammals; the majority of dinosaurs were bigger than all but 2% of living mammals.

                http://www.dinosauri.info/eng/dinosaur.html

            4. Daniel Carter profile image91
              Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Vague references do not provide fact. Behemoth is not defined as "dinosaur." You defined it yourself. Thus construing something with little evidence is not fact.

              Sorry, your claims do not hold up under any kind of analytical, factual scrutiny, if this is all the "fact" you have.

        2. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          This is surely science at its best.  First we assume that a behemoth or leviathan ("large animal" in both cases) is a dinosaur and then claim that a passing mention that there are a large number of stars is astronomy.

          We can see 3000 stars so estimate that there are 1021 total?  And there are 1025 grains of sand on the seashores?  1025 grains in an ounce perhaps - a few more on all the beaches.

          Well done!  You have certainly proven that the bibles science is exemplary.

          1. Evolution Guy profile image60
            Evolution Guyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Is 1,025 a lot? lol

            1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
              heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I'll get back to you on the math and tell you what it adds up to be later- I didn't realize I was going to be ask a math question that I couldn't answer- oops.

              I just think this stuff is interesting - but I will continue with other examples of science and the bible.

              Statements Consistent With Meteorology

              The Bible describes the circulation of the atmosphere.

              Ecclesiastes 1:6
              The wind goes toward the south,
              And turns around to the north;
              The wind whirls about continually,
              And comes again on its circuit.


              The Bible includes some principles of fluid dynamics.

              Job 28:25
              To establish a weight for the wind,
              And apportion the waters by measure.
              The fact that air has weight was proven scientifically only about 300 years ago. The relative weights of air and water are needed for the efficient functioning of the world’s hydrologic cycle, which in turn sustains life on the earth.

              1. Evolution Guy profile image60
                Evolution Guyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Don't worry - I am quite capable of working out how many zeros 10 to the 25th is. But - thank you for convincing me the bible is utter nonsense. I appreciate it.

                Science? lol lol

                1. profile image0
                  Emile Rposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I'd walk softly around this one. I just checked out her hub activity. She never sleeps. She might be Legion. You never know.

                  1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
                    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    You're funny!
                    Seriously that was funny! smile

                    I am not a demon/ group of demons- but still funny.

                    Yes I have been up to long tonight and some other nights as do most people from time to time.

                    I don't work anymore because of my husband's job change.
                    Not that you ask but I am just sharing & a little tired too  smile

        3. peterxdunn profile image60
          peterxdunnposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          So Job was alive prior to, and manage to survive, the comet impact that killed off the dinosaurs? 63 million years ago! I very much doubt it.

      2. heavenbound5511 profile image79
        heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this
    2. profile image59
      MoverReviews21posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Ah...you have found relevance between the words of Bible with Science. Nice work. Thanks.

    3. profile image0
      Emile Rposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I think you give the book too much credit for accuracy, but there are statements that do very loosely line up. This isn't surprising. Ancient people could observe the world they lived in. Many statements made are the result of those observations. Other statements were the result of their attempting to line up what they saw with their understanding of the cosmos. And then, you've got the left field statements that don't line up with anything.

      My point is, you are kind of right, but not for the reasons you think.

      As to your question about 10 to the 25th power. Just add that many zeroes and you've got your number. I think that's 30 septillion. Which, I doubt even comes close to the number of grains of sand on the seashore. I could be wrong, but I think the current estimate of stars in the observable universe is about 3 septillion.

    4. Titen-Sxull profile image93
      Titen-Sxullposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Talking snakes, talking donkeys, talking bushes. The creation story alone is the most scientifically illiterate work of mythology I've ever come across. For one thing you have night and day, light and dark, existing before THE SUN, as well as plants growing before the sun. This marks profound ignorance of how planets form, of how life evolved and of the very basic idea of photosynthesis. Genesis also has a firmament separating the waters because the authors thought space was an ocean.

      We also have the scientific impossibility of fitting all the animals on Noah's ark, the superstitious and medically unnecessary genital mutilation (circumcision). In the King James you have Unicorns and satyrs to worry about as well.

      You may as well say Doctor Seuss is scientifically consistent. Does the Bible get a few things right? Sure it does but then it would likely be statistically impossible for it to get everything wrong.

    5. amymarie_5 profile image86
      amymarie_5posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You're theories are vague.  The bible is a book written in primitve times.  The bible condones slavery and the oppression of women.  If you want me to give you examples, I may be writing all day.  Anyway you cant pick what to believe in the bible and ignore everything else.  God didn't write the bible, people did.  If you want to believe in it then great, just please stop shoving your beliefs down everyone's throats.  Also if you ever read Roman and Greek mythology you'd be stunned to see the similarities between Jesus and other gods.  Most Christians don't realize that Christianity is based on pagan religions.  Check this site out if you like some proof of that.

      http://missy.reimer.com/library/scale.html

      1. amymarie_5 profile image86
        amymarie_5posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        FYI: Captain Kirk even made the list.

        1. TMMason profile image72
          TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Seems to me the Left jams more down the throats of Christians, than the other way around. The Homo-agenda, Atheism, Secular humanism, Moral Equivalency, Evolution, and the list goes on. And worse yet they jam it into our kids minds and then get mad when we say enough is enough. So that goes both ways.

          1. psycheskinner profile image81
            psycheskinnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            So it is fine to do bad things if other people do worse things.

            Isn't that the moral relativism you keep saying belongs only on the left?

            I have a lot of respect for conservative people and for liberals, but not for hypocrites.

            1. TMMason profile image72
              TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Thats not what I said.

              lollll

              Ah you all and your translations, interpretations and straight out lack of comprehension.

              1. psycheskinner profile image81
                psycheskinnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                You are saying that you can't complain about being force fed crap if you do it yourself.

                That is a moral relativist position.

                A deontological/virtue-based/moral -onservative position would be to say no one should do it--thus if the complaint is accurate, it is valid--no matter what the complainant themself is guilty of.

                If you complain about other people's philosophies you should be sure not to use them yourself.

                1. TMMason profile image72
                  TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  No I am not. I am saying to say it is only religious folks who jam things down others throats is false.

                  Simple.

                  1. psycheskinner profile image81
                    psycheskinnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    The only reason that matters is if it makes religious people less culpable in some way, which is a morally relative position.  You may not have a lot of insight into it, but you are doing what you disparage in others. Moral conservatism would not see the sins of others as having any bearing in the discussion of one's own sins or those of one's brethren.

          2. Beelzedad profile image59
            Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Just keep your kids at home with no contact with the world, surgically attach the bible to the front of their heads and you'll accomplish the above. smile

          3. Daniel Carter profile image91
            Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Depends on personality. I know devout, religious people who never bother to shove and preach. I also know atheists of the same temperament. However, it's a lot more common to see those who preach and shove things down people's throats, and they come from both sides.

            1. TMMason profile image72
              TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Exactly, Dan. One doesn't have to be religious to preach and shove.

              1. Evolution Guy profile image60
                Evolution Guyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Odd tha you do. Am u Religious? Did u like LEFTISTS Innite? LOLOLOLO

                Gawd u is brave intcha.

                Iz that wot god sed into yor hed? U reely is brave.

                1. TMMason profile image72
                  TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I am not to sure what your actual point is, Evo...?

                  But yes, it takes a brave man to use the avatar I have and to write the hubs I write.

                  1. Evolution Guy profile image60
                    Evolution Guyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    LOL

                    Really ? Brave LOLOLOLOLOLO

                    OK LOLOLOLO

                    Wot U iz name innit? lol lol

              2. psycheskinner profile image81
                psycheskinnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                But it helps?

    6. Stolive profile image78
      Stoliveposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I do believe, as you certainly do, that there's nothing that science can contradict in the bible. But I wouldn't say that the bible is scientifically accurate.

      Why? Simply because I think that it is science that has to conform with the absolute truth that the bible reveals. Science deals with matter and addresses the intellect, whereas the bible deals primarily with spiritual issues.

      The intellect is not the appropriate tool to grab the message that the bible conveys but the spirit transcends its limits, allowing one to acknowledge the accuracy of the holy book.

  2. heavenbound5511 profile image79
    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago

    Another example:
    Statements Consistent With Biology

    The book of Leviticus (written prior to 1400 BC) describes the value of blood.

    Leviticus 17:11
    ‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.’
    The blood carries water and nourishment to every cell, maintains the body’s temperature, and removes the waste material of the body’s cells. The blood also carries oxygen from the lungs throughout the body. In 1616, William Harvey discovered that blood circulation is the key factor in physical life—confirming what the Bible revealed 3,000 years earlier.[1]

    The Bible describes biogenesis (the development of living organisms from other living organisms) and the stability of each kind of living organism.

    Genesis 1:11,12
    Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

    Genesis 1:21
    So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

    Genesis 1:25
    And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
    The phrase “according to its kind” occurs repeatedly, stressing the reproductive integrity of each kind of animal and plant. Today we know this occurs because all of these reproductive systems are programmed by their genetic codes.[1]

    The Bible describes the chemical nature of flesh.
    Genesis 2:7
    And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

    Genesis 3:19
    In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
    Till you return to the ground,
    For out of it you were taken;
    For dust you are,
    And to dust you shall return.

    It is a proven fact that a person’s mental and spiritual health is strongly correlated with physical health.[1] The Bible revealed this to us with these statements (and others) written by King Solomon about 950 BC.

    Proverbs 12:4
    An excellent wife is the crown of her husband,
    But she who causes shame is like rottenness in his bones.

    Proverbs 14:30
    A sound heart is life to the body,
    But envy is rottenness to the bones.

    Proverbs 15:30
    The light of the eyes rejoices the heart,
    And a good report makes the bones healthy.

    Proverbs 16:24
    Pleasant words are like a honeycomb,
    Sweetness to the soul and health to the bones.

    Proverbs 17:22
    A merry heart does good, like medicine,
    But a broken spirit dries the bones.

    1. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Everyone has a bible or can read one on the net.  There is no need for you to keep placing your novel's scripture here.  Believe me, many before you have posted the exact same verses here before.

      You have absolutely nothing new to offer here in the way of scripture.  It's already been done!  Got any original thoughts in your head?  smile

      1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
        heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Randy Godwin-
        It's so nice you keep hissing at me with your snake pic.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image93
          Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Merely trying to keep you from embarrassing yourself any further, HeBo!  And the other christians too!  But as most of us know, for some reason your god seems to choose the most scientifically ignorant people to pass his message on for him.  Why do you think this is?

          1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
            heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;-1 Cor 1:27
            For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.-1 Corinthians 1:21

            1. Evolution Guy profile image60
              Evolution Guyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              SO - why on earth do you think your rudimentary understanding of science - which then leads you to believe that dinosaurs were on the earth 65 million years after they actually died out - will convince anyone of anything?

              You do realize you are the one preaching foolishness - right? lol

              1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
                heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Foolishness to you- because you must not think God created this world or even exists.
                God bless you!
                smile

                1. Evolution Guy profile image60
                  Evolution Guyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  As I said - you are the one preaching foolishness. Just like your majik book tells you you are going to do. wink

                  Dinosaurs with men? lol lol

  3. heavenbound5511 profile image79
    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago

    Statements Consistent With Anthropology-

    We have cave paintings and other evidence that people inhabited caves. The Bible also describes cave men.

    Job 30:5,6
    They were driven out from among men,
    They shouted at them as at a thief.
    They had to live in the clefts of the valleys,
    In caves of the earth and the rocks.
    Note that these were not ape-men, but descendants of those who scattered from Babel. They were driven from the community by those tribes who competed successfully for the more desirable regions of the earth. Then for some reason they deteriorated mentally, physically, and spiritually.[1] (Go into a bad part of your town and you will see this concept in action today.)

  4. heavenbound5511 profile image79
    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago

    Statements Consistent With Hydrology

    The bible includes reasonably complete descriptions of the hydrologic cycle.[3]

    Psalm 135:7
    He causes the vapors to ascend from the ends of the earth;
    He makes lightning for the rain;
    He brings the wind out of His treasuries.

    Jeremiah 10:13
    When He utters His voice,
    There is a multitude of waters in the heavens:
    “And He causes the vapors to ascend from the ends of the earth.
    He makes lightning for the rain,
    He brings the wind out of His treasuries.”
    In these verses you can see several phases of the hydrologic cycle—the worldwide processes of evaporation, translation aloft by atmospheric circulation, condensation with electrical discharges, and precipitation.[1]

    Job 36:27-29
    For He draws up drops of water,
    Which distill as rain from the mist,
    Which the clouds drop down
    And pour abundantly on man.
    Indeed, can anyone understand the spreading of clouds,
    The thunder from His canopy?
    This simple verse has remarkable scientific insight. The drops of water which eventually pour down as rain first become vapor and then condense to tiny liquid water droplets in the clouds. These finally coalesce into drops large enough to overcome the updrafts that suspend them in the air.[1]

    The Bible describes the recirculation of water.

    Ecclesiastes 1:7
    All the rivers run into the sea,
    Yet the sea is not full;
    To the place from which the rivers come,
    There they return again.

    Isaiah 55:10
    For as the rain comes down, and the snow from heaven,
    And do not return there,
    But water the earth,
    And make it bring forth and bud,
    That it may give seed to the sower
    And bread to the eater,

    The Bible refers to the surprising amount of water that can be held as condensation in clouds.
    Job 26:8
    He binds up the water in His thick clouds,
    Yet the clouds are not broken under it.

    Job 37:11
    Also with moisture He saturates the thick clouds;
    He scatters His bright clouds.

    Hydrothermal vents[4] are described in two books of the Bible written before 1400BC—more than 3,000 years before their discovery by science.

    Genesis 7:11
    In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

    Job 38:16
    Have you entered the springs of the sea?
    Or have you walked in search of the depths?

    1. Susana S profile image91
      Susana Sposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Instead of spending your time posting bible quotes and wasting it by telling us how scientific the bible is, why not go out and do something worthwhile? I'm sure there must be plenty of community groups that would value a volunteer with so much time on their hands (so long as you spent you time actually helping rather than proselytizing).

      1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
        heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Do you know what I do with all my time? NO
        I have the same rights as you with the internet you know.
        So why are you on here and not out volunteering all your time to help your local community?
        Don't pretend to know me Lady.

        1. Beelzedad profile image59
          Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Could ask you the same question. However, the burning question is how are your ridiculous comparisons going to help anyone? Since we have mountains more evidence and information about those concepts, what use can we make of your comparisons? smile

      2. heavenbound5511 profile image79
        heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Also conversion isn't a bad thing if it will and can transform one's life to something better. Knowing God through Jesus- and choosing life as Jesus said is much better.

  5. heavenbound5511 profile image79
    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago

    Statements Consistent With Geology

    The Bible describes the Earth’s crust (along with a comment on astronomy).

    Jeremiah 31:37
    Thus says the LORD:
    “If heaven above can be measured,
    And the foundations of the earth searched out beneath,
    I will also cast off all the seed of Israel
    For all that they have done, says the LORD.”
    Although some scientists claim that they have now measured the size of the universe, it is interesting to note that every human attempt to drill through the earth’s crust to the plastic mantle beneath has, thus far, ended in failure.[1]

    The Bible described the shape of the earth centuries before people thought that the earth was spherical.
    Isaiah 40:22
    It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,
    And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
    Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
    And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
    The word translated “circle” here is the Hebrew word chuwg which is also translated “circuit,” or “compass” (depending on the context). That is, it indicates something spherical, rounded, or arched—not something that is flat or square.

    The book of Isaiah was written sometime between 740 and 680 BC. This is at least 300 years before Aristotle suggested that the earth might be a sphere in this book On the Heavens.

    This brings up an important historical note related to this topic. Many people are aware of the conflict between Galileo and the Roman Catholic Pope, Paul V. After publishing A Dialogue on the Two Principal Systems of the World, Galileo was summoned to Rome, where he was forced to renounce his findings. (At that time, “theologians” of the Roman Catholic Church maintained that the Earth was the center of the universe, and to assert otherwise was deemed heretical.)

    We could not find any place in the Bible that claims that the Earth is flat, or that it is the center of the universe. History shows that this conflict, which took place at the time of the Inquisition, was part of a power struggle. As a result, scientific and biblical knowledge became casualties—an effect we still feel to this day.

  6. heavenbound5511 profile image79
    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago

    Statements Consistent With Physics-

    The Bible suggests the presence of nuclear processes like those we associate with nuclear weaponry. This is certainly not something that could have been explained in 67 AD using known scientific principles (when Peter wrote the following verse).

    2 Peter 3:10
    But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.

    The television is a practical (if not always worthwhile  ) device that uses electromagnetic waves (which transmit its video signal). The Bible contains passages that describe something like television—something that allows everyone on earth see a single event. (Note: such passages typically refer to the end of time. It may not be long before all of us learn for sure whether the Bible is true or not.)
    Matthew 24:30
    Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

    Revelation 11:9-11
    Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three-and-a-half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into graves. And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth. Now after the three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them.

  7. heavenbound5511 profile image79
    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago

    Things In The Bible That Science Can Not Explain-

    The purpose of this forum is not to explain what a great science text the Bible is, but to show that it is consistent with scientific facts. Still, the Bible mentions some things that we can not explain. Yet, if God is really God, He should have the ability to do some things we can not explain.

    In the last 100 years (and especially in the last ten) scientists discovered many proofs that confirm the Bible’s accuracy. Since these proofs support the accuracy of the text we can understand scientifically, it makes sense to trust the Bible’s text that we can not yet understand. (For example, how many people knew what hydrothermal vents were 30 years ago?) 


    The Bible Is True.
    http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/b_proof.shtml

    1. Paul Wingert profile image78
      Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You have way too much time on your hands.

      1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
        heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Sometimes smile

    2. profile image0
      Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      this is all nonsense & certainly in no way science.  You don't even understand what you've cut and pasted in such large quantities.

      Since when was a circle a sphere?
      What dinosaur grazed on grass like an cattle?
      'How many people knew what hydrothermal vents were 30 years ago?' In NZ they've been used for decades to make electricity.

      Since when has making a statement that the wind blows around meteorology?
      The bible lumps bats in with birds.  Bats are not birds.
      Science doesn't back the bible up.

      1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
        heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Sphere Meaning and Definition:
        (v. t.) To form into roundness; to make spherical, or spheral; to perfect.
        (n.) The extension of a general conception, or the totality of the individuals or species to which it may be applied.
        (n.) Hence, any globe or globular body, especially a celestial one, as the sun, a planet, or the earth.
        (n.) The apparent surface of the heavens, which is assumed to be spherical and everywhere equally distant, in which the heavenly bodies appear to have their places, and on which the various astronomical circles, as of right ascension and declination, the equator, ecliptic, etc., are conceived to be drawn; an ideal geometrical sphere, with the astronomical and geographical circles in their proper positions on it.
        _______________________________
        In terms of their diet, most dinosaurs are classified as either “meat eaters” (carnivores) or “plant eaters” (herbivores). Some examples of well-known meat eaters include Tyrannosaurs Rex and Velociraptor, while examples of plant eaters include Stegosaurus and Triceratops.   
        (Grass is a plant)
        ______________________________
        ('How many people knew what hydrothermal vents were 30 years ago?' In NZ they've been used for decades to make electricity.)

        Hydrothermal vents were first discovered near the Galápagos Islands in 1977 by scientists in the research submersible Alvin. That makes the invention 34 years old- very close wouldn't you say?
        _________________________
        God bless you smile

        1. profile image0
          Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          a sphere is 3D ie like a ball.  A circle is flat.

          plant eating dinosaurs ate trees - what dinosaur grazed on grass?  They didn't have the right kind of teeth.

          I come from NZ & the hydroelectric power stations were in way before I was born in the early 70s, so saying they were discovered in around 30 years ago is incorrect (along with pretty much everything else you've said).

          1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
            heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            The first hydrothermal vent was discovered in 1977 by geologists on a research expedition in the Galapagos Rift off the coast of South America. The Galapagos Rift is part of the mid-ocean ridge system. To understand vents it is helpful to first have an understanding of these ridges and how new sea floor is formed.
            http://www.botos.com/marine/vents01.html  ^^

            Hydrothermal vents and their exotic fauna were first discovered on the Galápagos Rift in the Pacific as recently as 1977!! Vents are found on mid-ocean ridges and back-arc basins, which are deep-water volcanic chains. One of the most striking adaptations of vent animals is their association (symbiosis) with microogranisms that use the chemical energy found on the vent fluids for the production of organic matter.

            http://www.noc.soton.ac.uk/chess/education/edu_htv.php  ^^

            1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
              heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              How do you know dinosaurs just ate leaves and not grass?

              They didn't have the right kind of teeth?- so they can eat leaves off trees with the wrong teeth for grass you say- but not grass from the ground?
              HMMM... WEAK ARGUMENT!

            2. profile image0
              Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              first geothemal power station in NZ built in the 1950s.  One in Italy built before that.  So obviously they knew what this was (by the way, your bible didn't explain it whatsoever)
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wairakei_Power_Station

              1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
                heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Bailey Bear-
                Their a difference between  Geothermal electricity & Hydrothermal vent.

                Geothermal energy has been used for thousands of years in some countries for cooking and heating.

                The name "geothermal" comes from two Greek words: "geo" means "Earth" and "thermal" means "heat".

                Geothermal energy is thermal energy generated and stored in the Earth. Thermal energy is energy that determines the temperature of matter. Earth's geothermal energy originates from the original formation of the planet, from radioactive decay of minerals, from volcanic activity, and from solar energy absorbed at the surface. The geothermal gradient, which is the difference in temperature between the core of the planet and its surface, drives a continuous conduction of thermal energy in the form of heat from the core to the surface.

                There are several ways to harness these underground heat sources, let's explore them.

                Tapping Into the Crust: Geothermal Heat Pumps

                The upper 10 feet of the Earth's surface does not change temperature very often. The average temperature hovers around 50°F-60°F. By inserting heat-transfer elements into
                the ground, and using a pump to bring that heat energy up, homes in the winter time can be heated. During the summer, the system goes in reverse, transferring the hot air in the house, into the cool ground. 

                Electricity Strait from the spring: Geothermal Power Plants

                One of the oldest forms of electricity generation, ground steam used to turn turbines
                (hydrothermal energy) has been used as far back as 1904 in Italy. Naturally occurring steam from springs is tapped and driven through a turbine. This turbine creates the electricity used for homes. This is called Dry Steam Power.

                Another form of hydrothermal energy is called Flash Steam. Geysers that contain fluids above 360°F can be tapped just like Dry Steam Power Plants, but the high-pressure vapors are injected into a "flash tank" which is kept at a much lower pressure. The unequal pressures cause the heated fluid to "flash" which will turn a turbine. These "Flash Steam Power Turbines" are more efficient than Dry Steam Power Turbines because any unused fluid can be held in another tank and flashed again.

                A third form of geo-thermal energy is called Binary-Cycle. This system employs two closed-circuit systems. The first pumps the hydrothermal fluids up from the ground and into a heat exchanger. The second system pumps another fluid around a closed loop. This fluid in the second system has a much lower boiling point than the geothermal fluid. When the second fluid gets to the heat exchanger, it flashes into vapor and is used to turn a turbine. This system is highly efficient because there are no lost liquids because they are closed circuits. This will eventually be the standard geothermal power plant.


                first geothermal power generator on 4 July 1904

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_electricity


                Hydrothermal vents were first discovered near the Galápagos Islands in 1977 by scientists in the research submersible Alvin.
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent


                http://www.nwcouncil.org/history/hydrothermal.asp

                Hydrothermal vents is a form of geothermal energy-A hydrothermal vent is a fissure in a planet's surface from which geothermally heated water issues. Hydrothermal vents are commonly found near volcanically active places..Hydrothermal vents in the deep ocean.

                Geothermal energy is thermal energy generated and stored in the Earth. Earth's geothermal energy originates from the original formation of the planet, from radioactive decay of minerals, from volcanic activity, and from solar energy absorbed at the surface.

                So are knowledge increased when it came to geothermal energy- when hydrothermal vent were found at the bottom of the ocean in 1977.

                Before the discovery of Hydrothermal vents- we still had other methods of geothermal energy.
                Hydrothermal  energy is a form of geothermal energy- not the discovery of geothermal energy- but the discovery of the hydrothermal vents discovered at the bottom of the ocean.

                smile

            3. Evolution Guy profile image60
              Evolution Guyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Do you even know what these words mean? lol

      2. heavenbound5511 profile image79
        heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "Since when has making a statement that the wind blows around meteorology?"
        Answer:
        Wind is the flow of gases on a large scale. On Earth, wind consists of the bulk movement of air. In outer space, solar wind is the movement of gases or charged particles from the sun through space, while planetary wind is the outgassing of light chemical elements from a planet's atmosphere into space. Winds are commonly classified by their spatial scale, their speed, the types of forces that cause them, the regions in which they occur, and their effect. The strongest observed winds on a planet in our solar system occur on Neptune and Saturn.
        In METEOROLOGY, winds are often referred to according to their strength, and the direction from which the wind is blowing. Short bursts of high speed wind are termed gusts. Strong winds of intermediate duration (around one minute) are termed squalls. Long-duration winds have various names associated with their average strength, such as breeze, gale, storm, hurricane, and typhoon. Wind occurs on a range of scales, from thunderstorm flows lasting tens of minutes, to local breezes generated by heating of land surfaces and lasting a few hours, to global winds resulting from the difference in absorption of solar energy between the climate zones on Earth. The two main causes of large scale atmospheric circulation are the differential heating between the equator and the poles, and the rotation of the planet (Coriolis effect). Within the tropics, thermal low circulations over terrain and high plateaus can drive monsoon circulations. In coastal areas the sea breeze/land breeze cycle can define local winds; in areas that have variable terrain, mountain and valley breezes can dominate local winds. smile

        1. profile image0
          Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          you fail to get my point.  Your bible makes a sweeping statement, and then you try to claim it is science.  Science is explaining what the observations mean.  Religion just says god did it (not much different from superstition)
          Do you really believe there were no rainbows before Noah?

          1. heavenbound5511 profile image79
            heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            It took scientists explaining there observations to even discover what was already in the bible long before there scientific discoveries- that God put there.

            God does more than observe and explain- But He created all and cures, God has all power, knowledge and wisdom.

            1. profile image0
              Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              God cures?  If God was all powerful, why did God allow the 'curse' of illness? Check out my links below for scientifically inaccurate stuff in the bible. The bible was written by men trying to make sense of their world with the knowledge they had - not by god.

      3. heavenbound5511 profile image79
        heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        one more thing-From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
        This article is about the geometrical concept. 

        A two-dimensional perspective projection of a sphere
        A sphere (from Greek σφαῖρα—sphaira, "globe, ball") is a perfectly round geometrical object in three-dimensional space, such as the shape of a round ball. Like a CIRCLE in two dimensions, a perfect sphere is completely symmetrical around its center, with all points on the surface lying the same distance r from the center point. This distance r is known as the radius of the sphere. The maximum straight distance through the sphere is known as the diameter of the sphere. It passes through the center and is thus twice the radius.
        In higher mathematics, a careful distinction is made between the sphere (a two-dimensional spherical surface embedded in three-dimensional Euclidean space) and the ball (the three-dimensional shape consisting of a sphere and its interior).

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere

        Do you always get caught up on the detail that mean the same thing?

        God bless you!
        smile

        1. profile image0
          Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          yes I am interested in the detail, because it points out they are NOT the same thing

    3. profile image0
      Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  8. TMMason profile image72
    TMMasonposted 6 years ago

    http://www.uncommondescent.com/

    http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml

    Yes science does confirm the Bible... I don't know if you could call that, "Proves"... but circumstantial cases put people in prison for life, and even the death penalty, so as far as circumstiamally... the bible is very strongly supported.

    And as we all know, other than the 7th grade biology teachers, Human evolution has less cicumstiantial suport than the bible. It takes a lot of faith to buy into the science many try to push today as fact. Even the co-discoverer of the theory of evolution, Alfred Russel Wallace, understood the problems with Human Evolution and stated it is not something he would support. He did support evolution in Nayute and the Animal Kingdom but saw way too many problem with its application to Humans. He drafted a list of problem in that application, which has nnot been addressed and answered to this day. Thats is why Science ignores him.

    Alfred Russel Wallace (1823 - 1913) was one of the 19th century's most remarkable intellectuals. His link to Charles Darwin as the co-discoverer in 1858 of evolution by natural selection would alone have secured his place in history, but he went on to make very many other significant contributions, not just to biology, but to subjects as diverse as glaciology, land reform, anthropology, ethnography, epidemiology, and astrobiology. His pioneering work on evolutionary biogeography led to him becoming recognised as that subject’s ‘father’. Beyond this, Wallace is regarded as the pre-eminent collector and field biologist of tropical regions of the 19th century, and his book The Malay Archipelago (which was Joseph Conrad’s favourite bedside reading) is one of the most celebrated travel writings of that century and has never been out of print. Add to the above that Wallace was deeply committed to and a vocal supporter of spiritualism, socialism, and the rights of the ordinary person, and it quickly becomes apparent that he was a man with an extraordinary breadth of interests who was actively engaged with many of the big questions and important issues of his day.

    http://wallacefund.info/

    So the evo communitty has a long way to go before they even know what they PRETEND to know.

  9. earnestshub profile image89
    earnestshubposted 6 years ago

    A couple of problems with this boloney.

    The proponents of the Quoran use the same arguments.

    Scientific method.
    I can think of many more, but no more are needed.

    End of argument, anything else is conjecture

    1. TMMason profile image72
      TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      All kinds of examples... but you don't name them... right E.

      Scientific method doesn't prove your "faith" either. Science is its own religion.

      And, Alfred Russel Wallace, was a Scientist, with as much intellectual ability, if not more, that Darwin. So... he is a credible as any scientist I know of, or have heard of, if not more. He doesn't inflate and exagerrate the knowledge of science, from educated guesses, to fact.

      As I said, liars are in every field of life.

      And  http://www.uncommondescent.com is all science, and it specializes in confronting those of you who think you can pervert science and minipulate it to your own ends.

      Uncommon Descent holds that…

      Materialistic ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins. At the same time, intelligent design (ID) offers a promising scientific alternative to materialistic theories of biological and cosmological evolution — an alternative that is finding increasing theoretical and empirical support. Hence, ID needs to be vigorously developed as a scientific, intellectual, and cultural project.

      1. profile image0
        Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        science as a religion - another baseless claim

        1. TMMason profile image72
          TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          It requires just as much faith to believe in Human Evolution, as it does my religion.

          And you just continue on with what your doing Heaven... you know when your on the right track... the nest of vipers start to hiss and moan. The more they scream and insult you, the more it proves your right, and they cannot stand against those facts and assertions with any type of real arguments.

          1. dutchman1951 profile image62
            dutchman1951posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "if people are bitching, your probly doing something right!"
            -Greg Norman

            Me thinks when you make claims, you then are to be tested to see if it is true, it does not mean right or wrong, it means people are in question of the knowledge.

            What Greg and others like him have stated above, is right on practical things like inventions or starting a business, but all of this you quote over and over endlessly,  is honestly yet to be proven, so claims of vast Knowledge in this subject will and are going to be questioned. Hard!

            Science is postulation based on Human observation,  Religion is by blind Faith, and Both, not necessarly cognitive of each others needs. Be carefull

            quoting scripture sentance after sentance for personal admiration, or self justification, is not proof. Be carefull, the attacks may be a sign that your implied knowledge is in question, not accepted, and or not the truth..?

          2. profile image0
            Emile Rposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I'm afraid you are wrong about evolution and faith. We see the physical evidence of the evolutionary process. That isn't faith. Those are facts.

            Faith in your god is simply a belief that what you imagine is true. Two totally different things. There are no verifiable facts to back up your belief.

            1. TMMason profile image72
              TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Not when it comes to human evolution you do not. And yes, Micro evolution is a fact, hman evo is not. That is just a fact.

              And even Dutch agree it isn't fact... note the word postulate... Definition of POSTULATE

              transitive verb

              1 : demand, claim


              2 a: to ASSUME or CLAIM as true, existent, or necessary : depend upon or start from the postulate of b: to assume as a postulate or axiom (as in logic or mathematics)

              — pos·tu·la·tion noun

              — pos·tu·la·tion·al adjective

              There are no transitional fossils to show one species giving rise to another, and no proof that one spoecies can produce another. it is pure faith in your own assumptions. Faith in your Human Evoluton Theory, (Which connotes in its own that it isn't a fact), is simply a belief that what you imagine is true. Two totally different things. There are no verifiable facts to back up your belief human Evolution.

              1. dutchman1951 profile image62
                dutchman1951posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                nothing to do with fossils, except me, my age!!!!!    lol

                I just know those who spout it out get challanged the most on thier true knowledge, so I am suggesting here, be carefull.

                1. TMMason profile image72
                  TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I am always carefull, Dutch. Thank you for your concern, friend.

                  And I do not mind the ?'s, the attacks get old though. I would think they would get tired of arguing and simply debate and speak civilly to us sooner or later.

                  I dont mind good heated debate... and I stand my ground, and I have no problem agreeing to dis-agree. Something only Earnest and very few seem in agreement with.

                  I hope your having a good day, Dutch. Be well.

                  1. dutchman1951 profile image62
                    dutchman1951posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Here, in the threads, probly a no on that one TM, you really might consider Hubs, and fact point, and let folks comment. May get better results.

              2. profile image0
                Emile Rposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Thus far, the theory holds. I am not saying there aren't holes that need to be filled in. that is the beauty of science. No one expects you to take things on faith. I don't see scientists running around threatening hell if I have a wait and see philosophy as to the end result.

                You have nothing but faith to prop up your belief in god. No facts. No proof. No divine intervention. Nothing but faith. Huge difference.

                1. TMMason profile image72
                  TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Same with your science of Human Evolution, M-Theory, String thry, and so on with many others. And your restistance to accepting that proves my point.

                  You sound just like a religious fanatic. Screaming fact, fact, fact, but we'll find the proof of it later. You see the similarity? Probrably not. And where are the transitional fossils? Not in the record... so where? How do explain the human mind, or the brain? You cannot through evolution. Too many holes as you call them to conssider it anything near a fact.

                  1. profile image0
                    Emile Rposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    The funny thing is, I’m not fanatical about either religion or science, in any way.  You see fanaticism because you are projecting.

                    As to the evidence science has found so far, that is fact.  It doesn’t mean that it will ultimately lead in the direction they think it will; but, each new discovery solidifies the theory. So, unless some evidence is discovered to turn the theory upside down it will continue to be considered correct.

                    If we did like you, we’d just assume that since we don’t have all of the facts we should just forget about it and head out to church to praise God for making it unnecessary to use our heads and search for the answers.

                  2. Beelzedad profile image59
                    Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes, we know you don't understand any of those concepts even though your consistency in dismissing them is evidently obvious even though many have tried to explain them to you. Believing your thinly veiled disregard of those concepts to be valid isn't fooling anyone. smile

          3. profile image0
            Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            sounds like you're having a tantrum with your exaggerated claims that 'vipers' are 'screaming'

            1. Randy Godwin profile image93
              Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I know I never raised my voice concerning these silly posts. Well, perhaps when I was laughing at how ludicrous the OP's statements were.  lol

              1. OutWest profile image61
                OutWestposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                But there are some good points raised.  Does it not say we will return to dust from which we came and we all know we are made up of the same chemicals that this world is made of.  There are many truths like that.  And even Hebrew 11:3 which I posted that stated how the visible world is made up from the invisible.  You have to admit these are very deliberate statements and not so easy to over look

                1. Randy Godwin profile image93
                  Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  The book says lots of things.  Just because it says mountains are tall and valleys are low doesn't mean everything else it says is true.  We've always known our bodies turn into something else.  Are we gods too?

                  It also says women should not speak out concerning religion.  Know anyone on this thread who is going against the scriptures?

  10. TMMason profile image72
    TMMasonposted 6 years ago

    We all operate on faith in our lives, scientists and religionists, all of us. We just have diiferent objects of that faith. And I love science and accept it for what it is and what it can do... and no more than that.

  11. Dave Mathews profile image61
    Dave Mathewsposted 6 years ago

    heavenbound: there are always sarcastic people who will accept nothing as proof even when offered the proof right before their own eyes. Such skeptics should be seen as mere dust on our clothes to be brushed away and ignored.

    1. TMMason profile image72
      TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Actually I pity and pray for those who do not know, or just do not want to know. It must be an awful existence to think you die and then it is over. No hope there.

    2. profile image0
      Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      don't mistake skeptical thinking for sarcasm

  12. peterxdunn profile image60
    peterxdunnposted 6 years ago

    If your claim - that the Bible is entirely consistent with empirical science - is true: then so must the mythologies of ancient Greece, Egypt, Babylon and Sumeria, all of which the Bible plagiarizes outrageously.

    1. TMMason profile image72
      TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Actually if you subscribe to God and his plan, then those who fell from heaven and twist man, had knowledge of that plan, and could very easily have mimicked it before hand. It would be a good way to plant doubt... see how that works.

      And yes I bele\ieve all those ancient gods were in fact demons who posed as such, planting the seeds of doubt way before. And since the coming of the Messiah they have been restricted in their actions with men to the spiritual world. Meaning they could no longer walk physically on this world and interact physically with mankind.

    2. earnestshub profile image89
      earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      A good observation Peter. smile

  13. heavenbound5511 profile image79
    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago

    Examples of scientific principles described in the Bible hundreds to thousands of years before they were proved to be true by science.

    Scientific Principle
    Cosmology/Astronomy:

    Examples of scientific principles described in the Bible hundreds to thousands of years before they were proved to be true by science.
    Everything that is in the bible lines up to true scientific Principle.

    The universe had a beginning-
    The universe was created from the invisible-
    The dimensions of the universe were created-
    The universe is expanding-
    Creation of matter and energy has ended in the universe (refutes steady-state theory)-
    The universe is winding down and will "wear out" (second law of thermodynamics ensures that the universe will run down due to "heat death"-maximum entropy)-
    Describes the correct order of creation-
    Every star is different-
    Pleiades and Orion as gravitationally bound star groups-
    Light is in motion-
    The earth is controlled by the heavens-
    Earth is suspended in space-

    Also Earth Sciences:

    Earth began as a waterworld-
    Formation of continents by tectonic activity described-        
    Water cycle described-      
    Valleys exist on the bottom of the sea-
    Vents exist on the bottom of the sea-    
    Ocean currents in the sea-    
    Air has weight-    
    Winds blow in circular paths-    

    Biology:

    The chemical nature of human life    
    Life of creatures are in the blood    
    The nature of infectious diseases

    Here's the link and it includes all scriptures to back up science in the bible lines up to true science today way before the scientist even discovered it. God is awesome!!smile

    http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic … bible.html

    1. profile image0
      Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      just because you put a link doesn't give you permission to copy large portions of text

  14. earnestshub profile image89
    earnestshubposted 6 years ago

    No, god is not awesome, you are just very very gullible is all. smile

    1. ahandforreading profile image61
      ahandforreadingposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      God is awesome.smile

      1. earnestshub profile image89
        earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I don't see a myth as being awesome. smile

        1. OutWest profile image61
          OutWestposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I think you just don't see. smile

          1. Beelzedad profile image59
            Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Perhaps, you're just pretending to see things that aren't there?

            1. OutWest profile image61
              OutWestposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Well my life isn't pretend or all that God has done for me and enabled me to do.

              1. Beelzedad profile image59
                Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Really? Just like he's "done" for the tens of thousands of starving children who die each day, which is absolutely nothing at all? Funny how he has decided to give you the attention you believe you deserve while ignoring them.

                You must really love your god for that. smile

                1. OutWest profile image61
                  OutWestposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I do not know these "tens of thousands" you mention...do you?  Maybe before you generalize and become angry you should go and talk to them.  As for me I cannot tell you why God came to me, but anyone who earnestly seeks Him will receive.  Just like Psalm 116:1-2
                  1 I love the LORD, for he heard my voice;
                         he heard my cry for mercy.
                  2 Because he turned his ear to me,
                         I will call on him as long as I live.

                  I still call on Him.  Maybe you need to cry out in mercy instead of anger.

                  1. Beelzedad profile image59
                    Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Not personally, does that make all the difference?



                    How is talking to them going to help them? Should I offer them a bible? Or, maybe tell them to pray harder to your god for a morsel of food? Perhaps, they would really like to know that your god is looking after you just fine.



                    Yes, thank you for the worthless bible quote. Should I pass it along to the starving so they may find comfort in your abundance and their impeding deaths? Would that make you feel better?



                    Yes, I'm sure your diversion towards me will really help the starving. Keep calling your god, it does a world of good for the dead bodies piling up higher each day.

                    smile

                  2. jacharless profile image80
                    jacharlessposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    most do not know how to cry out in mercy/grace,
                    which is why they cry out in anger.

              2. Randy Godwin profile image93
                Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                How do we know what you see in your head, or what experience you have with your god?  You have no profile information, have written no hubs, (unless you are a sock puppet,of course) and have absolutely no credibility here at all.

                The old testament is myth and the new is fiction, written long after the supposed Jesus guy was around.  Most of his followers,and probably Jesus too was illiterate and couldn't have written anything about him if they wanted to.  Baptist are you?

  15. heavenbound5511 profile image79
    heavenbound5511posted 6 years ago

    for the historical reliability of the Bible. And it certainly has. For the past 150 years archaeologists have been verifying the exact truthfulness of the Bible's detailed records of various events, customs, persons, cities, nations, and geographical locations.

    In every instance where the Bible can be, or has been checked out archaeologically, it has been found to be 100% accurate. The Bible has proven so accurate that archaeologists often refer to it as a reliable guide when they go to dig in new areas.

    Nelson Glueck, who appeared on the cover of Time magazine and who is considered one of the greatest archaeologists ever, wrote: “No archeological discovery has ever controverted [overturned] a Biblical reference. Scores of archeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical descriptions has often led to amazing discoveries.” [Nelson Glueck, Rivers in the Desert (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publications Society of America, 1969), 31.]

    These are the words of a man who has who has been credited with uncovering more than fifteen hundred ancient sites in the Middle East. [ “Archaeology: The Shards of History,” Time, December 13, 1963, accessed November 18, 2010.]

    There have been more than 25,000 discoveries within the region known as the "Bible Lands” that have confirmed the truthfulness of the Bible. What's staggering about this enormous number of discoveries is that less than one percent of the dirt in Israel has even been excavated. There are literally thousands of discoveries just waiting to be found. I have written an entire book on this topic called Archaeological Evidence for the Bible. Allow me to give you three examples:
    Link to page>>
    http://www.alwaysbeready.com/index.php? … &id=99

  16. OutWest profile image61
    OutWestposted 6 years ago

    Not sure if this one was posted but it clearly indicates that the universe is made of things we cannot see. 


    By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God,
    so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible. (NKJV)

    Hebrews 11:3

  17. Greg Sage profile image61
    Greg Sageposted 6 years ago

    Wow.  Trolltastic.

    1025 grains of sand?  Fascinating.  Scientists may one day discover the same number of stars?  Groundbreaking.

    The religious aspect of the conversation becomes moot when the facts are so far off as to be comical. Being able to count is a reasonable prerequisite for discussing science.

    Come on, people.  This is a piss-take.  She's a Christian like Stephen Colbert's a conservative.  No adult could get this kind of 4th grade stuff botched so badly unless it was done for purposeful comic effect.

    1. Optronical profile image61
      Optronicalposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      HeavenBound this sums up my argument to you. 

      I love this guys work "Qualisoup" on Youtube.

      http://www.youtube.com/user/QualiaSoup# … wV_REEdvxo

  18. Optronical profile image61
    Optronicalposted 6 years ago

    I should have added that in your first post you say "The Bible is not a science book, yet it is scientifically accurate. We are not aware of any scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible.". 

    It is not science's place to prove or contradict the bible.  It is the Bible that needs to prove its 'fact'.  Something you have failed to do with your posts above.  You have posted statements of observations in the physical world and because people wrote the story of course they're going to write about their observations.  This does not make them scientific.

    Plenty people before Newton would have seen things fallen from a tree but until Newton explained, through proof, the properties of Gravity, those were just observations and not facts regarding the physical world.

 
working