Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To the ancients, the stars were essentially spiritual beings. Just like the earth was populated with all the creatures we see (and us), the heavens were populated with the heavenly creatures. The stars were no different than angels for the people of ancient Israel.
To the people of 2024, it doesn't matter what the ancients thought the stars were...except for those of us who may enjoy history. The vast majority of people in the western world don't give a flying fig about the ancients thinking stars were spiritual beings. Even the uneducated among us usually know that stars are not spiritual beings.
Yes, they were speaking about things from their vantage point. That's not a problem. Where they can't be wrong concerns with the history of creation. For instance if there was no flood during Noah's day, then we can throw the scriptures away. The same concerning the Exodus and all other historical events written in the Bible. If there was no Adam and Eve, then in my estimation we can throw it all away.
No, they can be wrong -- and mostly were -- about almost everything. You demonstrate very clearly that you will twist all real knowledge in order to support the scriptures you believe in. You've got it backwards. Again, stop trying to prove what is not true and start focusing on principles; you seem incapable of talking about principles, but instead try to align yourself with people who didn't even have a first grade education; in that you are succeeding.
I believe Big Bang origin is false. God gave us our true history in Genesis. He didn't give the people an in depth explanation of what everything was. Most people today can't comprehend the distance of the sun from the earth, and the solar system for that matter. Yet we expect the ancients to understand these things in great detail from their perspective? At one time Pluto was considered a planet by scientists, but now its considered a dwarf planet. So whatever we call what we observe, God gave us the freedom to name those things. (No different from God bringing the animals to Adam for him to name them)
Fine, believe what you wish. But you are the one who is expected 'the ancients' to believe reality. There is no god.
Well we know we live in a world with dimensions. Its not like dimensions are figments of the imagination. This is why we speculate on things like String Theory, which leads to the possibility of multiple universes. None of this can be confirmed through our limited observation.
It would be so interesting to sit down with you -- when you can't suddenly look something up on the internet -- and have you tell me/us all about string theory.
Science goes but so far. Eventually our observation breaks down, and where it breaks down is where it doesn't work.
Clearly, you don't understand how science works. You have no problem believing what people thousands of year ago believe. You just don't want to believe what people in 2024 actually know.
Well Paul did die for his faith. He considered himself a fool for Christ's sake. He also said concerning the faith, if Jesus didn't rise again, then they are to be the most pitied among all men. This would certainly be the case in this day and age, with science's contention with the Bible. So anyone who takes the history presented in the Bible as literal will be considered a fool from the world's perspective, but wise in God's eyes.
Thank you for admitting that the bible is not factual.
Dogma always beats out science in the minds of those who believe in dogma when it comes to almost anything but medical science. And even then... dogma still wins in some cases.
It might be better if they stuck to the dogma in medical cases...show they actually stand for some principles...and reduce the overcrowding in hospitals and long waits to see doctors.
I did not say that the Bible is a fable. I said that certain specific things in the Bible are just stories. And I was responding to chief scum's post that you can't determine the age of something by calculating the time of distance traveled from point A to point B.
For me, the better way to look at the bible is that it contains moral lessons, not facts (with occasional exceptions, which are mostly undocumented and therefore unsupportable as facts).
right here you call the Bible wrong and a fable. stories. not historical. not literal.
Perhaps if you were to actually think about what a person posts you wouldn't keep making these waste of time comments. Or perhaps you argue out of boredom.
Here on Earth, time is known by the rotations, evening and morning. Days, months and years reveal age of existence.
You can't determine the age of something by calculating the time of distance traveled from point A to point B. That would mean that when I drove 5 minutes to the grocery store that the grocery store is only 5 minutes old.
When you measure something with a ruler, say 1ft., the markers of point A and point B exist in that same moment. No matter how long it takes to get from point A to point B. And the calculated time it takes to get from point A to point B would mean that point B would no longer age according to your linear time. It would have to keep moving further and further away to age, like moving the goal post. So, the reality of it all is that it could only age according to the rotations of evening and morning another day, month and year in real time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
This is completely off-base. First, time is measured here on earth by far more exact measurements than 'evening and morning' which is the biblical description. By international scientific agreement, a second is the period of time it takes for a cesium atom to oscillate 1,192,631,770 times. Sixty of those seconds is a minute, sixty minutes is an hour, 24 hours is one day, 365 days is one year.
Now, we know that in a vacuum light travels at the speed of 186,282 miles per second. From that, we know how far light travels in a year and in a billion years.
We have ways of measuring distance of objects in space. For relatively close stars we can use the parallax method. For stars beyond 400 light years we use brightness measurements. It is known that certain stars at a certain distance always have the same degree of brightness. They become measuring sticks. Since we know the speed of light in a vacuum and the distance to some star, we know how long it takes light to travel from that star to the earth.
As far as the big bang goes, there are several different lines of evidence for the big bang. Rather than spending the time to list them, I'll let the following link do that.
You didn't address anything I wrote. Was the elementary nature of it, too far beyond you to grasp?
I addressed exactly what you wrote and showed that you can indeed determine the approximate age of, in this case, the universe, since that was what you were replying to regarding Menaguy's post #288.
Last edited by Michael Way; 04-29-2024 at 01:16 PM..
I addressed exactly what you wrote and showed that you can indeed determine the approximate age of, in this case, the universe, since that was what you were replying to regarding Menaguy's post #288.
What I posted were a few established facts. I was careful to word it that way. For example, I used "over 13 billion years" instead of saying 13.8 billion years +/- 50 million years. The things I said are true, regardless of what a person believes.
Anyone can say the earth is 6000 years old because that's what the Bible says. That doesn't make that a fact. The fact is that we know quite a bit about the age of the earth, the age of the Universe, and how the universe has evolved over the millennia.
Now, none of the remarks about the Genesis Creation stories are ever made as if to imply that they apply to all of the Bible. Allegories, parables, and fables are all examples of stories that may not literally be true, but they still have value and they still contain lessons we can learn from.
To say that you said the Bible is false because you said one story cannot be literally true is really disingenuous, being as generous as possible. It truly misrepresents what you said.
What I posted were a few established facts. I was careful to word it that way. For example, I used "over 13 billion years" instead of saying 13.8 billion years +/- 50 million years. The things I said are true, regardless of what a person believes.
Anyone can say the earth is 6000 years old because that's what the Bible says. That doesn't make that a fact. The fact is that we know quite a bit about the age of the earth, the age of the Universe, and how the universe has evolved over the millennia.
Now, none of the remarks about the Genesis Creation stories are ever made as if to imply that they apply to all of the Bible. Allegories, parables, and fables are all examples of stories that may not literally be true, but they still have value and they still contain lessons we can learn from.
To say that you said the Bible is false because you said one story cannot be literally true is really disingenuous, being as generous as possible. It truly misrepresents what you said.
Thanks, Mensa. When I say something I try to be as clear as I can, but sometimes a person will either not understand, or in some cases, deliberately mis-represent what I said.
Yes, we know a great deal about the age of the universe. It shows how strong religious beliefs can be that people who hold those beliefs will simply dismiss scientific evidence which you would think would cause them to examine if what they believe has any merit.
What I posted were a few established facts. I was careful to word it that way. For example, I used "over 13 billion years" instead of saying 13.8 billion years +/- 50 million years. The things I said are true, regardless of what a person believes.
Anyone can say the earth is 6000 years old because that's what the Bible says. That doesn't make that a fact. The fact is that we know quite a bit about the age of the earth, the age of the Universe, and how the universe has evolved over the millennia.
Now, none of the remarks about the Genesis Creation stories are ever made as if to imply that they apply to all of the Bible. Allegories, parables, and fables are all examples of stories that may not literally be true, but they still have value and they still contain lessons we can learn from.
To say that you said the Bible is false because you said one story cannot be literally true is really disingenuous, being as generous as possible. It truly misrepresents what you said.
When someone states their belief that the Genesis creation stories in the Bible are "just stories" and are "wrong," and are "not historical" and "not literal," then expounding on what science says is irrelevant, in the same way that dragging "scientific evidence" into a conversation about Lord of the Rings is irrelevant to point out that putting on a ring doesn't make a person invisible. In my view, that is not rational behavior.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 04-29-2024 at 03:12 PM..
When someone states their belief that the Genesis creation stories in the Bible are "just stories" and are "wrong," and are "not historical" and "not literal," then expounding on what science says is irrelevant, in the same way that dragging "scientific evidence" into a conversation about Lord of the Rings is irrelevant to point out that putting on a ring doesn't make a person invisible. In my view, that is not rational behavior.
You are dead wrong again. Those are ways of demonstrating how the Bible can't be taken literally in all cases, and shows why that is. Sometimes it is necessary to show WHY something can't literally be true.
I can't comprehend why this is so difficult for you to understand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
