It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

God Did It! The rest is post modern chatter!

page: 11
23
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: edmc^2

Haha haha you are still clinging to the hangs on nothing scripture. Thats not irrefutable evidence of anything. I've stated this before and I'll say it again. Making a statement as vague as that is nothing more than a logical inference.

If I look out at space I see nothing.

Again the earth isn't just hanging. Its not suspended sitting still which is what that scripture infers.

If the scripture read "you Lord who spins the earth in orbit around the Sun " then you may have a case.

But again other scriptures make inference that it is the Sun moving around the earth. We now know the Sun does not move around the earth.


OK - let's get into it more and see how far your understanding is.

How do you say what you said in very simple poetic terms using a 4000 year old nomadic language and in a nomadic setting? Either in Old Hebrew or Aramaic language.

"you Lord who spins the earth in orbit around the Sun"

Remember, the Bible writers didn't have the scientific knowledge that we have today or even the knowledge of 200 years ago. Also, the subject is location in space not its orbit or rotation.

So - please do tell.




Very simple explanation. The bible writers claimed there knowledge and words came directly from God. If they came from God they should have had better knowledge than what they had. You would think god could bestow on them knowledge beyond what we currently have today. You know since he is the one who created everything.




posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 04:40 PM
link   
I stopped the moment I saw the scripture being quoted again...



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2
a reply to: Joecanada11

You also said:




But again other scriptures make inference that it is the Sun moving around the earth. We now know the Sun does not move around the earth.


Can you please provide the scripture so that we can find out if you're correct?



Certainly.

Instead, the Bible implies that the sun moves around the Earth, rather than the Earth rotating. Ecclesiastes 1:5 shows a geocentric world view:
“”The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose

I brought this scripture up previously. It is very clearly inferring that the Sun is moving around the earth. We know better now.

But again I make the point if God were the one giving this knowledge to the scribes then we should expect better than this.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: edmc^2
Problem is the two are not compatible. One requires guidance and intelligence while the other is just dumb luck.


I can't agree with that. Evolution is basically life's ability to adapt over time to an ever changing earth environment. It makes sense for a creator to design life with the ability to adapt. Do you really deny that? Why is it mutually exclusive?



Key word is "adapt". We all adapt to our environment. We were created that way.

Evolution on the other hand - in terms of ORIGIN - is incompatible with creation.



Been a long time

Evolution is only incompatible with creation IF one subscribes to YEC... which is not biblical anyways...

So you are incorrect brother



Read again what I said - in terms of ORIGIN.

That is in terms of ORIGINS, evolution has no need for a Creator since life started on its own.

Creation from Biblical point of view - started with the creation of a complete fully grown man and woman with the ability to pro-create.

There was no need to "evolve" (macro or otherwise) their alleles but had the ability and capacity to adapt.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: edmc^2

So again, Like i said

The only way they're incompatible is IF one subscribes to YEC... which is not biblical in the first place

IF one believes in the idea that consists of... "POOF" man is here... its incompatible

On the other hand IF one believes that we evolved from an earlier form of man, creationism and evolution are completely compatible


edit on 22-4-2016 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11

originally posted by: edmc^2
a reply to: Joecanada11

You also said:




But again other scriptures make inference that it is the Sun moving around the earth. We now know the Sun does not move around the earth.


Can you please provide the scripture so that we can find out if you're correct?



Certainly.

Instead, the Bible implies that the sun moves around the Earth, rather than the Earth rotating. Ecclesiastes 1:5 shows a geocentric world view:
“”The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose

I brought this scripture up previously. It is very clearly inferring that the Sun is moving around the earth. We know better now.

But again I make the point if God were the one giving this knowledge to the scribes then we should expect better than this.


Wow! Sorry but wow!

It merely says sunrise and sunset and to you this implies the sun rotating the earth?

Sorry but wow.

Also, the writer is not talking about rotation but the PERMANENCE of things.

Look at v4. It says

[Ecc 1:4 KJV] "[One] generation passeth away, and [another] generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever."

Just like the PERMANENCE of the earth is for sure - so does the rising and setting of the sun. It will go on forever.

[Ecc 1:4 KJV] "[One] generation passeth away, and [another] generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever."
[Ecc 1:5 KJV] "The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose."
[Ecc 1:6 KJV] "The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits."
[Ecc 1:7 KJV] "All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea [is] not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again."

Stop listening to others who have no idea what the Bible is talking about.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: truthseeker84
I stopped the moment I saw the scripture being quoted again...



You need to read in context - a question was asked if the Bible is correct. So an answer was provided.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: edmc^2

Read again.

The sun riseth and the sun seteth. And hasteth to the place whence it came. How can the sun hasteth anywhere when the earth revolves around the sun.

Then you bring up the permanence of the earth. We know that the earth is not permanent. Again scripture conflicting with our better knowledge now. The earth will perish when the sun dies as all stars eventually do.

I'm not believing what anyone else told me. That would be the old me when I listeners to preachers instead of examining the scriptures myself. Hence I'm an ex Christian.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: truthseeker84
I stopped the moment I saw the scripture being quoted again...



LOL same here... if the Bible is the real holly book, why does it have so many contradictions?
And if a God made us, why create us with so many imperfections?



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: edmc^2

Haha haha you are still clinging to the hangs on nothing scripture. Thats not irrefutable evidence of anything. I've stated this before and I'll say it again. Making a statement as vague as that is nothing more than a logical inference.

If I look out at space I see nothing.

Again the earth isn't just hanging. Its not suspended sitting still which is what that scripture infers.

If the scripture read "you Lord who spins the earth in orbit around the Sun " then you may have a case.

But again other scriptures make inference that it is the Sun moving around the earth. We now know the Sun does not move around the earth.


OK - let's get into it more and see how far your understanding is.

How do you say what you said in very simple poetic terms using a 4000 year old nomadic language and in a nomadic setting? Either in Old Hebrew or Aramaic language.

"you Lord who spins the earth in orbit around the Sun"

Remember, the Bible writers didn't have the scientific knowledge that we have today or even the knowledge of 200 years ago. Also, the subject is location in space not its orbit or rotation.

So - please do tell.




Very simple explanation. The bible writers claimed there knowledge and words came directly from God. If they came from God they should have had better knowledge than what they had. You would think god could bestow on them knowledge beyond what we currently have today. You know since he is the one who created everything.


Sure he coulda - woulda but God wasn't teaching them or showing them science. No, the Bible is much more than that. But it contains information that when it touches science - it's accurate. He also allowed the writers to write the things they saw and heard according to their own way of writing style.

So back to my question -

How do you say what you said in very simple poetic terms using a 4000 year old nomadic language and in a nomadic setting? Either in Old Hebrew or Aramaic language.

"you Lord who spins the earth in orbit around the Sun" ?

Not is scientific terms but in a very simple poetic way.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: edmc^2

Read again.

The sun riseth and the sun seteth. And hasteth to the place whence it came. How can the sun hasteth anywhere when the earth revolves around the sun.

Then you bring up the permanence of the earth. We know that the earth is not permanent. Again scripture conflicting with our better knowledge now. The earth will perish when the sun dies as all stars eventually do.

I'm not believing what anyone else told me. That would be the old me when I listeners to preachers instead of examining the scriptures myself. Hence I'm an ex Christian.


Like I said - it's merely talking about the sun rising and sun setting each and every day. Nothing more nothing less.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: edmc^2

Well let's see.

You Lord who moves the earth around the sun in perfect timing.

That works for me. Much more accurate than hangs on nothing. Again your reaching. It's okay though you have to reach with the bible.

And regarding Ecclesiastes you conveniently left out the last part of the verse because it doesn't fit your position.

The sun hasteth clearly implies its the sun in movement.

And no reply about the earths permanence? Oh right you don't want to admit that sfhripture is wrong. None of this is permanent. To state the earth abideth forever is false based on current knowledge.

Do you have any other "proof" from the bible?

How about the ark story. Would you like to discuss the sheer impossibility of the ark story ?



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
Actually that was an excellent point...and that and " science says the universe has a begining and the bible said god created it. So that's proof God created the universe" those are lierally the cruxes of your argument.


You can't use "something can't come from nothing" then claim God came from nothing....


Also, you didn't even attemp a counterpoint....just "I don't like your question mr. Rant.."


Quite to the contrary, I've answered the question multiple times already but for some reason Mr. Rant can't seem to see the logic in it.

In any case, let's discuss.




You can't use "something can't come from nothing" then claim God came from nothing....


Let's break it down:

It's a fact mathematically AND scientifically that "something can't come from nothing".

This axiom holds true from a PHYSICAL standpoint. It holds true particularly with the creation of the universe. The "singularity" (big-bang") theory confirms this to be so. Through background radiation, we can trace back in time the beginning of the universe. 13-14 billion years ago (according to findings) the universe was born.

That is a fact!

E = mc2 gives us an idea how matter and energy can transform to either form.

That energy can be transformed into matter and matter can be transformed into energy.

But we know that matter is not eternal neither energy. So what then is source of the raw material that became the universe?

Again, it's NOT nothing because, nothing - absolute nothing - can not exist.

Thus there MUST be then by necessity - something that ALWAYS existed. Something that had no beginning and no end must be the ultimate source of everything.

Question is - who or what is this "something"?

Is it intelligent? Is it alive? or is it just "something" that always existed but without any intelligence.

The latter is not logical. For how could "something with no intelligence" create something with intelligence?

The ONLY logical conclusion is - the "something" is not a "thing" but SOMEONE Alive possessing great intelligence and power.

If E = mc2 requires a great mind to formulate, then what about the universe with all it's wonders?

The movements of galaxies, the movements stars and planets - show a great deal of balance. An intricate cosmic dance that shows an amazing cohesion. Some call this cohesion - the fine tuning.

The four fundamental forces that holds the universe together show a great deal of intelligence! Yet many here attribute this to dumb luck.

Mr. Rant's answer? IDK.

Now how logical is that?







Plants create something with no intelligence.

The sun creates elements, without any intelligence.

There is no astronomical feature or physical law since the Big Bang, that requires an intelligent omnipotent being to have created it or guided it. All the galaxies and such are easily explained by gravity and such, with zero intelligent guiding force. Yet your claiming an intelligent force must have been the catalyst for the universes, when the universe runs just fine with no intelligent guiding force, since its creation.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: edmc^2

Well let's see.

You Lord who moves the earth around the sun in perfect timing.

That works for me. Much more accurate than hangs on nothing. Again your reaching. It's okay though you have to reach with the bible.

And regarding Ecclesiastes you conveniently left out the last part of the verse because it doesn't fit your position.

The sun hasteth clearly implies its the sun in movement.

And no reply about the earths permanence? Oh right you don't want to admit that sfhripture is wrong. None of this is permanent. To state the earth abideth forever is false based on current knowledge.

Do you have any other "proof" from the bible?

How about the ark story. Would you like to discuss the sheer impossibility of the ark story ?


If simple words like sunrise and sunset meant the sun rotating around the earth, then it's like someone insisting 1+1 = 3.

How can one have an intelligent discussion then?

Here's another way of reading the verse:

The sun rises, and the sun sets;
Then it hurries back to the place where it rises again.

A person wakes up in the morning and sees the sun rising and retires when the sun sets then wakes up again the following day where the sun "hasteth" to rise again.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
Actually that was an excellent point...and that and " science says the universe has a begining and the bible said god created it. So that's proof God created the universe" those are lierally the cruxes of your argument.


You can't use "something can't come from nothing" then claim God came from nothing....


Also, you didn't even attemp a counterpoint....just "I don't like your question mr. Rant.."


Quite to the contrary, I've answered the question multiple times already but for some reason Mr. Rant can't seem to see the logic in it.

In any case, let's discuss.




You can't use "something can't come from nothing" then claim God came from nothing....


Let's break it down:

It's a fact mathematically AND scientifically that "something can't come from nothing".

This axiom holds true from a PHYSICAL standpoint. It holds true particularly with the creation of the universe. The "singularity" (big-bang") theory confirms this to be so. Through background radiation, we can trace back in time the beginning of the universe. 13-14 billion years ago (according to findings) the universe was born.

That is a fact!

E = mc2 gives us an idea how matter and energy can transform to either form.

That energy can be transformed into matter and matter can be transformed into energy.

But we know that matter is not eternal neither energy. So what then is source of the raw material that became the universe?

Again, it's NOT nothing because, nothing - absolute nothing - can not exist.

Thus there MUST be then by necessity - something that ALWAYS existed. Something that had no beginning and no end must be the ultimate source of everything.

Question is - who or what is this "something"?

Is it intelligent? Is it alive? or is it just "something" that always existed but without any intelligence.

The latter is not logical. For how could "something with no intelligence" create something with intelligence?

The ONLY logical conclusion is - the "something" is not a "thing" but SOMEONE Alive possessing great intelligence and power.

If E = mc2 requires a great mind to formulate, then what about the universe with all it's wonders?

The movements of galaxies, the movements stars and planets - show a great deal of balance. An intricate cosmic dance that shows an amazing cohesion. Some call this cohesion - the fine tuning.

The four fundamental forces that holds the universe together show a great deal of intelligence! Yet many here attribute this to dumb luck.

Mr. Rant's answer? IDK.

Now how logical is that?







Plants create something with no intelligence.

The sun creates elements, without any intelligence.

There is no astronomical feature or physical law since the Big Bang, that requires an intelligent omnipotent being to have created it or guided it. All the galaxies and such are easily explained by gravity and such, with zero intelligent guiding force. Yet your claiming an intelligent force must have been the catalyst for the universes, when the universe runs just fine with no intelligent guiding force, since its creation.


So tell me then o wise one, what are the fundamental laws governing the growth of plants and fundamental law for nuclear reaction?

If you can tel me, then where did these laws came from?

Who created them?

Laws just don't happen on their own you know - there's always a mind behind it.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: edmc^2

Exactly. You just said it

Then it hurries back to the place from where it came.

That implies the sun moving and not the earth.

If you want to use things like "you hang the earth on nothing" then you have to take that into account.

Also you are still ignoring the "earth abideth forever "

Which is funny because it was you who quoted earlier in this thread that we know matter is not eternal. Therefore how can the earth (matter) be eternal.

Your using scriptures in the bible as "proof" then when your proof gets debunked you ignore it. It's okay I used to do that too when I was a believer.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 06:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: edmc^2

Exactly. You just said it

Then it hurries back to the place from where it came.

That implies the sun moving and not the earth.

If you want to use things like "you hang the earth on nothing" then you have to take that into account.

Also you are still ignoring the "earth abideth forever "

Which is funny because it was you who quoted earlier in this thread that we know matter is not eternal. Therefore how can the earth (matter) be eternal.

Your using scriptures in the bible as "proof" then when your proof gets debunked you ignore it. It's okay I used to do that too when I was a believer.


May I ask, what do you see in the horizon when you wake up early in the morning and before you retire?

Is it not sunrise and sunset?

If this is so, then does this mean that the sun is rotating around the earth?

Come on use your common sense.

The writer of Ecl was writing what he saw from his POINT OF VIEW!!!!

In other words He Was On Earth Looking at the horizon where the sun sets and the sun rises.



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: edmc^2

So again, Like i said

The only way they're incompatible is IF one subscribes to YEC... which is not biblical in the first place

IF one believes in the idea that consists of... "POOF" man is here... its incompatible

On the other hand IF one believes that we evolved from an earlier form of man, creationism and evolution are completely compatible





You mean kinda like , God gifted the spark of intellect To some primate. White the spark of intellect being what was "in gods image."

That works.



That works,



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: edmc^2

Yes and the writer of Ecclesiastes also claims to have a special relationship the the supreme being of the universe. I don't.

He should have better knowledge. I mean God told these people to sacrifice animals. Cure leoprosy with sacrificing birds and running the blood on the afflicted. All kinds of silly laws in Leviticus. But he couldn't let them know how diseases were spread? Man he must have really cared about his creations.

And for the third time in a row you IGNORE YOUR CONTRADICTION OF THE EARTH AVIDETH FOREVER.



You talk of common sense. Tell me to use common sense. I'm not the one who thinks "hang the earth on nothing" is some specific proof that God wrote that scripture.

But you are. You state that proves God gave knowledge to the writer of the book supernaturally. Then when other scriptures conflict with science you ignore them or say " the reader is just observing what they saw"

You can't have it both ways.
edit on 22-4-2016 by Joecanada11 because: Added info



posted on Apr, 22 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: edmc^2

So again, Like i said

The only way they're incompatible is IF one subscribes to YEC... which is not biblical in the first place

IF one believes in the idea that consists of... "POOF" man is here... its incompatible

On the other hand IF one believes that we evolved from an earlier form of man, creationism and evolution are completely compatible





You mean kinda like , God gifted the spark of intellect To some primate. White the spark of intellect being what was "in gods image."

That works.



That works,


I didn't say anything about being in Gods image...

I find the very idea that we are created in Gods image absurd...




new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join