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.

 

Concerning UFOs. Can't we agree that the Bible is not a scientific source?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 03:53 PM
link   
I am not trying to debate the validity of the Bible. My beliefs revolving around the Bible are irrelevant.
I am just astounded that people use the Bible as if it was a legitimate scientific source.
One of the requirements of an actual scientific source is that it contains experiments and/or studies that show repeatable results.
The topic of UFOs and ETs is an intellectual excercise, for those of us who have not seen or had contact with the same.
Most of us see this as a study worthy of SCIENTIFIC research.
With respect to everyone who this concerns;
Believing what the Bible says, on your part, does not constitute evidence either for or against this issue, for those who are more analytical and scientific in their thought process.
What do you guys think?




posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 04:01 PM
link   
All in favor that the bible sucks as reference for anything? All agree?

And so it was decided. *Bangs judges hammer*



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 04:01 PM
link   
I think most use the Bible (in regards to UFOs), to merely establish that people have looked up and seen unidentifiable phenomenon in the skies for many centuries.

I'd be surprised if anyone viewed the Bible (or Vedas, or any other ancient scripture) as scientific....



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
I think most use the Bible (in regards to UFOs), to merely establish that people have looked up and seen unidentifiable phenomenon in the skies for many centuries.

I'd be surprised if anyone viewed the Bible (or Vedas, or any other ancient scripture) as scientific....

I don't mean this the way it sounds.
But you of all people should re-read the post that get placed here very, very , all too often.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 10:33 AM
link   
I agree it can not be used as reference at all as it is totally outdated and based on the beliefs of a more primitive society.
However, I think it is interesting that the concept of a place in heaven could be a metaphore of other worlds that are out there.
I think that technologically advanced races would appear to be godlike.
Perhaps these things have been taken out of context.

I think we need more peace in the world.

Since when has it been a "Christian" act to invade another country for its oil?



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 10:44 AM
link   
No, as a matter of fact, I cannot agree to that, edpending upon whta you mean.
When you say scientific, what do you mean? In your mind, does scientific mean definitive? The End-All in truth? Science is merely a thorough, procedure-controlled manner of gatehring information. The information is as clean and unbiased as those gathering the information. For example, I read some really stupid comments on this thread, written by people who know little more about the Bible than their own hatred for the faith. That is not ubiased, and because of their biased thinking, they have no idea what is in it. The Bible can be the stable foundation from which to launch many studies, as a matter of fact, and has been just that in the past.

As far as UFO's I have never seen any clear and unbiased UFO reseach based on the Bible. I have seen some try and say that books in the Bible, such as Ezekiel, are Biblical evidence of UFO's, but those assertions are made out of ignorance of the text. I don't see it as the writers' fault, as the Word is a mystery to them, as it is to so many others, and they are merely looking for supporting information.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   
I guess, one typical example of what I'm thinking about, exists in replies to a thread that is currently on the board. That thread is titled "Does extraterrestrial life exist?"
I don't want to use names or point directly at the person, because, they are in no way the only ones that use this type of biblical "proof".
Maybe I'm just being too 'thin-skinned' about the issue. Maybe it isn't a issue to anyone else. I don't know.
'



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 02:37 PM
link   


I don't mean this the way it sounds.
But you of all people should re-read the post that get placed here very, very , all too often.


I'm well aware of the threads you mean, but they aren't done by "most" members, primarily just a few... And, they may have valid reasons for basing their ideas on such texts, as TC mentioned above.

Nobody is forcing you or anyone else to accept them as "scientific" bases for research. And, by the same token, they are free to their beliefs as well...



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 03:05 PM
link   
very true Gazrok.

I sincerely don't mean to offend anyone or scoff at anyone regarding their religious beliefs.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 03:49 PM
link   
In my opinion the Bible can be used as a source, just like any other text from that time. But it shouldnt be given any more credability... And I think that any descriptions of 'angels appearing' and such should be discarded. Only direct "I saw a light descend from the sky" could be given credit, again, just like any other sighting from back then.

Ancient paintings are MUCH more interesting in my opinion.




top topics



 
0

log in

join