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.

 

The Bible and Science Part 2 / The Science of Hydrology

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


I don't really think those passages are actually talking about the hydrological cycle as we know it. Rain is something that has always been important to man so it makes sense that he would study it.

These passages are no doubt referring to god pulling the water up and then letting it drop just like any man would do to water a garden. They see god as a keeper that is doing just that, caring for his creation and not evaporation, condensation and precipitation as we understand it today.

The one about the wharehouses for rain and hail are not talking about clouds. It's supposedly god asking Job a bunch of questions showing him that there are alot of things about the world/universe that he doesn't know. We see clouds all the time so why would he ask Job if he has seen them? Also it says that there are seperate wharehouses for each when today we know that they are both formed in the clouds.


edit on 28-12-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 28 2011 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Bingo.

And that's what I mean with interpretation. Just because the OP has a certain knowledge about hydrology does not mean those who wrote the Bible did, it just means the OP is inserting his interpretation as incentive to amaze people and draw them in for whatever reason. Religious people are dangerous in the sense that if they believe they can go to heaven by 'saving' people through recruitement/conversion, they will try their very best to do this through all kinds of means.

So OP, what is so scientific about not working on a Sunday? What is scientific about shunning entire groups of people because of skin color(bible was used to paint non-anglo saxons as demons)/sexuality/conflicting beliefs? You asked for something that was not correct, well I ask you this: Do you believe there is nothing that is incorrect in the Bible?
edit on 28-12-2011 by InfoKartel because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


You obviously didn't read the opening post . Your opinion is noted and thanks for the contribution to the thread. I like seeing people have an opinion on the topic.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by InfoKartel
 


You also didn't read the opening post . There are plenty of ways I guess to interpret the verses but not all people will call red -green and a pig an elephant. Your accusations about me are your own opinions as well and you may interpret this anyway you want but the truth is, THE TRUTH is, you know nothing about me and therefor you are wrong. If you knew me you wouldn't say alot of what you say. I happen to know that.

I am sorry your so upset over someone sharing an opinion and a few verses. You have the freedom to believe what you want. I too have that same freedom as do others and if that makes you this angry , you need to maybe relax and let people be people and enjoy the freedom you enjoy without gettting your blood pressure up.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Your claims are inaccurate.

Quoth Aristotle:

"Now the sun, moving as it does, sets up processes of change and becoming and decay, and by its agency the finest and sweetest water is every day carried up and is dissolved into vapour and rises to the upper region, where it is condensed again by the cold and so returns to the earth."

That water evaporated from the ocean to form clouds which brought rain in turn was known to the ancients well before the texts of your Bible were penned. Being an arguably Hellenistic work, or at most no older than the Babylonian exile, such descriptions aren't surprising at all.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by PoeteMaudit
 


Where is your link to this claim you make. I would like to read something that says what you claim. Can you provide one?



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


Not only did I read the OP but I also read the chapters in the bible where those passages came from. Placing them in context shows that they are the ideas of minds that didn't really have the same concept of the hydrological cycle as we know it today.

Care to explain why the bible says that there is a wharehouse for rain and another for hail? Today we know that water vapor is held in the clouds until it forms drops and if the temps are right balls of ice. The passage that you quoted says that god has them stored somewhere that isn't the clouds, given the context, which is not consistent with science.

Deflecting and ignoring will not make your proposal true.


edit on 29-12-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Really? You say,



Care to explain why the bible says that there is a wharehouse for rain and another for hail? Today we know that water vapor is held in the clouds until it forms drops and if the temps are right balls of ice. The passage that you quoted says that god has them stored somewhere that isn't the clouds, given the context, which is not consistent with science


That isn't in the clouds you say? If you were truely interested and had read the passages with a concern in your heart you would have seen ,,,


22 “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,


Where do you find Lightning other than the clouds ( figuratively speaking ) verse 24.

And don't try to presume on me like you do on the word. I don't deflect and I owe you NOTHING understand. I am not on trial here nor is The Word regardless of your fear and secrets.
Let me make it clear for you. I don't care what you believe or disbelieve. This thread is not to "Win you over" your fate and life are not my responsibility nor do I want to make them my responsibility.

This thread is not for those who Dis-believe but rather for those who do believe. To remind them of the reasons for confidence in Gods Word and it's truth and for those who dis-believe I couldn't care less. Believe what you want and live with it. you end by saying,,



Deflecting and ignoring will not make your proposal true


Do I need to say more? I dont propose anything to YOU.This thread wasn't started for your convictions and possible future or eventualities!!!

PS your previous post proves the scriptures truth but you seem to not get it..



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
That isn't in the clouds you say? If you were truely interested and had read the passages with a concern in your heart you would have seen ,,,


22 “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,


Where do you find Lightning other than the clouds ( figuratively speaking ) verse 24.

Verse 24 is seperate from verse 23. You even cut it in half. It says


What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?


It is a question unto itself and not part of the question made in verse 23.

You still did not explain why god would be asking Job if he had seen clouds (warehouses) when every human who is not blind has seen them. Or why he speaks of seperate warehouses when in fact snow, hail and rain are all stored in the same clouds and only change due to other factors.


And don't try to presume on me like you do on the word. I don't deflect and I owe you NOTHING understand. I am not on trial here nor is The Word regardless of your fear and secrets.

But you do have to follow the rules of the forum if you wish to participate here. Since the motto of ATS is to deny ignorance then I will point out the ignorance in your posts whenerver I can.


Do I need to say more? I dont propose anything to YOU.This thread wasn't started for your convictions and possible future or eventualities!!!

Every thread started here is a proposal to the ATS community. I am part of the community so...
edit on 29-12-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Your right you are a part of that community and so am I. You can read right. I don't intend on having to lead you around by the hand and answer your questions that are nothing more that an act to create contention. If you want answers find them. Honest doubt is one thing. Trying to argue with me is another. I am finished explaining things to you that you can't understand .

PS The question of where are the storehouses for snow etc was referring to the fact that they are the clouds. The question was saying have you seen them or been in them etc, no they are above in the clouds but you choose to argue. Start a thread, I notice you never have, have you?



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by daskakik
 

I don't intend on having to lead you around by the hand and answer your questions that are nothing more that an act to create contention. If you want answers find them. Honest doubt is one thing. Trying to argue with me is another. I am finished explaining things to you that you can't understand .

PS The question of where are the storehouses for snow etc was referring to the fact that they are the clouds. The question was saying have you seen them or been in them etc, no they are above in the clouds but you choose to argue. Start a thread, I notice you never have, have you?

Actually I'm trying to have an adult conversation. I don't need to be lead around by the hand. You made a statement that is incorrect. I asked that you give a logical explanation or accept that your original premise is wrong. That is what we do here. If that is not what you wanted then you are on the wrong site.

Your explanation does not refute my point. Your whole OP is based on your opinion and not fact. Even the text you quote doesn't back up the claim in your OP when taken in context.

edit on 29-12-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Your point is your point. Its your opinion . Your entitled to your opinion . How many times are you going to kick and complain. No one is going to care. Your opinion is just that your opinion. Now your opinion is your opinion. Do you have another opinion? opions are opinions and in my opinion your opinion is just another opinion. Is it not your opinion? Then I guess it's an opinion of yours. Your opinion.. How many times are you going to state the same opinion?



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Furthermore. Find me ascientist that says the scripture is not accurate in the topic of this thread. I will listen to his reasons . That is if you want to embaress yourself and waste your time cause you wont find one. The text is accurate regardless of your lack of vision.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 

Actually it isn't just an opinion but a logical argument. Again, if that is not what you wanted you are on the wrong site. Just a reminder:

AboveTopSecret.com is the Internet's largest and most popular discussion board community dedicated to the intelligent exchange of ideas and debate on a wide range of "alternative topics"



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


Find me a scientist that says your right and the scripture is wrong on the subect of the topic.. Do you know what the word topic means? Are you going to continue posting off topic questions? Prove what you say or start a thread . Do you have a reason for not sharing you knowledge in a thread? u2u me and I will tell you why



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 

I am a scientist in the broad sense and even a bit in the strict sense. Of course you will just say I'm making it up to prove my point. Also, why would the opinion of a scientist have more weight when the topic in question is about biblical interpretation?

Here's one anyway.
Subjectivity and No Definitive Answers in the Bible


As shown by the numerous examples in Morris (1986), YECs will grasp at any extreme and ridiculous argument to "prove" that the Bible is "scientifically valid". As Christian fundamentalists, YECs want us to believe that their Bible interpretations are "objective", "final", "scientific", and "reliable evidence of inspiration from God".



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


You really are grabbing at straws. Fist off the post you make and your link is not a bit on this thread topic. I have said it to you numerous times already and you plow forward with issue after issue after issue that has nothing to do with the thread topic. I said get a scientist that will tell me that the thread topic I quoted scripture on is not accurate. No credible scientist would because the scriptures I quoted and the thread topic are in agreement.

Are you of those people that has to be right about everything? I hope not because the thread and the scriptures referenced in the first post I started the thread with are not in contradiction !!! Im not interested in a persons opinion that has to be right even when they are wrong due to agenda or prejudice.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


If you had taken a look at the link you would have seen that it is taking on your series "The Bible and Science" in general.

Here is something specific:
Bible Science Debunked


Job 38:23 reads, �Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?� Cleary the intent of these passages is to depict a storage place for frozen forms of water. There is no rational basis for inferring that this word is describing the intricate shapes of snowflakes. It refers to the mythical storehouses of the snow which the TSIBAGH thought existed above the equally mythical firmament. Accordingly, most Bible versions translate this phrase as �storehouses� or �treasuries� of the snow.


These are not clouds but deposits which would be in what we call outer space. Clouds don't exist on the other side of the firmament so it can't be referring to clouds.


Are you of those people that has to be right about everything? I hope not because the thread and the scriptures referenced in the first post I started the thread with are not in contradiction !!! Im not interested in a persons opinion that has to be right even when they are wrong due to agenda or prejudice.

You know I could throw that question right back at you. I post rational and logical observations and you accuse me of just not getting it and that you are not going to hold my hand and lead me. Of course you didn't see the contradictions when you posted the OP but ignoring them when they are pointed out to you is exactly what you describe above.
edit on 29-12-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


First you post a quote that doesn't even contain the entire verse and the end of the verse is very important. It contains the word "Hail" Now that is important because hail is used as a weapon per say in The Bible.


"Have you entered the storehouses of the snow, or have you seen the storehouses of the hail?"


Then I love this next one below. It is funny because the very person you use is also saying that there is what? No difference between Snow and Hail? Lets read and see,



There is no rational basis for inferring that this word is describing the intricate shapes of snowflakes. It refers to the mythical storehouses of the snow which the TSIBAGH thought existed above the equally mythical firmament. Accordingly, most Bible versions translate this phrase as �storehouses� or �treasuries� of the snow.


In the above quote you use I am curious what word is he talking about? Then he tries to decide what Scripture Says and what it Means .Then tries to say that Scripture was trying to not describe intricate shapes. Snow is Snow and Hail is Hail and they are Both Frozen Forms Of Water.
For him to say it only means frozen water but not snowflakes is purely prejudicial and biased. Also he says according to MOST Bible versions they translate it as snow . He makes the case himself.
Then you say ,



These are not clouds but deposits which would be in what we call outer space. Clouds don't exist on the other side of the firmament so it can't be referring to clouds.


How did you come up with that conclusion?
Maybe you call it outer space but I don't agree. So now we are in outter space . Is this a good time to start looking at the moon for the answers. Maybe there are some snow and hail storage bins up there in one of those craters
As far as your conclusion and closing statement I won't dignify it's error with an answer.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by daskakik
 

Then I love this next one below. It is funny because the very person you use is also saying that there is what? No difference between Snow and Hail?

Actually you just asked for a scientist that would refute the statements of the OP. It was almost a given that you would not agree with them.


How did you come up with that conclusion?
Maybe you call it outer space but I don't agree. So now we are in outter space . Is this a good time to start looking at the moon for the answers. Maybe there are some snow and hail storage bins up there in one of those craters

I used your source, the bible:
Genesis 1:7-8


7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.

And Genesis 1:16-17



16 And God made the two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of heaven to give light upon the earth,

In the first quote god calls the firmament heaven and it is where the sun and the moon exist so that means it is outer space. But the firmament holds back the water which he makes rain down.

and according to Genesis 7:11-12

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.


So if the rain is stored above the firmament then it can't be clouds.

In other parts of the bible the firmament is said to be the world's roof or vault upon which gods throne rests and upon which he walks. It is said to be "...strong as a molten mirror? (Job 37:18). Nothing like that exists between the surface of the earth and outer space so that is just more proof against scientific knowledge in the bible.


As far as your conclusion and closing statement I won't dignify it's error with an answer.

Didn't like the mirror, huh? Alright I have been involved in threads like this where the OP is showed to be wrong but just won't accept it. Not going to waste any more time pointing out facts just to have them ignored.


edit on 29-12-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join