Jump to content

The BIBLE and SCIENCE


betsy

Recommended Posts

If one looked closely enough at a stack of Zane Grey novels, you could probably base a religion on 'em. It might involve horse worship, though. A sermon might

*.

*Col. Potter was a Zane Grey fan.

Edited by DogOnPorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 937
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hey you infidel! The gospel of Loius L'amour shall not be mocked!

Without looking it up online, this bothered me the whole day of how I know who Louis L'amour is. I had a classmate in highschool who read just about every one of his books. I just figured this out ..like now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey you infidel! The gospel of Loius L'amour shall not be mocked!

All science should be mocked to some degree - as should all religion. Religion is not all knowing nor is science - both must be questioned and examined for what is true and good and real and what is NOT - those that adhere to science as a religion are just as foolish as those that read the bible and believe that it is an untained and totally accurate compulation of ancient documents - all is fudged - and all is political - only the free mind without religious or scientific interferance can come up with the truth - the "truth is within you" not in a book or a study - I believe that real scientists would agree- as well as renegade and real theologists...God - or goodness means reality and on going learning - It never stops - institutionalization of science and religion is a mistake...once you have all the answers - the universe changes and offers more questions - it's the game of life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope- not going to link ---you are going to mock me - and I am not science or religion --- I am Oleg..but I am curious - okay - here goes _ I will press the button... :rolleyes:

Pressed the link and the computer failed - I guess we can now mock the machine - the computer science is not all perfect - and it is defective - You would assme that computers were mans answer to the great mystery - apparently they get glitches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say that 'mock' is the right word.

'Question' would be a better word... and science welcomes and thrives on questions. If someone can prove something wrong about a currently accepted scientific theory, scientists are happy because it furthers our knowledge and understanding. The same cannot be said about religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say that 'mock' is the right word.

'Question' would be a better word... and science welcomes and thrives on questions. If someone can prove something wrong about a currently accepted scientific theory, scientists are happy because it furthers our knowledge and understanding. The same cannot be said about religion.

Furthers "our" knowledge - I see you use the collective - I guess there is safety and authority in numbers. The word "religion" might not be the one we want here - I approach religion with a scientific mind- I took it upon myself to study - for three long years - new testimonial scripture - I questioned every last word and cross referenced and tested every little bit of doctrine - I used a very thick old latin dictionary - along with a book of explainations that was written by over 100 biblical scholars that did not take a religious approach. Also- I put myself back in time and walked though every scene recorded - and I looked around in a world gone for over 2000 years - I literally time traveled - and I did learn - what was a lie - what was political - what was contradictory and why it was presented as such - and I saw something - I saw the application of the highest form of science - These ancients were not stupified - modern religious types are. And YES - I gained knowledge---no different than a man of science. I put it to the test - I did not toss out the baby with the bath water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope- not going to link ---you are going to mock me - and I am not science or religion --- I am Oleg..but I am curious - okay - here goes _ I will press the button... :rolleyes:

It's a picture of open heart surgery. A service you'll no longer need as it is part of science.

(edit: if you click on a jpeg and your computer breaks, I'd say the problem is on your end. Time for a scan disc/defrag.)

Edited by DogOnPorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a picture of open heart surgery. A service you'll no longer need as it is part of science.

(edit: if you click on a jpeg and your computer breaks, I'd say the problem is on your end. Time for a scan disc/defrag.)

Hey - I have a friend who sits on the board of a few major hospitials - I was telling him - that I had a chest pain - it was either pull over and go to emerge or have faith and keep going - I kept going and survived - faith does control the mind and the mind has great influence over the body - the man I told the story too - did not disagree - He is an honouary chief of surgery - and he did not disagree on my decision - all of us during our life times will develope different little cancers - and our bodies will cure them in most cases - instant and natural remission - but - sometimes if the wrong doctor gets a hold of you - he will kill you with chemo - not saying that I am against medical science - but there is more to life than having others ensure your survival - You have to have faith - it is powerful - and in the end - if you need a doctor - hopefully - you find a skilled one with a healing spirit and faith....and a guy that understands his cosmic science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.drdino.com/article-categories.php?c=27

No Chance of Life by Chance

In the 1700's many scientists believed that life spontaneously generated from non-living matter (such as raw meat or sewage). In the 1800's, using careful experimentation, Louis Pasteur proved this concept wrong and verified that life only comes from previously existing life. Ironically, many scientists have...

Life from meat? Meat is dead, previously alive flesh.

Even the simplest living cell is an incredibly complex machine. It must be capable of detecting malfunctions, repairing itself, and making copies of itself. Man has never succeeded in building a machine capable of these same functions. Yet most scientists accept the belief that life arose from non-life (in spite of the evidence clearly indicating that it did not and could not happen). This incredible belief is as absurd as finding a complex chemical manufacturing facility on Mars and assuming that it built itself.

Nanotechnology is doing just such a thing with self replicating and self healing. And when these guys come around to accept it, it will be used as proof for creationism. Because man created it. Can't win either way with logic like this.

. As you search for truth, perhaps you should consider the possibility that the source of all life... is GOD

The possibility. Not absolute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_machine

http://www.drdino.com/read-article.php?id=23&c=27

With the exception of mutations, what Darwin believed about evolution has changed little in the last 140 years.

Hard to change the mind of anyone who has been dead. That will not change in the next 140 years either.

http://www.drdino.com/read-article.php?id=2&c=1

I was in Australia recently ministering; Australia is a small island off the coast of New Zealand. And I preached

This made me giggle. Actually this whole article made me giggle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top 25 Creationist Fallacies

On YouTube there used to be a really crazy MoFo Creationist named 'VenomFangX'...might still be there. Check out his stuff if you want a laugh. A search for his name should do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On YouTube there used to be a really crazy MoFo Creationist named 'VenomFangX'...might still be there. Check out his stuff if you want a laugh. A search for his name should do.

I like to laugh at the all knowing and devine evolutionists - they said I was a brother of a monkey - no apes in my family..but there are some in theirs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On YouTube there used to be a really crazy MoFo Creationist named 'VenomFangX'...might still be there. Check out his stuff if you want a laugh. A search for his name should do.

And it turned out he was a fake, and beleived in evolution. Admitting it in the end. I kinda figured he was just a troll when I saw his videos.

Oleg

I like to laugh at the all knowing and devine evolutionists - they said I was a brother of a monkey - no apes in my family..but there are some in theirs.

Apes and other primates are cousins of humans, and of each other. Not brothers. Which indicates a common ancestor. I have an uncle who looks like a gorilla though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, nothing like intellectual arrogance to aid your cause. Tell me Mr. toadbrother, how do evolutionists say the universe began, A big bang? And what caused that to happen? How did life begin on earth? The best they can come up with is that matter on CRYSTALS began the first cells as the crystals did some hocus pocus on them. I am not making this up.

Or if the evolutionists really trust you, in a moment of weakness they will say it's possible that ALIENS SEEDED THE EARTH with life. Again, I am not making this up. They offer no word on who created the aliens, however.

Another theory is that a bolt of lightning hitting mud started the process of life, but in the 50's some schmuck scientist proved to himself that he could not get any life to start when he experimented with lightning and mud over and over again repeatedly. Some say it started to smell good, which is where mud pies came from. :lol:

If that's the best the brightest minds in the world can come up with after hundreds of years and the power of computers, then perhaps those that oppose ID need to realize there is nothing better coming from their side.

Science does not deal with absolutes, it asks questions, develops theories to answer those questions, run tests and experiments to prove or disprove the theories, and more often then not actually create more questions in the process. There are no holy cows in science, even the seemly sacrosanct Newtonian Laws of Motion and Albert Einstein's Theory of Relativity are constantly being questioned, tested and revised as new knowledge is gleemed.

Religion on the other had does deal with absolutes, basically, GOD's word as written down is absolute and is not open to be questioned or challenged. To do so is to risk incurring the wrath of church (whichever one hold sway in your society) and its hordes of true believers. Even educated Churchmen are not immune to prosecution from the church when they put forth a theory that runs counter to Church Dogma, just ask Copernicus.

True science and honest scientist do not claim to have all the answers, religion and its true believe DO claim to have all the answers, therein lays the biggest difference between the two.

But to answer your question, how did the universe begin, well Physicist are still working on that question and have some very interesting theories which require an understanding of higher mathematics that the majority of us could never hope to master or understand. However those theories and idea can be presented in a manner that makes them understandable to most of us.

Here are a couple of links of BBC Science Programmes for you that deal with the subject:

Most of the universe is missing

Parallel Universes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE

That guy fits an unbelievable amount of information in a 10 minute clip!

I've been watching his other vids, he is pretty damn smart, and really breaks it down. And yes, full of information in a short time. It's like the 25 Creationist Falacies vid I linked previously, but each point givin 10 minutes of details.

The guy has a great speaking voice as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be forewarned: most, if not all of the sources will come from Scientists-Christian Apologetics. I, myself, am learning about them as I go along with this.

If only that were true! If you really were interested in learning your creationism, you would be able to answer questions directly, instead of cutting and pasting the statements of others.

This "God and Science" site that she's pasting articles from has a discussion forum; I may try to join there to find out how much science they mix with God. But, if it's anything like most Christian forums (CARM, for example), they won't be interested in honest debate -- just practicing how to sharpen their rhetorical skills on atheists and non-evangelicals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the seventh day he rested - what the heck - God does not get tired creating worlds and universes - He's God for God's sake - who invented this stupid idea - and doing it in six days ---- days did not exist prior to the world existing...There is about as much logic in this thought as a crazed Muslim thinking that God is so weak he can not do his own killing or birthing ------- ALL MIGHTY.....means just that....it's absurd - to put God into human terms - of time and duration of creation - Genesis - opens the door to creation - but it was put in human terms - it was dummied down so the average primative could grasp the concept to some degree - the book was written in a format that was applicable to children...Time to understand one thing about creation and God - we will never understand the mystery of God and creation - not the secularist and not the religious - Why would God grant understanding of all grand events? That would take all the fun and mystery out of life and make it not worth living ... No one will ever know - nor should they - science - and religion are both very backward in comparison - to the huge eternal mystery - maybe we should just relax and enjoy this place and being alive - it does not matter how we got here - it only matters that we are here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This "God and Science" site that she's pasting articles from has a discussion forum; I may try to join there to find out how much science they mix with God. But, if it's anything like most Christian forums (CARM, for example), they won't be interested in honest debate -- just practicing how to sharpen their rhetorical skills on atheists and non-evangelicals.

http://www.carm.org/secular-movements/evolution/creationism

In the midst of the debates -- or wars -- concerning the issues of creation and evolution, there is a tendency to over-generalize. Both sides often refer to the opposing side with the broad term of either "evolutionist" or "creationist." And yet there exists within both sides a great deal of variety and even controversy. As a creationist myself, I am hoping the following will help increase the understanding of the variety of positions on the creationist side of the fence.

Once creationists have a unifying hypothesis then we can talk. Which creationist view is right??

Science, in its purest form, deals with what can be tested and worked with. It does not matter when adding materials to a Petri dish, when excavating fossils, when operating the spacecraft, whether the person or people involved are atheistic, deistic, agnostic, New Age, or whatever else they might consider themselves. The technical aspects are not part of the belief systems of the men and women involved.

This is the only bit of truth you will ever get out of a creationist webstie. I have read a few so far. The rest of this sit is bunk.

http://www.carm.org/secular-movements/evol...tion-myth-right

3. Electricity: lights do not turn on because of science. Science means knowledge. We found out enough about electricity to learn how to harness it. Science did not invent electricity, and science does not turn on lights. A completed electrical connection turns on lights. Science discovered how to do it. There is a difference. If the electrons did not have the charge and the properties they do, science could never have done anything about learning how to fashion an electrical circuit. But the properties and charges within atoms are part of something that is intricately and intelligently designed. Science cannot take credit for doing anything but having scratched the surface of knowledge concerning this.

Without science, harnessing existing electricity would have been impossible at best. Science did turn on the light, and kept them on. This is the discovery and knowledge process. We could have sat around and wished for it to happen. But humans are not like that at all. We make it happen. And we use science to make it happen. And harnessing the electricity was a long ride.

http://www.about-building-in-canada.com/discovery.html

Electricity - A Brief History of Discovery

1780 – Italy -Italian anatomist Luigi Galvani while experimenting with static ‘electricity’ and dissected frogs stumbled upon what is today known as ‘electric current’

1791 – Italy - Luigi Galvani published a paper regarding the presence of a continuous flow of electricity, at the time referring to it as ‘animal electricity’

You can bet your ass the Bible does not tell us how to harness electricity. It is not a science book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...