g_bambino Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Talk is cheap. Especially, speculation. And yet, somehow, you treat your speculative beliefs as invaluable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 And yet, somehow, you treat your speculative beliefs as invaluable. Yes... religion is entirely based upon speculation.... which is fine, but let's not pretend otherwise... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 (edited) What are you talking about???? Be specific! Explain! I don't get what you're trying to say here. Explain. Just go back to your posting saying to Bambino your claims regarding stretching are facts. Then to the following one when you tell me it's speculation - after that... Well, as you have proven so often, I don't know what I think, so I'll you do your own thinking. Especially if you don't know a negative cannot be proven. Edited September 19, 2012 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 (edited) See what I mean? This is a pattern with you....evading to answer, or clarify. Slick and slide. What's the point of discussion Indeed, what is the point? Whatever I say is never clear enough (to you, and only you). And you, and only you, understand better than me what I think or don't think, what I mean or don't mean. Besides, I think more people would agree if I said that your idea of discussion is you berating whoever fails to agree with you. You know what? You're afraid to clarify.... I am wondering why it is that most other people don't seem to need clarifications on what I said. or more so, you know that I see you're full of beans So, that's why I am gaining so much weight. Because, just like the "bullying" or the gay union or the adultery-analogy tight spot you placed yourself in.... . Thanks for informing me that I used the word adultery in the first place. What can I say... I though I was not talking about something irrelevant to the issue at hand, but once again you know better than I what I think. You should know the drill by now. The new drill is that, after saying what I think clearly enough for others, I serve you the mockery that is the appropriate response to your arrogance. And I'm enjoying every second of it Edited September 20, 2012 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 Interesting, by the way... The bit about the Universe stretching... (now, I will not pretend to be a scientist, so those with better KNOWLEDGE of science than I are free to tell me where I get it wrong) Interesting because, if one is to take, for example, the metric expansion of space (the growing distance, over time, between parts of the Universe), analogies that have been offered are the expansion of a rubber balloon and the rising of a loaf of raisin bread. Some view this as stretching. Fair enough. This is not, though the same kind of stretching as the one referred to in the Bible. Some of the passages where the terms stretch(ed) out and stretch(ed) forth are used use the analogy of a canopy or a tent. Not the same as a a rubber ballon or a rising loaf of raisin bread. BTW, the terms used are not stretch(ed), but strech(ed) OUT and stretch(ed)FORTH. Not quite the same thing. The Oxford Concise dictionary define stretch as "draw or be drawn or admit to being drawn out into greater lenght or size" and stretch out as "extend (a hand, a foot, etc.)" (interestingly enough, the same meaning as in the Hebrew word graciously provided by... betsy ). There is no doubt to me that the Bible IS the Word of God. There is also no doubt in my mind that it does not include a description of the way God's Universe works, placed in it ages ago so that people could some day exclaim "see... the Bible talks this recent scientific discovery". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 There is no doubt to me that the Bible IS the Word of God. If this is true, why do people ignore 90% of what is in it? And the excuse that it is the Old Testament is a lame one. Why did god change her mind about all these rules? What happened to stonings and the sabbath? Makes no sense. Borders on ridiculous. When does it simply become irrelevant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 (edited) Since my assertion was in direct response to the vague statements of yours that immediately preceded it, it's impossible that the argument I made has been addressed already. If you mean someone's earlier expressed observation about some previous comments of yours was similar to the one I just made, the argument can't have been addressed, since you're obviously still making the same contradictory claims (indicating you actually have been repeating yourself) as those that prompted that other person to point them out before. Surely you don't intend for this to get bogged down in an endless "please address the point" "I already did" cycle. So, can you explain for me why you say that you know and have proof the Bible is the word of God while simultaneously expressing uncertainty about which of the authors of the various versions of the Bible and the translators of those versions into multiple different languages God chose to influence and when He chose to do so? The legitimacy of your wider argument depends upon it. You also might, if you don't elaborate as requested, seem a hypocrite in light of this: [ed.: +] Read the topic, The Bible and this topic. Your question, "can you explain for me why you say that you know and have proof the Bible is the word of God," had been asked so many times, in so many different ways....and all have been answered. and for this: "while simultaneously expressing uncertainty about which of the authors of the various versions of the Bible and the translators of those versions into multiple different languages God chose to influence and when He chose to do so?" The only uncertainty about this (on my part), is the actual plan or purpose of God - since obviously I can only speculate about it. But the same fact does not change at all: for whatever purpose or reason or plan He may have - the word, "stretches" ended up in the Bible, 11 times and in the right context. "Accidentally," as Canadien implies, the very same word ends up as an accurate description for the expanding universe. Hence I say you evolutionists don't make any sense. You readily accept the theory of origin as being caused by an accident after an accident after an accident, without any proof about it except through speculations and assumptions - and yet you outright reject the Bible which made several claims - that have been proven right by modern science. At least the Bible scored several points already! To say the translation in various languages for the word, "stretches" does not come close to the actual Hebrew meaning is irrelevant - unless of course you're using those so-called Bibles that have questionable translations to begin with - that's why Bibles used by most scholars is the one being recommended. If you've got something to show the Hebrew translation to "stretches" does not come close to French translations (or any other language translations like Spanish etc..,) then bring it up. Cite. That argument however, still does not affect the fact that the word, "stretches" appeared 11 times, in the right context - and later on ended up being confirmed by science that the word,"stretches" accurately describes the expanding universe. As to why it ended up in KJV and in English translation.....ask God. Maybe He'll explain His reasoning behind that. As for me, I find it quite so accidental that the Huble telescope - which enabled modern science to understand about the stretching universe in 1929 - was invented by an American named, Edwin Huble....and I can only guess, he speaks English. If that telescope was invented by a Chinese in China, I wonder if we'll be reading it in Chinese - if there will even be a Bible in Chinese since Christianity was not exactly appreciated in China. But of course, that telescope just had to come from America! Quite a lot of "accidents" happening here, I find. Canadien keeps reiterating he believes the Bible is the Word of God - which sounds too hollow when he places a limit as to what the Bible can say or do. I wonder if he is even aware that through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the same verse could give different messages - depending on what God wants to convey to the seeker? Anyway, I'm still waiting if Canadien will graciously enlighten me as to why on earth - as he described himself being a christian - does he find it so hard to accept that science comes from God, and therefore, can be used by God for whatever purpose(s) He may have, or however He may want to do so. Edited September 20, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 (edited) Read the topic, The Bible and this topic. Your question, "can you explain for me why you say that you know and have proof the Bible is the word of God," had been asked so many times, in so many different ways....and all have been answered.¸ Ever crossed your mind that most people who read you find the answer lacking? "Accidentally," as Canadien implies That's what I imply? Thanks for letting me know. If you've got something to show the Hebrew translation to "stretches" does not come close to French translations (...) Err... Betsy... Stretches (or most exactly, as I pointed out stretches out and stretches forth) in the KJB is a translation from the original Hebrew text... Not the other way around.That argument however, still does not affect the fact that the word, "stretches" appeared 11 times Again, it is streches OUT and stretches FORTH.Canadien keeps reiterating he believes the Bible is the Word of God - which sounds too hollow when he places a limit as to what the Bible can say or do. I do that? Thanks for letting me know. Anyway, I'm still waiting if Canadien will graciously enlighten me as to why on earth - as he described himself being a christian - does he find it so hard to accept that science comes from God, and therefore, can be used by God for whatever purpose(s) He may have, or however He may want to do so. Since, once again, YOU are enlighting me by letting me know I have a problem accepting something something I thought I have no problem accepting... I'll let you give the honours. You express my opinions better than I do - even those I don't have. Edited September 20, 2012 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 (edited) Now this merits its own separate reply. As for me, I find it quite so accidental that the Huble telescope - which enabled modern science to understand about the stretching universe in 1929 - was invented by an American named, Edwin Huble....and I can only guess, he speaks English. If that telescope was invented by a Chinese in China, I wonder if we'll be reading it in Chinese - if there will even be a Bible in Chinese since Christianity was not exactly appreciated in China. But of course, that telescope just had to come from America! Quite a lot of "accidents" happening here, I find. Since unlike you, I lack the uncanny capacity to know better than others what they mean or think, let me ask you: should I conclude from this paragraph that English-speaking people are the new Chosen People? That God has chosen the translators who produced the KJV to be entrusted with knowledged denied to translators who have translated the Bible in other languages? Or perhaps all good Christians should try to figure out who will make the next big scientific breakthrough and start reading the Bible in that person's language... BTW, you didn't know, you really didn't know, that the Bible HAS been translated in a number of Chinese languages? some info Edited September 20, 2012 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melanie_ Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 Now this merits its own separate reply. Since unlike you, I lack the uncanny capacity to know better than others what they mean or think, let me ask you: should I conclude from this paragraph that English-speaking people are the new Chosen People? That God has chosen the translators who produced the KJV were entrusted with knowledged denied to translators who have translated the Bible in other languages? Or perhaps all good Christians should try to figure out who will make the next big scientific breakthrough and start reading the people in that person's language... BTW, you didn't know, you really didn't know, that the Bible HAS been translated in a number of Chinese languages? some info Ah, but the word "stretches" doesn't appear in any of those Chinese translations. How can it be a valid Bible without the key word, "stretches"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 Now this merits its own separate reply. Since unlike you, I lack the uncanny capacity to know better than others what they mean or think, let me ask you: should I conclude from this paragraph that English-speaking people are the new Chosen People? That God has chosen the translators who produced the KJV to be entrusted with knowledged denied to translators who have translated the Bible in other languages? Or perhaps all good Christians should try to figure out who will make the next big scientific breakthrough and start reading the Bible in that person's language... BTW, you didn't know, you really didn't know, that the Bible HAS been translated in a number of Chinese languages? some info Would this be a good time for me to once again point out that the English language KJV Bible offers a different cosmological model of the universe than the original Hebrew (again, with the sky has a dome made of solid material stretched over the disc of the earth)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted September 20, 2012 Report Share Posted September 20, 2012 The only uncertainty about this (on my part), is the actual plan or purpose of God - since obviously I can only speculate about it. If you can only speculate about God's plan, then you can only speculate on why the word "stretches" appeared in a version of the Bible (but not others or their translations). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) If you can only speculate about God's plan, then you can only speculate on why the word "stretches" appeared in a version of the Bible (but not others or their translations). You are speculating big time. Cite. And explain how those translations differ. Edited September 21, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) Would this be a good time for me to once again point out that the English language KJV Bible offers a different cosmological model of the universe than the original Hebrew (again, with the sky has a dome made of solid material stretched over the disc of the earth)? That's interesting. Cite on Hebrew and KJV. Edited September 21, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) Now this merits its own separate reply. Since unlike you, I lack the uncanny capacity to know better than others what they mean or think, let me ask you: should I conclude from this paragraph that English-speaking people are the new Chosen People? That God has chosen the translators who produced the KJV to be entrusted with knowledged denied to translators who have translated the Bible in other languages? Boy, you can conclude anything you want - you've been making these silly conclusions so many times, what's stopping you now? You've even made your conclusion that the Bible doesn't explain anything about origin! Or perhaps all good Christians should try to figure out who will make the next big scientific breakthrough and start reading the Bible in that person's language... BTW, you didn't know, you really didn't know, that the Bible HAS been translated in a number of Chinese languages? some info Sure, the Bible has been printed in China. But what seems to escape you and Melanie's grasp is my comparison between China and the USA! Bibles in Communist Asia Chinese Christians suffer persecution because of their faith. The Chinese government limits the printing and distribution of Bibles and imposes penalties on people who teach Christianity without official sanction. During the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s, the Chinese government burned Bibles, and Chinese Christians hid their Bibles. North Korea encourages neighbors to spy on people in their community and even finds ways to encourage children to report that their parents possess hidden Bibles in their homes. The North Korean regime sends anyone caught with a hidden Bible to prison Read more: Different Ways Bibles Have Been Hidden | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/info_8448626_different-ways-bibles-hidden.html#ixzz275wlXaAh So it does actually lend support in a way to my assumption that if God actually planned it in His own way and His own time - surely, since He knows everything (including the future) - He knew and planned how it's going to play out! Do you also contradict this ability by God, Canadien? Why does it have to be an American inventor or from Western civilization that based and rooted in Christianity, and not a Chinese or Russian or anyone from repressive regimes to invent scientific knowledge that points to Creation??? Edited September 21, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) Now I'd like to hear your own side: Blackdog, Bambino, Canadien, melanie, Squid and other evolutionists who outright reject Design or Creation. Explain how you support your own assumptions that we exist purely by simple chance - and a long series of accidents. Edited September 21, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) And I'm still waiting for Canadien's answer to this. why on earth - as he described himself being a christian - does he find it so hard to accept that science comes from God, and therefore, can be used by God for whatever purpose(s) He may have, or however He may want to do so. Edited September 21, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) Would this be a good time for me to once again point out that the English language KJV Bible offers a different cosmological model of the universe than the original Hebrew (again, with the sky has a dome made of solid material stretched over the disc of the earth)? Anyway, that's skirting around the issue. Whether it's been described as a dome or not in KJV, is not the point! So you can skip the citing. Unless you want to enlighten us by citing any "sightings" of evidence that supports your - ahem - very accidental theory. Here you go trying to bring up petty "holes" to try bust up the Bible - which by the way had already gained points - while you haven't even had a single score yet! The whole point is this: The word, "stretches" still managed to end up in the Bible 11 times, in the right context! And science - which at first described the universe as "expanding" - acknowledged that the more accurate term is, "stretching." You guys swallow the theory of accidents as the answer to origin - without any evidence of such accidents ever happening - yet you gag at the thought of considering this "accident" - which by the way is only one among many other accidents that appeared in the Bible - and ended up being proven true by modern science. What about yours? NOTHING. PLAIN ASSUMPTION. Go figure. Edited September 21, 2012 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 You've even made your conclusion that the Bible doesn't explain anything about origin! Thanks again for reaching my own conclusion for me. Why does it have to be an American inventor or from Western civilization that based and rooted in Christianity, and not a Chinese or Russian or anyone from repressive regimes to invent scientific knowledge that points to Creation??? I didn't know knowledge was invented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 Now I'd like to hear your own side: Blackdog, Bambino, Canadien, melanie, Squid and other evolutionists who outright reject Design or Creation. Explain how you support your own assumptions that we exist purely by simple chance - and a long series of accidents. Thanks for letting me know I do not believe the Universe was created by God. For years and years I thought I believed God created the Universe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 And I'm still waiting for Canadien's answer to this. Sorry, but I still have to absorb the fact I find it hard to accept that science come from God. After all, I was under the mistaken impression that I believed science (that is, in the Oxford dictionary definition, `the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experimen"), or more exactly the intellectual capacity to engage in science, is, like other intelectual capacities, part of the attributes God has given human. I even thought, and I even have a faint memory of stating it in a thread here in a distant past, that in that sense it can be said that science comes from God. But now, you have proven to me, once again, that I didn't think what i thought I thought. So why why don't YOU tell me why I have problems accepting something I didn't even know I had problems accepting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 Sorry, but I still have to absorb the fact I find it hard to accept that science come from God. After all, I was under the mistaken impression that I believed science (that is, in the Oxford dictionary definition, `the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experimen"), or more exactly the intellectual capacity to engage in science, is, like other intelectual capacities, part of the attributes God has given human. I even thought, and I even have a faint memory of stating it in a thread here in a distant past, that in that sense it can be said that science comes from God. But now, you have proven to me, once again, that I didn't think what i thought I thought. So why why don't YOU tell me why I have problems accepting something I didn't even know I had problems accepting? So what exactly are u bitchin about, then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) So it does actually lend support in a way to my assumption that if God actually planned it in His own way and His own time - surely, since He knows everything (including the future) - He knew and planned how it's going to play out! Do you also contradict this ability by God, Canadien? I could have sworn there is a difference between KNOWING, through faith, that God has he ability do ANYTHING He wants - and concluding through a bad reading of one translation of the Bible (remember, it is streched OUT and streched FORTH, not streched) that God inspired the writers of one translation to include words which, when misread later would appear to match an anslogy used by scientists when talking about a recent discovery. But as usual, you will in due time inform me that I do not believe there is a difference between the two. And then, of course, you will expect me to explain how come I don't believe something I didn't know I don't believe. Edited September 21, 2012 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) So what exactly are u bitchin about, then? Not bitching about anything. Just having fun with the fact betsy keeps telling me what I think even when I have the distinct impression I think something else. Now, if you have something to contribute on the topic, you're welcome. Edited September 21, 2012 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melanie_ Posted September 21, 2012 Report Share Posted September 21, 2012 Now I'd like to hear your own side: Blackdog, Bambino, Canadien, melanie, Squid and other evolutionists who outright reject Design or Creation. Explain how you support your own assumptions that we exist purely by simple chance - and a long series of accidents. Betsy, its too much of a stretch for you to understand it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
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.