betsy Posted July 2, 2017 Author Report Posted July 2, 2017 23 hours ago, DogOnPorch said: You're the one apparently using science and claiming it's proof of the Bible's veracity. So explain it... You're trying to change the channel. Not after you explain this: On 6/30/2017 at 8:08 PM, betsy said: "If the primordial hydrogen and hellium are synthesized inside the star..." How can it be inside the star, if the star isn't there? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 2, 2017 Report Posted July 2, 2017 (edited) 6 hours ago, betsy said: You're trying to change the channel. Not after you explain this: "If the primordial hydrogen and hellium are synthesized inside the star..." How can it be inside the star, if the star isn't there? You claimed that I wrote it...I never wrote the above. I wrote the following... Quote Metallicity: elements beyond primordial hydrogen and helium are synthesized inside stars...which then explode releasing all the remaining elements you know and love (copper, tin, arsenic, uranium, etc.) into the Universe...unless you believe in magic...and you seem to. Primordial hydrogen is from the Big Bang event. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_nucleosynthesis Stars are made of mainly hydrogen, betsy. Element #1 on the Periodic Table. Hydrogen fuses and produces helium...it's how hydrogen bombs work. Are you familiar with the Periodic Table, even? Gravity collapses a hydrogen cloud which condenses into a star once pressures reach enough to begin fusion. How stars form.... You do not understand ANY of this, mind you...but toss around the laws of thermodynamics as if they prove something despite you not having a living clue what they are. So explain ...please. Edited July 2, 2017 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
JamesHackerMP Posted July 12, 2017 Report Posted July 12, 2017 I thought this bible thread was supposed to be about biblical contradictions. Quote "We're not above nature, Mr Hacker, we're part of it. Men are animals, too!" "I know that, I've just come from the House of Commons!" [Yes, Minister]
Guest Posted July 12, 2017 Report Posted July 12, 2017 33 minutes ago, JamesHackerMP said: I thought this bible thread was supposed to be about biblical contradictions. Well, it is and it isn't... Quote
JamesHackerMP Posted July 12, 2017 Report Posted July 12, 2017 Betsy's already covered that one in another thread, the one I bailed from. But it seems she keeps cross-posting her arguments. I have no problem discussing topics of interest with people that won't agree with me--it would be boring if we all agreed with each other--but this constant rehashing on different threads of the same information is cluttering up the forums, in my opinion. Quote "We're not above nature, Mr Hacker, we're part of it. Men are animals, too!" "I know that, I've just come from the House of Commons!" [Yes, Minister]
betsy Posted July 12, 2017 Author Report Posted July 12, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said: Betsy's already covered that one in another thread, the one I bailed from. But it seems she keeps cross-posting her arguments. I have no problem discussing topics of interest with people that won't agree with me--it would be boring if we all agreed with each other--but this constant rehashing on different threads of the same information is cluttering up the forums, in my opinion. This thread is meant to be about alleged contradictions in the Bible. But you're nitpicking about my cross-posting arguments. That's soooo pathetic. That some arguments from another thread about the Bible are re-posted sometimes, cannot be helped if the said arguments are rebutting a given contradiction. Generally speaking, where does it say that you can only use an argument in one issue, alone? That's like saying I can't use supply-and-demand as an argument to a subject about entrepreneurship, if I'd already used it in another subject like, a sagging economy. Never heard of such thing. If the argument is relevant, and it fits.......of course it can be used again. Really James, you're starting to come across as a real whiner. Edited July 12, 2017 by betsy Quote
JamesHackerMP Posted July 12, 2017 Report Posted July 12, 2017 (edited) so let's talk about alleged contradictions in the bible. Not the laws of thermodynamics again. How was that relevant to the contradictions in the Bible? Just please explain. Not trying to get nasty about it, I just want to stay on topic. Again, I have no problem talking about this. But you seem to be rehashing your arguments in thread after thread. All right? Not whining, let's just be clear on this. So let's talk contradictions, shall we? The bible does contain anachronisms (a kind of contradiction in a way). Abraham left "Ur of the Chaldeans". But the Chaldean civilization wasn't in Ur at the time. That would be later. I already mentioned the one about Judas hanging himself in Gospel of Matthew, while his bowels explode in Acts of the Apostles. This is why the bible must be taken in context. It's not bullshit by any means, I'm not trying to say that. But there are contradictions if you start looking at the trees and forgetting the forest. Do you understand what I mean? You don't have to agree or accept my view. Edited July 12, 2017 by JamesHackerMP Quote "We're not above nature, Mr Hacker, we're part of it. Men are animals, too!" "I know that, I've just come from the House of Commons!" [Yes, Minister]
betsy Posted July 13, 2017 Author Report Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) 19 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said: The bible does contain anachronisms (a kind of contradiction in a way). Anachronisms, figures of speech - some of which have been shown to be literal. If it isn't really an issue whether earth is young or not (as an example)......unless they really affect the issue or the message being imparted, do they really matter that much? Here is a short excerpt from one interesting long article: Quote One of the obvious questions when studying the ancient Chaldeans is whether there were a people with that name during the lifetime of Abram. The Bible dates Abram’s life from the late part of the Third Millennium B.C. to the early part of the Second Millennium B.C. (based on dating the Exodus according to 1 Kings 6:1), but I read that the first mention of Chaldea was in the annals of the Assyrian King Ashurnaspirpal II from the middle of the Second Millennium B.C., centuries after Abram’s life. Could it be that the Bible writers were wrong about Abram’s birthplace or wrong about the existence of Abram? Serious excavations of Ur (modern Tell el-Muqayyar, Iraq, “important city of ancient southern Mesopotamia (Sumer)” located about “140 miles (225 km) southeast of the site of Babylon” – Encyclopedia Britannica Online) began soon after World War I by archaeologist H.R. Hall of the British Museum. Sir Leonard Wooley, another famous British archaeologist, began an excavation of ancient Ur in the early 1920s that continued for more than ten years. It was a joint venture of the British Museum and the University of Pennsylvania. The dating of the city of Ur to the Third Millennium is interesting for many reasons, but during my investigation about the existence of God, and specifically the God of the Bible, it helped confirm the possibility that Abram could have been a real person living in Ur during that time. https://faithandselfdefense.com/2014/01/04/convince-me-theres-a-god-archaeology-7/ Quote Genesis 11:31 says that the patriarch's father, Terah, took his son (who was then called Abram before God renamed him Abraham) and their extended family out of a city called Ur of the Chaldeans. Archaeologists took this notation as something to investigate, because according to The Biblical World: An Illustrated Atlas, the Chaldeans were a tribe that didn't exist until somewhere around the sixth and fifth centuries B.C., nearly 1,500 years after Abraham is believed to have lived. Ur of the Chaldeans has been located not far from Haran, whose remnants are found today in southwestern Turkey. The reference to the Chaldeans has led biblical historians to an interesting conclusion. The Chaldeans lived around the sixth-to-fifth century B.C., when Jewish scribes first wrote down the oral tradition of Abraham's story as they put together the Hebrew Bible. However, archaeologists have uncovered evidence over the past several decades that sheds new light on the era of city-states which corresponds more closely to Abraham's time. https://www.thoughtco.com/archaeological-evidence-abraham-in-the-bible-116875 Edited July 13, 2017 by betsy Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 13, 2017 Report Posted July 13, 2017 How old is the Earth, besty? Roughly, how old is our Universe? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
betsy Posted July 13, 2017 Author Report Posted July 13, 2017 1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said: How old is the Earth, besty? Roughly, how old is our Universe? Earth is around 5 billion? Universe, around 13 or so? Quote
Omni Posted July 13, 2017 Report Posted July 13, 2017 1 hour ago, betsy said: Earth is around 5 billion? Universe, around 13 or so? So the universe was around for 8 billion or so and then somebody decided to create a little round ball for people. I'm gonna roll up a joint and think about that. Quote
GostHacked Posted July 13, 2017 Report Posted July 13, 2017 Contradiction #1, Thou shalt not kill. God ignores his own advice and kills countless. Quote
The_Squid Posted July 13, 2017 Report Posted July 13, 2017 2 hours ago, GostHacked said: Contradiction #1, Thou shalt not kill. God ignores his own advice and kills countless. In the NIV, it's murder. But God commands the murder of innocent children because they are the children of His enemies. And at midnight the LORD killed all the firstborn sons in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn son of the captive in the dungeon. Even the firstborn of their livestock were killed. Pharaoh and his officials and all the people of Egypt woke up during the night, and loud wailing was heard throughout the land of Egypt. There was not a single house where someone had not died. (Exodus 12:29-30 NLT) sounds like murder to me... Quote
The_Squid Posted July 13, 2017 Report Posted July 13, 2017 Betsy, does the bible say bats are birds? Yes or no? Quote
JamesHackerMP Posted July 13, 2017 Report Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) 6 hours ago, betsy said: Anachronisms, figures of speech - some of which have been shown to be literal. If it isn't really an issue whether earth is young or not (as an example)......unless they really affect the issue or the message being imparted, do they really matter that much? Here is a short excerpt from one interesting long article: https://faithandselfdefense.com/2014/01/04/convince-me-theres-a-god-archaeology-7/ https://www.thoughtco.com/archaeological-evidence-abraham-in-the-bible-116875 But it doesn't sound like it's been "proven" yet absolutely. Archaeologists are a stubborn bunch, and stuff needs to circulate for a while until they really admit it. The bible I have, heavily footnoted, was revised in 2010, so that's pretty recent. Sometimes these biblical archaeologists start to find exactly what they're looking for, is my point. Edited July 13, 2017 by JamesHackerMP Quote "We're not above nature, Mr Hacker, we're part of it. Men are animals, too!" "I know that, I've just come from the House of Commons!" [Yes, Minister]
JamesHackerMP Posted July 13, 2017 Report Posted July 13, 2017 And what of Judas? Quote "We're not above nature, Mr Hacker, we're part of it. Men are animals, too!" "I know that, I've just come from the House of Commons!" [Yes, Minister]
Omni Posted July 13, 2017 Report Posted July 13, 2017 1 hour ago, The_Squid said: Betsy, does the bible say bats are birds? Yes or no? I know what bats are but I'm gonna wait for Betsy to com bat, er I mean come back. OK I'm just wingin' it here. Quote
AsksWhy Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 Boy this is a busy topic! Having skimmed through most of the comments, some things were left unclear to me. As such, and as my alias suggests I might do, I would like to ask a few questions. @betsy: please, do your best to answer simply "Yes" or "No". - Hopefully, this will minimize the chances that your words are interpreted incorrectly. Do you claim that there are "no contradictions in the Bible"? Do you believe that the bible was written by man using God's Word (Devine Authorship)? In Genesis, Chapter 1 (The Beginning), would it be fair to say that the days were listed in chronological order (the order by which these events took place)? I will stop there for now, allowing you to respond. Thank you. Quote
betsy Posted July 14, 2017 Author Report Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 12 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said: But it doesn't sound like it's been "proven" yet absolutely. Archaeologists are a stubborn bunch, and stuff needs to circulate for a while until they really admit it. The bible I have, heavily footnoted, was revised in 2010, so that's pretty recent. Sometimes these biblical archaeologists start to find exactly what they're looking for, is my point. It's not disproven. That's the point. Edited July 14, 2017 by betsy Quote
betsy Posted July 14, 2017 Author Report Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, AsksWhy said: Boy this is a busy topic! Having skimmed through most of the comments, some things were left unclear to me. As such, and as my alias suggests I might do, I would like to ask a few questions. @betsy: please, do your best to answer simply "Yes" or "No". - Hopefully, this will minimize the chances that your words are interpreted incorrectly. Do you claim that there are "no contradictions in the Bible"? Do you believe that the bible was written by man using God's Word (Devine Authorship)? In Genesis, Chapter 1 (The Beginning), would it be fair to say that the days were listed in chronological order (the order by which these events took place)? I will stop there for now, allowing you to respond. Thank you. Do you claim that there are "no contradictions in the Bible"? Yes. Do you believe that the bible was written by man using God's Word (Devine Authorship)? Yes. I can't simply say yes or no .....since your question can have a different nuance to it. In Genesis, Chapter 1 (The Beginning), would it be fair to say that the days were listed in chronological order (the order by which these events took place)? "The Beginning," is an ambiguous declaration. I don't know what you mean exactly by "days," - God days? Human days 24/7? But yes, creation narrative - though not in full details - is written in chronological order. Edited July 14, 2017 by betsy Quote
JamesHackerMP Posted July 15, 2017 Report Posted July 15, 2017 (edited) 15 hours ago, betsy said: It's not disproven. That's the point. Now you sound like a journalist, lol. It still has to be proven, Betsy, in order for it to be accepted. Otherwise you're just believing what you want to believe. There are anachronisms in the Bible, as well as contradictions. This is why I believe you cannot take it literally: it brings out the inaccuracy if you try to take it literally. Edited July 15, 2017 by JamesHackerMP Quote "We're not above nature, Mr Hacker, we're part of it. Men are animals, too!" "I know that, I've just come from the House of Commons!" [Yes, Minister]
The_Squid Posted July 15, 2017 Report Posted July 15, 2017 18 hours ago, betsy said: God days? What's a "God day"? and are bats actually birds? Quote
Omni Posted July 15, 2017 Report Posted July 15, 2017 35 minutes ago, The_Squid said: What's a "God day"? and are bats actually birds? A God day is what I had last Sunday after we got rid of a 40 of single malt on saturday night. And a bat is a bald mouse. Chauve souris and maybe I'll just try a wee nuther sip. Quote
betsy Posted July 15, 2017 Author Report Posted July 15, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said: Now you sound like a journalist, lol. It still has to be proven, Betsy, in order for it to be accepted. Otherwise you're just believing what you want to believe. If archeologists and scholars says it is....and there's no counter, or any disagreement.....what more is there to prove? Quote There are anachronisms in the Bible, as well as contradictions. This is why I believe you cannot take it literally: it brings out the inaccuracy if you try to take it literally. I say there are no contradictions at all. You can't say what's contradicting IF you can't tell something is given as a figure of speech or not. One thing we agree with: we can't take everything literally! Who ever said we should??? Certainly not me. You're bringing up a non-issue about taking things literally, James. We can't take everything literally in the Bible! I've been saying that all along - and I've even created a thread to show the numerous kinds of figures of speech found in the Bible! Edited July 15, 2017 by betsy Quote
betsy Posted July 15, 2017 Author Report Posted July 15, 2017 4 hours ago, The_Squid said: and are bats actually birds? Explain what makes you ask that. I can't read your mind. Quote
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.