Does Science Agree With the Bible?

[LittleLambofJesus]

There are no, none, zip, zero contradictions in the Bible. I use to follow them though and check them out. Now I realize there is no need for that because there are no contradictions. Period the end.

Yes of course I realize that. That means that the Bible does not teach that there was a global flood. I have gone though all the Hebrew word to verify that it was "Adamah" or the land of Adam that was flooded. Not the whole world as some people seem to believe. The evidence is overwhelming that Noah's flood was local from OUR perspective. From Noah's perspective his world was flooded. He was on the Ark and the Ark was surrounded by water and there was no land to be found. When you read the story the Bible is not written from your perspective. It is written from Noah's perspective. This is all basic 101 Bible interpretation. Maybe you should study up on how to understand and interpretate the Bible. Do a google search and study up on the rules.

What I found interesting in this site's commentary on the Flood, was tho the Judgement was local, it was in essence "global".
It is the same way in the Book of Revelation. It is a great CITY in a particular land area [perhaps Jerusalem/Judea/Israel? where it is destroyed with fire instead of a flood.


Luke 21:20
`Whenever yet ye may be seeing Jerusalem being compassed by armies, then be ye knowing that has neared the desolating of Her
21 then those in the Judea let them be fleeing! in to the mountains......


2 Peter 3:10
Shall be arriving yet day of Lord as thief in night, in which the Heavens boomingly shall be passing-away, elements yet burning/kausoumena <2741> (5746) shall be being dissloved,
and Land and the in her works shall be being burned/katakahsetai <2618> (5691. [Reve 16:15]


Reve 18:8
Yet this, in one day, shall be arriving the stripes of her, death and sorrow and famine. And in fire She shall be being burned/katakauqhsetai <2618> (5701),
that strong Lord the God, the one judging Her.


http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/localflood.html
*SNIP*

If God had told Noah to just migrate away from the flood area, the people would not have been warned of the impending judgment. Ultimately, they were without excuse in their rebellion against God, since the impending judgment was proclaimed to them for 100 years before it happened. Likewise, God will send two preachers for 1260 days prior to the ultimate judgment of God.17 Those who get on God's ark (Jesus Christ) will be saved from the judgment and pass from death to eternal life.

God promised no more floods like the Genesis flood
What about the Genesis 9:11 and 9:15. If the flood was local, did God lie, since floods have destroyed local areas since the Genesis flood.

"And I establish My covenant with you; and all flesh shall never again be cut off by the water of the flood, neither shall there again be a flood to destroy the earth." (Genesis 9:11)
and I will remember My covenant, which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and never again shall the water become a flood to destroy all flesh. (Genesis 9:15)

The first part of the verse is a promise not to exercise universal judgment by means of a flood, "all flesh shall never again be cut off by the water of the flood."
The flood, although local in extent, was global in judgment, since all humanity lived in the same locale.
It wasn't until God confused the languages (Genesis 11) that people began to spread over the earth. So, God promised to never again execute universal judgment of humans by means of a flood. The second part, "never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth" can be explained by other verses found in the Genesis flood account.




.

 

[Kylie]

No. I bought it.

And before that you were a non-believer? Of course not. You had exposure to Christianity before then, something to tilt the scales in favour of you becoming a Christian.

No more than if you said that physics will exist as is in the future, or there are no spirits.

You really miss the point a lot, doncha?

Thought they were for you?

Then who are they for? Not for me, because using the Bible to convince someone who isn't convinced by the Bible is just a waste of time. Not for you, because you're already convinced. Or do you need your conviction strengthened after you've faced reality for a bit?

Or is it for someone else?

Or do you just want to get your word count up a little bit?

Jesus did that, holy apostles witnessed it. Others deny for no reason.

The Invisible Pink Unicorn did it, Sparky the lobster witnessed it. Others deny it for no reason.

Not in the case of the future and past that led to a lie.

Of course, you can't show it was a lie (no, the Bible doesn't count. It's the claim, not the evidence.)

Yes they do.

No they don't.

This is about science so one cannot avoid those.

Science demands support for claims. You're thinking of religion that is happy to make untestable claims with no support for them.

Part of your delusion is viewing things that way.

Yeah, you tell yourself that. Anything to make you feel more confident.

Don't look to men, look to God.

I will look to God when I am convinced he exists.

You have done nothing to convince me of that.

In fact, your arguments supporting your religious beliefs have been so bad you have actually strengthened my atheism. I'm sure you've done the same for others who may be unsure, but have seen how bad your arguments are.

Welcome to 2016. That marks the year Jesus came to settle that issue.

Jesus is going to return this year, is he?

So on January 1st, 2017, when there has been no sign of Jesus coming back, you'll admit you were wrong the whole time?

Of course, if Jesus does return, I'll be happy to admit I was wrong about this. I'll be happy to convert to Christianity.

See? I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. I'm willing to state, "If a particular clearly defined event takes place, I will change my beliefs." Are you willing to do the same? (I'll be so impressed if you say, "Yes.")

 

[Kylie]

All it took was an ability to read to see that the religion you pound cannot be called science.

Any idiot can read. There are people who can read who believe the world is controlled by walking lizards disguised as humans. Who believe that the moon landings never happened. Who believe that the government is secretly implanting mind control microchips. Who believe that they are drugging us with "chemtrails" from planes.

It takes INTELLIGENCE to understand how science works.

 

[Kylie]

Just out of curiosity, are you against giving out Bibles on the grounds that They are scientifically incorrect?

No. The Bible is fine to read for what it is - a collection of old myths. In the same way, it is fine to read the Koran or any other holy texts.

But it is NOT fine to teach the Bible as literal fact when there is no supporting evidence for it. Religious faith is the very opposite of what rational scientific investigation is. And it is science which has proven to be the best tool we have for learning about the universe.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Luke 21:20"Whenever yet ye may be seeing Jerusalem being compassed by armies, then be ye knowing that has neared the desolating of Her 21 then those in the Judea let them be fleeing! in to the mountains......"

This is called the Gospel according to Luke. We know that Luke was not Hebrew he was a gentile and he was a doctor. Luke was a good friend of Paul and he was very careful to research and find out as much as he could about the early church. We learn a lot from Luke about Mary and Jesus as he was growing up. It did not occur to any of the disciples to talk to Mary as Luke did. Even Jesus asked John to take care of Mary and John does not give us nearly the information about Mary that we receive from Luke. But we have to look at the context when Luke says:

"1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,"

Luke is writting a letter to his friend Theophilus. He is telling his friend what he has learned there in Jerusalem. The story that Luke tells has to do with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. IF you look at the same story in Matthew:

"24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately*, saying, Tell us,when shall these things be ? andwhat shall be the sign of thy coming,and of the end of the world?"

Now we have more information. We see that the disciples asked Jesus TWO (2) questions. One had to do with the temple being tore down and the other question had to do with the end of the church age.

Now to get back to your question. Noah's flood HAD to have been what we would call a local flood. There is overwhelming evidence to show that Noah's flood did not destroy the whole world in Noah's day. There have been MANY world wide extinctions. In fact the last major extinction was VERY recent, only about 13,000 years ago. Noah's flood was 4,359 years ago in the year 1656 AM or 2348 BC. When I look at the Hebrew words I do not find any conflict or contradiction between science and what the Bible says. The issue has to so with peoples understanding or interpretation of the Bible.

where it is destroyed with fire instead of a flood.

Yes in Noah's day the world was cleansed with water. At the end of this age the world will be cleansed with fire. At one time I used fire to burn out weeds. Only we quit doing that because the fire does not destroy the roots and when they come back they really come back strong. Even now they do not always put out forest fires. It is their policy to allow small fires to burn to thin out the overgrown forests.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hi,

Ever, or just in that originally erroneous timing, like 2760 BCE?

Side issue, since you have a geology background, that water erosion of the pit, for the Egyptian Sphinx, is that still valid, setting the pit age at 12,500 BCE, or so, still?

LOVE,

For the entire history of the world it has never been covered totally with water.

And sorry, but the Sphinx question is more of an archaeological one. By the way you do realize that the Earth itself is 4.55 billion years old, don't you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is no contradiction. God is smart enough to figure all of this out even if you and I are still having to struggle to mature and come to a full measure of understanding. It takes time and you have a lot to learn.

I clearly know far more than you ever will. You put to much faith in something that you have no reason to believe.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I never went to Europe. My grandmother wanted to give me a trip there as a graduation gift but I did not want to go. I did go to Hong Kong so I have seen where the East meet the West. I am here because this is where God wants me then when I finish my work here I will go onto my next assignment.

I seriously think that you are mistaken.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There are no, none, zip, zero contradictions in the Bible. I use to follow them though and check them out. Now I realize there is no need for that because there are no contradictions. Period the end.

Wrong, I gave a link that listed hundreds of them. All that you can do is to go through extreme rationalization. Of course that is only how people who can't be honest with themselves deal with reality. And then you are forgetting the failed science, bad morals, and failed prophecies.

Yes of course I realize that. That means that the Bible does not teach that there was a global flood. I have gone though all the Hebrew word to verify that it was "Adamah" or the land of Adam that was flooded. Not the whole world as some people seem to believe. The evidence is overwhelming that Noah's flood was local from OUR perspective. From Noah's perspective his world was flooded. He was on the Ark and the Ark was surrounded by water and there was no land to be found. When you read the story the Bible is not written from your perspective. It is written from Noah's perspective. This is all basic 101 Bible interpretation. Maybe you should study up on how to understand and interpretate the Bible. Do a google search and study up on the rules.

Yes, some Christians believe in a local flood, and the story may have been inspired by a local flood that did occur in the region. The problem is that a local flood makes the Ark superfluous. A local flood would not have wiped out humanity, much less all of the life on Earth. Even if Noah and family died humanity would have survived. Land life would have had practically no impact. I know that there are multiple interpretations of the Bible, the sad fact for you is that none of them match up with reality on this topic.

Also we know that during man's entire existence that the population of humans did not drop below 1,000 individuals.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I clearly know far more than you ever will. You put to much faith in something that you have no reason to believe.

You do not know far more about the Bible then I will ever know. You may know far more about science, but knowing science does not connect with knowing the Bible.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You do not know far more about the Bible then I will ever know. You may know far more about science, but knowing science does not connect with knowing the Bible.

I know that it has hundreds of self contradictions. Something that you won't admit to.

 

[katerinah1947]

For the entire history of the world it has never been covered totally with water.

And sorry, but the Sphinx question is more of an archaeological one. By the way you do realize that the Earth itself is 4.55 billion years old, don't you?

Hi,

So, never once has the entire earth been covered in water.

If that is Geology's claim, and if that is their field, then yes I accept that.

Yes I have heard that the earth is 4.55 Billion years old. The universe is supposedly around 13.5 Billion years old, I have heard also.

They are older than any of the expected lifetimes of silicon transistors, whose junctions will actually again dissapear by diffusion processes, in I think 35,000 years or so, but that is not studied normally.

Diffusion is a root DT, relationship, meaning that atoms move freely at a measured rate, in each type of material, arbitrarily given the functional name Diffusion Coefficient and goes by the letter D, times the time, where the square root of that is the actual distance atoms move, for a given time.

I accept all proven science. I even accepted the results of those five controlled experiments on The Bible.

LOVE,

 

[dad]

And before that you were a non-believer? Of course not. You had exposure to Christianity before then, something to tilt the scales in favour of you becoming a Christian.

I bought one after getting saved.

Then who are they for?

Lurkers and I. Well I guess you too...as much as you squawk.

Of course, you can't show it was a lie (no, the Bible doesn't count. It's the claim, not the evidence.)

Overruled. His word counts.

Science demands support for claims.

Not when claims are assumptions upon which it builds models.

Jesus is going to return this year, is he?

The idea was that He came 2016 years ago...according to their best estimate.

 

[dad]

Any idiot can read. There are people who can read who believe the world is controlled by walking lizards disguised as humans. Who believe that the moon landings never happened. Who believe that the government is secretly implanting mind control microchips. Who believe that they are drugging us with "chemtrails" from planes.

It takes INTELLIGENCE to understand how science works.

Even more it takes God's wisdom to bust the dickens out of it.

 

[katerinah1947]

I bought one after getting saved.

Lurkers and I. Well I guess you too...as much as you squawk.


Overruled. His word counts.

Not when claims are assumptions upon which it builds models.

The idea was that He came 2016 years ago...according to their best estimate.

Hi,

Asked in a strange way needed by science, "You bought one AFTER, you were saved."

Tell me about your getting saved.


Really, that may bea strange way to say that, but please bear with me.

Tell me about your getting saved.

LOVE,

 

[Subduction Zone]

Even more it takes God's wisdom to bust the dickens out of it.

And since you have always failed at that that tells us quite a bit about you.

 

[katerinah1947]

Lovers love and birds fly. So who is the hater? We hate evil of course. We hate lies...etc.
No idea.

Right.
Exactly and science is like that when it talks about creation issues.

Right and science is Satan inspired to a large degree.

Us, doing our own will, rather than God's Will, is all it takes to work for Satan, I think.
Nice thoughts so can you relate it to the thread or anything at all here?

To me, Biblically, even if I am wrong, that substitution I make, Biblically, for the word love, everywhere in that book.


OK...so? Did that happen to someone here?
Right...and...is there a point?
I insult lies and science as one should.

Hi,

In your words, how Does God define these words:

Love
Hate

LOVE,

 

[katerinah1947]

And since you have always failed at that that tells us quite a bit about you.

Hi,

Two different definitions of wisdom are being talked about.

LOVE,

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hi,

Two different definitions of wisdom are being talked about.

LOVE,

And sadly dad seems to have neither. But then he does not like it when I point out that he is trying to tell God how he made the Earth instead of listening to God's testimony in nature. He makes the mistake of making a false idol of the Bible. Rather than trying to understand its message he takes it absolutely literally. And only the KJV if I remember correctly. Just a little background for you.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Wrong, I gave a link that listed hundreds of them.

I did not see any link but I am sure that all 100 of them are wrong and reflect a lack of understanding. I have never seen a claim for a contradiction pan out. So my claim is that there are no contradictions in the Bible. NONE Even what is amazing is the absence of mistakes or copy errors. There is a mathematical precision to the Bible, that is why the Bible can be so accurate and true. Also God watches over His word to perform it. So the Bible and it's accuracy is backed up by God Himself. That is what we are doing when we pray. We ask for God to do in our life what He says He will do in the Bible. Actually we have a covenant relationship with God. If we keep our part of the covenant then you can be sure that God will keep His part. That is why we are told the Law of God is perfect. You know all about the laws of the universe. So in a sense you know God because you know the laws that He created. Creation itself, science gives a testimony for God. "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." (Rom1:20) So the bottom line is: You are without excuse> We have no excuse before God: zip, zero, nada, nothing. Man's attempt to justify himself always fails. God is justified. Man will keep trying to justify himself right up to the end, but he will continue to fail. If you want to testify against God then the only way you can do that is to testify against the science that He created and you claim to believe in and support. Plenty of atheists are ready to reject science when science gives a testimony for God. I do not think you are so ready to reject what you believe to be true. If science is true, then that means God is true.