Does Science Agree With the Bible?

[joshua 1 9]

When you make ignorant claims like this you cause people to laugh at you. I am not a specialist in astrophyscis, I know far more about evolution and I know that there is no scientific evidence for creationism and there are mountains of scientific evidence for evolution. Don't you remember the court cases you listed? The creationists have such a bad record because they have no supporting evidence. And it seems that you can't make up your mind. In one post you say that you accept evolution and in the next you are attacking the idea.

What part of "we all have the exact same evidence" do you have trouble understanding. We do appreciate your hard work to gather that evidence for us. For 1,000 years that evidence will be used for Creationism.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What part of "we all have the exact same evidence" do you have trouble understanding. We do appreciate your hard work to gather that evidence for us. For 1,000 years that evidence will be used for Creationism.

But you don't. You have no evidence for your beliefs. Your problem is that you do not understand the nature of evidence. To date there is only evidence for the theory of evolution. Why do you think that there is evidence for your beliefs?

 

[Hoghead1]

The inerrancy theory that your are proposing, Joshua, goes right down the drain because the Bible contains so many contradictions. In order to support your case, you need to show how you can resolve all of these. To date, no one has been able to. Take 2 Sam. 21:19, it says Elhanan killed Goliath. Some Bibles have "brother of" written in here, but that was inserted by the translators to make Scripture com[ply with their inerrancy theory. The Hebrew text states Elhanan killed Goliath. Now if you are correct, there is no contradiction here, right? So show me how that is the case?

 

[dad]

That explains it.

You already believed that the Bible was true when you sat down to read the Bible. Thus, you were more likely to suffer from confirmation bias and allow the claims made in the Bible support the conclusions you had already reached.



Ya huh.



No it doesn't.

Or can I start posting passages from the Harry Potter series and whenever you complain that it's not real, I say, "Overruled, J K Rowling's word counts."



You mean like the Bible?



Stop avoiding the issue and answer the question.

You apparently have some problem with God's word. I don't cotton to folks trivializing it and trying to belittle it and bring it down to their dirty level.

 

[Kylie]

You apparently have some problem with God's word. I don't cotton to folks trivializing it and trying to belittle it and bring it down to their dirty level.

My problem is that it does not match reality.

When reality and the Bible contradict each other, reality wins every time.
Oh, and you didn't answer the question. Do you think 2016 is going to be the year that Jesus comes back?

 

[joshua 1 9]

But you don't. You have no evidence for your beliefs. Your problem is that you do not understand the nature of evidence. To date there is only evidence for the theory of evolution. Why do you think that there is evidence for your beliefs?

I have repeatedly shown evidence. Just a very very tiny example is where the Bible talks about the walls in Jericho. You can go to the old city in Jericho today and the wall that was around the old city is still on the ground. You can do a carbon test and see those wall came down just when the Bible says. So there no question at all that the bible is very historically accurate. There is overwhelming evidence to show that. We know that there was a temple in the old City of Jerusalem because the foundation is still there. The wailing wall is still there and people still go there to pray. For 100 years now huge, huge, huge amounts evidence has been collected to show overwhelmingly that the Bible is accurate and true. All rock solid scientific evidence. That is why I question your respect for science when you do not seem to be able to properly handle the evidence that shows how accurate and true the Bible is.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I have repeatedly shown evidence. Just a very very tiny example is where the Bible talks about the walls in Jericho. You can go to the old city in Jericho today and the wall that was around the old city is still on the ground. You can do a carbon test and see those wall came down just when the Bible says. So there no question at all that the bible is very historically accurate. There is overwhelming evidence to show that. We know that there was a temple in the old City of Jerusalem because the foundation is still there. The wailing wall is still there and people still go there to pray. For 100 years now huge, huge, huge amounts evidence has been collected to show overwhelmingly that the Bible is accurate and true. All rock solid scientific evidence. That is why I question your respect for science when you do not seem to be able to properly handle the evidence that shows how accurate and true the Bible is.

We know that there is a state called Kansas. We know that Kansas is prone to tornadoes. We've seen EF5 tornadoes rip houses from their foundations and send them flying, even "over the rainbow," as it were." That is why I question your respect for science when you do not seem to be able to properly handle the evidence that shows how accurate and true The Wizard of Oz is...

...or could it be that just because a book is scientifically accurate about some things, it's not necessarily accurate about all things?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have repeatedly shown evidence. Just a very very tiny example is where the Bible talks about the walls in Jericho. You can go to the old city in Jericho today and the wall that was around the old city is still on the ground. You can do a carbon test and see those wall came down just when the Bible says. So there no question at all that the bible is very historically accurate. There is overwhelming evidence to show that. We know that there was a temple in the old City of Jerusalem because the foundation is still there. The wailing wall is still there and people still go there to pray. For 100 years now huge, huge, huge amounts evidence has been collected to show overwhelmingly that the Bible is accurate and true. All rock solid scientific evidence. That is why I question your respect for science when you do not seem to be able to properly handle the evidence that shows how accurate and true the Bible is.

But finding Jericho is not really evidence for anything. We do know that some of the tales of the Bible are true. For example much of the history is essentially correct. But that is not really evidence for anything. Battles are always exaggerated by the winners, and they may have attacked by digging under the walls. But you have no evidence that the Sun stood still or that there was a prostitute that changed sides, thought that is not too unreasonable either. Your "evidence" is not germane to the debate that we are having. Therefore it is not really evidence at all.

Let's use an analogy. Tony is on trial for murder. He has testified that he did not do it. The murder happened a month ago on a Thursday. The defense tries this argument: Tony told his friends that he bought a newspaper last week on Tuesday. We have video tape from the surveillance camera at the newspaper booth that shows Tony buying a paper that day. He told his friends the truth. Therefore since we know that Tony told the truth about the newspaper he must be telling the truth about the murder that he is accused of.

Would that argument sway you on the jury? That is basically what you are doing. You are using a much more recent part of the Bible that we can check on to claim the older parts are true. That is not evidence. It does not support the scientific errors in the Bible.

 

[TLK Valentine]

But finding Jericho is not really evidence for anything. We do know that some of the tales of the Bible are true. For example much of the history is essentially correct. But that is not really evidence for anything. Battles are always exaggerated by the winners, and they may have attacked by digging under the walls.

If you're going to attack a walled city without artillery or siege equipment, your best bet is to have a man on the inside who can sneak some of your people in to cause havoc at the opportune time.

We know from the Bible that at the battle of Jericho, the Israelites had just such an inside man... woman, actually.

 

[joshua 1 9]

But finding Jericho is not really evidence for anything.

Of course it is evidence for something. YOU are the one presenting nothing in the way of evidence. You need to quit accusing others of what you are guilty of. The NYTIMES does not support your claim: "not really evidence for anything". Again I am disappointed in you. You say you understand science and scientific evidence but you disregard what the NYTIMES accepts as evidence.

According to the NYTIMES:

Believers Score in Battle Over the Battle of Jericho

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/22/world/believers-score-in-battle-over-the-battle-of-jericho.html

 

[Michael]

Linking your old failures is simply just more failure on your part. You have no actual science that supports your worthless model.

I am still waiting.

LOL! There was no failure to produce published peer reviewed material to support my beliefs. There was only a failure on your part to read or deal with any of it! Wow. Denial at it's finest.

 

[dad]

My problem is that it does not match reality.

Your so called reality doesn't match God. Any evidences it may match would be because you view evidences through that little godless methodology you mistakenly refer to as reality.

When reality and the Bible contradict each other, reality wins every time.

That just shows disbelief, and an unfamiliarity with actual reality.

Do you think 2016 is going to be the year that Jesus comes back?

The reason I mentioned that year is because that is the year of our Lord, 2016. The Rapture could come at any time, so we can't rule that out this year either. However He will not be coming to take over earth forever with His saints this year. That event is preceded by a clear sequence of events and numbered days that start after a certain event.

My personal opinion is that the Rapture may be close, because the armies and king of the north are getting closer to Israel. I do not think believers alive now will have to go through the horrible final days here on earth. (except the new believers that start to believe after the Rapture of course)

 

[Subduction Zone]

Of course it is evidence for something. YOU are the one presenting nothing in the way of evidence. You need to quit accusing others of what you are guilty of. The NYTIMES does not support your claim: "not really evidence for anything". Again I am disappointed in you. You say you understand science and scientific evidence but you disregard what the NYTIMES accepts as evidence.

According to the NYTIMES:

Believers Score in Battle Over the Battle of Jericho

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/22/world/believers-score-in-battle-over-the-battle-of-jericho.html

Once again I have not needed to supply any evidence yet. It seems that you forgot the title of this thread:

"Does Science Agree With the Bible?"
[/B]
Your article does not support science agreeing with the Bible. Dang, I don't know how this got in "bold".

 

[Subduction Zone]

LOL! There was no failure to produce published peer reviewed material to support my beliefs. There was only a failure on your part to read or deal with any of it! Wow. Denial at it's finest.

Nope, we went over this. You are merely repeating your failures.

 

[Kylie]

Your so called reality doesn't match God. Any evidences it may match would be because you view evidences through that little godless methodology you mistakenly refer to as reality.

When reality and your beliefs contradict, you better change your beliefs, because you sure can't change reality.

That just shows disbelief, and an unfamiliarity with actual reality.

So you think that reality needs to change itself to fit an old book?

REALLY?

The reason I mentioned that year is because that is the year of our Lord, 2016. The Rapture could come at any time, so we can't rule that out this year either. However He will not be coming to take over earth forever with His saints this year. That event is preceded by a clear sequence of events and numbered days that start after a certain event.

Which has been prophecised for ages and has never happened.

My personal opinion is that the Rapture may be close, because the armies and king of the north are getting closer to Israel. I do not think believers alive now will have to go through the horrible final days here on earth. (except the new believers that start to believe after the Rapture of course)

People have been saying it's close for about 2000 years.

It's old now.

 

[dad]

When reality and your beliefs contradict, you better change your beliefs, because you sure can't change reality.



So you think that reality needs to change itself to fit an old book?

REALLY?



Which has been prophecised for ages and has never happened.



People have been saying it's close for about 2000 years.

It's old now.

If an event prophesied is going to happen it doesn't matter what anyone said. The only question is whether the events leading up to that time are in place.

 

[fronteirins]

Hello All!

Yes, In my recent article, I list 14 examples backed by Bible passages that reveal why and how science confirms the accuracy of the Holy Bible.
The very first verse in the Bible reveals an important scientific theory:
In Genesis 1:1 – God declares “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”! Hebrews 11:3 tells us that the universe was framed by the word of God.
The Science Connection: Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity actually supports that the Universe as well as mass, energy and time all had a beginning, and that some “entity” must have been responsible for its beginning.

Below is my article:
http://robertritebooks.com/how-science-actually-confirms-the-accuracy-of-the-bible/

Best,
Robert Rite

 

[fronteirins]

Hello All!

Yes, In my recent article, I list 14 examples backed by Bible passages that reveal why and how science confirms the accuracy of the Holy Bible.
The very first verse in the Bible reveals an important scientific theory:
In Genesis 1:1 – God declares “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”! Hebrews 11:3 tells us that the universe was framed by the word of God.
The Science Connection: Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity actually supports that the Universe as well as mass, energy and time all had a beginning, and that some “entity” must have been responsible for its beginning.

Below is my article:
http://robertritebooks.com/how-science-actually-confirms-the-accuracy-of-the-bible/

Best,
Robert Rite

 

[joshua 1 9]

But finding Jericho is not really evidence for anything.

Really, not evidence for anything? I think we need to take a look at what the definition of evidence is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Really, not evidence for anything? I think we need to take a look at what the definition of evidence is.

Yes, most creationists have no understanding of the concept of evidence.. Are you ready to learn?