Science PROVES the BIBLE is True

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It's the backfire effect too. Where the more facts and evidence you present that demonstrates they are wrong, they will believe their claims even more.

And that's when stuff gets dangerous.

 

[joshua 1 9]

No. No-one fails

A double negative is a positive. Just like there is a binary code for computers there is a Bible code that can not be broken. That is why the Bible can never be falsified. Just like DNA corrects it's own copy errors. This is not as much of a issue today as this was an issue before printing presses and the Bible was hand copied from generation to generation. Because of this Bible code they could correct any copy errors and the errors could not pass from generation to generation.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

A double negative is a positive. Just like there is a binary code for computers there is a Bible code that can not be broken. That is why the Bible can never be falsified. Just like DNA corrects it's own copy errors. This is not as much of a issue today as this was an issue before printing presses and the Bible was hand copied from generation to generation. Because of this Bible code they could correct any copy errors and the errors could not pass from generation to generation.

Why? Why do you do this? Why do you never reply to a comment in full? Why do you only cut out one tiny sliver from the comment and only focus on that, and completely ignore the rest of the message?

And yes, you have been proven wrong because no-one has failed to falsify your evidence. They have falsified your evidence repeatedly. Astrophile did so in this very thread about Jericho, citing the fact that walls of Jericho actually fell during the Medieval Ages, not early Antiquity as the Bible suggests.

And please, actually respond to this message in full or I will really start questioning whether you are on this forum with genuine intentions.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Why? Why do you do this? Why do you never reply to a comment in full? Why do you only cut out one tiny sliver from the comment and only focus on that, and completely ignore the rest of the message?

And yes, you have been proven wrong because no-one has failed to falsify your evidence. They have falsified your evidence repeatedly. Astrophile did so in this very thread about Jericho, citing the fact that walls of Jericho actually fell during the Medieval Ages, not early Antiquity as the Bible suggests.

And please, actually respond to this message in full or I will really start questioning whether you are on this forum with genuine intentions.

I do not have time to play your game. According to the New York Times the scientific evidence proves the Bible to be true and that is good enough for me.

"After years of doubt among archaeologists, a new analysis of excavations has yielded a wide range of evidence supporting the biblical account about the fall of Jericho."

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

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I do not have time to play your game. According to the New York Times the scientific evidence proves the Bible to be true and that is good enough for me.

"After years of doubt among archaeologists, a new analysis of excavations has yielded a wide range of evidence supporting the biblical account about the fall of Jericho."

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

What game? I am just consistently tired and ticked off of you ignoring perfectly reasonable replies to your comments, and only taking out tiny, inconsequential parts from the posts and focusing on them only.

An article from 1990. That's your ace in the hole? An article from 26 years ago? You do know that a lot can be learnt in 26 years, and also, modern evidence has shown that the battle as described in the Bible could not have taken place during the time period described in the Bible, as astrophile has already pointed out to you.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What game?

It is called the abundance of words game. The truth is concise, simple and easy enough a child can understand. I can sum up the WHOLE Bible in ONE word: "LOVE". From this we know that: "God is LOVE". You see how simple and easy that is? Even a one year old can understand LOVE and that God is LOVE. So we avoid people that represent anger, bitterness, hatred, contentions, controversy and emulations. They are little more then: "resounding gong or a clanging cymbal".

 

[joshua 1 9]

I am just consistently tired and ticked off

I bet you are. Why don't you try the truth then you will have peace.

An article from 1990. That's your ace in the hole?

My "ace in the hole" are the 3500 years old books written by Moses. They stand on their own merit but truth is universal and you can not falsify the Bible. You will always fail 100% of the time. No matter how many words you use and how abundant your attempt is you will just end up tired and you will have accomplished nothing.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It is called the abundance of words game. The truth is concise, simple and easy enough a child can understand. I can sum up the WHOLE Bible in ONE word: "LOVE". From this we know that: "God is LOVE". You see how simple and easy that is? Even a one year old can understand LOVE and that God is LOVE. So we avoid people that represent anger, bitterness, hatred, contentions, controversy and emulations. They are little more then: "resounding gong or a clanging cymbal".

Stop doing this! Don't just cut out parts of a comment, and ignore the bits that you don't like just to make yourself feel better.
Knowledge scares you, we get it!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I bet you are. Why don't you try the truth then you will have peace.

Don't try and twist this to make it seem like I'm someone with a grudge against God. The person I'm ticked off at is you, and only you because of your infantile tactic of only responding to tiny parts of someone's sentence and then drowning then in Gish Gallop of pseudo-Biblical nonsense.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Knowledge scares you, we get it!

 

[bhsmte]

It seems to be a game that they like to play, even though there have never once accomplished their stated objective. I have never seen a people that enjoy losing so much as the skeptics and the scoffers.

Projection.

 

[bhsmte]

Astrophile had an excellent post demonstrating why your Jericho argument was complete nonsense and your only reply was "Of course skeptics will try to cover the truth" Even though he referenced the research.

Did you know he has read the bible 5-6 times?

 

[bhsmte]

It's the backfire effect too. Where the more facts and evidence you present that demonstrates they are wrong, they will believe their claims even more.

That is the cognitive dissonance kicking in when some are presented with solid evidence that refutes their claim.

For some, it is far to painful to admit their claim was wrong, so the defense mechanisms then kick in to protect the belief.

It is really interesting to watch in action, and one of the main reason this site is entertaining.

 

[bhsmte]

Why? Why do you do this? Why do you never reply to a comment in full? Why do you only cut out one tiny sliver from the comment and only focus on that, and completely ignore the rest of the message?

And yes, you have been proven wrong because no-one has failed to falsify your evidence. They have falsified your evidence repeatedly. Astrophile did so in this very thread about Jericho, citing the fact that walls of Jericho actually fell during the Medieval Ages, not early Antiquity as the Bible suggests.

And please, actually respond to this message in full or I will really start questioning whether you are on this forum with genuine intentions.

Because he needs to pretend the part that refutes his claims doesn't exist.

 

[florida2]

Did you know he has read the bible 5-6 times?

If you're really lucky he might post a photo of some bibles on a shelf.

 

[Jimmy D]

A double negative is a positive. Just like there is a binary code for computers there is a Bible code that can not be broken. That is why the Bible can never be falsified. Just like DNA corrects it's own copy errors. This is not as much of a issue today as this was an issue before printing presses and the Bible was hand copied from generation to generation. Because of this Bible code they could correct any copy errors and the errors could not pass from generation to generation.

More assertions bearing little resemblance to reality. You do realize that many parts of the bible come from oral traditions, passed down verbally through the generations.

Maybe you'd be interested in the article about the dangers of worshipping the bible...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/the-deadly-cost-of-worshi_b_1892812.html

For any book to “say” something it has to fulfill 2 tests: First it has to be a work of non-fiction whose truth claims can be corroborated from outside of itself. Second, it has to be by one author or at least by authors who know each other and collaborate to bring their message to readers.

What it can’t be and at the same time be said to have a single coherent message worth killing people over, is a collection of myths, essays, letters, stories, recorded oral history, misinformation and fables that were gradually collected and added to over thousands of years without the authors being aware that their bits and pieces of writing would someday be seen as “chapters” in one “book.” And since little to nothing in the book can be corroborated from outside testable sources, its truth claims (real or imagined) are worthless if taken as “fact”-based let alone in a juridical sense and then used to judge others.

 

[In situ]

You need to do more research then that.

I don't care about a stone wall. You said that The Bible is scientifically proven. So where are the scientific evidence that shows snakes and burning bushes indeed can talk, that wooden stick can turn into snakes and angles and demons exists?

As already pointed out for you, and which you agree with, just because you can finds something to be true in a book does not mean all of it is true. However, when it comes to the Bible you keep a double standard and this "rule" does no longer apply for the Bible. Why can you not admit that this "rule" also apply to the Bible?

I would advice you to consider the following writings of Augustine of Hippo:

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience.

Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.

If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?

Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. [1 Timothy 1.7]

Now lets talk about talking snakes, and the science behind it, shall we not?

 

[mmksparbud]

An article from 1990. That's your ace in the hole? An article from 26 years ago? You do know that a lot can be learnt in 26 years, and also, modern evidence has shown that the battle as described in the Bible could not have taken place during the time period described in the Bible, as astrophile has already pointed out to you.

That is interesting as astropohile was siting evidence from the 1950's!

This is from 2013

 

[In situ]

Sure, it is all over the internet, just Google Peter Stoner or The probability of Jesus based on completed prophecies .

You are asking people to find your own references. That is not how it works. However, the other day when you named the person who made the claim I did google him and find his "research" in chapter 3 in his book Science Speak.

I will assume this to be your reference, but I cannot know it is since you has not told us.

If you cannot recall the source of a claim nobody will blame you for that, that happens to all of us, but if you know the source then don't tell people to goggle it and find it out them self. And if they do, then you cannot afterwards say "that is not the one I meant!".

What you do is not polite and breaks the rules of debating; if you claim or refer to something then be prepared to refer to a sources, otherwise people can freely ignore the claim you maid, or find a source that fits them - but perhaps not you.

Anyway, now when I done what you are obligated to do, what did i find out? Well, I really dunno what to say, but if this is the standard of evidence you accept, then I must conclude you will virtual believe in any nonsense any one claim with out questioning it.

The figure he ends up with. 1 : 10^17 is just pure nonsense. It is nonsense because when you start with nonsense (cherry picking and biased thinking) you will end up with nonsense.

Stoned starts by inviting us to biased thinking and then he cherry picks some quotes from OT which he claims speaks about Jesus. Why he picked these particular quotes is not explained, nor why he ignored others. For some reason (read: cherry picking) the interpretation (read: biased thinking) he makes happens to fit Jesus.

Stoned then goes on with some estimate of population sizes and assigns probabilities to the likelihood his cherry picked quotes will fit a random person. (of course we already know they all fit Jesus because that was the point with cherry picking them and making up personal interpretation of scripture in the first place). So indeed, Stoner use math, (not even) basic probability calculus, but using math does not qualify anything as being scientific. The quality of his mathematical model, and "research", can easily be put in question and as a matter of fact it is below any decent scientific standard, which would explain why his "mathematical" model and work has passed mainly unnoticed to the rest of the thinking humanity.

I am not to say that you cannot believe Stoners claims to be true. However, my demand for evidence is a bit more rigorous, in particular when it comes to extraordinary claims, then the evidence need to be extraordinary as well, and these "evidence" are not in any way, or form, convincing to me.

Again, I have been wasting my short life on this planet on gullible peoples claims and beliefs. Life is to short to investigate every possible claim made about reality, and you have only been wasting my time so far...

 

[In situ]

That is interesting as astropohile was siting evidence from the 1950's!

This is from 2013

I DO NOT CARE ABOUT STONE WALLS!

WHERE ARE THE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR TALKING SNAKES?