B flat B♭

[Hentenza]

I know this, I never said they were as I have explained all this too David Lamb.

Don't you ever read the posts on here ?

Post 1850.

 

[d taylor]

-

​

So Globe earth christian believers i am guessing they also go with science. That stars die out and new stars are being formed, of course that again is also without Biblical support.

But i guess science rules over God's creation account.

 

[Apple Sky]

-

​

So Globe earth christian believers i am guessing they also go with science. That stars die out and new stars are being formed, of course that again is also without Biblical support.

But i guess science rules over God's creation account.

Seems like it.

Isaiah 40:26
Lift up your eyes on high: Who created all these? He leads forth the starry host by number; He calls each one by name. Because of His great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing.

 

[HantsUK]

Second, I have already stated, as per my own experience via short wave radio reception, and per the experience of ham radio operators, the ionosphere is notoriously unreliable to skip radio signals. One minute there is clear reception, the next it has faded. The reliability to receive signals via skipping off the ionosphere is very dependent on the time of day, the weather and other such influences.

Satellite tv signals are extremely reliable, far more reliable than any signal skipped off the ionosphere. Since I have already told you all this, if you had even used the remotest of intelligence to research the facts, you would know this.

Adding to Phil G's response:

The ionosphere only reflects frequencies below 30MHz, such as short wave. Higher frequencies, as used by TV and satellite, are not reflected (or bounced).

 

[Hentenza]

-

​

So Globe earth christian believers i am guessing they also go with science. That stars die out and new stars are being formed, of course that again is also without Biblical support.

But i guess science rules over God's creation account.

The Bible is not exhaustive and only teaches what God chose to reveal. Secondly, God created everything including science. There are a lot of scientists that are Christians. Third, God created the universe and wants us to look at it and study it because, as Paul teaches, we can see God’s attributes in His creation (Rom. 1). Fourth, God inspired the Bible, He did not dictate it to the writers, consequently, there are a variety of literary devises employed to tell the stories, including poetic, symbolic, observational, metaphors, similes, and parables among others.

What I have noticed is that those, like you, who propose nonsense like a flat earth strictly read the Bible literally. That destroys any kind of proper understanding of the teachings of the Bible and introduces a flawed interpretation. Secondly, you are missing the richness of God’s teachings by negating the fullness of the word of God.

 

[HantsUK]

-

​

So Globe earth christian believers i am guessing they also go with science. That stars die out and new stars are being formed, of course that again is also without Biblical support.

But i guess science rules over God's creation account.

Science does not rule over God's creation. Science attempts to understand and explain how God's creation works.

The Bible states that the created world reveals God's character and divine nature (Romans 1:20). God has given mankind the ability to investigate and learn how his creation behaves. This is called science. We will never be able to fully understand, but there are many aspects which we can and do understand. The understanding from science has been used by engineers to develop many different technologies. Some of which enable you and me to communicate on this forum: semiconductors, electronics, laser diodes, radio comms, thermal management, etc.

What science does not do is explain why. Why are we here? What is our purpose? Or give any moral direction - what is right or wrong.

 

[d taylor]

-

​

Science does nothing but lie about God's creation from the globe lie to the evolution lie and whatever future lies they come up with.

 

[David Lamb]

I meant, Leaders who are mostly Freemasons & Royalty.

Sorry - It''s the way I must have worded it.

Thanks. Perhaps a comma after the word "Freemasons" would make it clear that you didn't mean that the NASA leaders are royalty.

 

[David Lamb]

NASA executives are not royalty.

I'm glad to see that I am not the only one who thought that Apple Sky was saying that NASA leaders are both Freemasons and royalty.

 

[Apple Sky]

​

Science does nothing but lie about God's creation from the globe lie to the evolution lie

Apart from the globe, evolution is the next biggest lie, I've never seen a monkey change into a human being, well not yet anyhow.

 

[David Lamb]

Apart from the globe, evolution is the next biggest lie, I've never seen a monkey change into a human being, well not yet anyhow.

Don't tar all scientists with the same brush. There are scientists who do not believe in evolution. They believe that God created the various "kinds" of animals and plants, and although various breeds of (for example) dogs have developed within the "dog kind," they remain dogs. Praise God for such scientists, and pray for them as they witness to the truth of God's Creation.

 

[Strong in Him]

-​

So Globe earth christian believers i am guessing they also go with science. That stars die out and new stars are being formed, of course that again is also without Biblical support.

Lots of things are "without biblical support"
Computers, for example; going to hospital for a scan, x ray or an operation under anaesthetic, for example. There is no Biblical support for owning a car, smart watch, tv, hand gun or a thousand other things.
There is "no Biblical support" for them because a) that is not the purpose of the Bible and b) they hadn't been invented.

If you/a loved one had a rare medical condition would you "look to science" - take the medication/raise money for a particular form of treatment/go for regular scans to show if it was getting worse? Or would you say "there is no Biblical support for those things - just do nothing and hope that I/my relative gets better on their own"?

 

[Apple Sky]

If you/a loved one had a rare medical condition would you "look to science" - take the medication/raise money for a particular form of treatment/go for regular scans to show if it was getting worse? Or would you say "there is no Biblical support for those things - just do nothing and hope that I/my relative gets better on their own"?

But the Jehovah Witness's refuse to have a blood transfusion b/c of what the Bible says.

 

[d taylor]

Lots of things are "without biblical support"
Computers, for example; going to hospital for a scan, x ray or an operation under anaesthetic, for example. There is no Biblical support for owning a car, smart watch, tv, hand gun or a thousand other things.
There is "no Biblical support" for them because a) that is not the purpose of the Bible and b) they hadn't been invented.

If you/a loved one had a rare medical condition would you "look to science" - take the medication/raise money for a particular form of treatment/go for regular scans to show if it was getting worse? Or would you say "there is no Biblical support for those things - just do nothing and hope that I/my relative gets better on their own"?

-
​

If you want too, you can look up my past answers to these questions. I have only been asked this 5+ times on this site.

 

[David Lamb]

But the Jehovah Witness's refuse to have a blood transfusion b/c of what the Bible says.

No, because of their mistaken interpretation of what the bible says. The bible makes no mention of blood transfusions.

 

[Apple Sky]

No, because of their mistaken interpretation of what the bible says. The bible makes no mention of blood transfusions.

AI Overview


Jehovah's Witnesses do not receive blood transfusions because they believe it is against biblical teachings to "abstain from blood". This interpretation means they refuse whole blood, red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, and plasma, even in life-threatening situations, as it is considered a sin and a violation of God's will that could lead to spiritual damnation.

 

[David Lamb]

AI Overview


Jehovah's Witnesses do not receive blood transfusions because they believe it is against biblical teachings to "abstain from blood". This interpretation means they refuse whole blood, red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, and plasma, even in life-threatening situations, as it is considered a sin and a violation of God's will that could lead to spiritual damnation.

Yes, that is what I meant. God's word forbids the eating of blood (of an animal which has been killed) not blood transfused from a donor who remains alive.

 

[Apple Sky]

Yes, that is what I meant. God's word forbids the eating of blood (of an animal which has been killed) not blood transfused from a donor who remains alive.

Yes, but JW's still refuse blood transfusions.

 

[Jerry N.]

Apart from the globe, evolution is the next biggest lie, I've never seen a monkey change into a human being, well not yet anyhow.

I think you are having a major problem with the word “lie.” When one is wrong about a scientific theory, like the four humors from the time of the Greeks to the 18th Century, they are not lying. They are only wrong. The paleontologists who write about evolution are sincere in what they believe. The fact that some use that to disprove God’s creation does not make the paleontologists liars. If you study the history of science, you will find that errors are almost as common as facts. It is just the way it is. I’m still irritated that wrote Copernicus was forced to lie. It is insulting to all of the great people of science to state they are all liars. Piltdown Man was a lie, but thousands of other finds were reported truthfully, even if one doesn’t agree with the theory. So far you have insulted thousands of scientists, astronauts, cosmonauts, astronomers, and regular scientists and scholars, but you support a few flim-flam men on the internet.

 

[Jerry N.]

Yes, but JW's still refuse blood transfusions.

I didn’t think you supported the teachings of Jehovah Witnesses.