B flat B♭

[Apple Sky]

What about Flamenco guitar?

Love it

 

[Kathleen30]

Then why was he right ? Martin Luther didn't seem to think so.

Nor did John Calvin. All looked upon the heliocentric proposition with disdain

 

[David Lamb]

No not then bit they knew where all this was leading too, from Newton to Albert Einstein to Morley & Tesla and then eventually NASA.

So (just to be sure I haven't misunderstood you) you think that the "establishment" of Luther's time somehow knew about future (to them) people like Einstein and Tesla, and organisations like NASA?

 

[David Lamb]

Well, you live in a NASA/Hollywood production. Funny how Nasa means deceive in Hebrew and Hollywood is a reference to witchcraft.

So what? "Nasa" also means "pot" in Spanish, and "in" in Filipino. Are you claiming that the people who chose the acronym "NASA" for the America space agency deliberately chose it because of its Hebrew meaning? I am sure there are other acronyms that have meanings as words in other languages. As for the name "Hollywood," some sources say that it is named after the village of the same name in Ireland, others that it is a corruption of "holy wood" (the cross), others that it was named after the holly tree.

 

[Apple Sky]

So (just to be sure I haven't misunderstood you) you think that the "establishment" of Luther's time somehow knew about future (to them) people like Einstein and Tesla, and organisations like NASA?

No, but it was part of their plan.

 

[David Lamb]

No, but it was part of their plan.

How could Einstein, NASA, etc. be "part of their plan" if they didn't even know about such future people and organisations? Also, what evidence do you have that Newton, Einstein, NASA, etc were part of the "establishment's" plan back in Luther's time? Just to make the statement without saying what evidence you have for its truth means little or nothing.

 

[Strong in Him]

Strong in him . You can absolutely debate and disprove the science of men.

I said, you can't debate science from the Bible.
@Apple Sky was unable to answer any of the questions that I asked, using the Bible as reference.

More so when it be in direct contradiction to the Bible .

Some people read the Bible literally when it was not meant to be read that way.
You won't find scientific explanations in the Bible; that is not its purpose.
We use, have and do many things today which are not mentioned in the Bible.

Yes the Bible is not fully a science text book .

It's not in any way a science textbook - not even partially.

But it is the Final authority on all science text books

No, it isn't.
It is the final authority on God; on his nature, his will, his actions and his relationship with mankind.

You can't give the Bible to someone studying physics to use as a textbook. You won't learn Biology, Zoology, Chemistry, Astrophysics or any other science subject from the pages of Scripture.
In the same way that you won't learn Spanish from a cookery book that mentions Paella and Spanish wine.
You won't become an artist because you read a novel about someone who learns to draw.
Someone could read a biography about the Beatles; it doesn't mean they can sing. Or you could find out all about Mozart; it doesn't mean you'll be able to play the piano/clarinet/violin.

If you're interested in science, quantum physics, chemistry, astronomy and so on - go and read the appropriate books.
If you want to know God and have a relationship with him; read the Bible.
There are people who do both and find no contradiction.

 

[Strong in Him]

Funny how Nasa means deceive in Hebrew

Here we go again.

NASA is not a word. It stands for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and should be written N.A.S.A.
Whatever the word is in Hebrew that we translate as "deceive", that word existed long before America was even discovered, never mind them setting up a space agency.

I'm sure these highly educated and qualified men and women did not set up their agency and think, "we need people to know who we are and what we do; what shall we call ourselves? I know, there's a word in OT Hebrew which means "deceive"; that'll do."

 

[Kathleen30]

St

I said, you can't debate science from the Bible.
@Apple Sky was unable to answer any of the questions that I asked, using the Bible as reference.

Some people read the Bible literally when it was not meant to be read that way.
You won't find scientific explanations in the Bible; that is not its purpose.
We use, have and do many things today which are not mentioned in the Bible.

It's not in any way a science textbook - not even partially.

No, it isn't.
It is the final authority on God; on his nature, his will, his actions and his relationship with mankind.

You can't give the Bible to someone studying physics to use as a textbook. You won't learn Biology, Zoology, Chemistry, Astrophysics or any other science subject from the pages of Scripture.
In the same way that you won't learn Spanish from a cookery book that mentions Paella and Spanish wine.
You won't become an artist because you read a novel about someone who learns to draw.
Someone could read a biography about the Beatles; it doesn't mean they can sing. Or you could find out all about Mozart; it doesn't mean you'll be able to play the piano/clarinet/violin.

If you're interested in science, quantum physics, chemistry, astronomy and so on - go and read the appropriate books.
If you want to know God and have a relationship with him; read the Bible.
There are people who do both and find no contradiction.

Stonginhim you mention that some people read the Bible literally where it is not supposed to be read literally. There are certainly places in the Bible where the scriptures are not to be taken literally. But before I reply fully to your post . I need to know Just exactly which part of the Bible are you referring to that shouldn’t be taken literally . Are you referring to the creation account ?

 

[Apple Sky]

How could Einstein, NASA, etc. be "part of their plan" if they didn't even know about such future people and organisations? Also, what evidence do you have that Newton, Einstein, NASA, etc were part of the "establishment's" plan back in Luther's time? Just to make the statement without saying what evidence you have for its truth means little or nothing.

So how did we get too this supposed space/NASA & a supposed orbiting earth ?

If it weren't for these guys we'd all be living in truth right now which is a none rotating flat earth.

 

[David Lamb]

So how did we get too this supposed space/NASA & a supposed orbiting earth ?

If it weren't for these guys we'd all be living in truth right now which is a none rotating flat earth.

I didn't say that there was no connection between the scientists who lived at the same time as Luther, and modern scientists. Rather, I was questioning what you wrote about people of Luther's time knowing about Einstein, NASA, etc. You still haven't said how that would be possible.

 

[Kathleen30]

T

I didn't say that there was no connection between the scientists who lived at the same time as Luther, and modern scientists. Rather, I was questioning what you wrote about people of Luther's time knowing about Einstein, NASA, etc. You still haven't said how that would be possible.

David The answer be a rather simple one. It be about satans and mans long war with God through the ages and how in anyway they can diminish or undermine the remembrance, authority and glory of God. False science is merely one of the many subjects that they weave in their deception

 

[David Lamb]

T

David The answer be a rather simple one. It be about satans and mans long war with God through the ages and how in anyway they can diminish or undermine the remembrance, authority and glory of God. False science is merely one of the many subjects that they weave their deception

So you believe Satan revealed to scientists who lived in Luther's time that hundreds of years later, a scientist called Einstein would introduce his theory of relativity, and that a space agency would exist in America? Where is the evidence that anybody in Luther's day knew such things?

 

[Hentenza]

H5377 - nāšā' - Strong's Hebrew Lexicon (kjv)

H5377 - נָשָׁא nâshâʼ, naw-shaw'; a primitive root; to lead astray, i.e. (mentally) to delude, or (morally) to seduce:—beguile, deceive, greatly, utterly.

www.blueletterbible.org

Still nah. Still a figment of your imagination. NASA is an acronym not a word.,

 

[Apple Sky]

So you believe Satan revealed to scientists who lived in Luther's time that hundreds of years later,

Yes @Kathleen30 is exactly right. Satan influences until the end of days. He knows the Bible inside out & knows the past & the future.

 

[Jerry N.]

Yes @Kathleen30 is exactly right. Satan influences until the end of days. He knows the Bible inside out & knows the past & the future.

Don’t give Satan too much credit. He is very good at predicting the future and manipulating people to influence the results. However, he is not all-knowing and often gets things wrong. I have known my wife for over 30 years, and I can predict what she will do about 60% of the time. Imagine watching people for thousands of years. He would be able to predict human behavior at a high percentage and influence humans to meet his predictions, but he is not anywhere close to God. On top of that, God often changes things in ways Satan could never predict. Satan does not know the future, but he is very good at predicting what might happen. Probably, he can do it much better that the weather stations. Whether or not Satan could predict the space program in much detail from 1700AD is doubtful.

 

[David Lamb]

Yes @Kathleen30 is exactly right. Satan influences until the end of days. He knows the Bible inside out & knows the past & the future.

I agree that Satan knows the bible. We have only to consider the way he tempted Jesus in the wilderness to see that. What I am asking you and Kathleen is what evidence you have that people of Luther's day knew about NASA, Einstein, etc.

 

[Apple Sky]

Whether or not Satan could predict the space program in much detail from 1700AD is doubtful.

Maybe not predict but he was able to influence people at that time ,just as he sill does today, you see a moving earth around the sun & space makes God's word unbelievable & tends to hide God. Just like the big bang theory & Darwinism did, it's all the work of Satan.

 

[Strong in Him]

Maybe not predict but he was able to influence people at that time ,just as he sill does today, you see a moving earth around the sun & space makes God's word unbelievable & tends to hide God. Just like the big bang theory & Darwinism did, it's all the work of Satan.

Rubbish.

Many, if not all, scientists accept evolution, that the earth is a globe and that it revolves around the sun.
Some of them are also Christian. Evolution, the shape of the earth etc etc has nothing to do with salvation and whether God loves, and can save, you. Evolution doesn't stop people from believing that Jesus died on the cross and cannot prevent us from being filled with the Spirit.
THAT is what Satan doesn't want - I don't believe he gives a toss about the shape of the earth.

Even though both you and @d taylor have said that this is impossible; Christians believe Genesis 1 and that the earth is a globe.

 

[Strong in Him]

Stonginhim you mention that some people read the Bible literally where it is not supposed to be read literally. There are certainly places in the Bible where the scriptures are not to be taken literally. But before I reply fully to your post . I need to know Just exactly which part of the Bible are you referring to that shouldn’t be taken literally . Are you referring to the creation account ?

That's one of the things, yes.

God did not dictate a literal, detailed account of how he created the universe because a group of scientists wanted to know.
Instead, Moses, or someone, wrote 2 creation accounts. He wanted people to know that it was GOD who created. At the time he wrote it down, there were several other countries around him who all believed in a different god for a different thing - a god of the rain, a god of the stars, a god of animals, crops and so on. Moses said that there is only one God who created everything.
Also, Moses was not writing for scientists; he was writing for people who, I understand, thought in picture language. They did not know, or want or need to know, about atoms, gravity, astronomy etc etc.

And if you take these accounts literally, which do you believe?
In Genesis 1 God created male and female together; in chapter 2 he created Adam from dust and, a little later, created woman from one of Adam's ribs.
In chapter 1, God created humans and said "it is very good"; in chapter 2 he created Adam and said "it is not good for him to be alone."
Genesis 2 does not tell us when God created the trees, birds, the garden etc. There are also other countries mentioned in Genesis 2.