101 Scientific Facts: The Bible-Creationism is accurate and true.

joshua 1 9 said:

The fact remains science is true, the Bible is true and they agree with each other.

Click to expand...

Not true as you should know, joshua 1 9. There is scientific evidence and evidence in the Bible that that establishes that the Bible is not the absolute truth.

27 July 2016 joshua 1 9: The existence of telescoping in the genealogies where the authors condensed lines by omitting names into esthetically pleasing lists is evidence against an assertion of an accurate Bible.

28 July 2016 joshua 1 9: The genetic evidence is that the Hebrew priesthood does not stem from a single ancestor (as in the Biblical Aaron).
Likewise there is no genetic evidence of extreme bottleneck in our past, e.g. the family of Noah or the Biblical Adam and Eve.
28 July 2016 joshua 1 9: It is circular reasoning to assume the Bible genealogies are accurate, calculating dates for Abraham, Aaron, etc. and then erroneously asserting that genetic evidence matching them show that Bible genealogies are accurate.
28 July 2016 joshua 1 9: Asserting that the genetic Adam and Eve are the Biblical Adam and Eve (which they are not!) shows that the Bible is not the absolute truth because that gives thousands of missing generations in the genealogies.

Click to expand...

There are plenty of places listing the scientific errors in the Bible, e.g. the pi = 3 cauldron in 1 Kings 7:23-26 (KJV).
Science and History in the Bible, e.g. bats "among the fowl", describing the Moon as a light like the Sun.

RealityCheck01 said:

Not true as you should know, joshua 1 9. There is scientific evidence and evidence in the Bible that that establishes that the Bible is not the absolute truth.


There are plenty of places listing the scientific errors in the Bible, e.g. the pi = 3 cauldron in 1 Kings 7:23-26 (KJV).
Science and History in the Bible, e.g. bats "among the fowl", describing the Moon as a light like the Sun.

Click to expand...

Actually that 1 kings scripture is pretty close to the correct math calculation. The bible didn't use exact measurements like we do today perhaps, but that doesn't mean that the scripture is telling a lie. The bible says that the circumference is 30 cubits, but the exact measurement would be 31.4159265

joshua 1 9 said:

You claim that you do not want to be deceived and yet your statement shows that you are. You do not understand what Adam represents and the part that he played in the evolution of man and the neolithic revolution. You do not understand the significance of the transition from hunter gather nomads to civilized food producers. As we go from the stone age to the metal age and the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Click to expand...

What a load of irrelevant rubbish, but then you can't begin to put your scientific citations where your mouth is when it comes to supporting the Biblical assertion that menstruating women are "unclean", so running up this tree, making more claims you don't support (the guff about that "Adam", evidence for the person?) is apparently "as good as it gets" in creo-verse.

W2L said:

The bible says that the circumference is 30 cubits, but the exact measurement would be 31.4159265

Click to expand...

1 kings gives the circumference as 30 cubits and diameter as 10 cubits. Pi = circumference/diameter = 3 regardless of how big a cubit is, W2L.
There are ways to get around this , e.g. say that the Bible is inaccurate and that the circumference was actually 31.42 cubits. Or that the Bible was written by people using what they thought at the time which was circumference/diameter of a circle = 3.

RealityCheck01 said:

1 kings gives the circumference as 30 cubits and diameter as 10 cubits. Pi = circumference/diameter = 3 regardless of how big a cubit is, W2L.
There are ways to get around this , e.g. say that the Bible is inaccurate and that the circumference was actually 31.42 cubits

Click to expand...

I cannot say that because the 1 kings scripture is not supposed to be a set of blueprints. Surely you can see that it was close enough to lend credibility to the story. I bet archeologists wouldn't be so critical of a record they dug up. They instead would see how close it was and would tend to believe it might be a credible story. How do know that the writer was not using approximate measurements instead of exact measurements? I use approximate measurements all the time when describing things. Its not uncommon

W2L said:

I cannot say that because the 1 kings scripture is not supposed to be a set of blueprints.

Click to expand...

1 Kings 7:23-26 (KJV) is a description of how the cauldron was made by Hiram out of Tyre and includes its dimensions which makes pi = 3. As does 2 Chronicles 4:2-5 (KJV).
The imprecision argument and other arguments are not good for Biblical literalists. But if you are willing to have the Bible as an inaccurate document then so be it, W2L.

Hiram out of Tyre is described as "filled with wisdom, and understanding, and cunning to work all works in brass" (1 Kings 7:14). That sounds like a competent artisan who could measure lengths to a precise scale implying that it is the author of Kings who made the mistake, probably copied by the author of Chronicles.

RealityCheck01 said:

1 Kings 7:23-26 (KJV) is a description of how the cauldron was made by Hiram out of Tyre and includes its dimensions which makes pi = 3. As does 2 Chronicles 4:2-5 (KJV).
The imprecision argument and other arguments are not good for Biblical literalists. But if you are willing to have the Bible as an inaccurate document then so be it, W2L.

Hiram out of Tyre is described as "filled with wisdom, and understanding, and cunning to work all works in brass" (1 Kings 7:14). That sounds like a competent artisan who could measure lengths to a precise scale implying that it is the author of Kings who made the mistake, probably copied by the author of Chronicles.

Click to expand...

Was Hiram the author of 1 Kings? Probably not.

joshua 1 9 said:

Oh, I would expect that she does understand me. I did take four (4) teacher training classes at the Bible college and it was a women that teaches that class. So I expect I learned a little on how to communicate on all levels with most anyone.

Click to expand...

As somebody who is an actual qualified teacher and who has read many many posts of yours, I recommend you ask for your money back.

RealityCheck01 said:

Did that unsupported claim pop here too?
In another thread I asked for Biblical references to support the claim and the obvious questions:
Are there historical reports of Christians living 30 years longer then their neighbors?
Is there evidence that modern Christians live a lot longer than non-Christians in the same location? For example a comparison of New York Christians and non-Christians?

Click to expand...

I'm just going to keep asking until he actually answers the question.

joshua 1 9 said:

I seldom use creationists sites but this link does offer Scientific Evidence to show the Bible is accurate and true. So the atheists can try to go through and falsify all 101 points or they can come up with evidence to falsify the Bible.

Click to expand...

From my personal point of view, it is creation science that has caused me to question the bible and whether there is a God or not. Why? Creation science is full of intellectual dishonesty with respect to science and in numerous cases present deliberate deceptions and out right lies. Why do they feel they need to do that to believe in God and the bible? Even worse, their information is targeted to the greater population of people without any scientific background. Creation science presents exactly what Christianity and the bible teach as being wrong.

Double post. Darn this confounded laptop!!

RickG said:

From my personal point of view, it is creation science that has caused me to question the bible and whether there is a God or not.

Click to expand...

Don't blame your lack of faith on creation science.

It won't wash with God.

I claim there is no such thing as creation science, and you still want to argue about it.

AV1611VET said:

Don't blame your lack of faith on creation science.

It won't wash with God.

Click to expand...

How do you "know" what "won't wash with God"? Does He "speak" to you (from His lips to your pearly ear, right?) or is this just a example of the line "blurring" between a self-appointed spokesman for an alleged super-powerful/all-knowing Entity and that Entity?

AV1611VET said:

I claim there is no such thing as creation science, and you still want to argue about it.

Click to expand...

I going to shock you and agree with you, there's no such thing as "creation science" ==> the Quintessential Oxymoron™.

It's a contemptible ruse by a no-science religious POV, attempting to gain the gravitas it does not deserve by hijacking the mantle of science which has a well-deserved proven track-record for producing results, answers and virtually every advance that's made life so much better.

Now wrapped in that mantle they don't warrant because science is NOT any part of their "bill of goods" (they actually hate/despise/fear both it and education), they can proceed to use that faux-credibility for conning the mugs ==> cha-ching! cha-ching! money makes the world go'round, the word go'round!

gladiatrix said:

How do you "know" what "won't wash with God"?

Click to expand...

He wrote us some letters.

And in one of them, He says:

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

florida2 said:

As somebody who is an actual qualified teacher and who has read many many posts of yours, I recommend you ask for your money back.

Click to expand...

We could start with "it was a women that teaches that class".

gladiatrix said:

Now wrapped in that mantle they don't warrant because science any part of their "bill of goods" (they actually hate/despise/fear both it and education), they can proceed to use that faux-credibility for conning the mugs ==> cha-ching! cha-ching! money makes the world go'round, the word go'round!

Click to expand...

You really get excited about creation science being an oxymoron, don't you?

AV1611VET said:

You really get excited about creation science being an oxymoron, don't you?

Click to expand...

That sentence reads like you agree.

JackRT said:

That sentence reads like you agree.

Click to expand...

I do.

Been saying it for years.

Creation science is a contradiction in terms and a tool of the Devil.

AV1611VET said:

I claim there is no such thing as creation science, and you still want to argue about it.

Click to expand...

There is creation science, the problem is that it is not legitimate science.

RickG said:

There is creation science, the problem is that it is not legitimate science.

Click to expand...

Do you like to argue against illegitimate science?