Why are we here?

46AND2 said:

You don't get to claim that ancient people had special knowledge about humans being last, when they got so many other things out of order.

Click to expand...

Whatever ancient people said in the Bible is absolutely correct. So far, I have not found anything which is scientifically wrong. I am absolutely amazed and eagerly wish to have a challenge on that.

pitabread said:

In my experience, attempts to claim the Bible is scientifically prescient is usually just based on post-hoc reasoning.

Click to expand...

Tell me one. I am excited to argue about it.

Scientific messages in the Bible are mostly plain descriptions of some features. Post-hoc or not, the descriptions do not change, and one by one, they are found fit perfectly on knowledge discovered thousands years later. Tell me another religion scripture which has this nature.

juvenissun said:

If you do not trust what the Bible says, then your religion has no scripture.

Click to expand...

Who said I didn't trust scripture? You're way off base there.

juvenissun said:

Whatever ancient people said in the Bible is absolutely correct. So far, I have not found anything which is scientifically wrong. I am absolutely amazed and eagerly wish to have a challenge on that.

Click to expand...

LOL

Speedwell said:

Who said I didn't trust scripture? You're way off base there.

Click to expand...

YOU decide with Bible verse to accept or not. What kind of religion scripture is that?

pitabread said:

The order of events in Genesis 1 is wrong. It also completely leaves out the most abundant life forms on Earth.

Click to expand...

Which order is wrong?

juvenissun said:

YOU decide with Bible verse to accept or not. What kind of religion scripture is that?

Click to expand...

I accept all of it, 100%, as the inspired word of God.

Speedwell said:

I accept all of it, 100%, as the inspired word of God.

Click to expand...

Even the interpolations?

46AND2 said:

Even the interpolations?

Click to expand...

Interpolations are interesting--so long as they are recognized as interpolations. And who's say what divine inspiration the interpolator was or was not receiving?

Speedwell said:

And who's say what divine inspiration the interpolator was or was not receiving?

Click to expand...

Ay, there's the rub. After all, who's to say how much inspiration the anonymous author of the Canticles was receiving? Etc.

Speedwell said:

I accept all of it, 100%, as the inspired word of God.

Click to expand...

But, you do not accept the creation Day sequence.
What else in the Bible you do not accept in a similar manner? Are you picking and choose?

pitabread said:

As an example, it describes the creation of things like fruit trees and grasses (Genesis 1:11) before the creation of water life (Genesis 1:20).

In reality, life in the water (including animals) appeared much sooner than grasses and fruit trees.

Click to expand...

I have a full, but lengthy, argument on that issue. What you see is the apparent situation on the earth. When we open our eyes to the whole universe, it shows a different picture, which strongly suggests that plant was created before our sun.

To highlight the argument, consider one question: where does the organic molecules in comets come from? A practical implication on that thought is: If we found large organic molecules on Mars, or found sea weed in the ocean of Europa, could we claim that we found "life" outside the earth?

46AND2 said:

Even the interpolations?

Click to expand...

This very viewpoint is exactly a very strong argument for the truth of Bible message.

The Bible is a historical document. At any moment in the history, any verse in any Book of the Bible could be modified, for any reason, by Scribes. If so, what would be the consistency of the Bible messages after thousands of years? A similar situation can be seen in Buddhism scriptures. Do you know what is the current situation of Buddhism scriptures? Tell you in brief: it is disastrous. That is why we have denominations in Buddhism which is far far diversified (disastrously) in doctrines when compared with Christian denominations.

juvenissun said:

This very viewpoint is exactly a very strong argument for the truth of Bible message.

The Bible is a historical document. At any moment in the history, any verse in any Book of the Bible could be modified, for any reason, by Scribes. If so, what would be the consistency of the Bible messages after thousands of years? A similar situation can be seen in Buddhism scriptures. Do you know what is the current situation of Buddhism scriptures? Tell you in brief: it is disastrous. That is why we have denominations in Buddhism which is far far diversified (disastrously) in doctrines when compared with Christian denominations.

Click to expand...

It is not an argument for the truth of it at all. Even if it was perfectly preserved, that says nothing about whether its contents are or ever were truth.

46AND2 said:

It is not an argument for the truth of it at all. Even if it was perfectly preserved, that says nothing about whether its contents are or ever were truth.

Click to expand...

It a strong support to the truth of Bible.

pitabread said:

Genesis 1:11 is just about plants though; it's specific to certain types of terrestrial plants like grasses and fruit-bearing trees.



And this is exactly what I said: post-hoc interpretation.

When you interpret things this way, you can make passages in the Bible fit anything you want them to fit.

Click to expand...

No. The argument has to be scientific. Scientific argument is never post-hoc. You have to respond scientific argument with one of the same nature.