Is Astrology a science?

[Astrid]

Give me a better term and I'll use it.

It's your perception and attitude needs chaging.
Appropriate words will follow.

 

[inquiring mind]

It's your perception and attitude needs chaging.
Appropriate words will follow.

Noted

 

[Diamond72]

The way you Christians come up so many
wildly different versions of what the Bible says
does nothing for credibility.

The Bible has to be translated and interpreted. But that is NOT what we are doing here. You are trying to claim that the Bible contradicts Science and you have failed to prove your claim. You are trying to do the impossible because God gives us Science and God gives us the Bible and He does not contradict Himself.

By science, I mean evidence, physical evidence, and artifacts. Also, Science has a method to determine what is true. I also have a lot of understanding of Ancient History, and Archeology to help substantiate that what we read is true. My father was a medical doctor so I was raised to take science very seriously.

God gives us the laws of Physics. So the laws of Physics can be used to show how accurate and true the Bible is. Also, Astro physics tells us a lot about the Universe that God created. We can spend our whole life reading, studying, and learning. In the end, we will just be getting started. Because God is infinite.

People are subjective and we all have our own understanding. God wants each and everyone to have a personal relationship with Him. The atonement is twofold. Jesus died so we could be reconciled with the Father, but also so we could be reconciled with Each other. There are people that are Christians just for the fellowship. Just for their brothers and sisters in the Lord.

Pointing out that the "flood" is not an actual
historical event should lend clarity to understanding.

Everything in the Bible is symbolic but first, it is literal. One does not cancel out the other. There are rules for Bible interpretation that they teach in Bible college. You can do a google search on that also.

There are four major types of biblical hermeneutics that have arisen throughout history, although only the first is widely accepted today amongst evangelical churches.

• Literal Interpretation. ...
• Moral Interpretation. ...
• Allegorical Interpretation. ...
• Anagogical Interpretation.

For me, the allegorical is best. I use to enjoy reading Christian Allegorical books. Even the Love Comes Softly books are more designed for teenage girls. Some of those were made into movies. My wife likes to go to the movies a lot more than I do. But she does not watch much TV.

 

[AV1611VET]

Been there. Done that.

And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
...
Need I go on?

Please do.

What is the VERY NEXT VERSE after your quote?

Spoiler: Genesis 6:8

But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Please do.

What is the VERY NEXT VERSE after your quote?

Spoiler: Genesis 6:8

But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

We *all* know that the story includes 8 survivors. That's not the point. The point is that the evidence is *NOT* consistent with just 8 humans surviving the extinction of all other humans.

 

[Bradskii]

There have been six extinctions. God always destroys 90% and then He repopulates the Earth with 10%. This happened 12,700 years ago when the glaciers melted. Only 10% survived to repopulate the earth. They call this remnant theology. In the case of Noah, only his family survived. Everyone else was destroyed. Even though they had every chance and every opportunity to repent. Noah was a preacher of Righteousness.

So please don't give me any bulldust about needing to 'read the whole chapter'. As I said, the bible says God destroyed everyone except Noah and his family. And you said that the bible doesn't contradict science. All I can say is that your understanding of science is extremely limited, as that is about as unscientific as you can possibly get.

 

[Bradskii]

Yes, go on… reading that is.

Bible – 3, Antagonist - 0

I think that's:
Bible 3
Diamond7 0

He was the one denying it.

 

[Bradskii]

Everyone else was destroyed. Even though they had every chance and every opportunity to repent.

How does an infant repent?

 

[Bradskii]

We *all* know that the story includes 8 survivors. That's not the point. The point is that the evidence is *NOT* consistent with just 8 humans surviving the extinction of all other humans.

Was there a comment directed at me? I'll gladly accept the inconvenience of not
knowing for the sheer peace of mind that 'ignored content' gives me.

 

[Diamond72]

How does an infant repent?

The parent has to repent. The child goes straight to Heaven. I had a dream about my daughter in Heaven.

 

[sjastro]

They use to call it continental drift but now they call it plate tectonics. This is the reason California is in a constant state of disaster. This is why we have rocky mountains. This is why we have a ring of fire in the Pacific Ocean. The earth was covered with water only the water was frozen and we call it the ice age because of the glaciers.

People need to study this to keep themselves protected from disaster.

You seemed to have missed the point I was making about catastrophic plate tectonics.
Where as plate tectonics is now mainstream science supported by observation, the motivation behind catastrophic plate tectonics it to distort plate tectonics so it becomes consistent with the creationist storyline which is not evidence based.

This is the reason why catastrophic plate tectonics is pseudoscience.

 

[Diamond72]

As I said, the bible says God destroyed everyone except Noah and his family.

We know for a fact that Noah's flood did not destroy everyone. So maybe you need to go back and read your Bible again to see who was destroyed in Noah's flood. You will need the Holy Spirit of God to be your guide and teacher.

I will give you a clue. In Genesis 6:7 we read: "I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish."

You clearly missed: THE BREATH OF LIFE. This is very important.

Nephesh (נֶ֫פֶשׁ‎ nép̄eš) is a Biblical Hebrew word which occurs in the Hebrew Bible. The word refers to the aspects of sentience, and human beings and other animals are both described as being nephesh.[1][2] Plants, as an example of live organisms, are not referred in the Bible as being nephesh. The term נפש‎ is literally "soul", although it is commonly rendered as "life", "living being" and "creature" in English translations.[3] One view is that nephesh relates to sentient being without the idea of life and that, rather than having a nephesh, a sentient creation of God is a nephesh. In Genesis 2:7 the text is not that Adam was given a nephesh but that Adam "became a living nephesh." Nephesh when put with another word can detail aspects related to the concept of nephesh; with רוּחַ‎ rûach ("spirit") it describes a part of mankind that is immaterial, like one's mind, emotions, will, intellect, personality, and conscience, as in Job 7:11.[4][5] WIKI

We see this again in Genesis 7:22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died.

Genesis 2:7 Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

 

[Diamond72]

creationist storyline which is not evidence based.

Depends on what Creationist you are talking about. Also there are a lot of different kinds of creationism. YEC, GAP, OEC, dispensationalism, and theistic evolution, to name the more popular ones. There is truth in all of them.

 

[Diamond72]

This is the reason why catastrophic plate tectonics is pseudoscience.

You may want to go in and edit the Wiki article then. There is nothing there about "pseudoscience". I do not think it would last very long before someone would edit it out.

"Plate tectonics is the generally accepted scientific theory that considers the Earth's lithosphere to comprise a number of large tectonic plates which have been slowly moving since about 3.4 billion years ago". Wikipedia

 

[Astrid]

The Bible has to be translated and interpreted. But that is NOT what we are doing here. You are trying to claim that the Bible contradicts Science and you have failed to prove your claim. You are trying to do the impossible because God gives us Science and God gives us the Bible and He does not contradict Himself.

By science, I mean evidence, physical evidence, and artifacts. Also, Science has a method to determine what is true. I also have a lot of understanding of Ancient History, and Archeology to help substantiate that what we read is true. My father was a medical doctor so I was raised to take science very seriously.

God gives us the laws of Physics. So the laws of Physics can be used to show how accurate and true the Bible is. Also, Astro physics tells us a lot about the Universe that God created. We can spend our whole life reading, studying, and learning. In the end, we will just be getting started. Because God is infinite.

People are subjective and we all have our own understanding. God wants each and everyone to have a personal relationship with Him. The atonement is twofold. Jesus died so we could be reconciled with the Father, but also so we could be reconciled with Each other. There are people that are Christians just for the fellowship. Just for their brothers and sisters in the Lord.


Everything in the Bible is symbolic but first, it is literal. One does not cancel out the other. There are rules for Bible interpretation that they teach in Bible college. You can do a google search on that also.

There are four major types of biblical hermeneutics that have arisen throughout history, although only the first is widely accepted today amongst evangelical churches.

• Literal Interpretation. ...
• Moral Interpretation. ...
• Allegorical Interpretation. ...
• Anagogical Interpretation.

For me, the allegorical is best. I use to enjoy reading Christian Allegorical books. Even the Love Comes Softly books are more designed for teenage girls. Some of those were made into movies. My wife likes to go to the movies a lot more than I do. But she does not watch much TV.

Ifn you knew so much about science you would
know not to assume your conclusions.

Depends on what Creationist you are talking about. Also there are a lot of different kinds of creationism. YEC, GAP, OEC, dispensationalism, and theistic evolution, to name the more popular ones. There is truth in all of them.

I expect most of them get their
spelling right most of the time.

 

[sjastro]

Depends on what Creationist you are talking about. Also there are a lot of different kinds of creationism. YEC, GAP, OEC, dispensationalism, and theistic evolution, to name the more popular ones. There is truth in all of them.

This doesn't even make any sense.
How can there truth in YEC and OEC when they are diametrically opposite.

 

[sjastro]

You may want to go in and edit the Wiki article then. There is nothing there about "pseudoscience". I do not think it would last very long before someone would edit it out.

"Plate tectonics is the generally accepted scientific theory that considers the Earth's lithosphere to comprise a number of large tectonic plates which have been slowly moving since about 3.4 billion years ago". Wikipedia

You seem to devoid of basic comprehension skills.
I am referring to "catastrophic plate tectonics" which is not the same as "plate tectonics" which is the mainstream theory.

The vast majority of geologists regard the hypothesis of catastrophic plate tectonics as pseudoscience; they reject it in favor of the conventional geological theory of plate tectonics. It has been argued that the tremendous release of energy necessitated by such an event would boil off the Earth's oceans, making a global flood impossible.[100] Not only does catastrophic plate tectonics lack any plausible geophysical mechanism by which its changes might occur, it also is contradicted by considerable geological evidence (which is in turn consistent with conventional plate tectonics), including:[101]

• The fact that a number of volcanic oceanic island chains, such as the Hawaiian islands, yield evidence of the ocean floor having moved over volcanic hot-spots. These islands have widely ranging ages (determined via both radiometric dating and relative erosion) that contradict the catastrophic tectonic hypothesis of rapid development and thus a similar age.
• Radiometric dating and sedimentation rates on the ocean floor likewise contradict the hypothesis that it all came into existence nearly contemporaneously.
• Catastrophic tectonics does not allow sufficient time for guyots to have their peak eroded away (leaving these seamounts' characteristic flat tops).
• Runaway subduction does not explain the kind of continental collision illustrated by that of the Indian and Eurasian Plates. (For further information see Orogeny.)

Conventional plate tectonics accounts for the geological evidence already, including innumerable details that catastrophic plate tectonics cannot, such as why there is gold in California, silver in Nevada, salt flats in Utah, and coal in Pennsylvania, without requiring any extraordinary mechanisms to do so.[101][102]

 

[Diamond72]

I am referring to "catastrophic plate tectonics"

This is the first I ever heard that term. They call this a strawman when you knock down your own theory.

 

[inquiring mind]

How does an infant repent?

Sometimes Alan Watts had a peculiar way of expressing these types of situations in his talks… in one instance I remember a reference to Divine nonsense. I don’t think he was being sacrilegious, but a way of saying we could not comprehend the answer, or that it was simply unexplainable to us.

 

[Diamond72]

How can there truth in YEC and OEC when they are diametrically opposite.

YEC covers the last 6,000 years. OEC covers the last 12.7 billion years. dispensationalism covers the last 12,700 years. So they are not even talking about the same thing.