Moon light - the word of God vs falsely so called science

[AV1611VET]

Only the deluded believe that they know everything ...

One thing I find interesting here is that people balk when I claim science is myopic.

I gave your post a check mark.

 

[Kylie]

In light of the mysteries of the universe, there is undeniably much that we don't know. How we fill the vacuum of our lack of knowledge is our prerogative, I would suppose.

Only the deluded believe that they know everything ...

True, but we can eliminate certain things. If I want to know if there's any water in the sink, I just need to look at the very bottom, since I know that if there's no water there, there can't be any water anywhere else. If there was water elsewhere in the sink, it would contradict things I already know, since water fills the sink from the bottom up. Likewise, if any god-concept violates things we know to be true, then we can eliminate those god-concepts.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I find it fascinating that the blind call science myopic.

 

[Ophiolite]

Only the deluded believe that they know everything ...

I didn't know that.

 

[AV1611VET]

I find it fascinating that the blind call science myopic.

Science is either blind, myopic, or omniscient.

Take your pick.

And I'll take mine.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I'm neither blind, nor myopic (I have 20/20 vision), nor omniscient. Your trichotomy is false.

 

[AV1611VET]

I find it fascinating that the blind call science myopic.

Science is either blind, myopic, or omniscient.

Take your pick.

And I'll take mine.

I'm neither blind, nor myopic (I have 20/20 vision), nor omniscient. Your trichotomy is false.

Wh... huh?

Every academian who ever lived, alive today, and will be tomorrow ... even if they all had 20/20 vision, they would be myopic.

The whole of science is less than the sum of its parts.

 

[Tinker Grey]

An analogy is not the thing. The map is not the territory.

 

[Ophiolite]

The whole of science is less than the sum of its parts.

Let me bring you back on track here AV. You are confusing science with your contribution to this forum, which is certainly less than the sum of your many posts.

 

[Kylie]

@AV1611VET in your opinion, does the Bible state that the moon is a light source?

 

[AV1611VET]

@AV1611VET in your opinion, does the Bible state that the moon is a light source?

Weeeeel ... let's put it this way:

Yes ... in the same sense It states the sun is a light source.

Genesis 1:14 ¶ And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

 

[Kylie]

Weeeeel ... let's put it this way:

Yes ... in the same sense It states the sun is a light source.

Genesis 1:14 ¶ And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

I think you know what I am asking. Does the moon, according to the Bible, produce light of its own?

 

[Radagast]

Does the moon, according to the Bible, produce light of its own?

No. The Bible tells us that light comes from the Moon, but it says nothing about the mechanism.

 

[Kylie]

No. The Bible tells us that light comes from the Moon, but it says nothing about the mechanism.

I wonder if AV holds the same opinion...

 

[AV1611VET]

I think you know what I am asking. Does the moon, according to the Bible, produce light of its own?

1. Bible says X, science says Ø = go with X
2. Bible says X, science says X = go with X
3. Bible says X, science says Y = go with X
4. Bible says Ø, science says Y = go with Y
5. Bible says Ø, science says Ø = speculate

 

[Kylie]

1. Bible says X, science says Ø = go with X
2. Bible says X, science says X = go with X
3. Bible says X, science says Y = go with X
4. Bible says Ø, science says Y = go with Y
5. Bible says Ø, science says Ø = speculate

Why do you apparently not count Genesis 1:16?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why do you apparently not count Genesis 1:16?

Because "produce light" and "give light" can have two different meanings.

Is the moon a female?

 

[Kylie]

Because "produce light" and "give light" can have two different meanings.

But the Bible just says that they are lights.

Is the moon a female?

Let's apply your boolean standards.

1. Bible says X, science says Ø = go with X
2. Bible says X, science says X = go with X
3. Bible says X, science says Y = go with X
4. Bible says Ø, science says Y = go with Y
5. Bible says Ø, science says Ø = speculate

Does the Bible say anything about the moon having gender?

Isaiah 13:10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

Bible: Refers to the moon as feminine.
Science: says the moon has no gender.

Clearly, this is case 3 in your Boolean standards, since the Bible and science are saying different things. Therefore, we go with the Bible, and the moon is categorically female.

Do you disagree with my interpretation of your boolean standards?

 

[Kaon]

True, but we can eliminate certain things. If I want to know if there's any water in the sink, I just need to look at the very bottom, since I know that if there's no water there, there can't be any water anywhere else. If there was water elsewhere in the sink, it would contradict things I already know, since water fills the sink from the bottom up. Likewise, if any god-concept violates things we know to be true, then we can eliminate those god-concepts.

Can the universe be recreated in the lab such that it's dynamics can be measured and reproduced in a precise way that models our known universe?

Can we do this with Earth?

 

[Ophiolite]

Can the universe be recreated in the lab such that it's dynamics can be measured and reproduced in a precise way that models our known universe?

Can we do this with Earth?

This can be done for portions of the universe and is done so across probably all fields of science. Without this capacity we should be much further behind in our understanding.