Myth About the Bible - Busted!

[BCP1928]

Such as back when the earth presented to us that the whole universe orbited her?



But are they called into the laboratory or field, in the same way that God calls His children into the pulpit or mission field?

Yes, many regard the scientific study of God's creation as a calling.

 

[BCP1928]

The scientific method.



I would get moderated if I answered that.

Scientists are not afraid of the Bible. Scientists who are Christians are not, of course, and atheists just don't care.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, many regard the scientific study of God's creation as a calling.

Perhaps that's the problem?

They think God called them to be a scientist, when instead God was calling them elsewhere?

 

[AV1611VET]

Scientists are not afraid of the Bible.

Where, in your opinion, do you think they get their courage?

Scientists who are Christians are not, of course,

I agree.

... and atheists just don't care.

I totally disagree.

 

[BCP1928]

Perhaps that's the problem?

They think God called them to be a scientist, when instead God was calling them elsewhere?

The heavens, in fact all of creation, declares the glory of God. To study it, and share what they have learned is indeed a calling.

 

[BCP1928]

Where, in your opinion, do you think they get their courage?



I agree.



I totally disagree.

They need no courage, because there is no threat. The only threat comes from those who would weaponize the Bible with lliteraliam to advance their political agenda.

 

[AV1611VET]

The heavens, in fact all of creation, declares the glory of God.

Yes.

That is my favorite Psalm, and I even have it framed on my wall.

But tell a scientist that God put the plan of salvation in the constellations, and even a Christian who is a scientist just might laugh you to scorn.

To study it, and share what they have learned is indeed a calling.

I see what they share.

Have you seen my thread on SN1987A?

 

[dlamberth]

Such as back when the earth presented to us that the whole universe orbited her?

I believe that was born from religious beliefs before science.

I believe that was born from religious beliefs before science.

But are they called into the laboratory or field, in the same way that God calls His children into the pulpit or mission field?

Some are, yes. An example is Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.

 

[AV1611VET]

They need no courage, because there is no threat.

Okay.

Let's leave it at that then.

The only threat comes from those who would weaponize the Bible with literalism to advance their political agenda.

Mamma mia.

Fair enough.

Our little chit-chat is taking a dive now, isn't it?

 

[AV1611VET]

I believe that was born from religious beliefs before science.

So no atheist was ever a geocentrist?

Some are, yes.

I agree.

An example is Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.

How about Darwin?

 

[dlamberth]

Perhaps that's the problem?

They think God called them to be a scientist, when instead God was calling them elsewhere?

God has infinite ways of calling us to him, some is through science.

 

[AV1611VET]

God has infinite ways of calling us to him, some is through science.

Um ... no.

God doesn't need science to call someone into his respective mission field (such as the pulpit, the mission field, or a lab).

That's like you telling your boss ...

"If you hire me, I'll work in whatever department I think is calling me to work in."

 

[dlamberth]

Um ... no.

God doesn't need science to call someone into his respective mission field (such as the pulpit, the mission field, or a lab).

That's like you telling your boss ...

"If you hire me, I'll work in whatever department I think is calling me to work in."

Sorry, I'm just unable to define for God how and where He calls us to Him.

 

[sjastro]

No. You shifted the burden of proof from you having to demonstrate that 1) Mt. Everest's build rate was constant, slow, and gradual, and 2) it's impossible for the conditions mentioned to be different to what is assumed.
I am very familiar with this tactic.
I asked. You did not answer.

Yes I did answer your question, you either failed to comprehend it or chose to ignore to it because it is an inconvenient truth which clashes with your beliefs.
Either way you are the one avoiding the burden of proof with this futile attempt at diversion.

Let me try one more time with an extra caveat, you don’t appear to grasp the concept of geological time scales.
Mountain building occurs on geological time scales lasting tens of millions of years, you are only interested in what has happened in the last 4500 years.
It doesn’t take much insight to realize 4500 years is far too short for any significant changes in mountain height, and let’s not forget you accepted the tectonic uplift rates from the 2006 Andes link which if applied to a 4500 year interval is still insignificant.

There is another variable I should have mentioned it’s called the conservation of mass.
If every single drop of water from oceans, lakes, rivers, ice sheets and groundwater was converted to water vapour and added to the existing vapour in the atmosphere and allowed to rain, the total depth for the global flood would be ~2700 meters.

This is an idealized case for the earth being perfectly smooth, if we included ocean basins for example, the depth would be less.
This leads to the absurd situation that Mt Everest would have a fraction of its current height at the time of the flood to be covered by water and the tectonic uplift rate would have to be many magnitudes times greater than the measured rate to achieve its current height.

If you disagree with this the burden of proof is on you to show it is wrong, since this is a science forum miracles violating the conservation of mass, or massive acceleration in the recent past without supporting evidence is not allowed.

 

[sjastro]

If the sea floor drops, due to pressure weighing on it, will the height of a mountain's measurement above sea level be the same, as previous?

Yes because as explained the sea floor, sea level and mountain are all part of the lithosphere which is sinking into the asthenosphere due to the weight.

 

[BCP1928]

Okay.

Let's leave it at that then.



Mamma mia.

Fair enough.

Our little chit-chat is taking a dive now, isn't it?

Sorry, I know you're not one of them.

 

[loveofourlord]

The waters rose and covered the mountaintops to a depth of fifteen cubits. Genesis 7:20

Thanks for that.

#2 The Global Flood - Mountains
Myth: During the Biblical flood, mountains were as tall as Mount Everest, and could not have been covered by water, up to 270 inches.

Fact:

Mountain Ranges Rise Dramatically Faster Than Expected​

Two new studies by a University of Rochester researcher show that mountain ranges rise to their height in as little as two million years -- several times faster than geologists have always thought.​

​

"We've always assumed that the folding and faulting in the upper crust produced high elevation mountains. Now we have data on ancient mountain elevation that shows something else is responsible for the mountains' uplift."​

Geologists raise the speed limit for how fast continental crust can form

Study suggests parts of the Sierra Nevadas formed in a “geologic instant,” more than twice as fast as previously thought.​

The assumptions on how things happened or progressed in the past, has led to errors in conclusions reached.
There is no evidence that mountains were as tall as Mount Everest, thousands of years ago.
The height of mountains then, are not known, and so, an assumption cannot be used as evidence to claim that the flood waters did not indeed rise and cover the mountaintops to a depth of fifteen cubits, as stated in the Bible.

MYTH

That was a good one. Short and sweet.

the biggest problem with all of the attempts to make the flood happen in a year, is it would kill everyone on the ark an all the fish. All that energy would build up and would super heat the water and the air.

 

[AV1611VET]

the biggest problem with all of the attempts to make the flood happen in a year, is it would kill everyone on the ark an all the fish. All that energy would build up and would super heat the water and the air.

Ever read the story of Daniel's three friends in the burning, fiery furnace; and how God handled the heat problem?

Daniel 3:27 And the princes, governors, and captains, and the king's counsellors, being gathered together, saw these men, upon whose bodies the fire had no power, nor was an hair of their head singed, neither were their coats changed, nor the smell of fire had passed on them.

Here's a good question for you:

Do you think it's plausible that Jesus was on the Ark with them?

 

[CoreyD]

Would you agree that scientists create the templates that are used against the Bible?

Not generally.
I would say people do that.
Some of these are scientists, true, but not all scientists agree.

For example, the ideas on the theory of evolution aren't agreed upon by all scientist, and while most believe evolution on a large scale is possible, others don't.
Some scientists believe the James Web Telescope can answer the questions :
Where do we come from?
How did we get here?
Are we alone?

That's in the head of some scientists. Others don't believe a telescope can tell us where we came from, and how we got here.
Many questions that some scientists are probing, cannot be answered by science.
The natural world cannot supply those answers.

Many scientists believe the Bible gives us answers to those questions.
I think atheists, agnostics, and other Bible skeptics do hold biases, and expound on these.
I think you know a few of these by name.

 

[AV1611VET]

I would say people do that.

Not even close.

Ordinary people aren't qualified to create a scientific template.

Would you advocate using the janitor to develop a template for the microcode that runs the mechanical arm that assists in heart surgery?