• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Taking Questions on Embedded Age Creation

QvQ

Member
Aug 18, 2019
2,381
1,076
AZ
✟147,890.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The thing is, if a person does not take the time to learn and understand the science of something like geology, the course forward seems to be that we can still that person to argue as though they think they are an expert on the subject.
It is interesting that we can argue and question the Bible and God but not science

My view is historical:
Historical Records.
All of which are suspect because we can't know the conditons on the ground at X time
There is a fire in Los Angeles now.
That will leave a record of ash layer which archeologist of the future can examine.
Good Enough
However there is a rise in ocean levels, an earthquake, a pit mine that disturbs or destroys that layer.
And there is going to be a lot of earth moved around in rebuilding
So then what is the record?
Will geologist and archeologist be able to say with any accuracy in the year 5024 what the geological conditions on the ground were in LA in 2024?


Also I do not accept anything without careful examination and a second opinion.
There are too many stories and speculations in "science."
Too much of that has become dogma.
There was settled science, dogma, until Einstein and Darwin rattled the cage
Science is never "settled." It is an ongoing investigation and todays "settled science" is tomorrow's flat earth.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Hood was a loser.
Mar 11, 2017
21,569
16,268
55
USA
✟409,375.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Matthew 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
How does this apply? If a modern believer wants to make a claim, based on the passages quoted recently and similar ones, that they can do seemingly impossible through prayer because of their faith, then how is it tempting god if I offer to test that claim and see if it actually happens?
 
Upvote 0

AveChristusRex

Unapologetic Marianite
Nov 20, 2024
478
225
19
Bible Belt
✟51,929.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
if u dont mind, im going to copy this and use this in the future, amazing work as always AV!
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,580
52,504
Guam
✟5,126,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critically Recalculating!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,570
11,468
Space Mountain!
✟1,354,406.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm not clear on what specifically counts as "jargon," especially if and when my "jargon" is likely found easily enough within the bastions of most university campuses across the nation, whether sitting in books on library shelves or offered as curricular content in various classes, and by that, I don't mean "christian" universities.

So, no. I don't accept your recoil at my "jargon" any more than you would accept mine if presented with the essential "jargon" within the field of Physics (or engineering, or whichever field is your specific field of study and work).
I referred to what was "invalid" rather than uninteresting. (Though to be fair, theology is also uninteresting as it ever was.)
NONE of what I study is 'invalid.' I take your comment as an attempt to sideline was is pertinent in any discussion regarding Christianity or World History or World Literature. So. no. That's fallacious.
My only attempted humor was on your jargon.
Not funny.
Stop acting like a concordance is a ball and chain. It's simply a basic literary tool. It does very little other than to make looking up certain words in the Bible easier. I think you already know this, let's not talk to each other like either of us is a witless fool.
I take it for granted that most ex-Christian atheists today, or at least a majority of them, have deconverted because they've "been studying a few things" that don't line up with what they were told by their earlier church leaders.

I never assume ex-Christians are ignorant and uneducated. Of course you know something about textual studies. However, that doesn't mean you also know the various comparative historical issues involved in those things that you're now barely interested in. It's no different than me admitting that I don't know how all of the math in Physics works.................................. I don't claim to "know Physics." I am familiar with the ideas, however.
No, that's not how historical research works, Hans, whether in the past or today. If you study Historiography, you'll realize that.

And now that you've pulled the lid off of the fact that you've apparently read some critical studies of the biblical texts, which sources or authors have you read exactly?

I'm going to blunt your insinuated allusion to the use of Occam's Razor here. I know that our old dearly departed guru, Carl Sagan, whom we both love and admire, liked to refer to it, but the truth is, the Razor gets overused and it assumes too much. In history, unlike in science, the presence of "simplicity" doesn't necessarily indicate more coherence exists in a given description of the past. Moreover, all human writing expresses a varying degree of representation regarding the referents described in that respective literature.
Demons, I forgot about the demon in the cure of the epileptic, and dead fig trees, sure, that seems to be the point that strong faith with prayer can make the biggest impossible things happen.
Right. But I don't think even Jesus, or Peter or Paul, literally thought entire geological structures would move via "faith." They might have thought geological structures could move via God's "outstretched arm," but we don't need to dally on how God might make a deep impact, volcanic eruption, or Split Sea, here or there.
Is it Jewish, or Greek, or whatever? I don't know. Does anyone?

Are you asking me to supply you with a reference source that you're not interested in reading? Your question is sort of ambiguous, and with the way you use your rhetoric, I'm guessing your question is reflective of you not really caring to know? Yet, you care enough to keep showing up here and putting in your two cents.

The thing is, you don't fool me. I know you're a brilliant chap. You just don't like to be pushed.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critically Recalculating!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,570
11,468
Space Mountain!
✟1,354,406.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It is interesting that we can argue and question the Bible and God but not science

It might surprise folks to know that I question science all the time.

Of course, it doesn't mean I throw the baby out with the bath water just because geology doesn't line up with the biblical account. No, it just means that I hold the Bible in one hand as one form of communication for a particular prophetic purpose from the Lord, and I hold what is found in the physical world by us human beings within the bounds of what I know are the limits of our science, and I don't have to feel jilted when geology (or paleontology and archaeology) and the Bible don't jive.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Hood was a loser.
Mar 11, 2017
21,569
16,268
55
USA
✟409,375.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
It was your choice to use "exegetics" and "hermanetics" (or however they are spelled), instead of "textual analysis" (or something similar) that was "jargony". I've seen those words before, but their meaning is not apparent to me (without a dictionary). As for the departments that use them, I don't even know where they are on the campuses I have most recently spent some time one. THe last such department I knew where it was was the English Dept. at my graduate university, and that was only because I taught a class in their building.
So, no. I don't accept your recoil at my "jargon" any more than you would accept mine if presented with the essential "jargon" within the field of Physics (or engineering, or whichever field is your specific field of study and work).
If I thought "Hermitian matrices" were necessary to mention in a CF post I would define and explain it. If I needed to use one in a journal article I would not explain it.
NONE of what I study is 'invalid.' I take your comment as an attempt to sideline was is pertinent in any discussion regarding Christianity or World History or World Literature. So. no. That's fallacious.
I find theology an invalid field of study, as I do its sub-field of apologetics. But we're doing a textual analysis not theology, right?
Unless you are holding something back, nothing about our discussion has involved the definition or usage of words. None of the words in these passages are extraordinary or odd. Pretty regular words. I have no idea why you even brought up a concordence. If we are going to go into the meaning and translation of specific words, then I will withdraw.

Mostly I don't recall. The only thing even close I can think of is Ehrman's "How Jesus became God", but that's (as I recall) about early Christian understanding of the nature of Jesus, and not largely about the texts themselves. I don't recall reading any other books. I've read some articles and watched some lectures, debates, discussions, and documentaries, which ones I don't recall.
I did use, but did not name the Razor. I do think it is more likely that Matthew added the "mountain moving" metaphor to the story of the epileptic boy than Mark removed it from some prior source and Matthew put it back, because that would imply that both had the same written source, which I see no reason to presume exists.
I have no idea what they thought and it is difficult for me to imagine what they thought since I grew up in the technologically sophisticated and scientifically advanced late 20th century when the age of the Earth, plate tectonics, and the formation of planetary systems from the debris of prior generations of dead stars was already firmly established. Even the notion that epilepsy was "caused" by demon posession would have seemed barbaric to the youthful me that learned how to respond to a seizure.
No, I just didn't know if it was certain the metaphor was Jewish. Mark and Matthew were Greek speakers (and writers) so it could be a Greek metaphor. If you know difinatively, I am curious, if you don't that is fine.
The thing is, you don't fool me. I know you're a brilliant chap. You just don't like to be pushed.
I don't like to be pushed (who does) and I'm not trying to fool you.

I really am not well versed in the NT and even less so in the OT. I once decided about a decade ago to read the Bible from stem to stern, but after only skipping some geneologies and descriptions of the scrafices, tabernacle, priestly garb in Genesis and Exodus, stopped part way through the third book because it was just to unintersting. (I also don't like pre-20th century literary styles in English, so translations of ancient texts weren't really a great read.) Later I tried the gospels, I started with Mark and got all the way through, but somewhere in the next one (Matthew) it got repetative and I stopped again. I think I've read a few of the epistles but don't remember which ones, except that when I tried to to read Romans I got too disgusted after the first chapter and stopped. All of that was after deconversion, before it the amount I'd read on my own was proabably less than the text on this page of this thread.

I mostly read post-WWII written non-fiction, especially histories, and religious texts from religions I don't follow are not something I can bring myself to read. Most of the stuff I read is the first time I've seen it and a lot doesn't stick.
 
Upvote 0

QvQ

Member
Aug 18, 2019
2,381
1,076
AZ
✟147,890.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
IT is a test. That is specifically prohibited.

Prayer is a personal dialogue with God.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

QvQ

Member
Aug 18, 2019
2,381
1,076
AZ
✟147,890.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I think you overestimate science
Panama Canal was 240 million cubic ft of rock and sand
Plus 4447032.106 cubic yards of concrete
That was 1914, mostly mules and steam engines

The Bingham Canyon Mine is a bigger excavation than the Canal.

Everest at 1.5 Trillion cubic ft would be a piece of cake
We have the Bomb to reduce that pile of rock to rubble
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
15,069
5,309
✟327,545.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I was suggesting that since the Bible's claim specifies what the outcome will be ahead of time, we can test to see what actually happens is the same as the predicted outcome.

That's how the scientific method works. Use the hypothesis to make a prediction about what will happen, and then see if that's what happens in reality.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
15,069
5,309
✟327,545.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, that's not what I was talking about.

Do you have enough faith that your prayers can move mountains like the Bible says? Yes or no.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
15,069
5,309
✟327,545.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Im not that clever
Then you aren't clever enough to avoid doing it accidently, it seems.

Maybe we should have a chat about YOUR discussion style, since it evidently needs improvement.
No, we are absolutely sure God exists...
And Muslims are absolutely sure that they have it right, Hindus are absolutely sure they have it right...

See how being absolutely sure about something doesn't mean you're actually right?
...just as you are absolutely sure you have a companion...
I can test the existence of my husband in a way that is verifiable and testable and repeatable.
...the faith comes in when we are considering their love for us, there we find the Christian faith: not faith that God exists, but faith that He died for us, and loves us eternally.
I can see the things my husband does for me without needing to rely on reading it somewhere.
 
Upvote 0

AveChristusRex

Unapologetic Marianite
Nov 20, 2024
478
225
19
Bible Belt
✟51,929.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
See how being absolutely sure about something doesn't mean you're actually right?
We as Christians know we are right, and there is (and will never be) a time in history when everyone is absolutely sure in what is right; rather, the faith will be a mystery (St. Augustine), but those who know it will declare its truth.
I can see the things my husband does for me without needing to rely on reading it somewhere.
Well, if your husband gives you a gift you are not aware of until it is brought up to you, are you to say he did not give it? If he says "I bought you a [_]", then besides reading it and trusting that he is telling the truth, what proof do you have?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,580
52,504
Guam
✟5,126,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I was suggesting that since the Bible's claim specifies what the outcome will be ahead of time, we can test to see what actually happens is the same as the predicted outcome.

Let me point out again that this is one of the most thoughtless scientific experiments imaginable.
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
8,399
4,188
82
Goldsboro NC
✟257,674.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
It doesn't matter--they all mean "backing your doctrine into an ancient text."
Same as above.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,580
52,504
Guam
✟5,126,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Do you have enough faith that your prayers can move mountains like the Bible says? Yes or no.

Did Paul?

1 Corinthians 13:2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,145
3,176
Oregon
✟928,467.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others

Big NO for me. But it's not about contradictions. Found myself in a spiritual path where there was no issue with the Word of God and Science as both are on the same side of the coin. But that's looking at the Word of God as the essence of Life which includes the forever changing and transforming cosmos.
 
Upvote 0

truthpls

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2023
2,615
556
victoria
✟76,641.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
That would make moving it to Australia hard. You would just be shipping rubble
 
Upvote 0