The Demise of Evolution

Kylie said:

Probably not, since the writing was on the wall long before last week.
.

Click to expand...

Your answer above makes sense, compared to your own previous posts #867 and #875.

Bungle_Bear said:

Must have been a very different post to the final version - @roman2819 responds to @Jimmy D and you, @Warden_of_the_Storm and I all get notifications that we've been mentioned. I'd love to know what the original post said!

Click to expand...

If you want to know what my original post is, go to #881 which contains my words in quotes, and click on the quotation. I mention a few peoples' names, but decided to make it more inclusive so others can answer as well.

Kylie said:

Me too!

Click to expand...

If you want to know what my original post is, go to #881 which contains my words in quotes, and click on the quotation. I mention a few peoples' names, but decided to make it more inclusive so others can answer as well.

Warden_of_the_Storm said:

Huh.
... now that's screwy.

Click to expand...

If you want to know what my original post is, go to #881 which contains my words in quotes, and click on the quotation. I mention a few peoples' names, but decided to make it more inclusive so others can answer as well.

Kylie said:

In other words, interpret the Bible to fit in with what we have confirmed with science. Funny how it's always the Bible fitting in with science and never the other way around, huh?

Click to expand...

The bible said it first before science, and science confirms it later. It is overly-critical people who refuse t believe the dozens of correct verses (not just a couple of statements) in the Bible.

[/QUOTE] Why is it that no one said, "Those passages where the Bible refers to a flat earth were clearly figurative, you can't use them to support your flat earth idea!"[/QUOTE]

Figurative statements can be correct too. The bible contains various literal and figurative verses that turn out to correct. If it only provides couple if statements, then perhaps not enough weight, but it match with science, history and archaeology as well, they all add up.

In post #811, you say:
[/QUOTE] The Bible does not provide specific points, it provides vague descriptions that you interpret as matching with science so you can claim that the Bible was right all along.[/QUOTE]

Have you ask yourself: How specific points and descriptions will be enough for you? Or do you just refuse to believe the many correct stuff already in the Bible and keep asking for more on your own terms, and keep saying not good enough?

roman2819 said:

Your answer above makes sense, compared to your own previous posts #867 and #875.

Click to expand...

How do you figure?

In 867 and 875, I was saying that if we are to believe that the Bible made prophecies, then Star Trek made prophecies too. If the prophecies just extrapolated from current trends and made predictions that were likely, then they should not be counted as prophecies. That's what Star Trek did, and that's partially what the Bible did (the Bible also has other ways of getting prophecies to appear where they are not true prophecies, but that's a different story.)

And now, I have said that if someone makes a prediction about the stock market regarding what it would be like a week after the prediction, then this is also not a valid prophecy, since many stock market trends can be extrapolated from current trends, just as mentioned above.

However, if someone makes an extremely accurate and detailed prediction - I predict that December 18th at the close of trade, stocks in KylieCo will start the day at $51.87, rise to $55.03 at ten minutes past one in the afternoon before falling back down to exactly $53.12 at the close of business - then I will sit up and take notice, because simple extrapolation of trends can't produce results that detailed.

What part of this do you think does not make sense?

roman2819 said:

The bible said it first before science, and science confirms it later. It is overly-critical people who refuse t believe the dozens of correct verses (not just a couple of statements) in the Bible.

Click to expand...

Please give examples of these things. Of course, I expect these to be things that could not have been known by the people at the time.

Figurative statements can be correct too. The bible contains various literal and figurative verses that turn out to correct. If it only provides couple if statements, then perhaps not enough weight, but it match with science, history and archaeology as well, they all add up.

Click to expand...

But we can't take figurative statements as fact. And we certainly can't take a figurative statement, find a way to interpret that in a way that fits with science and then conclude that the original author meant it as fact and that the interpretation that fits with science is the way that original author intended.

Have you ask yourself: How specific points and descriptions will be enough for you? Or do you just refuse to believe the many correct stuff already in the Bible and keep asking for more on your own terms, and keep saying not good enough?

Click to expand...

I want it to be clear and unambiguous and matching what we see in reality. If you can show me an example of that in the Bible that could not have been known by the people at the time, then you will certainly have my attention.

Kylie said:

You might want to tell this to the many Christians who believe the Bible is the only book they need and is a literally true account of what happened.

Click to expand...

Some or many of these Christians may not understand the Bible well enough, but they got one thing right: They are on the same side as God. On judgement day, they are in a better place, compared to unbelievers who refuse to believe the many credible evidence both in and beyond the Bible.

Arguing against the Bible may seem to win some battles for those who don't believe. but win the battles and lose the war in the end .... does not make sense, get you anywhere.

roman2819 said:

Are there other flat earth verses in the BIble?

Click to expand...

Isaiah 40:22 is not a "flat Earth" verse. The only point in bringing up a flat Earth at all is to show you that IF the purpose of Isaiah 40:22 was to teach anything specific about the shape of the Earth (which is a stupid idea to begin with) it would be more likely that it was teaching a flat Earth than a spherical one.

roman2819 said:

Some or many of these Christians may not understand the Bible well enough, but they got one thing right: They are on the same side as God. On judgement day, they are in a better place, compared to unbelievers who refuse to believe the many credible evidence both in and beyond the Bible.

Arguing against the Bible may seem to win some battles for those who don't believe. but win the battles and lose the war in the end .... does not make sense, get you anywhere.

Click to expand...

There is still no evidence in reality to back up the Bible, and thus there is no evidence to support your threats of punishment for not believing.

Show me the evidence from reality.

Kylie said:

Please give examples of these things. Of course, I expect these to be things that could not have been known by the people at the time.

Click to expand...

Said these before: "He sit upon the Circle of the earth and "He suspend the earth upon nothing" but not good enough for over-critical people.

Kylie said:

But we can't take figurative statements as fact. And we certainly can't take a figurative statement, find a way to interpret that in a way that fits with science and then conclude that the original author meant it as fact and that the interpretation that fits with science is the way that original author intended.

Click to expand...

Today we say "Men are taller than women." Is it fact? No, some women are taller. But is the statement seen as wrong? No, because we know what it is trying to say. Of course, one may insist on holding the Bible to a much higher standard, and insist that it spell things out the way you want because they refuse to believe.

Kylie said:

I want it to be clear and unambiguous and matching what we see in reality. If you can show me an example of that in the Bible that could not have been known by the people at the time, then you will certainly have my attention.

Click to expand...

It is back to this: "He sit upon the Circle of the earth and "He suspend the earth upon nothing" plus other stuff already said. However, you "want it to be clear and unambiguous" on your terms , so you refuse to believe.

In Revelation, the apostle John wrote about future machines of war: "Locust that made whirling noises" (helicopters and jets) and "horses with heads like lion and threw sulphur"" (armor tanks). If you lived 2000 years ago, what words would you use to try to depict machines that did not exist on the ground or in the dictionary?

delete repeat post

Kylie said:

There is still no evidence in reality to back up the Bible, and thus there is no evidence to support your threats of punishment for not believing.
Show me the evidence from reality.

Click to expand...

Even God give you free will. so why would I use threats of punishment, was just stating my belief even if it does not sound pleasant.

About your need for reality . I will repost this (it is a previous post a few months ago), the point being that if people does not have the facts to prove something is real, it does not mean that "something" isn't real or isn't true.

I will try to keep this true incident brief (and it is only ONE of the many such spiritual things that happen). Many years ago, a close friend at same church was on the verge of death, from a lightning strike. He was the only Christian among his many siblings, and as he laid comatose for a few days in hospital, his family decided to consult the temple medium (a pagan priest) who communicated with spirits. Although our church was not agreeable, however, we cannot stop the family. As the medium called upon ithe spirit, he did something to an ordinary porcelain bowl -- he cast a spell, so to speak. He then threw the bowl on the floor and if it broke, my friend would die, and if the bowl didn’t break, my friend would live -- the medium said. At first throw, the porcelain bowl didn’t break. My friend’s family asked him to throw it up in the air so it would fall from a great height. The medium did, the bowl didn’t break. They requested the medium to throw even high, as much as 15 feet – my friend 's brother told me later-- the bowl dropped to ground and didn’t break. He was asked to repeat the highest throw, but the result was same. After the ceremony ended and the spirit’s presence left, the priest, to show that he did not use a fake porcelain bowl, dropped it to the ground, and it broke into pieces. The family told the church members about what they saw. Although I did not witness the process, however, I am sure they would not lie. They even believed that their brother would live. A few days later, however, he died. The siblings, in a state of deep grief, related the same temple process to people who came for the funeral ie they could not be lying.

Can science or reality explain how the bowl didn’t smashed into pieces when thrown a few times from high during the spiritual process, and after the spirit left, it broke when thrown from a few feet above ground?

Now, this is not the only unexplained spiritual phenomena. There are many in this part of the world. In about 2010, in Singapore, one incident even went to court as the woman, who used to have a snake spirit, sued the Catholic church and blamed them for mental and physical pain she felt after she was exorcised. During the hearing, the priests and church members narrated that the woman could move like a snake on the floor during the exorcism. Can science explain such spiritual phenomena?

Science does not say non-scientific explanations are unreliable or wrong. But some people say that millions of lifeforms does not mean God created them -- just because science didn't prove it OR they said they have not seen God, so He isn't real. Some people deny the power of observations, common sense, intuition, probability, process of elimination etc. Does science tell you to do so? Or are you denying your basic intelligence in order to make it more complicated and intellectual?

roman2819 said:

So you cautiously agree that "circle of the earth" could possibly means sphere.

If you read the entire verse "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers," it means that God is above the entire earth, not just its boundary or horizon. As to whether flat earth or sphere, it depends whether you insist on being one-dimensional or three-dimensional.

Are there other flat earth verses in the BIble?

Click to expand...

you are grasping at straws now. This is not proper. In context the verses tell us again and again that the writers believed in a flat Earth.

Astrophile said:

More seriously, although Nebuchadrezzar was a real king of Babylon who conquered and destroyed Jerusalem, as the Bible says, it does not follow that the Bible is correct in asserting that the Babylonian conquest was a punishment sent by God.

Click to expand...

I believe I answered your question partially before. Just want to add couple of points. If Israel was obedient to God and did not worship idols stubbornly and constantly for generations after generations, God who help them to fend off conquest by Nebuchadnezzar. If Israel was a righteous God-fearing nation, their government, people and army would be able to defend themselves better, God would supplement their effort and they would not fall to the Babylonians.

Secondly, the Bible asserts God's sovereignty. Although God allowed the Babylonians to overwhelm a weak and decadent Israel, the Bible writes in a way that depict God's sovereignty. When the Bible says God's will (in certain context), it does not differentiate whether God causes it or allows it. To the Hebrew way of writing back then, it happened on God's watch, He allow it is as good as He cause it. Today, we analyze words as we read Scriptures and puzzled over certain words technically or factually. We would do better to know how the ancient scribes wrote in the first place. And it was not only the Hebrews that wrote this way, many eastern orthodox religions did the same.

In the same spirit, when Paul the apostle said all governments and institutions are appointed by God. it does not mean He literally appoint Nazi Htler, Amin of Uganda or Deng of China or every government. At times, God can appoint some specific person or government in accordance with some agenda HE has, but not most of the time.

roman2819 said:

Some or many of these Christians may not understand the Bible well enough, but they got one thing right: They are on the same side as God. On judgement day, they are in a better place, compared to unbelievers who refuse to believe the many credible evidence both in and beyond the Bible.

Arguing against the Bible may seem to win some battles for those who don't believe. but win the battles and lose the war in the end .... does not make sense, get you anywhere.

Click to expand...

What "credible evidence beyond the Bible" ? That sounds like a false claim if there ever was one.

roman2819 said:

Arguing against the Bible may seem to win some battles for those who don't believe. but win the battles and lose the war in the end .... does not make sense, get you anywhere.

Click to expand...

Neither does concocting fakeries of prescience.

Bungle_Bear said:

How do you prove that a supernatural event did or did not occur? The evidence we have indicates that the creation stories and the Flood are myths. Can we prove they aren't correct? No, but if they are true it would just mean God is a lying god which doesn't really help your case. Likewise Joshua 10:13. Did the Earth really stop rotating for a whole day? Highly unlikely, but again we have no way to prove that such a supernatural event didn't happen.

There is no evidence the Hebrews were ever captive in Egypt. To the contrary, the evidence indicates that there were many semitic people living freely in Egypt and they were also thriving elsewhere. There is no evidence of 1 million people living for 40 years "in the wilderness". Does that mean the Exodus didn't happen? We can't prove it, but the evidence we have suggests it didn't.

Your best bet is to stop insisting that the bible is 100% literal history.

Click to expand...

No proof does not mean it didn't happen. Surely you are not unaware of this fundamental. Can you literally going to prove everything and if not, they are not real ... are you going to say that? There are trillions of stuff not proved.

About the Hebrews in Egypt you mentioned. Do we know how the pyramids was built? The ability to make the huge stones and to cut their surface so smoothly that even a paper cannot slip through has baffled historians and scientists today because the technology and engineering were not known to exist 3000 years ago. Today, we don''t know how they did it, but does it mean people back then didn't build it?

Subduction Zone said:

What "credible evidence beyond the Bible" ? That sounds like a false claim if there ever was one.

Click to expand...

Obviously, "credible evidence beyond the Bible" means the creation, the earth ecosystem, the planets, the wonders of life on earth and millions of lifeforms we see around us, which we are part of. These are proof of God if we do not deny the overwhelming evidence.

roman2819 said:

No proof does not mean it didn't happen. Surely you are not unaware of this fundamental. Can you literally going to prove everything and if not, they are not real ... are you going to say that? There are trillions of stuff not proved.

About the Hebrews in Egypt you mentioned. Do we know how the pyramids was built? The ability to make the huge stones and to cut their surface so smoothly that even a paper cannot slip through has baffled historians and scientists today because the technology and engineering were not known to exist 3000 years ago. Today, we don''t know how they did it, but does it mean people back then didn't build it?

Click to expand...

No, the only problem with pyramid construction at this time is what sort of ramps were used. There is more than one possibility. They had the technology then. Don't watch the History Channel for your history.