What does worship have to do with science?

[sjastro]

This would have been more fun before chat bots.

Now mr. user @Diamond7 do you actually understand what you copied and pasted into the reply box? I do. (And I did before you posted. Decades before.)

You can tell the difference between a chatbot response and a Diamond7 response.
When you pick up an error the chatbot apologizes whereas Diamond7 does the very opposite and attacks your credibility.

 

[Diamond72]

A rather silly petulant comment.

I am rubber you are glue, bounces off of me and sticks to you.

 

[Diamond72]

Let there be lights in the firmament

So the discussion is about the firmament. Actually, I do not care what you do, interpret it any way you want.

 

[sjastro]

I am rubber you are glue, bounces off of me and sticks to you.

This is very point I was making in post #181.
Chatbot at least has the "dignity" of admitting its limitations........

I apologize if my previous responses came across as condescending or if I made any incorrect assumptions about your level of understanding. As a language model, I am trained to provide explanations and additional context for a wide range of audiences. My goal is to assist users with accurate and informative responses, but I understand that my explanations may not always align with an individual's specific knowledge or understanding.

I assure you that I will always try my best to understand the context of the question and provide the most accurate and helpful answer possible. However, if there is any confusion or inaccuracies in my responses, please let me know so that I can correct them.

You on the other hand suffering severely from the DK effect when confronted by your own limitations resort to immature snarky comments instead of taking the opportunity of learning from others in this forum.

 

[Hans Blaster]

So the discussion is about the firmament. Actually, I do not care what you do, interpret it any way you want.

Oh, if you only would. Though part of the problem with the discussion is that you don't seem willing to commit to what the firmament is and what is in it. (At least the latter is specified in the text of Genesis if you use a translation, like KJV, that uses the word "firmament".)

So let's review this sordid tale... (There are often posts missing from our back and forth as you repeatedly dove into various unrelated rabbit holes. I omit those for clarity. I tried to quote full "paragraphs" [either delimited by blank lines or inserted between quoted text blocks] or sentences as to best represent what each of us were saying with out clogging up this post. Click the author link on any quote to see the full original post.)

It started with a rather generic comment from you about the events described in Gen 1 and things like the length of the day:

If you look at this as a metaphor or allegory, no one seems to care what the length of a day is. The order of the events basically agrees with science. Although people may come up with something minor as to what came first the birds or fish and things like that. Science seems to have the order of events all figured out with the recent discovery of DNA.

So I challenged your statement on specifics, specifically that Gen 1 has the "lights" (Sun, Moon, stars) forming *after* the Earth (and some life) which is not the finding of science.

Doesn't the earth exist (in day 1) before the Sun or other stars? That's very wrong. The Earth formed shortly after the Sun and other stars existed for ~9 billion years before either.

Apparently I didn't grab your response, to which I reiterated and clarified my challenge on cosmological grounds:

Specifically, I challenged you notion that Gen 1 matched science and did so using only cosmology and astronomy and nothing else. That's why I said "I don't need DNA", because I don't to counter the Gen 1 cosmological claims.

You then acknowledged that we were discussing the lights in the firmament (Sun,Moon,stars) but started to distract with a divergence into the properties of light in air.

There are not very many words here. We are talking about the "lights in the firmament". We already had a discussion about the physics of light. Light is filtered and light is reflected.

Here I did say "firmament" doesn't exist. In that I mean that there doesn't seem to be a clear correlation between actual physical objects and the ancient Hebrew notion of "firmament". (There is an ocean *above* the firmament and below the seat of God in their cosmology and the "firmament" has gates to let in the flood waters.)

Well, the "firmament" doesn't exist, so this isn't a good argument.

Your reaction is to claim I reject because I don't understand. I was trying to get you to explain what you think it is. I do know what is actually between the surface of the Earth and the stars and what is beyond. To me "firmament" is an ancient nonsense word, but if Gen 1 claims there are lights embedded in it, we kind of have to know what it represents to evaluate that claim.\

That tells us a LOT about you. If you do not understand something, rather than to figure it out, you just claim it does not exist. Problem solved.

For some reason you seem to think "lights in the firmament" isn't cosmology. (In fact Gen 1 is exactly what scholars of culture call a cosmology. It isn't what I would call a cosmology, but that's just because I use the term to refer to "physical cosmology".)

Here you introduce the notion that I claim the sky does not exist. (From what I can glean, this is because you have combined my "firmament doesn't exist" claim (see above) with your "firmament = sky =? atmosphere" notion to concoct a claim from me that I did not make.

We are not talking about cosmology we are talking about lights in the firmament. So now when I say the sky is blue. You says what sky, there is no sky, the sky does not exist. There is nothing to be blue about.

So I asked for clarification about your definition of "firmament"...

If you claim this "firmament" exists, what exactly is it? And what are those "lights"?

(I ask because you seem to be rejecting the notion that the lights are the stars.)

Before you answered a bit of your interaction about the sky with @sjastro

The sky is not blue because light is filtered, it is blue due to Rayleigh scattering.

To which you replied, but only quoted the first 4 words of his sentence "The sky is not blue" and implied that he did not know the color of the sky:

Congrats, you just flunked your preschool readiness test.

Returning from your kindergarten jabs we get a non-physical metaphorical non-answer about the firmament:

The firmament, then, represents a spiritual challenge that must be overcome in order to reach this state of unity. The literal represents the divine.

Before finally you respond to the identity of the firmament as:

The atmosphere.

My sarcastic response after waiting for so many posts to get an answer:

Oh, the atmosphere!

Well then those lights in the firmament, they must just be alien space craft.

Because, there clearly isn't any star or moon in the atmosphere.

Then I drag the conversation back to the order of creation question involving those "lights in the firmament"

That's cool, man, but it means that the "lights in the firmament" are formed in the wrong order relative to reality.

After a few more distracting posts this content from you again secures your "atmosphere = firmament" claim

The reason the sky is blue is because of the atmosphere or the old word firmament.

Then you insist that I need to know about a specific Hebrew letter that some how clarifies things (it doesn't). You offer no explanation of why "YOD" is important to the defintion of firmament or what ever.

You need to do a study on what a YOD is.

Then you throw in this distraction about the effects of the atmosphere on the stars. Does Gen 1 make any claim about the light from stars being modified by the atmosphere of our planet? (If not this is irrelevant.)

Do you know the physics of light? If you do that what effect does our atmosphere have on the light from stars?

And so we are.

I can again quote the KJV:

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,

Now how can this (Gen 1:14-17) be a scientifically accurate description of reality and the order in which things were created. That was my challenge all along and you have not really answered it. I give you that opportunity now.

 

[Diamond72]

Though part of the problem with the discussion

There is no discussion.

Your reaction is to claim I reject because I don't understand.

If you are not a spirit-filled Christian then you are carnal and you are not going to understand the Bible and the things of God.

Then you insist that I need to know about a specific Hebrew letter

Hebrew is real and pure before all the confusion at Babylon. I believe during the 1,000 year reign of Christ that you will need to know the alphabet before you can start the first grade. Today you can have a PhD in education and still not know that the alphabet is symbolic not just phonic. In fact phonics comes from the Phonicians not the Semetic. Hebrew is a Semitic language. Science tells us even at the time of Eden 6,000 years ago in Ancient Mesopotamia there were two people and two language. Actually the Bible tells us the same when Cain said: "I must wander around on the earth, and anyone who meets me can kill me.” Genesis 4:13 Who would kill Cain if he was the only one alive? Clearly there were people alive other than Adam and Eve and their son Cain.

 

[Diamond72]

Chatbot at least has the "dignity" of admitting its limitations........

Are you saying that you don't ?

 

[Hans Blaster]

I don't have time to look at all of your odd claims, but this one stuck out...

In fact phonics comes from the Phonicians not the Semetic. Hebrew is a Semitic language.

The Phoencians were also Semetic speaking people. They were probably just the Canaanites living on the northern coastal area of Canaan. (North of Isreal, Judea, and Philistia)

 

[Hans Blaster]

There is no discussion.

It would seem, not with you. It is exceedingly difficult to communicate with you.

If you are not a spirit-filled Christian then you are carnal and you are not going to understand the Bible and the things of God.

I don't think being an intoxicated Christian is necessary to understand the relatively simple facts given in Genesis 1 about stars, the Sun and Moon, and their location and formation.

I know and understand why you don't want to face this head on. There is not any way to reconcile the scientific facts about the Sun, Moon, stars, and Earth and the text of Gen 1. Let's take one "solution" that hasn't come up yet (and also doesn't work) where the firmament is "the sky" (all that is "above us" the atmosphere and interstellar space beyond). The placement of the Sun, Moon, and stars in "the sky" works perfectly fine, but the text also says there are "waters above the firmament" and that isn't true in this case as there is not waters "beyond space". (The creation order is also wrong.)

There are really only two ways to consolidate Gen 1 and modern science, either the people who wrote Genesis (including the redactors who put it in the current form about 2600 years ago)

1. didn't know certain facts about these things and used what information they had, and/or
2. didn't concern themselves with the factual basis and were more concerned about the theological perspective.

Hebrew is real and pure before all the confusion at Babylon.

"is" and "before"? Pick a tense and stick with it. (Most Babylonians spoke their own language, not the language of the exiled Hebrews.)

I believe during the 1,000 year reign of Christ that you will need to know the alphabet before you can start the first grade.

Are you trying to argue that it has started already because knowing the alphabet is already a requirement?

Today you can have a PhD in education and still not know that the alphabet is symbolic not just phonic.

That what is our letter "A" evolved from what was once a pictogram for cattle is interesting, but does not impact how the letter is pronounced or the meaning of words that contain it.

In fact phonics comes from the Phonicians not the Semetic. Hebrew is a Semitic language.

Phonics is a system for teaching children how to read. It comes from the mid 20th century about two millennia after the Phoenicians were conquered by the Romans.

Science tells us even at the time of Eden 6,000 years ago in Ancient Mesopotamia there were two people and two language.

Science does not tell us this. This is a claim from the bible.

Actually the Bible tells us the same when Cain said: "I must wander around on the earth, and anyone who meets me can kill me.” Genesis 4:13 Who would kill Cain if he was the only one alive? Clearly there were people alive other than Adam and Eve and their son Cain.

Not sure why you wrote this, but I'm definitely not making any claims about the consistency of the Bible, not even within the same book.

 

[sjastro]

Are you saying that you don't ?

So now you have to resort to blatant flaming.

Using a chatbot as a parroting device where you don’t have the vaguest comprehension of the subject matter is one thing, but hiding behind a chatbot’s “apologetic persona” which is completely at odds to your contemptuous attitude towards fellow posters is being deceptive.

 

[sjastro]

In fact phonics comes from the Phonicians not the Semetic.....

Don't tell me you misspelt Phonicians (should be Phoenicians), saw the word phonics and therefore concluded Phoenician cannot be a Semitic language; amazing absolutely amazing.
Well in fact you are wrong about the Phoenicians.

 

[Diamond72]

It is exceedingly difficult to communicate with you.

Because you disregard what I put a lot of work into. There is simply no reason for me to answer your questions. At least I can thing of any advantage in it for me.

Science does not tell us this. This is a claim from the bible.

I have put hundreds of hours into the study of what science says about the neolithic revolution. You do not appear to have even put 100 seconds into it. You think you can go after an elephant with a fly swatter.

 

[Diamond72]

you don’t have the vaguest comprehension of the subject matter

I know a lot more about it than you do. I simply let the chatbot do the writing for me because it is a lot faster and a lot easier than doing it myself. I usually disregard most of what you say because you are so disrespectful. I throw a few crumbs your way, but that is about all your going to get out of me, with your attitude.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Because you disregard what I put a lot of work into. There is simply no reason for me to answer your questions. At least I can thing of any advantage in it for me.

The questions you feed into chat bots? I'm sorry that just isn't really "a lot of work".

I have put hundreds of hours into the study of what science says about the neolithic revolution. You do not appear to have even put 100 seconds into it. You think you can go after an elephant with a fly swatter.

This thread isn't about the neolithic revolution. The recent sub-sub-sub topics of Hebrew/Babylonian cosmology, Genesis 1, or even Phoenicia aren't even close to the neolithic revolution. They aren't even occurring in the neolithic. Not even the Bronze Age. All of that is Iron Age stuff (1000-500 BCE).

 

[Diamond72]

I'm sorry that just isn't really "a lot of work".

That is what I said. I use the chat bot to write for me so I do not have to put a lot of work into this.

This thread isn't about the neolithic revolution.

Why did you hijack the thread in an attempt to get it to fit your ideology?

 

[Hans Blaster]

That is what I said. I use the chat bot to write for me so I do not have to put a lot of work into this.

Why did you hijack the thread in an attempt to get it to fit your ideology?

My "ideology"? I'm just trying to get you to answer a simple question about Gen 1. (There isn't much to say about "worship" and "science" that wasn't already covered by the simple answer: "Nothing.")

 

[sjastro]

I know a lot more about it than you do. I simply let the chatbot do the writing for me because it is a lot faster and a lot easier than doing it myself. I usually disregard most of what you say because you are so disrespectful. I throw a few crumbs your way, but that is about all your going to get out of me, with your attitude.

Who are you trying to kid?
You rely on chatbot for both presentation and content and as shown in this post along with @Hans Blaster's contributions, the quality of content can be pure drivel.
You blindly accept the content because you do not possess the knowledge or understanding to assess the content and exhibit a deep seated resentment against those who can assess the lack of quality.

Then there is the previously mentioned response from diamond7 aka chatbot.
“I assure you that I will always try my best to understand the context of the question and provide the most accurate and helpful answer possible. However, if there is any confusion or inaccuracies in my responses, please let me know so that I can correct them.”

For all your boasting about being superior not only is the post contradictory but as stated previously has a conciliatory tone which is at loggerheads with your rudeness which has also been highlighted by other posters.

 

[Diamond72]

Who are you trying to kid?

I am not trying to KID anyone. You think God can be tricked and fooled? God used HEBREW to create the universe. That is why we can use language to understand what HE did. If you think this is all one big random event of mistakes and mutations then clearly you are the one that is fooled and had denied their maker.

1. Proverbs 1:7: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction."
2. Proverbs 12:15: "The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice."
3. Proverbs 13:20: "Whoever walks with the wise becomes wise, but the companion of fools will suffer harm."
4. Proverbs 14:1: "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds; there is none who does good."
5. Proverbs 18:2: "A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion."

 

[Diamond72]

My "ideology"? I'm just trying to get you to answer a simple question about Gen 1.

You have the PhD. Why would you need answers from a high school drop out?

 

[Larniavc]

I believe one-third will be saved. But when you add in the aborted babies it becomes more than half or a majority of all people. Only too bad that a lot of their parents will not make it to heaven to be reunited with their children.

Irrelevant to the point.