responding to common objections to bible part 7

[total relism]

No, you will have to do that job yourself.

We're here to laugh at your ignorance, not educate you.

(and Pannonian has already given the most famous one anyway)

i claimed the bible was only account of time space matter in the beginning. You said that was false, you provided a wiki link that does not help your case, than claim i need to be educated. The burden of proof is up to you to counter my op's claim of genesis only account of time/space/matter creation.

In the same lifetime does not count? Are you aware that Greek states formed policies based on these oracles?

Example 1:
Athens sends to Delphi for an oracle seeking for advice on what to do about the coming Persian invasion. The oracle tells them to put their faith in their wooden walls. The Athenian strategists debate what this means. Some side with the interpretation that they should defend their city walls and make a stand on the Acropolis. Themistocles suggests that the wooden walls refers to their navy, Eventually they take this interpretation, and evacuate the whole of the Athenian population to Troizen across the bay, and if need be, elsewhere. Athens, left empty, is burned by the Persians. However, the Athenian strategy, based on their reading of the oracle, makes itself felt, as the military strength of the Greeks and principally the Athenians, transferred to their ships, defeats the Persians in the naval battle of Salamis. Thus we have the oracle, the discussion of the oracle and the formation of policy based on the oracle, and the fulfilment of the oracle.

Is there anything so substantial in the historical concerning the prophecies of the bible? Another oracle from that time resulted in Leonidas leading his 300 Spartans to Thermopylae to make a stand. We know the historicity of that stand because Alexander referred to it when he sent back 300 suits of Persian armour after Granicus, with a note singling out the Spartans for their absence.

Go read some history books. Heck, go read some books that aren't the bible.

I am not saying they cant be true in same lifetime, i am saying to prove true they would have to be written, than fulfilled later that same author/person could not be around to see them fulfilled.



Go read some history books. Heck, go read some books that aren't the bible.

show me the documents when written/when fulfilled in your claims, you wont be able to, they are written after the fact, does not make them false but does nothing to prove they are true.

As have you.

Ignorant rambling does not equate proving the bible shows a perfect understanding of the universe. I am just guessing here, but I don't believe knowledge of physics to be your strongest ability.

please read my op, it will fix your misunderstanding i hope. what were talking of is my claim that only genesis starts with the creation of time/space/matter, of all religious books and writings..

As to biblical inerrancy...

Jesus is mentioned as born in the reign of Herod the Great. At that time, Judea was a client kingdom of Rome. It also says that there was a census taken at his birth. The romans did not take a census in client kingdoms. They did take a census at a later date when Judea was a province, however, but that means Jesus could not have been born under Herod if the census story is true. Further, Jospeh lived in Galilee, which was not a part of the province of Judea, and so not subject to a census. A census also required the head of the household(the male) to announce his property, there would be no reason for a pregnant Mary to travel.

Thus, the story of Joseph travelling to Bethlehem to register as part of a census under Herod is obvious nonsense. That makes no difference for sane Christians who can happily appreciate the story for its moral value. It does, however, become a significant problem if you treat it as an authoritative history book.

off topic, please this is easily refuted, you could search online for your answer. Claimed contradictions i have seen around 400, answered 400. You just dont care or want a answer so you like to hear it to be false, so you never investigate. Contradictions are not topic, i have done them b-4 on this thread and allowed people to bring up top 3 each. I will do so again if you wish on another thread, maybe one focused on contradictions [supposed].

[HoreTore]

off topic, please this is easily refuted, you could search online for your answer. Claimed contradictions i have seen around 400, answered 400. You just dont care or want a answer so you like to hear it to be false, so you never investigate. Contradictions are not topic, i have done them b-4 on this thread and allowed people to bring up top 3 each. I will do so again if you wish on another thread, maybe one focused on contradictions [supposed].

You had never even heard of the Greco-Persian war before, this proves you have absolutely no authoritative knowledge of the classical world.

You can't even begin to address these contradictions(as you call them), as you do not have the required knowledge to do so.

[Kadagar_AV]

To be able to think the Bible explain physics, I for one think one have to be insane, uneducated, or religiously brainwashed.

Quite possibly a combination of more than one factor.

The universe is a great and wondrous thing, and I must quite frankly say I get upset when people try to diminish the sheer WORK of humanity's combined intelligence to reach where we are today.

[HoreTore]

To be able to think the Bible explain physics, I for one think one have to be insane, uneducated, or religiously brainwashed.

Quite possibly a combination of more than one factor.

The universe is a great and wondrous thing, and I must quite frankly say I get upset when people try to diminish the sheer WORK of humanity's combined intelligence to reach where we are today.

Thankfully, almost all christians refer to the bible for its moral values and tales of redemption and mercy, not scientific facts.

[Kadagar_AV]

Thankfully, almost all christians refer to the bible for its moral values and tales of redemption and mercy, not scientific facts.

Yeah, because religious books are like a smörgåsbord... Pick and choose the parts you like.

That's why religious people never go absolutely bonkers.

[HoreTore]

Yeah, because religious books are like a smörgåsbord... Pick and choose the parts you like.

That's why religious people never go absolutely bonkers.

The bonkers ones are usually the ones saying you can't pick and choose: "there's only on truth, and it's mine!!11"

[Kadagar_AV]

The bonkers ones are usually the ones saying you can't pick and choose: "there's only on truth, and it's mine!!11"

I dunno... I think christianity would be better off if the pope shot anyone through the neck, claiming to be christian but didn't follow his principals.

Not that his truth is worth more than anyone else's, but because then the rest of the world would have a clear source to blame for the ****, and would be able to reason towards a single entity.

As it is now, we have the scientific world, and then a bunch of varied freaks running around with their own idea of what it means to be a good christian.

[total relism]

You had never even heard of the Greco-Persian war before, this proves you have absolutely no authoritative knowledge of the classical world.

You can't even begin to address these contradictions(as you call them), as you do not have the required knowledge to do so.

no idea were your getting that from, plus has nothing to do with biblical authority. I simply said another time i have and will yet again, answer anyone's top 3 objections like these on another thread. Your objections you bring up are well know and long ago refuted, easily found online.Over and over you ignore points, than try to attack me personally, to avoid the arguments you first come up with. This is a logical fallacy.


this would do you well, not just this thread but over and over
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

To be able to think the Bible explain physics, I for one think one have to be insane, uneducated, or religiously brainwashed.

Quite possibly a combination of more than one factor.

The universe is a great and wondrous thing, and I must quite frankly say I get upset when people try to diminish the sheer WORK of humanity's combined intelligence to reach where we are today.

just wondering why would you say so? what would you say to the many phd scientist who have degrees in astronomy,physics,cosmology etc that would disagree with you. Maybe it is that you have been indoctrinated into certain thinking? so you view with tainted glasses and see what you want see? I also love what we have learned and gotten us here, thank those creationist for starting science


Stephen Snobelen, Assistant Professor of History of Science and Technology,
University of King’s College, Halifax, Canada
Here is a final paradox. Recent work on early modern science has demonstrated a direct (and positive) relationship between the resurgence of the Hebraic, literal exegesis of the Bible in the Protestant Reformation, and the rise of the empirical method in modern science. I’m not referring to wooden literalism, but the sophisticated literal-historical hermeneutics that Martin Luther and others (including Newton) championed. It was, in part, when this method was transferred to science, when students of nature moved on from studying nature as symbols, allegories and metaphors to observing nature directly in an inductive and empirical way, that modern science was born. In this, Newton also played a pivotal role. As strange as it may sound, science will forever be in the debt of millenarians and biblical literalists.


“Science was not the work of western secularist or even diest, it was entirely the work of devout believers in a active,conciuos, creator god”
rodney stark for the glory of god how monotheism led to reformations,science,witch hunts and the end of slavery Princeton university press 2003 p376


The theory of planetary orbits was invented by Johannes Kepler (1571–1630), famous for claiming that his discoveries were ‘thinking God’s thoughts after him’. Kepler also calculated a creation date of 3992 BC, close to Ussher’s.
The theory of gravity and the laws of motion, essential for the moon landings, was discovered by the creationist Isaac Newton (1642/3–1727).
The moon landing program was headed by Wernher von Braun (1912–1977), who believed in a designer and opposed evolution. And a biblical creationist, James Irwin (1930–1991), walked on the moon. See also Exploring the heavens: Interview with NASA scientist Michael Tigges.


Physics—Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Kelvin
Astronomy—Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Herschel, Maunder


some uneducated phd creationist astronomers,cosmologist, today

Dr Ronald G. Samec, Astronomy
Dr John Hartnett, Physics and Cosmology
Prof. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
Dr Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
Dr Thomas Barnes, Physics
Dr Don DeYoung, Astronomy, atmospheric physics
Dr Xidong Chen, Solid State Physics, Assistant Professor of Physics, Cedarville University
Dr Malcolm Cutchins, Aerospace Engineering
Dr Leroy Eimers, Atmospheric Science, Professor of Physics and Mathematics, Cedarville University
Dr Robert Gentry, Physics
Dr Jonathan Henry, Chemical Engineering, Astronomy
Dr Russell Humphreys, Physics
Dr David King, Astronomy.
Prof. Jin-Hyouk Kwon, Physics
Dr Jason Lisle, Astrophysics
Dr Mikhail Shulgin, Physics
Dr Keith Wanser, Physics
Prof. Seoung-Hoon Yang, Physics

[HoreTore]

no idea were your getting that from, plus has nothing to do with biblical authority. I simply said another time i have and will yet again, answer anyone's top 3 objections like these on another thread. Your objections you bring up are well know and long ago refuted, easily found online.Over and over you ignore points, than try to attack me personally, to avoid the arguments you first come up with. This is a logical fallacy.


this would do you well, not just this thread but over and over
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

lol, the point of using that website is to specify which logical fallacy was committed, not linking to its front page.

Knowledge of the Greco-Roman world is fundamental when dealing with two claims of how the Greco-Roman world works. You don't need biblical knowledge to decide the validity of the Matthew and Luke claims, you need knowledge of the Roman Empire in order to do that. You do not have this knowledge, and so you are completely unable to decide wether or not the claims in Luke and Matthew make any sense.

As Pannonian said, try reading something besides the bible.