A live poll on MSNBC indicates that 36% of voters believe the Bible is literally true. This includes a global flood, a 6000 year old universe, dinosaurs walking with man, a garden of eden, etc.
34% believe that "some details may be inaccurate or exaggerated, but the fundamentals are true."
And a lowly 25% believe it is a book of fiction.
Its really quite interesting that despite NO scientific evidence for a 6000 year old earth, or a global flood, that people still believe Genesis to be historically accurante. To dismiss dozens of arenas of science (including biology, physics, geology, archeology, astronomy, and more) in favor of a book that has been canonized, translated, had books inserted and removed, manipulated, and written by inverified unknown authors is simply amazing.
See the poll:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11656508/ They are no dismissing science. If you ever read the Bible, you will find some interesting things out. For instance, the Bible tells us that God does not count time as men do. So when He says 7 days, He could mean millions of years.
As for walking with dinosaurs, where does it say that in the Bible? Give me a passage before I start to respond to you on that. I believe the book of Job refers to dinosaurs.
By global flood, maybe they mean *their* world. I mean, their area was the inhabited area on earth, and that part of it flooded. A science show recreated the "global flood" by a rainstorm flooding the tigris and euphrates rivers, and that in turn flooded most of the inhabited world at that time. So it might not have been the entire earth, only the part of earth that was inhabited.
Sometimes you have to look beyond the literal text slightly
This is a long thing that I am about to post, I got it from Clarifying Christianity.
| Quote: |
Statements Consistent With Paleontology
Dinosaurs are referred to in several Bible books. The book of Job describes two dinosaurs. One is described in chapter 40 starting at verse 15, and the other in chapter 41 starting at verse 1. We think you will agree that 1½ chapters about dinosaurs is a lot—since most people do not even realize that they are mentioned in the Bible. (Actually reading the Bible would help, though. )
Statements Consistent With Astronomy
The Bible frequently refers to the great number of stars in the heavens. Here are two examples.
Genesis 22:17
Blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies.
Jeremiah 33:22
“As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand of the sea measured, so will I multiply the descendants of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me.”
Even today, scientists admit that they do not know how many stars there are. Only about 3,000 can be seen with the naked eye. We have seen estimates of 1021 stars—which is a lot of stars.[2] (The number of grains of sand on the earth’s seashores is estimated to be 1025. As scientists discover more stars, wouldn’t it be interesting to discover that these two numbers match?)
The Bible also says that each star is unique.
1 Corinthians 15:41
There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory.
All stars look alike to the naked eye.* Even when seen through a telescope, they seem to be just points of light. However, analysis of their light spectra reveals that each is unique and different from all others.[1] (*Note: We understand that people can perceive some slight difference in color and apparent brightness when looking at stars with the naked eye, but we would not expect a person living in the first century A.D. to claim they differ from one another.)
The Bible describes the precision of movement in the universe.
Jeremiah 31:35,36
Thus says the LORD,
Who gives the sun for a light by day,
The ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night,
Who disturbs the sea,
And its waves roar
(The LORD of hosts is His name):
“If those ordinances depart
From before Me, says the LORD,
Then the seed of Israel shall also cease
From being a nation before Me forever.”
The Bible describes the suspension of the Earth in space.
Job 26:7
He stretches out the north over empty space;
He hangs the earth on nothing.
Statements Consistent With Meteorology
The Bible describes the circulation of the atmosphere.
Ecclesiastes 1:6
The wind goes toward the south,
And turns around to the north;
The wind whirls about continually,
And comes again on its circuit.
The Bible includes some principles of fluid dynamics.
Job 28:25
To establish a weight for the wind,
And apportion the waters by measure.
The fact that air has weight was proven scientifically only about 300 years ago. The relative weights of air and water are needed for the efficient functioning of the world’s hydrologic cycle, which in turn sustains life on the earth.[1] (If you are a physics enthusiast, please ignore our omission of the terms mass, gravity, and density from this comment.)
Statements Consistent With Biology
The book of Leviticus (written prior to 1400 BC) describes the value of blood.
Leviticus 17:11
‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.’
The blood carries water and nourishment to every cell, maintains the body’s temperature, and removes the waste material of the body’s cells. The blood also carries oxygen from the lungs throughout the body. In 1616, William Harvey discovered that blood circulation is the key factor in physical life—confirming what the Bible revealed 3,000 years earlier.[1]
The Bible describes biogenesis (the development of living organisms from other living organisms) and the stability of each kind of living organism.
Genesis 1:11,12
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:21
So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:25
And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
The phrase “according to its kind” occurs repeatedly, stressing the reproductive integrity of each kind of animal and plant. Today we know this occurs because all of these reproductive systems are programmed by their genetic codes.[1]
The Bible describes the chemical nature of flesh.
Genesis 2:7
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
Genesis 3:19
In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.
It is a proven fact that a person’s mental and spiritual health is strongly correlated with physical health.[1] The Bible revealed this to us with these statements (and others) written by King Solomon about 950 BC.
Proverbs 12:4
An excellent wife is the crown of her husband,
But she who causes shame is like rottenness in his bones.
Proverbs 14:30
A sound heart is life to the body,
But envy is rottenness to the bones.
Proverbs 15:30
The light of the eyes rejoices the heart,
And a good report makes the bones healthy.
Proverbs 16:24
Pleasant words are like a honeycomb,
Sweetness to the soul and health to the bones.
Proverbs 17:22
A merry heart does good, like medicine,
But a broken spirit dries the bones.
Statements Consistent With Anthropology
We have cave paintings and other evidence that people inhabited caves. The Bible also describes cave men.
Job 30:5,6
They were driven out from among men,
They shouted at them as at a thief.
They had to live in the clefts of the valleys,
In caves of the earth and the rocks.
Note that these were not ape-men, but descendants of those who scattered from Babel. They were driven from the community by those tribes who competed successfully for the more desirable regions of the earth. Then for some reason they deteriorated mentally, physically, and spiritually.[1] (Go into a bad part of your town and you will see this concept in action today.)
Statements Consistent With Hydrology
The bible includes reasonably complete descriptions of the hydrologic cycle.[3]
Psalm 135:7
He causes the vapors to ascend from the ends of the earth;
He makes lightning for the rain;
He brings the wind out of His treasuries.
Jeremiah 10:13
When He utters His voice,
There is a multitude of waters in the heavens:
“And He causes the vapors to ascend from the ends of the earth.
He makes lightning for the rain,
He brings the wind out of His treasuries.”
In these verses you can see several phases of the hydrologic cycle—the worldwide processes of evaporation, translation aloft by atmospheric circulation, condensation with electrical discharges, and precipitation.[1]
Job 36:27-29
For He draws up drops of water,
Which distill as rain from the mist,
Which the clouds drop down
And pour abundantly on man.
Indeed, can anyone understand the spreading of clouds,
The thunder from His canopy?
This simple verse has remarkable scientific insight. The drops of water which eventually pour down as rain first become vapor and then condense to tiny liquid water droplets in the clouds. These finally coalesce into drops large enough to overcome the updrafts that suspend them in the air.[1]
The Bible describes the recirculation of water.
Ecclesiastes 1:7
All the rivers run into the sea,
Yet the sea is not full;
To the place from which the rivers come,
There they return again.
Isaiah 55:10
For as the rain comes down, and the snow from heaven,
And do not return there,
But water the earth,
And make it bring forth and bud,
That it may give seed to the sower
And bread to the eater,
The Bible refers to the surprising amount of water that can be held as condensation in clouds.
Job 26:8
He binds up the water in His thick clouds,
Yet the clouds are not broken under it.
Job 37:11
Also with moisture He saturates the thick clouds;
He scatters His bright clouds.
Hydrothermal vents[4] are described in two books of the Bible written before 1400BC—more than 3,000 years before their discovery by science.
Genesis 7:11
In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
Job 38:16
Have you entered the springs of the sea?
Or have you walked in search of the depths?
We discuss the “fountains of the great deep” further in our Creation Versus Evolution page.
Statements Consistent With Geology
The Bible describes the Earth’s crust (along with a comment on astronomy).
Jeremiah 31:37
Thus says the LORD:
“If heaven above can be measured,
And the foundations of the earth searched out beneath,
I will also cast off all the seed of Israel
For all that they have done, says the LORD.”
Although some scientists claim that they have now measured the size of the universe, it is interesting to note that every human attempt to drill through the earth’s crust to the plastic mantle beneath has, thus far, ended in failure.[1]
The Bible described the shape of the earth centuries before people thought that the earth was spherical.
Isaiah 40:22
It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
The word translated “circle” here is the Hebrew word chuwg which is also translated “circuit,” or “compass” (depending on the context). That is, it indicates something spherical, rounded, or arched—not something that is flat or square.
The book of Isaiah was written sometime between 740 and 680 BC. This is at least 300 years before Aristotle suggested that the earth might be a sphere in this book On the Heavens.
This brings up an important historical note related to this topic. Many people are aware of the conflict between Galileo and the Roman Catholic Pope, Paul V. After publishing A Dialogue on the Two Principal Systems of the World, Galileo was summoned to Rome, where he was forced to renounce his findings. (At that time, “theologians” of the Roman Catholic Church maintained that the Earth was the center of the universe, and to assert otherwise was deemed heretical.)
We could not find any place in the Bible that claims that the Earth is flat, or that it is the center of the universe. History shows that this conflict, which took place at the time of the Inquisition, was part of a power struggle. As a result, scientific and biblical knowledge became casualties—an effect we still feel to this day.
Statements Consistent With Physics
The Bible suggests the presence of nuclear processes like those we associate with nuclear weaponry. This is certainly not something that could have been explained in 67 AD using known scientific principles (when Peter wrote the following verse).
2 Peter 3:10
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.
The television is a practical (if not always worthwhile ) device that uses electromagnetic waves (which transmit its video signal). The Bible contains passages that describe something like television—something that allows everyone on earth see a single event. (Note: such passages typically refer to the end of time. It may not be long before all of us learn for sure whether the Bible is true or not.)
Matthew 24:30
Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Revelation 11:9-11
Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three-and-a-half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into graves. And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth. Now after the three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them.
Things In The Bible That Science Can Not Explain
The purpose of this page is not to explain what a great science text the Bible is, but to show that it is consistent with scientific facts. Still, the Bible mentions some things that we can not explain. Yet, if God is really God, He should have the ability to do some things we can not explain.
In the last 100 years (and especially in the last ten) scientists discovered many proofs that confirm the Bible’s accuracy. Since these proofs support the accuracy of the text we can understand scientifically, it makes sense to trust the Bible’s text that we can not yet understand. (For example, how many people knew what hydrothermal vents were 30 years ago?) |
There are PLENTY of scientific agreements with the Bible, and none that dismiss it. Science does dismiss multiplying fish and bread, parting oceans, the ability for a flood to cover the world and many other extremely obvious things as impossible (without some very ingenuitive machinery at least) but, let's just ignore those as, with God, all things are possible.
right?
Thank You for that post Soulfire, it reiterats many things I have said in the past. Not the least of which is answering the question of "How do explain the dinosaurs?". I believe science and religion do not have to be at odds, they can in fact coexist with each other without rubbing people the wrong way. What is needed now-a-days is a bit more acceptance of another persons beliefs, maybe not taking them as your own, but accepting them as being none the less valid as your own beliefs. Many people seem to get terribly worked up over the subject of religion, so many in fact that I try to avoid the subject in the course of my everyday life, and that's a shame. I would love to share with people the happiness religion has brought me and my family, but it doesn't seem worth the (almost) inevitable arguement that is to follow.
I think one of the problems many relgious people end up having is reading the bible as a science text book, which I personally think is way off from what it was meant to be. Or as an instruction book for life, which is another thing I personally think is in error.
It has all sorts of forms of literature, none of which I can find as scientific notation. Theres a whole lot of narative and poetry, alot of what the article from Clarifying Christianity that Soulfire was kind enough to post are beautiful forms of poetry. The people who are accredited with writing the bible weren't scientist. Some were priests, tentmakers, fishermen, kings, but from the studies I've done and had to do through school, I couldn't find one that was a scientist.
i spoke with a local Anglican minister on this issue, and he informed me that about 90% of the stories contained in the bible did not actually occur, but are there to promote goodwill etc... (he was talking about a regular NiV bible, he did not know about the amount of truth in the NiV Catholic edition)
For obvious reasons this minister decided to remain nameless.
It was rather interesting to hear this from the mouth of a minister. I now find myself thinking to myself "which stories are in the 10%?"...
When a religion is over a thousand years old many metaphors and fables startto be taken literally.
Some books like they celestine prophecies series are clearly metaphor and contain great ideas and imagery but are far to easily misinterpreted to be literal.
My belief: The bible is absoulely, literaly true.
When it says that God created the earth in 6 days, that means that it took God six days to create the earth.
When it said that the earth was covered with a flood, it happened.
(The great flood would explain all of the erosion and geolocial features that scientists say took millions of years.)
The grand canyon came to be by a small river carvin out a gully over millions of years? No. The grand canyon came to be when enough water to cover all of North America to several thousand feet deep drained into the ocean. Coincidentily, the bible also states that the forty days and forty nights that it rained was the first time it had ever rained.
| kimrei wrote: |
Science does dismiss multiplying fish and bread, parting oceans, the ability for a flood to cover the world and many other extremely obvious things as impossible (without some very ingenuitive machinery at least) but, let's just ignore those as, with God, all things are possible.
right? |
And like I said, maybe not in this post, but I've said it - the Bible cannot be taken literally. Sometimes people miss the connections and metaphors.hmm
Last edited by ggreiner9 on Mon Jul 23, 2007 8:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
Personally i think it's all made up. You could read the bible backwards and connect everybody to eachother, so it's more like a family book.
When i tell a story to someone and that person tells it to the next and so on the story will not be the same anymore. So how did they do it 6000 years ago? No my opinion is that they use the bible as a book to fear people, that's why the church is so powerful. People need hope and a reason for living, that's why there are religions.
| Gerardus™ wrote: |
When i tell a story to someone and that person tells it to the next and so on the story will not be the same anymore. So how did they do it 6000 years ago? |
the old days, bible time kind of old days, before everything was written down, it was oral tradition. One of the huge differences we miss when think of oral tradition as a game of telephone (where one person says something and passes it down the line to find out how messed up it is at then end of the line) is the group aspect. The people in the Bible, espically OT, were nomadic, they wandered around places in huge, huge groups of people in the thousands. It wasn't I'm in my apartment here and your in your home on the other side of the nation/world. You were always with someone, usually lots of someones, and you were usually with them alot, so anything you experience would be a group experience. When you told the story later on, the people that had experienced it with you were there, and would butt in and correct you if you messed something up. It happens all the time in our community now.
How many times have you done something with a group and told the story later, and were interupted by someone else who was there to correct something you messed up.
Add to that, the fact that this was a very, very proud people, very proud of thier heritage, and these stories were thier identity. Many Jewish people are still like that today. They highly value the story because it is thier story and part of thier identity, and they want it faithfully retold. | a_dubDesign wrote: |
| Gerardus™ wrote: |
When i tell a story to someone and that person tells it to the next and so on the story will not be the same anymore. So how did they do it 6000 years ago? |
the old days, bible time kind of old days, before everything was written down, it was oral tradition. One of the huge differences we miss when think of oral tradition as a game of telephone (where one person says something and passes it down the line to find out how messed up it is at then end of the line) is the group aspect. The people in the Bible, espically OT, were nomadic, they wandered around places in huge, huge groups of people in the thousands. It wasn't I'm in my apartment here and your in your home on the other side of the nation/world. You were always with someone, usually lots of someones, and you were usually with them alot, so anything you experience would be a group experience. When you told the story later on, the people that had experienced it with you were there, and would butt in and correct you if you messed something up. It happens all the time in our community now.
How many times have you done something with a group and told the story later, and were interupted by someone else who was there to correct something you messed up.
Add to that, the fact that this was a very, very proud people, very proud of thier heritage, and these stories were thier identity. Many Jewish people are still like that today. They highly value the story because it is thier story and part of thier identity, and they want it faithfully retold. |
Well yes i guess there is some truth in that also, and if there is a religion close to the real thing, then i think it's the jewish believe. They don't have the same bible as the rest of the world and they lived close to God.
Still i think that most of it is not true, churches have adjust the bible many times, so yes i believe your story about that group experience, but there were also lots of biblical figures that act alone or together with God.
And a lot written in the bible is as they saw it, or heard it. But visions and prophecy's were described as they experienced it. You can't give names to things you never saw before, so they wrote down things in their own words.
I guess im very sceptic about it all, but too many times they prove history wrong.Simply put: God didn't write ANYTHING. Actually, the last 'record' of God doing anything tells us it happened at least 3700 years ago.
The bible was written by men, and rewritten by men, printed by men, sold by men and it also got read by men. First jewish cohanim, then vatican councils, then protestant priests, then puritan whatevers.
IF just by some random reason anything God ever wanted to say is still there, it's quite impossible to prove. But you can still believe whatever you want, if there's freedom of religion in your country.
What's amazing here is that this people is allowed to choose a government for me, being that they don't represent what I (and millons of people like me) think.
Why doTHEY choose what government should I suffer?
| polarBear wrote: |
What's amazing here is that this people is allowed to choose a government for me, being that they don't represent what I (and millons of people like me) think.
Why doTHEY choose what government should I suffer? |
I was totally tracking with you untill this, and you've offically lost me. Are you speaking of "christians" when you say "this people is allowed to choose a governmetn for me" and other refrences with they. And to go along with that, what is it that you think? I'm assuming that you don't reside in the U.S., so where do you live? | Gerardus™ wrote: |
Well yes i guess there is some truth in that also, and if there is a religion close to the real thing, then i think it's the jewish believe. They don't have the same bible as the rest of the world and they lived close to God.
|
Can you explain to me what you mean by "they lived close to God".
Can you also explain the bit about the don't have the sme bible as the rest of the world too? | Quote: |
| I was totally tracking with you untill this, and you've offically lost me. Are you speaking of "christians" when you say "this people is allowed to choose a governmetn for me" and other refrences with they. And to go along with that, what is it that you think? I'm assuming that you don't reside in the U.S., so where do you live? |
I was finally sticking the topic 
Let me explain what I mean:
First the disclaimer:
I don't target ALL christians.
Just the 36% of the voters who believe that every freakin thing the bible says is literally true, even when the highest authority of their religion says another thing.
And what I mean is really this:
I happen to be an atheist.
Evidently, those religious fundamentalists represent interests that are closer to the Amish than to mine. Then why should I legitimate the whole process of getting me ignored, by voting? Or why should I actually enforce any law that comes from people that represent THEM more than me? | polarBear wrote: |
I happen to be an atheist.
Evidently, those religious fundamentalists represent interests that are closer to the Amish than to mine. Then why should I legitimate the whole process of getting me ignored, by voting? Or why should I actually enforce any law that comes from people that represent THEM more than me? |
I personally dont believe religion should have anything to do with politics, morals yes, but those are in no way exclusive to any religion. Many "christians" seem to have forgotten to "give to ceaser what is ceaser's and to god what is god's" ((mark 12:13-17).
I totaly understand your frustration, but how can it change if you don't vote for someone who shares those views? If that 36% is correct, then theres alot of leway. Get people who agree with you to vote too. Even if the person you vote for doesn't win, it still sends a message to the people who win. Join a group of political activists, speak out against what you see is wrong. Theres plenty of ways to do something, I'm sure if you look hard enough you could find something to get involved with that will further your views.The Bible is true... and is the Word of God.
2 Tim 3:16 tells us that all scripture God breathed.
Now there is plenty in that the Bible is not definite about. Some of them have been listed in the forum. Thousands of scholars going back to the original transcripts and translations have not been able to determine the definite meaning of some things.. and never will... But in the whole picture, it doesn’t matter...
There I things we simply won't know until we die.
We decide what we want to believe and what we don't. If there is something in the Bible we don't agree some of us simply won't believe it.
I was not raised a Christian, I had my own belief system based on what I wanted to believe about God and what I didn't... after a while... I asked myself who am I? What authority do I have to think that the way I think something is, it correct. In my searching, I looked at many religions that said that I needed to do something, or I needed to do some course of action to achieve the after life. What intrigued me about Christianity was there was nothing that I as a human can do to gain salvation. Romans 3:23 says "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"
No matter how smart we think we are, we will never have it figured out. Noone. But there is truth communicated to us from the creator. We need to lose our stubborness and arrogance of our mind, and responding to that truth.
If we read that drinking bleach is not a good idea, but disagree with it, it doesen't change the fact that it's not a good idea...
| Quote: |
| 36% of voters believe the Bible is literally true |
i didn't read the rest of the posts, but the first one i read at least some of. and this really angers me..you can't say "god 'wrote' this but means this" and say the bible is literally true. if you can say "when god built the earth in seven days, he may have meant seven million years because he doesn't have the same time as us" you can also say things like "when jesus died for our sins, he really meant his direct followers because they were his 'our' (audience)."
even if none of that is true, you CANNOT literally translate from one language to another. it's impossible, especially being that the language it was originally written in is now dead, and the "american" english most of us speak today (most of us on this board, i'm assuming), there is no way those two language can parallel each other.
and ANOTHER thing. there were THOUSANDS of books written on the half of the jews/now christian people. only a handful of them were published -the ones the people were in charge wanted to publish. what if one of them said believe in EVERYTHING in the bible..except when the year 1950 comes along deny your religion and kill yourself or you'll be dammed to hell.
there are some other things, but i'm done for now.From my experiance talking to Christians, the more intelligent ones, those who have actually gone past the spoon-feeding by parent/minister stage, know that the bible is not meant to be taken literally in all areas. What annoys me however, are the people who believe a "blind faith" in the christian god, in the bible, merely because that is what they were spoon-fed to believe. The moment you get into a discussion with them about religion they will back out, because they are insecure about arguing about something they know little about, or they will argue and keep throwing back utter nonsense, because they themselves do not have a decent understanding of their own religion.
I think that a person that cannot defend his/her own religion in an argument, should not be religious in any way, or at least not wear it on the sleeves.
i agree with you smartbei. no matter what you believe in you have to be able to back it up. i think that is why i personally have this prejudice against christians; most of them have no idea why they believe in what they believe in, other than "my parents did." that's definitely not a legit reason.
If any god came himself to the Earth, hijacked a lot of people's bodies (like around twelve sanhedrins and four vatican councils ) and wrote the bible, why exactly couldn't he write things that we could take literally? At least that way there would be a lot less debate on what god wants and what god doesn't want. If god wanted me to know the age of the universe, why is he unable to say it in a way I can count? why didn't he write: hey! the universal flood happened here (big arrow pointing to the tigris). More importantly: When some bastards make money selling the words HE wrote FOR FREE, why doesn't he do anything?
Why can't god talk? I mean, he is allmighty after all, right?
PS: If you didn't read all the above ironically stated, I do not believe that the bible was written by a deaf, mute and immaterial allmighty thing that looked like a human being.
| polarBear wrote: |
PS: If you didn't read all the above ironically stated, I do not believe that the bible was written by a deaf, mute and immaterial allmighty thing that looked like a human being. |
Oh man, I need to get some new glasses. I actualy had to increse the text size to read it. I suck.i didn't even realize it was text. ><
| smartbei wrote: |
| From my experiance talking to Christians, the more intelligent ones, those who have actually gone past the spoon-feeding by parent/minister stage, know that the bible is not meant to be taken literally in all areas. |
I can give you names of dozens of PhD's who believe the Bible to be 100% accurate.
I have gone past the "spoon-feeding," and have found many things unlikely. But it is possible. And if I cannot believe it to be 100% true, how can I believe any part of it?
Let's take the creation of the universe. I have no trouble visualizing the six-day creation. It's Adam and Eve's immortality I cannot grasp. Could their skin be cut? If they fell on a sharp rock, would their skin be punctured? If so, then the were not immortal. A stick piercing the heart would kill them. If not, then did they feel pain? They would really have no reason to. Immortality seems impossible, but I believe they were.
Some people (such as the Jesus seminar) have gone through and decided what parts of the Bible are fact, and what is a lie. (About the only thing in the Lord's Prayer the Jesus seminar believed He actually said is "Our Father). I cannot with good conscience throw out portions of a book and keep the rest. If I ever find proof of error in the Bible, I will recognize it as false. Until then, I will believe every word.
--RFThere are really three types of people here, perhaps more but I'll address three.
To the Christians who can't seem to wrap their head around the authenticity of the Bible because they lack the knowledge of the "dead" languages. I recommend visiting http://www.biblicalupan.org/ There you will find course designed to bring the languages back to life. I am a linguist who specializes in teaching languages and I highly recommend these courses above any other you may find, including Christian Seminaries and Bible Colleges, as I have tried those and found them unacceptable in acquiring fluency in Ancient Languages.
To the doubters of the accuracy of the Bible, both Christian and non-Christian, I would say that you are most likely (though not all of you) making your judgements without much research. Did you know the Bible is the most influencial book ever written, the most read, and the oldest know book(s)? It would behoove you to actually read it through before making such widesweeping judgements. I'm not saying you will come to a different conclusion, I am simply saying that your current conclusion is being made in complete ignorance if you have read the item you are judging and knowledge of it and heresay is not enough.
More to this group I will add some interesting tidbits. Let's discuss the relevance of the "Dead Sea Scrolls". What was learned is that texts of the scrolls (dated at 250 B.C.E.) match the texts of the same later copies (1000 C.E.) to near exact detail. There are no differences in meaning, but only a few typographical errors that are noted and were expected to be errors in the later texts. This proves that the method of transmitting the texts was more than just accurate, it was immaculate. Some of these texts have been dated as early as 400 B.C.E. and one of these earlier dated texts contains prophecies that were only fulfilled after those dates, like the declaration of Cyrus King of Persia to release the Jewish people to rebuild Jerusalem, the city in which they were previously forbidden to dwell in starting from the time of the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem 70 years prior. A great deal more could be said, but you ought to do your own homework and not take my word for it.
In addition, I might also add that there is a great deal of Archaelogical evidence to support Biblical events and plenty of evidence to support certain prophecies that have been fulfilled. As someone who lives in Israel I can take to sights and show you the ruins of ancient cities that were burned by Joshua and accurately dated as such etc... I can show you the statue of King Omri, who get just a byline in the Bible, but never the less was a verified king.
Lastly, there are those in this forum that really don't care what people believe as long as we respect each other. To this I agree as much as I can agree. However, this is the appearance we give on the outside. On the inside our views will always be dominant. My perspective is simply, research the facts and find the truth if you can. Just accpeting other peoples' views is not enough, actually investigating them may be a lot of work but it is worth the peace of mind later. I was not raised a "christian" and rarely go by that Title, prefering less stereotypical definitions instead. My belief that Jesus is the Messiah and that Bible is true came only after a thorough investigation and had I been older and wiser it may have been an even more thorough investigation. Luckily for me, I was able to continue my investigation as I got older, not to seek to discover a truth but gain more insight. But please don't misunderstand me, I am still a skeptic by nature, but I have come to some conclusions I just couldn't ignore.[/url] | broken2144 wrote: |
I cannot with good conscience throw out portions of a book and keep the rest. If I ever find proof of error in the Bible, I will recognize it as false. Until then, I will believe every word.
--RF |
What about the fact that out of the hundreds of thousands of early manuscripts of the new testament that we have, no two of them are the same?
The PhD's you are reffering to probably hold to the idea of the "inerrancy" of the bible, which states that the bible, in its original manuscript, is without error. The key there is original manuscript, which no one has. Or they have an understanding that the bible wasn't written as a book of facts, so the defintion of error is different.
It seems like such a brick wall belief structure can tend toward a spiritual growth stunt. If theres another interuptation of a passage of scripture that one happens to come by the has alot of truth in it, one wouldn't be able to accept the truth contained it in simply because a little different that what they currently believe.
Thoughts?What about the fact that out of the hundreds of thousands of early manuscripts of the new testament that we have, no two of them are the same? | Quote: |
You are almost correct, some are identical. Some are different. The differences are typographical, not meaning oriented. If memory serves, which it could be off, there are only 16 meaning differences across all of the different manuscripts for the entire new testament and none of those meaning differences affects the message of the author intended to transmit. This is another of those eliged falasies that when you look more deeply into the issue, you will realize the claim carries little weight.
There are hundreds of books written on this topic which you can feel free and investigate in your local library or online encyclopedia.
|
| jsamuelr wrote: |
What about the fact that out of the hundreds of thousands of early manuscripts of the new testament that we have, no two of them are the same? | Quote: |
You are almost correct, some are identical. Some are different. The differences are typographical, not meaning oriented. If memory serves, which it could be off, there are only 16 meaning differences across all of the different manuscripts for the entire new testament and none of those meaning differences affects the message of the author intended to transmit. This is another of those eliged falasies that when you look more deeply into the issue, you will realize the claim carries little weight.
There are hundreds of books written on this topic which you can feel free and investigate in your local library or online encyclopedia.
|
|
coulld you share some of your sources on this one? I'm espically interested in the source of the 16 meaning differences.
What about the fact that in the earliest manuscripts there is no resurection story in Mark? I'd say thats a huge difference of message, espically since the resurection tends to carry alot of weight.
Even if you ignore the differences in the manuscripts, theres still the matter of translating a dead language, what type of translation (word for word vs phrase by phrase), and then the interpretation of what was translated.
My point was theres are differences, and I don't believe that any one denomination/religion/sect has it all figured out, and saying everything is just like we understand it totally cuts out the work of the holy spirit in reading the bible.Minor differences like the holyness of the Trinity, the role of Mary of Magdala, the binary nature of god, and such.
Four modern religions are schisms (correct me if I've misspelled this) or sincretisms of judaic bible and tradition:
-Catolicism (big news huh?)
-Protestantism
-Islam
-The orthodox Catholics
And each one of them has a book that says different things about: Mary, Joseph, Jesus, Mary of Magdala, the Watchers, the Elders, the church, the prayers, each one of the apostles and God itself.
Not counting the endless schisms of catolicism, lately labeled as heresies:
-Gnostics, for instance, said that God is one, but is not the only one. There was a Good God and a Demiurg, who was just an evil and revengeful bastard.
-The protestants didn't buy the Trinity, and didn't believe Mary was any sort of a holy person.
-The orthodox church doesn't give a damn about Christ himself.
-The arrianists thought that Christ was some fella that was in the wrong place in the wrong moment, and not a divine part of God.
If you want to understand the Bible you should get some really good background on who's who in the Vatican along the centuries. That way you can begin to understand that the Holy Book was written by men, printed by men and sold by men.
OR you could alternatively give me a prove of it's divine nature.
BRAVO polarBear BRAVOOO!
*huge ovations*
I wish for once people would open their eyes, and look with them!
I wish they would relize already that, if "God" really existed, he/she would not have given them eyes, because they would be able to see what the truth really is...and for "His" truth, we should not need eyes, now should we?
Bible and the truth...bah! What a load of...let's not say it 
| polarBear wrote: |
-The orthodox church doesn't give a damn about Christ himself.
|
What orthodox branch are you speaking of here?Let me try. Let me translate the Genesis account into Scientific language as close as possible.
As explained by Genesis, there were 6 days of creation. God rested on the 7th day. Intial stages of creation were extremely explosive, as written:
| Quote: |
Genesis 1
1 First God made heaven & earth 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. |
God first created the materials. Solid, Liquid, Gas, and Plasma. Gas and Plasma - the heaven (space), Solid and Liquid - the Earth and the waters.
| Quote: |
| 3 And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. |
By the interaction of their atoms, these 4 matters was fused together and this is the time the superdense core exploded and there was light. More like Nuclear fusion. Remember, this superdense core was extremely massive, therefore has extreme gravity force, many times stronger than the black hole. With this force, explosion can never go straight but follows a spiral elliptical path. And, the Polarize Vacuum charge at this moment will be at 0.00000000000000000001 or even less. Light at this time could have been travelling at a much faster pace because it needs to escape the immense gravity at the core. It could be traveling at a million times more than today.
| Quote: |
| 4God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. |
At this stage, the Earth is beginning to form and spin as it collected solid debris from the explosion. As it formed and grew in mass, earth gravity was born. At this stage day and night appeared. But, the Earth was still formless, not spherical in shape as we know today. It will look like a half eaten apple.
| Quote: |
| 6 And God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." 7 And God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. |
As the formless Earth spun like an asteroid, it collected gases and extreme pressure was created. So much so that the gases turned into liquid and water was formed. Lower pressure formed our atmoshpere at different altitudes and higher pressure formed water, our seas, at different depths. Just the right balance.
...continued | Quote: |
| 9 And God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. |
At this this time as the formless Earth Spun, it started to have a spherical shape and the land mass began to move and stretch due to the massive centripetal force acting on the Earth. And dry land appeared and water was called the seas.
| Quote: |
| 11 And God said, "Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, upon the earth." And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. |
This is the 3rd day of creation.
| Quote: |
| 14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth." And it was so. 16 And God made the 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 heavens to give light upon the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day |
Now, at this time, matters that was sprung forth during the explosion, finally reached it's final position in the universe and formed mini explosions by their own. Light from the stars and galaxies has reached planet Earth on the fourth day. Now, we can conclude light was traveling much much faster at it's primal stage. Light from the stars only reached Earth on the 4th day, please note. Research about "the dark ages" of the universe.
| Quote: |
Quote:
What does the term "Dark Ages" mean to astronomers?
The years before the invention of the telescope could certainly be thought of as a dark age. The actual first telescope probably appeared in Holland a year or two before Galileo started making his famous astronomical discoveries in 1609. The telescope definitely brought light to astronomy.
These days, however, astronomers use the term "Dark Ages" to refer to a time much further back, when the Universe itself was dark. Based on current results, especially from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), our current thinking about the early Universe has this time line:
http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/scienceques2003/20031031.htm
 |
As you can see, there is a dark period of the universe after the "big bang".
Remember, light from the stars only started to reach Earth on the 4th day. 4th day relative to that time frame. 4th day is about 200million years relative to our current year length.
To have all of these, extreme forces are needed. At this stage, the Earth could be orbitting the Sun at extreme velocity as it was still in the initial stage of the explosion. No living thing could survive yet. Our year relative to our time is 365days / revolution around the Sun. Our day relative to our time is 24hrs / 1 Earth revolution. At the initial stages it might be only a few days / revolution around the Sun and maybe 1hr / 1 Earth revolution, relative to the initial stages of time. We are totally seeing a different time scale here. If you were born at the initial stages, you could have been around more than a thousand years old, but relative to our time scale, you're just 12 years old.
At the later stages, living things started to be created, at this time, the forces were subsiding slowly. First the plants and trees, then the sea creatures, then the land animals, and then man. Each stages of creation corresponds to the survivability of each living thing, and thus the land animals were created at the last stages. Man, having the least capability of surviving harsh environment conditions, was created last.
Last edited by altec on Sat Mar 25, 2006 7:05 am; edited 4 times in totalaltec, I appreciate your passion and your scientific thought, but I think it may be limiting your ability to see the pure beauty and poetic nature of the creation story.
The Bible isn't meant to be read literally. Why do I think this? The society in those days really "loved" metaphores, and if you know something about text-analysis and you read the Bible, you'll notice that the makers of it want to learn the reader something by using things that aren't true. By example walking on water, that means being so "strong", believing so much in something that you can defy nature. Of course, you can't defy nature (you can't start walking at water just because you want to without using equipment), but walking about water says something about the belief or the origin of Jezus. That's my opinion.
Thank you.
But, I do not see the Bible that way, as mere poetic or metaphoric in nature. I view it objectively. The more I read the Bible and spend time on it, the more I understand it and the more I found truths about the world around us.
Everything in the Bible has deep messages. One cannot just read it on the surface, you'll definitely go wrong. You have to understand it and take time.
The Bible is deeply integrated. You cannot understand one chapter if you don't read the other chapters. It's all interlinked. If you don't understand one passage, the other passages will make it clear.
| altec wrote: |
But, I do not see the Bible that way, as mere poetic or metaphoric in nature. I view it objectively. The more I read the Bible and spend time on it, the more I understand it and the more I found truths about the world around us.
|
Theres no such thing as a totally objective view of the bible. We all bring our own biases and our own interputations into the text. Its the same as any other book, or movie, or tv show, etc.If we look at the Bible in a poetic and metaphoric manner, you'll have thousands of interpretation relative to the readers. Just about anyone can take passages out of context and in danger of twisting the verses.
It is better to leave that verse alone if you do not understand it.
In an objective manner, you don't just read it, you research about what it says. You'll have to go to other sources to confirm what it says whether it agrees to what our current knowledge tells us.
There are parts of the Bible which requires "faith". The blind see, the lame walk, the dead arise, and etc. Jesus even said that unless you see signs and wonders, you will not believe. People even at His time, requires evidence. The evidence was shown, some were baffled because they could not explain, some were overjoyed and gave glory to God, some sarcasticly questioned Him. People just cannot explain it. It's all too out of this world and mind boggling.
There were a lot of people who did not believe in Him and it is all recorded in the Bible. His own people, the Jews, did not believe Him. Even His brothers did not believe in Him. Even to the point He told people that if they don't believe Him, believe Him for the sake of the works themselves.
Well, even the highest of bishops and cardnals know that the Bible is not completley true. That some parts are made for the reason of teaching a lesson to all who read it. Like the flood, odds are that it didn't happen but it might have. The reason it is in there is to tell all God's followers to do what he says no matter what people think of you for doing it.
| thpn wrote: |
| Well, even the highest of bishops and cardnals know that the Bible is not completley true. That some parts are made for the reason of teaching a lesson to all who read it. Like the flood, odds are that it didn't happen but it might have. The reason it is in there is to tell all God's followers to do what he says no matter what people think of you for doing it. |
Their opinion. It is not conclusive. We as a christian, should not rely too much on the leaders. We should test them whether what they teach conforms strictly to the Bible and not some extra biblical man made sources. The Bible warns us that there are false teachers and false prophets that will bring in destructive hearsay. The bible also tells us that you will know them by their fruits. Check them out.
As what I have said, if you do not understand some passages in the Bible, do not conclude right away that it is false. It is safer to say that I do not know or I do not have the answer right now or it is just my humble opinion.
It is written:
| Quote: |
2 Peter 3:16
as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand,which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. |
They say that the Earth was flat. It was already in the Bible that the Earth was round all the time. Why can't they get it? The passage is already shouting at them, but I can't believe that they are so blind.
It is written:
| Quote: |
Isaiah 40:22
It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in. |
| altec wrote: |
hey say that the Earth was flat. It was already in the Bible that the Earth was round all the time. Why can't they get it? The passage is already shouting at them, but I can't believe that they are so blind.
It is written:
Isaiah 40:22
It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in. |
You said the previous post "Just about anyone can take passages out of context and in danger of twisting the verses.", can you explain how you're not doing that here?
Whats the point of the whole passage, not just that singular verse? Its a message of hope, and comfort to kind of relax the people after the harsh comments and warnings. Need proof? Look at the very first verse. Comfort, comfort my people, says your God. Isaiah/God doesn't seem to be shooting for scientific data. If we continue with your way of thinking we learn that God has literal arms(v10), he used a literal hand to measure all of the water on the earth, he held all the dust of the earth in a literal basket, to weigh all of the mountains he used a scale but used a balance to weigh the hills (v15). We have to deny almost everything we know about earths rotation because God brings out the stars at night(v26). And I technically should have wings and fly, and be able to run forever, because I hope in the Lord(v31).
Anyone saying the bible is all fact or, the other side of the coin, all fiction/metaphor/allegory/hyperbole seems to have a misunderstanding on what the Bible is. A collection of writings, by a collection of people, to other people, throughout time. Every book when it was originally written, had an author, many of which are different authors, writing to a certain people, with a certain purpose. We need to totally understand the settings of a specific book when we read it, and be able to understand what type of writing is being used, so we can get the closest understanding of text.
| altec wrote: |
| Their opinion. It is not conclusive. We as a christian, should not rely too much on the leaders. We should test them whether what they teach conforms strictly to the Bible and not some extra biblical man made sources. |
I agree (rejoice!) that we shouldn't rely to much on the leaders. Although its more about our current understanding/interpration of the Bible. And in turn we need to test our understanding/interpration of the Bible with the rich history of the Church. | a_dubDesign wrote: |
| You said the previous post "Just about anyone can take passages out of context and in danger of twisting the verses.", can you explain how you're not doing that here? |
How do you explain, "the circle of the Earth"? In our modern language, how do you understand what it means?
| a_dubDesign wrote: |
| Whats the point of the whole passage, not just that singular verse? Its a message of hope, and comfort to kind of relax the people after the harsh comments and warnings. Need proof? Look at the very first verse. Comfort, comfort my people, says your God. Isaiah/God doesn't seem to be shooting for scientific data. If we continue with your way of thinking we learn that God has literal arms(v10), he used a literal hand to measure all of the water on the earth, he held all the dust of the earth in a literal basket, to weigh all of the mountains he used a scale but used a balance to weigh the hills (v15). We have to deny almost everything we know about earths rotation because God brings out the stars at night(v26). And I technically should have wings and fly, and be able to run forever, because I hope in the Lord(v31). |
My point here is, to understand verses in the Bible into what our modern language can comprehend. And that is, science. They are certain parts in the Bible that are written in the form of allegory, certain parts in parables, certain parts in songs and poems. We have to distinguish clearly which is which.
The Bible also records certain parts of what happened in the past, the culture of the people, what they worship, their practices, and etc. in which we can actually read it in any archeological book. It is very surprising how the Bible actually tells about the cultural practices of ancient people, the practice of witchcraft, sorceries, mediums, augury, astrology, and etc. And idol worshipping, false gods made of wood and stone. It tells about what people actually practiced. Up and until now, the form of worship did not changed. If you were to explore Asia and understand the culture of the people there, you'll know.
For me, the Bible is one extra ordinary book. There is no book like it. Discovering the Bible is an exciting adventure. The more we increase in knowledge, the more I am able to see the Bible as the living word of God.
| Quote: |
Proverbs 2:3-5
Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding; If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures; Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God
|
| Quote: |
The Bible
Eclipses in the Bible:
SOLAR AND LUNAR ECLIPSES (RED)
It is written:
Joel 2:31 The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.
Acts 2:20 The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.
Revelation 6:12 I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red,
Science:
Quote:
October 13, 2004: According to folklore, October's full moon is called the "Hunter's Moon" or sometimes the "Blood Moon." It gets its name from hunters who tracked and killed their prey by autumn moonlight, stockpiling food for the winter ahead. You can picture them: silent figures padding through the forest, the moon overhead, pale as a corpse, its cold light betraying the creatures of the wood.
What makes the eclipsed moon turn red? The answer lies inside Earth's shadow: Our planet casts a long shadow. It starts on the ground--Step outside at night. You're in Earth's shadow. Think about it!--and it stretches almost a million miles into space, far enough to reach the moon. Suppose you had a personal spaceship. Here's your mission: Tonight, at midnight, blast off and fly down the middle of Earth's shadow. Keep going until you're about 200,000 miles above Earth, almost to the moon. Now turn around and look down. The view from your cockpit window is Earth's night side, the dark half of our planet opposite the sun. But it's not completely dark! All around Earth's limb, the atmosphere glows red. What you're seeing is every sunrise and sunset on Earth--all at once. This ring of light shines into Earth's shadow, breaking the utter darkness you might expect to find there.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/13oct_lunareclipse.htm |
Last edited by altec on Sun Mar 26, 2006 3:56 pm; edited 2 times in total | Quote: |
The Bible
Revelation 16 18Then there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder and a severe earthquake. No earthquake like it has ever occurred since man has been on earth, so tremendous was the quake. 19The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath.
Revelation 16 20 Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found.
Revelation 6 14The sky receded like a scroll, rolling up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place.
Science:
Quote:
Islands Move
Scientific Occurrences
Earthquake Redraws the Map
December 31 The devastating earthquake that struck the Indian Ocean probably caused some islands to move by several meters. (BBC)
U.S. Scientists Say Quake Movement Shifted Islands
December 28 The massive earthquake that devastated parts of Asia permanently moved the tectonic plates beneath the Indian Ocean as much as 98 feet, slightly shifting islands near Sumatra an unknown distance. (Reuters)
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/Headlines/2004/200412.html
--
McCloskey and colleagues used a map of the slip and displacement from the Sumatra-Andaman earthquake to calculate the stress buildup on the Sunda trench and neighboring Sumatra fault.
The map was created by Chen Ji, a seismologist at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. According to Ji's work, portions of the ocean floor along the Sunda trench moved as much as 65 feet (20 meters) in an area stretching from the epicenter north for about 310 miles (500 kilometers).
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/03/0316_050316_sumatra.html
--
More spectacularly, there was 10 m (33 ft) movement laterally and 4 to 5 m (13 to 16 ft) vertically along the fault line. Early speculation was that some of the smaller islands southwest of Sumatra may have moved southwest by up to 20 m (66 ft). There were also calculations that the northern tip of Sumatra, which is on the Burma Plate (the southern regions are on the Sunda Plate), may have moved up to 36 m (118 ft) southwest. Since movement was vertical as well as lateral, some coastal areas may now be below sea level. Measurements using GPS and satellite imagery are being used to determine the extent and nature of actual geophysical change . The Andaman and Nicobar Islands appear to have shifted southwest by around 4 m (13 ft), according to GPS data.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake
--
Tremendous Great Earthquake = Islands moving/shifting/remove from it's original place. |
As to the truth of the Bible or any religion it would be best to remember one common truth in life and that is: A lie told long enough seemed like the truth. Ignore this at your own peril.
| altec wrote: |
| How do you explain, "the circle of the Earth"? In our modern language, how do you understand what it means? |
My first step wouldn't be understanding it our modern language, it would be attempting to get an Old Testament Jewish understanding of it. That would be my first step because it wasn't written for me at this modern time, it was written for OT Jews at thier time.
I usually won't focus on one single verse though. Like you explained, snagging any single verse leeds to bad things. On the rare occasion I do focus on a single verse, it starts off with understanding where the book fits into the grand scheme of God returning all things to him, and then where the context of the passage fits into the book, and then finally where the single verse fits into the passage. I'll usually check the passage out in a few different translations, thanks to BibleGateway thats alot easier. In all of that, and in truely trying to understand any passage, i have to put myself into the shoes of the audience, who they were, what they did, why they did it, political happenings, and more. Theres alot that goes into doing that. Thrown in with that is trying to find out what christian tradition surronding the passage is, and the earlier the better. If something warrants it, I do some digging into Greek Language scholars, since they can read the original language. All of which gets tested against what I understand to be true in other parts of the scripture. Once I had what I feel is a solid grip on how the audience would understand the book/passage/verse, then I would try to relate that and explain that in our modern language.
Specifically for Isaiah 40:22 and the question of the circle of the earth. My guess at this point, wtihout doing any studying on the specific verse, would be that it was a reference to something they called the circle of the earth, like the sun or moon maybe. Although I have to admit, even though I think this is a great example of wonderful poetry, I am intrigued into the meaning of the circle of the earth, and will see what I can find.
I gotta wrap this up, but thanks for the NASA article, that was pretty cool, bummed I missed it. Thanks for posted that bro.
