Support NeoGAF

[Subtervotion]

The Big Bang is like a chapter (or even a verse) in the science world, how many other theories are there?. If you strongly believe in it then you should be able to tell me what that theory entails, it seems like many people in this thread are afraid that they might say the wrong thing and it will basically mess up their whole argument. Telling me to summarize the Bible is the same as me telling you to summarize every theory and experiment ever conducted in the name of science. In this case am asking you to tell me what a single theory entails, that would be equivalent of you telling me to summarize a chapter in the Bible that i always use against you.

What will take longer to read...

A. The bible
B. All scientific findings.

Hmmm. I think summarizing the whole bible might be a little easier than summarizing all of science.

 

[Subtervotion]

2. So you are saying that you are not able to fully explain the thing in which you use as a defense against my beliefs? that makes you even less reliable in an argument.

3. So you can't answer a question about what you believe in but i bust my ass in answering question's in what i believe in. Go ahead ask me a question that is based on what I believe in because since this thread began i have not asked you one single question that had it's roots from the bible. You are basically asking me questions on the things that i am trying to gain FULL knowledge of while evading to ask me of the things that i already have FULL knowledge of. If i asked you right now to quote where Jesus stated that the good news should be preached you most likely will not be able to come up with the verse

If god is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent why did he allow Adam and Eve to sin in the first place?

Omnipotent- How could have stopped it.
Omniscient- He knew it would happen.
Omnipresent- He watched it happen.

Why would god allow that?

 

[ZZMitch]

This is the series of events that happened in that thread that made me to post the post you responded to. The Bible has been around for quite some time and the point i was trying to make back then is that some of the things the Bible proclaimed are actually coming to fruition and to my surprise 2 weeks after i stated the above it was proven by a news source. Weirdly enough someone in here shunned me for beiliving in the Bible even if somethings in it came to fruition, ironically the same group of people acknowledged that humans are limited in their knowledge and everything they say is not true. they state and i quote "Our knowledge is limited, therefore it's all wrong? Science does not deal in absolutes, therefore it's useless?" meaning that scientist can always be wrong but you should trust in them and if the bible happens to be wrong you should burn it with fire.)

BTW the bolded are the reason for my the post a few persons above.

LOL, you really think the world is going to end?

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

GTP_Daverytimes what about these:







I would argue they all show that the idea of the second coming and end of times approaching is wrong.

Matt. 24:7 -----“For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be food shortages and earthquakes in one place after another.

Luke 21:10 and 11 ----- Then he went on to say to them: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; 11 --- and there will be great earthquakes, and in one place after another pestilences and food shortages; and there will be fearful sights and from heaven great signs.


Matt. 24:11 ---- And many false prophets will arise and mislead many; 12 --- and because of the increasing of lawlessness the love of the greater number will cool off.

Luke 21:25 ---- (the following verse peaks symbolically) “Also, there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth anguish of nations, not knowing the way out because of the roaring of the sea and [its] agitation, 26 ---- while men become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

Matt. 24:9 ----- (Jesus speaking of those following him) “Then people will deliver YOU up to tribulation and will kill YOU, and YOU will be objects of hatred by all the nations on account of my name.

Matt. 24:14 ----- And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.

 

[DefectiveReject]

I don't believe in a big bang theory, I trust in it.
Why? Because it seems a logical explanation to the creation of the universe. And it changes as our understanding of the world and the universe itself changes

God creating us all..... I can't go with.
At the time and in the times after. They had no clue whatsoever how big the universe was. What our place in it is, and our insignificance in it's vastness
Its also a fixed thing. It just doesn't change in its own fact. No matter how illogical that in it's timescales, we wouldn't populate the numbers we have. There wouldn't be such a gene pool in biblical timescales as there is. That our knowledge of this gene pool can negate any beginnings the bible states.

 

[Furret]

The Big Bang is like a chapter (or even a verse) in the science world, how many other theories are there?. If you strongly believe in it then you should be able to tell me what that theory entails, it seems like many people in this thread are afraid that they might say the wrong thing and it will basically mess up their whole argument. Telling me to summarize the Bible is the same as me telling you to summarize every theory and experiment ever conducted in the name of science. In this case am asking you to tell me what a single theory entails, that would be equivalent of you telling me to summarize a chapter in the Bible that i always use against you.

I gave you a link to the Wikipedia section on the size of the universe, have you read it yet?

Or are you just continuing to ignore everything that refutes your bronze age fantasies about the end of the world?

 

[CornBurrito]

2. So you are saying that you are not able to fully explain the thing in which you use as a defense against my beliefs? that makes you even less reliable in an argument.

3. So you can't answer a question about what you believe in but i bust my ass in answering question's in what i believe in. Go ahead ask me a question that is based on what I believe in because since this thread began i have not asked you one single question that had it's roots from the bible. You are basically asking me questions on the things that i am trying to gain FULL knowledge of while evading to ask me of the things that i already have FULL knowledge of. If i asked you right now to quote where Jesus stated that the good news should be preached you most likely will not be able to come up with the verse

I do not have a degree in physics, biology, nor climatology. I try to be well versed in them, but I'm not some super genius. I have trouble understanding some shit, I have even more trouble being able to explain stuff. That is why I, and others, POST LINKS to people that can FARRRRRR better explain shit, and who have far more knowledge about their given field.


And you asking questions wouldn't be a problem if you actually clicked links, read, responded to questions yourself, or actually bothered to try understanding people. There were like two pages worth of people trying to explain science, and what a scientific theory is. You ignored all of them.

 

[Noirulus]

The world is not going to be destroyed rather it's going to be made anew 9Like the way you restore something old into a wonderful masterpiece). Reveletion 21: 1-5 is were my quote was coming from (But since most of you consider the Bible a fairy tale why even bother)

Bible passages that mention the signs of the last days(If you are interested):
Matt. 24:7
Luke 21:10 and 11
Matt. 24:11, 12
Luke 21:25, 26
Matt. 24:9
Matt. 24:14



Wait, what? was i replying to you. What did i take out of context?

"Our knowledge is limited, therefore it's all wrong? Science does not deal in absolutes, therefore it's useless?" meaning that scientist can always be wrong but you should trust in them and if the bible happens to be wrong you should burn it with fire

You took his comment out of context, when scientists are wrong, it's because they experiment and find out that they're wrong. They then do more experimentation and adjust their math/theory until they're right.

What the bible does is put everything in absolutes, and at very general terms too. How the hell can you claim to be right, that disasters are happening and etc, when all the bible says is "People will fight people, earthquakes will happen" -> Earthquakes/Natural disasters happen ALL the time, and they've been WORSE before. I could write on a book that people will fight people, and natural disasters happen, because this shit happens all the time. Would you study my book as a religion?

So basically WE DON'T KNOW, right?

No, he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's merely speculating because, as he said, he's tired and overworked.

The answer to his question is that the observable universe is a sphere about 46b ly from any observer So yes, we are at the center of the universe, and we would be if we lived in the Andromeda Galaxy, or any where else in the observable universe.

So no, the universe is not older or younger than 13.7 Billion years. the oldest light we can see is 13.7 billion years, because that is when the universe began, but light has redshifted due to the expansion of the universe, so 13.7 billion years old light is actually really from 46 billion ly away now.

 

[Subtervotion]

I'm making a prophecy right here and now. Hear my words!

It will rain! It will thunder! And man will look at the sky! Darkness will be upon them!

 

[Pixel Pete]

A while back i said that we were living in the last days and i told some of the guys that i was arguing with that 2011 is already one of the most disastrous years (Storms), many people in the thread backfired with stupidity and am happy that i wasn't wrong: http://www.heraldtribune.com/articl...2011-already-among-most-extreme-weather-years

You make it sound like there's something bad about being wrong.

There are infinitely many numbers and positive infinity is infinitely far away from any other number, but despite any finite number is a finite distance away from any other.

That is, despite natural numbers being a scale from negative infinity to positive infinity, 7 - 5 = 2.

I understand the concept, I think, but I'm still just not quite there. I still fail to see how that makes an infinite universe tenable.

The geometry of the universe is what's infinite. There's nothing else "outside" the observable universe.

Basically, If the universe is positive in curvature, It would be spherical. Imagine an ant on the surface of the earth, in it's perspective the surface is flat, but if it traveled long enough, it would come back to it's starting point. The universe would be huge, but still finite. If the universe is negative in curvature, it would curve front and back, and left and right.. sort of like a pringles chip. The universe would be infinite with this also. The last is having zero curvature (flat), an analogy is a sheet of paper.


According to current models, the universe is infinite in size, and it's flat. However, we're not 100% sure. There's about a 2% margin of error, so the universe could be very slightly curved, or we need more accurate measurements.

As for the question about your atoms, why would they have to be infinitely distant from each other?

Because they are in an infinite universe, where everything is infinite. There is an infinite amount of matter. An infinite number of infinite things within an infinitely large space.

Between yourself and Slavik, I think I will need to do more research.

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

I do not have a degree in physics, biology, nor climatology. I try to be well versed in them, but I'm not some super genius. I have trouble understanding some shit, I have even more trouble being able to explain stuff. That is why I, and others, POST LINKS to people that can FARRRRRR better explain shit, and who have far more knowledge about their given field.


And you asking questions wouldn't be a problem if you actually clicked links, read, responded to questions yourself, or actually bothered to try understanding people. There were like two pages worth of people trying to explain science, and what a scientific theory is. You ignored all of them.

I myself also do not have a degree in Religious Studies or comparative religion but since i actually have a pretty good insight in what i believe am able to defend it, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to defend your standing unless you have no insight on it.

 

[DefectiveReject]

Matt. 24:7 -----“For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be food shortages and earthquakes in one place after another.

Luke 21:10 and 11 ----- Then he went on to say to them: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; 11 --- and there will be great earthquakes, and in one place after another pestilences and food shortages; and there will be fearful sights and from heaven great signs.


Matt. 24:11 ---- And many false prophets will arise and mislead many; 12 --- and because of the increasing of lawlessness the love of the greater number will cool off.

Luke 21:25 ---- (the following verse peaks symbolically) “Also, there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth anguish of nations, not knowing the way out because of the roaring of the sea and [its] agitation, 26 ---- while men become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

Matt. 24:9 ----- (Jesus speaking of those following him) “Then people will deliver YOU up to tribulation and will kill YOU, and YOU will be objects of hatred by all the nations on account of my name.

Matt. 24:14 ----- And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.

Lol

I read a book once about a school you can go to where you can learn magic, and play games and get hunted by a murderous sonofabitch hell bent on domination.
Then this other book about some ring that could make be powerful

I put them down and carried on in my life, happy that the writer had entertained me.

 

[Subtervotion]

I myself also do not have a degree in Religious Studies or comparative religion but since i actually have a pretty good insight in what i believe am able to defend it, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to defend your standing unless you have no insight on it.

We are defending it. And we are sharing links for your convenience. You have to read to become more knowledgeable. Do you want us to just say things without providing a source?

 

[CornBurrito]

I myself also do not have a degree in Religious Studies or comparative religion but since i actually have a pretty good insight in what i believe am able to defend it, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to defend your standing unless you have no insight on it.

I am able to defend it, and part of that is using outside sources.

Why do I need to reinvent the wheel? Why can't I use data from people far more knowledgeable than I, that can describe something far better than I possibly can?

You seem to be saying "lol you don't have an advanced degree in biology/physics/climatology! If you aren't an expert in those given fields then your arguments are clearly invalid!"

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

You took his comment out of context, when scientists are wrong, it's because they experiment and find out that they're wrong. They then do more experimentation and adjust their math/theory until they're right.

What the bible does is put everything in absolutes, and at very general terms too. How the hell can you claim to be right, that disasters are happening and etc, when all the bible says is "People will fight people, earthquakes will happen" -> Earthquakes/Natural disasters happen ALL the time, and they've been WORSE before. I could write on a book that people will fight people, and natural disasters happen, because this shit happens all the time. Would you study my book as a religion?





No, he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's merely speculating because, as he said, he's tired and overworked.

The answer to his question is that the observable universe is a sphere about 46b ly from any observer So yes, we are at the center of the universe, and we would be if we lived in the Andromeda Galaxy, or any where else in the observable universe.

So no, the universe is not older or younger than 13.7 Billion years. the oldest light we can see is 13.7 billion years, because that is when the universe began, but light has redshifted due to the expansion of the universe, so 13.7 billion years old light is actually really from 46 billion ly away now.

My question was the "HOW" not the end result. "HOW" are we able to calculate that of which we know nothing of. Peering into the universe with the Hubble telescope is like peering into a living room and telling me whats in an enclosed iron safe.

 

[Dr. Malik]

I myself also do not have a degree in Religious Studies or comparative religion but since i actually have a pretty good insight in what i believe am able to defend it, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to defend your standing unless you have no insight on it.

Your insight is a book with very little facts. I feel like I am being trolled

 

[DefectiveReject]

As a member of one species of the millions of species on this planet who can't communicate, I put myself forward as their representative and say for them. "you think we give a shit about a God or the universe? We just gotta survive"

I think everyone of the 10 commandments is ignored by the circle of life in nature

 

[CornBurrito]

My question was the "HOW" not the end result. "HOW" are we able to calculate that of which we know nothing of. Peering into the universe with the Hubble telescope is like peering into a living room and telling me whats in an enclosed iron safe.

I can make terrible analogies that make absolutely no sense too!

 

[DefectiveReject]

My question was the "HOW" not the end result. "HOW" are we able to calculate that of which we know nothing of. Peering into the universe with the Hubble telescope is like peering into a living room and telling me whats in an enclosed iron safe.

No it's not like that at all.

How do you defend something you know nothing about other than that written in a book, show me what you believe in. Show me it's existence

The universe though lays it's pretty fucking ass on the table for you to have a good rummage around.

 

[Subtervotion]

My question was the "HOW" not the end result. "HOW" are we able to calculate that of which we know nothing of. Peering into the universe with the Hubble telescope is like peering into a living room and telling me whats in an enclosed iron safe.

Are you saying that I couldn't peer into a living room and figure out whats in the enclosed iron safe? Because I sure as hell could if I had the right equipment.

 

[Noirulus]

Because they are in an infinite universe, where everything is infinite. There is an infinite amount of matter. An infinite number of infinite things within an infinitely large space.

You misunderstand. When I say the universe is infinite, i'm talking about the geometry. Since we can't actually observe what is outside of the observable universe, we can't conclude that there is infinite matter, but if we apply the cosmological principle, it suggests that.

This is why for all practical purposes, it is more wise to talk about the density of the universe (which is not infinite)

 

[wolfmat]

Just so we're clear on this:
it's = it is
its = the thing from it

"I got a puppy. It's brown. Its name is Gandalf."

As for the claim that current cosmologic elaborations are dubious because we personally can't explain them: Fuck you. You probably can't even tell me what a CPU is. It still works though. So it HAS to be magic then? No.

The only thing that matters in that regard is evidence. Proof. Disproof. Conflict between statements. Things like that.

This science stuff isn't really affected by belief. Either there's proof for a scientific statement, which leads one to accept its veracity, or there isn't, which then gives you the choice of either disproving it or proving it.

Furthermore, you can be ignorant of scientific findings, but that doesn't make them untrue. Your personal grasp of the subject matter doesn't affect the truth meter.

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

If god is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent why did he allow Adam and Eve to sin in the first place?

Omnipotent- How could have stopped it.
Omniscient- He knew it would happen.
Omnipresent- He watched it happen.

Why would god allow that?

God gave Adam a test and he flunked hard. Say i built a car, i wouldn't just give you the car without testing it out. Adam's ultimate test was that tree (The tree in the center of the garden) but he and his wife were led astray by Satan. If God wanted he would not have put them in that position.

 

[NullPointer]

My question was the "HOW" not the end result. "HOW" are we able to calculate that of which we know nothing of. Peering into the universe with the Hubble telescope is like peering into a living room and telling me whats in an enclosed iron safe.

The answers are hidden in the light - what it absorbs and what is reflected tells us the composition of luminous bodies.

And the science behind this is using the very basics of understanding light here on Earth.

The Earth's atmosphere can distort the light, so we get the best data from powerful telescopes in space.

 

[Falcs]

Just want to address a few things.

First of all the question "Why should we believe in the Bible or how do we know that it's true?"
There are two main reasons why I believe it to be truth.
1. When you study the origin of the Christian Bible, if you look at the complex way in which it was composed and written it is humanly impossible, yet somehow it happend. The explanation for this is some form of devine intervention. I'll go into this a bit more below.
2. Scientific evidence (Yes, that's right). Again I will go into this in more detail below...

But first.. point number 1.
The design of the Bible is humanly impossible. It was written over a span of more than 1,500 years by heaps of different writers, yet every book in the Bible is consistent in its message. There are no contradictions!
All the books in Bible talk about different things: history, prophecy, poetry, and theology. Despite their complexity, differences in writing styles and vast time periods, the books of the Bible all agree miraculously well in theme, facts and cross-referencing. No human beings could have possibly planned such an intricate combination of books over a 1,500-year time span. Although apparently somehow, we did.
Anyone who hasn't studied the Bible and its origin cannot argue against this point, you are uneducated in the matter.
Another thing which is humanly impossible about the Bible - Prophesies.
"One of the strongest arguments for the accuracy of the Bible is its 100% accuracy in predicting the future. These future predictions are called “prophecies.” The Old Testament was written between approximately 1450 BC and 430 BC. During that time, many predictions of the future were recorded in the Bible by God’s prophets. Of the events that were to have taken place by now, every one happened just the way they predicted it would. No other “sacred writing” has such perfectly accurate predictions of the future."
It's not hard to find 100s of fullfilled prophecies from the Bible, knock yourselves out - www.google.com.
Can anyone explain this?

Point number 2.
The prophecies for one thing.. the fact that they have actually happend is scientific proof.
But not only that...
Evidence of the Bible's authenticity:
Ancient manuscripts from the old and new testament have been found in the Red Sea Scrolls, Cunniform tablets, etc. which when compared with the modern translations of today's bible you can see that no editing has taken place, only translation.

I'll paste in here some stuff that I wrote in another forum..
"Bible manuscripts (remember, there were no printing presses until 1455) have survived despite weather, persecution and time. Most ancient writings written on weak materials like papyrus have vanished all together. Yet many copies of the Old Testament scriptures survived. For instance, the Dead Sea Scrolls contain all books of the Old Testament, except Esther, and have been dated to before the time of Christ. Consider Julius Caesar’s Gallic Wars. Only ten copies written about 1,000 years after the event are in existence. In comparison, there are over 24,000+ New Testament manuscripts, the earliest one dating to within 24 years after Christ."

"There are more than 14,000 existing Old Testament manuscripts and fragments copied throughout the Middle East, Mediterranean and European regions that agree dramatically with each other. In addition, these texts agree with the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, which was translated from Hebrew to Greek some time during the 3rd century BC. The Dead Sea Scrolls, discovered in Israel in the 1940's and 50's, also provide phenomenal evidence for the reliability of the ancient transmission of the Jewish Scriptures (Old Testament) before the arrival of Jesus Christ."

It is my belief that God has purposely preserved this evidence of the Bible's authenticity because he knew the deceitful world we would live in (evolution theories etc.) and without it we would pretty much have nothing to base our faith on (aside from first hand experiences with God, but that's something a non-believer would never know about).

"This manuscript evidence far surpasses the manuscript reliability of other ancient writings that we trust as authentic every day. Look at these comparisons:
Julius Caesar's "The Gallic Wars" (10 manuscripts remain);
Pliny the Younger's "History" (7 manuscripts);
Thucydides' "History" (8 manuscripts);
Herodotus' "History" (8 manuscripts);
Sophocles (193 manuscripts);
Euripides (9 manuscripts);
and Aristotle (49 manuscripts)."

And as for those of you who say "The bible is a translation of a translation of different variation of 100 different variations." etc, have a look at how many original manuscripts we have. Our modern day Bibles can be cross referenced with these manuscripts for accuracy. Is there any other book in all of human history quite like this one? I don't think so.


Also, to those that think the Bible is full of contradictions.. It's not. There are many parts of the Bible that do appear to be contradictory, but that is only when it is taken out of context.
Most people who make claims of Bible contradictions do not understand the Bible.
In order to properly understand what is written in a particular verse, one must not neglect the remainder of the entire Bible.


Here let me give you an example myself of a "Contradiction":
Exodus 31:14 "Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death"
Now most would think this contradicts the 6th commandment not to murder. But the problem here is that the verse (Exodus 31:14) is misinterpreted as a result of it being taken out of the context of the entire Bible. The full verse is as follows:
"Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people."
The problem here is when you look at the verse alone you read "shall be put to death" meaning "shall be killed." However this is incorrect. The correct meaning is "shall be handed over to death". Death being sin. The consequence of sin is death, hence why sin is referred to as death. Furthermore, "that soul shall be cut off from among his people." - This is the result of sin. Your soul is cut off from God.

Another interpretation and the most common one is that 'death' refers to Satan himself. So in other words, the understanding from the verse would be "...one that defies this shall be handed over to Satan."
So as you can see... No contradiction.
If anybody wants to google some Bible contradictions, while you're at it also google an explanation for the contradiction and you'll find that it in fact is not a contradiction at all when in the right context.
I know that all seems very convident, but hey.. that's why the Bible is so perfect, so flawless. What man could have written it?

 

[CornBurrito]

God gave Adam a test and he flunked hard. Say i built a car, i wouldn't just give you the car without testing it out. Adam's ultimate test was that tree (The tree in the center of the garden) but he and his wife were led astray by Satan. If God wanted he would not have put them in that position.

Way to miss the point.

Here let me try to make it clearer:

God knows EVERYTHING. The past, the present, and the FUTURE.

BEFORE giving the TEST to Adam he KNEW Adam would fail.

If god didn't know that, then he isn't all knowing.

If he did know that, why would he give the test? He KNEW Adam would fail BEFORE he even gave the TEST.

Spoiler

Capitalizing random words is fun.

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

The answers are hidden in the light - what it absorbs and what is reflected tells us the composition of luminous bodies.

And the science behind this is using the very basics of understanding light here on Earth.

The Earth's atmosphere can distort the light, so we get the best data from powerful telescopes in space.

So our final conclusion of how big the universe is is just how far we can see yet. Is that right? (Not trying to sound sarcastic, these questions are honest questions. and besides i learn a few things from this kinds of discussions)

 

[The Technomancer]

God gave Adam a test and he flunked hard. Say i built a car, i wouldn't just give you the car without testing it out. Adam's ultimate test was that tree (The tree in the center of the garden) but he and his wife were led astray by Satan. If God wanted he would not have put them in that position.

No He did not. If He knew the outcome with certainty then Adam was not put to the test, since there is no way in which Adam could not fail.

Now there are theist people who disagree with me. If you're going to convince me that free will and an omniscient being aren't mutually incompatible then feel free to try, but I expect any argument to be coherent and logically presented.

 

[CornBurrito]

No He did not. If He knew the outcome with certainty then Adam was not put to the test, since there is no way in which Adam could not fail.

Not to mention that it wouldn't even take an all knowing god to realize Adam would fail.

Adam lacked the ability to know good from evil, as he had not yet eaten from the tree.

Adam failed the test because he disobeyed god, but he had no way of knowing that disobeying god was bad.

He didn't have the tools needed to pass, and the tools were basically required to ensure that he wouldn't fail.

The design of the Bible is humanly impossible. It was written over a span of more than 1,500 years by heaps of different writers, yet every book in the Bible is consistent in its message. There are no contradictions!?

Except when the Bible outright contradicts fact? Like when it states the entire universe was created in 7 days around 6000 years ago? Or that every animal was crammed onto a boat and there was a huge global flood? Or that disease is caused by malevolent spirits?

Yeah, I suppose if you ignore all that the Bible is never wrong.

"But wait, the Bible didn't say that. You aren't meant to take those passages literally!"

Really? So if I can interpret the Bible any way I want of course it will never contradict itself or be wrong. I could do the same for any other book, whether it be a religious text or Harry Potter. Hell, I could argue Harry Potter is a metaphor for the slave trade if I was able to interpret every line of text anyway I wanted to.

 

[wolfmat]

God gave Adam a test and he flunked hard. Say i built a car, i wouldn't just give you the car without testing it out. Adam's ultimate test was that tree (The tree in the center of the garden) but he and his wife were led astray by Satan. If God wanted he would not have put them in that position.

I just want to note that Satan wasn't synonymous with the serpent until roundabout the early Middle Ages (a time at which the concept of an evil counterpart to God was established, in a manner that spoke to the pagans that were being converted).

 

[Lesath]

God gave Adam a test and he flunked hard. Say i built a car, i wouldn't just give you the car without testing it out. Adam's ultimate test was that tree (The tree in the center of the garden) but he and his wife were led astray by Satan. If God wanted he would not have put them in that position.

If you were the best mechanic ever, chances are that your car will work even if you do not test it out, because such is your ability and knowledge in the art of carcraftery. If the car somehow fails, it is either a conscious choice in your part, or a failure in your ability. In either case, the only one culpable is the creator.

 

[Pixel Pete]

You misunderstand. When I say the universe is infinite, i'm talking about the geometry. Since we can't actually observe what is outside of the observable universe, we can't conclude that there is infinite matter, but if we apply the cosmological principle, it suggests that.

This is why for all practical purposes, it is more wise to talk about the density of the universe (which is not infinite)

I think this is where I fall down somewhat. How can there not be logical limitations on a universe that has a size that is limitless? if the matter inside it is finite in quantity, as you say, then the space between that matter would be infinite in order to occupy an infinitely large space.

And, to be clear, I really am not trying to be difficult :3
I find it interesting but seem to have hit a barrier of comprehension.

 

[Noirulus]

I think this is where I fall down somewhat. How can there not be logical limitations on a universe that has a size that is limitless? if the matter inside it is finite in quantity, as you say, then the space between that matter would be infinite in order to occupy an infinitely large space.

And, to be clear, I really am not trying to be difficult :3
I find it interesting but seem to have hit a barrier of comprehension.

The concept of infinite can be confusing. It seems to me that you're simply overthinking it. Just imagine that the universe is never-ending, matter merely occupies a certain place in it.

 

[NullPointer]

So our final conclusion of how big the universe is is just how far we can see yet. Is that right? (Not trying to sound sarcastic, these questions are honest questions. and besides i learn a few things from this kinds of discussions)

You'll have to give me some time with this. Its hard to describe this entire process in pictures.

 

[Orayn]

"One of the strongest arguments for the accuracy of the Bible is its 100% accuracy in predicting the future. These future predictions are called “prophecies.” The Old Testament was written between approximately 1450 BC and 430 BC. During that time, many predictions of the future were recorded in the Bible by God’s prophets. Of the events that were to have taken place by now, every one happened just the way they predicted it would. No other “sacred writing” has such perfectly accurate predictions of the future."
It's not hard to find 100s of fullfilled prophecies from the Bible, knock yourselves out - www.google.com.
Can anyone explain this?

I can retrodict things too.

11
The motion of the senses, heart, feet, and hands
will be in agreement between Naples, Lyone, and Sicily.
Swords fire, floods, then the noble Romans drowned,
killed or dead because of a weak brain.

This is clearly about the rise of fascism in Italy under Mussolini. Prophecy confirmed!

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

Whether he knew that Adam would fail or not i don't know, maybe he wanted to see the development of man in a sinful world (yea i know, lol) but whatever the reasons are it doesn't take away that Adam failed big time and we are reaping the sweet consequences

You'll have to give me some time with this. Its hard to describe this entire process in pictures.

No problem, am about to go study for my MAT course test tomorrow. I hate Math such bullshit lol

 

[CornBurrito]

Whether he knew that Adam would fail or not i don't know, maybe he wanted to see the development of man in a sinful world (yea i know, lol) but whatever the reasons are it doesn't take away that Adam failed big time and we are reaping the sweet consequences

But is god not all knowing?

And he wanted to see man develop in a sinful world, knowing that many would be forever damned, and spend eternity in hell?

Why is this being deserving of worship?

 

[The Technomancer]

Whether he knew that Adam would fail or not i don't know, maybe he wanted to see the development of man in a sinful world (yea i know, lol) but whatever the reasons are it doesn't take away that Adam failed big time and we are reaping the sweet consequences

If He wanted to see the development of man in a sinful world then are you acknowledging that He does not know all moments, past, present, and future, perfectly?

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

If He wanted to see the development of man in a sinful world then are you acknowledging that He does not know all moments, past, present, and future, perfectly?

My statement is not saying that he doesn't know everything, which is why i suggested that "maybe he just wanted to see man develop in a sinful world".

 

[Pixel Pete]

The concept of infinite can be confusing. It seems to me that you're simply overthinking it. Just imagine that the universe is never-ending, matter merely occupies a certain place in it.

yeah I was afraid of that. My mind sees infinity as an all-or-nothing concept. Your definition, to me, is interpreted not as infinity, but simply as an exponentially larger space than the observable universe.

 

[Orayn]

My statement is not saying that he doesn't know everything, which is why i suggested that "maybe he just wanted to see man develop in a sinful world".

Wouldn't that imply that he knowingly allows all the evil in the world to exist, just to test our faith? Sounds kind of sadistic to me.

 

[The Technomancer]

My statement is not saying that he doesn't know everything, which is why i suggested that "maybe he just wanted to see man develop in a sinful world".

To what purpose?

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

Guys i gotta go study for my Test tomorrow, so no replies till tomorrow (Thursday to Sunday am off from my tiring schedule). So abayo my minions (Jk).

@ the two above posts, there is a limit to my knowledge and i can't come up with a concrete answer because i don't know. I will make an assumption, but at the end of the day i would not be able to satisfy you curiosity towards what you seek.

 

[ViperVisor]

Wouldn't that imply that he knowingly allows all the evil in the world to exist, just to test our faith? Sounds kind of sadistic to me.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

 

[The Technomancer]

Guys i gotta go study for my Test tomorrow, so no replies till tomorrow (Thursday to Sunday am off from my tiring schedule). So abayo my minions (Jk).

@ the two above posts, there is a limit to my knowledge and i can't come up with a concrete answer because i don't know. I will make an assumption, but at the end of the day i would not be able to satisfy you curiosity towards what you seek.

You can see how questions like these strain our credulity at the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient God?

Good luck on your test.

 

[Subtervotion]

God gave Adam a test and he flunked hard. Say i built a car, i wouldn't just give you the car without testing it out. Adam's ultimate test was that tree (The tree in the center of the garden) but he and his wife were led astray by Satan. If God wanted he would not have put them in that position.

Why does an all knowing being (omniscient) need to give a test? He already knows the outcome to all tests.

Just want to address a few things.

First of all the question "Why should we believe in the Bible or how do we know that it's true?"
There are two main reasons why I believe it to be truth.
1. When you study the origin of the Christian Bible, if you look at the complex way in which it was composed and written it is humanly impossible, yet somehow it happend. The explanation for this is some form of devine intervention. I'll go into this a bit more below.
2. Scientific evidence (Yes, that's right). Again I will go into this in more detail below...

But first.. point number 1.
The design of the Bible is humanly impossible. It was written over a span of more than 1,500 years by heaps of different writers, yet every book in the Bible is consistent in its message. There are no contradictions!

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk

 

[The Technomancer]

Why does an all knowing being (omniscient) need to give a test? He already knows the outcome to all tests.


http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html

1. "That is to be taken metaphorically." In other words, what is written is not what is meant. I find this entertaining, especially for those who decide what ISN'T to be taken as other than the absolute WORD OF GOD--which just happens to agree with the particular thing they happen to want...

I find that this is the major flaw in pretty much all Biblical interpretation. Either its all literally true or else you cannot say which parts are true and which are not. I'll make an exception for the OT/NT distinction.

 

[Subtervotion]

I added another link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk

There are so many contradictions in the bible.

 

[kunu]

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

Great quote by Epicurus. Whenever I hear this thrown out there in a debate like this, the religious people never seem to know the answer to it, and that's understandable because it's quite a logical argument.

 

[Atramental]

.