The belts are not full of atoms but electrons stripped from atoms streaming from the sun (plasma, but that aside)The H falls through the air rich in O2 (on a planet barren of plant life & animal life as the plants can not breathe & the pressure is so great, but lets forget that too)It combines with the O2 (some how without energy or a catalyst to combine it) then turns to water (stripping every available bit of O2 from the atmosphere, suffocating all life on the planet).WOW excellent theory!!!!!
He doesn't answer:where did the oxygen to make the water come from? Back of the envelope calculation: It would take approx. 150 times more O2 than there is in the atmosphere now in order to make enough water to cover to a depth of 5km (height of Mt. Ararat). If all this O2 were in the pre-flood atmosphere the pressure would be higher than 30atm and the partial pressure of O2 (P(O2)) would be over 30atm (almost 100% O2). Limit for human survival: .5atm. And everything becomes super-flammable
Irritated is putting it mildly, matey. Do you know what you would do if you found out your wife was cheating on you??? when God found you cheating Him....sinning..lying...what should He do??
a) Why would the earth's magnetic field just disappear?
b) Even if the above happened and water formed: Combining hydrogen and oxygen to form water is an exothermic reaction. That means you would not only have water, but also one gigantic explosion that would kill everything on the earth.
c) Noah and the animals would have been killed by cosmic radiation if there were no magenetic field.
He's wrong about magnetic reversals, there is no evidence for magnetic reversals, he's confused. If the continents are as God said they are and ride atop a balsitic outer core, then a bolide could easily have sent those plates flying across the surface of the earth crashing into one another at impact. The subsequent volcanic activity would be recorded as mafic igneous rock erupts through the now fractured rock and would be "SEEN" as a magnetic reversal when in fact it's not.
It would been seen as a magnetic reversal of the poles when in fact it's only how the grains of magnetic material lines up with the plates as they slide across the surface of the earth at a particular moment in time. He is not following scripture, he is making it up to fit the science instead of making the science fit the scripture. God said he placed the land in the midsts of the water, not connected to the balsitic plate.
It's funny that if this were the case that it automatically points to that assumption that "God" did it. This couldn't happen any other way. This video shows how this could happen, but has no other evidence to support the idea that a god caused it.
It's a no win situation here, explain how jesus made water to wine,resurected the dead, made a blind man see? explain those scientificaly please...lol i believe you can't scientificaly explain the flood,God, as one poster said could just MAKE water come down.
Creationists trying to use science to prove the miracle is their own deinal of the miraclulous aspect of it, and their attempt to rationalize it by twisting science to support their miracle. It's non-linear, isn't it? They should just stick to the story, "Some magic guy made it happen."
There is plenty of geological evidence of Earth's magnetic field recorded in the alignment of iron atoms in ocean bottom that has expanded away from the Mid Atlantic Rift. The process of magnetic reversal itself takes thousands of years to happen for each incident. ALSO, this same record of magnetic reversal is a witness to such incidents that have happened over many MILLIONS of years, which is rather inconvenient for Creationists who believe Earth was created just seven thousand years ago.
You are sure that in every case magnetic reversals took place over thousands of years? Were you there to measure them? If you dig deeper, you may find that the greatly oversimplified textbook cross-sectional crust diagrams of iron atom alignments are woefully incomplete, and the real picture is not only far more complicated, but makes nonsense out of the uniformitarian account. By the way, was that 7000 years on the Earth's surface, at the event horizon on a black hole, or in Schwarzchild time?
I would assume that for The Bible, being an ancient text that makes no mention of these other time references, that 7000 years is extrapolated by literal interpretation fundamentalists in the conventional sense. Creationists will argue, when pinned down by undeniable evidence of existance prior to the conventional 7K years age of the universe (speed of light and lightyear distance of observable stars)that time has not remained constant over the 7K years, thus reserving a loophole in their dogma.
Let's see, so you say that the hydrogen was burned as it entered the atmosphere, forming water. First of all, burning hydrogen, like all combustion reactions, releases a great deal of heat. You wouldn't get water, you would get steam. It would be hot enough to burn Noah's skin. Secondly, if all that hydrogen were to react with oxygen, there would be no oxygen left. I never thought I'd say this, but Kent Hovind makes better arguments than this guy.
This would not produce water with the oxygen without combustion. I think your clutchin at straws here, if you believe that god can do anything, then why do you have to explain the flood? God could have just magicked the water up.
I agree with the post below and I would like to add one thing; if all the hydrogen fell into the torposphere and mixed with the oxygen, then wouldn't all of that breathable oxygen be taken away?
The extra water that the Earth receives is a no-brainer. Our Sun is 98% hydrogen. During a CME the Sun can eject billions of gallons of hydrogen into space. Hydrogen is just hydrogen and in the vacuum of space freezes. Earth's gravity pulls it in and during entry it burns and mixes with the oxygen and creates water, heat and electricity, see PME. Hmm, also explains why there is lightning now. LOL, the water molecules bumping together creating static never did sit right with me.
I do not agree with the magnetic reversals being evidence for a old earth. what was measured by the compasses and put in science books are two different things.
No. In the strata you find that the iron rich minerals are pointing in one direction then the opposite way in another layer. The different layers denote a passage if time. So at one time the poles switched sides. The last time this happed was 780,000 years ago.
There is one area where I agree with this video. He sees that the magnetic field reversals show that the earth is not a Young earth. I can agree with that point. But the rest is bunk.
OK...sent you the sites that show how the earth magnetic filed doesn't collapse...it cant. The earths rotation would have to stop. And not just the surface rotation, the inner core would have to stop spinning as well. That cant happen.
Yes, thats because we are losing our moon. This means nothing concerning this goofy video. Read the rest of the posts on why this video is bunk. The guy who posted this video gave up on the argument.
You're talking about electric motors and generators. The magnetic fields will collapse when you shut off the electricity or power supply. This is electromagnetic induction, which is not the same as the earth's magnetic field, which is a magnetic dipole. Don't confuse the two. The earth has a consistent magnetic field not dependent on electricity. So the earth's field may move but never collapse.
Every magnet is a dipole, which simply means it has 2 poles, North and South. The earth's magnetic poles have reversed. The sun's magnetic poles also have reversed. We can prove that and we can measure that. Reversing of the magnetic poles requires collapsing the field and building it back up in the opposite direction. No scientist suggests that the earth's poles rotate. The lines of flux cannot just change direction without the field collapsing.
There are magnets that generate a field when powered up -- like electric motors. There are other magnets that do not need power -- like natural earth magnets. These are different. The first magnet type's field will collapse when the power is shut off. The other you can move, spin, throw, juggle and the field is always there. This is the type the earth has. The earths field can move but doesn't collapse.
You are talking about electromagnets and permanent magnets. It makes no difference. With either kind of magnet the magnetic poles cannot reverse without the magnetic field collapsing during the reversal. Science has demonstrated this has happened to the earth's magnetic field. In fact it is becoming less strong right now indicating a possible reversal at some future time.
Science has said the poles have reversed. Meaning the North swung to the South. The field didn't collapse, it just spun around. And yes it has happed in the past. It last happed about 780,000 years ago. And though it can't be predicted it probably will happen again.
The poles have reversed but they did so by the magnetic field collapsing and then restoring with the opposite polarity. Can you cite one scientific publication which says the poles have rotated or "swung" or "spun around" as you say?
I can ask you the same question. You are tying to say the Earth's magnetic field has an on/off switch. It doesnt. it is always on just like a natural magnet. The only way for the poles to reverse is if the poles flipped.
It is impossible for a magnetic field to reverse polarity without the field collapsing. It has happened with both the earth's magnetic field and the sun's magnetic field. You can't cite any scientist who says the magnetic field swings or spins around.
I just showed you (Twice) that the magnetic field doesn't collapse. I posted (Twice) a NASA site that illustrates this. For some inexplicable reason they don't seem to show up in your comments & responses.
I did not remove or block any comment or response from you. YouTube does not allow URLs in comments posted (for good reason because of spammers) so perhaps they blocked it. Try sending it to me as a YouTube email message. Thanks.
So I think it's safe to conclude the earths magnetic field never collapsed. The hydrogen gas layer hovering in the magnetic field is imaginary. The hypothesis of this video has no grounding. This video is fooling those who dont know any better and is just plain pseudo -Science.
Going back to your video.... If we lost our magnetic field massive amounts of stellar radiation from our sun would cook our planet in days. Life would be killed off in a very short time. Plus the Hydrogen wouldn't collapse. It would bleed off into space from the massive solar winds which our magnetic field protects us from. Wow. Religion meets science fiction. Come on People .... Think...use reason.
You're assuming the hydrogen is hydrogen gas. The Van Allen Belts are made of charged hydrogen atoms attached to heavier atoms and molecules. There is much we don't know about magnetic reversals, but the date you give is not what most evidence points to. If the magnetic field flips reversing north and south, there will be a period when magnetism is zero and there is no magnetic shielding for the earth. We can't determine how long that is since we have not been able to observe such a process.
The astronauts passed through the so called Van Allen Belt on their way to the moon and felt nothing. To say these charged particals fell to earth and became water is just plain nuts.
You assume the reversal of the magnetic field caused a collapes. Why couldnt the poles just switch? The magnetic field is always there. Just not working in the same direction.
Your statement is like saying the astronauts passed through the atmosphere on the way to the moon and felt nothing so believing that the moisture in the atmosphere could become water and fall to the earth is "just plain nuts." Also a magnetic field cannot switch polarity without collapsing. It happens all the time in electric motors and transformers. The lines of flux collapse into the magnet and then expand back outward again with opposite polarity.
The atmosphere is measurable. It can be felt on re-entry. It can be seen thought light refraction. It exerts pressure per square inch. Your fantasy hydrogen layer is simple speculation with not measurable proof and is only a hypothesis to help your inexplicable Earth wide flood. A flood for which there is no proof or evidence.
You're talking about electric motors and generators. The magnetic fields will collapse when you shut off the electricity or power supply. This is electromagnetic induction, which is not the same as the earth's magnetic field, which is a magnetic dipole. Don't confuse the two. The earth has a consistent magnetic field not dependent on electricity. So the earth's field may move but never collapse.
2CH 13:3 Abijah sent 400,000 men into battle against Jeroboam's 800,000 men. This is a total of 1,200,000 men, all of them Jews. (Note: Assuming one additional woman per man of fighting age, plus two persons per man [either older persons or children] would put the Jewish population of the surrounding area at a minimum of 4,800,000 persons; hardly feasible.)
This is the same passage you referred to before and which I answered before. You say these numbers are too big. I have no way of knowing and neither do you. The fact that you say the numbers are too large doesn't prove anything except that you don't believe it.
I don't believe it because there is no evidence for it. We know a lot about the population make up during those times. Rome, one of the largest cities in the world at the time, had 1,000,000 inhabitance. Israel had nowhere near the population of Rome. The evidence shows that. This is obviously more bible author grandstanding in order to build zeal with its target audience.
Actually at the time Abijah was king of Judah (915-913 BC) the population of Rome was 0. Rome was founded in 753 BC and remember the year numbers advance from larger to smaller in BC dates. Perhaps you don't 'know a lot about the population make up during those times.'
Again you miss my point. There was even less of a population in 915 BCE to draw such a huge Israeli army. 1.2 million men was more than 1/2 of Egypt's total population. Raising 400,000 and 800,000 men armies was just biblical grandstanding on the part of the writer. If Israel really could have raised such an army they could have invaded Assyria, Persia, and Egypt all at the same time.
More Corinthian shenanigans. 2CH 7:5, 8-9 Solomon sacrificed 22,000 oxen and 120,000 sheep in one week. This is 845+ animals per hour, 14+ animals per minute, for seven days straight. John Morrell cant even do that!
Actually you mean Chronicles. Corinthians is in the New Testament. Chronicles is in the Old Testament. Actually it was the people of Israel gathered together to dedicate the new temple who sacrificed 22,000 cattle and 120,000 sheep and goats. Solomon didn't do it himself. He was their leader and the one who supervised the building of the temple and its dedication.
Yes. My mistake. Be glad I am not a scribe. I could have been the fault for yet another contradiction in the bible.
That must have been one gruesome site. So tell me. To what purpose does the almighty god need to have animals slaughtered in his name? If god created all life on the planet what is the point of killing them for him?
God made the animals, he can replace them. But the point is not the animals, it is the sacrifice made by the people who paid money to purchase those animals and spent time raising them. Our sacrifice to God is giving back to him what he has given to us even though we want to keep it for ourselves. It is really giving ourselves to God. That's what God wants from us and that is what we owe to our Creator and Redeemer. I don't suppose you can comprehend that.
Just to put this into perspective. The entire German army on the eastern front just before they invaded Russia had 1.2million men. The German population was 60 million. Even with the military buildup of the Nazi war machine they could not match the men at arms vs. Population ratio the jews apparently were able to achieve? Its not reasonable.
I suspect that you would also say that the ratio of military vs population of the Jewish state of Israel today is not reasonable. It far exceeds that of Nazi Germany.
What I am saying is an army of 400,000 men was unheard of in those days, let alone 800,000. You were a Superpower if you had 40,000. You dont seem to appreciate the difficulty in supplying, arming and training 400,000 men in a pre-industrial age. To say that Israel and Judah had a combined army of 1.2 mill is plain lunacy. The entire population of Israel today is just over 7 mill. It would be hard for Israel to raise a 1.2mill man army without a suffering serious economic repercussions.
In those days it would be easier to raise an army because the farmers would leave their fields, go into battle, and then return to their farms. In the "pre-industrial age" and with their primitive weapons soldiering was not as complicated as it is today. Virtually every man could be a soldier.
LE 14:33-57 God himself believes that a house or clothes can have leprosy and he details the remedy.
LE 14:49-53 The cure for leprosy involves incantations and the blood of a bird.
NU 11:31-33 A "wind from the Lord" brings such an abundance of quail that "he who gathered the least gathered ten homers," or about 62 bushels. Altogether, this would have been enough to fill several thousand boxcars. Unfortunately, it was immediately followed by a great plague (food poisoning?) from the Lord.
Lev 14- A house or building today can be infected with mildew or black mold which makes it an unhealthy place for people to live or work. We refer to it as a 'sick building.' Sometimes the only cure is to tear it down. God was giving healthy living instructions to the Israelites that were way ahead of their time. The atonement ceremony was not the cure, but it declared to the community that the house was 'clean' similar to the ceremony to restore a man cured of leprosy to the community.
We arent talking about some infestation of the house it-self, like mold. We are talking about a disease. The bible says the disease comes from the house it self. THis is obviously the work of some uneducated superstitious early Iron age man and not the work of some all knowing god. Common, lets get real.
This passage is talking about cleansing a house that is infested with mildew or mold. Living in a house like that can make people sick the same as if they had a disease. People in that day did not understand good health practices such as this. God was giving instructions for healthy living that were way ahead of their time.
What verse does it say mold or mildew? It talks about the plague. It says the source comes from the walls or mortar of the house. The house isn't the cause. Now if it said to bath regularly and to use some herb to dress blemishes and to keep a clean home then I would agree with you in being a guide for hygiene. But this is not the case. then to end it all with some Voodoo ceremony really smacks of primitive minds at work here.
It says "mildew" or "mold" all the way through this passage. You must be using the King James Version with its old English words. The ceremony has nothing to do with voodoo or with cleansing the house. It was to pronounce the house clean to the community and to honor God as the one who gave the instructions for cleansing.
Yes. I am using the king james version. Because that is the closest to the original script. You are using the newer "revised" versions of the bible, which change many of the descriptive words to make the bible sound more pleasing to today's ideals. These versions play down the embarrassing parts and play up those things that make god look good. This is man re-inventing god. Read the original English bible. There you will see your real god.
The King James Version is not closer to the original text. We have older manuscripts today than the KJV translators had. Since they made their translation in 1611 several older manuscripts have been found and they are used in the newer translations. Also many English words have changed in meaning since 1611. Go back to the original Hebrew and Greek if you want to understand the meaning. I suspect that you really don't want to understand.
Well since we don't have the original writings we really don't know what was written. But Bible scholars have been able to ascertain that the bible has gone through some editing and mistranslations down through the centuries. You have evidence that some New and better bible is available that is based on the oldest text found? And more accurately tells the word of god? What bible rendition is this?
We don't have the original documents written by the hand of the Bible writers. We do have over 5000 Bible manuscripts and fragments - way more than any other ancient document. We have New Testament manuscripts dating as early as the second century and Old Testament manuscripts written before Christ. Comparing the oldest manuscripts with the newer ones shows the Bible has been faithfully and accurately transmitted to us. Any differences are insignificant and make no difference to the message.
Are you kidding? The only way to make copies of books was to take it to a scribe. There are many cased where you could see the scribe got tired or bored and made big mistakes. Then others where the scribe didnt understand or agree what was written so would note in the margin his thoughts which became text in subsequent copies. Editing was discovered when a scribe didnt like how John's gospel ended so added 12 verses to the book that are still there today.
Again, the accuracy of the scribes has been verified by comparing manuscripts from various centuries. There are no significant differences which make any change to the message of the Bible. Also you made an error in your last statement. There is no question about the last verses of John. You probably meant to say the last 12 verses of Mark's gospel are not found in the oldest manuscripts. But even if you throw them out those verses add no information that isn't found elsewhere in the gospels.
You have admitted that the scribes have made errors in translation and now are guilty of editing the word of god. Why does gods book need edited? Further more why wouldn't the original text have been miraculously preserved if it were from divine dictation? Oh! And BTW. What ever happed to the 2 stone tablets with the 10 commandments? You would think that would have survived 3000 or so years.
Num 11- This is an example of getting what you ask for rather than what you need. The Israelites were blessed with divine food, but they wanted meat and the delicacies of Egypt. They forgot they had been slaves in Egypt and wanted to go back. God gave them a super-abundance of what they asked for and it killed many of them. I suspect it was food poisoning. It says those who gathered collected at least 60 bushels, but we don't know how many gathered.
So am I to understand that if god is giving that I should not take it because he may try and make an example of me? Is this the Loving caring god you are trying to sell?
I guess the moral of Numbers 11 is that you had better be careful about your whining, crying and complaining. God may get tired of hearing it and decide to give you what you ask for, even though he knows it will not be good for you. I have to admit I may have done that with my sons at some time.
1) The shear exageration in the number of quail is not believeable.
But assuming the mirical is true......
2)Why would a kind and loving god give his people food that would kill them. Just to teach them a lesson? Sounds more like the work of a Dad who got tired of lisening to the kids in the back seat. So hauls off and slaps them.
So the problem is (1) you don't believe there is an almighty God who can perform miracles and supply a super-abundance of what we ask for and (2) you don't believe that this almighty God has the right to pass judgment on rebellious humans. These are not "2 points in the story that are wrong". They are just 2 points that you don't believe.
I believe that a god who could conjure up millions of birds in a day could also feed starving kids in the desert, cure the sick and end war and famine. But he'd rather teach us a lesson on why not to question his absolute power over us. Sounds more like a plot for some alien invasion movie than a reason love this murdering god.
God has given us the resources to feed all the starving children in the world. The problem is same as that of the ancient Israelites - our sin and self-centered greed have prevented us from doing what God put us on earth to do.
What did god put us on earth to do? What purpose would man serve to an All mighty super being who can create an entire universe in a day? .... Worship? Is that what we we're here for? To bow before the All might god. To tremble at the mere sound of his name? Did you bring your sons into this world for them to worship you? Sounds maniacal to me. What a turn off.
What did god put us on earth to do? What purpose would man serve to an All mighty super being who can create an entire universe in a day? .... Worship? Is that what we we're here for? To bow before the All might god. To tremble at the mere sound of his name? Did you bring your sons into this world for them to worship you? Sounds maniacal to me. What a turn off.
I believe that God put each of us on this earth for a purpose. Yes, the purpose is to worship God by serving him and serving our fellow human beings created in his image. Does your life have a purpose? Is there any reason for your existence? Are you just spending your short time here on earth serving yourself and trying to convince others that God does not exist?
I ask those questions to make a point. The age-old question of "what is the meaning of life" is answered by religion. The problem is religion is faulty. Simple wishful thinking. What does a god need with some insignificant humans to worship him? Nothing. Because god was made up through superstition to give our life meaning. Man made god to satisfy his needs and to control the masses.
You say "religion" was devised to give meaning to life, but you didn't answer my questions. "Does your life have a purpose? Is there any reason for your existence? Are you just spending your short time here on earth serving yourself and trying to convince others that God does not exist?"
Does my life have propose? I guess that depends on whom you ask. To my wife, children and loved ones - yes. Otherwise - no. I dont believe there is some calculating god who put me here to fulfill some mission. We are no diffent than any bacteria, plant or animal. We are just part of the life circle. The only difference is we are self aware. As far as convincing others....I get some satisfaction out of snapping them out of their delusion.
There was no worldwide flood. Why? Because there is no evidence for it. This psudo-Science fiction is a desperate attempt to bring the bible in line with what we know about the world today. So make up your ridiculous rationalizations all you want. In the end you are only deluding yourself.
Because floods happen. At the end of the last Ice age man was just developing the written language. There were a lot of huge but localized floods. Stories were passed down from Generation to Generation that turned into legends. Simple really.
Yes, floods do happen. But most floods are not like the big one. Many different ancient civilizations have their story of a massive flood in which only one man and his family survived. You can't just blow that off as being 'simple really.'
You have to put yourself in the world of the bronze aged man. The world is big. There is no internet, no telephones, no CNN. The whole world had yet to be discovered. How would they know the world was flooded? Their little 10,000 sq mile area they lived in was their world. So a big flood from glacial melting happened that devastated their land. To them the world was flooded. The flood was so devastating it became a legend as it was passed from generation to generation.
The glacier melt happend over hundreds of years which formed inland seas and lakes. Some of those "Great lakes" are still here. Others overfilled and flooded vast areas. During the summer months the glaciers melted faster causing massive floods all around the northern hemisphere. It was these floods that formed the Grand Canyon. It was these floods that were to become legend.
I am familiar with what the glaciers did. I live by one of those Great Lakes. Legends of a great flood are found in ancient writings of cultures not only in the northern hemisphere, but in the southern hemisphere as well. The story was also a legend in other places where glaciation did not occur. Also the Grand Canyon was not formed by a flood. John Clayton discusses that in his book "The Source" and in a video called "Canyonlands" available at DoesGodExist-dot-TV.
Did you read what I wrote? I said "the Grand Canyon was NOT formed by a flood." I will soon put portions of the "Canyonlands" video on YouTube. In the meantime you can get the entire video by going to DoesGodExist-dot-TV.
It wasn't just the northern pole that was affected by the Ice age. The south had its melting period too. With all this melting what do you thing happened with the ocean levels? They rose. So even the equatorial lands would have been affected.
I believe the world experienced a climate change at the time of early man. To explain these changes they blamed it on thier god and this became legends. There were floods but not a flood that covered the entire land suface of the earth. Just lots of little big floods. Enough to tell stories about.
LOL MessianicJew2000 Emails me telling me he wont answer anymore of my questions. He has to go to class then blocks me from replying. Face it, you argument held no water. You saw you were in checkmate so you bogied out, headed for the deck and ran like a girl.
Good analogy. Defending the bible is like defending OJ.
Can my mind be changed? Probably not. I have read too much of the bible and know many of its faults, holes and incongruities. But I hold out the hope that there is a god. SO that makes me Agnostic rather than atheist. Although I do lean to the Atheistic view.
When you read the Bible, hold it in your hands as Holy. Believe that it could be the truth, and pray for it to be revealed as such.
Don't just read it like any other book, throwing out what you think are inconsistencies. When you dig deeper, you recieve a new spirit of language to interpret the words with. Not your school education.
If the bible didnt contradict itself. If the evidence in the universe supported the words in the bible then -You Bet! Id be holding the bible and praying to the all mighty god.
But this is not the case. The bible is nothing more than a book of fairytales and teachings to give meaninig to the world and to those who cant understand it.
If you see the Bible as a book of fairytales then that is all you will get.
If you find out what the Bible really is, you would humble yourself before it and realize that all your wisdom is empty without the understanding of God.
What you are suggesting is akin to believing OJ Simpson is innocent no matter the evidence. Just trust in your heart that if you love OJ then he is innocent.
This is your argument? Forget the evidence. Forget what the bible teaches. Forget the contradictions. Just Believe and you will be all right. Well, believing has "Zero" bearing on the Truth.
OJ confessed. The book is available on Amazon. You are right. Believing something does not make it true, even if OJ believes it. But what about the contradictions in the Bible. Why not point out some of them?
1SA 16:14-23 Evil spirits can come from God (and be exorcised with God's help).
2CH 13:17 500,000 Israelites are slain in a single battle. (Note: This is more than were lost in any single battle of World War II, and even exceeds the number of deaths that resulted from the dropping of the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.)
The Holy Spirit was with King Saul as he led God's people. Saul disobeyed God so God's Spirit departed and God allowed a tormenting spirit to come in, because God's Spirit was not there to keep the evil spirit away. When Saul was tormented he called for David, the writer of Psalms, to play his harp and sing his psalms. Saul was comforted by that. Many people have been comforted by David's Psalm 23. I am one of those people, so I can understand this passage and I see no contradiction.
The parallel passage in I Kings 15 does not give a number so I see no contradiction. However, this does seem to be an overly large number and I suspect it's a scribal error. Some scribe copying by hand many years ago mis-copied the number and the error carried over to subsequent copies. If a trivial number error is the worst you can find in a 3000-year-old document that was copied by hand for the first 2500 years, that is amazing!
lol..Ok so if one mistake can happen in a book the size of the bible then surely others can happen. How do we know that the bible is really accurate since we dont have the original texts?
EX 12:37, NU 1:45-46 The number of men of military age who take part in the Exodus is given as about 600,000. Allowing for women, children, and older men would probably mean that a total of more than 2,000,000 Israelites left Egypt at a time when the whole population of Egypt was less than 2,000,000.
Embellishments seem to happen a lot in the bible. If this can happen how do we know the words haven't been effected as well?
2CH 21:20, 22:1-2 Ahaziah was forty-two when he became king; he succeeded his father, who died at the age of forty. Thus, Ahaziah was two years older than his father. 2CH 21:20, 22:1-2 Ahaziah was forty-two when he became king; he succeeded his father, who died at the age of forty. Thus, Ahaziah was two years older than his father. [Note: Some translations use "twenty-two" here in an attempt to rectify this discrepancy. The Hebrew is clear, however, that 2CH 22:2 is 42.
Don't you think that if these contradictions were as plain as you describe them, the Bible would have been tossed out long ago - or succesfully destroyed by now - which people have tried to do since it's existence? Furthermore, what authors could plainly write such "so-called contradictions" and not know it, or have done it for a contex reason? And then I supposed when you read the words of Jesus, you find them to be contradicting words of a human being as well?
On the surface you dont see the contradictions because they are at different parts in the bible. The bible is big and complicated for a reason. One part says to love thy neighor as yourself then in an other part, several books away, it says to treat others as they treat you "eye for an eye", "take thy women for yourself" sort of stuff. The context argument is always -"well thats not what god meant when he said that" Bull. This is his word, his book.
The "eye for an eye" principle is directed toward human government, originally given as directions to Moses and the Jewish leaders to punish criminals in accordance with their offense. The punishment fits the crime. It's called justice. We still expect our civil government to carry out justice today. But love for neighbor is brought out all through the Bible. It is especially emphasized by Jesus. Civil governments must administer justice. We as individuals, and Christians, must minister love.
Moses wrote Genesis but he was not present at creation. How did God reveal the details to him? Suppose God gave Moses a vision of creation from the view of a man standing on earth watching it happen. Genesis 1:1, undated and un-timed, says darkness covered the earth. Day 1 Moses is standing in total darkness as clouds and gases begin to dissipate. Moses sees light appear and there is now day and night. By day 4 it is clear enough that the sun, and then the moon, and then the stars appear.
So your saying the bible, the word of god, is flawed because of the perspective of the writer? Interesting. I can understand this. But it doesnt help your case that the word of god could be skewed because of perspective.
Genesis chapter 1 gives a chronology of creation. Chapter 2 gives further details. Chapter 1 says trees and birds were created before man. Chapter 2 does not say man was created before trees, It merely says God 'had planted a garden' into which he placed man and he planted trees in that garden. Chapter 2 does not say God created man before animals and birds. It says God 'had formed' the animals and birds which he brought to man to name them. No contradictions here.
If god created man on the 6th day after the plant and animals then why did he create man (Adam) again in the garden out of order from Gen 1? LOL... Created vs Formed. Same thing to me. But it is funny when christens hang on a word when it suits them but twist it to make it fit their paradigm in others. Example Circle vs. Orb, Globe, Ball, Round.
You are still missing the point. The English translation in chapter 2 says that God brought to Adam the animals that he "had formed" so that Adam could name them. "Formed" is past tense. "Had formed" is past perfect, meaning something completed in the past. It does not say that God created the animals after he created Adam. It says he had already created them in the past (before Adam) and after creating Adam he brought the animals to Adam.
You are making the mistake of only looking at the English words. Remember the Bible was written in Hebrew and Greek. For example in the passages in Luke and 1 Peter the Greek word is 'phobeo' which means 'being in awe of, reverence'. In I John the word is 'phobos' which means 'be afraid exceedingly, terror.' If we reverence, stand in awe, and love God, the perfect love of God casts out the terrifying fears of this world. Try it and see.
The real problem is we don't have the original text of any of the books in bible. We have some very old copies that we hope were copied exactly. The bible has undergone changes over time. From copy to copy over hundreds of years scribes have made errors and even edited the bible books. For example the last 12 verses in Mark were added by a scribe because he didn't like how the book ended. This became part of the text in later copies and is in our bible today.
You are taking events out of context. The people refused to hear the truth and only wanted to hear what they wanted to hear. God allowed the false prophets (not the true prophets of God) to tell them what they wanted to hear. There are still plenty of false prophets today telling people what they want to hear, because they don't want to hear the truth. For example, the truth that God exists.
I would hope they are more than words. I would hope you understand the ideas I am trying to convey. Since that is the whole idea with communication...the exchange of ideas.
I feel that I am looking at the whole of the bible. I see some good teachings. And I also see questionable teachings. When I look at the whole I see contradiction, impossibilities, and revolution. There isn't a consistent underlying theme. But if I narrowed my vision and only looked at the good things taught in the bible then I would be cherry picking my way into believing.
I guess I could. But I thought you said the whole bible was the word of god. Now you are suggesting that I ignore the majority of the book? Is this what you do? Did you like President Clinton? Could you only focus on what was good with that president and ignore the bad? Then only think of him as a good and just man? No? Well the same works for the bible. I cant just break off the pieces I like. Otherwise I'd just be kidding myself.
I'm not telling you to perminently ingore what you think to be flaws.
I'm saying temporarily ignnore them until you seek out the glory of Christ. I wanted to find the truth so I got blockbuster online and rented every movie that I could find about Jesus. And I am still finishing up the gospels. After concluding that Jesus was for real - because I don't think he could have been made up - I am waiting for the rest of the Bible to open up to me in small dosages.
The consistent underlying theme of the Bible is God reaching out to restore his wayward creatures back to himself. It it a true story of creation, fall, and redemption which is greater than any fiction story man has ever written.
So you beleive the bible is the Ture word of god? Or are they just inspired books written by a group of men that were collated to make a book for god?
The Bible was written by 40 different men, with different backgrounds in different languages over a period of 1600 years but all under the inspiration of God. It has a cohesiveness and focus that make it truly amazing and without contradictions. It has been proven many times to be historically accurate. It has survived many efforts to eradicate it from the earth. It has even survived neglect. There is nothing like it in all of literature. It still changes people's lives. It is the word of God.
You say it "is" the word of god yet you admit there are some scribe errors. Is it not possible that other mistakes, mistranslations or even editing could have happened? I have shown you Many many examples of contradictions yet you rationalize those away by beating the same drum that god is the truth.
You have shown a few examples of what you say are 'contradictions.' I have shown you why they are not. I have not said 'God is the truth.' I have merely shown why your 'contradictions' are not contradictions. You refuse to listen.
You have rationalized why they are not. Anyone can do that. Tilting your head to make your gas gauge seem more full is rationalizing. You are fooling yourself to think there is more gas in the car then there really is. So rationalize all you like but don't be surprised when you run out of gas.
What a bunch of crap. If we lost our magnetic field massive amounts of stellar radiation from our sun would cook our planet in days. Life would be killed off in a very short time. Plus the Hydrogen wouldn't collapse. It would bleed off into space from the massive solar winds which our magnetic field protects us from. Wow. Religion meets science fiction. Come on People .... Think...use reason.
LOL... you mean the Mid Atlantic ridge? That "Scar line" as you call it is a fault where two plates are pushing away from each other causing continental drift. The Atlantic is getting 1" bigger each year.
Yes, but not enough to flood the earth. Ok.... Answer me this...Where did all the water go after the flood? According to the bible it covered all land on earth. This would effectively double the water volume of the oceans. Where did it all go...and don't say evaporation.
"3And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated." Yes it did. So if you can't find simple things like this than take everything out of context. Who are you to tell me what the dogon thing is saying?
So your saying the water just evaporated? Come on. Even someone with no scientific training will know that is simply impossible. There is "Zeor" scientific backing for this. Face it. Noah's flood is just a fairytale story and thats all.
The lord needs to give me a reason (a sign) inorder to believe. The lord has turned his back on all of mankind. Unless he just never existed at all, which sems to be the more plausible answer. Jesue has already broken his promise - MT 16:28, MK 9:1, LK 9:27 Jesus says that some of his listeners will not taste death before he comes again in his kingdom. This was said almost 2000 years ago.
The kingdom of God did come with power on the day of Pentecost which was 50 days after the Passover when Jesus was crucified and rose again. Jesus came in his kingdom here upon the earth, the church, on that day and it was during the lifetime of most of those living at the time he spoke those words. He is also coming again to judge the earth.
You are right. That is the excepted view. But if you think about this notion for a minute. If god wanted the world to be perfect why didn't he do that? Either god is not all-powerful and doesn't have control Or god just wants the world to be this way. Either way god isnt much of a benevolent omnipotent being.
I don't know if God wanted the world to be perfect from the start or not, but if he created it perfect from the start, you would not be a free spirit to even think on the terms that you do. If God wants us to be perfect, he might expect us to strive for perfection and overcome all evil. Isn't life and free will beautiful? Do you wish to be a robot?
1) God can do anything right? I'm sure if he was real, god could have made us perfect with a free spirit. If he created quantum Mechanics and dark matter and those other things that defy the laws of physics then he could have made us with the ability to chose and to
2) If god is an all knowing and all seeing creator of time, space & dimension then there is nothing god couldn't know -Right?
God gave us the gift of free will because he loves us.
So he gave us plenty of rope to hang ourselves but that was not his intention.
That is why he offers us salvation by grace through Jesus. He is giving us a loop-hole out of our wages. None of us are deserving of heaven on our own. I'm still trying to figure out how to get there.
When god crated time, all future events unfolded before him. So he knew Adam would eat of the fruit. He knew Satan would turn against him. He knew all the choices everyone would ever make even before they were born. From our perspective we think we are making choices but in reality your destiny is already written. You are nothing more than a semi-blind slot car in god's racetrack of life. In other words....if you believe in a all powerful god then we cant have free will.
I was joking in my last post. However, even though the bible doesnt plainly say the world is flat there are many places where it suggests it. The 4 corners of the earth, the pillars that hold it up, being able to see all the nations on the earth. They believed the world was flat.
The "flood" was a sprinkle compared to the Ice Age. But then Noah didn't collect mammoths.
jasbcor 3 years ago 20
Never tought on what the effect would be to the belts if poles were reversed.
Interesting point of view, don't agree, but still, made me think for my own.
Cunelito 3 years ago
The belts are not full of atoms but electrons stripped from atoms streaming from the sun (plasma, but that aside)The H falls through the air rich in O2 (on a planet barren of plant life & animal life as the plants can not breathe & the pressure is so great, but lets forget that too)It combines with the O2 (some how without energy or a catalyst to combine it) then turns to water (stripping every available bit of O2 from the atmosphere, suffocating all life on the planet).WOW excellent theory!!!!!
rubberdown1969 3 years ago 116
He doesn't answer:where did the oxygen to make the water come from? Back of the envelope calculation: It would take approx. 150 times more O2 than there is in the atmosphere now in order to make enough water to cover to a depth of 5km (height of Mt. Ararat). If all this O2 were in the pre-flood atmosphere the pressure would be higher than 30atm and the partial pressure of O2 (P(O2)) would be over 30atm (almost 100% O2). Limit for human survival: .5atm. And everything becomes super-flammable
machomaas 3 years ago 59
Comment removed
theleeburton 3 years ago
So...
Aside from the flood being totally impossible without God miracling the water here, do we ever think about what it would mean if it was true?
27,000,000 people would have died. 8 people would have lived. That is one irritated deity.
sacrosanct24 3 years ago 32
Irritated is putting it mildly, matey. Do you know what you would do if you found out your wife was cheating on you??? when God found you cheating Him....sinning..lying...what should He do??
spmathew 3 years ago
a) Why would the earth's magnetic field just disappear?
b) Even if the above happened and water formed: Combining hydrogen and oxygen to form water is an exothermic reaction. That means you would not only have water, but also one gigantic explosion that would kill everything on the earth.
c) Noah and the animals would have been killed by cosmic radiation if there were no magenetic field.
d) Where did all the water go?
ConanTL 3 years ago 108
He's wrong about magnetic reversals, there is no evidence for magnetic reversals, he's confused. If the continents are as God said they are and ride atop a balsitic outer core, then a bolide could easily have sent those plates flying across the surface of the earth crashing into one another at impact. The subsequent volcanic activity would be recorded as mafic igneous rock erupts through the now fractured rock and would be "SEEN" as a magnetic reversal when in fact it's not.
sweetbilly 3 years ago
It would been seen as a magnetic reversal of the poles when in fact it's only how the grains of magnetic material lines up with the plates as they slide across the surface of the earth at a particular moment in time. He is not following scripture, he is making it up to fit the science instead of making the science fit the scripture. God said he placed the land in the midsts of the water, not connected to the balsitic plate.
sweetbilly 3 years ago
yes.
BRESHEET 3 years ago
So the godmade magnetic field protect us from godmade debris hitting the earth?
tomaselvis 3 years ago
It's funny that if this were the case that it automatically points to that assumption that "God" did it. This couldn't happen any other way. This video shows how this could happen, but has no other evidence to support the idea that a god caused it.
stevenstreet483 3 years ago
It's a no win situation here, explain how jesus made water to wine,resurected the dead, made a blind man see? explain those scientificaly please...lol i believe you can't scientificaly explain the flood,God, as one poster said could just MAKE water come down.
realistromeo 3 years ago
Creationists trying to use science to prove the miracle is their own deinal of the miraclulous aspect of it, and their attempt to rationalize it by twisting science to support their miracle. It's non-linear, isn't it? They should just stick to the story, "Some magic guy made it happen."
satweavers 3 years ago 8
There is plenty of geological evidence of Earth's magnetic field recorded in the alignment of iron atoms in ocean bottom that has expanded away from the Mid Atlantic Rift. The process of magnetic reversal itself takes thousands of years to happen for each incident. ALSO, this same record of magnetic reversal is a witness to such incidents that have happened over many MILLIONS of years, which is rather inconvenient for Creationists who believe Earth was created just seven thousand years ago.
satweavers 3 years ago
You are sure that in every case magnetic reversals took place over thousands of years? Were you there to measure them? If you dig deeper, you may find that the greatly oversimplified textbook cross-sectional crust diagrams of iron atom alignments are woefully incomplete, and the real picture is not only far more complicated, but makes nonsense out of the uniformitarian account. By the way, was that 7000 years on the Earth's surface, at the event horizon on a black hole, or in Schwarzchild time?
357MagnumBob 3 years ago
I would assume that for The Bible, being an ancient text that makes no mention of these other time references, that 7000 years is extrapolated by literal interpretation fundamentalists in the conventional sense. Creationists will argue, when pinned down by undeniable evidence of existance prior to the conventional 7K years age of the universe (speed of light and lightyear distance of observable stars)that time has not remained constant over the 7K years, thus reserving a loophole in their dogma.
satweavers 3 years ago 2
I imagine that they play this video in the geology classes in Kansas...
OhMyScience1 4 years ago
Let's see, so you say that the hydrogen was burned as it entered the atmosphere, forming water. First of all, burning hydrogen, like all combustion reactions, releases a great deal of heat. You wouldn't get water, you would get steam. It would be hot enough to burn Noah's skin. Secondly, if all that hydrogen were to react with oxygen, there would be no oxygen left. I never thought I'd say this, but Kent Hovind makes better arguments than this guy.
civisromae 4 years ago 5
So say the hydrogen did collapse.
This would not produce water with the oxygen without combustion. I think your clutchin at straws here, if you believe that god can do anything, then why do you have to explain the flood? God could have just magicked the water up.
adamsrj06 4 years ago 2
I agree with the post below and I would like to add one thing; if all the hydrogen fell into the torposphere and mixed with the oxygen, then wouldn't all of that breathable oxygen be taken away?
Venaloid 4 years ago
The extra water that the Earth receives is a no-brainer. Our Sun is 98% hydrogen. During a CME the Sun can eject billions of gallons of hydrogen into space. Hydrogen is just hydrogen and in the vacuum of space freezes. Earth's gravity pulls it in and during entry it burns and mixes with the oxygen and creates water, heat and electricity, see PME. Hmm, also explains why there is lightning now. LOL, the water molecules bumping together creating static never did sit right with me.
bignewgame 4 years ago
these arguments have more holes than a prostitute's fishnet stockings.
1st: how many times has the earths magnetic field been reversed? too many times to fit on a young earth
2nd: what EVIDENCE is there for the existence of these "belts"? none!
DriftingAces87 4 years ago
I do not agree with the magnetic reversals being evidence for a old earth. what was measured by the compasses and put in science books are two different things.
goodshorts 4 years ago
No. In the strata you find that the iron rich minerals are pointing in one direction then the opposite way in another layer. The different layers denote a passage if time. So at one time the poles switched sides. The last time this happed was 780,000 years ago.
Panzerjock 4 years ago 2
There is one area where I agree with this video. He sees that the magnetic field reversals show that the earth is not a Young earth. I can agree with that point. But the rest is bunk.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
OK...sent you the sites that show how the earth magnetic filed doesn't collapse...it cant. The earths rotation would have to stop. And not just the surface rotation, the inner core would have to stop spinning as well. That cant happen.
Panzerjock 4 years ago 2
the earth's rotation speed is declining, so eventually it will. it was faster in the past.
goodshorts 4 years ago
Yes, thats because we are losing our moon. This means nothing concerning this goofy video. Read the rest of the posts on why this video is bunk. The guy who posted this video gave up on the argument.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
You're talking about electric motors and generators. The magnetic fields will collapse when you shut off the electricity or power supply. This is electromagnetic induction, which is not the same as the earth's magnetic field, which is a magnetic dipole. Don't confuse the two. The earth has a consistent magnetic field not dependent on electricity. So the earth's field may move but never collapse.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Every magnet is a dipole, which simply means it has 2 poles, North and South. The earth's magnetic poles have reversed. The sun's magnetic poles also have reversed. We can prove that and we can measure that. Reversing of the magnetic poles requires collapsing the field and building it back up in the opposite direction. No scientist suggests that the earth's poles rotate. The lines of flux cannot just change direction without the field collapsing.
PowerVine 4 years ago
There are magnets that generate a field when powered up -- like electric motors. There are other magnets that do not need power -- like natural earth magnets. These are different. The first magnet type's field will collapse when the power is shut off. The other you can move, spin, throw, juggle and the field is always there. This is the type the earth has. The earths field can move but doesn't collapse.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
You are talking about electromagnets and permanent magnets. It makes no difference. With either kind of magnet the magnetic poles cannot reverse without the magnetic field collapsing during the reversal. Science has demonstrated this has happened to the earth's magnetic field. In fact it is becoming less strong right now indicating a possible reversal at some future time.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Science has said the poles have reversed. Meaning the North swung to the South. The field didn't collapse, it just spun around. And yes it has happed in the past. It last happed about 780,000 years ago. And though it can't be predicted it probably will happen again.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
The poles have reversed but they did so by the magnetic field collapsing and then restoring with the opposite polarity. Can you cite one scientific publication which says the poles have rotated or "swung" or "spun around" as you say?
PowerVine 4 years ago
I can ask you the same question. You are tying to say the Earth's magnetic field has an on/off switch. It doesnt. it is always on just like a natural magnet. The only way for the poles to reverse is if the poles flipped.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
It is impossible for a magnetic field to reverse polarity without the field collapsing. It has happened with both the earth's magnetic field and the sun's magnetic field. You can't cite any scientist who says the magnetic field swings or spins around.
PowerVine 4 years ago
I just showed you (Twice) that the magnetic field doesn't collapse. I posted (Twice) a NASA site that illustrates this. For some inexplicable reason they don't seem to show up in your comments & responses.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
I did not remove or block any comment or response from you. YouTube does not allow URLs in comments posted (for good reason because of spammers) so perhaps they blocked it. Try sending it to me as a YouTube email message. Thanks.
PowerVine 4 years ago
So I think it's safe to conclude the earths magnetic field never collapsed. The hydrogen gas layer hovering in the magnetic field is imaginary. The hypothesis of this video has no grounding. This video is fooling those who dont know any better and is just plain pseudo -Science.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Going back to your video.... If we lost our magnetic field massive amounts of stellar radiation from our sun would cook our planet in days. Life would be killed off in a very short time. Plus the Hydrogen wouldn't collapse. It would bleed off into space from the massive solar winds which our magnetic field protects us from. Wow. Religion meets science fiction. Come on People .... Think...use reason.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
It's a scientific fact the the earth's magnetic field has reversed itself more than once.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Sure, but the last one was 780,000 years ago. And it was a reversal not a collapse. A collapse would be devastating.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
You're assuming the hydrogen is hydrogen gas. The Van Allen Belts are made of charged hydrogen atoms attached to heavier atoms and molecules. There is much we don't know about magnetic reversals, but the date you give is not what most evidence points to. If the magnetic field flips reversing north and south, there will be a period when magnetism is zero and there is no magnetic shielding for the earth. We can't determine how long that is since we have not been able to observe such a process.
PowerVine 4 years ago
The astronauts passed through the so called Van Allen Belt on their way to the moon and felt nothing. To say these charged particals fell to earth and became water is just plain nuts.
You assume the reversal of the magnetic field caused a collapes. Why couldnt the poles just switch? The magnetic field is always there. Just not working in the same direction.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Your statement is like saying the astronauts passed through the atmosphere on the way to the moon and felt nothing so believing that the moisture in the atmosphere could become water and fall to the earth is "just plain nuts." Also a magnetic field cannot switch polarity without collapsing. It happens all the time in electric motors and transformers. The lines of flux collapse into the magnet and then expand back outward again with opposite polarity.
PowerVine 4 years ago
The atmosphere is measurable. It can be felt on re-entry. It can be seen thought light refraction. It exerts pressure per square inch. Your fantasy hydrogen layer is simple speculation with not measurable proof and is only a hypothesis to help your inexplicable Earth wide flood. A flood for which there is no proof or evidence.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
You're talking about electric motors and generators. The magnetic fields will collapse when you shut off the electricity or power supply. This is electromagnetic induction, which is not the same as the earth's magnetic field, which is a magnetic dipole. Don't confuse the two. The earth has a consistent magnetic field not dependent on electricity. So the earth's field may move but never collapse.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
2CH 13:3 Abijah sent 400,000 men into battle against Jeroboam's 800,000 men. This is a total of 1,200,000 men, all of them Jews. (Note: Assuming one additional woman per man of fighting age, plus two persons per man [either older persons or children] would put the Jewish population of the surrounding area at a minimum of 4,800,000 persons; hardly feasible.)
Panzerjock 4 years ago
This is the same passage you referred to before and which I answered before. You say these numbers are too big. I have no way of knowing and neither do you. The fact that you say the numbers are too large doesn't prove anything except that you don't believe it.
PowerVine 4 years ago
I don't believe it because there is no evidence for it. We know a lot about the population make up during those times. Rome, one of the largest cities in the world at the time, had 1,000,000 inhabitance. Israel had nowhere near the population of Rome. The evidence shows that. This is obviously more bible author grandstanding in order to build zeal with its target audience.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Actually at the time Abijah was king of Judah (915-913 BC) the population of Rome was 0. Rome was founded in 753 BC and remember the year numbers advance from larger to smaller in BC dates. Perhaps you don't 'know a lot about the population make up during those times.'
PowerVine 4 years ago
Thanks for making my point. There was even less of the population to draw from to make that 1.2 million man army.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
The population of the city of Rome has no bearing on the armies of Israel. Israel did not draft Romans into their army.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Again you miss my point. There was even less of a population in 915 BCE to draw such a huge Israeli army. 1.2 million men was more than 1/2 of Egypt's total population. Raising 400,000 and 800,000 men armies was just biblical grandstanding on the part of the writer. If Israel really could have raised such an army they could have invaded Assyria, Persia, and Egypt all at the same time.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
More Corinthian shenanigans. 2CH 7:5, 8-9 Solomon sacrificed 22,000 oxen and 120,000 sheep in one week. This is 845+ animals per hour, 14+ animals per minute, for seven days straight. John Morrell cant even do that!
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Actually you mean Chronicles. Corinthians is in the New Testament. Chronicles is in the Old Testament. Actually it was the people of Israel gathered together to dedicate the new temple who sacrificed 22,000 cattle and 120,000 sheep and goats. Solomon didn't do it himself. He was their leader and the one who supervised the building of the temple and its dedication.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Yes. My mistake. Be glad I am not a scribe. I could have been the fault for yet another contradiction in the bible.
That must have been one gruesome site. So tell me. To what purpose does the almighty god need to have animals slaughtered in his name? If god created all life on the planet what is the point of killing them for him?
Panzerjock 4 years ago
God made the animals, he can replace them. But the point is not the animals, it is the sacrifice made by the people who paid money to purchase those animals and spent time raising them. Our sacrifice to God is giving back to him what he has given to us even though we want to keep it for ourselves. It is really giving ourselves to God. That's what God wants from us and that is what we owe to our Creator and Redeemer. I don't suppose you can comprehend that.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Just to put this into perspective. The entire German army on the eastern front just before they invaded Russia had 1.2million men. The German population was 60 million. Even with the military buildup of the Nazi war machine they could not match the men at arms vs. Population ratio the jews apparently were able to achieve? Its not reasonable.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
I suspect that you would also say that the ratio of military vs population of the Jewish state of Israel today is not reasonable. It far exceeds that of Nazi Germany.
PowerVine 4 years ago
What I am saying is an army of 400,000 men was unheard of in those days, let alone 800,000. You were a Superpower if you had 40,000. You dont seem to appreciate the difficulty in supplying, arming and training 400,000 men in a pre-industrial age. To say that Israel and Judah had a combined army of 1.2 mill is plain lunacy. The entire population of Israel today is just over 7 mill. It would be hard for Israel to raise a 1.2mill man army without a suffering serious economic repercussions.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
In those days it would be easier to raise an army because the farmers would leave their fields, go into battle, and then return to their farms. In the "pre-industrial age" and with their primitive weapons soldiering was not as complicated as it is today. Virtually every man could be a soldier.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Yes but there still wasn't 1.2million farmers in all of Isreal/Judha to be soldiers. You admitted yourself that these figures are probably a mistake.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
LE 14:33-57 God himself believes that a house or clothes can have leprosy and he details the remedy.
LE 14:49-53 The cure for leprosy involves incantations and the blood of a bird.
NU 11:31-33 A "wind from the Lord" brings such an abundance of quail that "he who gathered the least gathered ten homers," or about 62 bushels. Altogether, this would have been enough to fill several thousand boxcars. Unfortunately, it was immediately followed by a great plague (food poisoning?) from the Lord.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Lev 14- A house or building today can be infected with mildew or black mold which makes it an unhealthy place for people to live or work. We refer to it as a 'sick building.' Sometimes the only cure is to tear it down. God was giving healthy living instructions to the Israelites that were way ahead of their time. The atonement ceremony was not the cure, but it declared to the community that the house was 'clean' similar to the ceremony to restore a man cured of leprosy to the community.
PowerVine 4 years ago
We arent talking about some infestation of the house it-self, like mold. We are talking about a disease. The bible says the disease comes from the house it self. THis is obviously the work of some uneducated superstitious early Iron age man and not the work of some all knowing god. Common, lets get real.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
This passage is talking about cleansing a house that is infested with mildew or mold. Living in a house like that can make people sick the same as if they had a disease. People in that day did not understand good health practices such as this. God was giving instructions for healthy living that were way ahead of their time.
PowerVine 4 years ago
What verse does it say mold or mildew? It talks about the plague. It says the source comes from the walls or mortar of the house. The house isn't the cause. Now if it said to bath regularly and to use some herb to dress blemishes and to keep a clean home then I would agree with you in being a guide for hygiene. But this is not the case. then to end it all with some Voodoo ceremony really smacks of primitive minds at work here.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
It says "mildew" or "mold" all the way through this passage. You must be using the King James Version with its old English words. The ceremony has nothing to do with voodoo or with cleansing the house. It was to pronounce the house clean to the community and to honor God as the one who gave the instructions for cleansing.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Yes. I am using the king james version. Because that is the closest to the original script. You are using the newer "revised" versions of the bible, which change many of the descriptive words to make the bible sound more pleasing to today's ideals. These versions play down the embarrassing parts and play up those things that make god look good. This is man re-inventing god. Read the original English bible. There you will see your real god.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
The King James Version is not closer to the original text. We have older manuscripts today than the KJV translators had. Since they made their translation in 1611 several older manuscripts have been found and they are used in the newer translations. Also many English words have changed in meaning since 1611. Go back to the original Hebrew and Greek if you want to understand the meaning. I suspect that you really don't want to understand.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Well since we don't have the original writings we really don't know what was written. But Bible scholars have been able to ascertain that the bible has gone through some editing and mistranslations down through the centuries. You have evidence that some New and better bible is available that is based on the oldest text found? And more accurately tells the word of god? What bible rendition is this?
Panzerjock 4 years ago
We don't have the original documents written by the hand of the Bible writers. We do have over 5000 Bible manuscripts and fragments - way more than any other ancient document. We have New Testament manuscripts dating as early as the second century and Old Testament manuscripts written before Christ. Comparing the oldest manuscripts with the newer ones shows the Bible has been faithfully and accurately transmitted to us. Any differences are insignificant and make no difference to the message.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Are you kidding? The only way to make copies of books was to take it to a scribe. There are many cased where you could see the scribe got tired or bored and made big mistakes. Then others where the scribe didnt understand or agree what was written so would note in the margin his thoughts which became text in subsequent copies. Editing was discovered when a scribe didnt like how John's gospel ended so added 12 verses to the book that are still there today.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Again, the accuracy of the scribes has been verified by comparing manuscripts from various centuries. There are no significant differences which make any change to the message of the Bible. Also you made an error in your last statement. There is no question about the last verses of John. You probably meant to say the last 12 verses of Mark's gospel are not found in the oldest manuscripts. But even if you throw them out those verses add no information that isn't found elsewhere in the gospels.
PowerVine 4 years ago
You have admitted that the scribes have made errors in translation and now are guilty of editing the word of god. Why does gods book need edited? Further more why wouldn't the original text have been miraculously preserved if it were from divine dictation? Oh! And BTW. What ever happed to the 2 stone tablets with the 10 commandments? You would think that would have survived 3000 or so years.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Num 11- This is an example of getting what you ask for rather than what you need. The Israelites were blessed with divine food, but they wanted meat and the delicacies of Egypt. They forgot they had been slaves in Egypt and wanted to go back. God gave them a super-abundance of what they asked for and it killed many of them. I suspect it was food poisoning. It says those who gathered collected at least 60 bushels, but we don't know how many gathered.
PowerVine 4 years ago
So am I to understand that if god is giving that I should not take it because he may try and make an example of me? Is this the Loving caring god you are trying to sell?
Panzerjock 4 years ago
I guess the moral of Numbers 11 is that you had better be careful about your whining, crying and complaining. God may get tired of hearing it and decide to give you what you ask for, even though he knows it will not be good for you. I have to admit I may have done that with my sons at some time.
PowerVine 4 years ago
You poisoned your sons?
Panzerjock 4 years ago
There are 2 points in this story that are wrong.
1) The shear exageration in the number of quail is not believeable.
But assuming the mirical is true......
2)Why would a kind and loving god give his people food that would kill them. Just to teach them a lesson? Sounds more like the work of a Dad who got tired of lisening to the kids in the back seat. So hauls off and slaps them.
Is this the sort of god you want to worship?
Panzerjock 4 years ago
So the problem is (1) you don't believe there is an almighty God who can perform miracles and supply a super-abundance of what we ask for and (2) you don't believe that this almighty God has the right to pass judgment on rebellious humans. These are not "2 points in the story that are wrong". They are just 2 points that you don't believe.
PowerVine 4 years ago
I believe that a god who could conjure up millions of birds in a day could also feed starving kids in the desert, cure the sick and end war and famine. But he'd rather teach us a lesson on why not to question his absolute power over us. Sounds more like a plot for some alien invasion movie than a reason love this murdering god.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
God has given us the resources to feed all the starving children in the world. The problem is same as that of the ancient Israelites - our sin and self-centered greed have prevented us from doing what God put us on earth to do.
PowerVine 4 years ago
What did god put us on earth to do? What purpose would man serve to an All mighty super being who can create an entire universe in a day? .... Worship? Is that what we we're here for? To bow before the All might god. To tremble at the mere sound of his name? Did you bring your sons into this world for them to worship you? Sounds maniacal to me. What a turn off.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
What did god put us on earth to do? What purpose would man serve to an All mighty super being who can create an entire universe in a day? .... Worship? Is that what we we're here for? To bow before the All might god. To tremble at the mere sound of his name? Did you bring your sons into this world for them to worship you? Sounds maniacal to me. What a turn off.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
I believe that God put each of us on this earth for a purpose. Yes, the purpose is to worship God by serving him and serving our fellow human beings created in his image. Does your life have a purpose? Is there any reason for your existence? Are you just spending your short time here on earth serving yourself and trying to convince others that God does not exist?
PowerVine 4 years ago
I ask those questions to make a point. The age-old question of "what is the meaning of life" is answered by religion. The problem is religion is faulty. Simple wishful thinking. What does a god need with some insignificant humans to worship him? Nothing. Because god was made up through superstition to give our life meaning. Man made god to satisfy his needs and to control the masses.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
You say "religion" was devised to give meaning to life, but you didn't answer my questions. "Does your life have a purpose? Is there any reason for your existence? Are you just spending your short time here on earth serving yourself and trying to convince others that God does not exist?"
PowerVine 4 years ago
Does my life have propose? I guess that depends on whom you ask. To my wife, children and loved ones - yes. Otherwise - no. I dont believe there is some calculating god who put me here to fulfill some mission. We are no diffent than any bacteria, plant or animal. We are just part of the life circle. The only difference is we are self aware. As far as convincing others....I get some satisfaction out of snapping them out of their delusion.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
There was no worldwide flood. Why? Because there is no evidence for it. This psudo-Science fiction is a desperate attempt to bring the bible in line with what we know about the world today. So make up your ridiculous rationalizations all you want. In the end you are only deluding yourself.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Why are Godless people always the meanest?
ollonelycat 4 years ago
If there was no worldwide flood then why do ancient cultures around the world (including the Egyptians and the Chinese) have legends of one?
PowerVine 4 years ago
Because floods happen. At the end of the last Ice age man was just developing the written language. There were a lot of huge but localized floods. Stories were passed down from Generation to Generation that turned into legends. Simple really.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Yes, floods do happen. But most floods are not like the big one. Many different ancient civilizations have their story of a massive flood in which only one man and his family survived. You can't just blow that off as being 'simple really.'
PowerVine 4 years ago
You have to put yourself in the world of the bronze aged man. The world is big. There is no internet, no telephones, no CNN. The whole world had yet to be discovered. How would they know the world was flooded? Their little 10,000 sq mile area they lived in was their world. So a big flood from glacial melting happened that devastated their land. To them the world was flooded. The flood was so devastating it became a legend as it was passed from generation to generation.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
And the same 'local flood' happened from glaciers in numerous places all around the world. And how fast does a glacier melt?
PowerVine 4 years ago
The glacier melt happend over hundreds of years which formed inland seas and lakes. Some of those "Great lakes" are still here. Others overfilled and flooded vast areas. During the summer months the glaciers melted faster causing massive floods all around the northern hemisphere. It was these floods that formed the Grand Canyon. It was these floods that were to become legend.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
I am familiar with what the glaciers did. I live by one of those Great Lakes. Legends of a great flood are found in ancient writings of cultures not only in the northern hemisphere, but in the southern hemisphere as well. The story was also a legend in other places where glaciation did not occur. Also the Grand Canyon was not formed by a flood. John Clayton discusses that in his book "The Source" and in a video called "Canyonlands" available at DoesGodExist-dot-TV.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Let me guess. It says that noah's flood not only created the Grand Canyon but even shaped the contenents we have today. Right?
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Did you read what I wrote? I said "the Grand Canyon was NOT formed by a flood." I will soon put portions of the "Canyonlands" video on YouTube. In the meantime you can get the entire video by going to DoesGodExist-dot-TV.
PowerVine 4 years ago
It wasn't just the northern pole that was affected by the Ice age. The south had its melting period too. With all this melting what do you thing happened with the ocean levels? They rose. So even the equatorial lands would have been affected.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
So you believe the entire world was flooded by glaciers, but you can't believe in the flood of the Bible.
PowerVine 4 years ago
I believe the world experienced a climate change at the time of early man. To explain these changes they blamed it on thier god and this became legends. There were floods but not a flood that covered the entire land suface of the earth. Just lots of little big floods. Enough to tell stories about.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
LOL MessianicJew2000 Emails me telling me he wont answer anymore of my questions. He has to go to class then blocks me from replying. Face it, you argument held no water. You saw you were in checkmate so you bogied out, headed for the deck and ran like a girl.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Like you said... anyone can rationalize or argue a point even if it is not true. The OJ Simpson defense team was proof of this.
Can your mind be changed? Or are you married to your conclusions? And more importantly: WHY?
ollonelycat 4 years ago
Good analogy. Defending the bible is like defending OJ.
Can my mind be changed? Probably not. I have read too much of the bible and know many of its faults, holes and incongruities. But I hold out the hope that there is a god. SO that makes me Agnostic rather than atheist. Although I do lean to the Atheistic view.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
When you read the Bible, hold it in your hands as Holy. Believe that it could be the truth, and pray for it to be revealed as such.
Don't just read it like any other book, throwing out what you think are inconsistencies. When you dig deeper, you recieve a new spirit of language to interpret the words with. Not your school education.
ollonelycat 4 years ago
If the bible didnt contradict itself. If the evidence in the universe supported the words in the bible then -You Bet! Id be holding the bible and praying to the all mighty god.
But this is not the case. The bible is nothing more than a book of fairytales and teachings to give meaninig to the world and to those who cant understand it.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
I view the Bible as a living thing.
This word will not die.
Jesus made that clear.
If you see the Bible as a book of fairytales then that is all you will get.
If you find out what the Bible really is, you would humble yourself before it and realize that all your wisdom is empty without the understanding of God.
ollonelycat 4 years ago
What you are suggesting is akin to believing OJ Simpson is innocent no matter the evidence. Just trust in your heart that if you love OJ then he is innocent.
This is your argument? Forget the evidence. Forget what the bible teaches. Forget the contradictions. Just Believe and you will be all right. Well, believing has "Zero" bearing on the Truth.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
OJ confessed. The book is available on Amazon. You are right. Believing something does not make it true, even if OJ believes it. But what about the contradictions in the Bible. Why not point out some of them?
PowerVine 4 years ago
If you had proper vision, I doubt you would still see the contradictions that you speak of.
ollonelycat 4 years ago
You mean stuff like this:
1SA 16:14-23 Evil spirits can come from God (and be exorcised with God's help).
2CH 13:17 500,000 Israelites are slain in a single battle. (Note: This is more than were lost in any single battle of World War II, and even exceeds the number of deaths that resulted from the dropping of the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.)
Panzerjock 4 years ago
The Holy Spirit was with King Saul as he led God's people. Saul disobeyed God so God's Spirit departed and God allowed a tormenting spirit to come in, because God's Spirit was not there to keep the evil spirit away. When Saul was tormented he called for David, the writer of Psalms, to play his harp and sing his psalms. Saul was comforted by that. Many people have been comforted by David's Psalm 23. I am one of those people, so I can understand this passage and I see no contradiction.
PowerVine 4 years ago
The parallel passage in I Kings 15 does not give a number so I see no contradiction. However, this does seem to be an overly large number and I suspect it's a scribal error. Some scribe copying by hand many years ago mis-copied the number and the error carried over to subsequent copies. If a trivial number error is the worst you can find in a 3000-year-old document that was copied by hand for the first 2500 years, that is amazing!
PowerVine 4 years ago
lol..Ok so if one mistake can happen in a book the size of the bible then surely others can happen. How do we know that the bible is really accurate since we dont have the original texts?
See another glairing error in my next post.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
EX 12:37, NU 1:45-46 The number of men of military age who take part in the Exodus is given as about 600,000. Allowing for women, children, and older men would probably mean that a total of more than 2,000,000 Israelites left Egypt at a time when the whole population of Egypt was less than 2,000,000.
Embellishments seem to happen a lot in the bible. If this can happen how do we know the words haven't been effected as well?
Panzerjock 4 years ago
more Scribe Errors?
2CH 21:20, 22:1-2 Ahaziah was forty-two when he became king; he succeeded his father, who died at the age of forty. Thus, Ahaziah was two years older than his father. 2CH 21:20, 22:1-2 Ahaziah was forty-two when he became king; he succeeded his father, who died at the age of forty. Thus, Ahaziah was two years older than his father. [Note: Some translations use "twenty-two" here in an attempt to rectify this discrepancy. The Hebrew is clear, however, that 2CH 22:2 is 42.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.
GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.
GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Don't you think that if these contradictions were as plain as you describe them, the Bible would have been tossed out long ago - or succesfully destroyed by now - which people have tried to do since it's existence? Furthermore, what authors could plainly write such "so-called contradictions" and not know it, or have done it for a contex reason? And then I supposed when you read the words of Jesus, you find them to be contradicting words of a human being as well?
ollonelycat 4 years ago
On the surface you dont see the contradictions because they are at different parts in the bible. The bible is big and complicated for a reason. One part says to love thy neighor as yourself then in an other part, several books away, it says to treat others as they treat you "eye for an eye", "take thy women for yourself" sort of stuff. The context argument is always -"well thats not what god meant when he said that" Bull. This is his word, his book.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
The "eye for an eye" principle is directed toward human government, originally given as directions to Moses and the Jewish leaders to punish criminals in accordance with their offense. The punishment fits the crime. It's called justice. We still expect our civil government to carry out justice today. But love for neighbor is brought out all through the Bible. It is especially emphasized by Jesus. Civil governments must administer justice. We as individuals, and Christians, must minister love.
PowerVine 4 years ago
Moses wrote Genesis but he was not present at creation. How did God reveal the details to him? Suppose God gave Moses a vision of creation from the view of a man standing on earth watching it happen. Genesis 1:1, undated and un-timed, says darkness covered the earth. Day 1 Moses is standing in total darkness as clouds and gases begin to dissipate. Moses sees light appear and there is now day and night. By day 4 it is clear enough that the sun, and then the moon, and then the stars appear.
PowerVine 4 years ago
So your saying the bible, the word of god, is flawed because of the perspective of the writer? Interesting. I can understand this. But it doesnt help your case that the word of god could be skewed because of perspective.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Genesis chapter 1 gives a chronology of creation. Chapter 2 gives further details. Chapter 1 says trees and birds were created before man. Chapter 2 does not say man was created before trees, It merely says God 'had planted a garden' into which he placed man and he planted trees in that garden. Chapter 2 does not say God created man before animals and birds. It says God 'had formed' the animals and birds which he brought to man to name them. No contradictions here.
PowerVine 4 years ago
If god created man on the 6th day after the plant and animals then why did he create man (Adam) again in the garden out of order from Gen 1? LOL... Created vs Formed. Same thing to me. But it is funny when christens hang on a word when it suits them but twist it to make it fit their paradigm in others. Example Circle vs. Orb, Globe, Ball, Round.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
You are still missing the point. The English translation in chapter 2 says that God brought to Adam the animals that he "had formed" so that Adam could name them. "Formed" is past tense. "Had formed" is past perfect, meaning something completed in the past. It does not say that God created the animals after he created Adam. It says he had already created them in the past (before Adam) and after creating Adam he brought the animals to Adam.
PowerVine 4 years ago
OK. Here are a few contradictions:
DT 6:5, MT 22:37, MK 12:30, LK 10:27 Love God.
DT 6:13, PS 33:8, 34:9, 111:10, 115:13, 128:1, 147:11, PR 8:13, 16:6, 19:23, 22:4, IS 8:13, LK 12:5, 1PE 2:17 Fear God.
1JN 4:18 There is no fear in love.
PR 30:5 Every word of God proves true.
1KI 22:23, 2CH 18:22, JE 4:10, JE 20:7, EZ 14:9 God deceives some of the prophets.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
You are making the mistake of only looking at the English words. Remember the Bible was written in Hebrew and Greek. For example in the passages in Luke and 1 Peter the Greek word is 'phobeo' which means 'being in awe of, reverence'. In I John the word is 'phobos' which means 'be afraid exceedingly, terror.' If we reverence, stand in awe, and love God, the perfect love of God casts out the terrifying fears of this world. Try it and see.
PowerVine 4 years ago
The real problem is we don't have the original text of any of the books in bible. We have some very old copies that we hope were copied exactly. The bible has undergone changes over time. From copy to copy over hundreds of years scribes have made errors and even edited the bible books. For example the last 12 verses in Mark were added by a scribe because he didn't like how the book ended. This became part of the text in later copies and is in our bible today.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
You are taking events out of context. The people refused to hear the truth and only wanted to hear what they wanted to hear. God allowed the false prophets (not the true prophets of God) to tell them what they wanted to hear. There are still plenty of false prophets today telling people what they want to hear, because they don't want to hear the truth. For example, the truth that God exists.
PowerVine 4 years ago
The truth will eventually be made known once and for all.
I don't forget any evidence.
The evidence that teaches you is the same evidence that supports my beliefs.
What we are exchanging here are merely words.
ollonelycat 4 years ago
I would hope they are more than words. I would hope you understand the ideas I am trying to convey. Since that is the whole idea with communication...the exchange of ideas.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
"communication = exchange of ideas" seems to contradict everything else you said.
I don't know if you are getting the right message when you read the Bible.
Jesus knows the nature of God and he explains a lot in the gospels... the old God isn't different, he is just expressed differently.
If you opened your perception, you would see the signs of God. Is it really wrong for him to pass judgment on the wicked anyway?
Eartly understanding will not reveal the truth to you.
ollonelycat 4 years ago
I feel that I am looking at the whole of the bible. I see some good teachings. And I also see questionable teachings. When I look at the whole I see contradiction, impossibilities, and revolution. There isn't a consistent underlying theme. But if I narrowed my vision and only looked at the good things taught in the bible then I would be cherry picking my way into believing.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Could you be able to put everything else aside and just focus on reading and understanding the 4 gospels alone?
ollonelycat 4 years ago
I guess I could. But I thought you said the whole bible was the word of god. Now you are suggesting that I ignore the majority of the book? Is this what you do? Did you like President Clinton? Could you only focus on what was good with that president and ignore the bad? Then only think of him as a good and just man? No? Well the same works for the bible. I cant just break off the pieces I like. Otherwise I'd just be kidding myself.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
I'm not telling you to perminently ingore what you think to be flaws.
I'm saying temporarily ignnore them until you seek out the glory of Christ. I wanted to find the truth so I got blockbuster online and rented every movie that I could find about Jesus. And I am still finishing up the gospels. After concluding that Jesus was for real - because I don't think he could have been made up - I am waiting for the rest of the Bible to open up to me in small dosages.
ollonelycat 4 years ago
The consistent underlying theme of the Bible is God reaching out to restore his wayward creatures back to himself. It it a true story of creation, fall, and redemption which is greater than any fiction story man has ever written.
PowerVine 4 years ago
So you beleive the bible is the Ture word of god? Or are they just inspired books written by a group of men that were collated to make a book for god?
Panzerjock 4 years ago
The Bible was written by 40 different men, with different backgrounds in different languages over a period of 1600 years but all under the inspiration of God. It has a cohesiveness and focus that make it truly amazing and without contradictions. It has been proven many times to be historically accurate. It has survived many efforts to eradicate it from the earth. It has even survived neglect. There is nothing like it in all of literature. It still changes people's lives. It is the word of God.
PowerVine 4 years ago
You say it "is" the word of god yet you admit there are some scribe errors. Is it not possible that other mistakes, mistranslations or even editing could have happened? I have shown you Many many examples of contradictions yet you rationalize those away by beating the same drum that god is the truth.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
You have shown a few examples of what you say are 'contradictions.' I have shown you why they are not. I have not said 'God is the truth.' I have merely shown why your 'contradictions' are not contradictions. You refuse to listen.
PowerVine 4 years ago
You have rationalized why they are not. Anyone can do that. Tilting your head to make your gas gauge seem more full is rationalizing. You are fooling yourself to think there is more gas in the car then there really is. So rationalize all you like but don't be surprised when you run out of gas.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
What a bunch of crap. If we lost our magnetic field massive amounts of stellar radiation from our sun would cook our planet in days. Life would be killed off in a very short time. Plus the Hydrogen wouldn't collapse. It would bleed off into space from the massive solar winds which our magnetic field protects us from. Wow. Religion meets science fiction. Come on People .... Think...use reason.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
The really thing that people don't look at that I found with common sense is the scar line in the Atlantic.
MessianicJew2000 4 years ago
LOL... you mean the Mid Atlantic ridge? That "Scar line" as you call it is a fault where two plates are pushing away from each other causing continental drift. The Atlantic is getting 1" bigger each year.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Now you know where the water came from: The crust of the earth.
MessianicJew2000 4 years ago
Water came from the crust of the earth? That makes no scense at all. So the continents were floating on water? PLEASE!
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Water Chambers. And the is a fact that there are water chambers in the crust.
MessianicJew2000 4 years ago
Yes, but not enough to flood the earth. Ok.... Answer me this...Where did all the water go after the flood? According to the bible it covered all land on earth. This would effectively double the water volume of the oceans. Where did it all go...and don't say evaporation.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
"3And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated." Yes it did. So if you can't find simple things like this than take everything out of context. Who are you to tell me what the dogon thing is saying?
MessianicJew2000 4 years ago
So your saying the water just evaporated? Come on. Even someone with no scientific training will know that is simply impossible. There is "Zeor" scientific backing for this. Face it. Noah's flood is just a fairytale story and thats all.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Who are you to but limits on God?
ollonelycat 4 years ago
God puts limits on himself...unknowingly it would appear.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
If you continue to deny the Lord, you very well may be denied by him when your time on Earth is up.
ollonelycat 4 years ago
The lord needs to give me a reason (a sign) inorder to believe. The lord has turned his back on all of mankind. Unless he just never existed at all, which sems to be the more plausible answer. Jesue has already broken his promise - MT 16:28, MK 9:1, LK 9:27 Jesus says that some of his listeners will not taste death before he comes again in his kingdom. This was said almost 2000 years ago.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
The kingdom of God did come with power on the day of Pentecost which was 50 days after the Passover when Jesus was crucified and rose again. Jesus came in his kingdom here upon the earth, the church, on that day and it was during the lifetime of most of those living at the time he spoke those words. He is also coming again to judge the earth.
PowerVine 4 years ago
God can do whatever he wants - if that means break ALL laws of science (which he created), so be it.
ollonelycat 4 years ago
You are right. That is the excepted view. But if you think about this notion for a minute. If god wanted the world to be perfect why didn't he do that? Either god is not all-powerful and doesn't have control Or god just wants the world to be this way. Either way god isnt much of a benevolent omnipotent being.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
I don't know if God wanted the world to be perfect from the start or not, but if he created it perfect from the start, you would not be a free spirit to even think on the terms that you do. If God wants us to be perfect, he might expect us to strive for perfection and overcome all evil. Isn't life and free will beautiful? Do you wish to be a robot?
ollonelycat 4 years ago
The problem with this line of thinking is 2 fold.
1) God can do anything right? I'm sure if he was real, god could have made us perfect with a free spirit. If he created quantum Mechanics and dark matter and those other things that defy the laws of physics then he could have made us with the ability to chose and to
2) If god is an all knowing and all seeing creator of time, space & dimension then there is nothing god couldn't know -Right?
Panzerjock 4 years ago
God gave us the gift of free will because he loves us.
So he gave us plenty of rope to hang ourselves but that was not his intention.
That is why he offers us salvation by grace through Jesus. He is giving us a loop-hole out of our wages. None of us are deserving of heaven on our own. I'm still trying to figure out how to get there.
ollonelycat 4 years ago
continued.....
When god crated time, all future events unfolded before him. So he knew Adam would eat of the fruit. He knew Satan would turn against him. He knew all the choices everyone would ever make even before they were born. From our perspective we think we are making choices but in reality your destiny is already written. You are nothing more than a semi-blind slot car in god's racetrack of life. In other words....if you believe in a all powerful god then we cant have free will.
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Well if you believe in the bible then you must believe the world is flat. Maybe the extra water just spilled off the edges!
Panzerjock 4 years ago
Wrong. The Bible does not say it is flat. And that argument sucks anyways.
MessianicJew2000 4 years ago
I was joking in my last post. However, even though the bible doesnt plainly say the world is flat there are many places where it suggests it. The 4 corners of the earth, the pillars that hold it up, being able to see all the nations on the earth. They believed the world was flat.
Panzerjock 4 years ago