14 May 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou say that the laws of nature has not been the same throughout the history? That the nature of light has not always been the same? That science is wrong about this?
No he didn't he found out how it works not why it exists. However one is left wondering whether light worked differently before the flood. Either God planned it all ahead of time or the fundamental laws of physics were changed quite considerably. 🙂
Think again, what does the bible say about electromagnetic radiation?
14 May 08
Originally posted by pawnhandlerSo the letters of Paul is not the word of god, then why can I find those letters in the bible in the first place? I thought all books in the bible was the word of god, isn't it so?
That'd make him a good Jew, because it was mostly OT teaching. Jesus himself never said it was OK and the question doesn't seem to come up under his watch. Just because Paul says something doesn't mean it's what Jesus wanted; it just means he wrote things down and someone kept them. It could be that all remaining apostles said that slavery was a horrendous sin, but no one wrote it down.
If Paul thinks it is okay with slavery, then it must be the will of god that it is okay with slavery? I can read it in the bible, so it must be the word of god, interpreted by Paul with the aid of the holy spirit.
14 May 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasYou missed the smiley at the end of my post.
You say that the laws of nature has not been the same throughout the history? That the nature of light has not always been the same? That science is wrong about this?
Think again, what does the bible say about electromagnetic radiation?
You could just have well have said that whoever discovered the water cycle and how rain falls goes against any claims in the Bible of God making it rain.
Some people believe that Gods actions or 'miracles' work within the laws of physics. Others believe that some of them do and some of them don't.
There are many Christians (the majority I think) who believe that God made life via evolution, so knowing how evolution works does not negate the Biblical claim of "God made man".
Oddly enough this often results in the question of whether or not Gods input was necessary at all ie could it all have 'just happened' without Gods input.
I am an atheist by the way so none of the above really concerns me that much.
14 May 08
Originally posted by twhitehead"You missed the smiley at the end of my post." So I did, sorry. 😞
You missed the smiley at the end of my post.
You could just have well have said that whoever discovered the water cycle and how rain falls goes against any claims in the Bible of God making it rain.
Some people believe that Gods actions or 'miracles' work within the laws of physics. Others believe that some of them do and some of them don't.
There ar ...[text shortened]... s input.
I am an atheist by the way so none of the above really concerns me that much.
14 May 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NagePlease give me your view, Bosse, why was it okay to burn Bruno, by the order of the pope?
Try a little harder. Maybe, like, read up about Newton. You could also look into why Bruno was burnt. The case was a little more complex than you might think.
I'm glad they didn't burn Newton, though, but still he explained the colour of the rainbow as a natural fenomenon, and the physics behind has been there by billion of years, actually from the very start of Universe, some 14 billion years ago, not from the time after the, so called, flooding.
So please, give me your view, Bosse?
14 May 08
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasFor a start I don't think the Catholics take the story of the flood too literally but I don't know if they did in Newtons day. But then Newton was I believe in an Anglican country...
I'm glad they didn't burn Newton, though, but still he explained the colour of the rainbow as a natural fenomenon, and the physics behind has been there by billion of years, actually from the very start of Universe, some 14 billion years ago, not from the time after the, so called, flooding.
Now if Newton had lived in Rome and said something offensive about Marys virginity he might not have fared so well.
14 May 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasNo, twhitehead was being facetious. He doesn't really believe in the flood or that the laws of physics have ever changed. He's parodying the young earth creationists who claim that the decay constants of radioactive elements sped up during Noah's flood.
Who? Newton, the pope, or god himself?
I don't find anything funny about Bruno be burnt living in fire by the order of the pope. Is the pope evil? Too?
14 May 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasIt wasn't ok. But Bruno wasn't a scientist. He was more dangerous than Galileo.
Please give me your view, Bosse, why was it okay to burn Bruno, by the order of the pope?
Newton lived in England, so the Pope had no sway there. Even so, he kept his heretical religious views to himself.
14 May 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasIf you want to believe that every single iota of information in the Bible is God's will for all people for all times, and none of it is based on the wishes, desires, and beliefs of the people who wrote those things down as well as those who later copied them and translated them, then go for it. That's not my belief.
So the letters of Paul is not the word of god, then why can I find those letters in the bible in the first place? I thought all books in the bible was the word of god, isn't it so?
If Paul thinks it is okay with slavery, then it must be the will of god that it is okay with slavery? I can read it in the bible, so it must be the word of god, interpreted by Paul with the aid of the holy spirit.
14 May 08
Originally posted by pawnhandlerBut I suspect you do believe a considerable amount of stuff that Paul said that Jesus did not. So how do you know which bits to accept?
If you want to believe that every single iota of information in the Bible is God's will for all people for all times, and none of it is based on the wishes, desires, and beliefs of the people who wrote those things down as well as those who later copied them and translated them, then go for it. That's not my belief.
And as I pointed out earlier, surely Pauls writings are more likely to be an accurate recording of Pauls thoughts than the gospels are of what Jesus said.
14 May 08
Note, I personally disagree with slavery on all levels but...
Another interesting thoguth is that our idea of slavery is different than the biblical idea of slavery. In our culture's idea of slavery, slavery is forced upon the individual. During the bible times, people would sell themselves into servitude if they could not pay debts. At this point in time the became property.
So to answer the poster of "The Austrian with a basement of [sex] slaves is a perfect christian" i would have to say you have horrible understanding of truth. That man forced slavery upon his family.
14 May 08
Originally posted by endgamerEven so, what kind of Holy Book would condone the beating of an individual to death in certain circumstances?
During the bible times, people would sell themselves into servitude if they could not pay debts. At this point in time the became property.