Why do the anti God crowd attack the bible ?

[ABikerSailor]

Eye witness accounts are always evidence. That's not debateable. The debate is whether the witnesses are credible.

And you learn that by experimenting on the word.

Are you serious? You have no proof that those "eyewitnesses" even existed.

Why do you believe in evolution again ?

Because there is archaeological evidence that can be carbon dated.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I don't think God is too much for anyone to take in.

It is for the unwilling.

Lol no its not....God is a simple concept....everything is answered by goddidit

Learning all the evidence for the big bang however, is a lot to take in

Are you saying creationist don't look at the same evidence as evolutionist and just have different explanations for it ?

If the big bang happened why does it appear to be speeding up not slowing ?

 

[Avatar4321]

YWC why do you feel it's your divine right to pull certain parts of the Bible out and post them on here, but when others do the exact same thing they're "attacking the Bible"?



Maybe it's the devil working behind the scenes when you do it, and god working behind the scenes when we do it .

Don't make it bigger then it is pal.

It's our Christian duty to bring truth to the lost,thank US.

I seriously cringed when i read that. I believe you have sincere intent. But I think the Lord wants us to be humble and not condescending.

 

[cbirch2]

The only book more hateful than the bible is the koran.

Talk about absurd rhetoric.

Where exactly does Mien Kampf fall on your list of hateful books?

The old testament says things that are many levels more vile than things said in Mein Kampf.

How about when the man offered his daughted to be raped, so the angels wouldnt be?

 

[Avatar4321]

Having to imagine something, with no facts behind it, means it's not factual.

It's your belief, it's not fact. Call them beliefs, cuz they're not facts by any definition of the word fact.

Oh my God

Waving the white flag again, well done, 2 posts in a row.

There's no facts that show there's a force that can make snakes talk or make it possible to live inside whales, that's a belief. Glad we agree.

Arguments from silence aren't exactly the most reliable.

 

[cbirch2]

It is for the unwilling.

Lol no its not....God is a simple concept....everything is answered by goddidit

Learning all the evidence for the big bang however, is a lot to take in

Are you saying creationist don't look at the same evidence as evolutionist and just have different explanations for it ?

If the big bang happened why does it appear to be speeding up not slowing ?

lol if the big bang didnt happen why is everything expanding at all...

Doesnt expansion mean it was smaller at one point? How do you explain that?

 

[Avatar4321]

I always get a laugh when Christians pretend the Bible is scientific proof of anything.

And I'm amused when people pretend that scientific proof is the only way we can know anything. Amused and yet sad.

 

[cbirch2]

Based on the prediction of the big bang, its early supporters predicted that if it had happened it should leave behind traces of microwave radiation at about 3 degrees Kelvin.

Why then, if the big bang is wrong, did astronomers discover the Cosmic Microwave Background at a temperature of 2.7 Kelvin years after the Big Bang Theory predicted it?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Are you serious? You have no proof that those "eyewitnesses" even existed.

Why do you believe in evolution again ?

Because there is archaeological evidence that can be carbon dated.

You put a lot of faith in a system with flaws.

But how would carbon dating prove dinosaurs died off 65 million years ago if they say it carbon dating will only go back 40 thousand years ?

 

[Sky Dancer]

The only book more hateful than the bible is the koran.

Talk about absurd rhetoric.

Where exactly does Mien Kampf fall on your list of hateful books?

To be fair. The bible is full of passage after passage of who should be put to death. That can seem like hate to many.

It's an insult to tell this poster his view is absurd.

It's your holy book, but it's not the holy book of most of the people in the world.

 

[Avatar4321]

Your source says 50,000 animals were on board the Ark, including dinosaurs with men.



All basic elementary level science says that is jibberish. T-Rex wasn't quiety sitting on board next to cows and man.



Anything else? Or must the discussion stay at a pre-school level?

Do you think maybe God and noah was smart enough to think to use juveniles in the place of adults ?

Where did he find polar bears and penguins in the Middle East?

And who says he was in the middle east? The scriptures don't state that.

 

[cbirch2]

Why do you believe in evolution again ?

Because there is archaeological evidence that can be carbon dated.

You put a lot of faith in a system with flaws.

But how would carbon dating prove dinosaurs died off 65 million years ago if they say it carbon dating will only go back 40 thousand years ?

Pick one of the other 20 dating methods. No fossil is ever dated with just one technique, and never at just one spot. If samples from different spots agree, then you try a different form of dating. If all different samples agree and all forms of dating overlap you have a reliable date.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Lol no its not....God is a simple concept....everything is answered by goddidit

Learning all the evidence for the big bang however, is a lot to take in

Are you saying creationist don't look at the same evidence as evolutionist and just have different explanations for it ?

If the big bang happened why does it appear to be speeding up not slowing ?

lol if the big bang didnt happen why is everything expanding at all...

Doesnt expansion mean it was smaller at one point? How do you explain that?

How bout God is still creating.

Why would it speed up ?

 

[Avatar4321]

Let me give you an article with an explanation.

Could Noah's Ark really hold all the animals that were supposed to be preserved from Flood?











See this page in: Hungarian (magyar), Japanese - 日本語, Spanish (Español)

A growing number of scientists believe that geological evidence indicates our world has undergone a catastrophic flood. This is causing them to question whether or not the biblical account of Noah's ark could be true. Many people are rereading the Biblical description of the Ark to ascertain the feasibility of such a vessel to fulfill its designated purpose in light of present day knowledge of both zoology and our present day knowledge of shipbuilding.


Size comparison between average size one-story home and Noah's Ark. Illustration from The World that Perished.

How big was Noah's Ark?

"And God said unto Noah… Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt though make in the ark, and thou shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of… the length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. A window shalt thou make in the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side therof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it." (Gen. 6:14-16)


A cubit is the distance between an adult's elbow and tip of the finger, no less than 18-inches [45.72 centimeters]. (Scene from The World that Perished.)

Most Hebrew scholars believe the cubit to have been no less than 18 inches long [45.72 centimeters]. This means that the ark would have been at least 450 feet long [137.16 meters], 75 feet wide [22.86 meters] and 45 feet high [13.716000000000001 meters]. Noah's Ark was said to have been the largest sea-going vessel ever built until the late nineteenth century when giant metal ships were first constructed. Its length to width ratio of six to one provided excellent stability on the high seas. In fact, modern shipbuilders say it would have been almost impossible to turn over. In every way, it was admirably suited for riding out the tremendous storms in the year of the flood.

These dimensions are especially interesting when compared to those given in the mythical, Babylonian account of the Ark. Here the ark is described as a perfect cube, extending 120 cubits in all directions and with nine decks. Such a vessel would spin slowly round and round in the water and from the standpoint of stability, would be a disaster.

Was the ark big enough to hold the number of animals required?

The total available floor space on the ark would have been over 100,000 square feet, which would be more floor space than in 20 standard-sized basketball courts.


Assuming an 18-inch cubit [45.72 centimeters], Noah's Ark would have had a cubic volume equal to 569 modern railroad stock cars.

The total cubic volume would have been 1,518,000 cubic feet [462,686.4 cubic meters] --that would be equal to the capacity of 569 modern railroad stock cars.

Now comes the question, how many land dwelling air breathing animals would have had to be taken aboard the ark to survive the flood?

According to Ernest Mayr, America's leading taxonomist, there are over 1 million species of animals in the world.


God only provided the Ark for the protection of humans and land-dwelling, air-breathing creatures. A huge number of animals would not need to be taken aboard the Ark because they are water dwellers. Representatives would be expected to survive the catastrophe. With God's protection against extinction during the Deluge, survival would have been assured. (Scene from The World that Perished, a Christian motion picture about the Flood)

However, the vast majority of these are capable of surviving in water and would not need to be brought aboard the ark. Noah need make no provision for the 21,000 species of fish or the 1,700 tunicates (marine chordates like sea squirts) found throughout the seas of the world, or the 600 echinoderms including star fish and sea urchins, or the 107,000 mollusks such as mussels, clams and oysters, or the 10,000 coelenterates like corals and sea anemones, jelly fish and hydroids or the 5,000 species of sponges, or the 30,000 protozoans, the microscopic single-celled creatures.

In addition, some of the mammals are aquatic. For example, the whales, seals and porpoises. The amphibians need not all have been included, nor all the reptiles, such as sea turtles, and alligators. Moreover, a large number of the arthropods numbering 838,000 species, such as lobsters, shrimp, crabs and water fleas and barnacles are marine creatures. And the insect species among arthropoda are usually very small. Also, many of the 35,000 species of worms as well as many of the insects could have survived outside the Ark.

How many animals needed to be brought aboard?

Doctors Morris and Whitcomb in their classic book,The Genesis Flood state that no more than 35,000 individual animals needed to go on the ark. In his well documented book, Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study, John Woodmorappe suggests that far fewer animals would have been transported upon the ark. By pointing out that the word “specie” is not equivalent to the “created kinds” of the Genesis account, Woodmorappe credibly demonstrates that as few as 2,000 animals may have been required on the ark. To pad this number for error, he continues his study by showing that the ark could easily accommodate 16,000 animals.)

But, let's be generous and add on a reasonable number to include extinct animals. Then add on some more to satisfy even the most skeptical. Let's assume 50,000 animals, far more animals than required, were on board the ark, and these need not have been the largest or even adult specimens.

Remember there are really only a few very large animals, such as the dinosaur or the elephant, and these could be represented by young ones. Assuming the average animal to be about the size of a sheep and using a railroad car for comparison, we note that the average double-deck stock car can accommodate 240 sheep. Thus, three trains hauling 69 cars each would have ample space to carry the 50,000 animals, filling only 37% of the ark. This would leave an additional 361 cars or enough to make 5 trains of 72 cars each to carry all of the food and baggage plus Noah's family of eight people. The Ark had plenty of space.

The bigger problem would have been the construction of the Ark. But the Bible indicates that Noah did this under Divine guidance and there is no reason to believe he did not hire additional workmen.

Could Noah's Ark really hold all the animals that were supposed to be preserved from Flood?

Wow. What a crock of an article. Seriously.

And this guy claims to be a molecular biologist.

He is also older and recovering from a stroke. So he may have been much more articulate etc when he was younger..

 

[Youwerecreated]

Because there is archaeological evidence that can be carbon dated.

You put a lot of faith in a system with flaws.

But how would carbon dating prove dinosaurs died off 65 million years ago if they say it carbon dating will only go back 40 thousand years ?

Pick one of the other 20 dating methods.

You don't know which one ?

Each and everyone of them are unreliable no matter what you've been told.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I always get a laugh when Christians pretend the Bible is scientific proof of anything.

And I'm amused when people pretend that scientific proof is the only way we can know anything. Amused and yet sad.

It's sad you twisted the meaning of my words. I did not say that scientific proof is the only way to know anything. I said it's funny when Christians pretend the Bible is scientific proof of anything.

I keep trying to have a better connection with you, but it's difficult when you insist on distorting the meaning of my post.

The nature of faith is knowing beyond what can be proved. You keep forgetting I'm a person of faith, myself. I get it though. My faith doesn't count because it isn't Biblical.

You discount my religion. That is sad.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Because there is archaeological evidence that can be carbon dated.

You put a lot of faith in a system with flaws.

But how would carbon dating prove dinosaurs died off 65 million years ago if they say it carbon dating will only go back 40 thousand years ?

Pick one of the other 20 dating methods.

The problem is the presuppositions before they start,among others.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Are you serious? You have no proof that those "eyewitnesses" even existed.

Why do you believe in evolution again ?

Because there is archaeological evidence that can be carbon dated.

Dating methods do not impress me ok.

 

[Avatar4321]

I've found that those who don't like the Bible either haven't studied it or don't understand it. Of course, I am not going to presume that my experiences are the end all be all of the matter.

BTW, I don't find your evidence for the Bible very compelling.

1) Manuscripts - We don't have the originals. Doesn't matter how many copies or how old they are or how alike the are. Without the originals, they aren't very convincing.

2)Archaelogical - Not really relevant to any discussion on the Bible. The Bible is an ancient document. It records real people and places. It should hardly be surprising that places mentioned in the Bible existed as the Bible says they did. Archaelogical evidence does nothing to prove the Doctrine of Christ. It does nothing to prove the Resurrection of the dead.

3)Prophetic evidence - This is probably one of the strongest pieces of evidence. But unfortunately, people tend to ignore it and many are ignorant of history and events surrounding it to recognizing the prophetic evidence when it has occured and when it is occuring. Take the Pharisees for example, they lived in the days when the Prophecied Messiah came. and they were blind to it.

4) Statistics - Don't get me started on statistics. There are three types of liars. Liars, Damned liars, and statisticians. Statistics can be completely manipulated by anyone with an agenda. And they do nothing to prove the Doctrines of Christ or the reality of the Resurrection.

No, these evidences aren't the strongest in support of the Bible. The strongest evidence is the doctrine itself and the witness of the Holy Ghost.

Christ has said:

If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. (John 7:17)

In other words, He suggests that we act in faith and experiment on the Word. And by acting on the doctrine we will come to know whether it's from the Father or not.

But if we do experiment on the Doctrine, how will we know? The scriptures answer that question too:



We learn the Truth from the Spirit. That is the only evidence that can convince a man to turn to God. And what greater evidence is there than Revelation from the Father?

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (John 14:26)

If the Holy Ghost will teach us all things, then it is expedient for every Christian to seek the gift of the Holy Ghost. And we obtain this gift through exercising faith in Jesus Christ until we have enough faith to start repenting or changing our lives.

When we repent, we not only confess the things we do wrong, but we make active changes in our lives to stop the sins we are repenting of and trusting in the Atonement of Christ to help us change and be born again.

When we walk the path of repentence we will understand the need to be baptized, even by water, for the remission of sins. And after Baptism by water, we can recieve the baptism by fire, or the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands by one who has the authority to give it as the scriptures show.

That Gift is one of the most precious gifts God can give us aside from life itself. And it would benefit us all if we sought it out in faith and sincerity. With no hypocrisy.

I have read the bible thru several times and studied some parts extensively.
Attack the bible?
if god made us to decide and question then the bible should be able to stand up to logical critiques.
It does not in several areas.
I have discussed the bible with several preachers and a few theologians I know at the seminary at Wilmore, KY.

I don't know that I've ever seen you attack the Bible.

And I disagree that the Bible doesn't stand up to several critiques.

My point is the premise that the Bible needs to be proved through the above mentioned techniques is false. The only way to learn the truths of the Doctrine of Christ is to do them and recieve revelation from the Spirit.

That comes with an experiment on the word through faith.

 

[cbirch2]

Are you saying creationist don't look at the same evidence as evolutionist and just have different explanations for it ?

If the big bang happened why does it appear to be speeding up not slowing ?

lol if the big bang didnt happen why is everything expanding at all...

Doesnt expansion mean it was smaller at one point? How do you explain that?

How bout God is still creating.

Why would it speed up ?

Do you even know what your talking about? The idea of dark energy is based on observations from exploding supernovas rather than just galaxies expanding. That doesnt explain the fact that a universe that is expanding now must have been been a point previously. Have you ever seen an expansion or an explosion that was anything different than that? How does the big bang theory contrary to god? The big bang theory and god can coexist together. Why cant you accept evidence into your faith. Primitive jews and christians (and all people) were idiots, they thought the earth was flat. Why is this any different. Older generations had to eventually accommodate fact into their faith, like the earth goes around the sun. This is no different.

How do you explain the Cosmic Microwave Background and that the big bang theory made a successful prediction of its temperature 10 years before it was even known to exist?