|
Post by leeside on Jul 15, 2010 16:45:03 GMT
More importantly.....nobody has ever proved it right. Surely the onus is on those who claim it is the 'word of god' to prove it is the 'word of god'. I mean its pretty obvious that its written by man simply by observing all its errors and contradictions.
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Jul 15, 2010 21:14:05 GMT
More importantly.....nobody has ever proved it right. Surely the onus is on those who claim it is the 'word of god' to prove it is the 'word of god'. I mean its pretty obvious that its written by man simply by observing all its errors and contradictions. Well considering many of the predictions, advanced medical and scientific knowledge then that is a pretty smart man. Why is it more important to prove it is right?? You are the one that is going on about Biblical and religious beliefs, you are the one that is ridiculing my beliefs and not once have I done the same to you. I have acknowledged your point of view without resorting to childish insults or mocking your beliefs. All you want is an arguement so you can do some petty point scoring to advance whatever logic you currently have. If you want to debate things then do but try to avoid the manner in which you are doing them as it will only lead to nowhere. I am far from a biblical expert but if you want to debate the bible then I am willing to give it a go.
|
|
|
Post by collina on Jul 15, 2010 22:55:42 GMT
More importantly.....nobody has ever proved it right. Surely the onus is on those who claim it is the 'word of god' to prove it is the 'word of god'. I mean its pretty obvious that its written by man simply by observing all its errors and contradictions. Well considering many of the predictions, advanced medical and scientific knowledge then that is a pretty smart man. Why is it more important to prove it is right?? You are the one that is going on about Biblical and religious beliefs, you are the one that is ridiculing my beliefs and not once have I done the same to you. I have acknowledged your point of view without resorting to childish insults or mocking your beliefs. All you want is an arguement so you can do some petty point scoring to advance whatever logic you currently have. If you want to debate things then do but try to avoid the manner in which you are doing them as it will only lead to nowhere. I am far from a biblical expert but if you want to debate the bible then I am willing to give it a go. Here WASP, do you believe the Bible to be the sum of God's mesage to men? Do you think that God changes his mind? Do you think he might come and say something different at some point in the future? By the way I'm an atheist. There is nothing in the bible about Maradona's second goal against England in 1986, but you'd think someone would have let that out, no?
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jul 16, 2010 10:11:46 GMT
More importantly.....nobody has ever proved it right. Surely the onus is on those who claim it is the 'word of god' to prove it is the 'word of god'. I mean its pretty obvious that its written by man simply by observing all its errors and contradictions. Why is it more important to prove it is right?? Because claims such as the world being 4000 years old, made in 7 days, all things created by god and no such thing as evolution generally require cold hard facts to be taken seriously. Can you imagine any other subject basing its entire argument on one man made source? Yet apparently this is acceptable for religion.
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Jul 16, 2010 19:08:46 GMT
Why is it more important to prove it is right?? Because claims such as the world being 4000 years old, made in 7 days, all things created by god and no such thing as evolution generally require cold hard facts to be taken seriously. Can you imagine any other subject basing its entire argument on one man made source? Yet apparently this is acceptable for religion. I will try and address you all here. There are young creationists and old creationists, this means some believe the world to be about 6000 years old and some believe it to be much much older and where God used evolution or parts of evolution as a tool to do so. Here is parts of an article I read lately. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1, emphasis added throughout). "Heavens" refers to the galaxies, planets and stars, including our sun. We aren't given a date when this occurred. This verse does not restrict the time frame to either 6,000 or billions of years ago. Verse 2 then says, "The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep." As with most of the Old Testament, this verse was originally written in Hebrew. And the Hebrew word translated "was" here can have the sense of became. The same word is used in Genesis 3:20, where we read that Eve "became the mother of all the living" (New American Bible). Genesis 1:2 continues, "And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." Psalm 104 also describes some of God's creative works. Verse 30 says, "You send forth Your Spirit, they are created; and You renew the face of the earth." The word translated "renew" means to rebuild, renew or repair. This harmonizes with the understanding that the first two verses of Genesis show an initial creation of the heavens and the earth that was not in vain (tohu), followed by a catastrophic event that left the earth in ruins, followed by God renewing the earth by His Spirit. Verse 3, then, actually begins the record of God's creative work of renewing the earth and preparing it for His new creative masterpiece—human beings! The creation of angels and the record of their activity best harmonizes with a creation that existed prior to the seven days of re-creation or renewing the earth for human beings. In Job 38:4-7 God asks Job, "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth...when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" The terms "morning stars" and "sons of God" both refer to angels. They all shouted for joy when God first created the earth. All the angels—including Lucifer, who later became Satan—were in agreement with God and were ecstatic about what He had just made. When the earth was first created, Lucifer was not yet corrupted with iniquity. It certainly seems that considerable time must have passed between the creation of the earth, when Lucifer was in agreement with God, and his later appearance as the evil deceiver to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3. We find more details in Isaiah 14:12, where God says: "How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground." Jesus Christ, who lived in glory with the Father from eternity past before becoming human, said that He saw Lucifer fall from heaven (Luke 10:18). Isaiah 14:13-14 explains some of Satan's motivation: "For you have said in your heart: 'I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation on the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High.'" In Ezekiel 28:14-16 God sheds more light on the story: "You were the anointed cherub who covers; I established you; you were on the holy mountain of God; you walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones. You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you. By the abundance of your trading you became filled with violence within, and you sinned; therefore I cast you as a profane thing out of the mountain of God." Something caused the beautiful earth—which all the angels were thrilled to see—to become a wasteland, choked with debris and incapable of supporting life. It seems likely that the rebellion of Lucifer led to this devastation. Notice also Jude 6: "And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day." These angels abandoned the domain God gave them, the earth, either by leaving it (perhaps in the attempt to take over God's throne) or abandoning their responsibility to properly maintain it. So we don't know how long ago God originally created the heavens and the earth, but the biblical account reveals: • God first created the angels at an unspecified time in the past. • He then created the earth and material universe—including the sun and other stars. At this time all the angels were still righteous and rejoiced. • The angels were given a domain, which included the earth. • The angels may then have spent hundreds, thousands, millions or billions of years active in this domain, which likely included plant and animal life on the earth. There is nothing in the Bible to prohibit the existence of life-forms such as the dinosaurs in this pre-Adamic world. • Lucifer eventually deviated from God's righteous way. He ultimately convinced one third of the angels to follow him in rebelling against God (Revelation 12:4). • These angels became dissatisfied with their domain. Satan plotted to ascend into heaven and dethrone God. • God cast Satan and the sinful angels down to the earth to await judgment. We find Satan already here to turn Adam and Eve against God soon after they were created. • The result of Satan's rebellion likely resulted in the devastation (whether suddenly or over a long period of time) of the beautiful earth God originally created. • God renewed the surface of the earth to support life and be suitable for His new creation—human beings!
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jul 17, 2010 1:35:20 GMT
Wasp, did you just quote half the bible there?
Been reading about writing about christians in America. They're pretty dead set on evolution not happening, wanting creationism taught in science classes (lol the irony), and loads of other pish that is in direct contradiction to hard specific evidence.
No amount of man made quotes can change that mate.
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Jul 18, 2010 10:26:33 GMT
Wasp, did you just quote half the bible there? Been reading about writing about christians in America. They're pretty dead set on evolution not happening, wanting creationism taught in science classes (lol the irony), and loads of other pish that is in direct contradiction to hard specific evidence. No amount of man made quotes can change that mate. Jim the Bible has science in it so why shouldnt it be used in science classes. Many Chrisitans in America belong to sections of the charasmatic movement and most but not all believe in the actual 6 days to create the world. Could one day in the Lord's life be 1000 in ours or 1 million in ours?? Of course it could be. Another thing the more scientists look at monkey turning into man the weirder the drawings get without one shred of proof of what they looked like if true, these drawings are based on imagination yet they are used as proof. Isnt that ridiculous?
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Aug 2, 2010 12:52:40 GMT
The bible contains 'Science'?? My ass!! More like iron age ignorance. The 'science' you describe was way behind what was know by other cultures that existed before and at same time that these stories were written that were then put together and translated and re-written for various reasons including power and control and ultimately to subjugate the masses. A task it still succeeds in doing today. It prevents and stifles rational and critical thinking.
Does some of this 'science' you refer to include that women were created from the rib of a man?
"And God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man"
Genesis 2:21–22
Is this the kind of 'science' you refer to wasp?
No Wasp, What is ridiculous, is what you have just written here. Your blatant lack of understanding of the most basic of evolutionary claims is quite shocking actually. Monkeys did not turn into man. No scientist has ever claimed this. We share a common ancestor with apes...through a combination of environmental and genetic factors, man emerged as a species to produce the variety of ethnicities seen today, while modern apes evolved on a separate evolutionary pathway. This is proven by the transitional fossil record dating back millions of years that has been acquired over a couple of centuries of studies. The drawings you speak are of these transitions in effect by illustration. The proof is not in the drawings. The proof is in the fossil evidence illustrated by the drawings.
Poof of this shared ancestry with primates can be seen today in the tail bone that exists at the bottom of our spine. Why would God create such a unique creation in his own image......... but decided to fashion it with a primal tail bone?
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Aug 2, 2010 13:11:24 GMT
Because claims such as the world being 4000 years old, made in 7 days, all things created by god and no such thing as evolution generally require cold hard facts to be taken seriously. Can you imagine any other subject basing its entire argument on one man made source? Yet apparently this is acceptable for religion. I will try and address you all here. There are young creationists and old creationists, this means some believe the world to be about 6000 years old and some believe it to be much much older and where God used evolution or parts of evolution as a tool to do so. Here is parts of an article I read lately. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1, emphasis added throughout). "Heavens" refers to the galaxies, planets and stars, including our sun. We aren't given a date when this occurred. This verse does not restrict the time frame to either 6,000 or billions of years ago. Verse 2 then says, "The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep." As with most of the Old Testament, this verse was originally written in Hebrew. And the Hebrew word translated "was" here can have the sense of became. The same word is used in Genesis 3:20, where we read that Eve "became the mother of all the living" (New American Bible). Genesis 1:2 continues, "And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." Psalm 104 also describes some of God's creative works. Verse 30 says, "You send forth Your Spirit, they are created; and You renew the face of the earth." The word translated "renew" means to rebuild, renew or repair. This harmonizes with the understanding that the first two verses of Genesis show an initial creation of the heavens and the earth that was not in vain (tohu), followed by a catastrophic event that left the earth in ruins, followed by God renewing the earth by His Spirit. Verse 3, then, actually begins the record of God's creative work of renewing the earth and preparing it for His new creative masterpiece—human beings! The creation of angels and the record of their activity best harmonizes with a creation that existed prior to the seven days of re-creation or renewing the earth for human beings. In Job 38:4-7 God asks Job, "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth...when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" The terms "morning stars" and "sons of God" both refer to angels. They all shouted for joy when God first created the earth. All the angels—including Lucifer, who later became Satan—were in agreement with God and were ecstatic about what He had just made. When the earth was first created, Lucifer was not yet corrupted with iniquity. It certainly seems that considerable time must have passed between the creation of the earth, when Lucifer was in agreement with God, and his later appearance as the evil deceiver to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3. We find more details in Isaiah 14:12, where God says: "How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground." Jesus Christ, who lived in glory with the Father from eternity past before becoming human, said that He saw Lucifer fall from heaven (Luke 10:18). Isaiah 14:13-14 explains some of Satan's motivation: "For you have said in your heart: 'I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation on the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High.'" In Ezekiel 28:14-16 God sheds more light on the story: "You were the anointed cherub who covers; I established you; you were on the holy mountain of God; you walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones. You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you. By the abundance of your trading you became filled with violence within, and you sinned; therefore I cast you as a profane thing out of the mountain of God." Something caused the beautiful earth—which all the angels were thrilled to see—to become a wasteland, choked with debris and incapable of supporting life. It seems likely that the rebellion of Lucifer led to this devastation. Notice also Jude 6: "And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day." These angels abandoned the domain God gave them, the earth, either by leaving it (perhaps in the attempt to take over God's throne) or abandoning their responsibility to properly maintain it. So we don't know how long ago God originally created the heavens and the earth, but the biblical account reveals: • God first created the angels at an unspecified time in the past. • He then created the earth and material universe—including the sun and other stars. At this time all the angels were still righteous and rejoiced. • The angels were given a domain, which included the earth. • The angels may then have spent hundreds, thousands, millions or billions of years active in this domain, which likely included plant and animal life on the earth. There is nothing in the Bible to prohibit the existence of life-forms such as the dinosaurs in this pre-Adamic world. • Lucifer eventually deviated from God's righteous way. He ultimately convinced one third of the angels to follow him in rebelling against God (Revelation 12:4). • These angels became dissatisfied with their domain. Satan plotted to ascend into heaven and dethrone God. • God cast Satan and the sinful angels down to the earth to await judgment. We find Satan already here to turn Adam and Eve against God soon after they were created. • The result of Satan's rebellion likely resulted in the devastation (whether suddenly or over a long period of time) of the beautiful earth God originally created. • God renewed the surface of the earth to support life and be suitable for His new creation—human beings! Just change the words a little and you've got a level 2 Scientology handbook..
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Aug 2, 2010 22:37:01 GMT
While I believe that to be true, no its not the kind of science I refer to.
So there is fossils that match these ridiculous drawings, is there fossils showing one species turning into another via evolution, is there fossils showing say the eye being evolved etc?
Tail bone lol, what about hands and feet and fingers and toes and eyes and bones and hair etc etc, catch yourself on.
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Aug 3, 2010 14:09:33 GMT
Maybe you could share some of this biblical 'science' you're referring to then Wasp. I mean, it must be pretty amazing and insightful stuff if it was written by the creator of the universe. Yes, there are fossils that depict how humans and primates are related both directly and indirectly. The gradual evolution is evident from the fossil record. The drawings you refer to are obviously an artists impression because all we are left with are skeletal remains. From Australopithecus to Homo Erectus dating back millions of years of evolution. Obviously every single transitional link has not been been found and confirmed but its like a jigsaw puzzle with a number of pieces missing but you can still make out the overall picture. I'll believe that version over genesis's 'scientific' version anyday, thank you.......refer to genesis below...... Genesisthe LORD God formed man from the dust of the earth. He blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being." (Genesis 2:7) Genesis also states that "for Adam no fitting helper was found. So the LORD God cast a deep sleep upon the man; and, while he slept, He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that spot. And the LORD God fashioned the rib that He had taken from the man into a woman; and He brought her to the man." (Genesis 2:20-22) The man then named the woman. "This one shall be called Woman" (Genesis 2:23)
And you wonder why i find the bibles explanation of mans origins and those who believe in it to be open to ridicule?? No, there aren't to my knowledge and I would say its very unlikely because the eye is bio-degradable and would not survive being buried in the earth over a long period of time. However that doesn't mean the the evolution of the eye cannot be explained. Try this..... The Evolution of the eye in small steps..... The development of the eye is often given as evidence of the incompleteness of evolutionary theory. How could such a complex organ develop? It requires (apparently) the simultaneously development of several disparate elements none of which has any use without the other. The subject has come up on my D-Board so here is my solution in evolutionary terms ... i.e. not developing all at once. Instead of copying and pasting the rest of this article I suggest you check this out. Its very informative and simplified.... www.ebtx.com/theory/eyevolv.htmAbsolutely..... Transition from primitive jawless fish to sharks, skates, and rays: * Cladoselachians (e.g., Cladoselache). * Hybodonts (e.g. Hybodus) * Heterodonts (e.g. Heterodontus) * Hexanchids (e.g. Chlamydoselache) Transition from holostean fish to advanced teleost fish:
* Leptolepidomorphs, esp. Leptolepis, * Elopomorphs, both fossil and living (tarpons, eels) * Clupeomorphs (e.g. Diplomystus) * Osteoglossomorphs (e.g. Portheus) * Protacanthopterygians Transition from primitive bony fish to amphibians: * Paleoniscoids again (e.g. Cheirolepis) * Osteolepis -- one of the earliest crossopterygian lobe-finned fishes, still sharing some characters with the lungfish (the other group of lobe-finned fish). Had paired fins with a leg-like arrangement of bones, and had an early-amphibian-like skull and teeth. * Eusthenopteron (and other rhipidistian crossopterygian fish) -- intermediate between early crossopterygian fish and the earliest amphibians. Skull very amphibian-like. Strong amphibian-like backbone. Fins very like early amphibian feet. * Icthyostegids (such as Icthyostega and Icthyostegopsis) -- Terrestrial amphibians with many of Eusthenopteron's fish features (e.g., the fin rays of the tail were retained). Some debate about whether Icthyostega should be considered a fish or an amphibian; it is an excellent transitional fossil. * Labyrinthodonts (e.g., Pholidogaster, Pteroplax) -- still have some icthyostegid features, but have lost many of the fish features (e.g., the fin rays are gone, vertebrae are stronger and interlocking, the nasal passage for air intake is well defined.) Transition from reptiles to mammals: * Pelycosaur synapsids -- classic reptilian skeleton, intermediate between the cotylosaurs (the earliest reptiles) and the therapsids (see next) * Therapsids (e.g. Dimetrodon) -- the numerous therapsid fossils show gradual transitions from reptilian features to mammalian features. For example: the hard palate forms, the teeth differentiate, the occipital condyle on the base of the skull doubles, the ribs become restricted to the chest instead of extending down the whole body, the legs become "pulled in" instead of sprawled out, the ilium (major bone of the hip) expands forward. * Cynodont theriodonts (e.g. Cynognathus) -- very mammal-like reptiles. Or is that reptile-like mammals? Highly differentiated teeth (a classic mammalian feature), with accessory cusps on cheek teeth; strongly differentiated vertebral column (with distinct types of vertebrae for the neck, chest, abdomen, pelvis, and tail -- very mammalian), mammalian scapula, mammalian limbs, mammalian digits (e.g. reduction of number of bones in the first digit). But, still has unmistakably reptilian jaw joint. * Tritilodont theriodonts (e.g. Tritylodon, Bienotherium) -- skull even more mammalian (e.g. advanced zygomatic arches). Still has reptilian jaw joint. * Ictidosaur theriodonts (e.g. Diarthrognathus) -- has all the mammalian features of the tritilodonts, and has a double jaw joint; both the reptilian jaw joint and the mammalian jaw joint were present, side-by-side, in Diarthrognathus's skull. A really stunning transitional fossil. * Morganucodonts (e.g. Morganucodon) -- early mammals. Double jaw joint, but now the mammalian joint is dominant (the reptilian joint bones are beginning to move inward; in modern mammals these are the bones of the middle ear). * Eupantotheres (e.g. Amphitherium) -- these mammals begin to show the complex molar cusp patterns characteristic of modern marsupials and eutherians (placental mammals). Mammalian jaw joint. * Proteutherians (e.g. Zalambdalestes) -- small, early insectivores with molars intermediate between eupantothere molars and modern eutherian molars. * Those wondering how egg-laying reptiles could make the transition to placental mammals may wish to study the reproductive biology of the monotremes (egg-laying mammals) and the marsupials. The monotremes in particular could almost be considered "living transitional fossils". [see Peter Lamb's suggested marsupial references at end] I can go on and on but for some reason I doubt it will make the slightest difference. Dont get you Wasp?? You're clearly missing my point. I pointed out that our skeletons still have the stub of a tail bone. Why would 'God' have given us one when it serves no purpose whatsover. To me and others its physical proof that we once had a tail like early primates. To summarise, Wasp. i think you fall into the trap of what is known as the 'god of the gaps' theory. If it cant be explained 100% then obviously...... God did it.
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Aug 3, 2010 23:28:33 GMT
Come on wasp , i put alot of effort into that post. please reply.
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Aug 4, 2010 22:51:15 GMT
Come on wasp , i put alot of effort into that post. please reply. Yes you do put alot of effort into your posts in an attempt to mock and belittle me. First of all not once did I say evolution did not happen, I said it very well may have been a tool that the Lord used. The article I posted was to try and address the mix of opinions on a young or old earth and the article had some very valid points to the debate. So here is some more that should hopefully cover what I mean. A Time Magazine article dated Dec. 1976 said “Most cosmologists… scientists who study the structure and evolution of the universe, agree that the biblical account of creation, in imagining an initial void, may be uncannily close to the truth.” 1) How in about 1500 BC would they know that God hung the earth on nothing? 2) The universe has a huge hole in it that dwarfs anything else of its kind. The discovery caught astronomers by surprise. The hole is nearly a billion light-years across. It is not a black hole, which is a small sphere of densely packed matter. Rather, this one is mostly devoid of stars, gas and other normal matter, and it's also strangely empty of the mysterious "dark matter" that permeates the cosmos. Other space voids have been found before, but nothing on this scale. "He stretches out the north over empty space; he hangs the earth on nothing [Job 26:7] 3) The fact that air has weight was proven scientifically only about 300 years ago. The relative weights of air and water are needed for the efficient functioning of the world’s hydrologic cycle, which in turn sustains life on the earth. Yet it was in the bible many centuries before. 4) Matter is made up of atoms which are invisible to the human eye, when God created the world "For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible....." 5) Scientists have long believed that the earth revolved around the sun, which was stationary. This caused them to scoff at the following verses which, they said, taught the opposite… "In them has He set a tabernacle for the sun, which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoices as a strong man to run a race. His [the sun's] going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof." [Psalm 19:4-6] However it was later discovered that the sun is in fact moving through space at approximately 600,000 miles per hour. It is traveling through the heavens and has a "circuit" just as the Bible says. It is estimated that its circuit is so large, it would take 200 million years to complete one orbit. 6) “the treasures of the snow” is stated in the bible, with the aid of a microscope man discovered that each and every single snowflake is uniquely a symmetrical "treasure." 7) “the paths(currents) of the seas” is in the bible yet they were discovered by man only in the 1850’s 8) The first underwater hot spring to be discovered was probably in 1977, when scientists discovered hot springs at a depth of 2.5 km, on the Galapagos Rift (spreading ridge) off the coast of Ecuador. Since then other hot springs have been found at a number of sites along the mid-oceanic ridges, many on the East Pacific Rise. Giant tube worms, huge clams, and mussels all thrive around the hot springs. Yet once again the Bible was slightly ahead of man’s discovery.. Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? Or hast thou walked in the recesses of the deep? [Job 38:16] 9) Researchers at NASA's Ames Research Center confirmed that every element in man can be found in the soil, prompting one of the scientists to say "...the biblical scenario for the creation of life turns out to be not far off the mark". 10) Genesis 3:15 says "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." This verse reveals that the female possesses the "seed of life." This was not the common knowledge until a few centuries ago. It was widely believed that the male only possessed the "seed of life" and that the woman was nothing more than a glorified incubator 11) Leviticus 17:11, written 3,000 years ago, declared that blood is the source of life: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood." bloodletting to cure or prevent illness and almost every disease was a most common medical practice performed by doctors from antiquity up to the late 19th century. 12) Prothrombin a protein present in blood plasma plays a significant role in the clotting of blood, its quantity in the body being directly affected by vitamin K, which is responsible for the production (by the liver) of the element known as prothrombin. If vitamin K is deficient, there will be a prothrombin deficiency and hemorrhaging may occur. A full-term child is born with a relatively high level of prothrombin, however … “During the last few years, numerous studies have been made of the prothrombin level in the blood of the newborn infant. The results of six of these have been critically reviewed by Smith and Warner. They consider the investigations fall into two groups. Most studies report that in “normal” infants the level of prothrombin on the first day after birth is high, with a rapid fall on the second, to a lower level on the third and fourth, followed by a recovery by the sixth day. Smith and Warner accept the fact that the method of analysis may be a factor in the production of these two types of curves, but are satisfied that the class of patient and season of the year are also important items. These latter affect the diet of the mother and, hence, the vitamin K intake”. Note: In most countries infants are given vitamin K shortly after birth to prevent a rare but potentially fatal condition called vitamin K deficiency bleeding in infancy. Yet in the bible Genesis 17:12, God specifically directed Abraham to circumcise newborn males on the eighth day. 13) Since Ernest Rutherford, who received the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1908, is credited with splitting the atom only in 1917, it is quite impossible for people in the first century, to have known anything about the Atom Bomb. However they certainly described it well, speaking about the sky burning up and the earth itself melting. "Now this will be the plague with which the Lord will strike all the peoples who have gone to war against Jerusalem; their flesh will rot while they stand on their feet, and their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongue will rot in their mouth." [Zechariah 14:12] "And the atmosphere was pushed apart like a scroll when it is rolled together" (Revelation 6:14). In a nuclear explosion the atmosphere rolls back on itself It's this tremendous rush of air back into the vacuum that causes much of the destruction of a nuclear explosion. John's words in this verse are a perfect picture of an all out nuclear exchange. Now there are many more examples such as the singing stars, the amount of stars etc etc but there isnt much point in going through them all, you will not change your mind and I will not change my belief that God created the universe by whatever means possible.
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Aug 10, 2010 12:59:12 GMT
As ridiculous as your attempts to show examples of 'science' in the bible are and without going through each individual piece of bible 'science' you've copied and pasted... I can however see how someone with such a blind faith, a very poor understanding of the knowledge of ancient cultures and an overwhelming need to believe in the superstitious to give a sense of purpose and guidance....can be taken in with such vague quotes from ancient texts at explaining the world. Its no different to those who believe in astrology. You just join the dots to fit whatever picture you want to see.
|
|