The Bible Project

Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #30 - August 14, 2011, 01:27 PM

Quote
But if we're going to examine these texts critically, as products of their historical context, despite "yom"'s possible other meanings, it seems kind of pointless for the person who wrote the texts to refer to *six* periods of undefined length. It seems much more likely the original authors had the literal meaning of "day" in mind. Then again, I'm not a biblical scholar or anything; it just seems pointless to refer to a vague period of time and multiply it by six. It's like, there's no information content in that extra piece of info.

I don't really see the need to read it literally, and 7, (six days of creation plus the day of rest) is an important symbolic number in the Torah, and I think this is part of the reason for this division.

Quote
Also, I can't remember where, and whether it was in the Quran, but I've heard a Muslim authority of some kind say -- or write -- once that the universe was *not* created for us and that it is arrogant to think so. I'm too tired to verify this now, but I think I've seen it somewhere.

I guess you could infer that from the Qur'an too, and it's a respectable position, but I don't think there's any unequivocal statement in the Qur'an to that effect.

Quote
Are you a Muslim, by the way?

I'd say I'm more of a wishy-washy theosophist with some sympathies for the Abrahamic and Dharmic religions.
- QueenIsabel
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #31 - August 14, 2011, 06:29 PM

Quote from: Lilyesque on August 14, 2011, 07:52 AM
You don't believe in human evolution then?

No
- QueenIsabel
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #32 - August 14, 2011, 06:33 PM

Quote from: Hassan on August 14, 2011, 09:50 AM
Did you know that's exactly what Muslims say too. The word in the Qur'an is "Yawm" which is the same as the Hebrew word "Yom".

The day-age concept is promoted by some theologians. I didn't know Muslims say the samething. Then again Muslims have also gotten involved in the creationist movement and seem to be picking up some ideas from Christians.
- Ra
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #33 - August 14, 2011, 06:41 PM

Quote from: QueenIsabel on August 14, 2011, 06:29 PM
No

Why not?
- QueenIsabel
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #34 - August 14, 2011, 06:53 PM

I don't believe humans and apes have a common ancestor.
- mighty_cats
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #35 - August 14, 2011, 06:55 PM

Quote from: QueenIsabel on August 14, 2011, 06:53 PM
I don't believe humans and apes have a common ancestor.

Previous Biologist here. (Bio molecular analyst to be precise)
1) You're wrong.
2) Can you define your perspective on this issue (such as what you believe took place, in your own words).
- Ra
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #36 - August 14, 2011, 06:58 PM

Quote from: QueenIsabel on August 14, 2011, 06:53 PM
I don't believe humans and apes have a common ancestor.

But evidence tells us we do.
- QueenIsabel
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #37 - August 14, 2011, 07:03 PM

mighty_cats I'm a faithhead. I believe the earth came first. After earth was made stable enough to support life, the first humans appeared.
- mighty_cats
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #38 - August 14, 2011, 07:06 PM

Quote from: QueenIsabel on August 14, 2011, 07:03 PM
mighty_cats I'm a faithhead. I believe the earth came first. After earth was made stable enough to support life, the first humans appeared.

Now, normally when people say that --they also believe that god can do anything / no limitations etc etc.
So that would be inconsistent because your statement would conclude that there are obligational requirements for our existence that god had to meet or that there were restraints (such as building, waiting, deciding) form the setting..
So out of interest, can you define god for us.
- QueenIsabel
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #39 - August 14, 2011, 09:09 PM

Quote
mighty-cats
Now, normally when people say that --they also believe that god can do anything / no limitations etc etc.
So that would be inconsistent because your statement would conclude that there are obligational requirements for our existence that god had to meet or that there were restraints (such as building, waiting, deciding) form the setting..

No my statement is not inconsistent because God made the requirements for our existence.

Quote
So out of interest, can you define god for us

God is the creator. He is omnipresent, omniscient, the sustainer, the comfertor, and exc.
- mighty_cats
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #40 - August 14, 2011, 09:13 PM

Quote from: QueenIsabel on August 14, 2011, 09:09 PM
No my statement is not inconsistent because God made the requirements for our existence.
God is the creator. He is omnipresent, omniscient, the sustainer, the comfertor, and exc.

What if the sun wasn't there or the planet was far larger and had 300x the force of gravity exerted on it, could god still place you on it for you to live?
I'm just wondering, because you've agreed that he's all powerful which concludes he's above restriction, but you also say:
Quote from: QueenIsabel on August 14, 2011, 07:03 PM
After earth was made stable enough to support life

Which (to me,atleast) seems a strange way of wording it.
- QueenIsabel
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #41 - August 14, 2011, 09:46 PM

Quote
mighty_cats

What if the sun wasn't there or the planet was far larger and had 300x the force of gravity exerted on it, could god still place you on it for you to live?

No

Quote
I'm just wondering, because you've agreed that he's all powerful which concludes he's above restriction, but you also say:

Which (to me,atleast) seems a strange way of wording it.

Yeah well sometimes I say strange things.

Seriously, I believe God created everything over a series of episodes during an indefinite time between them to prepare the world for the arrival ( or should I say creation ) of humanity.
- Lynna
- Pub Regular
- Seek peace. Endure. Find joy.
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #42 - August 15, 2011, 08:44 PM

Hi Harakaat
The universe was not create for us. As in us human kind. If you are a believer in the Bible you would only be taught that Jehovah created the earth for human kind.

How interested are you in the creation account as set in the Bible?

For me the important information is so far removed from needing to know the length of the creative period it is difficult for me to get my mind around what your concern is. Short of 7 literal 24 hour days or something like that. The age of the physical creation is old compared to hair width of humankind being here.

Quote from: harakaat on August 14, 2011, 12:48 PM
But if we're going to examine these texts critically, as products of their historical context, despite "yom"'s possible other meanings, it seems kind of pointless for the person who wrote the texts to refer to *six* periods of undefined length. It seems much more likely the original authors had the literal meaning of "day" in mind. Then again, I'm not a biblical scholar or anything; it just seems pointless to refer to a vague period of time and multiply it by six. It's like, there's no information content in that extra piece of info.

Also, I can't remember where, and whether it was in the Quran, but I've heard a Muslim authority of some kind say -- or write -- once that the universe was *not* created for us and that it is arrogant to think so. I'm too tired to verify this now, but I think I've seen it somewhere.

Are you a Muslim, by the way?

If at first you succeed...try something harder.

Failing isn't falling down. Failing is not getting back up again.
- Jinn and Tonic
- My Place is the Placeless, the Trace of the Traceless
- Ex-Muslim
- aka عزرایل
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #43 - August 15, 2011, 09:21 PM

Quote from: QueenIsabel on August 14, 2011, 07:03 PM
mighty_cats I'm a faithhead. I believe the earth came first. After earth was made stable enough to support life, the first humans appeared.

but even the bible talks about previous dispensations. (i.e. the seed of man and
animal mixing, i.e. satyrs, and also what about giants? there has
NOT been found a single evidence that giants existed, even though they were considered
"mighty men of valor")

When one door of happiness closes, another opens; but often we look so long at the closed door that we do not see the one which has been opened for us.
Helen Keller
- Hallakuf
- Pastafarian
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #44 - August 15, 2011, 09:29 PM

To me the bible is not a book of history, geography, archaeology, astronomy or any other science, so I find it useless to discuss scientific things in those books. To me it is just an amazing, and sometimes inspiring collection of ancient Jewish myths and more modern legends and letters from early christian scholars.

Religion is organized superstition
- Lynna
- Pub Regular
- Seek peace. Endure. Find joy.
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #45 - August 24, 2011, 05:10 AM

Hi Hallakuf,
As a Pastapharian, I believe you hold the great Pasta Being with meat ball eyes as sacred. If I recall the diagram correctly, if not my memory fails me and I request, please forgive my short comings.
For many who hold the Bible as the holy word of God they would also say it is not a book of science. However only where it touches on science it must prove true. For example the creation account states that plants and animals reproduce according to there kind. This is what we see happening around us every day. There are other more deailed example if you're interested.
The Bible however is a book of history there is archaeology to prove it. Perhaps not every detail to every ones liking. But that could be said about some acconts of modern history.
For many who see the Bible as the inspired word of God an important issue
is that it is a book that tells about God's dealings with humans.
Quote from: Hallakuf on August 15, 2011, 09:29 PM
To me the bible is not a book of history, geography, archaeology, astronomy or any other science, so I find it useless to discuss scientific things in those books. To me it is just an amazing, and sometimes inspiring collection of ancient Jewish myths and more modern legends and letters from early christian scholars.

If at first you succeed...try something harder.

Failing isn't falling down. Failing is not getting back up again.
- Adey5
- Pub Regular
- No Nonsense Non-believer
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #46 - August 30, 2011, 01:17 AM

Yes that's very conveniently non-committal at best. Apologists have taken the word for day and castrated it of its meaning to the point where it no longer means what I understand it to mean. I bet that in every other instance the word for day is taken to mean 24hours. It's so ambigious, that it cant possibly ever be wrong can it? A day is a day, and you cant just go round changing the definitions just to suit the conclusion.

I am better than your god......and so are you.

"Is the man who buys a magic rock, really more gullible than the man who buys an invisible magic rock?.......,...... At least the first guy has a rock!"
- Lynna
- Pub Regular
- Seek peace. Endure. Find joy.
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #47 - August 30, 2011, 04:04 PM

Hi Adey5,
Your concern about the use of the word 'day' is very easy to respond to using a dictionary. I used the Webster's Dictionary and Thesaurus published in 2005. One of the meanings of the word day is - a successful period of vogue, or purpose. If you think about it, purhaps you have heard the word 'day' used in this manner. Have you very heard your grandparents say, ''In my day things were different.People...''? Did they mean during one day of thier life things were different then they are now. Or were they talking about since a period of time when they were in thier prime things have chaged. Also, please think about how historical periods are sometimes referred to. Have you every heard expressions like, 'In the day of the Cowboy and Indian', 'The day of Knights in shining armor', 'The day the dinosaur walked the earth'.Would you question that the user of any of those expressions was talking about a historical period lasting longer then 24 hours?

If at first you succeed...try something harder.

Failing isn't falling down. Failing is not getting back up again.
- Hallakuf
- Pastafarian
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #48 - August 30, 2011, 04:20 PM

Quote from: Lynna on August 24, 2011, 05:10 AM
Hi Hallakuf,
As a Pastapharian, I believe you hold the great Pasta Being with meat ball eyes as sacred. If I recall the diagram correctly, if not my memory fails me and I request, please forgive my short comings.
For many who hold the Bible as the holy word of God they would also say it is not a book of science. However only where it touches on science it must prove true. For example the creation account states that plants and animals reproduce according to there kind. This is what we see happening around us every day. There are other more deailed example if you're interested.
The Bible however is a book of history there is archaeology to prove it. Perhaps not every detail to every ones liking. But that could be said about some acconts of modern history.
For many who see the Bible as the inspired word of God an important issue
is that it is a book that tells about God's dealings with humans.

Of course the Bible, like the Qu'ran and other holy books, tells stories based on the science which was available to humans at the time they were written. The fact that modern science tells us another truth (2000 years from now that might again be another truth) only tells that those holy books were written by humans. Inspiration is not science. It may be of value though.
May the holy Spaghetti monster (PBUH) lead your path

Religion is organized superstition
- Lynna
- Pub Regular
- Seek peace. Endure. Find joy.
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #49 - August 30, 2011, 08:26 PM

Quote from: Hallakuf on August 30, 2011, 04:20 PM
Of course the Bible, like the Qu'ran and other holy books, tells stories based on the science which was available to humans at the time they were written. The fact that modern science tells us another truth (2000 years from now that might again be another truth) only tells that those holy books were written by humans. Inspiration is not science. It may be of value though.
May the holy Spaghetti monster (PBUH) lead your path

Interesting toughts Hallakaf,
Just happns this very morning I was reading a Babylonia accunt of creation and it had absolutely nothing in common with an scientific idea of any age. Totally a polytheistic epic of lust and power.
As regards the Qur'an my limited knowledge would incline me to conclude that it was greatly influenced by the science of the time during whch it was written. This would mostly be based on it's teachings about conception. Which not only contradicts it's self but reflexes the conflict of the time i.e. was the life from the mom or dad (very simplsticly stated). Any Muslim feeling a need to expand on this topic I would be interested in a few good reference.
In light of your postscript I found this information in the body of your post some what interesting. To quote you, ''...tells stories based on science available to humans at the time they were written. The fact that modern science tells us another truth (2000 years from now that might be again another truth)...''. Just an interesting acknowledgement about the changing nature of scienitific truth. However I know it to be so. In my life time change has taken place.
Just wondering what scienitifc knowledge of the time do you think was available to King David of ancient Israel to write in Psalms 139:16 ''...And in your book all its parts were down in writing...''. Now it does not say DNA and there is no way I could prove absolutely that is what it means. But where did the idea come from. Not the science of the time.

If at first you succeed...try something harder.

Failing isn't falling down. Failing is not getting back up again.
- Adey5
- Pub Regular
- No Nonsense Non-believer
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #50 - September 06, 2011, 09:11 PM

Hi Lynna,

so the word Day can now mean ANY period of time you want it to mean? How convenient. What about the verse in the bible regarding beating a slave but if he dies before 2 DAYS, then you can be punished. So 2 days can now mean 'an unspecified amount of time', like 20 years, or 20,000 years. All those poor slave-owners must feel hard done by

Kind of makes every other reference to the word Day seem useless. So we can conclude that ANY mention of time in terms of days is empty. Perhaps Year could also mean Second? Does that mean Noah could have been 600 seconds old when he built the ark? Or does year actually mean year in this case?

Can we now also transpose that any time the bible says Yom as interpreted as 'unspecified length of time' could also mean day? Where does that leave the accuracy of the bible?

I am better than your god......and so are you.

"Is the man who buys a magic rock, really more gullible than the man who buys an invisible magic rock?.......,...... At least the first guy has a rock!"
- Adey5
- Pub Regular
- No Nonsense Non-believer
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #51 - September 06, 2011, 09:20 PM

When people use the terms 'in my day' you know that they are not talking about 24hours. When you ask them exactly when that was they are not so vague and when pressed are more specific and would say 'back in the 50s'. When historians use the terms 'in the day of the KNights' they usually say 'In the DAYS (plural) of.....'.
You are trying to use colloquial terms in a scientific context which requires specifics

I am better than your god......and so are you.

"Is the man who buys a magic rock, really more gullible than the man who buys an invisible magic rock?.......,...... At least the first guy has a rock!"
- Lynna
- Pub Regular
- Seek peace. Endure. Find joy.
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #52 - September 12, 2011, 06:58 PM

Hi Adey5,
Can we go to any collection of book and insist that each word have the same meaning in each book regardless if that book is poetry, history or science? Not taking into account if it is using illustrations and figerative language or is using literal languge? When you look a word up in the dictionary is there usually just one absolute meaning for that word?
Have you ever heard of looking at that the context in which a word is used?
Ever thought about knowing something about a subject before you open your mouth?
Now, I'm not good at English. If you are a native speaker having been educated in it all your life you can likely dance circles around me. However, give me a break at least be logical.
Here is an example of one word meaning different things, that maybe you can relate to.
fuck
-This is really an acronym F.U.C.K. which means female use of carnal knowledge. A crime whores were charged with.
-It has also come to mean have sex.
-Some people use it as an explanative like 'darn'

If at first you succeed...try something harder.

Failing isn't falling down. Failing is not getting back up again.
- Adey5
- Pub Regular
- No Nonsense Non-believer
- offline
Re: The Bible Project
Reply #53 - October 24, 2011, 09:14 PM

Hi Queen Isabel,

Your claim that the biblical account in genesis is unambiguous in the 'periods of time' and that 'day' did not necessarily imply 24Hours is shown to be disproven by those same verses, just a few words later.

Genesis Chapter 1

5: And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

8: And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

12: And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13: And the evening and the morning were the third day.

Yadda yadda, etc etc, and so on.....

This is pretty clear that god did it in 6 actual days (periods of evening --> morning)

UNLESS of course that back then, there was no sin, so an evening through to the following morning would have lasted for many many millions of years?

Ade

I am better than your god......and so are you.

"Is the man who buys a magic rock, really more gullible than the man who buys an invisible magic rock?.......,...... At least the first guy has a rock!"
Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »