1
   

Is nature an answer?

 
 
Reply Fri 18 Feb, 2011 05:59 pm
500 years ago if you asked a secular scientist the question "What is rain?" their reply would have been "It is just nature" yet this stuff can be scientifically explained today by school children.

So using nature in a debate, is this not just the same as using faith in debate? i.e. It isn't an anwer.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 1 • Views: 1,220 • Replies: 11
No top replies

 
laughoutlood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Feb, 2011 08:37 pm
@underneaththequiet,
This banana smells as if it's slipping into sundae.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Feb, 2011 10:52 pm
@underneaththequiet,
underneaththequiet wrote:

500 years ago if you asked a secular scientist the question "What is rain?" their reply would have been "It is just nature" yet this stuff can be scientifically explained today by school children.

So using nature in a debate, is this not just the same as using faith in debate? i.e. It isn't an anwer.

Do you have an example that isn't 500 years old?
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Feb, 2011 11:32 pm
@underneaththequiet,
People certainly understood the science of rain 500 years ago

More then 800 years ago, people figured out how to set up stills. The purpose of this was to make liquor (a worthy endeavor in itself). But to be successful, they had to understand the science of evaporation and condensation which is the very mechanism that causes rain.

500 years ago was the time of Galileo and Sir Francis Bacon. At this time people started conducting rigorous scientific investigation. Of course, this was the also the start of religious based attacks on science, an early famous battle was Galileo's heretical claim the Earth moved around the Sun.
Smileyrius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Feb, 2011 06:10 am
@maxdancona,
King Solomon explained the water cycle 3500 yrs ago. Job knew the earth was round and that it hung upon nothing long before that.

The churches did alot of wrong things in the name of hanging on to thier unchallenged power. If you claimed a different point of view to them, they would have you put to death. If you tried to teach someone truths against the odd claims they would make, they had you put to death. Blasphemy was the name given to anything that would take any sort of power away from its leaders.

maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Feb, 2011 10:25 am
@Smileyrius,
I just checked.

I could not find where Job said the Earth was round (which would have been scientifically correct). He did say that it "hangs" which is incorrect. The verb hang implies there is a force holding it "up" when in fact there is no need for any force to hold it "up" or even any scientifically sensible meaning of the word "up".

There are references in the Bible about the corners of the Earth, and about the Earth being spread out. So it seems that the writers of the Bible envisioned a flat Earth that was hanging from nothing. This is not a very scientifically valid image.

I was impressed with the passages on the water cycle. There are passages in the Bible that show an understanding of evaporation and condensation.
Smileyrius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Feb, 2011 05:07 pm
@maxdancona,
My apologies, it was not job but Isaiah that said, He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth. The hebrew word for circle is also rendered sphere.

I see you view on the word "hang" but I would perhaps disagree. If something hangs upon "something" then yes, it is held up. If it hangs upon nothing, it has the same state of not resting upon anything, but it is also not held up by anthing.

The four corners references in the bible are a symbolic reference, I believe it speaks of the angels of the four winds, which establishes that you cannot escape it wherever you hide. Revelation was hugely written symbolically, as it was the dream of John. Revelation was a sealed scroll in the sense that it would not be understood in its entirity until the appointed time came. If you took Revelations and read it with a literal mind, it would give you some pretty screwy imagery.

earth being spread out does not necessarily suggest the Earth is flat, but it is one way that you can interpret it. Each must find his own interpretation, and go with that.

another one I found interesting, Job spoke of being alive by the skin of his teeth. Science established only in the last two decades that we do indeed have a thin layer of skin on our teeth Smile he may have intended gums, but I like to give him the benefit of the doubt.
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Feb, 2011 08:27 pm
There are no answers.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Feb, 2011 09:20 pm
@Smileyrius,
Quote:
My apologies, it was not job but Isaiah that said, He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth. The hebrew word for circle is also rendered sphere.


Sorry, nice effort, but your explanation fails the simple logic test.

If Isaiah considers the earth a "sphere", then what does the word "above" mean?
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Feb, 2011 09:20 pm
@JPLosman0711,
Quote:
There are no answers.


That's a crummy answer.
JPLosman0711
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Feb, 2011 09:26 pm
@maxdancona,
Actually, it's a suggestion.
0 Replies
 
Smileyrius
 
  2  
Reply Mon 21 Feb, 2011 02:49 am
@maxdancona,
mankind use many expressions that are relative to ones position. Although the heavens are spoken of as being above, it depicts something that is considered "lofty" or "out of reach." The bible was written from mans perspective, and as such, many things that would be difficult for us to comprehend otherwise, were written in a way that allowed him to understand it. When you speak of your boss, you speak of him being over you, however you do not mean that he is literally on top of you head, unless you work in an odd profession. By that logic, many of mankinds most basic expressions would fail the simple logic test. What you must discern, is when something is stated as pictoral, or literal.

Take the rest of the statement. He "sits" suggests that God has legs with which to sit, and "enthroned" suggests he has a literally seat. Being a spiritual being, he would neither have legs, nor require a literal seat. Visions of God seated upon a throne are intended to be inspirational, rather than literal.

If you read scripture with eyes of contention, you will find much to contend.If you read with eyes of reason, you will find reason.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is nature an answer?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/06/2021 at 09:56:34