What happens now that Biblical Literalism has been completely disproven?

[Ophiolite]

If you are making some sort of point or statement, say it.

I'll say it for him. There is a very real possibility that you actually believe Noah built an ark to accomodate two of every kind of animal on the planet. (Clearly he had not heard of the dangers of inbreeding.) It is hugely frightening to many of us that an adult human, with no brain damage arising from genetic defects, or physical trauma, could seriously entertain such a close minded notion, purely on the basis of what it says in a collection of myths from a tribe of nomads.

I value and am in awe of the power of the human mind. I am inspired by what we have learnt about the universe through the dedicated questioning of tens of thousands of committed individuals. I am enthused by the potential for the further extension of this knowledge throught the same rigorous application of scientific methodology.

And I am appalled by the self inflicted, self righteous stupidity of persons such as yourself. You are not in a state of grace, you are in a state of ignorance that you have chosen for yourself. You are using the power of your mind to deceive that same mind, body and spirit. You are rejecting the work of millions simply because it does not fit your prejudices. You are deprived of the opportunity to share in the wonders that science has yet to reveal because you deny truth when it stares you in the face.

It is difficult not to be frightened at the possibility such evil could spread.

 

[synthesizer-patel]

The reference to Noah is interesting. Not to sharp shoot your post, It is not a myth that Noah built a boat to house a pair of every animal on Earth.

How then did noah get hold of the sophisticated microscopy equipment required to identify both the species and sex of all animals that are a few millimetres or less in size?
Where did he acquire the advanced taxonomical knowledge to identify and sex them correctly?
Where did he acquire electric lighting to provide photosynthetic organisms with sufficient light to survive ?
Where did he acquire all of the aquarium equipment to keep all of the aquatic organisms alive for 12 months?
How did marsupials and monotremes migrate from the middle east to autralasia without leaving any fossil evidence of that journey? - and why did none of them stop to find appropriate habitats on the way?

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

How then did noah get hold of the sophisticated microscopy equipment required to identify both the species and sex of all animals that are a few millimetres or less in size?
Where did he acquire the advanced taxonomical knowledge to identify and sex them correctly?
Where did he acquire electric lighting to provide photosynthetic organisms with sufficient light to survive ?
Where did he acquire all of the aquarium equipment to keep all of the aquatic organisms alive for 12 months?
How did marsupials and monotremes migrate from the middle east to autralasia without leaving any fossil evidence of that journey? - and why did none of them stop to find appropriate habitats on the way?

Tough to argue against things imagined. Easy for believers to say God helped by working in mysterious ways but for some reason it wasn't written down.

The Bible mentions that the Lord remembered Noah, somewhere near the forty day mark. I don't know if this means God is prone to forgetfulness or if He didn't think Noah could pull it off. You wouldn't think that such an historical event would require God's memory to be sharp. Kind of makes one wonder if He's ever forgotten other stuff, like His own commandments.

 

[synthesizer-patel]

Tough to argue against things imagined. Easy for believers to say God helped by working in mysterious ways but for some reason it wasn't written down.

Sure you can invoke magic everytime that something gets difficult to explain - but then doesn't that make the whole flood somewhat extraneous? - why not just magic all the people except for Noah's family dead?
Why then do the fundaligionsists bother with bad jokes like "Flood Geology" which attempt to apply a naturalistic explanation of the story?

 

[free yourself]

The thing is, guys, we can use all the common sense, reasoning, and whatever else we may want, but I am trying to say that religious people aren't really ignorant. How can they "open" themselves up to a new idea or look at their beliefs with a skeptic mind when their experiences have conditioned their minds to the point where nothing makes sense except their one belief? It's not like they have an opportunity to be an objective learner and they are not taking it, thereby proving themselves ignorant and blind to reality. It's that they have never known anything else to be true other than their religion and therefore do not think unintuitively, like you guys and I do. Like I said before, scientists are an anomaly because they think in ways that are not natural to our origins.

 

[synthesizer-patel]

The thing is, guys, we can use all the common sense, reasoning, and whatever else we may want, but I am trying to say that religious people aren't really ignorant. How can they "open" themselves up to a new idea or look at their beliefs with a skeptic mind when their experiences have conditioned their minds to the point where nothing makes sense except their one belief? It's not like they have an opportunity to be an objective learner and they are not taking it, thereby proving themselves ignorant and blind to reality. It's that they have never known anything else to be true other than their religion and therefore do not think unintuitively, like you guys and I do. Like I said before, scientists are an anomaly because they think in ways that are not natural to our origins.

Welcome to Sciforums FY.

I'm not certain that scientists think in ways that are necessarily unnatural - but certainly its a kind of mental kung fu like discipline that not everyone can do - including a lot of very smart people.

Kent Hovind for example may make himself sound like an idiot to an educated audience with his utterly barking mad stories of dinosaurs and floods - but he is an extremely shrewd operator (although not quite shrewd enough to stay out of chokey).
I often think that there is far more money to be made writing boos filled with silly pseudoscientific explanations of biblical stories than there is to be made in marine biology - which is of course why so many creationsist organisations exist.

 

[TheVisitor]

How then did noah get hold of the sophisticated microscopy equipment...
Where did he acquire the advanced taxonomical knowledge...
Where did he acquire electric lighting...
Where did he acquire all of the aquarium equipment...

The world before the great flood was completely destroyed.
How can you limit what technology they possessed?
Science has an agenda in doing so.

The world before the flood was very advanced, they had achieved atomic power and beyond.
You want a reference for that? Luke 17:26
The Hindu Bhagavad Gita tells of this in 5000 year old Sanskrit.
Oppenheimer famously recalled the Bhagavad Gita: "If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the mighty one." and "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds."
The Bible says of the world before the flood;

LUKE 17:26
And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
LUKE 17:27
They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
LUKE 17:30
Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

As it was in Noah's day, so shall it be in our day. Today. Technology.
When God said "I will destroy the earth"...He let man do it.
Who built the nuclear weapons that will bring the judgement by fire God promised in this day?
Man did. Just like in Noah's day.

That's what the Bible really says of our history.
Not we climbed down from the trees and out of the caves...
That is what science is telling you.
While they build the weapons to destroy the world again.
Look at Oppenheimer's quote again.
He turned on them and they removed him from office and revoked his security clearance .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Robert_Oppenheimer

Where did they get the technology?
People with a thousand year lifespan, and you have to ask such a question.
I am constantly amazed.
It only took us fifty years to go from the horse and buggy to hydrogen bombs.
Those who claim to be so scientific and educated, will just swallow down whatever lies they feed you for truth.
By doing this you also become part of the problem.

Don't think I'm just picking on you synthesizer-patel, you brought up some good points.
I've been here before with all the usual suspects on SciForums.
We've been going down this road for years.
To avoid answering these claims, they will call the Bhagavad Gita fiction, they call the Bible fiction.
Deny the world's history recorded in the ancient texts, all in the name of "modern" science..
They are in danger of being "willingly ignorant". But why?

II PETER 3:5
For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
II PETER 3:6
Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
II PETER 3:7
But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Those bombs hanging out there are nothing new.
They've done their work many times in the past.

 

[synthesizer-patel]

Viz,

Congratulations - that's one I never heard before - at least not from a christian - my hare krishna mate Duncan has mentioned this sort of thing to me before - that we had advanced tech like that all the way back then - although not in reference to a global flood.

Of course there is zero evidence for it - and zero evidence for a global flood - unless we resort to invoking God's purple wand and hairy sack of magic to hide it all again.

But at least you are original -

Does that also provide any explanation for marsupials and monotremes in australasia?

 

[TheVisitor]

Viz,

Of course there is zero evidence...for a global flood -

Well, lets try to see why there is zero evidence.
Take what I'm saying about technology.
You would think they had similar vehicles and equipment.
The Bhagavad Gita speaks of a hundred different flying machines with description of their power-plants, energy sources etc...

The Bible says the world before the flood had never seen rain or a cloud in the sky.
Perfect balance in nature. Not an accident, terraformed that way.
Water like an ocean suspended in the atmosphere, condensed and fell as dew each night and watered the ground.
The world stood upright with the sun in it's orbit. 360 day orbit based on a 360 degree circle. Twelve 30 day months.
Now it leans 23 degrees. 365 and 1/4 day orbit.
It's farther away from the sun, and leaning in axis rotation.

The nuclear weapon described in the Hindu texts was not just a hydrogen bomb meant to destroy a single city.
It was a planet killer, a doomsday device.
Given to them by "the gods" it came with the warning; "not to be used on a terrestrial foe"....go figure what else that implies.

This is exactly the same time period as Noah's flood in the Bible.
A nuclear war...with a weapon so powerful it could destroy entire worlds.
Only a fanatic would push that button, but that's exactly what happened.
The worlds axis tilted with the magnitude of the blast, the canopy of suspended water in the atmosphere collapsed.
The storms that swept the face of the planet would make an f5 tornado and a Cat. 5 hurricane look like a dust devil.

It rained for 40 days, covered the tallest mountains for one year, and when the water went down all the debris settled on the bottom of the ocean and was covered with a heavy layer of silt.
The old world was gone. No foliage, no crops, no cities, nothing left.
Total destruction.

And you want to point to there being "Zero evidence of this" 5000 years later?


ISAIAH 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

ISAIAH 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, [and] consider thee, [saying, Is] this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

ISAIAH 14:17
[That] made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; [that] opened not the house of his prisoners?

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

What's the Hebrew word for nuclear?

 

[synthesizer-patel]

It rained for 40 days, covered the tallest mountains for one year, and when the water went down all the debris settled on the bottom of the ocean and was covered with a heavy layer of silt.

Deep sea sediment records contradict this.

If you examine the content of sediments in the middle of deep oceans it is almost exclusively very fine red iron rich dust.
Grain sizes are extremely fine and extremely well sorted and there is virtually no biogenic content.
Basically it is 99.9% wind blown dust from land.
The reason for this is only the very tinest grains will make it that far out to see - biogenic sediments are much larger - therefore sink more quickly - so they are deposited closer to land - plus the middle of oceans are not very productive so not much lives there so little in terms of deposition from calcifying / silicate producing plankton.
Furthermore if we measure the depth of sediments from the Mid ocean ridges to the continental shelf we see a gradual thickening of the sediment depth.
If we calculate the rate of deposition compared to the rate of seafloor spreading it is exactly consistent with that sediment having been laid down over millions of years - it even contains evidence of periodic climate change - showing appearance and dissapearance of sediments charateristic of glacial erosion - showing us the range and extent of sea ice over a few million years worth of ice ages. Not forgetting the magnetic evidence welded into the oceanic crust itself showing alternating lines of rock strongly and weakly aligned to the magnetic poles - showing that it had spread out from the MORs over a few millions years worth of polar shifts.

This is the exact opposite of what we would expect if there had been a global flood in the last few thousand years.

We would expect deep oceanic sediments to be of uniform thickness.
Of highly heterogenous consistency and grain size.
High in organic and biogenic content.
There would be no evidence of past ice ages
There would be no evidence of polar shifts

The only possible answers therefore are that it never happened - or God magicked it to look like it never happened.



This stuff is Oceanography and plate tectonics 101 - surprised you didn't know it - or at least have a clue

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

This stuff is Oceanography and plate tectonics 101 - surprised you didn't know it - or at least have a clue

I really don't think The Visitor is all that religious. He knows a lot more than he is credited for. All this creationist blather is available on various websites. The fact that he mentions the Gita and Bible in adjacent lines probably indicates he is not very scientifically inclined and not really tuned in to one religion in particular. He's testing you more or less.

 

[Pete]

The worlds axis tilted with the magnitude of the blast, the canopy of suspended water in the atmosphere collapsed.
The storms that swept the face of the planet would make an f5 tornado and a Cat. 5 hurricane look like a dust devil.

It rained for 40 days, covered the tallest mountains for one year, and when the water went down all the debris settled on the bottom of the ocean and was covered with a heavy layer of silt.
The old world was gone. No foliage, no crops, no cities, nothing left.
Total destruction.

And you want to point to there being "Zero evidence of this" 5000 years later?

Of course. An event of that magnitude would be pretty hard to hide.

 

[Gustav]

... many beleive it is

the "many" seems to be a minority

 

[CheskiChips]

Well, lets try to see why there is zero evidence.
Take what I'm saying about technology.
You would think they had similar vehicles and equipment.
The Bhagavad Gita speaks of a hundred different flying machines with description of their power-plants, energy sources etc...

The Bible says the world before the flood had never seen rain or a cloud in the sky.
Perfect balance in nature. Not an accident, terraformed that way.
Water like an ocean suspended in the atmosphere, condensed and fell as dew each night and watered the ground.
The world stood upright with the sun in it's orbit. 360 day orbit based on a 360 degree circle. Twelve 30 day months.
Now it leans 23 degrees. 365 and 1/4 day orbit.
It's farther away from the sun, and leaning in axis rotation.

The nuclear weapon described in the Hindu texts was not just a hydrogen bomb meant to destroy a single city.
It was a planet killer, a doomsday device.
Given to them by "the gods" it came with the warning; "not to be used on a terrestrial foe"....go figure what else that implies.

This is exactly the same time period as Noah's flood in the Bible.
A nuclear war...with a weapon so powerful it could destroy entire worlds.
Only a fanatic would push that button, but that's exactly what happened.
The worlds axis tilted with the magnitude of the blast, the canopy of suspended water in the atmosphere collapsed.
The storms that swept the face of the planet would make an f5 tornado and a Cat. 5 hurricane look like a dust devil.

It rained for 40 days, covered the tallest mountains for one year, and when the water went down all the debris settled on the bottom of the ocean and was covered with a heavy layer of silt.
The old world was gone. No foliage, no crops, no cities, nothing left.
Total destruction.

And you want to point to there being "Zero evidence of this" 5000 years later?


ISAIAH 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

ISAIAH 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, [and] consider thee, [saying, Is] this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

ISAIAH 14:17
[That] made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; [that] opened not the house of his prisoners?

Isaiah is commonly known to be referring to what would be the destruction of the first temple, then the Jews will be set free from that land.
My proof:
25 That I will break Asshur (Assyria/Babylon) in My land, and upon My mountains tread him under foot; then shall his yoke depart from off them, and his burden depart from off their shoulder.

By the way, anyone can just pick verses here and there and make stuff up. It takes a real man to recognize what the verse is actually saying and accept it.
18 All the kings of the nations, all of them, sleep in glory, every one in his own house. - Meaning...all the kings of all the nations will sleep in their own house ACCEPT Israel. But why???
20 Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, thou hast slain thy people; the seed of evil-doers shall not be named for ever. Oh that's why? But who?
21 Prepare ye slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they rise not up, and possess the earth, and fill the face of the world with cities. It was already discussed in verse 2 to be Israel.

More proof that this is what happened?
4 that thou shalt take up this parable against the king of Babylon, and say: How hath the oppressor ceased! the exactress of gold ceased!

Now...ready Esther...or Daniel.
===
Besides that I am really responding to re-translate some of these disgustingly bad translations.
"Lucifer" is an entirely Christian concept. (Therefore since Isaiah was well BEFORE Christianity...it's impossible for him to have said 'Lucifer')
How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, that didst cast lots over the nations!

They that saw thee do narrowly look upon thee, they gaze earnestly at thee: 'Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
===

Finally Genesis
20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
Could 20 cubits really cover mount Everest?

I'm not going to give you a hint here as to what it's talking about other than the Neffilim were shockingly spoken of 2 times...hmm...
Please get your facts straight. If you want to be religious get off your high horse.

 

[eddie23]

the "many" seems to be a minority

That ads up to 97% where are the other 3%?

 

[TheVisitor]

-Isaiah is commonly known...

-Lucifer is an entirely Christian concept..."How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning!"

Little real truth about the Bible is "commonly known".
All scripture has compound meaning.
The Spirit alone searches them out.

I CORINTHIANS 2:10
But God hath revealed [them] unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

I CORINTHIANS 2:11
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

Lucifer is not just a Christian concept.
He was known by a title as the morning or day star, but this is also a title given to the Lord Jesus and to His saints that overcome this world by His Spirit.
This is more a title of authority over this world. A bearer of the Light. A representative of God.
This position is being taken away and given to another.

The deception here is so close it would deceive the very elect, if that were possible.
It is a twin. A concept of the Bible not commonly known.
Don't think your Hebrew translations will reveal this.
Lucifer was an angel of the highest order, and can still transform into an angel of light.
The majority of this world believes he is God in one form or another to this day.
That includes Jews and Christians.

II CORINTHIANS 11:14
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

These titles now belong to the Lord Jesus that were once associated with Lucifer - before - he fell.
Jesus is called the "Morning Star" and this is given His saints that overcome.

REVELATION 22:16
I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, [and] the bright and morning star.

REVELATION 2:26
And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
REVELATION 2:27
And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
REVELATION 2:28
And I will give him the morning star.

Jesus is also called the Day Star, and this is also given His saints.

II PETER 1:19
¶ We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

If we found ample evidence of ancient technology, that would say nothing on whether there are gods.

 

[CheskiChips]

Little real truth about the Bible is "commonly known".
All scripture has compound meaning.
The Spirit alone searches them out.

I CORINTHIANS 2:10
But God hath revealed [them] unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

I CORINTHIANS 2:11
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

Lucifer is not just a Christian concept.
He was known by a title as the morning or day star, but this is also a title given to the Lord Jesus and to His saints that overcome this world by His Spirit.
This is more a title of authority over this world. A bearer of the Light. A representative of God.
This position is being taken away and given to another.

The deception here is so close it would deceive the very elect, if that were possible.
It is a twin. A concept of the Bible not commonly known.
Don't think your Hebrew translations will reveal this.
Lucifer was an angel of the highest order, and can still transform into an angel of light.
The majority of this world believes he is God in one form or another to this day.
That includes Jews and Christians.

II CORINTHIANS 11:14
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

These titles now belong to the Lord Jesus that were once associated with Lucifer - before - he fell.
Jesus is called the "Morning Star" and this is given His saints that overcome.

REVELATION 22:16
I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, [and] the bright and morning star.

REVELATION 2:26
And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
REVELATION 2:27
And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
REVELATION 2:28
And I will give him the morning star.

Jesus is also called the Day Star, and this is also given His saints.

II PETER 1:19
¶ We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

Your Christian citations don't prove anything...since it's a Christian idea and NOT Jewish idea you need a quote from a JEWISH source to prove that's what a CHRISTIAN meant when he said it. There's no angels that turn themselves into light that are evil and have free will in Jewish thought...

Little real truth about the Bible is "commonly known". - That's not true. Nearly the entire nation of Israel is fully competent. Christians don't know what the prophets or the Torah says....because they think a Torah quote is equal to a quote of the prophet...you've shown in this thread that you're wildly confused as to what the Tanakh IS and what is says.

By the way...no Orthodox Jews believe in 'evil angels'...it doesn't even make sense because the overwhelming contrast of what "angel" means.

 

[TheVisitor]

-Nearly the entire nation of Israel is fully competent...
-There's no angels that turn themselves into light that are evil.
-By the way...no Orthodox Jews believe in 'evil angels'

II CORINTHIANS 11:14
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

The entire nation of Israel's competence isn't in question.
They were blinded to the Messiah's advent, but it was done to save life.
Much like Joseph was sold into slavery by his brethren, it was God's doing to save all our lives.

Orthodox Jews have no scripture for Satan?
You have overlooked them.
The scripture above doesn't say "angels that turn themselves into light"
You have mis-quoted the scripture.
The scripture said; "Satan is transformed into an angel of light"
That means he can appear as a messenger of truth. A minister of righteousness.
He doesn't just appear as "the devil" tempting mankind to turn from God.
He appears as a minister of righteousness claiming to speak for God, but adding to or taking away from the Word of God.

That's why Paul had to say; If any, even an angel from heaven, bring another Gospel other than this He had delivered to the saints, let him be accursed.