• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Belief versus knowledge

ecco

Veteran Member
Belief is not incompatible with knowledge. For instance, modern science understands how a sea can part,

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ion-for-the-parting-of-the-red-sea-in-exodus/

how the feeding of the 5000 took place (hint: it's psychology),

https://theupsidedownworld.com/2012/09/25/how-did-jesus-feed-5000-people-does-it-matter/

and even changing water into wine (I'm the author here).

https://www.quora.com/Can-water-turn-into-wine/answer/Samantha-Rinne

Knowledge doesn't inhibit belief, but rather gives it a foundation.

Belief is that a prophet named Jesus spoke a 2000+ sermon on a mountain as written in the NT.
Knowledge tells us that no one did, or could have, recorded 2000+ words accurately.

Knowledge is the foundation that destroys this belief.


RE: Parting of the sea to allow Moses, et al to get from point A to point B. Did you bother actually reading it?

So from the perspective of many experts, while Drews may indeed describe an atmospheric and ocean effect that can really happen, trying to suggest this phenomenon can explain a biblical "event" is another matter entirely.

For Drews, though -- who has now self-published a new book, Between Migdol and the Sea: Crossing the Red Sea with Faith and Science, to explain his ideas further -​

Another example of how to make money by writing and hyping BS.
 

Yokefellow

Active Member
If I had read Ezekiel 1:27 by myself I would never have guessed the verse was about the electron!
Right on.

You have polite responses, so I'll share some more for fun and bump your thread.

We'll start with this verse...

Romans 1:20
"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse"


What the amazing verse above is saying is that everything that we see and everything that is made, consists of something the Bible calls 'Godhead'.

The modern term we use today is 'Atom'. Thus, the Godhead is the generic construct of an Atom...

[GALLERY=media, 8538]Godhead[/GALLERY]

1 John 5:7
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one"


The Atom is what God showed Ezekiel...

[GALLERY=media, 8539]MHP-0653[/GALLERY]
 

Yokefellow

Active Member
Armed with this amazing Revelation, we can now begin to put the pieces together to see what else God is showing us...

Ezekiel 1:14
"And the living creatures ran and returned as the appearance of a flash of lightning"


Lightning is of course electricity or the Electron. God is making it plain as to what we are looking at.

Thus the Living Creatures have something to do with the Atom/Godhead and the world of Particle Physics.

Long story short, the Four Living Creatures represent what Science calls "The Four Fundamental Interactions of Physics"...

Fundamental interaction - Wikipedia

[GALLERY=media, 8540]MHP-0631[/GALLERY]
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Armed with this amazing Revelation, we can now begin to put the pieces together to see what else God is showing us...

Ezekiel 1:14
"And the living creatures ran and returned as the appearance of a flash of lightning"


Lightning is of course electricity or the Electron. God is making it plain as to what we are looking at.

Thus the Living Creatures have something to do with the Atom/Godhead and the world of Particle Physics.

Long story short, the Four Living Creatures represent what Science calls "The Four Fundamental Interactions of Physics"...

Fundamental interaction - Wikipedia

[GALLERY=media, 8540]MHP-0631[/GALLERY]
Taking verses out of context does not support you. The Bible says at least twelve times:

"There is no God". Does that mean that you throw out the Bible?
 

Yokefellow

Active Member
Here is a how the Standard Model of Particle Physics fits in with the Bible...

[GALLERY=media, 8533]MHP-0793[/GALLERY]

It turns out that the High Priest's Breastplate is an exact replica of the Standard Model.

Notice how the Beryl corresponds to the Electron?

If One searches the KJV for the word 'Beryl', One will find verses filled with descriptions of the Electron...

Daniel 10:6
"His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude"


Again, we see Eyes being related to Electrons, lightning and the Beryl.

This is a type of 'Code'. Thus if we search for 'Eyes' in the KJV, we see things like...

Zechariah 3:9
"For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua; upon one stone shall be seven eyes: behold, I will engrave the graving thereof, saith the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day"


Here we have a Stone with Seven Eyes or Seven Electrons.

The Chemical Element for this would be Nitrogen. This is what is being described.

Why Nitrogen? The key is in the phrase 'Graving'. Nitrogen gets an 'engraving' and sin is eliminated.

We call these Stones 'Nitrogenous Bases'.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Here is a how the Standard Model of Particle Physics fits in with the Bible...

[GALLERY=media, 8533]MHP-0793[/GALLERY]

It turns out that the High Priest's Breastplate is an exact replica of the Standard Model.

Notice how the Beryl corresponds to the Electron?

If One searches the KJV for the word 'Beryl', One will find verses filled with descriptions of the Electron...

Daniel 10:6
"His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude"


Again, we see Eyes being related to Electrons, lightning and the Beryl.

This is a type of 'Code'. Thus if we search for 'Eyes' in the KJV, we see things like...

Zechariah 3:9
"For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua; upon one stone shall be seven eyes: behold, I will engrave the graving thereof, saith the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day"


Here we have a Stone with Seven Eyes or Seven Electrons.

The Chemical Element for this would be Nitrogen. This is what is being described.

Why Nitrogen? The key is in the phrase 'Graving'. Nitrogen gets an 'engraving' and sin is eliminated.

We call these Stones 'Nitrogenous Bases'.
Reinterpretation after the fact. Only the most ignorant fall for this argument.
 

Yokefellow

Active Member
One more before I leave...

In the Book of Revelation, we find a Lamb with Seven Eyes...

Revelation 5:6
"And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth"


Sounds creepy! What's up with that? It's easy now that we have the 'Key'...

John 1:14
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth"


The Word of God is the Lamb.

The Seven Eyes are Nitrogenous Bases.

The Lamb is a picture of a Nucleobase, the building blocks of DNA...

[GALLERY=media, 8542]MHP-0767[/GALLERY]

If we keep going with this discovery, we find that the Bible contains a Genetic Code.

There are already a handful of people deciphering this Code and compiling the Genetic Sequences.

These Beings will be coming online soon. The ones with the Twelve Unique Nucleobase Construct are the one's that keep me up at night.

Notice the efforts by some on this forum to marginalize this information?

Discoveries such as these have been accelerating at a rapid pace over the last few years, much to the dismay of the naysayers. They have no clue really. Some call them "Earth Dwellers".

Your World is about to change. The Blind such as those we see here in the sub-forum will be utterly steamrolled. Don't pity them. There is nothing we can do to help them awaken. They chose their path.

I came here only as a messenger to reach the precious few.

Base12 out.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
And are there some questions off limits?
Of course. You clearly have much to learn, grasshopper.
@Jayhawker Soule - I'm sorry... this is just so... so... goobery. What qualifies a question as "off limits?" What happens when one asks an "off limits" question? Who imposes the rules for "off limits" questions? This is just such a bunch of crap, and somehow you seem to think it's just fine and dandy to write such infantile blubbering - and it is, of course - except that you seem to pair it with thinking you're absolutely correct - which deserves a bit of ridicule. There are questions you (in your infinite "wisdom") can decide not to answer for whatever reason (fear, discomfort, embarrassment, etc.), but the question itself being objectively "off limits?" This has got to be a joke. Can you give any support at all for this idea of "off limits" questions... or can you only reply "of course" as if you were making a bad joke about having all the authority in the world?

Note, I am only being so condescending because it is typical of your style. There are several posts in this thread that can easily be referenced that attest to this idea. You reap what you sow, and all that...
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
@Jayhawker Soule - I'm sorry... this is just so... so... goobery.
I'm sorry - I honestly have no clue what that means.

@Jayhawker SouleWhat qualifies a question as "off limits?"
On some level that's a bit like asking what qualifies as pornography. Nevertheless, I'm sure that you could come up with questions that you thought were off limits.
What about walking up to a stranger and asking their sexual preferences?
What about asking the FBI/CIA or the press to divulge confidential informants?
What about approaching some random couple and inquiring about their net income.
What about approaching some random couple and inquiring about their favorite sex acts?
What about ...​
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry - I honestly have no clue what that means.
I'll take this to mean you're asking what i meant. An honest question, to be sure... and in no way off limits. What does it mean? It means you're being a goober.

On some level that's a bit like asking what qualifies as pornography. Nevertheless, I'm sure that you could come up with questions that you thought were off limits.
What about walking up to a stranger and asking their sexual preferences?
What about asking the FBI/CIA or the press to divulge confidential informants?
What about approaching some random couple and inquiring about their net income.
What about approaching some random couple and inquiring about their favorite sex acts?
What about ...​
This is just terrible... terrible. You're trapped, my friend. You probably won't understand what I mean by that, and based on your list above, you may never.

None of these examples are "off limits" and all of them have actual, truthful answers. Again, whether or not someone is COMFORTABLE answering a question doesn't mean it somehow becomes "off limits." There is no such thing. If we didn't have to worry about the possibilities of someone else taking advantage of our truth of information, would there be ANY reason not to answer the above without hesitation? You have to admit that there wouldn't be. Therefore any requirement of "off limits" you place on requests for any information is proved to be SUBJECTIVE in nature. The pre-requisite (for your examples) is the concern that someone will take advantage of the information in a negative way. And because there is a pre-requisite, there is no objectivity in your claim.

There are no limits to what one can ask... there are only limits to what someone is willing to answer. Think of it this way... do I not ask an "off limits" question because I am somehow prohibited? No. I may not ask them knowing that it is futile, because the answer-er is the one who has prohibited themselves. And that of their own accord!
 
Last edited:

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
Let’s say That I write a book containing chapter after chapter of supposedly truth,
And then I ask you to believe it.
I ask you to believe it because, obviously, by yourself you can’t verify the truth.
Wouldn’t it have been better if I had took some other approach,
An approach whereby you didn’t have to rely on your powers of belief?
An approach whereby you had firsthand knowledge of the truth.

For example let’s say you’re an Eskimo in the Artic,
And I give you a book describing the properties of a magnet and claim it’s the truth.
A better approach might be to show you a magnet and some iron filings,
And demonstrate what a magnet can do.

So let’s take another example........the Bible versus a personal miracle.
(A personal miracle may for example be the constant vision of a cross in the sky witnessed by all humanity)
Whereas the Bible supposedly contains truth but can’t be verified & requires belief,
The cross in the sky gives all firsthand knowledge of the truth of God.

So I would say knowledge is superior to belief.
So why then are we not presented with knowledge in this way to verify God’s existence?
Why go to all the trouble of documenting ‘facts’ in the Bible if, at the end of the day, belief is required?

I'll play a little. Someone already pointed out that the cross in the sky could easily be a magician's trick.

But according to Exodus 33:18:
Then Moses said, "Now show me your glory."​
And God said in Exodus 33.22
But," he said, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live."​

So what to do? Do you:
A. Believe without knowledge.
B. Die to attain certain knowledge.
C. Refuse to believe and refuse to die for knowledge.

The dilemma of knowledge is the category of things that are considered to be unknowable.
If it is true that some things are unknowable, then how do you choose to live your life knowing that some things will remain forever unknown to you?

For example, let's say you will never know the cure for cancer. That's a real position people have found themselves in (whether they knew it or not). Do you choose to believe that a cure is possible? Or do you reject that a cure is possible simply because you personally will never know it?
 

Hawkins

Well-Known Member
History was written by the winners.
But is it true?
Do you believe everything you read in history books?

There's not much you can do, other than doing an examination on how credible the sources and writers are. This is the nature of what history is and how we can possibly reach a fact happened in the long past.

You do have an option to reject them though. However if the piece of information concerns your own dead or alive, will you choose to reject it? To me, rejecting doesn't seem to be a good choice.

To put it another way, by the very nature of what happened in the past, which is our history, humans lack any capability to confirm a truth. Believing (or not) in the accounts of testimonies could be the only way. If the message concerns your own dead or alive, then you may need to carefully accept one, by carefully examining the credibility and reliability of both the writers and writings themselves.
 
Last edited:
what sorts of facts would make one believe more upon The Holy Bible?

Matthew 2:23 "And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene."


7d1742025e349848d8f7ee37e7e198d1--city-maps-testament.jpg



Nazareth is the capital and the largest city in the Northern District of Israel. Nazareth is known as "the Arab capital of Israel"

Nazareth - Wikipedia

Nazareth
נָצְרַת‬
Natzrat
النَّاصِرَة
an-Nāṣira


Panoramic view of Nazareth, with the Basilica of the Annunciation at the center


3478. Nazara or Nazaret or Nazareth
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
Nazareth.
Or Nazaret nad-zar-et'; of uncertain derivation; Nazareth or Nazaret, a place in Palestine -- Nazareth.


(/ˈnæzərəθ/; Hebrew: נָצְרַת‬, Natzrat; Arabic: النَّاصِرَة‎, an-Nāṣira; Aramaic: ܢܨܪܬ‎, Naṣrath)


Mark 7:31 "And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, he came unto the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis."

tyre.jpg


sidtyre.gif
lebanon-map.gif


Genesis 10:19 "And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon, as thou comest to Gerar, unto Gaza; as thou goest, unto Sodom, and Gomorrah, and Admah, and Zeboim, even unto Lasha."

Sidon (Arabic: صيدا‎, صيدون, Ṣaydā; French: Saida; Phoenician: , Ṣīdūn; Biblical Hebrew: צִידוֹן‬, Ṣīḏōn; Greek: Σιδών), translated to 'fishery' or 'fishing-town',[1] is the third-largest city in Lebanon. It is located in the South Governorate of Lebanon, on the Mediterranean coast, about 40 kilometres (25 miles) north of Tyre and 40 km (25 miles) south of the capital, Beirut. In Genesis, Sidon is the first-born son of Canaan, who was a son of Ham, thereby making Sidon a great grandson of Noah.

Sidon - Wikipedia

Gaza...


dateline.israel.gaza.gif





Maybe Jesus walked into Lebanon???

Matthew 15:21-28
"Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. 22And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. 23But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. 24But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 25Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. 26But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. 27And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table. 28Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour."


Lebanon in the middle ages:
During the 7th century AD the Muslim Arabs conquered Syria soon after the death of Muhammad, establishing a new regime to replace the Romans (or Byzantines as the Eastern Romans are sometimes called). Though Islam and the Arabic language were officially dominant under this new regime, the general populace still took time to convert from Christianity and the Syriac language. In particular, the Maronite community clung to its faith and managed to maintain a large degree of autonomy despite the succession of rulers over Syria. Muslim influence increased greatly in the seventh century, when the Umayyad capital was established at nearby Damascus.

During the 11th century the Druze faith emerged from a branch of Islam. The new faith gained followers in the southern portion of Lebanon. The Maronites and the Druze divided Lebanon until the modern era. The major cities on the coast, Acre, Beirut, and others, were directly administered by Muslim Caliphs. As a result, the people became increasingly absorbed by Arabic culture.

History of Lebanon - Wikipedia

Lebanon before middle ages:
After two centuries of Persian rule, the Macedonian ruler Alexander the Great, during his war against Persia, attacked and burned Tyre, the most prominent Phoenician city. He conquered what is now Lebanon and other nearby regions in 332 BCE.[5] After Alexander's death the region was absorbed into the Seleucid Empire and became known as Coele-Syria.

Christianity was introduced to the coastal plain of Lebanon from neighboring Galilee, already in the 1st century. The region, as with the rest of Syria and much of Anatolia, became a major center of Christianity. In the 4th century it was incorporated into the Christian Byzantine Empire. Mount Lebanon and its coastal plain became part of the Diocese of the East, divided to provinces of Phoenice Paralia and Phoenice Libanensis (which also extended over large parts of modern Syria).

During the late 4th and early 5th centuries, a hermit named Maron established a monastic tradition, focused on the importance of monotheism and asceticism, near the mountain range of Mount Lebanon. The monks who followed Maron spread his teachings among the native Lebanese Christians and remaining pagans in the mountains and coast of Lebanon. These Lebanese Christians came to be known as Maronites, and moved into the mountains to avoid religious persecution by Roman authorities.[6] During the frequent Roman–Persian Wars that lasted for many centuries, the Sassanid Persians occupied what is now Lebanon from 619 to 629.


Mark 7:24-26 "And from thence he arose, and went into the borders of Tyre and Sidon, and entered into an house, and would have no man know it: but he could not be hid. 25For a certain woman, whose young daughter had an unclean spirit, heard of him, and came and fell at his feet: 26The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation;.."


Sidon (Arabic: صيدا‎, صيدون, Ṣaydā; French: Saida; Phoenician: Ṣīdūn)


Phoenician was a language originally spoken in the coastal (Mediterranean) region then called "Canaan" in Phoenician, Hebrew, Old Arabic, and Aramaic, "Phoenicia" in Greek and Latin, and "Pūt" in the Egyptian language. It is a part of the Canaanite subgroup of the Northwest Semitic languages. Other members of the family are Hebrew, Ammonite, Moabite and Edomite.

Phoenician language - Wikipedia

Genesis 10:6 "And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan."



 
Last edited:

Audie

Veteran Member
First, the Inuit people can read. They can even get on the Internet and read your post. :)

Second, "belief" is no power, it's just (investment in) the apparently true and correct parts of the world. We do need reason to believe, and the appearance of truth and correctness supply that reason. If the book appeared correct, it would be believed.

Third, being a practical person I too believe that demonstration is the superior method of learning. However, not everyone is the practical person, some learn very well from reading the instruction manual. Being a practical person, I also give weight to the observations of my senses. If a cross appeared in the sky it would be a marvel, but just that one observation isn't sufficient to supply a conclusion like "miracle of God." There would have to be a lot of background story behind that cross before such a conclusion could be reached.

Keeping in mind that referring to the Eskimos as "Inuit" is like
referring to Caucasians as "irish".
 
Top