How could a sensible person believe in the bible?

[darkpenguin]

I saw this preacher Ken Hamm or something trying to teach kids that dinosaurs and humans lived together. I can't understand how he can defend that at all. He believes that if it's not in the bible, it never happened. Personally i can't understand how people believe in the bible. Honestly how could you believe a book that says God created the world about 10,000 years ago? Too bad for them because life fossils have been discovered that date back billions of years. Even the skeletons of modern humans date back before the time of Adam and Eve. I believe in evolution, but that doesn't mean i dont believe in God like all of these evangelists think. They have all just been horribly mislead since birth and are now proceeding to brainwash the children of our future.

Whilst I see what you're saying and get your point I do also have alot of respect for people who have that much faith and commitment in something that cannot be proven.
I say leave them to it, if it makes them happy and isn't harming anyone else then theres no huge problem really.
Yes you could possibly argue that "brainwashing" kids into believing it is right, is wrong but again, so long as no harm comes to the child then who are we to question the parents? After all there is no book or manual in parenting and we all do our best because that's all we can do.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe God laughs at the wisdom of man and makes himself known by foolish things to the simple. He takes the wise in their own craftiness, they are entangled in their own devices:

1 Corinthians 1:20
Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
1 Corinthians 1:25
Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
1 Corinthians 1:27
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
1 Corinthians 3:19
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

Read further in that chapter and you get where the devout Paul also talks about his own knowledge:

1 Corinthians 13:8-12:

But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

It seems the message isn't "scientists don't know for certain", but "nobody on Earth knows for certain... not even the truest of believers".

 

[joeboonda]

Read further in that chapter and you get where the devout Paul also talks about his own knowledge:

1 Corinthians 13:8-12:

But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

It seems the message isn't "scientists don't know for certain", but "nobody on Earth knows for certain... not even the truest of believers".

Yes, the love chapter. I don't really think it has to do with whether we can know for certain whethe God created the earth, but more that we should not be puffed up because of our spiritual gifts and they are no good unless they are done in love. It is more spiritual. We know God as he has revealed himself to us through his Word and the guidance of the Holy Spirit, but one day we will see him face to face and see him as he is. We are to put away the childishness of pride and put on the love of Christ.

1 Corinthians 13

Love

1If I speak in the tongues[a] of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,[b] but have not love, I gain nothing.
4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. 13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

 

[camanintx]

I believe scientists have recognized the universe had a beginning.

Some scientists, maybe. Yet others would say the universe is eternal. Most scientists would probably say we don't know yet.

My question still stands, if there was proof that the universe has existed forever, would it disprove the existence of God?

 

[Wandered Off]

My question still stands, if there was proof that the universe has existed forever, would it disprove the existence of God?

It may well disprove the existence of a separate creator god, but it would not necessarily disprove a pantheistic or panentheistic god, for example, or one co-eternal with the universe. There's a seemingly endless supply of god concepts out there... It's like a whack-a-mole game.

 

[rojse]

The original-language word translated "circle" at Isaiah 40:22 may also be rendered "sphere." Certain Bible translations read, "the globe of the earth" (Douay Version) and "the round earth."—Moffatt.

After we found out the earth was a sphere, not before?

 

[logician]

"
My question still stands, if there was proof that the universe has existed forever, would it disprove the existence of God?"

Why disprove something that has never been proven?

 

[may]

And yet anyone who seriously believes the Earth is flat point to the Bible as proof.

why would they do that when the earth is mentioned as a circle or sphere?

 

[may]

After we found out the earth was a sphere, not before?

the inspired scriptures were written before, that is why the bible is always right regardless of what man thinks, when they thought the earth was flat they looked at the bible and said it is not a circle it is flat , but later on they realized that the bible was right all along . it is always the same, the critics try to say that the bible is wrong but later on it is proved to be right. another thing that i find interesting is that the bible says that when a baby boy is circumcised, it should be done on the eighth day after being born , and it has been found out now that on the eighth day of a babies life the clotting agent , i think it is vitimin K is at its highest at that time , which would make perfect sense to do the opp at this time so as to not have much bleeding . and the God who inspired the bible knows that this is the case .

Why​

​

did the Law specify that circumcision be done on the eighth day?​

Jehovah did not explain, nor was it necessary that he do so. His ways are always right; his reasons, the best. (2Sa 22:31) However, in recent years man has learned some of the physical reasons why the eighth day was a good time to circumcise. Normal amounts of the blood-clotting element called vitamin K are not found in the blood until the fifth to the seventh day after birth. Another clotting factor known as prothrombin is present in amounts only about 30 percent of normal on the third day but on the eighth day is higher than at any other time in the child’s life—as much as 110 percent of normal. So, following Jehovah’s instructions would help to avoid the danger of hemorrhage. As Dr. S. I. McMillen observes: "From a consideration of vitamin K and prothrombin determinations the perfect day to perform a circumcision is the eighth day . . . [the] day picked by the Creator of vitamin K."—None of These Diseases, 1986, p. 21.

 

[rojse]

What I am asking is was the translation of the word sphere or circle before or after we conclusively proved that the earth was spherical?

The problem I have with the translation of any old religious book, Bible included, was that the decisions made during the translation process could be affected by our knowledge of the current world view, which have changed quite dramatically over the millenia.

I don't know what the word for circle or sphere is in Hebrew, nor do I know the proper translation, or the accuracy of the translators. But my point is that this translation may have been affected by the fact that the knowledge of the world changed, and the translation may have been altered to fit this new knowledge.

But then again, perhaps the original translation was faulty. Either alternative does not speak well for the unbiased nature of the translators.

 

[may]

What I am asking is was the translation of the word sphere or circle before or after we conclusively proved that the earth was spherical?

The problem I have with the translation of any old religious book, Bible included, was that the decisions made during the translation process could be affected by our knowledge of the current world view, which have changed quite dramatically over the millenia.

I don't know what the word for circle or sphere is in Hebrew, nor do I know the proper translation, or the accuracy of the translators. But my point is that this translation may have been affected by the fact that the knowledge of the world changed, and the translation may have been altered to fit this new knowledge.

But then again, perhaps the original translation was faulty. Either alternative does not speak well for the unbiased nature of the translators.

The Hebrew “hhug,” translated “circle,” can also mean “sphere,” as Davidson’s “Concordance” and Wilson’s “Old Testament Word Studies” show. Hence, Moffatt’s translation of Isaiah 40:22 reads: “He sits over the round earth.”

 

[Muffled]

I saw this preacher Ken Hamm or something trying to teach kids that dinosaurs and humans lived together. I can't understand how he can defend that at all. He believes that if it's not in the bible, it never happened. Personally i can't understand how people believe in the bible. Honestly how could you believe a book that says God created the world about 10,000 years ago? Too bad for them because life fossils have been discovered that date back billions of years. Even the skeletons of modern humans date back before the time of Adam and Eve. I believe in evolution, but that doesn't mean i dont believe in God like all of these evangelists think. They have all just been horribly mislead since birth and are now proceeding to brainwash the children of our future.

I don't see that as a valid belief. There is never a statement in the Bible that says it is a compendium of all knowledge.

I believe in the Bible because it led me to a relationship with God and God has never disowned the Bible.

Actually it is closer to 7000 years ago about the time that the first recorded history appears. To be accurate the Bible does not say when the Universe was created. Adam and Eve started 7000 years ago but that doesn't mean that they were the very first people only that they are the first in this record.

Everyone teaches what they believe whether it is correct or not. The schools teach evolution as though it were a law when in fact it is only a theory and most likely an unprovable one.

 

[UnTheist]

only a theory

Ugh. Please tell me you know what the Scientific definition of 'Theory' is.

and most likely an unprovable one.

If a galaxy full of evidence goes in favor of Evolution, it has basically been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[Muffled]

"
My question still stands, if there was proof that the universe has existed forever, would it disprove the existence of God?"

Why disprove something that has never been proven?

It is a moot point because no-one will ever be able to prove that the Universe existed forever.

 

[Popeyesays]

Definition of "theory" in scientific terms from Wikipedia:


"In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition."

Regards,
Scott

 

[Muffled]

Ugh. Please tell me you know what the Scientific definition of 'Theory' is.

If a galaxy full of evidence goes in favor of Evolution, it has basically been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Chicken Little was hit on the head by a rock. The evidence was quite clear that a piece of the sky had fallen and his logical conclusion was that the sky was falling. Your galaxy of evidence is full of gaps from which so called scientists draw Chicken Little like conclusions based upon their personal bias.

 

[Popeyesays]

Chicken Little was hit on the head by a rock. The evidence was quite clear that a piece of the sky had fallen and his logical conclusion was that the sky was falling. Your galaxy of evidence is full of gaps from which so called scientists draw Chicken Little like conclusions based upon their personal bias.

Actually, in the story Chicken Little was struck by a rain drop.

Regards,
Scott

 

[SoyLeche]

Actually, in the story Chicken Little was struck by a rain drop.

Regards,
Scott

I saw the movie - it was a loose tile off of the space ship.

I don't know what you are talking about