Biblical evidence of The Big Bang Theory

[Pommie]

If it wasn't for satan, those deaths would never had been necessary.
Please say on topic.

It was you who brought up Satan!!
Please stay on topic.

Mike.

 

[rc3po]

It was you who brought up Satan!!
Please stay on topic.

Mike.

Only because I was asked a question. I have tried to stay on topic.
I try to be nice and not ignore people. I posted the thread in the Physics forum and they moved it here.
If yall want to discuss religious matters, then ask them to start a "Religion Forum" and I'll be glad to discuss
any religious topic you want.

 

[rc3po]

I keep coming back to this one....
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Adam and Eve, according to the creation myth of Abrahamic religions,[1] were the first man and woman. The story of Adam and Eve is central to the belief that God created human beings to live in a Paradise on earth, although they fell away from that state and formed the present world full of suffering and injustice. It provides the basis for the belief that humanity is in essence a single family, with everyone descended from a single pair of original ancestors

OK everybody in the world is from Adam and Eve. From the IBM National geographic study they can trace Adam back to one guy in Africa and everyone has his DNA. Ok, cool. But..... this guy wasn't the first guy, only the first to survive and Eves line goes back many more years. How can this be?

Lol! Wikipedia?

 

[misterT]

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/03/backing-the-big-bang/

 

[rc3po]

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/03/backing-the-big-bang/

Interesting. Thanks misterT.

 

[ronv]

Lol! Wikipedia?

LOL Wikipedia what? Which bible do you want to use?

Whatca think about the study?

 

[hexreader]

I think Neil DeGrasse makes a good case here:

The whole interview is well worth watching, but go to 38 minutes in for his explanation of why he does not consider the Bible to be compatible with science.

 

[rc3po]

I think Neil DeGrasse makes a good case here:

The whole interview is well worth watching, but go to 38 minutes in for his explanation of why he does not consider the Bible to be compatible with science.

God had men write in ways that people at the time can understand. That is no mystery. The prophesies for the end-times, can only be understood by us. Ex: Increase in knowledge= people back then didn't know what computers are - books were painstakingly hand-written, now, we have Libraries at our fingertips.
Ex: Men will move to and fro in the world= travel used to be very arduous; you had to board ships and carry your gold with you - now, I can board a plane for Paris to eat supper and only need a few pieces of plastic.
The shame is when a person get's a PhD in one field, and thinks they are a world authority in every field...
His opinion means nothing to me.

 

[hexreader]

The shame is when a person get's a PhD in one field, and thinks they are a world authority in every field...

How can you possibly know what is in Neil's heart and what he thinks?
This seems like a cynical attempt to rubbish the opposition in order to try and discredit his argument.

I think the Devil must have got inside you.

 

[ronsimpson]

The topic of science and the bible comes up daily in my house.
For many years I know people that want to distort science to match the bible.
I know people that write Science/Bible books, make videos and preach for a living.

*The universe is <6000 years old.
#I can see light that is >1,000,000 years old.
*The speed of light goes to infinity 6000 years ago. (solves old light problem)
*The speed of light goes much slower before the flood. This disproves radioactive dating.
#The speed of light is as constant as God. It can’t get faster and slower at the same time.
*There was one flood that covered the world 1000 feet above the top of mountains.
#I see many layers of floods each killed different types of animals, at vastly different times.
*The excess water after the flood flew off in space. The earth was spinning 1000s or millions of times faster at the time of the flood. The water in space caused the pock marks on the moon.
#There are the same marks on moons around other planets.
*The world is <6000 years old.
# There are >10,000 years of tree rings.
*Trees make 2 to 3 rings a year. (1000s of years ago)
#Tree rings are +/-1% accurate.
*Scientists are out to kill the church.
#Scientists don’t care what you think, and 25% are Christians. (in the US)
*Historians are out to kill the church.
*The government want to kill the church.
*Geology is against the church.
*DNA is against the bible.
#Do you see a common theme here.

Every bible story has many different ways to translate it. Some of the versions do match science.

Bible & Science; four options:
The bible is right and science is wrong, history is wrong, Geology is wrong etc.
They are both wrong.
Both are right.
Science is (mostly) right and the bible has translation problems.

 

[ronv]

God Almighty, His Majesty on High. And His son Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
It's very simple, Jesus Christ is the only name men are trying to destroy, even in the USA. They don't attack Muslims or anyone else, just Christians. Even Homeland Security lists Christians as an enemy.
That should wake most people up, but it doesn't.

I couldn't figure out what you were talking about, but it must be this:

https://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf

I didn't see Christians mentioned only right wing extremists. Maybe that's the same? Or is it religious right wing extremists? Are they the same?

 

[ronv]

The topic of science and the bible comes up daily in my house.

My house to, but it usually my wife saying "It scares me that those people actually believe what they are saying."

 

[bryan1]

so if the bible is written in so many different ways then why isn't it called a novel.......

 

[rc3po]

I couldn't figure out what you were talking about, but it must be this:

https://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf

I didn't see Christians mentioned only right wing extremists. Maybe that's the same? Or is it religious right wing extremists? Are they the same?

Google it....sigh

 

[rc3po]

so if the bible is written in so many different ways then why isn't it called a novel.......

Research words paying attention to the subject matter and context. I don't have time to give English and reading comprehension lessons...
If you don't have anything about the BB, then I'll just ignore you from now on.
If you want to argue about the Bible, go to a Christian website. There are a bunch of them.

 

[misterT]

If you want to argue about the Bible, go to a Christian website. There are a bunch of them.

Then why did you come here to argue about the Bible? Nothing wrong with that on my opinion, but you started all this Bible-debate and now you are telling us to go somewhere else to argue.

 

[rc3po]

Then why did you come here to argue about the Bible? Nothing wrong with that on my opinion, but you started all this Bible-debate and now you are telling us to go somewhere else to argue.

Wrongo!

 

[JimB]

I cannot help but think that this thread has outlived its usefulness.

JimB

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I cannot help but think that this thread has outlived its usefulness.

I never thought it had any usefulness in the first place, I see no connection between a work of fiction for a primitive and outdated superstition and a widely accepted theory on the origin of the universe.

 

[Ian Rogers]

In total agreement with the majority... As the thread will not stay on topic... Thread closed...