Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
It Didn't Matter That Much Anyway.

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Phillip Martin on January 4, 2003 21:36:10 UTC

"I do believe that if it is in (wow four 2 letter i words in a row) the Bible than it is true. However, one must make sure that what the your reading Bible says is not a tranlational error."

Everything? How do you think a person could live to be over 900 years old? That teacher said it was because of an ice dome that covered the earth, not letting in enough UV rays to do as much harm as they do today. Thats also how the Dinosaurs were able to live with us. Ohh, yeah I finally remembered to ask him about the reference page for that. Job 38-39

"Do you mean follows just because the religion says something or follows because they don't understand the teachings."

Both, plus an ignorance about the other ways to look at a given topic. The third isn't always present, but often times it is. In the case of the girl, she didn't understand it (how he was able to live that long), and she believed it just because the bible said it was true. She did understand the other way to look at it, but it was immediately discredited due to the Bible conflict.

"But I also agree that untill one has one religion the world will still be in termoil. However, I don't think a combinations of religions would work to well either since many people (like me) would never consider join such a fake religion."

Only one religion, what about none at all? Do you think that would help, or hurt? Elaborate. Just curious. "... would never consider joining such a fake religion," an interesting choice of words. Am I mistaken when I think that all religions (the older ones, anyway) have changed over the years, to encompass other beliefs and ideologies?

"I know personally a truth that only one is correct."

The truth is, only a maximum of one is correct.

"By 'scientific' so you mean historical like ancient texts? Even though the texts from other ancient civilizations are also biased?"

That is to be determined on a case-by-case basis. I put it in '' because scientific doesn't mean what it once did, and even now, the boundaries are blurred.

"Personally I think it is almost funny that some people would refuse to beleive the Bible because it is religous yet they would qoute some ancient babalyonian document that has refrences to this God or that as completly reliable."

We have to quote something. I am not sure of why certain sources are deemed as more trustworthy than others, but the scientists think they do. Who am I to argue with them?

-Phillip Martin

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins