[_ Old Earth _] Science sometimes right but always wrong when.....

[jwu]

As the Holy spirit enlightens one regardless of the Denominational flock he has gleaned his Biblical knowlege from he should of course share with his bretheren what the Holy spirit has revealed to him so to help his bretheren grow in The word.

And what about those who hold to a different point of view but also say that the Holy Spirit revealed that to them? Who is right?

 

[carey]

smile

And what about those who hold to a different point of view but also say that the Holy Spirit revealed that to them? Who is right?

Thats simple.

Th correct one would be the one whos interpretation of a scripture cannot be contradicted by another scripture in the Bible.

 

[jwu]

...and who decides if another ambiguous part actually contradicts or should be interpreted differently as well? You can't know which of the two references needs to be interpreted differently.
If there is disagreement about the interpretation of one part, then there can be disagreement about the interpretation of another as well.

And there can be things which are not adressed anywhere else in scripture so that there is just one reference about them.

 

[carey]

smile

...and who decides if another ambiguous part actually contradicts or should be interpreted differently as well? You can't know which of the two references needs to be interpreted differently.
If there is disagreement about the interpretation of one part, then there can be disagreement about the interpretation of another as well.

And there can be things which are not adressed anywhere else in scripture so that there is just one reference about them.

Things that are not addressed elsewhere are hard to find but would also be easy to understand even for a non beleiver.

When one scriture is ambiguous another scripture will make it plain when referencing the same topic. So if the interpretation of the ambiguous scripture contradicts the more plian scripture the interpretation is incorrect of the undisputably plain scripture. But if a person does not have the Holy spirit dwelling in them they will try to argue a ridiculous point that is plain.

So if they do here is where this scripture again applies.

2 Timothy 2 : 23Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. 24And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. 25Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, 26and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

 

[jwu]

So if the interpretation of the ambiguous scripture contradicts the more plian scripture the interpretation is incorrect of the undisputably plain scripture. But if a person does not have the Holy spirit dwelling in them they will try to argue a ridiculous point that is plain.

That looks in some way like circular reasoning to me.

 

[carey]

hmmm

That looks in some way like circular reasoning to me.

Do you have faith that God had the power to create all matter allof the cosmos??

Do you have faith God sent his son to die for your sins??

Do you have faith that God would not allow the context ,jot or tiddle be changed from his Holy word the Bible??

If you do I seriously doubt this seems like circular reasonig.

God bless,
Craey

 

[jwu]

Yes, yes, no.

In case of the "no" i find this to be evidenced by all those arguments about the different Bible versions and translations. I don't see how this can be reconciled with God actively preserving the Bible - unless

If you do I seriously doubt this seems like circular reasonig.

It looks like "if someone agrees with me then he is guided by the Holy Spirit as i am, and if he disagrees then he isn't guided and wrong".

The first two questions have nothing to do with all this by the way.

 

[carey]

That looks in some way like circular reasoning to me.

Ok lets assume that Noahs 3 sons had 4 children averaga piece.

And that is all that humanity compounded coming from that original 12 averaged every year for 4000 years.

This is a very conservative number as I have several friends with double that number kids.

tHe number should sufficiently put you at ease with your doubts about the population today.

 

[jwu]

Umm...what does that have to do with this thread? I didn't say anything about doubts about population.

But i'm fine with that topic...

This is a very conservative number as I have several friends with double that number kids.

So what? Individual cases prove nothing about global averages, and not everyone procreates either.

I don't dispute that the current world population could be generated that quickly, but a global flood didn't happen, so that's a non-issue anyway.

And there would be serious problems with the population numbers in the Bible itself....6 billion after 4000 years are one thing, but many millions (basically 2/3 of the way to the 6 billion using exponential growth)after a few hundred years an entirely different one.

 

[army_of_juan]

When science theories seem to contradict anything in the Bible they will
100 % of the time stay Just theories.

Theories ALWAYS stay just theories, they don't graduate to anything else because a Scientific Theory (not layman's) is the highest form of scientific explanation we have. There are Theories of gravity as well as Laws of gravity.

The Bible foretold of the stupidity of mans science.

That's just to discourge people from learning, God likes his people ignorant apparently.

 

[Guest]

You cannot prove God and you can prove God. I know, it sounds really stupid.

Well, rather I should say that you cannot prove God scientifically but you can prove him with belief.
I believe in God because I can feel that he exists. Yes, I was brought up into believing in God, but by now I could have stopped believing in him/her.

I knew someone that stopped believing in God when she was 14. I could have done that, but I chose not to.

 

[jwu]

How can one chose one's beliefs? Could you chose to be persuaded that 2+2=5?
I think one can act as if one were persuaded and pretend to be, but one wouldn't really be.

 

[Guest]

A person choose another's beliefs? Because they're his/her parents. Now, I HOPE that the parents would allowed them to do whatever with their religion once they're an adult.

 

[jwu]

Perhaps i should have been more clear...i wasn't referring to manipulating someone else into believing something, but to choosing one's own beliefs.

As in, "i now choose to believe that the sky is green, and to be fully convinced of it".