[_ Old Earth _] The "springs of the sea"

[John]

In the book Job, Job referred to deep springs of water at the bottom of the ocean.

Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth? Job 38:16.

In this verse, the Bible refers to the existence of springs of water flowing in the depths of the sea. It is only in the last thirty years that underwater exploration of the ocean depths has reveled a remarkable phenomenon of numerous huge springs of fresh water pouring out of the ocean floor.
The many scientific statements found throughout the bible are one of the greatest proofs of god's inspiration of the scriptures. Significantly, there are no scientific errors or mistakes that have been discovered in the thousands of pages of inspired passages, These conclusive evidences provide overwhelming proof that god exists, and that he truly inspired the writers of scripture to record his message to all mankind. The fascinating scientific insights reveled in the pages of the bible from genesis to revelation, are gods authentic signature on the pages of scriptures, proving it is the genuine word of god.

Other topics the bible talks about:
Sea Currents
Lightning and Thunder
Weather Patterns
Water Cycle
"Hole in space"
The earth and empty space
The circuit of the sun
The earth is a Sphere
2nd Law Entropy
Ist Law Conservation of energy
Water in deep space
Vastness of outer space

Plus many many more

Tell me how a mere man back when they had no way of knowing these things wrote them down to the point of being 100% correct? its even at a greater improbability the abiogenics.

 

[Heidi]

In the book Job, Job referred to deep springs of water at the bottom of the ocean.

Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth? Job 38:16.

In this verse, the Bible refers to the existence of springs of water flowing in the depths of the sea. It is only in the last thirty years that underwater exploration of the ocean depths has reveled a remarkable phenomenon of numerous huge springs of fresh water pouring out of the ocean floor.
The many scientific statements found throughout the bible are one of the greatest proofs of god's inspiration of the scriptures. Significantly, there are no scientific errors or mistakes that have been discovered in the thousands of pages of inspired passages, These conclusive evidences provide overwhelming proof that god exists, and that he truly inspired the writers of scripture to record his message to all mankind. The fascinating scientific insights reveled in the pages of the bible from genesis to revelation, are gods authentic signature on the pages of scriptures, proving it is the genuine word of god.

Other topics the bible talks about:
Sea Currents
Lightning and Thunder
Weather Patterns
Water Cycle
"Hole in space"
The earth and empty space
The circuit of the sun
The earth is a Sphere
2nd Law Entropy
Ist Law Conservation of energy
Water in deep space
Vastness of outer space

Plus many many more

Tell me how a mere man back when they had no way of knowing these things wrote them down to the point of being 100% correct? its even at a greater improbability the abiogenics.

Also, what scientists don't know is that the earth was created out of water. But they do know that there are more than 54,000,000,000,000 gallons of water vapor in the universe. They also know that all animals gestate in water and that the human being is composed of over 80% water.

Yet they ignore the biblical creation account and make up wild myths about fictitious beasts turning into humans and the earth being billions of years old. : But Jesus praised our Father for hiding the truth from the 'wise and learned" and revealing them to little children. So God's existence is so obvious and simple that even little children can see it. But the "wise and learned" gloss right over it. That proves Jesus right once again. ;-)

 

[freeway]

There are mountains on the bottom of the ocean floor (Jonah 2:5-6). Only in the last century have we discovered that there are towering mountains and deep trenches in the depths of the sea
how could they had known this 2500 year ago, maybe God let them in on it.. :wink: this was not known until the age of modern man.

 

[freeway]

Which came first, proteins or DNA (Revelation 4:11)? For evolutionists, the chicken or egg dilemma goes even deeper. Chickens consist of proteins. The code for each protein is contained in the DNA/RNA system. However, proteins are required in order to manufacture DNA. So which came first: proteins or DNA? The ONLY explanation is that they were created together.

man i just wanted to know why did the chicken cross the road? :D

 

[Deep Thought]

Significantly, there are no scientific errors or mistakes that have been discovered in the thousands of pages of inspired passages, These conclusive evidences provide overwhelming proof that god exists, and that he truly inspired the writers of scripture to record his message to all mankind. The fascinating scientific insights reveled in the pages of the bible from genesis to revelation, are gods authentic signature on the pages of scriptures, proving it is the genuine word of god.

No scientific errors?? Hmmm....

Leviticus 11: 20-23
“All winged insects that go upon all fours are an abomination to you. Yet among the winged insects that go on all fours you may eat those who have legs on their feet, with which to leap on the earth. Of them you may eat: the locust according to it’s kind, the cricket according to its kind, and the grasshopper according to its kind. But all other winged insects which have four feet are an abomination to you.

Name me all the 4 legged insects that exist.

Matthew 13:31-32 NRSV
He [Jesus] put before them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in the field; it is the smallest of all seeds...

The mustard seed is small, but there's plenty of other seeds that are much smaller.

I Kings 7:23-26 (II Chronicles 4:2-5)
23Then he made the molten sea; it was round, ten cubits from brim to brim, and five cubits high. A line of thirty cubits would encircle it completely. 24Under its brim were panels all around it, each of ten cubits, surrounding the sea; there were two rows of panels, cast when it was cast. 25It stood on twelve oxen, three facing north, three facing west, three facing south, and three facing east; the sea was set on them. The hindquarters of each were towards the inside. 26It's thickness was a handbreadth; its brim was made like the brim of a cup, like the flower of a lily; it held two thousand baths.

Which makes the value of Pi equally exactly 3.

I could go on forever, but you get the point.

 

[Dunzo]

My personal favourite is where it says the world is flat and rests on pillars (1 Samuel 2:8)

 

[John]

In response of the bible containing a math error.

Does the Bible contain a mathematical error?

I Kings 7:23–26 and II Chronicles 4:2–5 describe a huge brass bowl built by King Solomon. If the diameter of this bowl was 10 cubits, then the circumference should have been 31.415926...cubits, not just 30 cubits! Any math student will tell you that the circumference of a circle is found by taking the diameter times Pi (3..141592653589793...). This apparent mathematical error caused me, as a new Christian, to doubt the accuracy of the Bible.

The answer is so simple!
The diameter of 10 cubits is from outer rim to outer rim, the way anyone would measure a circular object. The circumference of 30 cubits, however, was of the inner circle, after subtracting the thickness of the brass (two handbreadthsâ€â€one for each side) from which the bowl was made. This would be the number needed to calculate the volume of water.

Check for yourself.
Substitute the length of your cubit (elbow to longest fingertip) for the letter C in the following formula, and solve for H.

30C / p + 2H = 10C

The width of your handbreadth will be the result. For example, my cubit is 20 inches long. If I had built the brass bowl, the outer diameter would have a circumference of 600 inches (30 x 20 inches) and a diameter of 190.986 inches (600 inches / 3.14159). The difference between the two diameters is 9.014 inches (two of my handbreadths).

Option #2

They may have measured the bowl's circumference under the lip and the diameter including the lip, which added enough to make 10 cubits across. Rest assured God makes no mistakes, mathematical or otherwise. The Scriptures do not contain error. By the way, Solomon built this sea in 1000 B.C., long before the Greeks rediscovered Pi (p). We may not understand some things at first glance, but the problem is with us, not with the Bible. Please be sure you are on the solid foundation of God’s Word, saved by the blood of Christ.

 

[jwu]

i'll have to agree with johnmuise on the bowl thing; the description in the Bible does not describe the exact shape.

This shape could result in such measurements, if the diameter is measured at the top and the circumference at the middle:

That leaves the other examples though.

 

[John]

In response to the smallest seed.

Matthew 13:31-32 He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field. 32 It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches.â€Â

Please note that Jesus was not comparing the mustard seed to all other seeds in the world, but to seeds that a local, Palestinian farmer might have "sowed in his field," i.e., a key qualifying phrase in verse 31. And it's absolutely true that the black mustard seed (Brassica nigra = Sinapis nigra) was the smallest seed ever sown by a first-century farmer in that part of the world.

It's also true, as many modern-day encyclopedias will tell you, that the black mustard seed in Israel will typically grow to heights of 3.7 meters, or twelve (12) feet) -- plenty large enough to hold a bird nest.

It's important to remember that the Bible often uses everyday terminology in order to communicate simple truth. Even today, we might refer to a "sunset" when, technically, scientifically, we know that the sun never actually 'sets,' i.e., it's the earth that revolves.

When people come to visit us here in Yarmouth Nova scotia, we might take them on a drive, passing a good number of lakes and ponds, to Lake George , which I will describe to them as being "the largest lake of all." Of course, our guests will usually realize that I'm speaking locally, not globally. They don't often question my credibility.

The context of Matthew 13 makes it quite clear that Jesus was addressing a local lay audience, not an international conference of botanists. It seems that no reasonable person would therefore insist for very long that this text provides a viable basis for questioning either Jesus or the Bible, when it comes to getting the facts straight -- scientifically, historically, or technically.

 

[jwu]

Please note that Jesus was not comparing the mustard seed to all other seeds in the world, but to seeds that a local, Palestinian farmer might have "sowed in his field," i.e., a key qualifying phrase in verse 31. And it's absolutely true that the black mustard seed (Brassica nigra = Sinapis nigra) was the smallest seed ever sown by a first-century farmer in that part of the world.

If this "all" can be interpreted in a non-literal fashion there, due to the context, then why not Genesis as well?

 

[John]

11:23 But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you.

Mutations ? i really don't know as of yet to debate this claim.

 

[jwu]

The context of Matthew 13 makes it quite clear that Jesus was addressing a local lay audience, not an international conference of botanists. It seems that no reasonable person would therefore insist for very long that this text provides a viable basis for questioning either Jesus or the Bible, when it comes to getting the facts straight -- scientifically, historically, or technically.

And Genesis doesn't adress biologists and geologists either, but bronze age laypeople.

 

[John]

The context of Matthew 13 makes it quite clear that Jesus was addressing a local lay audience, not an international conference of botanists. It seems that no reasonable person would therefore insist for very long that this text provides a viable basis for questioning either Jesus or the Bible, when it comes to getting the facts straight -- scientifically, historically, or technically.

And Genesis doesn't adress biologists and geologists either, but bronze age laypeople.

Its not a blanket cover just for people of that time due to ignorance of facts. The bible talks about many times, even the world that you and me live in today.

It tells how about the creation, the middle part, and the future. using literal teaching and figurative, being able to distinguish between them is only half the battle, but its easily done with logic.

 

[John]

Nobody has answer the obvious question, how could the writers of the Bible know about these under water springs ?

 

[jwu]

Underwater springs can be observed in shallow lakes or near the shore as well.

 

[John]

Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth? Job 38:16.

Springs of the "sea"

The "Depth"

Definitions:
Sea:
1. a division of an ocean or a large body of salt water partially enclosed by land
2. ocean: anything apparently limitless in quantity or volume

Depth:
1. a division of an ocean or a large body of salt water partially enclosed by land
2. ocean: anything apparently limitless in quantity or volume

 

[jwu]

Yes? Once one has seen springs in lakes or the shore areas, it is easy to postulate deep water springs.

Besides...i don't care about English dictionary entries when the original hebrew would be the appropriate thing ;)

 

[John]

So you are putting up the shield of "misinterpretation" that unfortunately is the last defense of the person who does not believe. I admit it when i don't know the answer, maybe you should do the same :wink:

 

[jwu]

So you are putting up the shield of "misinterpretation" that unfortunately is the last defense of the person who does not believe. I admit it when i don't know the answer, maybe you should do the same :wink:

I'm not saying anything about misinterpretation (albeit that would be a perfectly valid objection). I'm just pointing out that English dictionaries are of no use here, as in the English language there are many synonyms which weren't the same in the original hebrew. Languages happen to change over time.

However, the hebrew word is "yam", which also can refer to seashore. That is independent from the actual point i was making though - once one knows about lake and shore underwater springs, one can easily deduce springs in the ocean from this.

 

[John]

So you are putting up the shield of "misinterpretation" that unfortunately is the last defense of the person who does not believe. I admit it when i don't know the answer, maybe you should do the same :wink:

I'm not saying anything about misinterpretation (albeit that would be a perfectly valid objection). I'm just pointing out that English dictionaries are of no use here, as in the English language there are many synonyms which weren't the same in the original hebrew. Languages happen to change over time.

However, the hebrew word is "yam", which also can refer to seashore. That is independent from the actual point i was making though - once one knows about lake and shore underwater springs, one can easily deduce springs in the ocean from this.

But there are fresh water springs in the ocean.