Decades after the fact?? What is the fact?? All the gospels were finished 25 years after the death of christ, by the men who witnessed it. And the bible has been proven to be accurate through history and archiology. And it is pretty well known that it is the most accurate writing of its kind. Thats not even mentioning the scientific facts that it states, that werent even known true until the last few hundred years.
Where is Jesus?
- Thread starter fields316_2000
- Start date
If you think that archeology has proven the Bible to be accurate, then you've been deceived. You'll not struggle to find Christians who'll tell you how archeologists have been "digging up Bible stories"...but then again, they would wouldn't they? They'll jump on any piece of information that supports the conclusion they've already drawn.
Archeologists have found evidence to support some parts of the Bible; the historical existence of some people, the historical occurrence of some events. Bear in mind that this simply proves that some of the people, places and events in the Bible weren't completely made up, it doesn't prove that the Biblical accounts of these people/palces/events are true.
Archeologists have also found evidence contradicting accounts in the Bible. There are a handful of examples here, if you're familiar with the Bible.
Archeologists have found evidence to support some parts of the Bible; the historical existence of some people, the historical occurrence of some events. Bear in mind that this simply proves that some of the people, places and events in the Bible weren't completely made up, it doesn't prove that the Biblical accounts of these people/palces/events are true.
Archeologists have also found evidence contradicting accounts in the Bible. There are a handful of examples here, if you're familiar with the Bible.
There is no date in which the Gospels were completed, the earliest copies of them are from the 4th century. Accurate through history?
"Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and the other on the left" (Matt. 27:38)
Thieves were not crucified, it was contrary to both Roman and Jewish law to be put to death for a petty crime.
"And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour" (Mark l5:33)
there was no written history of this happening.
"And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (Luke 2:1-2).
There are no Roman records of Augustus raising taxes in all Roman lands.
Heres some scientific errors
the bat is a bird (Lev. 19:19, Deut. 14:11, 18)
The earth has ends or edges (Job 37:3)
The earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1)
A mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds and grows into the greatest of all shrubs (Matt. 13:31-32 RSV) Orchids have the smallest seed, poppy seeds are also smaller than mustard seeds.
"Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and the other on the left" (Matt. 27:38)
Thieves were not crucified, it was contrary to both Roman and Jewish law to be put to death for a petty crime.
"And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour" (Mark l5:33)
there was no written history of this happening.
"And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (Luke 2:1-2).
There are no Roman records of Augustus raising taxes in all Roman lands.
Heres some scientific errors
the bat is a bird (Lev. 19:19, Deut. 14:11, 18)
The earth has ends or edges (Job 37:3)
The earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1)
A mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds and grows into the greatest of all shrubs (Matt. 13:31-32 RSV) Orchids have the smallest seed, poppy seeds are also smaller than mustard seeds.
some contradictories in the Bible:
There were in Israel 8000,000 (2 Sam. 24:9); 1,1000,000 (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword and there were 500,000 (2 Sam. 24:9), 470,000 (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword in Judah.
There were 550 (1 Kings 9:23), 250 (2 Chron. 8:10) chiefs of the officers that bare the rule over the people
Saul's daughter, Michal, had no sons (2 Sam. 6:23), had 5 sons (2 Sam. 21:6) during her lifetime
Lot was Abraham's nephew (Gen. 14:12), brother (Gen. 14:14)
Joseph was sold into Egypt by Midianites (Gen. 37:36), by Ishmaelites (Gen. 39:1)
Josiah died at Megiddo (2 Kings 23:29-30), at Jerusalem (2 Chron. 35:24)
There were in Israel 8000,000 (2 Sam. 24:9); 1,1000,000 (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword and there were 500,000 (2 Sam. 24:9), 470,000 (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword in Judah.
There were 550 (1 Kings 9:23), 250 (2 Chron. 8:10) chiefs of the officers that bare the rule over the people
Saul's daughter, Michal, had no sons (2 Sam. 6:23), had 5 sons (2 Sam. 21:6) during her lifetime
Lot was Abraham's nephew (Gen. 14:12), brother (Gen. 14:14)
Joseph was sold into Egypt by Midianites (Gen. 37:36), by Ishmaelites (Gen. 39:1)
Josiah died at Megiddo (2 Kings 23:29-30), at Jerusalem (2 Chron. 35:24)
Allright.. Hopefully I touch on everything here.
You said that there is no date for the gospels being completed. But this is not what historians/scholors believe.The evidence seems to indicate that all of the Gospels were written between about 45-75 A.D.Matthew, and the rest of the books before 100 A.D. Due partly because Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus’ prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation. See Mark 13:1-4,14,30; Luke 21:5-9,20-24,32.
History records that in 70 A.D., Jerusalem was destroyed along with its temple exactly as Jesus foretold, yet not a single book of the New Testament refers to this event as having happened. It seems unlikely that any writer after 70 A.D. would not make mention of the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy.
As for theives not being crucified? It doesnt say that no one was hurt or what these men stole, not to mention that this all could have been politically motivated, pontious pilate let the crowd do what they wanted, who knows?
As for the darkness. Thallus wrote of that.
Im not sure how accurate Roman records are from 2000 years ago and it they would have bothered writing down a tax increase, Im sure it happend all the time.
As for the scientific stuff, some of there are just stupid.
First off there is nothing in Leviticus at all about bats, and in Deut. it is basically explaining to the people at the time what they could eat, and they were broken up into 3 categories: fish, beasts, and birds (flying thing) and it doesnt state that a bat is a bird.
As far as the ends of the earth and it having four corners, it sounds more to me when I read it as something that the people then would undersand. It obviously doesnt state that the earth has four literall corners, or a literall edge.
As far as the mustard seed mentioned in the parable. It stats that it is talking about a shrub or tree, poppy seeds and orchid seed are flowers.
2 sam 21:6 says nothing about his daughter at all, it says "7 men of his sons" not that his daughter had sons. (It would save time if you checked some of these yourself)
Gen. 37:36 Says he was sold to the Midianites
Gen 39:1 does not say he was sold to the Ishmaelites, It says he was brought into egypt by them
2 Kings 23:29-30 is kind of a short version of the story it says he was "slew" at megiddo, which I looked up can simply mean struck down.
2 Chron. 35:24 is a longer version which says he was fatally wounded at megiddo and brought to jerusalem where he finally died. I would hardly call that a contradiction. For real though if you just read these for yourself it aint hard to figure out.
You said that there is no date for the gospels being completed. But this is not what historians/scholors believe.The evidence seems to indicate that all of the Gospels were written between about 45-75 A.D.Matthew, and the rest of the books before 100 A.D. Due partly because Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus’ prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation. See Mark 13:1-4,14,30; Luke 21:5-9,20-24,32.
History records that in 70 A.D., Jerusalem was destroyed along with its temple exactly as Jesus foretold, yet not a single book of the New Testament refers to this event as having happened. It seems unlikely that any writer after 70 A.D. would not make mention of the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy.
As for theives not being crucified? It doesnt say that no one was hurt or what these men stole, not to mention that this all could have been politically motivated, pontious pilate let the crowd do what they wanted, who knows?
As for the darkness. Thallus wrote of that.
Im not sure how accurate Roman records are from 2000 years ago and it they would have bothered writing down a tax increase, Im sure it happend all the time.
As for the scientific stuff, some of there are just stupid.
First off there is nothing in Leviticus at all about bats, and in Deut. it is basically explaining to the people at the time what they could eat, and they were broken up into 3 categories: fish, beasts, and birds (flying thing) and it doesnt state that a bat is a bird.
As far as the ends of the earth and it having four corners, it sounds more to me when I read it as something that the people then would undersand. It obviously doesnt state that the earth has four literall corners, or a literall edge.
As far as the mustard seed mentioned in the parable. It stats that it is talking about a shrub or tree, poppy seeds and orchid seed are flowers.
2 sam 21:6 says nothing about his daughter at all, it says "7 men of his sons" not that his daughter had sons. (It would save time if you checked some of these yourself)
Gen. 37:36 Says he was sold to the Midianites
Gen 39:1 does not say he was sold to the Ishmaelites, It says he was brought into egypt by them
2 Kings 23:29-30 is kind of a short version of the story it says he was "slew" at megiddo, which I looked up can simply mean struck down.
2 Chron. 35:24 is a longer version which says he was fatally wounded at megiddo and brought to jerusalem where he finally died. I would hardly call that a contradiction. For real though if you just read these for yourself it aint hard to figure out.
"TRYING TO DEFEND THE BIBLE IS LIKE TRYING TO DEFEND A LION. ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS LET IT OUT, AND IT WILL TAKE CARE OF ITSELF." -Charles Spurgeon
Here are some fun facts:
Only in recent years has man discovered that there are mountains on the ocean floor. This was revealed in the bible thousands of years ago. Jonah 2:6
The bible says "...and the fish of the sea and whatsoever passes through the paths of the seas" Psalm 8:8 What does the bible mean by "paths of the seas"? Man discovered the existence of ocean currents in the 1850's by Matthew Maury who is considered the father of oceanography. He noticed the expression "paths of the seas" while reading Psalms and went looking for them. His book on oceanography is still a basic text in colleges on the subject.
Psalm 19:5-6 The writer is talking about the sun, "his going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof." For many years critics scoffed at these verses because it was believed the sun was stationary. Then it was discovered in recent years that the sun is in fact moving through space at approximately 600,000 MPH. It is traveling and has a "circuit" just as the Bible says.
Three different places in the Bible (Isaiah 51:6, Psalm 102:25-26, Hebrews 1:11) indicate that the earth is wearing out. This is what the Second Law of Thermodynamics (the law of increasing entropy) states. Everything is running down and wearing out as energy is less and less available for use.
For ages, scientists believed in a geocentric view of the universe. The differences between night and day were supposedly caused by the sun revolving around the earth. Today we know that the earths rotation on its axis is responsible for the sun's rising and setting. But 4000+ years ago it was written, "have you commanded the morning since your days; and caused the day spring (dawn) to know his place?... It (the earth) is turned as clay to the seal. Job 38:12,14. The picture here is of a clay vessel being turned or rotated on a potters wheel-an accurate analogy of the earths rotation.
Galileo discovered the water cycle 300 years ago but amos wrote (9:6) that God "calls for the water of the sea and pours them out upon the face of the earth"
Gen 3:15 reveals that a female possesses a seed (egg) for childbearing. This was not the common knowledge until a few hundred years ago. It was widely believed that only the male possessed the seed of life and that the woman was nothing more than a glorified incubator.
Solomon described a cycle of air currents two thousand years before scientists found them. The wind goes toward the south and turns about unto the north; it whirls about continually, and the wind returns again according to his circuits. Ecclesiastes 1:6
The great biological truth concerning the importace of blood in our bodies has only been understood recently. Up until 120 years ago sick people were bled, and many died because of it. But leviticus 17:11 written 3000 years ago, declared that blood is the source of life: For the life of flesh is in the blood.
There are a bunch more but Im tired of typing.
Here are some fun facts:
Only in recent years has man discovered that there are mountains on the ocean floor. This was revealed in the bible thousands of years ago. Jonah 2:6
The bible says "...and the fish of the sea and whatsoever passes through the paths of the seas" Psalm 8:8 What does the bible mean by "paths of the seas"? Man discovered the existence of ocean currents in the 1850's by Matthew Maury who is considered the father of oceanography. He noticed the expression "paths of the seas" while reading Psalms and went looking for them. His book on oceanography is still a basic text in colleges on the subject.
Psalm 19:5-6 The writer is talking about the sun, "his going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof." For many years critics scoffed at these verses because it was believed the sun was stationary. Then it was discovered in recent years that the sun is in fact moving through space at approximately 600,000 MPH. It is traveling and has a "circuit" just as the Bible says.
Three different places in the Bible (Isaiah 51:6, Psalm 102:25-26, Hebrews 1:11) indicate that the earth is wearing out. This is what the Second Law of Thermodynamics (the law of increasing entropy) states. Everything is running down and wearing out as energy is less and less available for use.
For ages, scientists believed in a geocentric view of the universe. The differences between night and day were supposedly caused by the sun revolving around the earth. Today we know that the earths rotation on its axis is responsible for the sun's rising and setting. But 4000+ years ago it was written, "have you commanded the morning since your days; and caused the day spring (dawn) to know his place?... It (the earth) is turned as clay to the seal. Job 38:12,14. The picture here is of a clay vessel being turned or rotated on a potters wheel-an accurate analogy of the earths rotation.
Galileo discovered the water cycle 300 years ago but amos wrote (9:6) that God "calls for the water of the sea and pours them out upon the face of the earth"
Gen 3:15 reveals that a female possesses a seed (egg) for childbearing. This was not the common knowledge until a few hundred years ago. It was widely believed that only the male possessed the seed of life and that the woman was nothing more than a glorified incubator.
Solomon described a cycle of air currents two thousand years before scientists found them. The wind goes toward the south and turns about unto the north; it whirls about continually, and the wind returns again according to his circuits. Ecclesiastes 1:6
The great biological truth concerning the importace of blood in our bodies has only been understood recently. Up until 120 years ago sick people were bled, and many died because of it. But leviticus 17:11 written 3000 years ago, declared that blood is the source of life: For the life of flesh is in the blood.
There are a bunch more but Im tired of typing.
But thats your assumption, if they hurt something wouldn't that be written?
no other historian or astronomer in the world that wrote about the darkness (or eclipse) in that time frame. According to records the only eclipse that happened was 4 years prior to when jesus died.
If they were going to increase a tax throughout ALL of Rome, they would have written it down
assumptions
“The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; [32] and this is smaller than all other seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds in the air come and nest in its branches.”
i don't see where it says "Ok this only applies to trees, not to flowers alright?"
Those "scientific facts" that you wrote are like nostradamus "prophecies", poorly written passages that get interperated into things that make them sound right. For a thousand years the Catholic church said that the Earth was flat and the sun revolved around us, but now they say "Well we knew that, it was in the bible!"
no other historian or astronomer in the world that wrote about the darkness (or eclipse) in that time frame. According to records the only eclipse that happened was 4 years prior to when jesus died.
If they were going to increase a tax throughout ALL of Rome, they would have written it down
assumptions
“The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; [32] and this is smaller than all other seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds in the air come and nest in its branches.”
i don't see where it says "Ok this only applies to trees, not to flowers alright?"
Those "scientific facts" that you wrote are like nostradamus "prophecies", poorly written passages that get interperated into things that make them sound right. For a thousand years the Catholic church said that the Earth was flat and the sun revolved around us, but now they say "Well we knew that, it was in the bible!"
Its your assumption that they didnt
How many other historians/astronomers were practicing during the time of Jesus' death? I would love to know this, because there are two written accounts that say it did happen.
How can that even be known??
No more of an assumption than you believing that those phrases were more of a figure of speech. If someone says that they will follow someone to the ends of the earth today, you wouldnt jump on them telling them that the world isnt flat. More on this...
Yea it doesnt say, but it is possible that this is what the author was getting at.
Those facts are far from anything by nostradamus. How can you misinterperate that the dawn and dusk is controlled by the earth spinning around like on a potters wheel????
And how can you misinterperate the Lord commanding the infants to be circumcised on the eigth from their birth. Doctors have discovered that this is the day when the coagulating factor in the blood is the highest, and also the day the human imune system is at its peak. How can they have guessed all these things, its impossible.
I cannot attest to what the catholic church thinks, or thought. All I know is in Isaiah 40:22 says "it is he that sits upon the sphere of the earth." The Bible said the earth is round 2400 years before it was discovered. This passage was actually what inspired columbus to sail around the world.
How many other historians/astronomers were practicing during the time of Jesus' death? I would love to know this, because there are two written accounts that say it did happen.
How can that even be known??
No more of an assumption than you believing that those phrases were more of a figure of speech. If someone says that they will follow someone to the ends of the earth today, you wouldnt jump on them telling them that the world isnt flat. More on this...
Yea it doesnt say, but it is possible that this is what the author was getting at.
Those facts are far from anything by nostradamus. How can you misinterperate that the dawn and dusk is controlled by the earth spinning around like on a potters wheel????
And how can you misinterperate the Lord commanding the infants to be circumcised on the eigth from their birth. Doctors have discovered that this is the day when the coagulating factor in the blood is the highest, and also the day the human imune system is at its peak. How can they have guessed all these things, its impossible.
I cannot attest to what the catholic church thinks, or thought. All I know is in Isaiah 40:22 says "it is he that sits upon the sphere of the earth." The Bible said the earth is round 2400 years before it was discovered. This passage was actually what inspired columbus to sail around the world.
Cultures had calenders based on astrology and there were numerous astrologers in Egypt, Greece, India, China and Rome. No records from all of those cultures show an eclipse when jesus died.
read the book "Taxes and Trade in the Roman Empire (200bc - 400ad)" and you'll see that the taxes actually went down from 200bc - 1ad and kept going down until 400-650ad.
if God meant for us to understand that the world was round 2000 years ago he should've said "The world is round" instead of "The world has 4 corners, figure it out later".
But Jesus said that passage...and he got it wrong. Of course mustard seeds are the smallest seeds where Jesus lived, but being all-knowing he would've known that orchid seeds were smallest.
"Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in." (Isaiah 40:21-22)
Isaiah 42:5 & 44:24 state that god "spread out the earth", the hebrew verb for spread is "Flatten" or "pounding", if the writer were to say that the world was like a ball, he would have done so such as in Isaiah 22:18, where it says "rolled up tightly like a ball.", refering to the creation of man.
the clay-wheel theory doesn't work with other translations of the Bible.
"It is turned as clay to the seal."
Job 38:14 King JAmes Bible, the prefered book for people who want excuses
"It is changed like clay under the seal."
Job 38:14, Revised Standard Version & New American Standard Bible
"The earth takes shape like clay under a seal."
Job 38:14, New International Version
The problem? Well the King James bible was written during the time of King James, when Elizebethan English was used and "turning" was used as a synonym for "changed" or "takes shape", an example that we still use today is "the milk turned sour".
read the book "Taxes and Trade in the Roman Empire (200bc - 400ad)" and you'll see that the taxes actually went down from 200bc - 1ad and kept going down until 400-650ad.
if God meant for us to understand that the world was round 2000 years ago he should've said "The world is round" instead of "The world has 4 corners, figure it out later".
But Jesus said that passage...and he got it wrong. Of course mustard seeds are the smallest seeds where Jesus lived, but being all-knowing he would've known that orchid seeds were smallest.
"Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in." (Isaiah 40:21-22)
Isaiah 42:5 & 44:24 state that god "spread out the earth", the hebrew verb for spread is "Flatten" or "pounding", if the writer were to say that the world was like a ball, he would have done so such as in Isaiah 22:18, where it says "rolled up tightly like a ball.", refering to the creation of man.
the clay-wheel theory doesn't work with other translations of the Bible.
"It is turned as clay to the seal."
Job 38:14 King JAmes Bible, the prefered book for people who want excuses
"It is changed like clay under the seal."
Job 38:14, Revised Standard Version & New American Standard Bible
"The earth takes shape like clay under a seal."
Job 38:14, New International Version
The problem? Well the King James bible was written during the time of King James, when Elizebethan English was used and "turning" was used as a synonym for "changed" or "takes shape", an example that we still use today is "the milk turned sour".
I dont know what to say. You are as set in your opinion, as I am sure that the Bible is true. Im not sure that we'll ever convince each other of what the other believes. I still think that I'm right and believe it 100%, but Im sure you feel the same way. If you ever feel up to it, I invite you to read it for yourself sometime, if you havent already, the heart and the conscience is alot softer than our hard heads. Ill leave this with a list of a few of the populan scientists that belive the Bible as I do (there are lots and lots more) and their respective scientific contribution. Remember these are not weak minded people, and aethists are human and could be very wrong.
Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible.
Sir Fancis Bacon (1561-1627)
Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity."
Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled!
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts.
Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era.
Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being."
Robert Boyle (1791-1867)
One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era.
Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity.
Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)
Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution.
William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)
Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions.
Max Planck (1858-1947)
Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God. Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!"
Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible.
Sir Fancis Bacon (1561-1627)
Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity."
Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled!
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts.
Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era.
Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being."
Robert Boyle (1791-1867)
One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era.
Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity.
Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)
Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution.
William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)
Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions.
Max Planck (1858-1947)
Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God. Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!"
Indeed people who believed in the Bible created many great things, but what about the people who didn't believe in the Bible? Right now we're being held back because people are taking the bible literally. If the bible said not to sit under apple trees, would Isaac Newton had thought of Gravity? How many years would it have been before we had discovered it?
We've heard this argument a million times before.
Pascal's Wager doesn't work. A couple of points;
* You're assuming that either your God exists, or no God exists. There are lots of Gods that you don't believe in. If there is supreme being, creator and ruler of the universe, and he's NOT the God you worship, wouldn't be be more annoyed at you for blindly worshipping a false idol than me for being logical and not believing in anything?
* You're ignoring the costs involved in believing in a non-existant God. If your beliefs are wrong, you've wasted time and money in worshipping this God. You've also not been able to do things that you otherwise would have been able to do, depending on your beliefs and how devout you are. For example; if you live your life expecting to die and go to Heaven, and you don't, then you've wasted your life. Rather than making the most of your short time on earth, you've been walking on egg shells, trying not to offend God so that you'll end up in Heaven where you can enjoy yourself.
* You're assuming that God wants to be worshipped, irrespective of motive. It would be a very vain God who rewarded people who didn't have faith, but worshipped him just because they were worried about the possibility that he might exist.
If you want more, check out these;
http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/nogod/pascal.htm
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/heaven.html
And hey, if we're going to believe things just in case they're true, why stop with God?
Pascal's Wager doesn't work. A couple of points;
* You're assuming that either your God exists, or no God exists. There are lots of Gods that you don't believe in. If there is supreme being, creator and ruler of the universe, and he's NOT the God you worship, wouldn't be be more annoyed at you for blindly worshipping a false idol than me for being logical and not believing in anything?
* You're ignoring the costs involved in believing in a non-existant God. If your beliefs are wrong, you've wasted time and money in worshipping this God. You've also not been able to do things that you otherwise would have been able to do, depending on your beliefs and how devout you are. For example; if you live your life expecting to die and go to Heaven, and you don't, then you've wasted your life. Rather than making the most of your short time on earth, you've been walking on egg shells, trying not to offend God so that you'll end up in Heaven where you can enjoy yourself.
* You're assuming that God wants to be worshipped, irrespective of motive. It would be a very vain God who rewarded people who didn't have faith, but worshipped him just because they were worried about the possibility that he might exist.
If you want more, check out these;
http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/nogod/pascal.htm
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/heaven.html
And hey, if we're going to believe things just in case they're true, why stop with God?
At the end of the day he still believes in a God and you don't therefore he has hope and you dont, so pascals wager does work. There is the possibility that his God is the right one, you on the other hand dont have that possibility. So tell me again how pascals wager doesnt work?
Nope. Denying the existence of God all together is more of an "annoyance" than believing in a false God.
How do you know that? How do you know those people are wasting their life and money by believing in that God? to adopt a religion one must accept it full heartedly with sincerety and love. You're assuming that people believe in a religion for the sole reason of avoiding hell and entering heaven when infact that is far from the truth. I dont believe in Islam because i fear hell and want to enter heaven, i Believe in Islam because I feel it is best and most fun for me to live it making that not a waste instead an joyful life. Not everyone wants to live life the way you want to live yours
Again you're assuming that pascals wager applies only to those type of people and not the ones with faith.
So all in all your points really suck
Nope. Denying the existence of God all together is more of an "annoyance" than believing in a false God.
How do you know that? How do you know those people are wasting their life and money by believing in that God? to adopt a religion one must accept it full heartedly with sincerety and love. You're assuming that people believe in a religion for the sole reason of avoiding hell and entering heaven when infact that is far from the truth. I dont believe in Islam because i fear hell and want to enter heaven, i Believe in Islam because I feel it is best and most fun for me to live it making that not a waste instead an joyful life. Not everyone wants to live life the way you want to live yours
Again you're assuming that pascals wager applies only to those type of people and not the ones with faith.
So all in all your points really suck
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.