- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 29 2010,22:30) 1) Biochemistry: Pig is an unhealthy animal to consume for sustenance.
Leviticus 11:7 …the swine …he is unclean to you.
Pigs are scavenger animals, eating both dung and carcass remains.
Toxins are excreted out of the sweat glands of mammals, pigs don't sweat!
Plus: Without the advent of refrigeration, pork meat is susceptible to trichinosis.2) Digestion: Slaughtered animals that “ARE” to be eaten,
must first be bleed; and dead animals are not fit for human consumption.
Genesis 9:4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
Deut.15:23 …thou shalt not eat the blood thereof; thou shalt pour it upon the ground as water.
Leviticus 22:8 That which dieth of itself, or is torn with beasts, he shall not eat to defile himself therewith.3) Astronomy: The Earth is round and that the Universe is ever expanding…
Isaiah 40:22 …the circle of the earth, and …that stretcheth out
the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
Job 26:7 He …hangeth the earth upon nothing. (Gravitational forces hold it's position)
1. See Maguelonne Toussaint-Samat's A History of Food, on page 408:Quote However, pastoral people who kept sheep and oxen cannot have thought much of this scavenging animal, which sometimes ate humans and nearly always carried parasites. The ancient Egyptians thought it transmitted leprosy, and forbade their very few swineherds, who in any case were the lowest of the low, to enter temples. Pigs are never shown in Egyptian tomb paintings.
That attitude could be at the root of the Jewish and Muslim prohibition of pig meat. Moses, brought up in Pharaoh's court, declared the animal unclean (Leviticus XI, vii) – so unclean that is should not even be touched.In other words, forbidding pig consumption represented the ideas about pigs at the time the bible was written.
2. See here:
Quote To understand the magnitude, the awesomeness, of the problem, we have to put ourselves into an animistic mind-set, where every part of nature has a life of its own, guarded by its own protective power. To kill a goat, even for food, was an offense against Goat. And somehow, Goat must be appeased. Thus we find that our pre-Torah ancestors brought offerings to the Se'irim (Lev. 17:7), a word whose usual translation is simply “goats”, but here may well be translated as “Goat.”
This practice is clearly seen by the Torah as idolatrous, and in its attempt to stamp it out, the Torah in Leviticus introduces two new measures.
First, before any meat is to be eaten, the animal must be brought for slaughtering at the Tent of Meeting, and its blood must be dashed against the altar by the priest. A person who does not do this “has shed blood and shall be cut off from his people.” (Lev. 17:4)
This is about superstition, not digestion issues. In fact, people do consume blood in various forms with no real ill effects.
As for not eating animals that were found dead, that is common sense. It doesn't take long for scavenger creatures to infest the meat, and a few attempts to eat a maggot infested turkey leg will likely straighten you out. In any case, the biblical law goes back to the superstition described above. An animal that was not ritualistically killed was not properly “blessed” for consumption. It might offend Goat and God!
Another case of the bible encoding the present day thinking of the people who wrote it.
3. See my post to bodhitharta for the Isaiah passage. As for the Job passage, let's show more of the passage:
Job 26:7-8: He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing. He wraps up the waters in his clouds, yet the clouds do not burst under their weight.
Is this whole passage literal? Spreads out the northern skies over empty space? Is that a solid material suspended above the earth, (i.e. NOT a thinning of the earth's atmosphere as you get further away from the earth's surface)? How is the spreading of the sky over empty space different from hanging the earth on nothing? Are both solid materials? Are both relatively flat? Further, are clouds merely wrappers for water in the sky, (i.e NOT the actual water droplets suspended in air)?
I don't know Ed. If this is the best that you've got, you are on pretty shabby ground.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Nov. 30 2010,05:08) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 29 2010,22:27) Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Nov. 30 2010,02:09) Quote (bodhitharta @ Nov. 24 2010,03:41) No, I didn't agree with you at all, I said if I did agree it would still show you had no point worth noting.
This was my original point:Quote I was simply pointing out that the bible is exactly as you would expect it to be: a reflection of the scientific thinking at the time when it was written. Do you dispute it?
Yes, because it was not a scientific treatise. Where there are scientific statements they appear to be correct such as:It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
Isaiah 40:21-23I dont think it would be needed to say “Globe” for instance
Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
( سورة الأنبياء , Al-Anbiya, Chapter #21, Verse #30)This one Paragraph for instance is very accurate without using any scientific terms
Forgive me. I am not quite getting it. Is the Isaiah passage that you quote literal or figurative?For example, when it says that “he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth”, is that a literal statement? Furthermore, what exactly does “[stretching] out the heavens as a curtain” mean? Does that mean the “heavens” are a solid material that can be spread out like a sheet, or is that figurative language for something else entirely? Oh, what about “[spreading] them out as a tent to dwell in”? Is that meant to imply that the “heavens” are a covering over our heads only, (i.e. not something that the earth is a part of), or is that figurative language for something else?
As for the verse from the Quran, what does it even mean? How exactly were “the heavens and the earth were joined together”? And, what does it mean that they are now “clove … asunder”? And, does this “[we] made from water every living thing” line contradict the bibles assertion that man was made from dirt, or does this mean something else entirely?
I must admit that these verses are somewhat opaque compared to normal laymen descriptions of scientific concepts. I'll clearly need an “expert” apologist to interpret.
I understandQuote (WhatIsTrue @ Nov. 30 2010,05:08) For example, when it says that “he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth”, is that a literal statement? Furthermore, what exactly does “[stretching] out the heavens as a curtain” mean? Does that mean the “heavens” are a solid material that can be spread out like a sheet, or is that figurative language for something else entirely? Oh, what about “[spreading] them out as a tent to dwell in”? Is that meant to imply that the “heavens” are a covering over our heads only, (i.e. not something that the earth is a part of), or is that figurative language for something else?
Space is a fabric of sort.Think of a balloon with galaxies drawn on it. Now inflate the balloon. That is a simple way to see inflation of the universe, i.e., the movement of galaxies away from each other.
Now think of big bucket of water.
Put a soccer ball in the centre and place some smaller floating balls around the soccer ball. Now spin the soccer ball. What happens to the smaller balls? They go into orbit around the soccer ball.Try to think of space as a thing, substance, or fabric. It curves light and that would be odd if it were nothing.
T8,
That's a great way to explain a scientific concept in laymen's terms. It's too bad the bible doesn't do that. For example, if that's what you think the Isaiah passage is saying, it surely did a very poor job of it.
Quote (t8 @ Dec. 03 2010,08:51) Space is a fabric of sort. Think of a balloon with galaxies drawn on it. Now inflate the balloon. That is a simple way to see inflation of the universe, i.e., the movement of galaxies away from each other.
Using this anology, if you were in a galaxy looking back into the center of the balloon, wouldn't there be nothing to see?Tim
Good question.
Scientists say space is curved because it curves light.
Hence if we think the shortest distance between 2 objects is a straight line, then it is really a curve in a higher dimensional universe.This gives rise to the idea that we can take a shorter route, i.e., into that black space you speak of. Hyperspace or sub-space as it is sometimes called are terms used to explain faster than light travel and is the subject of many a science fiction movie.
Of course we can imagine this as a 3-dimensional image, but we are really talking about a multi-dimensional universe.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Dec. 03 2010,12:26) T8, That's a great way to explain a scientific concept in laymen's terms. It's too bad the bible doesn't do that. For example, if that's what you think the Isaiah passage is saying, it surely did a very poor job of it.
What I saw was you doubting or questioning the idea of [stretching] out the heavens as a curtain” and I was just saying that it is not a contradictory statement that was all and hence it can be easy to laugh at the language of the day, but sometimes you need to imagine what the words are saying and compare.I actually do not think the bible's purpose is to be scientific, but has the purpose of guiding men to God and as such it might reveal scientific truth in that process. Such ideas about God doing this and that is not a revelation or scientific statement but a statement of faith that God made the heavens.
To this day we say things like “my car is fast as a rocket”. Such a statement is not scientific but a descriptor to give you an idea.
Man has and still is very limited in his understanding of the universe. I think that we will know much more in the next life when we inherit eternal life in new spiritual bodies we will have plenty of time and better understanding to see things as they really are. The Earth and everything here is really an image of what is to come, and I think of it as being at school and one day we will graduate to higher education. Consequently, the bible is more about what is important to us now, than scientific data pertaining to the cosmos.
Can you give one single example of a “scientific truth” (whatever that might be) that was at some stage only known through divine revelation?
Stuart
That is like saying, can you give one piece of scientific evidence from a repair manual for a robot.
The bible is a series of books about man and God with advice, solutions, commands, prophecies, teachings, and help.
Of course there may be some evidence, but that is not the primary reason, hence why you do not see books like Spectrum, Light, and Gravity, within the covers.The bible is not meant as scientific analysis of the universe, rather it is a book about spiritual understanding which is more important because that realm is greater than the physical one.
It is also more about WHO created the universe than HOW it was created.
'HOW' is much less important in the scheme of things, not that it isn't important though.I think Newton had it right. He spent more time studying scripture and thinking about God than he did science.
His contribution to physics is believed by many to be the most influential of any scientist. So understanding God can certainly inspire you to great heights.Physics aside, there is a lot of good advice about hygiene for example. If you call that scientific, then a lot of the hygiene rules were not used by many till much later. It is only relatively recent that many cultures now wash their hands before eating food for example.
Since the book is not a Physics manual, the better question is, does it contain blatant error with proven scientific principles.
Anyway, rather than you dissecting this post and saying rubbish rubbish rubbish, it would be better to make a new topic if you are wanting to discuss this further.
Quote (t8 @ Dec. 05 2010,18:42) That is like saying, can you give one piece of scientific evidence from a repair manual for a robot.
The bible is a series of books about man and God with advice, solutions, commands, prophecies, teachings, and help.
Of course there may be some evidence, but that is not the primary reason, hence why you do not see books like Spectrum, Light, and Gravity, within the covers.The bible is not meant as scientific analysis of the universe, rather it is a book about spiritual understanding which is more important because that realm is greater than the physical one.
It is also more about WHO created the universe than HOW it was created.
'HOW' is much less important in the scheme of things, not that it isn't important though.I think Newton had it right. He spent more time studying scripture and thinking about God than he did science.
His contribution to physics is believed by many to be the most influential of any scientist. So understanding God can certainly inspire you to great heights.Physics aside, there is a lot of good advice about hygiene for example. If you call that scientific, then a lot of the hygiene rules were not used by many till much later. It is only relatively recent that many cultures now wash their hands before eating food for example.
Since the book is not a Physics manual, the better question is, does it contain blatant error with proven scientific principles.
Anyway, rather than you dissecting this post and saying rubbish rubbish rubbish, it would be better to make a new topic if you are wanting to discuss this further.
Sorry, was that a yes or a no?Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 05 2010,17:23) Can you give one single example of a “scientific truth” (whatever that might be) that was at some stage only known through divine revelation? Stuart
Stu…..All scientific truth is a revelation of the creator ..it is the vanity of man that thinks that he was the creator of fire ,the wheel all the way up to the scientific marvels of the twentieth century…Science is the essense of the creators on going plan and the vehicle by which he continues to create, it is man that has taken science to the level where it has the ability to threaten the creators ….creation…rest assured he will not allow this to happen at the hands of man…Quote (Stu @ Dec. 05 2010,19:21) Quote (t8 @ Dec. 05 2010,18:42) That is like saying, can you give one piece of scientific evidence from a repair manual for a robot.
The bible is a series of books about man and God with advice, solutions, commands, prophecies, teachings, and help.
Of course there may be some evidence, but that is not the primary reason, hence why you do not see books like Spectrum, Light, and Gravity, within the covers.The bible is not meant as scientific analysis of the universe, rather it is a book about spiritual understanding which is more important because that realm is greater than the physical one.
It is also more about WHO created the universe than HOW it was created.
'HOW' is much less important in the scheme of things, not that it isn't important though.I think Newton had it right. He spent more time studying scripture and thinking about God than he did science.
His contribution to physics is believed by many to be the most influential of any scientist. So understanding God can certainly inspire you to great heights.Physics aside, there is a lot of good advice about hygiene for example. If you call that scientific, then a lot of the hygiene rules were not used by many till much later. It is only relatively recent that many cultures now wash their hands before eating food for example.
Since the book is not a Physics manual, the better question is, does it contain blatant error with proven scientific principles.
Anyway, rather than you dissecting this post and saying rubbish rubbish rubbish, it would be better to make a new topic if you are wanting to discuss this further.
Sorry, was that a yes or a no?Stuart
Depends on what you define as science.I gave you an example of hygiene. If you define that as science, then you can answer your own question.
I gave you enough for you to work out your own answer from your own standards and if not, then to ask a further question by defining what you consider as scientific by which I could probably reply to you more adequately for your level of understanding.
This way we can cut out the platitude and rubbishy quotes we usually get. We don't always need to hold your hand and then get the “predictable, na, don't care” type answers afterwards. Adult to adult conversing is appreciated. Thanks.
Quote (theodorej @ Dec. 06 2010,00:12) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 05 2010,17:23) Can you give one single example of a “scientific truth” (whatever that might be) that was at some stage only known through divine revelation? Stuart
Stu…..All scientific truth is a revelation of the creator ..it is the vanity of man that thinks that he was the creator of fire ,the wheel all the way up to the scientific marvels of the twentieth century…Science is the essense of the creators on going plan and the vehicle by which he continues to create, it is man that has taken science to the level where it has the ability to threaten the creators ….creation…rest assured he will not allow this to happen at the hands of man…
That is just one big platitude.Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Dec. 06 2010,08:29) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 05 2010,19:21) Quote (t8 @ Dec. 05 2010,18:42) That is like saying, can you give one piece of scientific evidence from a repair manual for a robot.
The bible is a series of books about man and God with advice, solutions, commands, prophecies, teachings, and help.
Of course there may be some evidence, but that is not the primary reason, hence why you do not see books like Spectrum, Light, and Gravity, within the covers.The bible is not meant as scientific analysis of the universe, rather it is a book about spiritual understanding which is more important because that realm is greater than the physical one.
It is also more about WHO created the universe than HOW it was created.
'HOW' is much less important in the scheme of things, not that it isn't important though.I think Newton had it right. He spent more time studying scripture and thinking about God than he did science.
His contribution to physics is believed by many to be the most influential of any scientist. So understanding God can certainly inspire you to great heights.Physics aside, there is a lot of good advice about hygiene for example. If you call that scientific, then a lot of the hygiene rules were not used by many till much later. It is only relatively recent that many cultures now wash their hands before eating food for example.
Since the book is not a Physics manual, the better question is, does it contain blatant error with proven scientific principles.
Anyway, rather than you dissecting this post and saying rubbish rubbish rubbish, it would be better to make a new topic if you are wanting to discuss this further.
Sorry, was that a yes or a no?Stuart
Depends on what you define as science.I gave you an example of hygiene. If you define that as science, then you can answer your own question.
I gave you enough for you to work out your own answer from your own standards and if not, then to ask a further question by defining what you consider as scientific by which I could probably reply to you more adequately for your level of understanding.
This way we can cut out the platitude and rubbishy quotes we usually get. We don't always need to hold your hand and then get the “predictable, na, don't care” type answers afterwards. Adult to adult conversing is appreciated. Thanks.
There is nothing surprising in the bible. There is nothing about hygiene that could not have come from simple observation, and in any case the hand-washing described is ritualised and aimed at some concept of ritual cleansing , not necessarily at situations where there would be a need to remove microbes from the skin.Ritual cleaning in relation to sex (no actual danger posed by microbes in ancient Palestine anyway):
Leviticus 15:11 And whomsoever he toucheth that hath the issue, and hath not rinsed his hands in water, he shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
Psalm 26:6 I will wash mine hands in innocency: so will I compass thine altar, O LORD:
It is not a matter of hygiene that you should wash before worshipping:
Exodus 30:19 For Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet thereat:
30:20 When they go into the tabernacle of the congregation, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn offering made by fire unto the LORD:
30:21 So they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they die not: and it shall be a statute for ever to them, even to him and to his seed throughout their generations.Do you shave your eyebrows before eating?:
Leviticus 14:8 And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days.
9But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.This is more like a manifesto for obsessive-compulsives:
Leviticus 15:5-10 And whosoever toucheth his bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
6And he that sitteth on any thing whereon he sat that hath the issue shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
7And he that toucheth the flesh of him that hath the issue shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
8And if he that hath the issue spit upon him that is clean; then he shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
9And what saddle soever he rideth upon that hath the issue shall be unclean.
10And whosoever toucheth any thing that was under him shall be unclean until the even: and he that beareth any of those things shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.Here you wash AFTER you have eaten:
Leviticus 17:15 And every soul that eateth that which died of itself, or that which was torn with beasts, whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger, he shall both wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even: then shall he be clean.
Numbers 19:19 And the clean person shall sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day, and on the seventh day: and on the seventh day he shall purify himself, and wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and shall be clean at even.
Numbers 19:7-8 Then the priest shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp, and the priest shall be unclean until the even.
8And he that burneth her shall wash his clothes in water, and bathe his flesh in water, and shall be unclean until the even.And doesn’t Jesus make a bit of a mockery of the one reasonable point, that you should wash your hands before eating?:
Mark 7:3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.
5Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?
6He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
7Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.Did you have something else in mind that might have been surprising, or even an example of washing that is very specifically related to hygiene?
Stuart
Not sure what your point is, but suffice to say that shaving your hair is hygenic in certain circumstances.
And washing is good. Viruses and the like are caught on contact with certain body substances. Hep B for example can be caught from exposure to a carriers saliva.As for Jesus not washing his hands. He was making a point. The point was that the Pharisees thought more about washing hands than living a clean life. His message to them was that they go to huge lengths on the letter of the law and ignore the spirit of the law which is love.
I think the whole thing just went right over your head Stu.
Also, if I was going to shave off all my hair, I am not sure I would be doing my eyebrows. We often refer to my hair as that mop that sits on ones head.
Hey Stu, you certainly spend a large part of your life arguing about a God you think is fictitious. Surely within your own belief system there are better things you could be doing like things that you actually believe in.
Whoever heard of a person dedicating his life to arguing about something that he believed didn't exist. Perhaps you do not understand the stirring of your own heart Stu. Ask yourself why God gets such a reaction.
I will tell you. One way or another God will get a reaction. We will either love him or hate him. Hating the very idea of God fits in the hate God category too.
Quote (t8 @ Dec. 07 2010,19:22) Hey Stu, you certainly spend a large part of your life arguing about a God you think is fictitious. Surely within your own belief system there are better things you could be doing like things that you actually believe in. Whoever heard of a person dedicating his life to arguing about something that he believed didn't exist. Perhaps you do not understand the stirring of your own heart Stu. Ask yourself why God gets such a reaction.
I will tell you. One way or another God will get a reaction. We will either love him or hate him. Hating the very idea of God fits in the hate God category too.
This seems to really be bothering you t8. Perhaps you fear that I might be right. Would you like to talk about it?OK, maybe that is like the pigs discussing culinary techniques with a wolf, but I am here to help you with your doubts. Remember that doubting is the only honest approach!
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Dec. 07 2010,19:16) Not sure what your point is, but suffice to say that shaving your hair is hygenic in certain circumstances.
And washing is good. Viruses and the like are caught on contact with certain body substances. Hep B for example can be caught from exposure to a carriers saliva.As for Jesus not washing his hands. He was making a point. The point was that the Pharisees thought more about washing hands than living a clean life. His message to them was that they go to huge lengths on the letter of the law and ignore the spirit of the law which is love.
I think the whole thing just went right over your head Stu.
Also, if I was going to shave off all my hair, I am not sure I would be doing my eyebrows. We often refer to my hair as that mop that sits on ones head.
My point was, and still is that there is nothing surprising in the bible.Your point was that the bible discusses hygiene.
My point in reply was that it does not discuss hygiene because what it actually advocates is ritualistic cleansing, mostly in situations where washing would be of very limited hygienic value, and it insists on other practices in the same sentences that are not important hygiene practices.
Your point in turn appears to be hang on though, in some rare cases according to my modern knowledge of science, there could be a tiny hygiene advantage of some kind,
to which I in turn reply HA!, you have no real case that this is an example of something SURPRISING. It is non-surprising that the ancients would have a load of superstitious cleansing rituals, some of which inevitably overlap with modern hygiene practices, but actually there is less overlap that you might even expect by chance.
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Dec. 07 2010,19:16) Also, if I was going to shave off all my hair, I am not sure I would be doing my eyebrows. We often refer to my hair as that mop that sits on ones head.
I was just quoting your book of mumbo-jumbo supernatural paranoia, actually:Leviticus 14:8 And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days.
9But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
