copied from the BibleToday website:

http://www.bibletoday.com/archive/proof_text.htm

Return to BibleToday Homepage
Share this page with others

The God of Science

Science is a systematic knowledge of the physical or material universe gained by observable facts. The sacred writings of all world religions basically contain a system of faith. Yet each do make statements within the province of science that provides a uniquely valid test to prove their authenticity. If their scientific observations are in reality superstitions reflective of the culture in which they were written, these so called sacred books are disqualified as the inspired Scripture of God. If, indeed, the scientific observations of any of these purported Holy Scripture agree with the facts of science today, then that Bible is the inspired Word of a true and living God. Why? The Creator and God of the universe is the God of science — the author of the scientific laws that govern His universe. Only the God of science could cause scientific facts to be recorded in a book —the Bible — hundreds or thousands of years before scientists discover them.

Only the Judeo-Christian Bible contains scientific facts that anticipated scientific discovery by hundreds and in some cases several thousand years. The following are examples of remarkable scientific observations found in the Judeo-Christian Bible.

What Holds the Earth Up?

Three thousand years ago the Hindu scriptures recorded the earth was resting on the backs of several huge elephants. The elephants were resting on the back of a very large turtle that was swimming in a sea. Greek mythology claims that the god Atlas was holding the earth on his shoulders. But our Bible says in Job 26:7 — "[God] hangeth the earth on nothing." What a remarkable statement of fact. The earth is suspended in space. Nothing is holding it up. Job wrote about the same time the Hindu Scripture was written. How did Job know this scientific fact? Only God could have revealed this to Job. The Old Testament prophets wrote as they were moved by the holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21). The Judeo-Christian Bible is the inspired Word of God.

Flat Versus Round Earth

For thousands of years people believed the earth was flat. If one went too far, he would fall over the edge. This was taught in both Hindu and Buddhist scripture. In the 1500s, the first ship sailed around the world. This proved the earth was round. But the round earth was recorded in the Judeo-Christian Bible long before man discovered it in the 1500s.

The prophet Isaiah (40:22) spoke of the "circle of the earth." Solomon wrote, "He [God] set a compass [circle] upon the face of the deep." Proverbs 8:27. In our century, Arabs spoke of infidels being pushed over the edge into space. About 3,000 years ago, our Bible said the earth was round. This was not discovered until 500 years ago. Indeed, the Judeo-Christian Bible is the inspired Word of God.

Sun, Moon and Stars — Who? What?

Ancient people were afraid of the sun, moon and stars. They thought they were alive — that they were gods. But over 5,000 years ago, the Judeo-Christian Bible in the first chapter of Genesis pointed out that the sun, moon and stars were created by God. Remember, our God states that He is the one and only God. This proves the sun, moon and stars that He created are not gods.

Eclipses are an example of what people feared. An eclipse happens when the sun’s light is blocked by the earth or moon. The moon is bright because it reflects the sun’s light. But when the earth blocks that light, the moon looks like it is disappearing. Also, when the moon comes between the earth and the sun, it looks like the sun is disappearing.

This was frightening to people long ago. Some thought eclipses happened when the moon was mad at the earth and turned its face away. The Chinese believed that an eclipse was caused by a demon or some huge animal that ate the sun and then would give them up again. God told Jeremiah (10:2 KJ): "Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them." God went on to reassure Jeremiah that the universe is under God’s control.

Later scientists learned that heavenly bodies were not alive and that man need not fear them. Thousands of years before scientists discovered that the planetary bodies were inanimate, the Judeo-Christian Bible contained this scientific fact.

The Bottom of the Ocean

Until modern times people thought the ocean floor was sandy like the desert and saucer shaped—deepest in the middle. This was even true of the pre-1900 geologists. But in the 1900s oceanographers found the sea had many deep valleys or canyons. The deepest canyons were called trenches. The Marianas Trench in the Pacific is so deep that if Mt. Everest (29,000 feet high) was dropped into it, the peak would still be a mile below the water’s surface. There are also underwater mountains. The Atlantic Ocean contains an undersea range of mountains 10,000 miles long.

In addition, 3,000 years ago the Judeo-Christian Bible spoke of the valleys and mountains of the sea. In Psalm 18:15 (NIV) David wrote of God being the creator of "the valleys of the sea." God asked Job (38:16 NIV): "Have you walked in the recesses [valleys] of the sea?" The prophet Jonah was thrown off a ship and spoke of falling to the bottom of the mountains in the sea (Jonah 2:6).

The Judeo-Christian Bible spoke of the valleys and mountains of the sea thousands of years before scientists discovered them. Indeed our Bible is the inspired Word of God.

The Paths of the Sea

In the 1800s, Matthew Maury, an officer in the United States Navy believed his Bible. As a Christian he loved to read the Bible. One day Maury was reading about the dominion man was given over the animals in Psalm 8. He was amazed that verse 8 spoke of the fish and all creatures that swim in the "paths of the sea." "Paths of the sea"— how could this be? He never knew there was such a thing. He was determined to find them. Maury discovered that the oceans have many paths or currents, which were like rivers flowing through the sea. Maury wrote the first book on oceanography and became known as "the pathfinder of the seas"— "The father of modern navigation."

Maury received his idea about ocean currents from reading Psalm 8:8 which was written about 3,000 years ago by King David. David wrote as he was moved by the Spirit of God and probably never actually saw an ocean.

Incidentally, Psalm 8:8 also spoke of fish in the "paths of the seas." All fishing boats make a good catch in the currents or paths of the sea. They have learned this is where the fish swim.

Lightning, Thunder and Rain

In ancient times, most religious scripture taught that lightning bolts were missiles thrown in anger by their gods.9 In China, Taoist scripture regarded the rainbow as a deadly rain dragon.10 In Confucius scripture, the goddess of lightning, Tien Mu, flashed light on intended victims to enable Lei Kung, the god of thunder to launch his deadly bolts accurately.11

Since rain is so necessary to life, ancient people pondered what caused it. Some tried to stab holes in the clouds with spears. The Vedas (Hindu scripture) advised to tie a frog with its mouth open to the right tree and say the right words and rain would fall.

Our Bible also talks about rain, lightning and storms. But it contains none of these superstitious ideas found in the other so- called scriptures. The Judeo-Christian Bible taught that earth’s weather followed rules and cycles. Genesis 8:22. "While the earth remaineth, seed time and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."

Job stated (28:26): "God made decrees [rules] for the rain. And He set a way for the lightning of the thunder:" Centuries later, scientists began to discern the "rules for the rain" that Job talked about. Rainfall is part of a process called the water cycle. Here’s how the cycle works. The sun evaporates water from the ocean. That water vapor rises and becomes clouds. This water in the clouds falls back to earth as rain, collects in streams and rivers and makes its way back to the ocean. That process repeats itself again and again.

About 300 years ago, Galileo discovered this cycle. But amazingly the Scriptures described this cycle centuries before. The prophet Amos (9:6) wrote that God "calls for the water of the sea. He pours them out on the land." How did Amos know this? He wrote as he was moved by the Spirit of God.

Actually, scientists are just beginning to fully understand God’s "decrees or rules for the rain." Since 68 BC it was thought that somehow thunder triggered the rainfall. Now scientists are beginning to realize that as stated in Job 28:26, it is lightning that triggers the rain to fall. Job knew this 3,000 years ago. Certainly his writings were inspired of God (2 Peter 1:21).

Pleiades, Orion and Arcturus
pleides.jpg (5429 bytes)

Remember the story of Job? Job was extremely wealthy — enjoying a wonderful family. Then tragedy struck. He lost his wealth. His children were killed and his wife deserted him. Then Job lay in excruciating pain, covered with sores from head to toe. All this was too much for Job. He accused the Lord of being unjust. God didn’t answer Job’s accusation directly. He merely raised questions concerning the wonders of His creation. Three of these questions found in Job 38:31, 32, illustrate the dynamic logic conveyed in God’s questions.

Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? Canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?

ORION

"Canst thou . . . loose the bands of Orion?" Garrett P. Serviss, the noted astronomer, wrote about the bands of Orion12 in his book CURIOSITIES OF THE SKY.

At the present time this band consists of an almost perfect straight line, a row of second-magnitude stars about equally spaced and of the most striking beauty. In the course of time, however, the two right-hand stars, Mintaka and Alnilam, will approach each other and form a naked-eye double; but the third, Alnitak, will drift away eastward so that the band will no longer exist.

In other words, one star is traveling in a certain direction at a certain speed, a second one is traveling in a different direction at a second speed, and the third one is going in a third direction and at a still different speed. Actually every star in Orion is traveling its own course, independent of all the others. Thus, these stars that we see forming one of the bands of Orion are like three ships out on the high seas that happen to be in line at the present moment, but in the future will be separated by thousands of miles of ocean. In fact, all these stars that at the present time constitute the constellation of Orion are bound for different ports, and all are journeying to different corners of the universe, so that the bands are being dissolved.

THE PLEIADES

"Canst thou bind the sweet influence of the Pleiades . . . ?" Notice the amazing astronomical contrast with the Pleiades. The seven stars of the Pleiades are in reality a grouping of 250 suns. Photographs now reveal that 250 blazing suns in this group are all traveling together in one common direction. Concerning this cluster, Isabel Lewis of the United States Naval Observatory tells us: 13

Astronomers have identified 250 stars as actual members of this group, all sharing in a common motion and drifting through space in the same direction.

Elsewhere Lewis speaks of them as "journeying onward together through the immensity of space."

From Lick Observatory came this statement of Dr. Robert J. Trumpler:14

Over 25,000 individual measures of the Pleiades stars are now available, and their study led to the important discovery that the whole cluster is moving in a southeasterly direction. The Pleiades stars may thus be compared to a swarm of birds, flying together to a distant goal. This leaves no doubt that the Pleiades are not a temporary or accidental agglomeration of stars, but a system in which the stars are bound together by a close kinship.

Dr. Trumpler said that all this led to an important discovery. Without any reference whatsoever to the Book of Job, he announced to the world that these discoveries prove that the stars in the Pleiades are all bound together and are flying together like a flock of birds as they journey to their distant goal. That is exactly what God said. "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades?" In other words, Canst thou keep them bound together so that they remain as a family of suns?

INCREDIBLE! God's laws of cosmology are loosing or dissolving the constellation Orion. Sometime in the far distant future, Orion will be no more. Conversely, wonder of wonders — every last one of the 250 blazing suns in the Pleiades are ordained of God to orbit together in their symmetrical beauty throughout eternity.

ARCTURUS

"Canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?" Garrett P. Serviss wrote:15

Arcturus, one of the greatest suns in the universe, is a runaway whose speed of flight is 257 miles per second. Arcturus, we have every reason to believe, possesses thousands of times the mass of our sun. Think of it! Our sun is traveling only 12 ½ miles a second, but Arcturus is traveling 257 miles a second. Think then of the prodigious momentum this motion implies.

A further observation of Arcturus by Serviss reveals: 16

It could be turned into a new course by a close approach to a great sun, but it could only be stopped by collision head on with a body of enormous mass. Barring such accidents, it must, as far as we can see, keep on until it has traversed our stellar system, whence it may escape and pass out into space beyond to join perhaps one of those other island universes of which we have spoken.

Charles Burckhalter, of the Chabot Observatory, added an interesting note regarding this great sun: 17

This high velocity places Arcturus in that very small class of stars that apparently are a law unto themselves. He is an outsider, a visitor, a stranger within the gates; to speak plainly, Arcturus is a runaway. Newton gives the velocity of a star under control as not more than 25 miles a second, and Arcturus is going 257 miles a second. Therefore, combined attraction of all the stars we know cannot stop him or even turn him in his path.

When Mr. Burckhalter had his attention called to this text in the book of Job, he studied it in the light of modern discovery and made a statement that has attracted worldwide attention:18

The study of the Book of Job and its comparison with the latest scientific discoveries has brought me to the matured conviction that the Bible is an inspired book and was written by the One who made the stars.

The wonders of God’s universe never cease to amaze us. Arcturus and his sons are individual runaway suns that seem to be out of orbit in our galaxy. Traveling at such incredible speeds, why don’t they crash with other suns or planets? Where are they headed? Only God knows. Indeed they are not runaways. They will not crash. Why? God is guiding them.

The Lesson of The Pleiades, Orion, and Arcturus

Few have suffered the multiple tragedies of Job. How could God reach through the enormity of Job’s self-pity? (Job thought God just didn’t care.) In these three questions (Job 38:31, 32) God is in reality saying:

Job, you think I am not concerned about your suffering. Well, let Me ask you these questions. Can you loose the bands of Orion? No, you cannot. But My Divine power will. Some day Orion will no longer exist. Job, can you bind the 250 stars of the Pleiades together in their symmetry of beauty and not have a single one drift off? Only I have this power and wisdom. Can you prevent the runaways — Arcturus and his sons — from colliding as they go dashing out of the Milky Way? No, only My Divine power and wisdom can.

Job, if I am caring for the details of the universe, do you doubt that I not only care for the details of your life, but I have the ability to solve your problems? Trust that there is a good reason I am permitting these tragedies. Remember, Job, I work from the perspective of your eternal welfare.

What an awesome way God chose to tell Job that He was in full control of human affairs, including Job's life!

The Lesson of Job for Us

Some write off the history of Job as Old Testament folklore. Whoever heard of God talking to a man! These are hand-me-down tales! However, the account of Job cannot be gainsaid. Whatever the method of communication used by God, the astonishing facts cannot be refuted. These scientific facts recorded in the book of Job concerning the Pleiades, Orion and Arcturus anticipated scientific discovery by nearly 3,000 years. Scientists only discovered these startling facts in the Twentieth Century, yet they were recorded in the book of Job nearly 3000 years ago. What an awesome confirmation of the Bible! Who can doubt the Bible is the inspired word of God? Yes, the book of Job has a powerful, exclusive lesson for modern man. Twentieth Century science has proven God’s Word, the Bible, is true.

Other Sacred Books and the Physical Sciences

The Hindu scriptures, the Vedas and Uparushads, consider that "all the objects and phenomena of nature which man is surrounded, are animate and divine."19 This includes the sun, moon, earth, clouds, rain, rivers, seas and rocks as being alive. Writers of the Buddhist canon also ascribe life to numerous non-living objects— sun, moon, lightning, rainbows, mountains, etc. The Taoist and Confucian writings of China contain similar errors.

The Koran, the scripture of Islam, written 1,500 years after the Hindu scripture, does not contain many of the ancient superstitions. Yet its observations of the universe are seriously flawed. The Koran speaks of seven literal heavens which are solid.20 These heavens contain lamps or stars whose main purpose is to be "darted at the devils."21 Mohammed wrote that "the sun sets in a sea of black mud."22

Which Bible is Inspired by a Living God?

The Judeo-Christian Scripture made scientific observations that were confirmed centuries later by modern science, while the sacred scripture of other world religions merely reflected the scientific superstitions of their culture. How could the Judeo-Christian Scripture anticipate scientific discovery by 3,000 years? The Judeo-Christian Bible was written by men who were inspired by the Creator and God of the Universe — the God of science. Only the Judeo-Christian Bible is the Divine Revelation provided by our infinite Creator to direct us in the path to eternity.

Click here to send us your question on this subject and we will provide you a Bible answer.


10 Douglas, CONFUCIANISM AND TAOISM, pp. 260-271.
11 Williams C.A.S., OUTHLINES OF CHINESE SYMBOLISM AND ART MOTIVES, (Dover Publications Inc.).
12 Garrett P. Serviss, CURIOSITIES OF THE SKY.
13 Phillip L. Knox, WONDER WORLDS (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing Assoc., 1964) p.61
14 Ibid.
15 Serviss.
16 Ibid.
17 Knox, p. 60.
18 Ibid.
19 MacDonell, A. A., VEDIC MYTHOLOGY, (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1974) p. 2.
20 THE KORAN, Trans. George Sale (London: Frederick Warne, 1909) pp. 5, 541.
21 Ibid., p. 567.
22 Ibid., p. 294.

What a wonderful post.........thank you so much.


This will be printed and kept for future reference.


.........Whirlwind

Careful where you go with this Dennis. The Bible teaches that the earth is in the centre of the universe and that the sun traverses the sky. This is universally not believed by Christians and Scientists today. If we are to believe the Bible then we must reject the teachings of scientists which we believe to be in contradiction with the Bible or else we must confess that we must ourselves be misunderstanding the Bible. Virtually all Christians compromise on the literal interpretations of the Bible to some extent with regards to scientific theories. This appalls me but I can recognise that we cannot force every Christian to believe the Bible literally on every matter that seems to be describing the natural world, otherwise we offend the weak faith of our little brothers which is a dangerous error. I believe this is why the RCC speak in blurry terms regarding evolution, so that this issue of creation does not become a stumbling block to new Christians.

The statement in your article that "If their scientific observations are in reality superstitions reflective of the culture in which they were written, these so called sacred books are disqualified as the inspired Scripture of God" could result in a loss of faith in the inspired Scripture when a scientist demonstrates to a new Christian that "proven fact" contradicts the Bible.

The fact is that the inspired truth of the Bible transcends the sight of the eyes and the hearing of ears. It transcends the logic of the human mind. It is not subject or in any way subservient or apologetic to any scientific theories or formulas. If all our senses, scientific facts and observations appear to us to contradict the Bible then either we are misunderstanding the Bible or else the purported scientific facts are false. Science does not prove the Bible. Our logic and senses do not prove the Bible. The Bible is believed by faith and we confess it with our lips even though we may not understand with our mind how it truthfully matches with the reality of our physical world.

As an example I believe that Jesus turned water into wine. This is impossible according to science, does this mean that this account of Jesus turn water into wine is merely a superstition myth from the past? Of course not.

Of course there is much merit in the article. However the subtle and dangerous error in it needs to be pointed out. Sadly it works both ways. If we use science and observation to prove the Bible then we make the Bible subservient to science and observation which can then be used to disprove and discredit the Bible.

We must believe by faith not by sight and scientific evidence.

the RCC contradicts the Scripture

it calls Mary the MOST HOLY.

but God is the MOST HOLY

job 36;28.......the water cycle.........amplified bible


26Behold, God is great, and we know Him not! The number of His years is unsearchable.©

27For He draws up the drops of water, which distil as rain from His vapor,

28Which the skies pour down and drop abundantly upon [the multitudes of ] mankind.

29Not only that, but can anyone understand the spreadings of the clouds or the thunderings of His pavilion?(D)

30Behold, He spreads His lightning against the dark clouds and covers the roots of the sea.




**********


job 26;8...........God holds water in the clouds of the sky...........verse 7,....the earth is hung upon nothing

7He it is Who spreads out the northern skies over emptiness and [a]hangs the earth upon or over nothing.

8He holds the waters bound in His clouds [which otherwise would spill on earth all at once], and the cloud is not rent under them.

9He covers the face of His throne and spreads over it His cloud.

10He has placed an enclosing limit [the horizon] upon the waters at the boundary between light and darkness.

In the bible or the word of God or any other writing that tells what the God of Abraham Issac and Jacob Said. Where does The Lord God instruct anyone to study and log facts about His creation? He didn't even want King David doing a census of the people because He knows who and where everyone is at.

i'm thinking that
God dis-approved of David's census, because, ........david was trusting in his military might (men, swords, generals, fleshly strength), rather than trusting in the LORD GOD ALMIGHTY

Israel left Egypt without firing a shot
Jericho's walls fell down without firing a shot
Gideon defeated the Midians with only a few men .........the Mideons had a vast army
God saved hezekiah and jerusalem from the Assyrians ..........the Jews never fired a shot


Israel was forbidden to have chariots.........the heathen nations had chariots............Israel was to trust in the Lord, not in chariots

Just the same God did not create man to study and Log data on His creation.
Or is it possible maybe since God created a decaying Creation.
He needs mans input on the matter to recreate it perfect next time?
Not.

in the penteteuch, God promised Israel, that if they would obey the Mosaic law, they would be safe from their enemies, no matter what


David had an episode of un-belief (or he forgot what the Law said)..........David wanted a COUNT of the soldiers......so he could compare the size and strength of david's army to the armies of other nations.

that was a great sin

regardless of the COUNT, David's army COULD NOT LOSE, (assuming that Israel obeyed the Law of Moses).

Not even David could obey the law and he was the best of Israel. Murdering a man for his own flesh's sake.
David was a king but he was not "The King"
David was an example but he was not "The Example"
David was a teacher but he was not "The Teacher"

But David was a shadow and pattern of things to come. Then 'The King" appeared. The chief cornerstone became "The Example. "The Teacher" almighty arrived and showed us and taught us how to please God and to obtain eternal life.

It's simple to know if one's interpretation is correct. If it agrees with God's Holy Word, true Science, and History, it's as close to the One Truth as is Humanly possible. There's not one truth for christians and another one for 'science. When you find God's truth, there would not be any disagreement to this truth.

The fault is Not with God's Truth, but with man's ability to understand it, for His thoughts are far above man's thoughts.

God Bless

Ex..Hi!

I don't agree with you when you say;



nor this:



It's just simply not the case with most of the up to date scientific discoveries. Science in fact proves God.
Even Einstein said the answer would be beautiful and simple. God made the universe for us to participate in and also for us to discover our purpose and privilege in. God placed the Earth in such away so we could observe and discover who we were and are....maybe even what we will become but l don't have scientific proof of that only conjecture. Watch a DVD called the Privileged Planet...You will be greatly encouraged!

Ever wondered why God allowed so many UNEXPLAINED PHENOMENA???

God gave me the answer a couple of months ago. Unexplained phenomena are there to counfound those who profess to explain everything with their god, whom they have named "Science".

Want a scripture?
God has chosen the foolish things of the world to counfound the wise, and the weak things of the world to counfound those who are mighty.

Sometimes, "Science" rings with "SILENCE" !!!

What is strange is that it works also in FRENCH! We too use the SAME words for the SAME things!!!

Coincidence???
I don't think so!

Exactly Anne

Yes I agree that you should be careful where you go with this ,Statements like this don't help us

"What a remarkable statement of fact. The earth is suspended in space. Nothing is holding it up. Job wrote about the same time the Hindu Scripture was written. How did Job know this scientific fact? "

I mean any schoolboy knows that's not true,it's not a scientific fact


fullywired

.

Thank you for sharing what God gave you on this. It's an incredible observation, and so very true.

i think shekel said, something like:

It's OK with God if we study and detail scientific discoveries , such as what NASA is doing in SPACE, BUT!

NASA is often doing science studies FOR THE WRONG MOTIVATION..........NASA wants to prove the bible wrong, and evolution right,.........because NASA (and their supporters) hate Christ.

Christ knows our MOTIVATION..........whether it is pro-christ, or anti-christ

most people are anti-christ................christians are a tiny minority

Job said .........i know that my redeemer liveth, and,,,,,,though the skin worms destroy my body, i shall see him, in my flesh , on the last day.

how did job know this?.................Christ revealed it to him.

Thank God!

and , in the bible, God revealed it to me!

PTL!

Thank You Lord, for my bible!

Science that is TRUE is untainted and usable.
But the statistics jugglers that come after, are wolves in sheep clothes.
I have seen them at work, they are so sloppy and shallow,
that even the man in the street says: what a waste of money.
Amused I watched their daily parade, chuckling
seeing their lies written all over.
No greater game than to expose such lies,
I could make a list of thousands.

One core question aimed at their flaw,
card house collapses.
Is that church built on a rock or sand?
For it is already beginning
shaking of truth reveals many cracks
easy it is to aim, they do not see.

Still after 500 years now
Leonardo's sketches still a mystery?
Huomo Universalis better than university.

Here is a funny one.

NASA sends satellite up
Google Earth doubles the bid
So I went to look for my self
Found God painting in the sand
Found God painting in the Arctic Ice
Found God painting EVERYWHERE

Every painting was multiple images in ONE
Different height different scene.

Thank you NASA & Google
saw God is EVERYWHERE.

(Btw, I took screen shots
GOD is the best painter ever!)

um I sorry but I have some bad news, a circle is flat. And christians used to believe the earth to be flat.

An elephant holds the earth up...and after that a turtle, all the way.

wait a minute. if the bible tells us the earth is round, why did people think it was flat until science proved it wasn't? why did people only pick up on this "evidence" in the bible only after science proved it first?

Unfortunately, Job's explanation is as laughable as any of the others. The Earth doesn't "hang" at all. Hanging would imply that the Earth is being held over an external field of gravity, being pulled down towards it.

First off, there is no objective "up" or "down" in space, so it becomes impossible for the Earth to be hanging over anything. Second, the Earth orbits-- it does not hang. This orbit is the result of Earth 'attempting' (in lieu of a more scientific term) to escape the intense gravitational pull of the Sun's mass.



A circle is a two-dimensional surface-- flat. Earth is a sphere, or more precisely, an oblate spheroid.



And the Book of Revelations says that the stars are little tiny beads of light sitting in the solid "firmament," and can be put out and fall to Earth. They just traded one incorrect idea for another.



It's interesting to see that the word "recesses" was interpreted to be beneficial to this article's writer's theory. "Recess" can also mean "an inset, hole, space or opening." Could you not argue that the entire ocean is a "recess?" At worst, this theory is deceptive; and at best, it's a finagle of what the words of the verse really are.



Considering other scientific absurdities in the Tanakh, I'm more apt to chalk this one up to "poetic license" than to "scientific foreknowledge," especially in light of the fact that "path" can mean "a course taken." In that light, yes, the Israelites would have known that the seas could have favorable courses taken-- they were a nautical peoples, after all.



That just talks about natural cycles-- something that even Cro Magnon man would have known about.



Um. Saying that god makes rules for the rain doesn't equate with detailing the water cycle.



Sounds like floods to me. That's water from the sea pouring out on land. And even if Amos was talking about rain, who's to say that he didn't mean, "the seas are the reservoir for all water on earth, and god pulls water out of them to pour onto land?" That could be interpreted to fit this verse-- the problem is that Amos didn't go into specifics, so it remains a vagarity that could be really applied in any way.



Total lie. The two theories on lightning formation require precipitation for lightning to form-- not the other way around.



It'd be impressive if the stars that made up Orion's belt were *bound together.* But they're not-- by any stretch of the imagination. They're in a "band" because human beings looked up at the stars and picked out a pattern. They're a series of stars that have no cosmic relation to one another. How are they bound, except by human imagination and poetic license?



This passage said "...bind the sweet influence of the Pleiades," not "bind the Pleiades." Binding "sweet influence," whatever that is (most likely an ancient belief in the power of constellations over human behavior) is not the same as "pulling the stars together." Plus, the whole problem with "binding" not being a scientific term or idea from the Orion section applies here too.



Outright lie. Our sun is travelling at an average velocity of 220 km/s.



In a vaccuum, everything will travel perpetually without a loss of momentum. Plus..."island universes?" What is this guy talking about?



Whoever that Charles Burckhalter is, he obviously needs to be fired from his job as a scientist. Newton's ideas have been replaced/built upon by developments in the last *two hundred years.* Our sun is moving at an average rate of 220 km/s. While Arcturus is moving quickly, not everything in the galaxy moves at the same speed-- though there is an average throughout the galaxy.



Arcturus hasn't crashed into another star because space is very large and very empty? And if Arcturus was so isolated and moved so rapidly, why is it part of the constellation Boötes, and has been observed there for thousands of years?



The "facts" are either easily refuted, or so subjective that they can be applied however you choose. Neither are miraculous.



Well, if you want to get as subjective with the Vedas and Upanishads as you do with the Tanakh, I could say that we are made out of the same materials as every unliving thing in the universe-- so the inanimate could be interpreted as having a spark of the animate. It's all in how you interpret these things, see?

I believe that God holds the world in His hand. Sounds like a song I heard somewhere.


John

Look! The snares pop out of the woodworks! That is good news, for it means that we are heading in the right direction. We "are onto something".

Every time when we are breaching Satan's deceptive illusions, he reacts fierce, like a wounded cat. It happened many times to me, and I know the results.
Let us breach the evil domes, viper nests and all the hide-outs of evil, and hold the light of truth over them! In the Name of Jesus our Lord!

Um? No? When you post bad science to justify your ideas, you should expect people to point out the flaws. It's really a simple concept-- cause and effect. I mean, heck, I didn't see you even try to contradict me other than saying that I'm "satanic." That doesn't give validity to your ideas, "Justice." That just makes you look like a poor sport.

In fact Job's statement utterly defies science. Science teaches that the earth is being flung around the sun at a huge speed like a yo-yo on a string, with gravity serving as the string. If something is being hung then it is stationary. For critics of Job's description what word would you use instead of "hung"? "Mounted"? It would be just as incorrect to say that the earth is seated upon a firm base. So what holds the earth in place? There doesn't appear to be anything holding it there. This is the purpose of Job's astounding statement. NOTHING physical holds the earth in place. God by his own supernatural power holds the earth in place. Science defies Job by saying that the earth is supported by the gravity of the sun and inertia.

So we see that science is diametrically opposed to the Bible. So we all must choose. Do we reject Science or do we reject the Bible?

I agree with this poster to the extent that I agree that trying to make out that the Bible reveals truths which have recently been discovered by science is utterly erroneus. Christian authors who do this do a disservice to Christianity because it implies that science is somehow confirming the Bible. NO. The Bible does not need to be backed up by science. It is the Bible which is the authority and science must fit in with it.

Science has absolutely no authority for a Christian. A Christian's authority is the Bible and his evidence is faith.

Another snare as I do not bite into temptation. I am sorry but I can not help myself chuckling.

And what temptation is that, dare I ask?



Um. I'm glad to see a Christian who understands that science and religion are diametrically opposed, but gravity is a physical phenomenon. Gravity keeps us in orbit around the sun, not "nothing," or "god's supernatural power." Gravity can be observed, measured, and has understandable laws that regulate its presence.



Well, being an atheist, my answer is number two. But I'm sure that's not practical for most of you, so why not just compartmentalize them into two distinct areas? Having your cake, as they say, and eating it too?



Well...if the bible is supposedly the innerrant word of an omniscient being, and it contains scientific errors, then...that's kind of odd, to say the least. That's my problem with the whole shabang.



Science should have as much authority for a Christian as it does for a Muslim, a Hindu, or an atheist-- there's no religious or theistic component attached to it; it's just a means of understanding the objective facts of the universe. Kelvin, Leibniz, Spinoza, they were all religious men, but they knew that they must compartmentalize religion and science in order to pursue objective truth without bias.

Sartrian

Atheist perhaps, scientist no. you said--- Um. I'm glad to see a Christian who understands that science and religion are diametrically opposed, but gravity is a physical phenomenon. Gravity keeps us in orbit around the sun, not "nothing," or "god's supernatural power." Gravity can be observed, measured, and has understandable laws that regulate its presence----


--------------------------------

The law of gravity is not understood. No one knows why perfect balance without decay is maintained. It goes against all the laws of physics. The best scientists believe in God. That's because they don't let their thinking get in the way of their intelligence.

John

Einstein and his Theory of General Relativity would disagree with you.



What are you talking about? What "balance?" What "decay?" If you're talking about a scientific principle, bring it up and I'll answer to the best of my abilities.



The best scientists know how to keep "beliefs" seperate from "evidence."



Everything that we have today was created by application of scientific progress. I don't have a microwave in my kitchen and an internet to browse because I prayed to Yahweh, I'm afraid.

Since you say you are an atheist, and apparently do not agree with the statement of faith of this forum, why is it, Shekel !!, that we are seeing these futile discussions with people who obviously only aim to snare and distract those who have a job to do for God?

And that is my final say on the matter.
For the rest: return to sender.

Because if the arguments for your beliefs were so strong, they would be able to stand up to the questions and rebuttals of those who don't think like you?



Arguments aren't action films. Having a flashy exit doesn't make your assertions correct.

Don't pretend to understand gravity. Things should spin away over time. Not be drawn in. If you knew more you would admit to knowing less. You have the confidence of a novice; a dilletante.

Why doesn't a magnet run out of energy?

Why does light bend back after refraction?

What is the principle of perpetual motion?

What makes a heart beat?

What combination of elements produces love?

How did babies learn when to breathe at birth? Trial and error? illogical .

Just because you have been given freedom of thought and movement doesn't make you god. It just makes a mess of His creation. It also shows the greatness of the true God. He has calculated all our stupidities into account in His plan. Your myopic view doesn't allow you to see what is beyond. You have failed to evolve and your species (the atheists) are destined for discontinuation. Now that's scientific!!!!

John

Not if spacetime were curved by mass-- which is what Einstein's theory predicted. Oh. You sure showed me, yessirie.



Because magnetism is a natural result of electrons interacting. Magnets aren't battery-charged toy cars, they don't require an input of external energy to be magnetic.



All waves refract, and they don't "bend back" after refraction. They change their velocity after moving through materials with different indices of refraction. If, for instance, light travels through air, then water, then back to air, the refractive indices for the air will be the same, but different for the water, thus creating the image of light "bending" as it travels through the water.



Non-existant and contrary to the Laws of Thermodynamics.



The automatic contraction of myocyte cells in the heart, caused by a charge difference in the transfer of sodium ions.



Testosterone and estrogen for the first few months, then a steady stream of pheromones, dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin for the next one to three years. After that, high levels of oxytocin and vasopressin.



DNA programming the brain to develop in a way that creates natural instincts, such as breathing.



I never claimed I was.



His creation had tuberculosis. Science has developed antibiotics. I believe that would be considered the opposite of making a mess.



Tuberculosis is great?



Like microwave ovens and the internet?



Beyond what? Life? I'll die and cease to exist, my body being slowly devoured by the cycles that unmake all living things.



Okay, Uncle Milty.



Hence the need for four exclamation points!!!!

Gravity can be observed, measured and understood to some extent, but in many others it is an utter mystery. Scientists still have no idea what the force is. They can find photons but not a single graviton has been detected. Science cannot replicate gravity in the laboratory. No physical method has ever been devised to shield it or reduce it. Its like a perpetual motion machine, it never reduces over the supposed milllions of years of the earths existence. It has no verifiable source. . How can mass of an object produce an attraction. No scientific theory even attempts to explain this. The laws of physic state that energy must be converted and that it cannot be created or destroyed. Where then does all the energy for gravity come from? Some say it is the cooling of the planet. Why then do frosty gas planets also have gravity? Why is the cooling rate of the planet NOT included in the gravitational calculations. Unlike any other energy the temperature, chemical composition of an object has no effect on gravity which works with all objects equally. Even massive objects fall at the same speed as light objects and yet scientists try to tell us that objects of large mass attract other astronomical bodies with greater force than those with smaller objects. So the rules for gravity are changed from what we readily observe when applied to the theoretical science of astronomy.

How does gravity reach across the vast distances of space to grab another object? Why does an astronaut float when in orbit with the moon and yet the moon can lift the vast oceans of the earth in tides?

In fact gravity is a profound mystery and is one of the chief examples of the inability of science to explain our creation. We can't even figure out a miracle that occurs every day right before our noses and yet we seem to think they can explain the mysteries of the creation of the universe and man.

I am not arguing that gravity does not exist. I am arguing that it is a supernatural force. A daily miracle that occurs in front of our noses every day. A force which is completely unrelated to the mass of an object. Similarly the force which holds the planets in order is completely supernatural, a miraculous force from God with no physical source.

The scriptures prove this when they say
Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

So The Word speaks and his power goes out to do his bidding. Its as simple as that. But this demands faith and belief. The atheist refuses to believe this. He simply must come up with a natural explanation for everything no matter how absurd and impossible his theories are.

Scientists can spin themselves around and come up with all kinds of theories and ideas. They can turn themselves blue if they want. I dont care. But what if gravity is a supernatural force. WHAT IF that is the truth after all. No amount of scientific study will ever arrive at such a truth because that is NOT the answer that science wants to get. They see that as an intellectual copout. So this is how science becomes opposed to the truth. The scientists don't like the truth so they put all their energies into opposing and denying the truth. In the end they become fools and their followers become fools.


You can't have your cake and eat it too. Isnt that what the saying teaches. This is like Elijah said to Israel. 1 Kings 18:21 And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions if the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word.

I ask the same thing of Christians. How long are you going to give God's glory to science and nature?
Give God the glory for holding the universe together not science or nature.


There is bad lieing science and then there is good and truthful science. The Bible exposes which is which. The Bible is not opposed to science, it is opposed to science "falsely so-called". This oppositions of science is nothing new. It existed in the first century prompting Paul to write to Timothy.
1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called

Okay, you are the most intelligent person that has ever been on this thread. You get decent marks...but you explained lust not love. Good try though. Love comes out of a good character that is way beyond carnal hormones.

What causes bad character?

Who programmed the DNA for babies? You admit there was a programmer. Good move! So do I!

Your other arguments are only pseudo science really. Just because we name something doesn't mean we understand it. Why do the Japanese love Elvis?.... Well it's easily explained by the elvision hair theory professor! Oh! that explains it then!

Magnetism is not understood...only observed as a phenomenon. Electro magnets lose their strength after being charged. Why the difference? Who invented magnetism? Could it be the same Person that programmed DNA?

Atomic theory is only a theory...you can't prove atoms exist. Show them to me and I'll believe! lol


Automatic contractions blah blah blah.. you think that explains the heart? You are an intelligent fool to think that. You debunked perpetual motion did you not. Be logical. Where's the battery? Show us the formula.Get scientific!

Why do we age so quickly? Turtles can live for hundreds of years. Make us live for ever. You will never understand why we age. I apparently know more than you on the reason why.


I realize that things like TB are a big challenge to people who think this life is all there is. This is due to the theory of myopicity. It's a science in itself. The lack of seeing beyond cause and effect and into purpose.

What is the purpose of life?

Why are you here...apparently alive by some freak of nature? Based on the ionic blah blah of your heart muscle, how many more days before you croak? Get out the slide rule and make me a believer. Science should provide us an answer to this important question, no? Isn't it more important than the sex life of the dung beetle? Your own life is not in your own hands. God can take it away in a heartbeat. Wise men live with this in mind. Intelligence is not wisdom. Scientists are among the greatest fools on this planet. Better to have a little wisdom than a whole laboratory full of knowledge. Read up on Einstein. He was of that rare breed that didn't let his thinking get in the way of wisdom. I respect him.

It takes all kinds to make up a world. Are you satisfied with your role in it? Or do you seek to evolve on this forum.

God bless you,

John

That's not science's fault.



Einstein's curvature of spacetime would account for that. But because of problems integrating General Relativity with the Standard Model, many scientists think that Gravity, the fourth force, could be particle-mediated. Many scientists don't. So far, the General Relativity and the Standard Model don't cross, but scientists are still looking for a hypothetical graviton anyway, to see if their hypotheses fit.



Yes they can. By *dropping things.*



Because it's a physical law. Two of the qualities of a physical law are " Omnipotence. Everything in the universe apparently must comply with them," and "Absolute. Nothing in the universe appears to affect them."



The fundamental forces don't need energy to work. They're quintessential interactions between mass and energy.



By curving spacetime. Think of it like this. Spacetime is a stretched out bedsheet. If you put a bowling ball on that sheet, and a pea, which will distort the bedsheet more? Will the pea not begin to roll towards the bowling ball as the bowling ball distorts the sheet more and more?



Energy is, in fact, the *result* of the Fundamental Forces' interactions. Along with mass.



Whoever told you this is very silly. Gravity has nothing to do with temperature. A cold object will exert the same amount of gravitational pull as a warm object.



Energy results from the Fundamental Forces' interactions. Along with mass.



This question is oddly phrased, but I'll try my best to answer it. Forgive me if this wasn't what you wanted to know--

Massive in relation to what? The largest boulder on Earth is still substantially smaller than Earth itself. Earth's gravitational field pulls a boulder in with more gravitational pull than the boulder on Earth; the Sun's gravitational field pulls on the Earth more than the Earth's field pulls on the Sun; et cetera.



Think of the bedsheet analogy again. A more massive object (a bowling ball, or black hole) is depressing the bedsheet more than a less massive object (a pea, or a planet).



Because no matter how big the "bedsheet" of spacetime is, every single point on the "bedsheet" is going to sink a little bit. The sinking will be closer to the object on the "bedsheet," but the whole "bedsheet" will depress a bit.



The moon can affect the Earth's tides because it's so close to Earth, and it's massive enough that its gravitational field can affect our planet's tides. The astronaut, however, has gotten far enough away from the "sink in the bedsheet" that Earth's gravitational pull on him is minimized. That doesn't mean that the Earth still isn't pulling on him, but it means that from his perspective, he's floating freely in space.

I explained it pretty well, if you'll forgive my pride in my typing skills.



Despite the fact that we've observed that more massive objects exert more of a gravitational pull, like the Sun on Earth, for instance?



It's the planets, swinging with extremely large momentum against the gravitational field.



That doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand.



Actually, the scientific method is coming up with the theories. And the "absurd theories" are the ones that allow you to argue with me on the internet, on a computer, in, presumably a room with central air and heating, lighted by electricity. Without natural explanations, we're reduced to tenth-century Europe, where the only explanation why most children died in the crib, or why things fell towards the Earth was "goddidit."



You're right. They're the only ones coming up with the theories and ideas. You're just sitting around, trying to use an Iron Age text to try and refute anything they say.



If you think your hypothesis is correct, perform an experiment to see if:
1. It fits with the observed phenomenon,
2. It has predictive capabilities for future acts of the phenomenon.



If you've got god at your house, bring him to a lab. I'm sure that every scientist on Earth would give up their right leg to study him.



No, saying "goddidit" and leaving it at that is an intellectual cop-out.



Right. They oppose the truth. Is that why I don't have tuberculosis and can expect to live to my seventies?



If you want to believe in god, that's perfectly all right. Adherence to human rights demands that I respect your right to believe in whatever you choose. But believing what you want doesn't mean that you get to choose your own facts.



Which god? Amaterasu? Allah? Ahura Mazda?



"Of the birds, regard the following as an abomination and do not eat them: the eagle, the osprey...and the bat."
--Leviticus 11:13- 11:19

No, the first few months, where the body is experiencing an upswing in testosterone and estrogen-- that's lust. The next period (dopamine, serotonin, etc.) is a period of acclimatizing to live with a person forever-- the early stages of love. The third period, of oxytocin and vasopressin, is the period of deep union to another human being.



Almost. The programmer is Natural Selection. Thousands, possibly millions of babies dying throughout human history bred a group of humans whose offspring would have evolved the natural tendancies for self-preservation. Like breathing.



You think my explanations are pseudo-science? Well, as the Japanese say, adullam-san, "Prove it."



Um, what? Electromagnets are materials that are *only* magnetic when they have an electric charge running through them. And nobody *invented* magnetism. It's a physical law.



Why not take a trip to Hiroshima or Nagasaki? Those places, and the atomic bomb dropped on them show the presence of the atom quite efficiently. lol!



Fairly well, considering we've seen myocytes and observed their cellular functions. Or would you think that chest-pixies run the heart?



The "battery" that runs the myocytes is the movement of sodium ions. They create an electrical charge in the myocytes, until the cells react by contracting.



There are twelve very good theories as to why we age, ranging from free radicals permanently damaging the cells of the body; to telomeres reducing with every cellular division, causing irreparable long-term damage as the cells repair in the short-term; to the evolutionary idea that overcrowding is bad, and death is the result of the damaged naturally being replaced by their offspring without having to compete for resources.



Well, you show me heaven, then I'll reconsider my stance on materialist humanism. Until then, I'm not going to waste my short life doing anything but that which aids humanity and the progress of our logic.



Simple. There is none. There is no grand master plan to the universe. It exists, and we're a result of it. However, as thinking creatures, we can create a subjective reality and give ourselves meaning. So you could say that the meaning of life is also "whatever you want it to be."



On the contrary, I think it's amazing that we could come to exist randomly, and I strive to preserve our presence in the universe.



Which of the trillions of variables would you like me to calculate first?



Why an omnipotent being would feel it important to snuff a life-form in a particularly insignifigant sector of the galaxy, I'll never know.



Well, then you ought to get off this computer right now and run into the forest naked, considering that scientists have designed everything that makes your life livable in the modern age. Like functional medicines, electronics, life-support systems, efficient methods of clothes-productions, glasses, et cetera.



"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
--Albert Einstein

Well of course. Any attempt to explain the source of gravity is going to sound silly. In the end scientists lament "We just don't know"

Here are some examples:
http://www.socialtext.net/wired-mag/index.cgi?what_causes_gravity
What causes gravity?
Isaac Newton first figured out the fundamental nature of gravity in the late 1600s. By unraveling the mysteries of planetary movement and Earth’s pull on its inhabitants, he described modern physics. But more than three centuries later, that’s still all we have: an understanding of the effect, with almost no grasp of the cause. Is gravity carried by an elementary particle? Is it some fundamental feature of spacetime we don’t understand? Why can’t gravity be reconciled with the better-understood quantum forces? All these questions remain unanswered. Many scientists think gravity must be generated by a massless particle, and have even dubbed it the graviton. But experiments to detect this entity (using a super-collider, for example) can’t be performed with current technology. “To generate t