Science and the Bible

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
K

KnowMe

Guest
#21
#21
posthuman said:
the Hebrew words here have no relation to the modern names 'Orion' & the 'Pleiades' -- words which are names of characters in specific Greek myths. scholarship determined that these Hebrew words probably refer to the same constellations that you know by their common names in the Hellenized world. in China Orion is called 'shen' meaning simply 'three stars' and the Aztecs called what we know as the Pleiades 'tianquiztli' meaning 'marketplace'


there's no such thing as an 'official discovery' of the stars we all see above. there are only 'standardized' names agreed upon among international groups of astronomers, so everyone can be sure that they are talking about the same thing. that's not 'official discovery'

Arcturus, for example, is a star. the brightest in Bootes. the root word is word that has to do with a bear, and in fact many translations decided to just say 'the bear' in Job 9:9 -- and some more recent versions went so far as to translate this as 'the big dipper' because its Latin name ((again an agreed upon standard, not a 'discovery')) is ursa major, the large bear.
Click to expand...
if using that standard what does it really mean if replacing those words with those above. the latter job with those words doesn’t quite sound right.

Job 9:9
Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south.

Job 9:9
Which maketh the bear, Three stars, and marketplace, and the chambers of the south.
 
I

IMB

Member
#22
Feb 8, 2019
54
19
8
#22
posthuman said:
why should they? His eternal qualities are clearly seen by the things which are made. we may, however, need to clearly see the things which are made before we understand how that's so.
Click to expand...
how about you post some scriptures that refute what i am saying or science articles that do the same.


I did.

the bible or science

or both
 
posthuman

posthuman

Senior Member
#23
Jul 31, 2013
36,672
13,131
113
#23
KnowMe said:
if using that standard what does it really mean if replacing those words with those above. the latter job with those words doesn’t quite sound right.

Job 9:9
Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south.

Job 9:9
Which maketh the bear, Three stars, and marketplace, and the chambers of the south.
Click to expand...
if you were making a translation of the Bible into Mandarin would you use Greek names for the stars or Chinese one?

why not just leave the Hebrew word?

this is how we get things like 'red sea' and 'unicorns' and 'basilisks' --- IMHO, poor translating decisions.
 
I

IMB

Member
#24
Feb 8, 2019
54
19
8
#24
posthuman said:
if you were making a translation of the Bible into Mandarin would you use Greek names for the stars or Chinese one?

why not just leave the Hebrew word?

this is how we get things like 'red sea' and 'unicorns' and 'basilisks' --- IMHO, poor translating decisions.
Click to expand...
and thus the confusion


TERMS

archaic TERMS used back in the day
 
posthuman

posthuman

Senior Member
#25
Jul 31, 2013
36,672
13,131
113
#25
IMB said:
how about you post some scriptures that refute what i am saying or science articles that do the same.

I did.

the bible or science

or both
Click to expand...
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24091682?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

some dinosaur fossils in some areas show relatively high levels of radiation. not any more than the surrounding sediment ((normalized by density)) and not any more than the glow-in-the-dark paint used on watches and gun sights. nothing you'd want to eat, but nothing that is going to rot all nearby flesh if it's not kept in a lead box.

most museum fossil displays are cast replicas -- most actual fossils are incomplete skeletons -- which were made by and large before lead paint fell out of use.

pro tip: ancient aliens isn't a reliable source of information either, and the internet makes it extraordinarily easy to propagate false information and urban myth.


btw -- i did a project for a physics class when i was in college, measuring radioactivity of all kinds of things. that's how i know about walnut shells. if you had a geiger counter you'd be surprised at how hot they are, tbh
 
K

KnowMe

Guest
#26
#26
posthuman said:
if you were making a translation of the Bible into Mandarin would you use Greek names for the stars or Chinese one?

why not just leave the Hebrew word?

this is how we get things like 'red sea' and 'unicorns' and 'basilisks' --- IMHO, poor translating decisions.
Click to expand...
Three stars or stars I can see that but what translation is proper for that verse in Job do you know?

is water always the right choice in a translation, I don’t know is it I mean water in Hebrew means chaos Mayim.
 
K

KnowMe

Guest
#27
#27
Science says, hydrogen and helium was the first main elements.

in the beginning God created heaven and earth.

earth floats on nothing and the universe most abundant element is hydrogen.
 
I

IMB

Member
#28
Feb 8, 2019
54
19
8
#28
posthuman said:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24091682?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

some dinosaur fossils in some areas show relatively high levels of radiation. not any more than the surrounding sediment ((normalized by density)) and not any more than the glow-in-the-dark paint used on watches and gun sights. nothing you'd want to eat, but nothing that is going to rot all nearby flesh if it's not kept in a lead box.

most museum fossil displays are cast replicas -- most actual fossils are incomplete skeletons -- which were made by and large before lead paint fell out of use.

pro tip: ancient aliens isn't a reliable source of information either, and the internet makes it extraordinarily easy to propagate false information and urban myth.


btw -- i did a project for a physics class when i was in college, measuring radioactivity of all kinds of things. that's how i know about walnut shells. if you had a geiger counter you'd be surprised at how hot they are, tbh
Click to expand...
i never even mention "ancient aliens"

pls refrain from putting words in my mouth
 
I

IMB

Member
#30
Feb 8, 2019
54
19
8
#30
posthuman said:
yay!

please never do!
Click to expand...
lol hows this?

Numbers 13:22 And they ascended by the south, and came unto Hebron; where Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai, the children of Anak, were

Numbers 13:28 Nevertheless the people be strong that dwell in the land, and the cities are walled, and very great: and moreover we saw the children of Anak there.

Numbers 13:33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

Deuteronomy 1:28 Whither shall we go up? our brethren have discouraged our heart, saying, The people is greater and taller than we; the cities are great and walled up to heaven; and moreover we have seen the sons of the Anakims there.

Deuteronomy 2:10 The Emims dwelt therein in times past, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims;

Deuteronomy 2:11 Which also were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites called them Emims.


Deuteronomy 2:21 A people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; but the Lord destroyed them before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead:


Deuteronomy 9:2 A people great and tall, the children of the Anakims, whom thou knowest, and of whom thou hast heard say, Who can stand before the children of Anak!


Joshua 11:21 And at that time came Joshua, and cut off the Anakims from the mountains, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, and from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel: Joshua destroyed them utterly with their cities.



this is about half the accounts mentioned in the bible


ANAK
ANAKIMS
EMIMS


all the same thing

ANNUNAKI

a total of 18 times.
 
I

IMB

Member
#31
Feb 8, 2019
54
19
8
#31
dont like that do ya? too bad it is in the bible.
 
posthuman

posthuman

Senior Member
#33
Jul 31, 2013
36,672
13,131
113
#33
IMB said:
and thus the confusion


TERMS

archaic TERMS used back in the day
Click to expand...
that's not really the issue.

the Hebrew word that got translated to 'red sea' has nothing whatsoever to do with 'red' -- there's no way to make that word mean 'red sea' -- it clearly means 'sea of reeds' or 'reed sea'
but someone, a thousand years later, decided 'oh they must mean the red sea' because when that person lived, there was a very famous sea in the area that people far removed from the context the account was originally written in, called 'the red sea'

and we all got raised on English Bibles that say 'the red sea' and never knew any better.
why not let it say 'yam suph' or translate it literally, 'sea of reeds' ?

and unicorns and basilisks -- when the vulgate was made, and the KJV, no one had any idea what animal these Hebrew words were referring to. again, thousands of years and very different culture. they just 'punted' and put a mythological creature down for it. same way we get 'Lucifer' and same way we get mentions of 'two pennies' in Luke 12:6 -- there was no such thing as a penny in 1st century AD! what's that word doing in my Bible? it's there because someone decided we'd get confused if it said 'an assarion' ((an ancient Greek or Roman coin)) as it literally says, decided to make the translation 'relevant' to the 'modern reader' ad decided not to give us the literal text.

that's why we have 'Orion' and 'Pleiades' -- not because Job 9:9 anticipated what the Western world would call these formations of stars thousands of years later, but because thousands of years later, the Western world decided this is probably what Job 9:9 is referring to. and maybe it's not - things like that are a guess. we really have no idea what specific type of insects Joel 1:4 is talking about, for example. we have a guess, an educated guess, but that's all. so Joel 1:4 isn't an example of 'discovering the cankerworm long before it was ever officially known!' -- it's a product of translation and choices the translators made.
 
posthuman

posthuman

Senior Member
#34
Jul 31, 2013
36,672
13,131
113
#34
IMB said:
dont like that do ya? too bad it is in the bible.
Click to expand...
don't like what?

do you think that means the Anakim are from outer space?

 
K

KnowMe

Guest
#35
#35
IMB said:
I like it when the two match up. This not only gives validity to both...but it makes you stop and wonder as to how they had advanced knowledge so long ago.

a couple of examples....
Isaiah 40:22
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:

and
Job 26:7
He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

these two say the earth is round and hangs upon nothing.
Scientifically valid.

A few more examples...

Job 9:9
Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south.

Job 38:31
Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?


mention very specific constellations not "officially" discovered until much later.


There is one more example I will list later...but I was wondering if anyone else has an example of valid science in the bible?
Click to expand...
Don’t know if your are aware of this but recently discovered that the star cluster called the Pleiades is gravitationally bound and that the Orion star cluster is flying apart due to insufficient gravity to hold the cluster together I though that was a interesting read.
 
L

louis

Senior Member
#36
Nov 1, 2017
1,102
86
48
#36
IMB said:
I like it when the two match up. This not only gives validity to both...but it makes you stop and wonder as to how they had advanced knowledge so long ago.

a couple of examples....
Isaiah 40:22
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:

and
Job 26:7
He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

these two say the earth is round and hangs upon nothing.
Scientifically valid.

A few more examples...

Job 9:9
Which maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades, and the chambers of the south.

Job 38:31
Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?


mention very specific constellations not "officially" discovered until much later.


There is one more example I will list later...but I was wondering if anyone else has an example of valid science in the bible?
Click to expand...
How about Isaiah 45:18 which says the Lord made the earth to be inhabited? To me this infers that there are many planets out there that are not inhabited (as we know there are today), but also that there are other planets out there that the Lord made to be inhabited.

Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.
 
I

IMB

Member
#37
Feb 8, 2019
54
19
8
#37
posthuman said:
that's not really the issue.

the Hebrew word that got translated to 'red sea' has nothing whatsoever to do with 'red' -- there's no way to make that word mean 'red sea' -- it clearly means 'sea of reeds' or 'reed sea'
but someone, a thousand years later, decided 'oh they must mean the red sea' because when that person lived, there was a very famous sea in the area that people far removed from the context the account was originally written in, called 'the red sea'

and we all got raised on English Bibles that say 'the red sea' and never knew any better.
why not let it say 'yam suph' or translate it literally, 'sea of reeds' ?

and unicorns and basilisks -- when the vulgate was made, and the KJV, no one had any idea what animal these Hebrew words were referring to. again, thousands of years and very different culture. they just 'punted' and put a mythological creature down for it. same way we get 'Lucifer' and same way we get mentions of 'two pennies' in Luke 12:6 -- there was no such thing as a penny in 1st century AD! what's that word doing in my Bible? it's there because someone decided we'd get confused if it said 'an assarion' ((an ancient Greek or Roman coin)) as it literally says, decided to make the translation 'relevant' to the 'modern reader' ad decided not to give us the literal text.

that's why we have 'Orion' and 'Pleiades' -- not because Job 9:9 anticipated what the Western world would call these formations of stars thousands of years later, but because thousands of years later, the Western world decided this is probably what Job 9:9 is referring to. and maybe it's not - things like that are a guess. we really have no idea what specific type of insects Joel 1:4 is talking about, for example. we have a guess, an educated guess, but that's all. so Joel 1:4 isn't an example of 'discovering the cankerworm long before it was ever officially known!' -- it's a product of translation and choices the translators made.
Click to expand...
not talking about unicorns or basilisks .

talking about science and the bible. Can you post an example?
 
I

IMB

Member
#38
Feb 8, 2019
54
19
8
#38
KnowMe said:
Don’t know if your are aware of this but recently discovered that the star cluster called the Pleiades is gravitationally bound and that the Orion star cluster is flying apart due to u sufficient gravity to hold the cluster together I though that was a interesting read.
Click to expand...
"loose the bands of Orion"
 
I

IMB

Member
#39
Feb 8, 2019
54
19
8
#39
louis said:
How about Isaiah 45:18 which says the Lord made the earth to be inhabited? To me this infers that there are many planets out there that are not inhabited (as we know there are today), but also that there are other planets out there that the Lord made to be inhabited.

Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.
Click to expand...
I like it.
https://www.space.com/39010-super-earth-alien-planet-maybe-rocky.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.