logo
 

Go Back   HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Religion

Religion Discuss how your religious views affect your hunting lifestyle. All religions are welcome to post.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-29-2009, 10:24 AM   #1
Nontypical Buck
 
Kosherboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 2,509
Default The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

SCIENCE PROVES THE BIBLE

The Bible begins with these words. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." There are many people in the world who do not believe that statement. Some say God does not exist, and therefore, the Bible cannot be His Word. Sometimes we are led to believe that all true scientists do not believe in God, or the Bible. However, this is not correct. True science is not opposed to the Bible. In fact, science, properly applied and understood, proves the Bible to be inspired. The Bible is not a science book. However, whenever it makes a statement relating to a a scientific principle or fact, it is completely accurate.

Let us notice some examples of the harmony between science and the Bible. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen. 1:1) This was written by Moses through dictation from God's Mouth To Moses Ears about 1500 B.C. In 1820 A.D. a man named Hubert Spencer gave the world five scientific principles by which man may study the unknown. They are time, force, energy, space, and matter. However, Moses, by inspiration, gave us those scientific principles in Genesis 1:1. "In the beginning" --time; "God"-- force; "created" -- energy; "the heavens" --space; "and the earth" -- matter. All of Spencer's scientific principles are right there in Genesis 1:1.

For many years man has estimated the number of stars in the heavens, and he has increased the estimate many times. Finally, in the 1900's, man determined that the stars could not be counted. God's book has always told us this fact. Notice Genesis 15:5. "Then He brought him outside and said, Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them. And He said to him, So shall your descendants be."

God was telling Abraham that just as the stars in the heavens cannot be numbered, Abraham's descendants would be more than could be numbered. If man had paid attention to this verse, he would never have tried to count the stars! Another example of how science and the Bible agree relates to the blood in our bodies. Man now knows that blood is necessary for survival. If our bodies lose too much blood, we will die. However, man did not discover this principle until the 19th century. Before that time, blood-letting was practiced, and many died because draining blood from their bodies drained the very source of life. George Washington, the first President of the United States, is said to have died in this way.

Moses, again writing by inspiration hundreds of years ago, told us something man did not know until much later. "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul" (Leviticus 17:11). How could Moses have known about the life-giving qualities of blood unless God had revealed it to him?

In the book of Job, the inspired writer in one verse reveals two scientific principles not known to man until much later. "He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing" (Job. 26:7). There is a place in the North where no stars exist , which cannot be seen with the naked eye. How did the writer of Job know this? Also, the same verse declares that God hangs the earth on nothing. We know this is true, but we have only known it for about 350 years. God's inspired writer told us over 3000 years ago that the earth is held in place by gravitational forces!

When we come to the psalms, we find an interesting statement in Psalm 8:8. The passage mentions "The birds of the air, And the fish of the sea that pass through the paths of the seas." The phrase, "the paths of the seas" caused a man named Matthew Fontaine Maury to begin a search which led to the discovery of ocean currents, the natural "paths of the seas" created by God. Maury concluded that if God's Book said they were there, they must be there! He was right.
What about The prediction Of Scientist Concerning the end of this Universe ?

ISAAC NEWTON IMAGINED a static cosmos of infinite space and time. In such a universe, it would be reasonable to conceive of an infinite future for our species or its remote descendants. But the discoveries of 20th century physics changed that picture, and after the Big Bang model began to solidify, astronomy textbooks typically described two possible fates for our universe.

First, if the average density of the universe were great enough, the universe would be 'closed': gravity would eventually halt its expansion and the universe would start to contract, ultimately collapsing in a kind of reverse Big Bang, or 'Big Crunch'.

Alternatively, if its average density were lower than this threshold, the universe would be 'open': it would expand forever and all processes in the universe would gradually cease, in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics (which says, essentially, that the amount of disorder in the universe must always increase, and that systems tend towards equilibrium). The universe would become ever darker, colder and less hospitable to life.

The 20th century American poet Robert Frost captured the essence of the two possibilities in 1923 with a famous poem 'Fire and Ice': "Some say the world will end in fire | Some say in ice". Until the final decades of the 2oth century, this was the best we could do: the universe would suffer one of these fates, but we could not say which one.
Does The Bible Predict this ?

And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.Revelations 6

And all the host of heaven will wear away, And the sky will be rolled up like a scroll; All their hosts will also wither away As a leaf withers from the vine, Or as one withers from the fig tree.
Isaiah 34;4 [/align]

The Bible is not a geography book or an archaeology book. However, whenever the Bible makes a statement relating to these sciences, it is completely accurate. Notice the Lord's statement for example, in Luke 10:30. 30 Then Jesus answered and said: "A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, who stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead." Now, Jericho is Northeast of Jerusalem, and normally we do not speak of going down when we refer to going North. We generally speak of going down South and up North, don't we? Why did the Lord say the man went down from Jerusalem? It is because Jerusalem is some 2500 feet above sea level. When one leaves Jerusalem in Palestine he goes down to go anywhere in the area. Therefore, our Lord's statement is completely accurate, and is recorded accurately by inspiration. No, the Bible is not a geography book, but it is geographically accurate in every instance.

Many archaeologists have explored the land of Palestine. Has any one of those scientists ever discovered anything which disproves the Bible? No. Many archaeological discoveries have confirmed the Biblical record. However, none has ever contradicted the Word of God. This ought to be very reassuring to those of us who believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. At the same time, it ought to convince the skeptic, the agnostic, and the atheist, that this Book is God's Book. Therefore, not only does God exist, but He has revealed His Will to man.

Many other examples of the harmony between science and the Bible could be given. However, the ones we have examined are sufficient to show that the Bible is God's Book. As the apostle Paul declared, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16,17).

The Bible is accurate in matters of science, and it is accurate in the matter of salvation. The Bible tells us that to be saved we must believe in Jesus Christ. "Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins." However, the same Lord said, "I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3). Jesus also spoke of confessing Him before men. "Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven" (Matthew 10:32,33). And Jesus declared, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned" (Mark 16:16). It is then that the Lord Himself adds us to the church of the New Testament, the one body of believers. If the Bible is accurate in matters of science, it is accurate in the matter of salvation. Will you respond to the inspired Word?
[/align]__________________
"Blessed is He Who Comes In The Name Of The Lord"
[/align]
__________________
The great day of the LORD is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the LORD: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly. Zephaniah 1:14
פרץ
Kosherboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 08:15 PM   #2
Super Moderator
 
CalHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: El Dorado County California USA
Posts: 8,754
Default RE: The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

Thank you Alex. I enjoyed that very much.
Cal
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.

If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
CalHunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 05:46 AM   #3
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,824
Default RE: The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

Very good read KB.
It appears IMO, that scientist' (so called) as a whole are not trying to prove thier theorys, but are determined to prove that God doesn't exist. If those of us who fall into the catagory, "foolish and decieved" were to suddenly change our stance and declare that somehow God has never existed and the big bang created a perfect world, far advanced to the one we now know, would there be the addament opposition? If all creationists suddenly declared that we were the reminants of a far greater world and civilation than is now known, would there be such adament opposition?
IMO the issue simply is , does God exist?
Snooky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2009, 04:53 AM   #4
Little Doe Peep
 
sachiko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 10,006
Default RE: The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

Quote:
ORIGINAL: Snooky

Very good read KB.
It appears IMO, that scientist' (so called) as a whole are not trying to prove thier theorys, but are determined to prove that God doesn't exist. If those of us who fall into the catagory, "foolish and decieved" were to suddenly change our stance and declare that somehow God has never existed and the big bang created a perfect world, far advanced to the one we now know, would there be the addament opposition? If all creationists suddenly declared that we were the reminants of a far greater world and civilation than is now known, would there be such adament opposition?
IMO the issue simply is , does God exist?

You're wrong Snooky. Scientists have absolutely no interest in proving the existence or non-existence of God. It's only religionists who worry about that. Some scientists believe in God, some do not, and some say they just don't know.

My sisters have extended breakfast into a long brunch But it's a beautiful day out there

__________________


Proud parents of our own "Daddy's Little Girls"

I heard Jesus He drank wine and I bet we'd get along just fine.

He could calm a storm and heal the blind and

I bet He'd understand a heart like mine.

Miranda Lambert
sachiko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2009, 08:01 AM   #5
LBR
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 10,247
Default RE: The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

"Scientists" who believe the theory of evolution, or the theory of the "big bang", or any other theory that cannot be proven or replicated believe them by FAITH. Therefore they are "religionists".

I'm pretty sure you'll find that most avowed atheists cling to those theories than don't.

Chad
__________________
"We can have no '50-50' allegiance in this country. Either a man is an American and nothing else, or he is not an American at all."-- Theodore Roosevelt

A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left. Ecclesiasties 10:2

The last four letters in American..........I Can
The last four letters in Republican........I Can
The last four letters in Democrats.........Rats



LBR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2009, 08:15 AM   #6
Giant Nontypical
 
etothepii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 8,548
Default RE: The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

Quote:
Scientists have absolutely no interest in proving the existence or non-existence of God.
I've read statements from scientists on both sides refuting this.
__________________
Spammers: Thanks for share.
etothepii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2009, 03:38 PM   #7
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 549
Default RE: The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

Quote:
ORIGINAL: LBR

"Scientists" who believe the theory of evolution, or the theory of the "big bang", or any other theory that cannot be proven or replicated believe them by FAITH. Therefore they are "religionists".

I'm pretty sure you'll find that most avowed atheists cling to those theories than don't.

Chad
I accept the theories of Evolution and the Big Bang and it has nothing to do with faith or religion. My belief is based on the large amount of observed physical evidence for these theories and the correct predictions both theories make concerning what we observe in the natural world.
Lemaitre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2009, 10:20 PM   #8
Dominant Buck
 
Chuck7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 23,569
Default RE: The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

In the WOrd there are 3 types of individuals..

The Natural Man

The Carnal Man

The Spirtiual Man..



THE NATURAL MAN...
1 Corinthians 2:14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. NOTE.."Neither can he know them..they are hidden from him/her.


THE CARNAL MAN...has some serious deficiancies .He is spiritually retarded in his growth..He is a babe and is still feeding on milk. There is much quarreling among the the carnal minded.
1Corinthinas 3And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
1 Corinthians 3:24
I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
2122For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
Andrean Rogers calls this group Spiritually Retarded..



[/color]SPIRITUAL MAN...He is a meat eatter having his senses comformed to the Word of God..He feeds himself..and feeds others..He's fruitful. He is judged by no man yet he judges all things} {Judging in this context means discerner}.He's a discerneer and is not fooled or taken in by this world's system..He has the mind of Christ.

__________________
The Day I Saw Jesus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p20E0nA7pZI
Chuck7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 07:48 AM   #9
LBR
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 10,247
Default RE: The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

Quote:
I accept the theories of Evolution and the Big Bang and it has nothing to do with faith or religion.
I beg to differ. You cannot replicate or prove either of these theories (that is why they are, and always will be, theories). Since you cannot observe either one in action, you accept them based on faith. Accepting evolution and/or the 'big bang' as truth is just as much a religion as accepting the Bible as the Truth. You have your evidence, you believe in something you cannot see, touch, feel, reproduce, etc., you were not there to see it happen, you cannot speak directly to anyone who did witness it, you only have what someone else tells you. If that's not a religion, I don't know what is.

Eto makes a good point also--it's a fact that many "scientists" and university professors are dead set at doing what they can to destroy Christianity. Watch Ben Stein's "No Intelligence Allowed" for some of the proof of this.

Chad
__________________
"We can have no '50-50' allegiance in this country. Either a man is an American and nothing else, or he is not an American at all."-- Theodore Roosevelt

A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left. Ecclesiasties 10:2

The last four letters in American..........I Can
The last four letters in Republican........I Can
The last four letters in Democrats.........Rats



LBR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 03:08 PM   #10
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 549
Default RE: The Bible is Not A Book Of Science, BUT

Quote:
ORIGINAL: LBR

Quote:
I accept the theories of Evolution and the Big Bang and it has nothing to do with faith or religion.
I beg to differ. You cannot replicate or prove either of these theories (that is why they are, and always will be, theories).
Yes, Evolution and the Big Bang are and always will be theories, just like the theories of Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Gravitation and the atomic nucleus will always be theories and never finally proven. To scientists something that has the status of a theory is not simply a hunch or a guess. A theory in science is a widely accepted explanation that is well supported by facts, laws, observations and experimental data. A theory has to be consistent with all observations and if there is even point on which a theory is inconsistent with observation it looses the status of a scientific theory. The theories of Evolution and the Big Bang are considered to be legitimate scientific theories because they are in agreement with all observations, laws, facts and experimental results known to date and are contradicted by none of these things.
Lemaitre is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Bible Is not A Book Of Science #2 Kosherboy Religion 23 07-01-2009 07:40 AM
Science Invisible Matter And The Bible Kosherboy Religion 0 05-28-2009 11:32 AM
Do I have to choose between the Bible and Science? Arjuna Religion 57 02-04-2009 03:54 AM
Bush Promotes Bible as Science Book 1sagittarius Politics 61 08-22-2005 08:11 PM
what book of the Bible are you? burniegoeasily Religion 18 04-27-2004 07:03 AM

 

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:38 AM.