In my experience when you preach the gospel you become all things to all people. Doubting Thomas needed to see the nail prints in the hand, that may have been due to a lack of faith, it may not have been blessed, but the Lord showed him the nail prints in his hands. Jesus is Lord of all, He is lord of the archaelogists and He is lord of statisticians and code breakers. Every knee will bow to Him.
Scientific Proof that all things came into being through the word of God?
- Thread starter ZNP
- Start date
-
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.
Science uses it's own methods to confirm itself.
For science to confirm that all things came into being through the Word of God, a scientist would need one of two things.
1. They would need God's cooperation to reproduce creation so it can be studied and confirmed by their "scientific method."
2. A scientist would need to become an all powerful, all knowing, God and then create things using the sheer power of their words.
1 could happen, but unlikely in my opinion. 2 will never happen. So the available options are limited for using scientific methods to confirm all things came into being through God's word.
For science to confirm that all things came into being through the Word of God, a scientist would need one of two things.
1. They would need God's cooperation to reproduce creation so it can be studied and confirmed by their "scientific method."
2. A scientist would need to become an all powerful, all knowing, God and then create things using the sheer power of their words.
1 could happen, but unlikely in my opinion. 2 will never happen. So the available options are limited for using scientific methods to confirm all things came into being through God's word.
Fair enough, the title is a little provocative, my bad.
Nor could we ever verify that "all things", I mean even if we find 1,000 things in the Bible code that is a far cry from "all things", even if we find 1,000,000 things that is a far cry from all things. Still, if you find 1,000,000 things that has got to be viewed as evidence of all things, not proof, but evidence.
Nor could we ever verify that "all things", I mean even if we find 1,000 things in the Bible code that is a far cry from "all things", even if we find 1,000,000 things that is a far cry from all things. Still, if you find 1,000,000 things that has got to be viewed as evidence of all things, not proof, but evidence.
Excellent Video and watching that sulfur [literally around 5,000 years old] not only ignite immediately, but left the ground yellow which is proof it was sulfur, and the guy telling how the initial smell hit the back of his throat...just solidifies that during the fire and brimstone downpour, people were not only burnt to dust, but they most likely [while being blind] were suffocating and suffered horrific and tremendous Wrath from Almighty God.
What a way to learn the lesson "ye reap what ye sow!"
What a way to learn the lesson "ye reap what ye sow!"
-
1
- Show all
Something rather amazing and it is off Twitter, but seen flashing across the skies of Texas was a Meteor literally becoming a [fireball]. What's interesting about this due to modern technology, there are literally 10 plus videos from personal security devices, the earth cameras that are set up to spot anything unusual from the view covering downtown Dallas, Texas from a massive tower platform, and then the most amazing video comes from Norway. In this video, you actually see the meteor/fireball coming at you so you are well aware this Star travels WEST to EAST, just opposite of Matthew 24 Christ telling us His Second Coming would be preceded by a streak of light, [which this Texas Meteor/Fireball] looks like a giant lightning bolt, to Christ's Second Coming travelling East to West.
Wonder if the antichrist is introduced from a bolt of lightning West to East opposite of Christ East to West?
I just typed [twitter: meteor/fireball across north texas]
Wonder if the antichrist is introduced from a bolt of lightning West to East opposite of Christ East to West?
I just typed [twitter: meteor/fireball across north texas]
We might look at a stone arch in the same way. How is it possible to balance so many stones at the same time and fit them into an arch perfectly without it falling apart? How was the keystone perfectly put into place? To the naive eye, we might make assumptions about how impossible it is to build a stone arch. But a stone arch is built around material that is later removed, left unseen in the finished product.
The human body is also built up by a guided process. Like the stone arch, there may be different supports that were in place in order to get the final product that were removed along the way when they were no longer needed.
I agree that evolution is not provable through conventional means but neither is instantaneous creation. Either perspective is consistent with the information at hand. The question comes down to which one someone finds more compelling. I see no contradiction between evolution and faith.
The human body is also built up by a guided process. Like the stone arch, there may be different supports that were in place in order to get the final product that were removed along the way when they were no longer needed.
I agree that evolution is not provable through conventional means but neither is instantaneous creation. Either perspective is consistent with the information at hand. The question comes down to which one someone finds more compelling. I see no contradiction between evolution and faith.
That is the point that I see. For years many different scientific fields and engineering fields were able to illustrate principals of the gospel because "the whole creation testifies of God". So why would we think it strange that computer science and code breakers would not also be able to testify of the greatness of God?
This is what always bothered me about Darwin. What he really discovered was species differentiation. The beaks of finches didn't "evolve" rather all of that diversity was within the range of the species at the time. That is why they were able to adapt so quickly to a changing environment. This declares that the creation was even more remarkable and amazing than he could believe. This is on full display with dogs All the different breeds are not the result of evolution but of species differentiation.
But then he theorizes evolution due to random mutations. This is what we see take place with a virus like covid 19. There is a reason we have never attempted to make a vaccine for the common cold. How ridiculous that those who are such big proponents of evolution and random mutations would think we could make a vaccine to stamp out Covid19. It demonstrates they never understood what they have been so vocal in proclaiming.
But then why would anyone think that this is an alternate explanation for the creation? Creation is to call not being as being. You begin with nothing, no universe and then you have a universe. Creation and evolution are two completely different concepts.
But then he theorizes evolution due to random mutations. This is what we see take place with a virus like covid 19. There is a reason we have never attempted to make a vaccine for the common cold. How ridiculous that those who are such big proponents of evolution and random mutations would think we could make a vaccine to stamp out Covid19. It demonstrates they never understood what they have been so vocal in proclaiming.
But then why would anyone think that this is an alternate explanation for the creation? Creation is to call not being as being. You begin with nothing, no universe and then you have a universe. Creation and evolution are two completely different concepts.
While the searches can be performed by anyone with the same text and software, that doesn't make the process "scientific". There is little about it that is "scientific" (and statistics don't make it so); it's merely examination of data using code. The same process can be applied to any body of text, and with similar methods of manipulation (searching through many iterations of sequenced letters), it is likely that similar results may be found. What would be truly rigorous, as an example, is searching for all the disciples' names through the entire text of the OT at all the spacings that were used for Isaiah 53. Another example would be compiling a list of significant names, dates, events, etc. and searching through the entire text for those sequences at all the different spacings. Names of Jewish rabbis is an odd choice, given that most rabbis reject the very Jesus whose Name is allegedly confirmed by this study.
You claim, "I asked you what you would search for and you refused to posit anything." What you actually asked was this: "How would you design an experiment to prove that all things came into being through the word of God?" which has nothing whatsoever to do with the ELS data. I did not "refuse to posit anything"; rather, I answered your specific question directly, stating that I would not "design an experiment to prove that all things came into being through the word of God".
Before you make any further accusations, kindly re-read the thread... carefully.
You claim, "I asked you what you would search for and you refused to posit anything." What you actually asked was this: "How would you design an experiment to prove that all things came into being through the word of God?" which has nothing whatsoever to do with the ELS data. I did not "refuse to posit anything"; rather, I answered your specific question directly, stating that I would not "design an experiment to prove that all things came into being through the word of God".
Before you make any further accusations, kindly re-read the thread... carefully.
Whoa. That is why the control included checking 1 million books to see if that were true. Yes, they found random words this way but they were unable to detect anything meaningful. The study they did had multiple words appear in the same page that were all related. For example if you simply look at Isaiah 53, one chapter in the Bible you can find the name Jesus three times, the names of the apostles, the term Messiah, and other related terms, all in that one chapter. What is "scientific" is the method by which they determine that this is not "random" and the odds of this happening by chance are miniscule.
Why is that more rigorous or "truly" rigorous? What we are discovering is that these codes show up in relevant passages and the words that appear are all meaningful together.
I think you have conflated several studies. The initial study was done by rabbis studying the Torah and in the beginning they only used the book of Genesis. Since then many others have also entered the fray. They have studied historical figures not related to the Bible and they had a list of 300 and found all 300. That led them to think that perhaps everyone is in the code and you can now hire people to do a search for your name. Others have looked for events like the Holocaust or 911 or JFK's assassination. Those have also been found.
The limiting factor is this. The computer can easily search for a word say "Jesus" using every possible skip up to a 1,000 letters or more. What becomes very difficult is knowing what word to look for. For example, when this study was first done they did a search on Yitzak Rabin and saw that he was going to be assassinated. They warned him, he dismissed them, and sure enough a year later he was assassinated. The reason they saw he would be assassinated is that the word crossed his name so being able to read Hebrew you could pick it up and you could also find the year. However, after he was assassinated they were then able to see that the name of the assassin, Amir, was also there in the code as well. If you don't know what words to look for it can be very difficult.
Why is that more rigorous or "truly" rigorous? What we are discovering is that these codes show up in relevant passages and the words that appear are all meaningful together.
I think you have conflated several studies. The initial study was done by rabbis studying the Torah and in the beginning they only used the book of Genesis. Since then many others have also entered the fray. They have studied historical figures not related to the Bible and they had a list of 300 and found all 300. That led them to think that perhaps everyone is in the code and you can now hire people to do a search for your name. Others have looked for events like the Holocaust or 911 or JFK's assassination. Those have also been found.
The limiting factor is this. The computer can easily search for a word say "Jesus" using every possible skip up to a 1,000 letters or more. What becomes very difficult is knowing what word to look for. For example, when this study was first done they did a search on Yitzak Rabin and saw that he was going to be assassinated. They warned him, he dismissed them, and sure enough a year later he was assassinated. The reason they saw he would be assassinated is that the word crossed his name so being able to read Hebrew you could pick it up and you could also find the year. However, after he was assassinated they were then able to see that the name of the assassin, Amir, was also there in the code as well. If you don't know what words to look for it can be very difficult.
Evolution is a fairytale not even a theory and there is contradiction between creation and evolution.
1. Creations reproduce in their own kind and don't evolve from other species
2. Birds preceded the reptiles not the other way around.
3. Rain came long after man was created.
4. The plants came before the sun
5. Earth came before the stars
6. Birds came before the insects
7. Creation was done in days not in billions of years!
Creation supports the laws of thermodynamics and laws of biogenesis. Sounds like Genesis. What a coincidence.
-
1
- Show all
I appreciate the feedback!
God can raise stones into descendants of Abraham. It is hardly the case that creations must always reproduce their own kind.
"And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven." - Genesis 1:20 KJV
It depends on how creatures from the water is being interpreted.
"And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground." - Genesis 2:5 KJV
That's an interesting one. Mankind was created on the sixth day and the end of the seventh mentions only a mist and no rain. Presumably when Adam was banished and the ground was cursed for his sake it was the first rain. But perhaps the description is specifically about rain on the land and would not speak to rain on the sea.
"And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also." - Genesis 1:16 KJV
If Genesis is metaphor, there are aspects that are mysterious. One could speculate that it is a description of space seeding, but leaving it a mystery is just as well.
Days that happened in the Lord's time.
"But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." - 2 Peter 3:8 KJV
God can raise stones into descendants of Abraham. It is hardly the case that creations must always reproduce their own kind.
"And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven." - Genesis 1:20 KJV
It depends on how creatures from the water is being interpreted.
"And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground." - Genesis 2:5 KJV
That's an interesting one. Mankind was created on the sixth day and the end of the seventh mentions only a mist and no rain. Presumably when Adam was banished and the ground was cursed for his sake it was the first rain. But perhaps the description is specifically about rain on the land and would not speak to rain on the sea.
"And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also." - Genesis 1:16 KJV
If Genesis is metaphor, there are aspects that are mysterious. One could speculate that it is a description of space seeding, but leaving it a mystery is just as well.
Days that happened in the Lord's time.
"But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." - 2 Peter 3:8 KJV
The one example I do find that can be similar to a Scientific explanation from the Bible itself would be when God told
(1) And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life,
Is this telling us the water understood God and then read God's mind and intent and filled the waters with (creation) apropiate to aquatic lifestyle?
(2) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
Is this telling us earth understood God and then read God's mind and intent and filled the earth full of cattle, reptiles, mammals and sort?
(3) But it changes up here:
and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
God directly tells the open firmament to bring forth fowl.
Before, in the first 2 examples, God tells the land and water to bring forth and then we read on and see what was brought forth. But in the 3rd example, God is identifying what creation He wants to come forth before Commanding, "Do!"
But the purpose I find most informative, is "both" the earth and water knew what to bring forth.
I believe this Verse explains that a bit more.
11And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
To begin with, there are no verses telling us what the "Specific Command" from God spoke forth the Order to, Go and make earth into a sphere that is void, under water, and whose seed is in itself, upon the earth:
So the earth, when we see the Spirit of God come upon the face of the deep (water), is already full of seed of all sorts of life forms. These range from flowers, trees, grasses, bushes, weeds. And we see earth is capable of bringing forth mammals, reptiles, rodents, multitude of insects.
And then God uses earth full of these (seeds), to create man, by forming man from the earth itself.
Those few examples are loaded with reasons why anyone including Science, should want to study God's Creation from the earth and water point of views.
(1) And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life,
Is this telling us the water understood God and then read God's mind and intent and filled the waters with (creation) apropiate to aquatic lifestyle?
(2) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
Is this telling us earth understood God and then read God's mind and intent and filled the earth full of cattle, reptiles, mammals and sort?
(3) But it changes up here:
and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
God directly tells the open firmament to bring forth fowl.
Before, in the first 2 examples, God tells the land and water to bring forth and then we read on and see what was brought forth. But in the 3rd example, God is identifying what creation He wants to come forth before Commanding, "Do!"
But the purpose I find most informative, is "both" the earth and water knew what to bring forth.
I believe this Verse explains that a bit more.
11And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
To begin with, there are no verses telling us what the "Specific Command" from God spoke forth the Order to, Go and make earth into a sphere that is void, under water, and whose seed is in itself, upon the earth:
So the earth, when we see the Spirit of God come upon the face of the deep (water), is already full of seed of all sorts of life forms. These range from flowers, trees, grasses, bushes, weeds. And we see earth is capable of bringing forth mammals, reptiles, rodents, multitude of insects.
And then God uses earth full of these (seeds), to create man, by forming man from the earth itself.
Those few examples are loaded with reasons why anyone including Science, should want to study God's Creation from the earth and water point of views.
A man named Philip Williams in the US has a website up. He says a Chinese group went to the ark, led there by a local tour guide and preacher. One documentary claimed the whole things was a hoax, he said, but fabricated their arguments against it, claiming there was a movie set up there. He said he went up there and went in, a big wooden room, a fragment of the ark on Mt. Ararat. I don't remember his website name. The Chinese group was named NAMI.
-
1
- Show all