Freedom From Atheism Foundation

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Versch [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You've derailed any attempt at a reasonable discussion. Well done, trolls.

Who are you referring to?

[Shamalam]

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Its also not something that is actually found in the bible. The word Raqia can have several different meanings, this shouldn't be hard to grasp, after all, every language has many words that have more than one meaning. The most common translation is "firmament", but its not.the only accepted translation. "Expanse" is also an accepted translation.
Though the formation of the expanse, or atmosphere, surrounding earth did not involve a ‘beating out’ of something as solid as some metallic substance, yet it should be remembered that the gaseous mixture forming earth’s atmosphere is just as real as land and water and has weight in itself (in addition to carrying water and innumerable particles of solid materials, such as dust). The weight of all the air surrounding earth is estimated at more than 5,200,000,000,000,000 metric tons. (The World Book Encyclopedia, 1987, Vol. 1, p. 156) Air pressure at sea level runs about 1 kg per sq cm (15 lb per sq in.). It also exercises resistance so that most meteors hitting the immense jacket of air surrounding the earth are p. 787burned up by the friction created by the atmosphere. Thus the force implied in the Hebrew word ra·qi′aʽ is certainly in harmony with the known facts.

You are seriously grasping at straws here. And of course it isn't found in the bible -- the authors had no fucking idea what they were talking about, which is imminently evident for anyone willing to take a step back and look at the actual evidence. I.E. the text found in the bible as it was written by the original authors.

You and RobotPelvis are doing the exact same thing. You're taking quotes from the bible that are 100% factually incorrect and twisting them to fit your agenda. You seriously think that the Hebrews from thousands of years ago had any concept of an atmosphere surrounding the earth? Or that this atmosphere, composed almost entirely of empty space, could be dense enough to produce the kind of friction necessary to vaporize meteors? Here's another hint: they had no fucking clue about anything of the sort.

Again, there are multitudes of biblical scholars, living and dead, who would disagree with your above interpretation of the word "dome" as presented in Genesis. What makes your opinion any more valid than theirs?

[Nihilist_santa]

If evolutionary theory and genetics hold true how come we can not reproduce life? We can put all of the building blocks together in optimal environment and poof nothing. Cloning or changing one gene is not the same as creating life.

Shouldn't this be something very basic and testable? Like the Miller-Urey experiment and that was ages ago. We supposedly have these mountains of evidence indicating evolutionary theory might be true yet when they take these basic building blocks and try to reproduce this they get nada. Then they play a game of moving goal post with the introduction of unprovable time scales =/

We do experiments with fruit flies and none of the mutations witnessed have been favorable. If anything evolution should lead to nothing but dead ends. Mutations are not typically passed on through reproduction. So say I have my mutated pig with wings on his back. When he reproduces his offspring will not have wings nor will it be a new species. No new genetic code is introduced to express new traits. The DNA is self correcting and the parents no matter how badly mutated are still only going to give birth to another pig.

I am being very basic here with these examples but it just illustrates the massive gaps in the theory that have not been hammered out.

[Rellapse40]

no way in hell evolution is true

[Nihilist_santa]

You have examples like the stomach. How did the stomach evolve to hold acid? You cant have the acid without the stomach.

[RobotElvis]

Originally Posted by Shamalam [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are seriously grasping at straws here. And of course it isn't found in the bible -- the authors had no fucking idea what they were talking about, which is imminently evident for anyone willing to take a step back and look at the actual evidence. I.E. the text found in the bible as it was written by the original authors.

You and RobotPelvis are doing the exact same thing. You're taking quotes from the bible that are 100% factually incorrect and twisting them to fit your agenda. You seriously think that the Hebrews from thousands of years ago had any concept of an atmosphere surrounding the earth? Or that this atmosphere, composed almost entirely of empty space, could be dense enough to produce the kind of friction necessary to vaporize meteors? Here's another hint: they had no fucking clue about anything of the sort.

Again, there are multitudes of biblical scholars, living and dead, who would disagree with your above interpretation of the word "dome" as presented in Genesis. What makes your opinion any more valid than theirs?

It is not my opinion or a scholars opinion that counts. It is what harmonizes with the test of the bible. I proved the creative day as an epoch was in harmony with the rest of the bible.

And can you say with absolute certainty that expanse is a mistranslation? No you cannot you assume that based upon a period when people could not have completed of modern scientific theories. But yet the bible also says:


Job26:7. He stretches out the northern sky * over empty space,* +

Suspending the earth upon nothing

Same bible writer as Genesis. Moses knew the earth was suspended in space. At that time that would have been a radical concept. In fact it took thousand of years for man to reach that conclusion. The same reason he knew this was the same reason he knew of the scientific creation of research, he knew how God though and was inspired to write accordingly.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Shamalam [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are seriously grasping at straws here. And of course it isn't found in the bible -- the authors had no fucking idea what they were talking about, which is imminently evident for anyone willing to take a step back and look at the actual evidence. I.E. the text found in the bible as it was written by the original authors.

You and RobotPelvis are doing the exact same thing. You're taking quotes from the bible that are 100% factually incorrect and twisting them to fit your agenda. You seriously think that the Hebrews from thousands of years ago had any concept of an atmosphere surrounding the earth? Or that this atmosphere, composed almost entirely of empty space, could be dense enough to produce the kind of friction necessary to vaporize meteors? Here's another hint: they had no fucking clue about anything of the sort.

Again, there are multitudes of biblical scholars, living and dead, who would disagree with your above interpretation of the word "dome" as presented in Genesis. What makes your opinion any more valid than theirs?

Well lets see. If something that's written has several different possible meanings, then you would have to figure out which of those meanings is most applicable to the subject being discussed. The most applicable meaning would have to fit the known facts of the subject at hand. My response to your assertion gave a more than reasonable.and scientific explanation of the meaning behind the language of.the creation account of Genesis. If you want to reject the meaning of a word that agrees with known science then the fault is yours not anyone elses.

[Lojik]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Lojik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I know right!

[Nihilist_santa]

I mean the stomach and the eye should be enough to show the theory does not work. The eye only functions with all of its parts. You mean separately all of the parts formed over millions of years creating nothing but a useless place where an eye should be until one day a working eye? Never mind all of the neurological stuff that is related to sight which is merely a holographic representation of observed light replaying in your "mind".