damilarelr:

Don't hang yourself yet until you find the truth. Do away with facts, Science is just there to explain/prove the acts of God through men as recorded in the Bible.

That battle day was not 24 hours..but 30 hours. The extra 6 hours had to be summed up every 4 years to make 1 day, usually added to a leap year, hence 365 1/4 days in a year. If you don't get it now, I can't explain any further.

is the battle over? then it is already a past. the period of a past event can not affect the future...thats not the reason for leap year. science has expalined that the earth revolves round the sun in an orbit in free space.
due to other forces in space, it sometimes miss its orbit and forms another orbit. the time that it misses it orbit must be accounted for. and who says the earth revolves for 365 1/4 days. this is just a reference. the actual word is "about" or in the leap year, how many days is the revolution?

mkmyers45:

Are you suggesting a gap theory?

I am not suggesting anything. All I am saying is that the Bible is scientifically true. But I'll like to understand by what you mean by gap theory so that i do not conclude on what i suppose you had in mind by "gap theory."

But I understand, from the pages of the bible that Life was created in distinctive kinds, even when they are created at "the same periods." for example, the Account of Genesis 1: 20, 21 show that during the "fifth day" or "fifth period," God created every living creature (precisely, all animals) according to its kind. Then, God blessed them and the "fifth day" ended. Then the sixth day.... So, logically, there must be some time difference in those times, days or periods but since its not specified, no one can conclude on how long or how short those gaps are....

And science confirms all these facts. I could reference some Science books/ Journals by reputable scientists and institutions if you like.....

(I hope my presumption about what you meant by "gaps" is actually what is treated. If not, please specify)

damilarelr:

Don't hang yourself yet until you find the truth. Do away with facts, Science is just there to explain/prove the acts of God through men as recorded in the Bible.

That battle day was not 24 hours..but 30 hours. The extra 6 hours had to be summed up every 4 years to make 1 day, usually added to a leap year, hence 365 1/4 days in a year. If you don't get it now, I can't explain any further.

I have just one question? Is it the earth that stopped rotating or the sun?

Please answer

mkmyers45:

Round: The shape of a closed curve with no sharp corners

Sphere: is a perfectly round geometrical object in three-dimensional space, such as the shape of a round ball.

you sound preety much like a Mathematician, physicist or someone skilled in the two fields.
1. To go by your definition, the "volume integral of 'a round' is a sphere." If that is so, then you are saying the same thing but in a different direction or angle.

2. In most archaic languages such as Hebrew and archaic Aramaic and Greek, there are no specific word for certain things. So, writers describe such things with group of words. It is now we coin out words or borrow from foreign languages to describe any such nameless object or whatsoever thing that needs a personal identity.

2good:

I have experienced alot of things that defies human explanation and accept ignorance on such subject matters pending when I have the exact evidence to back up my claims. Religion on the other hand tell you to throw away your brain and accept by faith even if it is the dumbest reasoning there is. That's the difference between me and you. I am open to learning and do alot of research into any thing new to me. But you have practically shut your brain to reason as long as your biblical myth or pastors tells you to do so.

No, you're wrong. That's not the difference between you two. The difference is that you continue to seek for knowledge and do as many research as possible to prove facts, which are temporal..but the other guy, he's given himself to the truth which does not change. But you know what, Science will continue to prove the truth but will never know the truth. 2nd Timothy 3v1 and 7 says in the perilous time, people will give themselves to learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. You're simply fulfilling the word of God.

demmie1: the Bible is as accurate as a myth. science is as accurate as a fact.

Yeah true, Science is full of facts..but the Bible is not myth, because God is not myth, and Science cannot be proving myths.

mkmyers45:

I have just one question? Is it the earth that stopped rotating or the sun?

Please answer

Your question is actually funny because in geography, we are told that the sun rises from the east and sets on the west. The same way the bible writer described that the sun stood still. Its funny that thousands of years later, scientists and everyone including you still use the same term. So your question is out of place.

Naturally, man describes the moon and sun from his position. A scientist doing an experiment or doing a journal will definitely use more specific description.
That is why a writer will call the moon light just the same way we refer to it as moonlight today. Or haven't you ever used the term moonlight? Do you normally say "baby, let's enjoy the moon as it reflects light from the sun"? No! You just say "baby, let's enjoy the moonlight".

Maybe you will have to go change all the geography textbooks and argue that the sun does not rise from the east and sets in the west but rather the earth falls from the west and rises on the east! You get the picture?

demmie1:
bro, their is no circuit in Hebrew. go and check direct translations from JWs.

Come on don't bring that up. JW is just another brand in it's own class, just like Mormonism, Hinduism, and Islam. JW are Christians but they are not Believing Christians or Believers. What kind of Christian doesn't pray? Even idol worshippers do pray.

phantasm:

you sound preety much like a Mathematician, physicist or someone skilled in the two fields.
1. To go by your definition, the "volume integral of 'a round' is a sphere." If that is so, then you are saying the same thing but in a different direction or angle.

2. In most archaic languages such as Hebrew and archaic Aramaic and Greek, there are no specific word for certain things. So, writers describe such things with group of words. It is now we coin out words or borrow from foreign languages to describe any such nameless object or whatsoever thing that needs a personal identity.

I have proved severally that they are different words for the two in Hebrew and the two are even used in the bible...

The irony of the whole argument is how can you totally depend on science when science is inconclusive by definition. Science is discovery. That simple definition is proof that there is God. If science has dicovered all, then it can claim that there is no God. But as long as science is still in a journey and has no clue what lies ahead in the journey, it is f00lish for any scientist to claim there is no God. Claiming there is no God is the same as claiming that science has reached its journey's end. Then science will no longer be discovery and all research should be stopped!

thelastPope: The irony of the whole argument is how can you totally depend on science when science is inconclusive by definition. Science is discovery. That simple definition is proof that there is God. If science has dicovered all, then it can claim that there is no God. But as long as science is still in a journey and has no clue what lies ahead in the journey, it is f00lish for any scientist to claim there is no God. Claiming there is no God is the same as claiming that science has reached its journey's end. Then science will no longer be discovery and all research should be stopped!

Does science say there is no God or is it scientist that do?

thelastPope:

Your question is actually funny because in geography, we are told that the sun rises from the east and sets on the west. The same way the bible writer described that the sun stood still. Its funny that thousands of years later, scientists and everyone including you still use the same term. So your question is out of place.

Naturally, man describes the moon and sun from his position. A scientist doing an experiment or doing a journal will definitely use more specific description.
That is why a writer will call the moon light just the same way we refer to it as moonlight today. Or haven't you ever used the term moonlight? Do you normally say "baby, let's enjoy the moon as it reflects light from the sun"? No! You just say "baby, let's enjoy the moonlight".

Maybe you will have to go change all the geography textbooks and argue that the sun does not rise from the east and sets in the west but rather the earth falls from the west and rises on the east! You get the picture?

He is preaching a new thesis so i wont clear cut definitions...

mkmyers45:

I have proved severally that they are different words for the two in Hebrew and the two are even used in the bible...

Recently, a popular Engish dictionary updated and added more new words to it. The bible was written for a span of over 1600 years. The book that describes the earth as being round was one of the earliest written work (in time). The volumes of words used then cannot be compared to the volumes of word used about 10-20 years later same as the dictionary example I stated above.
That the words translated "round" and "sphere" are found in the bible only imply at least two things:

- The time those accounts where the words are used and applied are gapped.

- The bible was not revised and edited but was only copied and transfered.

thelastPope:

Your question is actually funny because in geography, we are told that the sun rises from the east and sets on the west. The same way the bible writer described that the sun stood still. Its funny that thousands of years later, scientists and everyone including you still use the same term. So your question is out of place.

Naturally, man describes the moon and sun from his position. A scientist doing an experiment or doing a journal will definitely use more specific description.
That is why a writer will call the moon light just the same way we refer to it as moonlight today. Or haven't you ever used the term moonlight? Do you normally say "baby, let's enjoy the moon as it reflects light from the sun"? No! You just say "baby, let's enjoy the moonlight".

Maybe you will have to go change all the geography textbooks and argue that the sun does not rise from the east and sets in the west but rather the earth falls from the west and rises on the east! You get the picture?

dont you think the bible should know better since it is Gods word as you claim

bermuda1: The Bible is really the life and times of the Jews. It was the account of the world written from the point of view of the Jews. They biased it so much and declared themselves the chosen ones.

When I speak to some of these hook line and sinker bible believing christians, they can never give a good a explanation on why according to the bible, God will choose to favour one set of his children against the others, going so far as killing all the first born of the children of Egypt. All of a sudden , this God now changes in the new testament and becomes the God of love and turning the other cheek. Meanhwile they always tell me that God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. is this accurate?

The God of the Bible has many names..His names come by way of His acts among the children of men. Our God is a consuming fire, yet..He's the God of love.

thelastPope: The irony of the whole argument is how can you totally depend on science when science is inconclusive by definition. Science is discovery. That simple definition is proof that there is God. If science has dicovered all, then it can claim that there is no God. But as long as science is still in a journey and has no clue what lies ahead in the journey, it is f00lish for any scientist to claim there is no God. Claiming there is no God is the same as claiming that science has reached its journey's end. Then science will no longer be discovery and all research should be stopped!

You made sense with that. Never thought of it that way before.

mkmyers45:

Does science say there is no God or is it scientist that do?

Sorry for using a general term there. Of course not all scientists say there is no God and science itself does not say there is no God. But the argument on this is pretty much woven around the postulation that the bible is fiction and therefore there is no God. I know there are many shades of arguments in between by various groups.

phantasm:

Recently, a popular Engish dictionary updated and added more new words to it. The bible was written for a span of over 1600 years. The book that describes the earth as being round was one of the earliest written work (in time). The volumes of words used then cannot be compared to the volumes of word used about 10-20 years later same as the dictionary example I stated above.
That the words translated "round" and "sphere" are found in the bible only imply at least two things:

- The time those accounts where the words are used and applied are gapped.

- The bible was not revised and edited but was only copied and transferred.

They were both in the same Isaiah..

ghazzal:

is the battle over? then it is already a past. the period of a past event can not affect the future...thats not the reason for leap year. science has expalined that the earth revolves round the sun in an orbit in free space.
due to other forces in space, it sometimes miss its orbit and forms another orbit. the time that it misses it orbit must be accounted for. and who says the earth revolves for 365 1/4 days. this is just a reference. the actual word is "about" or in the leap year, how many days is the revolution?

Still waiting for an answer....

ghazzal:

dont you think the bible should know better since it is Gods word as you claim

The bible is not an academic book. The bible is more like a report or description of events for people to know and understand the meaning of life. The writers goal was not to be scientifically on point. It sought not just to describe events but to view it in terms of the why, how, when and what. Most of the time, the writers concentrated on God,s perspective of things.

it seems xtins refer to the old testament when it suits them.
1was Jesus worshiped when he was alive.

thelastPope:

The bible is not an academic book. The bible is more like a report or description of events for people to know and understand the meaning of life. The writers goal was not to be scientifically on point. It sought not just to describe events but to view it in terms of the why, how, when and what. Most of the time, the writers concentrated on God,s perspective of things.

yes, but that man misuse words (i.e sun rise in ....) is not a reason for the bible to misuse words too. God created this things and know better. His book should show this

mkmyers45:

Still waiting for an answer....

You are still making the same mistake. You are making a conclusion that suggests that science has already discovered everything. The same science that just found out that pluto is not a planet. Only God knows what the curiosity will discover in mars. Science is way too limited to make any sweeping claim. We don't even have a malaria vaccine after hundreds of years of malaria!

damilarelr:

Because when you reconcile yourself to God and ask something from Him according to His words in prayer, He answers. What proof do you need again?

How thoughtful! If humanity relies on your approach we would definitely be celebrating ignorance.

the wall of jericho fell down flat.

One wall was excavated by Sir Charles Warren in 1868 at the request of the Palestine Exploration Fund. He dug through the mud bricks of the wall without realizing what it was, suggesting there was little interesting at the site. Ernest Sellin and Carl Watzinger excavated Jericho between 1907 and 1909 and found the remains of two walls which they initially suggested supported the biblical account. They later revised this conclusion and dated their finds to the middle Bronze Age (1950-1550 BC).[3] The site was again excavated by John Garstang between 1930 and 1936, who again raised the suggestion that remains of the upper wall was that described in the bible

thelastPope:

Your question is actually funny because in geography, we are told that the sun rises from the east and sets on the west. The same way the bible writer described that the sun stood still. Its funny that thousands of years later, scientists and everyone including you still use the same term. So your question is out of place.

Naturally, man describes the moon and sun from his position. A scientist doing an experiment or doing a journal will definitely use more specific description.
That is why a writer will call the moon light just the same way we refer to it as moonlight today. Or haven't you ever used the term moonlight? Do you normally say "baby, let's enjoy the moon as it reflects light from the sun"? No! You just say "baby, let's enjoy the moonlight".

Maybe you will have to go change all the geography textbooks and argue that the sun does not rise from the east and sets in the west but rather the earth falls from the west and rises on the east! You get the picture?

In your belief, what was the consequence of Joshua's command?

miqos02: the wall of jericho fell down flat.

One wall was excavated by Sir Charles Warren in 1868 at the request of the Palestine Exploration Fund. He dug through the mud bricks of the wall without realizing what it was, suggesting there was little interesting at the site. Ernest Sellin and Carl Watzinger excavated Jericho between 1907 and 1909 and found the remains of two walls which they initially suggested supported the biblical account. They later revised this conclusion and dated their finds to the middle Bronze Age (1950-1550 BC).[3] The site was again excavated by John Garstang between 1930 and 1936, who again raised the suggestion that remains of the upper wall was that described in the bible

this is simply related to history. guy!

Kay 17:

In your belief, what was the consequence of Joshua's command?

the Question is "who said that was the consequence, or that there must be a consequence?"

towards the last days, man will be in a lost state (from Gods path)......... what is d God`s path?

phantasm:

I am not suggesting anything. All I am saying is that the Bible is scientifically true. But I'll like to understand by what you mean by gap theory so that i do not conclude on what i suppose you had in mind by "gap theory."

But I understand, from the pages of the bible that Life was created in distinctive kinds, even when they are created at "the same periods." for example, the Account of Genesis 1: 20, 21 show that during the "fifth day" or "fifth period," God created every living creature (precisely, all animals) according to its kind. Then, God blessed them and the "fifth day" ended. Then the sixth day.... So, logically, there must be some time difference in those times, days or periods but since its not specified, no one can conclude on how long or how short those gaps are....

And science confirms all these facts. I could reference some Science books/ Journals by reputable scientists and institutions if you like.....

(I hope my presumption about what you meant by "gaps" is actually what is treated. If not, please specify)

Your interpretation fills huge gaps with possibilities without considering the vast possibilities can also be filled in those gaps and too complicated.

The Genesis account mentioned 7 days. The account already provided the time measurement, why disregard it? Or is that the sacrifice to force an agreement with the present scientific view?

mkmyers45:

Does science say there is no God or is it scientist that do?

Can Science exist without scientists? You speak of science like it is something that lives... To the best of my knowledge, science is abstract.. A virtual explanation for reality. Science is not alive for Gods Sake!

truthislight:

no, rather, your own ignorance.

The man needed to see and ensure that the battle was conclusive.

What that needed to stop was the spinning of the earth on it axis so that the battle ground will continue to face the sun.

But since the bible was and is not a science text book but was written for all mankind to read and make sense of, then the choices of words used in the bible for ease of understanding by "all sort" of people.

Read the bible first so that when you speak you will be saying as an informed person.
Peace.

To which its presently "misunderstood" by us in these times. Maybe it wasn't written for us!

mkmyers45:

They were both in the same Isaiah..

Consider this statement:
The man left his room with the LAMP on. When the wife returned and entered the room, she found that the temperature was high for the husband left the LANTERN on.......
Lamp is a common name for any source of light.


Let's assume that the word "Round" was used 10years ago to describe a ball. Today, we have a word used to describe more specifically the shape of a ball which is sphere. Would it be wrong to use those words interchangeably since we've all be calling a ball 'round' before we conclude that a '3D round= sphere.'?

Even today, football is fondly called by some people the "round object" or "round ball".... Besides, both words could be applied to describe different objects or events in the book you mentioned and there is no crime using the words to desribe "1 object".

Also, the common name or description of Circles, Spheres and even some imperfect curves is ROUND. The bible was written in simple Languages and at some time, when complex words or logics are used, they are explained in the bible itself. The Bible explains itself...