jaephoenix:

I thought y'all said the Bible was divinely inspired. What stops the good Lord from explaining to Joshua some basic geography, since he himself explained geography to some guys in the bible, like the guys that talked about 'rain formation' and 'earth shape'

We were endowed with wisdom to explore our environment
Job did not give all the details about rain formation which you have failed to dispute

Every businessman can CHOOSE whatever he wants his secretary to write. So keep your grudge to yourself

Aemmyjah:


Because he did not describe how the phenomenon took place meant it never happens right
Sometimes, things that fellow humans do but we see as magic are not just magic. The person performing it knows what he did
I've seen so many on American gots talent and everyone is shocked as if it were grand.
How much more the Maker of the universe including the sun?
In Joshua's eye, the sun appeared to have stood still
Critics foolishly say the account is myth
Some scientists have tried to explain the possibilities for that to have taken place

Dude, the sun doesn't revolve round the earth hence can't stop. That's utter jargons that is unforgiveably wrong. The bihke is always wrong on basic things and then when you want to explain how wrong the Bible is, you have to insert magic called God.
There's no evidence that any make made any sun.

Stop making things up a d bring evidence. The Bible was written by bronze age goatherders who didn't know science. I can't trsyt such book, Joshua just proved it

Aemmyjah:


Lol
You're the one contradicting yourself with your last words

How?

Workch:
Dude, the sun doesn't revolve round the earth hence can't stop.
There's no evidence that any make made any sun.

Stop making things up a d bring evidence. The Bible was written by bronze age goatherders who didn't know science. I can't trsyt such book, Joshua just proved it

Show me where the bible says the sun revolves round the Earth

Aemmyjah:



Show me where the bible says the sun revolves round the Earth

I just did with Joshua.

Or do you want to explain to me what Joshua meant by the sun stopped over a city?

In relation to earth and sun movement, which one is moving and which is not?

Workch:
I just did with Joshua.

Or do you want to explain to me what Joshua meant by the sun stopped over a city?

In ralation to earth and sin movement, which one is moving and which is not?

The person talked about something that happened to the sun in his location and also happened to the moon in another location.
This did not make sense to you cos it will not make any sense to your understanding and the Bible does not need to validation cos you don't understand as a dog cannot understand everything his Master does. A child may not understand all that the father. You seem to have sense than the Creator himself so I congratulate you in your reversed wisdom. Why not check the internet as to the possibilities of how that event could take place from scholars or Bible commentaries?

Aemmyjah:


The person talked about something that happened to the sun in his location and also happened to the moon in another location.
This did not make sense to you cos it will not make any sense to your understanding and the Bible does not need to validation cos you don't understand as a dog cannot understand everything his Master does. A child may not understand all that the father. You seem to have sense than the Creator himself so I congratulate you in your reversed wisdom. Why not check the internet as to the possibilities of how that event could take place from scholars or Bible commentaries?

more reason why I cannot talk the Bible seriously.
Poor articulation of events.

A book that cannot properly articulate basic geography, biology and physics should be thrown into the dustbin.

Sun don't stop
Vrigins cannot conceive without fertilization
Snakes don't talk
Snakes cannot turn to stick.

. No evidence for any of these. It's all nonsense and can oy be found in myths like the bible

Workch:
more reason why I cannot talk the Bible seriously.
Poor articulation of events.

A book that cannot properly articulate basic geography, biology and physics should be thrown into the dustbin.

Sun don't stop
Vrigins cannot conceive without fertilization
Snakes don't talk
Snakes cannot turn to stick.

. No evidence for any of these. It's all nonsense and can oy be found in myths like the bible

Don't underestimate the power of the Creator as if he were a mere human
Humans have tried to defy laws,some with little success
There is nothing too wonderful for the Creator of life, animals, designer of the womb of a woman

Lemme ask you
Scientists have tried to transplant the organs of animals with man like the heart of a pig and other organs as well. Does that make us closer to pigs?

Aemmyjah:


We were endowed with wisdom to explore our environment
Job did not give all the details about rain formation which you have failed to dispute

Every businessman can CHOOSE whatever he wants his secretary to write. So keep your grudge to yourself

Oh now we've moved from 'The Bible is a scientific guide' to 'they didn't give all the details' in a short space of time
Easy bro, you'll soon turn atheist at this speed

triplechoice:

Oh my God!
Where did I say Moon landings brought phones?
I am talking of communication satellites which is used for internet connectivity and others, and not just phones.
I wonder why you're blind to the word,satellite, in that expression, communication satellite. You have been mentioning communication in isolation as if it's the same.
You have already shown us when the first analogue phone was invented and used, but the first communication satellite was launched in 1962 ,years after that
Please try to understand what I am talking about.

Ọmọ moon landing hasn't brought anything different with or without traveling there we are OK on this planet.
So tell me what the earth will lack if nobody travel to the moon!

Aemmyjah:


Don't underestimate the power of the Creator as if he were a mere human
Humans have tried to defy laws,some with little success
There is nothing too wonderful for the Creator of life, animals, designer of the womb of a woman

Lemme ask you
Scientists have tried to transplant the organs of animals with man like the heart of a pig and other organs as well. Does that make us closer to pigs?

Give me one evidence that your God exist

MaxInDHouse:


Ọmọ moon landing hasn't brought anything different with or without traveling there we are OK on this planet.
So tell me what the earth will lack if nobody travel to the moon!

You're just turning round in circles. The question you just asked is not different from the one you have asked before.

What the earth would lack if man didn't not go to the Moon are the benefits we are all currently enjoying from it.

I have already mentioned one, communication satellites and any other kind of satellites.

Your responses keep confirming what feared at the beginning . I know you won't make sense of the benefits of going to the Moon.

triplechoice:

You're just turning round in circles. The question you just asked is not different from the one you have asked before.
What the earth would lack if man didn't not go to the Moon are the benefits we are all currently enjoying from it.
I have already mentioned one, communication satellites and any other kind of satellites.
Your responses keep confirming what feared at the beginning . I know you won't make sense of the benefits of going to the Moon.

When there's no sense in something there's nothing you can say to convince right thinking persons. Just know that whatever makes you take drugs you're already a BELIEVER in the manufacturers of the drug you swallowed!

MaxInDHouse:


When there's no sense in something there's nothing you can say to convince right thinking persons. Just know that whatever makes you take drugs you're already a BELIEVER in the manufacturers of the drug you swallowed!

How does this response of yours relates to the benefits of going to the Moon that you were so eager to know, and which I have already explained?

It's not enough to just blab that there's no sense in something without showing how.

So your latest response is wayward and without any sense.

triplechoice:

How does this response of yours relates to the benefits of going to the Moon that you were so eager to know, and which I have already explained? It's not enough to just blab that there's no sense in something without showing how. So your latest response is wayward and without any sense.

Ọmọ there's nothing the earth lack if nobody travel to the moon.
So back to the OP drugs can't work without the user's belief in the physician's prescriptions!

Workch:
Give me one evidence that your God exist

It's all around you
Even the blind are 'seeing' it

It's like a deaddrunk man on a boat in the sea asking the sailor to prove that there is water. In other words, your request is pointless

jaephoenix:

Oh now we've moved from 'The Bible is a scientific guide' to 'they didn't give all the details' in a short space of time
Easy bro, you'll soon turn atheist at this speed

Where did I describe the bible as a scientific guide?

Workch:
The Bible was written by bronze age goatherders who didn't know science. I can't trsyt such book, Joshua just proved it

Why are you always repeating this Eurocentric/white supremacist nonsense that the Bible was written by “goat herders”?
Why not be original if you want to slur the writers. They could have been Bronze Age farmers, fishermen, craftsmen, miners, smiths, etc . Why is it always “goat herders”?

MaxInDHouse:


Ọmọ there's nothing the earth lack if nobody travel to the moon.
So back to the OP drugs can't work without the user's belief in the physician's prescriptions!

Ok. Almighty Maximus that created the earth to know what it would lack or not lack if man didn't go to the Moon.

KnownUnknown:



Why are you always repeating this Eurocentric/white supremacist nonsense that the Bible was written by “goat herders”?
Why not be original if you want to slur the writers. They could have been Bronze Age farmers, fishermen, craftsmen, miners, smiths, etc . Why is it always “goat herders”?

lol, GOATherder is a metaphor

Aemmyjah:



It's all around you
Even the blind are 'seeing' it

It's like a deaddrunk man on a boat in the sea asking the sailor to prove that there is water. In other words, your request is pointless

show me one, I won't ask if I am seeing them

Workch:
show me one, I won't ask if I am seeing them

Look at the mirror
The person you see. Ask him if he is a product of a great, intelligent mind or a byproduct of blind Chance

Aemmyjah:


Look at the mirror
The person you see. Ask him if he is a product of a great, intelligent mind or a byproduct of blind Chance

I just did, I didn't see your God.
Do you want to give me a testable evidence for your God or you want to keep committing a teleological fallacy?

Workch:
I just did, I didn't see your God.
Do you want to give me a testable evidence for your God or you want to keep committing a teleological fallacy?

The evidence is all around you. It's like preaching to an old drunk. Hopeless!

Workch:
lol, GOATherder is a metaphor

Metaphor for what?

Aemmyjah:




The evidence is all around you. It's like preaching to an old drunk. Hopeless!

Try not to commit this fallacy, you cannot convince any irreligious person with fallacious arguments. We are very much aware of how Christians reason.

A teleological fallacy occurs whenever you assert that, because a certain thing currently serves a certain purpose, it must have been designed to serve that purpose. Teleological fallacies most often crop up in arguments attempting to prove the existence of God (or some “intelligent designer”):

The human eye is very complicated and functions very well, therefore it must have been designed to be so complicated and work so well.
All the various systems of the human body work well together, therefore they must have been designed to work well together.
The universe supports the existence of human life, therefore it must have been designed to support human life.
Etc.
One of the problems with these sorts of arguments is that they fundamentally display an ignorance of how natural systems can self-organize and evolve according to purely natural laws. To say that some thing “couldn’t possibly happen by pure chance” is just an expression of ignorance since (a) following natural processes is not the same as “happening purely by chance” and (b) we do not necessarily know all the natural processes that could be involved.

Another problem is that these arguments show a fundamental misunderstanding of how probability works. If you start from a point before an event has occurred and try to work out how improbable that exact event would be, it may appear to be impossibly improbable. But once you start with an event that has actually occurred, the probability of it occurring is exactly 100% and you can’t work backwards to show how improbable it might have been.

A final problem is the fundamental conflation of cause and effect. If the universe, say, appears “fine-tuned” for the existence of human life, it is more accurate to say that human life evolved to live in a universe that could support it, not that the universe was designed to support human life.

For more on this, see the following:

A Response to the Argument from Design.

A Response to the “Fine Tuned Universe” Argument.

Lack of a Better Explanation Is Not Evidence for Your Explanation.

KnownUnknown:


Metaphor for what?

for how uninformed they were back then

Workch:
Try not to commit this fallacy, you cannot convince any irreligious person with fallacious arguments. We are very much aware of how Christians reason.

A teleological fallacy occurs whenever you assert that, because a certain thing currently serves a certain purpose, it must have been designed to serve that purpose. Teleological fallacies most often crop up in arguments attempting to prove the existence of God (or some “intelligent designer”):

The human eye is very complicated and functions very well, therefore it must have been designed to be so complicated and work so well.
All the various systems of the human body work well together, therefore they must have been designed to work well together.
The universe supports the existence of human life, therefore it must have been designed to support human life.
Etc.
One of the problems with these sorts of arguments is that they fundamentally display an ignorance of how natural systems can self-organize and evolve according to purely natural laws. To say that some thing “couldn’t possibly happen by pure chance” is just an expression of ignorance since (a) following natural processes is not the same as “happening purely by chance” and (b) we do not necessarily know all the natural processes that could be involved.

Another problem is that these arguments show a fundamental misunderstanding of how probability works. If you start from a point before an event has occurred and try to work out how improbable that exact event would be, it may appear to be impossibly improbable. But once you start with an event that has actually occurred, the probability of it occurring is exactly 100% and you can’t work backwards to show how improbable it might have been.

A final problem is the fundamental conflation of cause and effect. If the universe, say, appears “fine-tuned” for the existence of human life, it is more accurate to say that human life evolved to live in a universe that could support it, not that the universe was designed to support human life.

For more on this, see the following:

A Response to the Argument from Design.

A Response to the “Fine Tuned Universe” Argument.

Lack of a Better Explanation Is Not Evidence for Your Explanation.

Lol
Create a problem
Solves the problem
Create a problem from the solution

You're free to believe what you want

Workch:
Try not to commit this fallacy, you cannot convince any irreligious person with fallacious arguments. We are very much aware of how Christians reason.

A teleological fallacy occurs whenever you assert that, because a certain thing currently serves a certain purpose, it must have been designed to serve that purpose. Teleological fallacies most often crop up in arguments attempting to prove the existence of God (or some “intelligent designer”):

The human eye is very complicated and functions very well, therefore it must have been designed to be so complicated and work so well.
All the various systems of the human body work well together, therefore they must have been designed to work well together.
The universe supports the existence of human life, therefore it must have been designed to support human life.
Etc.
One of the problems with these sorts of arguments is that they fundamentally display an ignorance of how natural systems can self-organize and evolve according to purely natural laws. To say that some thing “couldn’t possibly happen by pure chance” is just an expression of ignorance since (a) following natural processes is not the same as “happening purely by chance” and (b) we do not necessarily know all the natural processes that could be involved.

Another problem is that these arguments show a fundamental misunderstanding of how probability works. If you start from a point before an event has occurred and try to work out how improbable that exact event would be, it may appear to be impossibly improbable. But once you start with an event that has actually occurred, the probability of it occurring is exactly 100% and you can’t work backwards to show how improbable it might have been.

A final problem is the fundamental conflation of cause and effect. If the universe, say, appears “fine-tuned” for the existence of human life, it is more accurate to say that human life evolved to live in a universe that could support it, not that the universe was designed to support human life.

For more on this, see the following:

A Response to the Argument from Design.

A Response to the “Fine Tuned Universe” Argument.

Lack of a Better Explanation Is Not Evidence for Your Explanation.

Lol
Create a problem
Solves the problem
Create a problem from the solution

You're free to believe what you want

Logic, common sense teaches me that there's a God
You are free to use any kind of fallacies and listen to people that tell you that life emerged from cosmic soup

Aemmyjah:


Lol
Create a problem
Solves the problem
Create a problem from the solution

You're free to believe what you want

How, I don't hold any belief. You are person who believes that your imaginary friend created everything and fallaciously using everything as evidence for his existence.

It doesn't work that way

triplechoice:

My friend, you don't not have any evidence of anything you said I implied.

My enemy, you changed post after I gave you your words which is proof you have nothing to say. Your attempt to reargue is just a waste of your time.

Workch:
How, I don't hold any belief. You are person who believes that your imaginary friend created everything and fallaciously using everything as evidence for his existence.

It doesn't work that way

Amd you believe the designs of this universe has no designer
That something (like our universe) came from nothing

Look at the image below. What is the chance or probability that that thing (though not a living frog) could appear in a bush just like that