(Hot-topic of the year): Ken Ham vs Bill Nye.
- Thread starter Smurfboy
- Start date
Ham keeps talking about only stuff that's observable is what is to take as concrete but then he keeps brining up Noah, Adam and Eve, God snapped his finger and made the stars but not one of those is observable and based solely on faith that the bible is the absolute word of God.
There were some interesting things that Ham said that made he think. Nye did ok. I will say that Ham is lucky that Neil Degrasse Tyson wasn't his "opponent." Ham left himself wide open all night, using the phrase "Law of logic," and saying "There's already a book," but Nye didn't choose to bring attention to it. It would have been brutal.
I honestly didn't think either were top of their field choices for a debate. There were some good points brought up by both sides that I hadn't heard before but in the end neither really pulled out the big guns. I do believe Nye incorrect in thinking that believing in creationism is any type of retardation towards the development of science and the thirst for knowledge.
watching the simspons episode where lisa finds the fake angel skeleton.
the religious people just attacked science lol.
the religious people just attacked science lol.
I've noticed that Bill kept saying that the Bible has been changing many times over the years. I have actually studied about that several years ago and, it's pretty obviously to me, that he didn't do homework more carefully. A book called "A Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel (please read it! It's an awesome book!) already covered about that issue. After hundreds of hours of interviews, researches and all that, (Strobel is a former lawyer, if I remember correctly), he did confirmed that none of the Bible has been changed compare to thousands of years ago. For example (I'll bet $100 that many people have never heard of these before!):
--Chester Beatly Biblical Papyr (discovered about 1930)
--CBBP #1; related with 4 gospels and the book of Acts (discovered in 3rd Century)
--CBBP #2; related with letters of Paul plus portions of Hebrews (200AD)
--CBBP #3; related with book of Revelation (3rd Century)
--Dead Sea Scrolls: Non-Biblical Manuscript; related to Old Testament; (4Q521 contains the life of Jesus Christ); (written in Hebrew by a group of Jews about ~30 years before the birth of Christ; discovered in the spring of 1947)
--Much more!
Now, forget about English versions of the Bible. English is, technically-speaking, not the most accurate language (more on that later); Greek and Hebrew (and even Latin) are the one people need to pay more attention when it comes to the Bible. Now, the list you just saw above, Strobel came to the conclusion that, when comparing the Scriptures thousands of years ago to the most currently one, none of the Scripture has been changed. Especially the Dead Sea Scrolls. I do actually agree with Ken Ham that people need to research on the history of the Bible more carefully and, once they see that none of the mistakes has been found in it, they will know that it hasn't been changed many times.
It pains in my heart to hear the fact that people have been constantly saying that the Bible has changed many times when it's not true. Now, some people should be aware by now that the most famous historian name Joesphus Flavius, born in ~37AD, wrote a book called "Testimonium Flavianum" about Jesus Christ. He confirmed that the histories, eye-witnesses account and some of Old Testament history are 100% real. I honestly do not see how people of today kept saying that the Bible isn't true whereas the historians, especially Joesphus, Tacitus, Plinty the Younger, Julius Africanus, etc. back in the early days actually confirmed that the history of Scriptures are real.
This is one of the major reason why I'm a believer of Jesus Christ and the Scriptures. For the past many years, I have not found anything that deny the Scripture (whether be it history events, places, people, or something else). I LOVE history!
--Chester Beatly Biblical Papyr (discovered about 1930)
--CBBP #1; related with 4 gospels and the book of Acts (discovered in 3rd Century)
--CBBP #2; related with letters of Paul plus portions of Hebrews (200AD)
--CBBP #3; related with book of Revelation (3rd Century)
--Dead Sea Scrolls: Non-Biblical Manuscript; related to Old Testament; (4Q521 contains the life of Jesus Christ); (written in Hebrew by a group of Jews about ~30 years before the birth of Christ; discovered in the spring of 1947)
--Much more!
Now, forget about English versions of the Bible. English is, technically-speaking, not the most accurate language (more on that later); Greek and Hebrew (and even Latin) are the one people need to pay more attention when it comes to the Bible. Now, the list you just saw above, Strobel came to the conclusion that, when comparing the Scriptures thousands of years ago to the most currently one, none of the Scripture has been changed. Especially the Dead Sea Scrolls. I do actually agree with Ken Ham that people need to research on the history of the Bible more carefully and, once they see that none of the mistakes has been found in it, they will know that it hasn't been changed many times.
It pains in my heart to hear the fact that people have been constantly saying that the Bible has changed many times when it's not true. Now, some people should be aware by now that the most famous historian name Joesphus Flavius, born in ~37AD, wrote a book called "Testimonium Flavianum" about Jesus Christ. He confirmed that the histories, eye-witnesses account and some of Old Testament history are 100% real. I honestly do not see how people of today kept saying that the Bible isn't true whereas the historians, especially Joesphus, Tacitus, Plinty the Younger, Julius Africanus, etc. back in the early days actually confirmed that the history of Scriptures are real.
This is one of the major reason why I'm a believer of Jesus Christ and the Scriptures. For the past many years, I have not found anything that deny the Scripture (whether be it history events, places, people, or something else). I LOVE history!
I've noticed that Bill kept saying that the Bible has been changing many times over the years. I have actually studied about that several years ago and, it's pretty obviously to me, that he didn't do homework more carefully. A book called "A Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel (please read it! It's an awesome book!) already covered about that issue. After hundreds of hours of interviews, researches and all that, (Strobel is a former lawyer, if I remember correctly), he did confirmed that none of the Bible has been changed compare to thousands of years ago. For example (I'll bet $100 that many people have never heard of these before!):
--Chester Beatly Biblical Papyr (discovered about 1930)
--CBBP #1; related with 4 gospels and the book of Acts (discovered in 3rd Century)
--CBBP #2; related with letters of Paul plus portions of Hebrews (200AD)
--CBBP #3; related with book of Revelation (3rd Century)
--Dead Sea Scrolls: Non-Biblical Manuscript; related to Old Testament; (4Q521 contains the life of Jesus Christ); (written in Hebrew by a group of Jews about ~30 years before the birth of Christ; discovered in the spring of 1947)
--Much more!
Now, forget about English versions of the Bible. English is, technically-speaking, not the most accurate language (more on that later); Greek and Hebrew (and even Latin) are the one people need to pay more attention when it comes to the Bible. Now, the list you just saw above, Strobel came to the conclusion that, when comparing the Scriptures thousands of years ago to the most currently one, none of the Scripture has been changed. Especially the Dead Sea Scrolls. I do actually agree with Ken Ham that people need to research on the history of the Bible more carefully and, once they see that none of the mistakes has been found in it, they will know that it hasn't been changed many times.
It pains in my heart to hear the fact that people have been constantly saying that the Bible has changed many times when it's not true. Now, some people should be aware by now that the most famous historian name Joesphus Flavius, born in ~37AD, wrote a book called "Testimonium Flavianum" about Jesus Christ. He confirmed that the histories, eye-witnesses account and some of Old Testament history are 100% real. I honestly do not see how people of today kept saying that the Bible isn't true whereas the historians, especially Joesphus, Tacitus, Plinty the Younger, Julius Africanus, etc. back in the early days actually confirmed that the history of Scriptures are real.
This is one of the major reason why I'm a believer of Jesus Christ and the Scriptures. For the past many years, I have not found anything that deny the Scripture (whether be it history events, places, people, or something else). I LOVE history!
I guess we'd have to read all those versions to know for ourselves. I did however find specific differences in versions listed in the following links. One of them actually mentions an especially big dfference in the dead sea scrolls.
http://www.nola.com/religion/index....re_being_studied_by_new_orleans_scholars.html
http://news.yahoo.com/jerusalem-scholars-trace-bibles-evolution-092932128.html
'The Book of Jeremiah is now one-seventh longer than the one that appears in some of the 2,000-year-old manuscripts known as the Dead Sea Scrolls. Some verses, including ones containing a prophecy about the seizure and return of Temple implements by Babylonian soldiers, appear to have been added after the events happened.'
I'm certainly no theology scholar though.
This is what a lot Christians do when it comes to debating religion/science. They pick a tiny picture of something and use that as a a strawman to the general argument.
Thanks for information. I'll look into that. My deepest desire is to have everyone actually sit down and research the history together. That and to be completely honest to each other. This is all I want. I do not claim to know "everything" about history but I'd love to learn as much as I can.
Right on. It's just hard to have a discussion when Christians say 'because bible'. Believe it or not though, I find Atheists just as stubborn sometimes. As an Agnostic, there's really not much to talk about because who the F knows is what I usually come away with. So I don't really discuss religion very often even though I think in probable scenarios, just not absolutes. I do however like pondering over existential things over a fatty every once in a while.
I've been to answers in genesis. It's nothing new. Ironchariots.org has a rebuttal for every single argument they have. There is also a Youtuber Aron Ra who has step by step videos explaining all the fallacies that creationists. I get the need to believe, I was a young earth creationist for years, but evidence is NOT on your side.
Winners and losers will be sorted upon death...
Evolution - Right...outcome = dead
Evolution - Wrong...outcome = burn baby
Creationism - Wrong...outcome = dead
Creationism - Right...outcome = everlasting life
Roll your dice but I only see 1 potential "winner" in the 4 possible outcomes.
If there's an afterlife I'll find out when I die. If there isn't then I won't find out and neither will I care because I'll not exist.
If there's a god of some sort I would hope it would cut me some slack for not having faith in it during life given the evidence (or lack there of) I had to work with.
If there's a god of some sort I would hope it would cut me some slack for not having faith in it during life given the evidence (or lack there of) I had to work with.
Haha! She spelled there wrong! What a dummy....Actual question poser and actual question from last night.
Winners and losers will be sorted upon death...
Evolution - Right...outcome = dead
Evolution - Wrong...outcome = burn baby
Creationism - Wrong...outcome = dead
Creationism - Right...outcome = everlasting life
Roll your dice but I only see 1 potential "winner" in the 4 possible outcomes.
Ever think of a 5th option? An all that was is and always will be option? You're made from the foods/drink your mother intakes, that existed before you and becomes you, you die, you become food that is then ingested to create more life and so on and so on. (I know this is a VERY general overview of the workings, but I aint typing all that s*** out lol.)
That's assuming that choosing ANY religion is the same as choosing Christian creationism.Winners and losers will be sorted upon death...
Evolution - Right...outcome = dead
Evolution - Wrong...outcome = burn baby
Creationism - Wrong...outcome = dead
Creationism - Right...outcome = everlasting life
Roll your dice but I only see 1 potential "winner" in the 4 possible outcomes.
What if the ancient Greek pantheon is actually "right"?
Or an as-yet unknown unrevealed power who punishes those who worship a false god, which would be every god currently known of/worshipped, but not atheists?
The possibilities are endless.
Well, if we want to be really open-minded, no.
Bizarro God says his loyal followers will be rewarded with an eternity in the paradise of torture, all other philistines can rot and suffer in luxurious cloud city.
Not my faith, but it's as possible as any other unprovable faith.