Religious

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

It proves nothing. And the entire book of Job is expressed poetically. I never denied that.

Ergo, the entire book is not, and was never intended to be, a scientific statement.

Originally Posted by boxcar

But what you have denied repeatedly is that any scientifically accurate statement can't be accepted as such unless it's written in scientific lingo.

I assume that the double negative was unintentional.

Either way, I don't think I ever said that. In which post did I say that?

Originally Posted by boxcar

And by the way, the people of Job's day and the Hebrews who later read that book were not rocket scientists. The were just simple people -- farmers, sheepherders, tradesman, etc.

Priests, kings, philosophers, etc. I mean, some of them were educated.

Originally Posted by boxcar

So, God spoke to them in terms they would understand.

When did God ever speak to the "simple people -- farmers, sheepherders, tradesman, etc?" I mean without some intermediary such as Abraham, Moses, prophets, etc. who were in positions of power and had every reason to lie in order to preserve that power.

Originally Posted by boxcar

But when I read the text, I understand what is being said.

Do you now?

Originally Posted by boxcar

I don't impose my rigid presuppositions upon it ...

Oh, I think you do. You don't realize that you do, but you do.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

And by the way, the people of Job's day and the Hebrews who later read that book were not rocket scientists. The were just simple people -- farmers, sheepherders, tradesman, etc. So, God spoke to them in terms they would understand.

Does God have a problem with Socrates' statement "The beginning of wisdom is a definition of terms"?

If God wanted to teach cosmology to whoever it was that wrote Job why didn't he take him aside and teach him mathematics and physics? I mean plenty of people dedicated their lives to the service of God. Couldn't God have given the straight poop to at least one of them. How long does it take to learn enough physics to grasp Copernicus' model of the universe, Kepler's laws and Newtonian mechanics? Plenty of people have done it by age 20. I did. Couldn't God have selected one of the smarter young priests and put him through a PhD program.

As you would have it God told someone that he "hangs the earth on nothing" and the guy still does not get it. He thinks the "nothing" is somewhere to the north.

And if God is so interested in giving man scientific facts why does he lie in Genesis and say that the earth is covered by a dome?

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by Actor

How long does it take to learn enough physics to grasp Copernicus' model of the universe, Kepler's laws and Newtonian mechanics? Plenty of people have done it by age 20?

Age 20....Sure. Me too.
But how long would it have taken us if Copernicus' model, Kepler's Laws, and Newtonian Mechanics had not been discovered?

I went to school with somewhat of a mathematical genius.
His name is Sidney McQueen-Smith.
Before he ever saw calculus he was doing it.
In his first year of University he completed 5 years of mathematics.
But the University would not let him graduate or move in to a graduate program.
He dropped out - went to India and studied all sorts of esoteric religions and practices.
I heard in the 1990's that he had become a medical doctor, practicing in British Columbia.
With the wonders of the internet I found out that today Sidney is a Buddhist Monk teaching at a Hermitage on Vancouver Island.
From the following website:
http://www.dharmafellowship.org/hermitage/lamas.htm
"Lama Lodoe Rabsal (Sidney McQueen-Smith) is a leading Spiritual Teacher at the Hermitage. He has been a Dharma practitioner for over 40 years, both in the world and as an ordained monk. For many years he worked as a medical doctor serving communities in the Canadian north. Now retired, he has been teaching Dharma and meditation in Nanaimo, Vancouver Island. His principal teachers include His Holiness the 16th and 17th Karmapa, His Eminance Tai Situ Rinpoche, Ayang Rinpoche, and the great Canadian master, Karma Namgyal Rinpoche. His expertise includes a profound knowledge of the Tibetan Book of the Dead, meditation for the Dying and the Dead, a knowledge of the deep metaphysics of the Prajnaparamita, and in particular, an understanding, through personal experience, of the path and method of Awakening for those living in the world. Lama Lodroe Rabsal has a unique way of making the age-old teachings come alive. He speaks from his own experience and deep insight. His talks at the Hermitage have been deeply appreciated by all and we feel very fortunate that he has agreed to teach on a regular basis at our centre."

My youth experiences with Sidney were fleeting.
However, it convinced me that some people are born with more than they could possibly learn from the environment or their teachers.
It's as if they have an "unwinding coil of knowledge" already built into them that they are able to unfold to a point.

In Sidney's instance, he was one of those individuals.
What was happening with his mathematical enlightenment was coming from inside him, not outside.
Obviously, he's long since dropped mathematics.
In fact, most mathematical geniuses of this ilk are burned out in the area in their early 20's and seldom bring forth true discoveries as they age.

I'm suggesting to you that Copernicus, Kepler, and Newton, may have formulated their ideas from some unwinding coil within rather than what was just going on in their observations of the external.
That may be true for Einstein as well. His ideas were quantum leaps ahead of the known Newtonian world at the time.

There might be more going on within us than we'll ever realize, if only we can tap into it.

By the way, I've never contacted Sidney over the years.
We've been out of touch over 40 years, and he may be operating on a different plane than me when it comes to Buddhism.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

Does God have a problem with Socrates' statement "The beginning of wisdom is a definition of terms"?

If God wanted to teach cosmology to whoever it was that wrote Job why didn't he take him aside and teach him mathematics and physics? I mean plenty of people dedicated their lives to the service of God. Couldn't God have given the straight poop to at least one of them. How long does it take to learn enough physics to grasp Copernicus' model of the universe, Kepler's laws and Newtonian mechanics? Plenty of people have done it by age 20. I did. Couldn't God have selected one of the smarter young priests and put him through a PhD program.

As you would have it God told someone that he "hangs the earth on nothing" and the guy still does not get it. He thinks the "nothing" is somewhere to the north.

And if God is so interested in giving man scientific facts why does he lie in Genesis and say that the earth is covered by a dome?

Uhh...Actor, here's a newsflash fer ya: God didn't inspire a science text book. The bible is divinely inspired spiritual truth that nonetheless contains many scientifically accurate statements.

Now, how I interpret the passage in Job is how the ancients would have. When it says that the "earth hangs on nothing", I take "nothing" to mean that the earth "hangs" on nothing that is visible or on nothing that can be detected by the senses.

Also, "dome" (as some translations have it in Genesis 1) means "firmament", as other translations have rendered the Hebrew term.

Have a great day in your lab,
Boxcar

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Age 20....Sure. Me too.
But how long would it have taken us if Copernicus' model, Kepler's Laws, and Newtonian Mechanics had not been discovered?

I went to school with somewhat of a mathematical genius.
His name is Sidney McQueen-Smith.
Before he ever saw calculus he was doing it.
In his first year of University he completed 5 years of mathematics.
But the University would not let him graduate or move in to a graduate program.
He dropped out - went to India and studied all sorts of esoteric religions and practices.
I heard in the 1990's that he had become a medical doctor, practicing in British Columbia.
With the wonders of the internet I found out that today Sidney is a Buddhist Monk teaching at a Hermitage on Vancouver Island.
From the following website:
http://www.dharmafellowship.org/hermitage/lamas.htm
"Lama Lodoe Rabsal (Sidney McQueen-Smith) is a leading Spiritual Teacher at the Hermitage. He has been a Dharma practitioner for over 40 years, both in the world and as an ordained monk. For many years he worked as a medical doctor serving communities in the Canadian north. Now retired, he has been teaching Dharma and meditation in Nanaimo, Vancouver Island. His principal teachers include His Holiness the 16th and 17th Karmapa, His Eminance Tai Situ Rinpoche, Ayang Rinpoche, and the great Canadian master, Karma Namgyal Rinpoche. His expertise includes a profound knowledge of the Tibetan Book of the Dead, meditation for the Dying and the Dead, a knowledge of the deep metaphysics of the Prajnaparamita, and in particular, an understanding, through personal experience, of the path and method of Awakening for those living in the world. Lama Lodroe Rabsal has a unique way of making the age-old teachings come alive. He speaks from his own experience and deep insight. His talks at the Hermitage have been deeply appreciated by all and we feel very fortunate that he has agreed to teach on a regular basis at our centre."

My youth experiences with Sidney were fleeting.
However, it convinced me that some people are born with more than they could possibly learn from the environment or their teachers.
It's as if they have an "unwinding coil of knowledge" already built into them that they are able to unfold to a point.

In Sidney's instance, he was one of those individuals.
What was happening with his mathematical enlightenment was coming from inside him, not outside.
Obviously, he's long since dropped mathematics.
In fact, most mathematical geniuses of this ilk are burned out in the area in their early 20's and seldom bring forth true discoveries as they age.

I'm suggesting to you that Copernicus, Kepler, and Newton, may have formulated their ideas from some unwinding coil within rather than what was just going on in their observations of the external.
That may be true for Einstein as well. His ideas were quantum leaps ahead of the known Newtonian world at the time.

There might be more going on within us than we'll ever realize, if only we can tap into it.

By the way, I've never contacted Sidney over the years.
We've been out of touch over 40 years, and he may be operating on a different plane than me when it comes to Buddhism.

BRAVO!

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Uhh...Actor, here's a newsflash fer ya: God didn't inspire a science text book.

Indeed He did not. That's assuming, of course, that He exists in the first place, otherwise, He could not have inspired anything.

Originally Posted by boxcar

The bible is divinely inspired spiritual truth that nonetheless contains many scientifically accurate statements.

Just how much "truth", spiritual or otherwise, the bible contains is subject to debate. As for "scientifically accurate statements", let's not forget all the scientifically inaccurate statements, e.g.,

• The universe was created in six days. That's what the Bible says, but, since the Bible is not a science text book we'd better go with a genuine science text book which says ...
• The universe is 6000 years old. That's what the Bible says (at least according to Ussher). But science textbooks say the universe is 13.7 billion years old.
• Men used to live over 900 years. But science textbooks say no one has ever lived to be 124.
• A great flood once covered the entire earth. So says the Bible. But science can find no evidence there ever was such a flood.
• A man rose from the dead. That's what the Bible says. Need I say what science textbooks say about that?

What you want is to have your cake and eat it too. You can't have it both ways.

Originally Posted by boxcar

Now, how I interpret the passage in Job is how the ancients would have. When it says that the "earth hangs on nothing", I take "nothing" to mean that the earth "hangs" on nothing that is visible or on nothing that can be detected by the senses.

Such as turtles all the way down?

Originally Posted by boxcar

Also, "dome" (as some translations have it in Genesis 1) means "firmament", as other translations have rendered the Hebrew term.

I know that. What's your point?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

Indeed He did not. That's assuming, of course, that He exists in the first place, otherwise, He could not have inspired anything.

Just how much "truth", spiritual or otherwise, the bible contains is subject to debate. As for "scientifically accurate statements", let's not forget all the scientifically inaccurate statements, e.g.,

• The universe was created in six days. That's what the Bible says, but, since the Bible is not a science text book we'd better go with a genuine science text book which says ...
• The universe is 6000 years old. That's what the Bible says (at least according to Ussher). But science textbooks say the universe is 13.7 billion years old.
• Men used to live over 900 years. But science textbooks say no one has ever lived to be 124.
• A great flood once covered the entire earth. So says the Bible. But science can find no evidence there ever was such a flood.
• A man rose from the dead. That's what the Bible says. Need I say what science textbooks say about that?

What you want is to have your cake and eat it too. You can't have it both ways.

Such as turtles all the way down?

I know that. What's your point?

There are no scientifically inaccurate statements in the bible. There are even ancient extra-biblical creation and flood accounts -- albeit myths that were created due to the corruption of sin in the world.

Also, Mr. Actor, when planet earth is viewed with telescopes from outer space, does not the earth appear to be "hanging" (suspended) on nothing?

Boxcar

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

There are no scientifically inaccurate statements in the bible.

You are blind to science. You are downright hostile to science.

Originally Posted by boxcar

There are even ancient extra-biblical creation ...

Extra-biblical? Yes. Most religions have a creation story. Science is undecided as to whether there ever was a creation (i.e., beginning of the universe).

Originally Posted by boxcar

... and flood accounts -

Not surprising. Ancient civilizations grew up around river valleys, the Nile, the Tigris-Euphrates, the Mississippi, etc. Flooding is common. Primitive peoples with a limited knowledge of geography would have seen a 1000 year flood as encompassing the entire world as they knew it.

Originally Posted by boxcar

- albeit myths that were created due to the corruption of sin in the world.

There's no such thing as sin.

Originally Posted by boxcar

Also, Mr. Actor, when planet earth is viewed with telescopes from outer space, does not the earth appear to be "hanging" (suspended) on nothing?

Boxcar

I don't think the passage in question refers to viewing the earth from outer space. I doubt the author had any concept of "outer space". He probably thought the earth was a disk covered by a dome.

The following has nothing to do with the question but I'll mention it anyway.

I'm not certain but I don't think the Earth has ever been viewed with a telescope from outer space. The Hubble is programmed to never point toward the earth, sun, or moon because their light is strong enough to burn out its super sensitive sensors. The famous Earthrise picture taken during the Apollo 8 mission was taken with a camera, not a telescope. Weather and spy satellite photos do not show the entire Earth. There is one photo taken from beyond the orbit of Pluto but in that one the Earth is a pale blue dot.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

You are blind to science. You are downright hostile to science.

Extra-biblical? Yes. Most religions have a creation story. Science is undecided as to whether there ever was a creation (i.e., beginning of the universe).

Not surprising. Ancient civilizations grew up around river valleys, the Nile, the Tigris-Euphrates, the Mississippi, etc. Flooding is common. Primitive peoples with a limited knowledge of geography would have seen a 1000 year flood as encompassing the entire world as they knew it.

There's no such thing as sin.

I don't think the passage in question refers to viewing the earth from outer space. I doubt the author had any concept of "outer space". He probably thought the earth was a disk covered by a dome.

The following has nothing to do with the question but I'll mention it anyway.

I'm not certain but I don't think the Earth has ever been viewed with a telescope from outer space. The Hubble is programmed to never point toward the earth, sun, or moon because their light is strong enough to burn out its super sensitive sensors. The famous Earthrise picture taken during the Apollo 8 mission was taken with a camera, not a telescope. Weather and spy satellite photos do not show the entire Earth. There is one photo taken from beyond the orbit of Pluto but in that one the Earth is a pale blue dot.

I never said or even remotely hinted that the passage was saying any such thing -- that the earth was being viewed from outer space. So, why even bring that up? My question to you was: If the earth was viewed from outer space, would it not appear to be "hanging" (i.e. suspended) over nothing? Would your senses be able to detect the technical scientific reason for how or why the earth is suspended in space? From your vantage view in space, it would certainly appear to you to be "hanging" on nothing.

By the way...the Flood did not last 1,000 years.

Boxcar

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

By the way...the Flood did not last 1,000 years.

Boxcar

I never said it did, neither the one in the Bible nor the one in the geological record.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by Actor

I never said it did, neither the one in the Bible nor the one in the geological record.

Is there evidence of a huge flood in the geological record?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

I never said it did, neither the one in the Bible nor the one in the geological record.

Then why did you write what you did in 14648?

Boxcar

[Actor]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Is there evidence of a huge flood in the geological record?

My understanding is that there is a layer of sediment in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley which indicates there was a flood around 7000 years ago. (I'm not certain of the date.) It was not a global flood but covered only the TGV.

Geology is not my field. If I have that wrong I welcome correction.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Then why did you write what you did in 14648?

Boxcar

14648? I assume you refer to my use of the term "1000 year flood".

Definition:
N-year flood -- a flood which has a 1 in N probability of occurring in a given year.

The terms 100-year flood and 500-year flood are more commonly used. Nonetheless the terminology extends to any time interval and/or infrequent event. Meteorologists refer to 100-year storms, 20-year droughts, etc.

The Mississippi-Missouri River flood of 1993 was probably a 100-year flood.

My error was in assuming that the definition was common knowledge.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by Actor

My understanding is that there is a layer of sediment in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley which indicates there was a flood around 7000 years ago. (I'm not certain of the date.) It was not a global flood but covered only the TGV.

Thank you.

That flood may have spawned the Epic of Gilgamesh and Noah's story.
But, as you say, it was not a global flood.