It's been a while :-)

[**bustysinclaire**]

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-no1-2018-jan-feb/bible-guidance-relevant/

A topic that is being offered for discussion this month. Some may find it interesting xxx

[cee-dee]

Going back to what I said in #305 and the response at #306, just have a look at the differences between the various versions of Genesis 1 : 5:-

https://www.biblestudytools.com/genesis/1-5-compare.html

You see where it says it was "the first day"?

OK, now have a look at the different versions of Genesis 14 to 19. I'll link to Gen 1 : 14 first:-

https://www.biblestudytools.com/genesis/1-14-compare.html

And now Gen 1 : 19:-

https://www.biblestudytools.com/genesis/1-19-compare.html

You see where on the one hand the light was in "the first day" and then it's in "the fourth day"?

Now, people with their so-called "explanations" or different "translations" twist things to suit their own agenda? Having regard to how things might have been "handed down" long before writing was "invented", how much reliance can be placed on what is, was or wasn't said?

[astrologica]

CeeDee.......I think that horse is dead.😉

[cee-dee]

Yeah, OK but I liked that old horse and it's early life is very interesting.

It's a shame no-one wants to discuss the subject properly rather than blankly state some point or other all coupled with their own agenda.

Like..... the early versions of the Douay bible were supposed to have been formulated from translations of ancient Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew to Latin. Translations of that to "English", like all translations were subject to "interpretation" and hence differences from one to the other.

We have no idea what might have been changed, edited and/or redacted in/from those ancient texts with the possibility that the sense of what was written has been changed over time.

[astrologica]

Yes...I see what you mean. Are you an Atheist, CeeDee? If so, I'm wondering why this matters so much to you?  You seem to have read up on the subject in a big way....

[cee-dee]

I can't accept the bible version of creation because it's clearly quite wrong.

It says god created the heaven and the Earth and that darkness was upon the face of the deep. There was no deep and there was no waters "in the beginning". In the beginning the Earth wasn't here!

It says god created the light and that he divided the light from the darkness and that he called the light Day and the dark he called Night.

The light came first, that is, before the Earth existed. The light came/comes from a Star (our Sun). It was created first, that is, before the Earth and before any waters existed.

So, if the beginning is wrong, the foundation (the beginning) being faulty will cause the rest of it to collapse.

What needs to be remembered is that when ancient things were written, there was absolutely no comprehension of the Universe and how things were created soooooooo, to "explain" what couldn't (then) be explained, some supernatural reason had to be invented to explain the inexplicable and which couldn't be contradicted.

From that, things were developed (corrupted?) in to a form of control by those continuing to promote and perpetuate the story.

[esme7crom0]

Reply to Busty

I am just curious I am not hating... but why do you guys go out and tout new followers knocking door to door? If you believed so much in your faith would you not have to do that? Just asking and curious.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

The light came first, that is, before the Earth existed. The light came/comes from a Star (our Sun). It was created first, that is, before the Earth and before any waters existed.

---

Isn’t that just what you “believe” was the case - you have no way of “knowing” that is the “truth” - your “faith” in science runs deep 🙂

[right-then-petal]

it was in the Sun Creeky

[cee-dee]

No, it can be seen happening "out there". The star comes before it's Planets.

Mind you, I've often thought that if some people tripped over a pebble they'd swear it was a boulder.

[upthecreekyetagain]

Actually if you Google the subject you will find there is some debate on the subject - even among the scientific community it isn’t accepted as fact by all.

To say we can see it happening is a bit of a stretch.

[cee-dee]

It doesn't matter which subject someone picks for "discussion", arguments for and against any acceptance of an agreed definition will rage, mind you, some will rage irrationally until the cows come home! Don't forget there's still those who believe the Earth is flat and is in the form of a flat disc.........

Obviously I can't "see it happening" but those interested with access to appropriate telescopes can see how clouds of gas "collect" before, when big enough, gravity eventually causes it to burst in to life as a new star.

[upthecreekyetagain]

You are again assuming that our Solar System was formed by accretion is a matter of fact - In the last 100 years there have been numerous theories that have tried to explain all the observed data, especially that concerning apparent anomalies in the angular momentum of the sun and planets.

These theories appear to be split into two main groups, those that propose that the Sun formed first and then the planets and those which propose that the Sun and the planets formed simultaneously.  If the latter is the truth then the planets would be at least partially formed before the Sun began to emit any light.

The Sun would only emit light once it had grown large enough so that the pressure and density at its core was large enough to allow nuclear fusion to take place.

The latest theory suggests that much of the water on the Earth is far older than the Earth itself, coming originally from comets and/or “clouds” of water molecules being captured by the Earth’s gravity field.

[cee-dee]

Theories? The World abound with them and some people will latch on to any weird and far-fetched "theory"......

They can't show how the planets "formed" at the same time as a star, they can theorise but nowhere can they show how a planet can form before a star forms.

Yes, the comet theory abounds but an alternative can't be disproved either = that the Earth collided with another planet which brought the water here. Where's all the "colliding comets" gone? Are there none left? Are they all "used up"? There's been no sign of one... er... um... er for a little while?

[upthecreekyetagain]

I agree with all that yet you quote one theory as a ‘fact’ when trying to dispute yet a different theory put forward by another proposer as a ‘fact’.

The truth is we don’t ‘know’ most things and those we do ‘know’ are probably wrong - we simply have our beliefs.

[cee-dee]

I suppose I could argue that some theories have a background on agreed facts but some beliefs are based on nothing more than factless heresay?

[upthecreekyetagain]

Yet had you been born just a few hundred years ago then what you call “factless heresay {sic}” was accepted as “agreed fact” by most. 

Who’s to say that what is accepted as “agreed fact” today won’t be considered as nonsense in another few hundred years.

[cee-dee]

That's not so. Had I questioned any of the supposed "agreed facts" I'd have been descended upon before being subjected to any variety of unmentionable tortures before being barbarically killed. See what happened to Jesus?

I might as well tell you..... One day I mentioned that I thought the resurection was a distinct possibilty because people had been pronounced dead and had "come back to life".

I was immediately rounded on by my (RC) wife and the priest because you were supposed to "have faith".

Well, since then I've sought out proper facts.......... I have to scoot for an hour..... I'll BE BACK!

[upthecreekyetagain]

‘Heretics’ were only treated in the way you described because the vast majority had total faith in what they had been taught.

We may be more ‘civilised’ now but we still treat those who hold a minority belief in a “how can you be so stupid” manner.  You only have to read this thread to see the truth of that statement.

[cee-dee]

OK, my spelling there was wrong. I meant "hearsay" not heresy. (No excuse except I was rushing).

There was no quarter given like with "witches". If they floated, they were guilty so were burned. If they drowned, "Oh dear, what a shame, we made a mistake, she was innocent".

Going back to the ancient beliefs you mentioned.... It's only a few hundred years ago that the Earth was supposed to be the centre of the Universe!!! It's not even the centre of our Solar system!

[upthecreekyetagain]

I think you have just reinforced the point I was making - truth, facts, call it what you will, changes over time - what’s considered fact today is often called bunkum tomorrow.