PDA

View Full Version : Some curios



rcscwc
18 February 2010, 12:16 AM
Some curios

Space birds
They are denizens of outer space which they share with the stars.
gen 1.8, 14-20

"fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven." Read with 21, there are two types of birds: Terrestrial and those in space [with space suits, I believe].

Flying fortress city, New Jersalem
Right now, it is hurtling toward earth. Rev 21.2, 16. In 21, it is revealed btw, that pure gold is transparent.

New physics: Properties of space and new hydraulics Gen 7.11, 8.2

Space has a window, through which excess water was drained. Space is solid enough to have a window.
How to find ET life? Easy, fly through that window, water is there somewhere and life is bound to be there. After all space birds must eat something.

A new geography.

Earth is square. Read Rev. 7.1. Moreover, earth is resting on pillars. See detailed descriptions. Ps 102.25, Mic 6.12, Zech 12.1, Heb 1.10, Is. 51.13. etc. It has pit of infinite depth too. Rev 9.2.

sanjaya
18 February 2010, 02:36 AM
Hi Rcscwc. These are indeed some curious passages of Christian scripture, but I'm not sure what your salient point is. As everyone here knows, I'm no fan of Christianity, but even I have to say that strange words in the Christians' holy book don't discredit the book. All religious texts say funny things, because they were written centuries ago when people had a different vocabulary than we do. Often times I'll hear people argue against the Bible by pointing out that it refers to bats as birds, when in fact bats are rodents. But such an argument imposes a modern taxonomy on an ancient culture which defined birds differently than we do. Likewise, the ancient Hebrews had no conception of space beyond the atmosphere, and likely wouldn't have referred to it in any way. As for Revelation 7:1, even today people use the expression "corners of the earth," despite that we don't believe in a flat earth.

There are many indicting arguments against the Christian religion, but I don't know that this is one of them. Poetic language isn't meant to be taken literally, and doesn't falsify the Bible. It's best to argue against Christians on their own terms, so that they can't challenge the valid objections that we raise against their religion. Of course, you might simply be pointing out the folly in an overliteral interpretation of the Bible, in which case I fully agree. Perhaps you could clarify.

shian
18 February 2010, 04:47 AM
do you believe,

next if sciene was funding and can explain in research of reincarnation,

christians will be searching in their bible what words is about reincarnation, to tell the world bible is know about this.

can we say not ?

please see in history. What happen with christians doctrine if sciene fund something new.
christians can released new claim who is very diferent with old claim.

That is christian

rcscwc
18 February 2010, 06:14 AM
Hi Rcscwc. These are indeed some curious passages of Christian scripture, but I'm not sure what your salient point is. As everyone here knows, I'm no fan of Christianity, but even I have to say that strange words in the Christians' holy book don't discredit the book. All religious texts say funny things, because they were written centuries ago when people had a different vocabulary than we do. Often times I'll hear people argue against the Bible by pointing out that it refers to bats as birds, when in fact bats are rodents. But such an argument imposes a modern taxonomy on an ancient culture which defined birds differently than we do. Likewise, the ancient Hebrews had no conception of space beyond the atmosphere, and likely wouldn't have referred to it in any way. As for Revelation 7:1, even today people use the expression "corners of the earth," despite that we don't believe in a flat earth.

There are many indicting arguments against the Christian religion, but I don't know that this is one of them. Poetic language isn't meant to be taken literally, and doesn't falsify the Bible. It's best to argue against Christians on their own terms, so that they can't challenge the valid objections that we raise against their religion. Of course, you might simply be pointing out the folly in an overliteral interpretation of the Bible, in which case I fully agree. Perhaps you could clarify.
Forgot that it is word of "god", so bound to be the truth?