So, did you even read the OP?
Oh, 10,000, 2,000, Adam, Eve, yadda yadda.
Pick your favorite number-- at least one that corresponds with
the age of the Earth and the age of the human race.
*So, did you even read the OP? *
Yes.
I would like to have this option removed. It is only as our understanding of the universe grows that the bible appears less and less congruent with reality. During the last days of the Roman empire, the Bible didn’t conflict with observable reality nearly as much as it does today.
Why would God want to trick increasingly advanced versions of humanity in gradually more thorough ways, instead of tricking us all at once with some declarations that conflict with what the Romans could see for themselves?
I think any ten commandments queries are not for us,
not for Dawkins, but from someone we can all relate to.
The perfect Ten Commandments explanation:
You probably already know who it is…
Not at all - the bible has always conflicted with observable reality. If the romans were too lazy to dig for dinosaur bones, that’s not God’s problem.
Also, the premise of option 2 is that the bible is accurate and the reality (or our perception of it) has been merely distorted to give false evidence about the universe, leading us to the beliefs supported by science today. (It’s the “reality is wrong” option, to mirror the “the bible is wrong” option 3.) So, because the bible was still being written in roman times, it seems reasonable to deduce that at the time, the world actually was as the bible describes (created 6000 years ago, no evolution whatsoever, flat earth, etc), and that the ‘reality shift’ occured some time more recently. It need not have been prior to the advent of science either; the reality shift could include all records and memories that might hint at the underlying, young flat created earth reality.
Why would he be? The conventional view in physics is that our universe is non-Euclidean, with mass corresponding to curvature according to general relativity.
The surface of the Earth is non-Euclidean too, but it certainly looks Euclidean at a first glance, given the insignificant difference between the two on small scale measurements. The Pythagorean theorem may not be strictly true on the Earth’s surface, but it gives fantastic approximations for most purposes. That sorta thing.
That’s not even right in Biblical terms. Moses was supposed to have written his four books, which was way after Adam and Eve. They were really written much later.
Sure, sure. But the way I read it, he was saying that if you couldn’t make precise measurements, it didn’t matter what system of geometry you were using. Which is the same thing as saying that geometry can’t be applied to the real world at all, given that it’s not too hard to think up some pretty odd geometries.
Now, I admit I might be misunderstanding him, but I still think an astonished response was in order.
Ah. Yeah, I can see where he could’ve worded his post more clearly, but I think he was just noting that all the usually considered non-Euclidean geometries are still “Euclidean in the small limit”.
What you call truth written in a book is the writings and idea of some human. Moses is not even regarded as a historical person so we can doubt that he spoke to a God. One can only go on faith that a God exists.
Strange but nowdays if some one says God spoke to him or her we consider them a bit balmy!
There are things in the Bible that can be proven to not be true.
Monavis
Where does it say in the bible that the earth is flat, or where the earth is 6000 years old?
I didn’t see it.