Science Proves the Bible Again

[LittleNipper]

More evidence for God. Science backs up the Bible regarding porn use.

"The Bible tells us, in 1 Corinthians 6:18, that sexual sin has negative physical consequences:

Escape from sexual immorality. Every sin that a man commits is outside the body. But he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body. (MEV)

Now, science has confirmed what God’s word has established.

Regardless of the type of sexual sin—premarital sex, adultery, or viewing pornography—it alters how the human brain functions. Indulged in repeatedly, one’s conscience is seared, a physical change in the brain that numbs one to the guilt and conviction of his or her wrongdoing.

MORE POWERFUL THAN MORPHINE

The producers of the Conquer Series—a cinematic DVD series that helps men break free from pornography— note that when porn is viewed, powerful hormones are released, including:

• oxytocin—called “the love hormone,” it is typically released when one is hugged or kissed, regulating social interactions, sexual reproduction, and human bonding.
• vasopressin—used as medication, it numbs pain.

This concoction of hormones rewires the brain, giving it the wrong material, luring one deeper into a prison of his or her own making. It’s intoxicating, intended to bring loved ones closer and promote mental healing, but instead having the opposite effect and confusing the mind.

Conquer Series expert contributor Heart to Heart Counseling Center Executive Director Dr. Doug Weiss said:

When [you] have a sexual experience, your brains makes these opiates which [are] four times stronger than morphine. Boom! It hits your brain, your brain lights up like a Christmas tree. This is the highest chemical reward your brain gets for anything. That’s why a lot of guys get in trouble, even in ministry. They don’t know their brain is defective.

This way, sexual sin takes a profound toll on the brain, and the rest of the body. The sinner knows watching porn is a shameful act that must be kept secret, yet each time one views it, he or she “trusts” it more as a result of the pairing and deep mental bond forged by the hormones."

TruNews with Rick Wiles, Real News, Latest News, Christian News

An Introduction to Biblical Nonsense

People get addicted on porn like drugs. That is not nonsense. It sounds you're addicted to nonsense.

On the other hand, you're addicted to sidestepping and deflection when direct refutation is presented to biblical "science" claims.

Absurdities of biblical "science" claims are easily refuted.

Actually, they are covered up and disregarded. They are not visited and investigated but simply denied! It's a political thing.

Those in power want to remain in command and not face competition that will upset their personal fields of study. It's human nature. What professor wishes to admit his years of work is founded on a wrong premise. Namely, GOD doesn't exist and the decent of man must be accepted.

And then there is the whole education debacle of how does one present INTELLIGENT DESIGN in an atmosphere of atheistic denial? The two are diametrically incomparable. To allow students the ability to choose between the opposing ideologies cannot be accomplished in an atmosphere that cannot permit any discussions of GOD because of an arbitrary divide that says that there is a separation between STATE and church ---- which OBVIOUSLY demonstrates that the STATE is manipulating public education and not the parents, not he community, nor the educators.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Actually, they are covered up and disregarded. They are not visited and investigated but simply denied!

haha... such embarrassing, stupid nonsense. oh no, it can't be that there is just no good science whatsoever is evidence for your magical horseshit... it HAS to be that ALL of it is sequestered in a vast conspiracy of the entire global scientific community!

Think of the absurdity of your claim. think about, just for a second, how fucking stupid this is.

 

[bripat9643]

The Zapata Track

I know you wont watch it

Obvious fraud. Why would anyone remove human 100 million year old fossil footprints from the bedrock?

TO PRESERVE THEM AND STUDY THEM


its obvious you didnt watch the video

Wrong. It's because you can't fake them if they are still attached to the bedrock. Once a block is removed from the strata, you have destroyed whatever provenance it had.

So, how exactly does your hypothesis reflect on the removal of fossils from their surrounding strata? Does this not then destroy whatever provenance that they had according to what your BELIEVE?

When fossil dinosaurs are excavated, each bone is photographed in situ and the location is fully documented. The bones have to be excavated in order to see them all and to reconstruct the skeleton of the animal. Generally, foot prints are not excavated because their location is important information. When you excavate fossil footprints you destroy a lot of important information.

 

[LittleNipper]

And YES! There is scientific proof that the entire earth was once covered in water and this is from a secular group nonetheless: Early Earth 'was covered in water' | Metro News

Firstly, your frantic claim to "proof" is based upon a study, that has not undergone peer review.

Secondly, did you read what was in the article?

".... billions of years ago the Earth’s deep mantle was 200C hotter than it is today."

Billions of years ago directly refutes the ID'iot / creationist claim to a biblical 6,000 year old earth.

Oops.

ONE: So what is stopping you from reviewing it? It's been around for quite a while.

TWO: My idea was to demonstrate that indeed there is PROOF that shows that the entire earth was once underwater. This flies in the face of ALL those who say --- "No, there isn't enough water!" --- "No, there is no evidence!" --- "No, because I'm told by my professor something different."

THREE: I don't believe in calling people I disagree with idiots. Who wants to be labeled an IDIOT! Let's go into some other field of study... Let's keep our religious insights to ourselves... Let's simply nod our heads and agree with the instructors to get through the course --- don't buck the system! This is not an education! This is indoctrination through threats and insults!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

My idea was to demonstrate that indeed there is PROOF that shows that the entire earth was once underwater.

And your evidence was an article that plainly stated that most,not all, of the earth was underwater. You are a fraud. A shameless liar.

 

[LittleNipper]

I know you wont watch it

Obvious fraud. Why would anyone remove human 100 million year old fossil footprints from the bedrock?

TO PRESERVE THEM AND STUDY THEM


its obvious you didnt watch the video

Wrong. It's because you can't fake them if they are still attached to the bedrock. Once a block is removed from the strata, you have destroyed whatever provenance it had.

So, how exactly does your hypothesis reflect on the removal of fossils from their surrounding strata? Does this not then destroy whatever provenance that they had according to what your BELIEVE?

When fossil dinosaurs are excavated, each bone is photographed in situ and the location is fully documented. The bones have to be excavated in order to see them all and to reconstruct the skeleton of the animal. Generally, foot prints are not excavated because their location is important information. When you excavate fossil footprints you destroy a lot of important information.

And so they record the evidence, take their photos, and present their hypothesis. What makes you believe they are not as diligent as any other professional. Do I perceive bias on your part? Creationists cannot be bias and yet "evolutionists" can be?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And so they record the evidence, take their photos, and present their hypothesis.

And then you examine the evidence in light of all the other evidence. You forgot that part. And all the evidence points in the same direction. Oh yeah, that's why you "forgot" that other part.

 

[LittleNipper]

My idea was to demonstrate that indeed there is PROOF that shows that the entire earth was once underwater.

And your evidence was an article that plainly stated that most,not all, of the earth was underwater. You are a fraud. A shameless liar.

They say that maybe 2% was not covered but they are not absolutely positive ---- unlike yourself.

 

[bripat9643]

Obvious fraud. Why would anyone remove human 100 million year old fossil footprints from the bedrock?

TO PRESERVE THEM AND STUDY THEM


its obvious you didnt watch the video

Wrong. It's because you can't fake them if they are still attached to the bedrock. Once a block is removed from the strata, you have destroyed whatever provenance it had.

So, how exactly does your hypothesis reflect on the removal of fossils from their surrounding strata? Does this not then destroy whatever provenance that they had according to what your BELIEVE?

When fossil dinosaurs are excavated, each bone is photographed in situ and the location is fully documented. The bones have to be excavated in order to see them all and to reconstruct the skeleton of the animal. Generally, foot prints are not excavated because their location is important information. When you excavate fossil footprints you destroy a lot of important information.

And so they record the evidence, take their photos, and present their hypothesis. What makes you believe they are not as diligent as any other professional. Do I perceive bias on your part? Creationists cannot be bias and yet "evolutionists" can be?

How us the photos of the footprints in situ.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They say that maybe 2% was not covered but they are not absolutely positive ---- unlike yourself.

You're confused again. I think it may be possible that the earth was once completely covered with water.

You are the one claiming with absolute certainty that it was. So, of the two of us, only one of us is "absolutely positive" of anything. So you just kind lied right there, didn't you?

And you claimed to demonstrate proof that the earth was once completely covered by presenting an article that says it was likely not. So that was another lie.

 

[bripat9643]

My idea was to demonstrate that indeed there is PROOF that shows that the entire earth was once underwater.

And your evidence was an article that plainly stated that most,not all, of the earth was underwater. You are a fraud. A shameless liar.

They say that maybe 2% was not covered but they are not absolutely positive ---- unlike yourself.

4 billion years ago, not 6000 years ago.

 

[Hollie]

More evidence for God. Science backs up the Bible regarding porn use.

"The Bible tells us, in 1 Corinthians 6:18, that sexual sin has negative physical consequences:

Escape from sexual immorality. Every sin that a man commits is outside the body. But he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body. (MEV)

Now, science has confirmed what God’s word has established.

Regardless of the type of sexual sin—premarital sex, adultery, or viewing pornography—it alters how the human brain functions. Indulged in repeatedly, one’s conscience is seared, a physical change in the brain that numbs one to the guilt and conviction of his or her wrongdoing.

MORE POWERFUL THAN MORPHINE

The producers of the Conquer Series—a cinematic DVD series that helps men break free from pornography— note that when porn is viewed, powerful hormones are released, including:

• oxytocin—called “the love hormone,” it is typically released when one is hugged or kissed, regulating social interactions, sexual reproduction, and human bonding.
• vasopressin—used as medication, it numbs pain.

This concoction of hormones rewires the brain, giving it the wrong material, luring one deeper into a prison of his or her own making. It’s intoxicating, intended to bring loved ones closer and promote mental healing, but instead having the opposite effect and confusing the mind.

Conquer Series expert contributor Heart to Heart Counseling Center Executive Director Dr. Doug Weiss said:

When [you] have a sexual experience, your brains makes these opiates which [are] four times stronger than morphine. Boom! It hits your brain, your brain lights up like a Christmas tree. This is the highest chemical reward your brain gets for anything. That’s why a lot of guys get in trouble, even in ministry. They don’t know their brain is defective.

This way, sexual sin takes a profound toll on the brain, and the rest of the body. The sinner knows watching porn is a shameful act that must be kept secret, yet each time one views it, he or she “trusts” it more as a result of the pairing and deep mental bond forged by the hormones."

TruNews with Rick Wiles, Real News, Latest News, Christian News

An Introduction to Biblical Nonsense

People get addicted on porn like drugs. That is not nonsense. It sounds you're addicted to nonsense.

On the other hand, you're addicted to sidestepping and deflection when direct refutation is presented to biblical "science" claims.

Absurdities of biblical "science" claims are easily refuted.

Actually, they are covered up and disregarded. They are not visited and investigated but simply denied! It's a political thing.

Those in power want to remain in command and not face competition that will upset their personal fields of study. It's human nature. What professor wishes to admit his years of work is founded on a wrong premise. Namely, GOD doesn't exist and the decent of man must be accepted.

And then there is the whole education debacle of how does one present INTELLIGENT DESIGN in an atmosphere of atheistic denial? The two are diametrically incomparable. To allow students the ability to choose between the opposing ideologies cannot be accomplished in an atmosphere that cannot permit any discussions of GOD because of an arbitrary divide that says that there is a separation between STATE and church ---- which OBVIOUSLY demonstrates that the STATE is manipulating public education and not the parents, not he community, nor the educators.

I don’t think conspiracy theories are really helpful.

So, what professors are actually looking to admit their error regarding science and admit Shiva, Brahma and Vishnu exist? I don’t believe Hindus have any propaganda about the descent of man.

Biblical science” claims are not covered up by the relevant science community, they’re just accepted as religious claims absent any corroboration. Their is nothing that prevents Christian ministries from presenting their evidence for supernaturalism to the journal Nature, for example to allow such evidence to be subjected to peer review. but that leaves the supernaturalists with some obvious problems.

There is no arbitrary divide as it relates to separation of church and state. The reasons for such separation are a matter of constitutional law and have served to protect this country from becoming a wasteland of religious intolerance like some islsmic backwater. I suspect you would want to force your religious beliefs into the public school curriculum and that is simply not going to happen. You are free to discuss your gods with all the other folks discussing their competing versions of gods. You just can’t bring those various gods into the school curriculum.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I don’t believe Hindus have any propaganda about the descent of man.

They have their own creationist myths. But very few of them are silly enough to believe them over evolution:

"
According to the ‘Darwin Survey’, Indians, with 37%
(sample size= 909), topped in the list of countries with the
portion of adults who opinionated that evolutionary theories
alone be taught in the school. For the question “To what extent
do you agree or disagree that it is possible to believe in a God
and still hold the view that life on earth, including human life,
evolved over time as a result of natural selection?", Indians
topped the list, with 85% affirmative responses. For the question
“To what extent do you agree or disagree that enough scientific
evidence exists to support Charles Darwin’s Theory of
Evolution”, Indians again topped the list, with 77% affirmative
responses. However, this survey tested no finer variables,
including state of domicile, gender, educational level,
occupation, religiosity, politics, etc."

F Bast, 2018

 

[rightwinger]

Does that mean we can’t dig to China?

 

[bripat9643]

Does that mean we can’t dig to China?

Sure, you can dig to China. Get started.

 

[progressive hunter]

I know you wont watch it

Obvious fraud. Why would anyone remove human 100 million year old fossil footprints from the bedrock?

TO PRESERVE THEM AND STUDY THEM


its obvious you didnt watch the video

Wrong. It's because you can't fake them if they are still attached to the bedrock. Once a block is removed from the strata, you have destroyed whatever provenance it had.

So, how exactly does your hypothesis reflect on the removal of fossils from their surrounding strata? Does this not then destroy whatever provenance that they had according to what your BELIEVE?

When fossil dinosaurs are excavated, each bone is photographed in situ and the location is fully documented. The bones have to be excavated in order to see them all and to reconstruct the skeleton of the animal. Generally, foot prints are not excavated because their location is important information. When you excavate fossil footprints you destroy a lot of important information.

that is exactly how the footprints were documented,,and if they left them they would get eroded by the water,,if you watch the video you would know that,

and what info is destroyed???

its just open rock around them

 

[progressive hunter]

They say that maybe 2% was not covered but they are not absolutely positive ---- unlike yourself.

You're confused again. I think it may be possible that the earth was once completely covered with water.

You are the one claiming with absolute certainty that it was. So, of the two of us, only one of us is "absolutely positive" of anything. So you just kind lied right there, didn't you?

And you claimed to demonstrate proof that the earth was once completely covered by presenting an article that says it was likely not. So that was another lie.

you are a liar and a troll,,,he never said that

 

[The Professor]

How come you don't link your quotes? Afraid of context?

I have some quotes for you. However, you must know that just because Einstein is considered a genius in some areas of math and science does not prove that he is an expert in other disciplines including religion.

"Why do you write to me, 'God should punish the English'? I have no close connection to either one or the other. I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of his children for their numerous stupidities, for which he himself can be held responsible; in my opinion, only his non-existence could excuse him" ( The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Collected and Edited by Aice Calaprice, p. 201).

“Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seems to me to be empty and devoid of meaning.” (Ibid, p. 202).

“I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings (Ibid, p. 204).

“I cannot conceive of a personal Gods who would directly influence the actions of individuals...My religiosity consists of a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we can comprehend of the knowable world. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God” (Ibid, p. 204).

“The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events...He has no use for the religion of fear and equally little for social or moral religion. A God who rewards and punishes is inconceivable to him for the simple reason that a man's actions are determined by necessity, external and internal, so that in God's eyes he cannot be responsible, any more than an inanimate object is responsible for the motions it undergoes...A man's ethical behavior should be based effectively on sympathy, education and social relationships; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained be fear of punishment and hope of reward after death” (Ibid, pp. 205, 206).

“I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of a kind we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual who survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts” (Ibid, p. 207).

“If one purges all subsequent additions from the original teachings of the Prophets and Christianity, especially those of the priests, one is left with a pedagogy that is capable of curing all the social ills of mankind” (Ibid, pp. 209, 210).

“You will hardly find one among the profounder sort of scientific minds without a religious feeling of his own. But it is different from the religiosity of the naive man. For the later, God is a being from whose care one hopes to benefit and whose punishment one fears; a sublimation of a feeling similar to that of a child for its father” (Ibid., p. 210).

“The main source of present-day conflicts between the spheres of religion and science lies in the concept of a personal god” (Ibid., p. 213).

“In their struggle for ethical good, teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God; that is, give up that source of fear and hope which in the past has placed such vast power in the hands of priests”(Ibid., p. 213).

“No idea is conceived in our mind independent of our five senses [i.e., no idea is divinely inspired]” (Ibid., p. 215).

“I do not believe in the immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it” (Ibid., p. 217).

“I am a religious nonbeliever.”...This is a somewhat new kind of religion” (Ibid., p. 218).

“I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me that can be called religion, then it is the unbound admiration for the structure of the world so far as science can reveal it” (Ibid., p. 218).

“What interests me is whether God could have created the world any differently; in other words, whether the demand for logical simplicity leaves any freedom at all” (Ibid., P. 221.)

The last quote is interesting because Tompson Jay Hudson, Ph.D, LL.D, author of the much discussed book The Law of Psychic Phenomena, argues that an omniscient being is incapable of inductive reasoning, a process which is necessary to analysis and independent decision making. Hudson claims that God would be capable of only deductive reasoning,

 

[james bond]

The text of the Bible is thousands of years old, yet it remains perfectly accurate in everything it says. This is especially noteworthy in the field of science. The science which backs up the Bible are many: The law of biogenesis, the law of thermodynamics, countless stars (God would cause Abraham’s descendants to multiply so that they would be as countless as the stars of the sky.), ship engineering (the instructions of how to build a very large ship are in the Bible from God to Noah), sewage and waste disposal, blood the liquid of life, germs, labor fever and dealing with dead bodies, quarantine, laws of food consumption, sexually transmitted diseases, circumcision, global flood, archaeological accuracy and more are in the Bible and science backs it up. Just fall to your knees and give it up now.

Science and the Bible.

 

[Hollie]

The text of the Bible is thousands of years old, yet it remains perfectly accurate in everything it says. This is especially noteworthy in the field of science. The science which backs up the Bible are many: The law of biogenesis, the law of thermodynamics, countless stars (God would cause Abraham’s descendants to multiply so that they would be as countless as the stars of the sky.), ship engineering (the instructions of how to build a very large ship are in the Bible from God to Noah), sewage and waste disposal, blood the liquid of life, germs, labor fever and dealing with dead bodies, quarantine, laws of food consumption, sexually transmitted diseases, circumcision, global flood, archaeological accuracy and more are in the Bible and science backs it up. Just fall to your knees and give it up now.

Science and the Bible.

Yes, the Bibles are the only books you ever need to read.... assuming you want to forever be ignorant.

Bible: Science and History