MDB Bible Study

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Evidence for what you said in your first post up there.

Sorry, I’m still not tracking. On page 8 I posted a video demonstrating how tiny we are, and I asked Ceeboo what is the end game with it all in context to the Biblical god. Help me me out?

- Doc

[_Jersey Girl]

How is it wasted when you see it, recognize it's vastness, wonder at it and appreciate it?

You are right Jersey Girl ,but but how could God waste all that resource for wonder. Is it a good investment?

Someone observed (u2) that our God is not short of cash mister.

He can afford to be prodigal with creation.

But what pains me here is the idea that creation, even this small world is here to be a testing ground. What an awful and narrow picture of life.

I don't see this world as a testing ground. Do you think that could be leaning into a more of a Mormonish concept?

Can anyone squeeze themself into such a tiny mold?

I dunno. I'm pretty darn small myself. :-) Still, I don't see this world or this life as a test. Surely I see trials and have experience trials, but the whole ballgame? No, I don't see it that way at all.

Of course my world view could be a bit skewed by a couple or three issues.

[_Jersey Girl]

Evidence for what you said in your first post up there.

Sorry, I’m still not tracking. On page 8 I posted a video demonstrating how tiny we are, and I asked Ceeboo what is the end game with it all in context to the Biblical god. Help me me out?

- Doc

I'm trying. I'm trying.

You wrote: how small we are compared to how large God’s supposed creations are.

And then what's it all about? What's the point?

And I basically said that I thought it was evidence of that. In other words, how large God's creation is compared to how small we are, how capable God is of largeness, therefore God's ability to create transformative largeness in our lives.

I think that goes a long with the verse I just posted because Ceeboo said the Bible Study disappeared.

“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” Romans 1:20 KJV

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Ah. So, from your perspective Jehovah created the Universe, both observed and unobserved, to serve as witness to His godhood? That’s literally the point of it all and the end game, if I’m understanding you correctly?

- Doc

[_Jersey Girl]

Ah. So, from your perspective Jehovah created the Universe, both observed and unobserved, to serve as witness to His godhood? That’s literally the point of it all and the end game, if I’m understanding you correctly?

- Doc

Wait one second. When you say "observed and unobserved" are you riffing off the verse that I posted there?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Ah. So, from your perspective Jehovah created the Universe, both observed and unobserved, to serve as witness to His godhood? That’s literally the point of it all and the end game, if I’m understanding you correctly?

- Doc

Wait one second. When you say "observed and unobserved" are you riffing off the verse that I posted there?

I’m kind of amalgamating my statement regarding the unobservable universe, and your verse, which brought to mind that we really can’t detect all aspects of reality yet.

- Doc

[_Jersey Girl]

Ah. So, from your perspective Jehovah created the Universe, both observed and unobserved, to serve as witness to His godhood? That’s literally the point of it all and the end game, if I’m understanding you correctly?

- Doc

Wait one second. When you say "observed and unobserved" are you riffing off the verse that I posted there?

I’m kind of amalgamating my statement regarding the unobservable universe, and your verse, which brought to mind that we really can’t detect all aspects of reality yet.

- Doc

I'm glad you answered, I need to be cooking soon here.

Okay but I just want to point out the way I read this. Bolded part.

“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” Romans 1:20 KJV

"the invisible things of him" are in my view, what you are calling his godhood or what I would call his power, ability, capability, the internal and eternal force if you will. What others might call his majesty, glory or general awesome nature.

I bet that doesn't help.

In any case, I don't think that Jehovah created the Universe solely as a witness to his godhood. I think that's only part of it. I think he created it because he wanted to and we are part of that.

I don't think that the whole point was to draw witness to his godhood though I could be wrong. I could be wrong about everything I think and believe. I think the point was that he wanted to create, he created, the creation became corrupt, we're part of it, and he provided a way to bring us back to him.

1 Cor 10:13 (KJV ) as follows:

There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

I don't like posting scripture out of context, but I do think that concept applies going back to the beginning.

I am sure this sounds like circular reasoning. To my believing mind, it's what makes sense to me. And when I use the word "he" in relation to God, I'm not really referring to gender. I'm using tradition as a communication tool.

[_Ceeboo]

Hey all
The below (in blue) is not mine. It is being copy/pasted from an outside source.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archaeological and External Evidence for the Bible: An Outline
Archeology consistently confirms the Bible!

Archaeology and the Old Testament
Ebla tablets—discovered in 1970s in Northern Syria. Documents written on clay tablets from around 2300 B.C. demonstrate that personal and place names in the Patriarchal accounts are genuine. In use in Ebla was the name "Canaan," a name critics once said was not used at that time and was used incorrectly in the early chapters of the Bible. The tablets refer to all five "cities of the plain" mentioned in Genesis 14, previously assumed to have been mere legends.
Greater proportion of Egyptian words in the Pentateuch (first five books) than in rest of the Old Testament. Accurate Egyptian names: Potiphar (Gen.39), Zaphenath-Paneah (Joseph's Egyptian name, Gen. 41:45), Asenath (Gen.41:45), On (Gen. 41:45), Rameses (Gen. 47:11), Oithom (Exodus 1:11).
Finds in Egypt are consistent with the time, place, and other details of biblical accounts of the Israelites in Egypt. These include housing and tombs that could have been of the Israelites, as well as a villa and tomb that could have been Joseph's.
Confounding earlier skeptics, but confirming the Bible, an important discovery was made in Egypt in 1896. A tablet—the Merneptah Stela—was found that mentions Israel. (Merneptah was the pharaoh that ruled Egypt in 1212-1202 B.C.) The context of the stela indicates that Israel was a significant entity in the late 13th century B.C.
The Hittites were once thought to be a biblical legend, until their capital and records were discovered in Turkey.
Crucial find in Nuzi (northeastern Iraq), an entire cache of Hittite legal documents from 1400 B.C. Confirms many details of Genesis, Deuteronomy, such as: (a) siring of legitimate children through handmaidens, (b) oral deathbed will as binding, (c) the power to sell one's birthright for relatively trivial property (Jacob & Esau), (d) need for family idols, such as Rachel stole from Laban, to secure inheritance, (e) form of the covenant in Deuteronomy exactly matches the form of suzerainty treaties between Hittite emperors and vassal kings.
Walls of Jericho—discovery in 1930s by John Garstang. The walls fell suddenly, and outwardly (unique), so the Israelites could clamber over the ruins into the city (Joshua 6:20).
In 1986, scholars identified an ancient seal belonging to Baruch, son of Neriah, a scribe who recorded the prophecies of Jeremiah (Jer. 45:1).
In 1990, Harvard researchers unearthed a silver-plated bronze calf figurine reminiscent of the huge golden calf mentioned in the book of Exodus.
In 1993, archaeologists uncovered a 9th century B.C. inscription at Tel Dan. The words carved into a chunk of basalt refer to the "House of David" and the "King of Israel." And the Bible's version of Israelite history after the reign of David's son, Solomon, is believed to be based on historical fact because it is corroborated by independent account of Egyptian and Assyrian inscriptions.
It was once claimed there was no Assyrian king named Sargon as recorded in Isaiah 20:1, because this name was not known in any other record. Then, Sargon's palace was discovered in Iraq. The very event mentioned in Isaiah 20, his capture of Ashdod, was recorded on the palace walls! Even more, fragments of a stela (a poetic eulogy) memorializing the victory were found at Ashdod itself.
Another king who was in doubt was Belshazzar, king of Babylon, named in Daniel 5. The last king of Babylon was Nabonidus according to recorded history. The tablet was found showing that Belshazzar was Nabonidus' son.
The ruins of Sodom and Gomorrah have been discovered southeast of the Dead Sea. Evidence at the site seems consistent with the biblical account: "Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens." The destruction debris was about 3 feet thick and buildings were burned from fires that started on the rooftops. Geologist Frederick Clapp theorizes that that pressure from an earthquake could have spewed out sulfur-laden bitumen (similar to asphalt) known to be in the area through the fault line upon which the cities rest. The dense smoke reported by Abraham is consistent with a fire from such material, which could have ignited by a spark or ground fire.
Archaeology an
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personally - These types of things are not the reasons for my belief - but I find them interesting so I thought I would include them in the Bible study to hear what others might think about it.

[_Lemmie]

[Archeology consistently confirms the Bible!

So, parallels and coincidences? No evidence of anything supernatural? Did the Dales (from the Interpreter’s unfortunate foray into Bayesian misinterpretation fame) write that?

[_canpakes]

Wouldn’t a direct approach be super-easy for an omnipotent creator to figure out? : )

You mean like do not eat fruit from that tree over there in the garden?

Or the simpler, don't lie, cheat,kill, and steal.

Right. God places a tree filled with desirable fruit right in front of two critters who have no concept of do or don’t, or of disobey. Then they are instructed not to ‘eat the fruit’. Not that it couldn’t happen that the whole Tree of Knowledge Hosting Tasty Fruit thing couldn’t have rather been The Cactus of Knowledge, or the Boulder of Knowledge, or anything else that would be much harder to eat. Maybe even the ‘Knowledge’ part could have been the bark. Whatever might have been best to keep two critters without knowledge from eating the thing that would give them the understanding of the situation, right?

Then, have another one of God’s creation try to convince the two new critters to eat the thing they’re supposedly not intended to eat.

This is kind of illustrative of the problem, and of a possible solution.

Likewise, “don’t lie, cheat, kill or steal” seems straightforward enough once the critters come to understand what that means. Looks like that was all that was needed unless God wants some group of folks to walk over and grab someone else’s land, then we can do all of those things.

Nevertheless, those rules seem to indicate that God could plainly talk to his creation as much as he wanted to, and at any time. That doesn’t seem to happen past those first few examples.