Hi you all! I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses and one of my reasons to be here is to share and learn more about the harmony of the Bible and science as well as to listen anyone who thinks something in the Bible is out of harmony with science.
My user name (Newtonian) was chosen because my beliefs are similar to Isaac Newton who believed in both science and the Bible as sources of truth Am I permitted to quote our literature here? I wanted to start off by sharing an article is our literature about Isaac Newton's search for God I will post a couple of excerpts but this link is to the article in its entirety:
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1977284#h=1:0-60:672
Like me (and my religion) Newton rejected the trinity doctrine (of Christendom) for many reasons - including Bible manuscript research which he show was corrupted by trinitarians that inserted words into 1 John 5:7 to make it appear the Bible teaches the trinity doctrine.
A couple of excerpts from the article:
"Shortly before his death in 1727 he said of himself: “I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.â€2
Newton appreciated that God is the Source of all truth, and in line with the deep reverence he had for his Creator, he appears to have spent even more time searching after the true God than he did in searching out scientific truths. An analysis of all that Newton wrote reveals that out of some 3,600,000 words only 1,000,000 were devoted to the sciences, whereas some 1,400,000 were on religious topics.3"
Reference 3 - 3. The Correspondence of Isaac Newton, edited by H. W. Turnbull, F.R.S., Cambridge 1961, Vol. 1, p. XVII.
"In his writings, Newton gave much attention to the doctrine of the Trinity. One of his most outstanding contributions to the Biblical scholarship of the time was his work An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture, first published in 1754, twenty-seven years after his death. It reviewed all the textual evidence available from ancient sources on two Bible passages, at First John 5:7 and First Timothy 3:16.
In the King James Version Bible, First John 5:7 reads:
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.â€
Using early Church writers, the Greek and Latin manuscripts and the testimony of the first versions of the Bible, Newton proved that the words “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one,†in support of the Trinity doctrine, did not appear in the original inspired Greek Scriptures. He then traced the way in which the spurious reading crept into the Latin versions, first as a marginal note, and later into the text itself. He showed that it was first taken into a Greek text in 1515 by Cardinal Ximenes on the strength of a late Greek manuscript corrected from the Latin. Finally, Newton considered the sense and context of the verse, concluding, “Thus is the sense plain and natural, and the argument full and strong; but if you insert the testimony of ‘the Three in Heaven’ you interrupt and spoil it.â€4"
Reference 4 -4. An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture, by Sir Isaac Newton, Edition of 1830, London, p. 60.
I was Lutheran until age 9, they teach the trinity doctrine. In my simple childhood mind I could not understand how Jesus could be God, and Jesus die for our sins when God cannot die! But I thought so many intelligent adults believed this so I must be wrong.
I was right - and some of the reasons are so simple a child could understand!
Sorry for the long post. Btw - our website is jw.org
Hi Newtonian!
Do you believe that the Bible is "The Word of God"? Or is it the word of men who claimed to speak for God?
An interesting coincidence that you're here right now, since I was just looking at some newton fractals!
https://www.unf.edu/~ddreibel/teaching/newton/index.html
Quote from: Unbeliever on March 13, 2020, 04:09:41 PM
Hi Newtonian!
Do you believe that the Bible is "The Word of God"? Or is it the word of men who claimed to speak for God?
Hi Back!
Yes, just as Isaac Newton did. But to which 'god' do you refer? We believe in Jehovah, the personal name of the Creator. That name comes from a Hebrew verb 'hawah" [in English the suffix hovah] which means "to be" but in the causative sense - primary definition: He causes to be - in harmony with both the scientific principle of cause and effect as well as the law of conservation of matter and energy - and thankfully God is love! (1 John 4:8).
There are scientific reasons why I believe the author of the Bible is Jehovah though humans were used to write the Bible over a period of c. 1600 years. {there are other reasons as well - e.g. Bible prophecy)
For example, Moses wrote the book of Job about 1513 BCE, yet it.tells us the earth is hung upon nothing in empty space - something science did not discover until much later in fact, Newton discovered the "nothing" is gravity. Job 26:10 here:
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/dx/r1/lp-e/1001070122/13474
Job 26:7
King James Version
7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
Exodus 34:14, KJV, says God's name is Jealous:
"For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:"
meh...your god is befuddled by a woman's menstrual cycle. Not impressed.
Quote from: Unbeliever on March 13, 2020, 04:52:59 PM
Exodus 34:14, KJV, says God's name is Jealous:
"For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:"
KJV is not my favorite translation - NW is one of my favorites -
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/bl/r1/lp-e?q=Exodus%2034%3A14
Exodus 34:14
New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (Study Edition)
14 You must not bow down to another god,+ for Jehovah is known for* requiring exclusive devotion.* Yes, he is a God who requires exclusive devotion.+
Most words in Hebrew, Greek and English have more than one definition. H8034/shem in Hebrew can be translated name or reputation. Another translation:
(GW) (Never worship any other god, because the LORD is a God who does not tolerate rivals. In fact, he is known for not tolerating rivals.)
While Jehovah has many title/names like Lord, almighty, creator (etc.) he has only one personal name:
Psalms 83:18
(KJV+) That men may knowH3045 thatH3588 thou,H859 whose nameH8034 aloneH905 is JEHOVAH,H3068 art the most highH5945 overH5921 allH3605 the earth.H776
H3068/Yehovah is found almost 7,000 times in the Hebrew Scriptures (aka Old Testament = OT.
Most Bible translations removed the Divine Name (H3068/) WH = JHVH = Hebrew yehovah and substitute the title Lord (Hebrew adon/adonay).
Note also that a number of people in the Bible are called Jesus, only God bears the name Jehovah.
Not much Newtonianism in Christianity, in whatever form ;-)
This is a tough crowd. Better have a broken bottle ready if you go into a bar in a bad neighborhood.
I have no problem with theists, just theists who make theism look bad ;-)
Regardless, welcome.
Quote from: aitm on March 13, 2020, 05:00:07 PM
meh...your god is befuddled by a woman's menstrual cycle. Not impressed.
But a Brit would say ... "Bloody hell!".
Hi.
Got anything other than modern translated semantics of ancient texts? Like, you know, arguments?
That's probably asking too much, Sal.
It doesn't hurt to ask.
Welcome.
Oh, Newton, I prefer the fig version of Newtons. You version is just too full of crap.
BTW, your god (and all others) are fictions and so is your Jesus. Can you provide any proof that Jesus is other than a fiction???
Quote from: Sal1981 on March 13, 2020, 07:00:07 PM
It doesn't hurt to ask.
I dunno. We were off to a smooth start until you barged in with the whole reality thing.
Quote from: Newtonian on March 13, 2020, 04:00:37 PM
Hi you all! I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses and one of my reasons to be here is to share and learn more about the harmony of the Bible and science as well as to listen anyone who thinks something in the Bible is out of harmony with science.
Nothing to follow from this post has anything to do with science. Quoting a scientist's opinions on nonscientific things doesn't prove your point. Let me ask you a few questions:
1. How old do you believe that the Earth is?
2. Do you believe in the global Flood?
3. Do you believe that the Bible is infallible? That it is the perfect Word of God?
Don't we have a rule about not posting links in your first few posts?
Other than that, welcome to our band of heathens.
Quote from: Baruch on March 13, 2020, 06:00:17 PM
Not much Newtonianism in Christianity, in whatever form ;-)
This is a tough crowd. Better have a broken bottle ready if you go into a bar in a bad neighborhood.
I have no problem with theists, just theists who make theism look bad ;-)
Regardless, welcome.
Thank you!
Quote from: Sal1981 on March 13, 2020, 06:54:44 PM
Hi.
Got anything other than modern translated semantics of ancient texts? Like, you know, arguments?
What is your definition of semantics? I have a sense of humor, btw.
Hebrew chuwg at Job 26:10 and Isaiah 40:22 have slightly different defitions:
At Job 26:10 the terminator is described on earth's primordial waters (Genesis 1:2 - earth was totally covered with water before the first creative day.(*)) is chuwg/circle - in two dimensions - the terminator is an actual line.
At Isaiah 40:22 two definitions of chuwg apply:
A. 2 dimensions/chuwg/circle - because from any direction (e.g. from any galaxy) or other solar system within Milky Way earth appears as a circle, much like the moon, Pluto, etc. appears as a circle to us earthlings. That would include any direction God views earth from.
B. 3 dimensions. In 3-D Hebrew chuwg means sphere - also translated correctly as 'round." [not flat]
I could post on any Bible subject or science subject - just gave you 2 Bible verses that are actually science subjects as well.
Quote from: Sal1981 on March 13, 2020, 07:00:07 PM
It doesn't hurt to ask.
Sorry for the delay in responding- I was rushed by helicopter to hospital Friday night with severe Atrial flutter - Cardizem was used to slow my heart rate and my pacemaker kept pulse from going below 60 bpm. On Saturday my pacemaker was re-programmed to catch any heartbeat above 125 bpm. I initially had such rapid BPM I could not feel my pulse - thankfully that only lasted about 10 seconds - then I stabilized with tachycardia at 150 bpm - just enough to keep me conscious so I could call 911 and stay conscious despite Angina from the inefficient blood circulation due to rapid heartbeat.
That is the only reason for my delay in responding - sorry about that!
Please be more specific as to what subject interests you or you would like me to post about.
Quote from: Newtonian on March 16, 2020, 04:38:24 AM
Sorry for the delay in responding- I was rushed by helicopter to hospital Friday night with severe Atrial flutter - Cardizem was used to slow my heart rate and my pacemaker kept pulse from going below 60 bpm. On Saturday my pacemaker was re-programmed to catch any heartbeat above 125 bpm. I initially had such rapid BPM I could not feel my pulse - thankfully that only lasted about 10 seconds - then I stabilized with tachycardia at 150 bpm - just enough to keep me conscious so I could call 911 and stay conscious despite Angina from the inefficient blood circulation due to rapid heartbeat.
That is the only reason for my delay in responding - sorry about that!
Please be more specific as to what subject interests you or you would like me to post about.
Get well. A wife of a coworker of mine has Atrial flutter, and it worries him greatly.
Quote from: Newtonian on March 16, 2020, 04:38:24 AM
Sorry for the delay in responding- I was rushed by helicopter to hospital Friday night with severe Atrial flutter - Cardizem was used to slow my heart rate and my pacemaker kept pulse from going below 60 bpm. On Saturday my pacemaker was re-programmed to catch any heartbeat above 125 bpm. I initially had such rapid BPM I could not feel my pulse - thankfully that only lasted about 10 seconds - then I stabilized with tachycardia at 150 bpm - just enough to keep me conscious so I could call 911 and stay conscious despite Angina from the inefficient blood circulation due to rapid heartbeat.
That is the only reason for my delay in responding - sorry about that!
Please be more specific as to what subject interests you or you would like me to post about.
Yeesh! Sorry to hear that. Stay well.
Quote from: Newtonian on March 16, 2020, 04:30:53 AM
What is your definition of semantics?
Semantics is the study between language and the derived meaning of words in linguistics.
So far, you've only quoted an ancient text, with modern-stylized interpretation of them.
---
Do you think Earth has 4 corners?
Quote from: Baruch on March 16, 2020, 06:15:48 AM
Get well. A wife of a coworker of mine has Atrial flutter, and it worries him greatly.
Worry is not going to help. Cardizem = Diltiazem stopped my rapid heartbeat/rtachycardia/Atrial flutter - through IV - two doses and my beat was down to 60bpm! I was prescribed with fast release 90mg. Diltiazem but was reassured by my cardiologist that it was less likely to reoccur like Atrial Fibrilation does (= A fib) - I am taking Amodarone (200 mg. daily) for that - it does work but has a weird side effect (realistic dreams).
When I was on Long Island (NY) I studied the Bible with my cardiologist (He was Hindu - we both liked Gandhi). This was one of his favorite Scriptures:
Proverbs 14:30
A calm heart is the life of the fleshly organism,+ but jealousy is rottenness to the bones.+
[Alternate translation- A calm heart gives health to the body]
Quote from: Newtonian on March 16, 2020, 04:38:24 AM
Sorry for the delay in responding- I was rushed by helicopter to hospital Friday night with severe Atrial flutter - Cardizem was used to slow my heart rate and my pacemaker kept pulse from going below 60 bpm. On Saturday my pacemaker was re-programmed to catch any heartbeat above 125 bpm. I initially had such rapid BPM I could not feel my pulse - thankfully that only lasted about 10 seconds - then I stabilized with tachycardia at 150 bpm - just enough to keep me conscious so I could call 911 and stay conscious despite Angina from the inefficient blood circulation due to rapid heartbeat.
That is the only reason for my delay in responding - sorry about that!
Please be more specific as to what subject interests you or you would like me to post about.
All the best, Newt. Get well and stay well, especially in these trying times.
Only here a few days and already we nearly kilt ya! Careful "we hav vays of getting to you"
Quote from: Mr.Obvious on March 18, 2020, 07:23:23 AM
All the best, Newt. Get well and stay well, especially in these trying times.
Thank you Mr. obvious! I stopped posting because I was back in the hospital again Now I am home again.
Quote from: Newtonian on March 21, 2020, 08:34:35 AM
Thank you Mr. obvious! I stopped posting because I was back in the hospital again Now I am home again.
Glad to hear. Get rest.
Quote from: Baruch on March 21, 2020, 10:58:16 AM
Glad to hear. Get rest.
Thank you - good suggestion!
Quote from: Newtonian on March 13, 2020, 05:37:23 PM
KJV is not my favorite translation - NW is one of my favorites
Funny how the "inerrant" word of god is available in so many translations, not all of which can be reconciled with each other. You'd think an all-powerful, all-knowledgeable entity could do better than that.