:::Thanks for deleting it. There is no need to put in entries which are not clear examples.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:50, 13 November 2016 (EST)
::::My question for [[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] is when is it okay to actually delete it. [[User:Erniecohen|Erniecohen]] ([[User talk:Erniecohen|talk]]) 13:40, 14 November 2016 (EST)
:::::An editor whom I trust has stated that the article is better without it, so I won't object you removing it. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:28, 14 November 2016 (EST)
::::::I deleted it (FILO :-) ) - after four and a half year... Success of sorts... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 07:29, 20 November 2016 (EST)
== Pi to one significant figure ==
::Are you claiming that hedonism is not a major cause for obesity? If so, why? Is the Christian conservative Chuck Norris wrong about obesity primarily being caused by hedonism? See: [[Chuck Norris on the topic of obesity]] If so, why? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:29, 24 September 2012 (EDT)
:::AugustO, I reread your criticism. It was valid. I removed the material. Thanks. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:46, 13 November 2016 (EST)
::::Has anyone in your collective gained weight lately ;-) ? No, seriously, thanks - perhaps you can take a look at the other points I've made over the last five years on this talk-page.... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 07:33, 20 November 2016 (EST)
Your welcome. Second, I don't think me being a mediator between you and the owner of the website would change matters significantly. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:00, 20 November 2016 (EST)
:I'm just happy that you have changed your mind and hope that it wasn't for the last time... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 14:18, 20 November 2016 (EST)
== Seriously disappointed... ==
So, Strong makes it clear that in the Bible, λέγω is used to denote speech in progress. He doesn't bother with irrelevant Homeric meanings. ..[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 07:48, 28 April 2016 (EDT)
== Perhaps a little more dual attribution ==
;I only read the lead section before posting this comment. I may revise after a more careful reading.
You may want to be a little more careful in the claims made in the lead section and, when appropriate, provide double-attribution. The prophecy of events in the Bible is OK but you should avoid revisionist claims in terms of specific scientific progress. It is sometimes very easy to take credit for specific aspects of scientific progress. I am just recommending caution and editorial review for the sake of protecting the reputation of the wiki as a trustworthy encyclopedia. An example might be a claim that it was G-d's Will that some fortunate historic event came out one way or the other (such as a military battle or potential Act of Nature) but it is more extraordinary to claim that a particular game of chess (or some such) was won through Divine Intervention. There are many scientific discoveries that came about in part because of accidents that can be treated as Acts of God, but attribution to the efforts of the researcher is also appropriate. One example might be the invention of the light bulb that was in part due to the grace of G-d but it was also due in part to Edison's persistence of making many hundreds of tries before he came upon a viable working model. Oh, I now see that my comments might be more appropriate over at [[Essay:Rebuttal to Biblical scientific foreknowledge]]. I am not sure I intend for a direct rebuttal but rather cautious claims and, to some degree, a meeting of the minds.--[[User:Amorrow|Amorrow]] ([[User talk:Amorrow|talk]]) 18:03, 12 January 2017 (EST)
== Set Theory ==
What is paradoxical about this? It's "first in, last out", a concept, a few of hunters will have experienced after entering a narrow cave. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 20:03, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
:You seem to be referring to this:
::Set theory was unknown until the devout [[Christian]] [[Georg Cantor]] developed it in the late 1800s to understand [[God]] better. But [[Jesus]] taught, “So the last will be first, and the first last” (Matthew 20:16 [[ESV]]), a concept that is paradoxical ''except'' in set theory. This set-theory concept is also echoed by the repeated references to [[Jesus]] as the "Alpha and the Omega" in the [[Book of Revelation]]. (Revelation 1:8, 21:6, 22:13)
:It is obviously paradoxical for “the last will be first, and the first last” in common situations ... except when viewed through the logic of set theory.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:07, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
*εἰσιν οἱ ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι could be seen as paradoxical, but what is paradoxical about ἔσονται οἱ ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι - which is in Matthew 20:16? Has your position never changed over time?
*Could you please explain in a little more detail the connection between set-theory and the concept? Perhaps in the language of set-theory? Thanks!
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 17:54, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
== Sports ==
This entry seems especially dubious: the pagans - especially the ancient Greeks - were known for valuing "physical exercise" very much (look for γυμνάσιον)! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 07:34, 3 November 2019 (EST)
==Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences==
This article could point out that when Saint Paul writes about the different spiritual gifts (I think it was in one of his epistles to the Corinthians) he was predicting Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences. [[User:Carltonio|Carltonio]] ([[User talk:Carltonio|talk]]) 15:44, 22 November 2019 (EST)
== Anaethestics ==
I find the following sentence confused and thus very confusing:
::Had scientists and physicians been more [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|openminded]] about Genesis 2:21 (perhaps they had considered it a miracle, and thus impossible for humans to achieve), they may have discovered anesthesia far sooner, and saved many more lives."
God was performing a miracle. And part of God's plan for humanity seems to have been that we would learn over a long period of time. The idea that science and scientists reject what the Bible says is nonsense. Rather God speaks differently to modern people whereas He was speaking to nomadic tribesmen in the Bible. He now speaks to an entirely different audience. The Bible is of great importance but God is the '''author of science'' and its modern discoveries also. To suggest otherwise is blasphemous according my understanding of religious faith. Please fix!! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:57, August 5, 2022 (EDT)
Maybe I'm too literal minded, but this seems to be saying that God performed an operation using a general anesthetic when he cut out Adams rib. This is ludicrous – God used His supernatural powers. Likewise he did not create Eve in a test tube out of Adam's bone marrow or by some advanced genetic technology. Logical thinking indeed.--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:20, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
:I've deleted the parenthetical, which detracts from the point. Miracles are possible, and many properly view miracles as signs of what is possible. Close-mindedness rejects the possibility.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:41, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
== Illogical (irreligious?) article ==
I find this article puzzling. Yes, God knows all and it is therefore not surprising that the Bible should appear to foreshadow some scientific discoveries. But there seems to be a confusion. The Bible was written for an ancient nomadic people and so does not speak in the language of modern science. Likewise it is not a manual for building a computer or how to get to the moon. Furthermore while God, as Creator, has absolute knowledge, humanity through science, philosophy, the arts, etc. gradually, overtime reveals more and more about creation. The article needs to more clearly acknowledge human imperfection and that science is fallible, while still being part of God's plan. The idea that if a scientist is an atheist his science is bad is problematic. Think about it. Do we only accept technology or medical procedures developed by Christians." God moves in mysterious ways his wonders to perform" (William Cowper).--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 18:07, August 6, 2022 (EDT)
:Maybe the argument is failure to acknowledge God's sovereignty contaminates everything. Sure, someone may argue, "What about Prof. such-and-such who discovered treatment for XYZ disease? He was an atheist." That has to be measured against him (or they) being held up as a role model for [[God denier]]s and God haters, and the damage human [[pride]] has done to the species. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]]</sup> 18:29, August 6, 2022 (EDT)
::Even an atheist scientists can be doing God's work, do you not agre? Most of the evil over the centuries has been caused by religious organizations and human greed not science. Where science has caused harm it has been mostly business men and politicians, along with the profit motif, that has been to blame, whatever, the faith of the scientists involved may have been. Also, it is worth noting the profound insights found in other religious texts, especially Buddhism. An atheist scientist who is awed by God's creation is closer to God than many who claim they are Christians, but who really worship materialism.--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 19:40, August 6, 2022 (EDT).
:::Interesting hypothesis. My determination: It's flawed. And for the sake of argument, I'm not going to argue it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]]</sup> 20:39, August 6, 2022 (EDT)
No one has yet explained to me the point of this illogical article.
(1) Why would God provide foreknowledge of things to the Israelites that have yet to be discovered?
(2) Why criticize scientists for not making discoveries sooner, when this was clearly God's intention that humankind would over aeons do this?
(3) God represents perfection whereas scientists only strifes for perfection and cannot be criticized for failing, if they acts in good faith.
(4) Religion has frequently opposed many scientific discoveries that are claimed here as biblical foreknowledge.
(5) Maybe the article ends up implying God that made the mistake of not revealing, at the beginning, what science has discovered?
Why is the article needed: to bash scientists? –or to to criticize God for not giving Adam and Eve access to the marvels of 20th century technology?
This article is utterly illogical. Delete it or get someone who understands theology to rewrite.
A genuine '''intelligent''' article on the dangers of worshipping of science to the detriment of spiritual values is needed, not this pseudo, fake "philosophy"/"theology".--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 12:59, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
:Predictions of scientific possibilities are immensely helpful. I don't understand your criticism.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:47, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
::My impression is RLW confuses science with human pride; he sounds as if he is of the school that teaches, "We don't need God. We have science. We're smarter than God." [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Ich bin ein breakfast taco]]</sup> 19:37, August 7, 2022 (EDT)
::::You are confused RobS. My point is that God is the supreme Creator and as the creator of humankind the source of science. I am not denying that science can be misused and corrupted. But just imagine what your life would be like if you were living in biblical times. --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 13:32, August 8, 2022 (EDT).
:::::The [[Amish]] live that way, and are thriving better than [[atheist]]ic society. Some atheists say we should strive to live "[[off-the-grid]]", which is how people lived in biblical times.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 13:41, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
Presumably you , [[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]], make frequent use of modern science, other than the internet and you and/or family have benefited from the advances made by modern medical science. What is needed is an intelligent discussion of the harm caused to spiritual values by a '''worship''' of science and materialistic values, not this waffle. I do not understand how these supposed biblical predictions are "immensely helpful".
Also, as noted previously, the idea of God performing surgery, using a general anaesthetic so totally absurd.
But I must be misunderstanding you and RobS, there is no other explanation. [[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]]
:Many lives could have been saved or improved if anesthesia had been discovered earlier. Why wasn't it? Because [[atheist]]ic scientists are closed-minded about [[Biblical scientific foreknowledge]]. If more scientists had been open-minded earlier about the anesthesia described in [[Genesis]], more would have benefited from anesthesia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 02:41, August 9, 2022 (EDT)
== Construction of ancient sky-high structures ==
I do not understand why this section was restored. The Bible recorded an historical fact and modern archeology has confirmed this. What has this to do with "scientific foreknowledge? Does the Truth of the Bible need to be confirmed? I don't understand the purpose of this compendium of biblical trivia. But I will remove this page from my watch list! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 14:37, August 8, 2022 (EDT)
:Leaving this discussion with a proverbial [[Parthian shot]]? We see lots of those here. Until the 1900s some thought skyscrapers were impossible. Not those who read the [[Bible]] with an open mind.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]]
::Presumably there were open-minded readers of the Bible before 1901, including architects and engineers. I doubt that all engineers/scientists are atheists, and they especially were not prior to 1901. You are blaming God because he did not give humankind enough knowledge in Eden! Skyscapers were not built until recently because that is how God planned it; use your God-given brain! --[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 10:16, August 9, 2022 (EDT)
== Source for scientific evidene for circumsision on the 8th day ==
I want to add the following link as a source for that section of the article under the bible and health practices, but am unable to add the link as a reference (am only used to doing it with wikipedia smart editor, not with wikitext). Could someone please add this? Thanks.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321462229_Haematological_Basis_of_8th_Day_Male_Child_Circumcision_in_The_Holy_Bible
[[User:Ethan Parmet|Ethan Parmet]] ([[User talk:Ethan Parmet|talk]]) 17:06, September 11, 2022 (EDT)
:Posted the good link as suggested. Well done!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:26, September 11, 2022 (EDT)