[Locked] Is Scientist really proving the Bible to be wrong?

In my humble opinion I have noticed science being used as a tool to reflect on how the events in the Bible to be true or could have happened. Be it miracles or the overall timeline. It is a known fact many grown people cannot even understand the bible. I finished the bible at age three and have been futhering my studies ever so often. Be it the king james version or tanakh. I like science it is a mighty tool when used properly. What I can also assume from all the different religions is they have a direct relationship too proving the existence of God. I reflect when people say God does not exist they are right. I say this because the word "God" is a title meaning immortal. That is like me saying "humans" do not exist that is a title meaning mortals. The only people that say the name "God" are people who do not know the true name however "God" has a over sixty-two names. Studying to find out the true name is a task I would rather leave to the neglecting individual. As it is stated in the book and I quote "He who reveals secrets is a base fellow". I like science so much that I want to look at the theories and natural phenomena so I can see with my own eyes what the community has found. Be that as it may alas science has had lephers in their community as well. From fake bones representing the primate qualities in us or forgies of artifacts and etcetera. In my opinion the light that "God" supposedly made is nothing more than what scientist call the big bang however that is a theory. What many people in my humble opinion are confusing is our being with our well being. The known amount of "God" laws are the ten commandments. That is what the KJV lost in being translated there are actually over one hundred and fifty laws. These laws personally have helped me from making mistakes that could have made me devoid of sense. From a standpoint I have realized that these laws are already stating what can and cannot be done by a righteous man. When it comes to the laws of common nations most are biased and a disaster usually has to take place before any written man made law can do anything to represent severe punishment for the actions of groups or individuals. My main concern is usually the wicked...Why is this is usually because of most religions have wicked people representing or as I like to call them infidels. These people are sadistic and barely even remotely people like the Pope and others like him are damaging the reputation of most peoples trust in religion. Just like people in the scientific communities reputation being destoryed by what I said earlier. When I read chapters of the old testament (I forget which one) it is stated that not one person does good on earth, not one. That means everyone is wicked, everyone is corrupt, and everyone schemes. That also mean that means trust no one not even children they are not only born to adversity but are born wicked from the womb. I therefor expect the worst out of people before I expect any good. False prophets that only preach for profits are a breed that are deserving of much misfortune. Just like scientist who scheme or dismantle the natural environment when they could simple observe. Both parties are as flawed as can be there is no mistaking that. I mean this with humble intentions if you have a problem with what I said or want to discuss more on this topic message me or post reply. I can talk about this subject matter for days. How about you?

Sorry if this is too personal, but do your parents think the same way you do? One thing I've come to notice is that sometimes the child's thoughts and ideas will differ from that of their parent's.

Stop double posting, OP. Keep your replies in one post.

Do it manually. It's a little bit of extra effort, but that's expected of users in this section.

First, will anyone tell me the the difference between faith and reasoning?

You can take anything and justify it using science.

Isn't that what happens most of the time? I've seen this happen so many times that it's quite embarrassing. Christians quickly stopped talking about literal interpretation of Gensis or dinosaurs living with humans because it didn't make any sense; now all you see is "Well, literal interpretation of Genesis is impossible but if you look at it symbolically it's true, God is true". The distortion of something obvious and justifying it using Science doesn't make it any true.

Search up Miracles of the Quran
Miracles of Bible
Miracles of Torah
Miracles of ancient gods

You'll find the same nonsense.

Agreed, and as you said, you can justify just about anything using science. This is because science is basically an equation, and as long as you exist within the equation, you will always get X.

This is true.. pop's is a popeist(roman catholic), mom a spiritual person.. what ever that means. I was a catholic until i was 16.. i punched a asshole who was a priest. Said shit no person should say to a grieving mother on her son's suicide because of his sexually vs morally. When i do thank god or whatever it is for the chance to find what i believe in and a place where i welcome with my mortal faults and no be judged.

My friend, justify does not mean make true, it merely means to provide evidence in the defense of said object.

Edit: or to provide sufficient reasoning of it's character.

It probably does, but I think it's mostly due to a placebo effect.

In some cases, a patient will sometimes be given a placebo (a.k.a. sugar pill) when conventional medicine will not work. The patient often not be told that it is a placebo. The patient will genuinely believe that they are receiving medicine that will make them better and give them mental motivation to continue fighting the illness and in about 20-30% of patients, the patient's condition will actually begin to improve.

For a religions person in medical trouble, religion serves the purpose of a placebo. The patient will genuinely believe that they are being healed by a higher power, which gives them the mental motivation to fight the illness. I'm not sure what the success rate is, though, but I expect it's not too far.

Ok, so what if a situation has multiple connotations?

or, what if someone attacks another person or animal, does the inability to justify it make the action any less true?

Does scientist did really proved that the world has GOD? and we should trust blindly to this so called fact of the past? who is this God? a Human? or just an alien that came from another planet bearing the knowledge of laws on their home planet and use that in our planet Earth? that so called bible can be the prove that all these ideas of laws and punishment came from somewhere. human on the earlier age does not have the knowledge to create all this law but suddenly we have a book of others called Bible.. it just like 'poof' came from thin air and we have a place called hell and a place called heaven.

And yeah the scientist did prove that some of the fact inside the bible are to be right such as the being that were called as Angels and the so called god are one of the alien that came to earth...

I feel like a majority of the people who post on here invest a little too much in the history channel.

EDIT: OK, the question was, I cannot justify the attack of that person, does that mean it didn't happen?

In other words, you have no evidence to believe this is true, you just say it's true anyway. Gotcha.