The rainbow


#1

I believe that god put the rainbow in the sky, in fact its one of the many “visible” miracles that is still around from biblical times. it gives me Great faith and confidence when im around my atheist freinds and family to see such a buetifull thing, knowing that God put it thier after the great flood. But then i watched this program, it was scientific in nature( it was about the invention of science and how it devoloped ), but it was sending a desguised message of how “science triumped” over the catholic church( the commentator was very entrusiastic, almost throthing at the mouth. Basically it was a made to make you doubt, deguising its agenda with science. It comes on late at night with a load of other history programs that i like wacthing. I have to admit, It shook me a bit, but i rembered my experiences that keep me clinnging on to god, i rembered that he saved me, so i ignored my doubts. The guy comentating the program said somthing about some kind of monk or preist could make atificail rainbows by some means that i cant remember clearly( i bet atheists hate the fact that science started in the church, thats one thing i proud of). I think the monk was spitting some kind of fluid in to a ray of light, creating and image of a rainbow, this cuased a great contraversy and was supressed, at least thats what the documentary wants us to believe( it trys to give sense of conspiracy, hidden behind a story about science). This made me qeustion if the rainbow was allways there from the beginning, or if it was put there by god after the flood, as a promise to never flood the whole world again. It would be a shame if the bible wasnt accurate on this, but it would not make me lose my faith. Its just one argument i wont be able to use agaist those who try to challenge my faith. please give me a anwser as soon as you can. :thumbsup:


#2

[quote=freesoulhope]I believe that god put the rainbow in the sky, in fact its one of the many “visible” miracles that is still around from biblical times. it gives me Great faith and confidence when im around my atheist freinds and family to see such a buetifull thing, knowing that God put it thier after the great flood. But then i watched this program, it was scientific in nature( it was about the invention of science and how it devoloped ), but it was sending a desguised message of how “science triumped” over the catholic church( the commentator was very entrusiastic, almost throthing at the mouth. Basically it was a made to make you doubt, deguising its agenda with science. It comes on late at night with a load of other history programs that i like wacthing. I have to admit, It shook me a bit, but i rembered my experiences that keep me clinnging on to god, i rembered that he saved me, so i ignored my doubts. The guy comentating the program said somthing about some kind of monk or preist could make atificail rainbows by some means that i cant remember clearly( i bet atheists hate the fact that science started in the church, thats one thing i proud of). I think the monk was spitting some kind of fluid in to a ray of light, creating and image of a rainbow, this cuased a great contraversy and was supressed, at least thats what the documentary wants us to believe( it trys to give sense of conspiracy, hidden behind a story about science). This made me qeustion if the rainbow was allways there from the beginning, or if it was put there by god after the flood, as a promise to never flood the whole world again. It would be a shame if the bible wasnt accurate on this, but it would not make me lose my faith. Its just one argument i wont be able to use agaist those who try to challenge my faith. please give me a anwser as soon as you can. :thumbsup:
[/quote]

I’m not sure I really understand what you are asking. I hope your faith is not dependent on a rainbow. Rainbows are commonplace after rain. They are nice to look at but I don’t see anything miraculous about them.
Also who said science started in the Church?


#3

The rainbow was placed AFTER the great flood!! We know this to be true because we know the bible to be true!! We also have huge amounts of theoligical, anthropology, and other scientific findings and facts that has proved many of the prophesies in the bibe and the miracles told about in the bible. Our scientific findings will blow away “1/2” findings on how the rainbow can be made and was probably there before.

In a logical sense, lets think about it this way. EVERYTHING is wiped off the face of the earth except what was on that arch!! Now where or who is going to create a rainbow?? God DID create ALL things and the rainbow is one of them!! Just because he didn’t make it when he made the heaven’s and the earth doesn’t mean he didn’t make it! It was his promise, solid promise!!

Also, if you do start to doubt it, believe it or not, you will start to doubt your faith and beliefs. “well, if that wasn’t true, what if this isn’t also” and so forth. It is not logical to say you believe on portion of the bible, but not the other. No, it is a WHOLE and ALL true!

Look up Dr. Kent Houind or is it Havind. Well, look him up, you can download his seminars FREE from your computer. It will blow you away and show you hard core proof of the bible being true, every part of it. It is awesome, you’ll probably like it.

Dragonfly


#4

[quote=dragonfly]…

Look up Dr. Kent Houind or is it Havind. Well, look him up, you can download his seminars FREE from your computer. It will blow you away and show you hard core proof of the bible being true, every part of it. It is awesome, you’ll probably like it.

Dragonfly
[/quote]

No, don’t go looking to Kent Hovind for anything! (Aside from amusement, that is). The man is a quack. If you want an apologist, go to one who is respectable.


#5

Its true, after every thing god has done for me i still lack in faith, i pray that god has mercy. And as for the idea that science started in the church, i had read about christian scientists that where around when “morden” science was in its early stages, hence the assumption. I think that i may be mistaken. The rainbow doesnt support my faith it strengthens it, this maybe becuase i have a weak faith, but i take pride in things like jesus reserection and the miracles he performed, the miracle in fatima and so on. if miracles where not performed to destroy doubt in us simple human beings, then why where they performed? god comunicated with us through miracles so that we might believe. if there where no miracles performed then i might still believe based on the love i feel from god( on a nesesertie for him, since he saved me from death, if he isnt real then i have no reason to live). i am not totally enslaved by the idea of miracles. when i was baptised i was expecting a miracle, but it did’nt happen, but i still went on believing even though i was being crushed by ridicule and other soul destroying things. However if the bones of jesus was found tommoro i would be destroyed, becuase my belief in jesus and new everlasting life in him, is based on a “miracle”. my faith is so weak that, Any augument that eats away at the foundation of the church of jesus Christ, usely ends up in me allmost having a panic attack. if this is weaknes, prey for me that i may live, becuase i continue to exist only for christ.


#6

[quote=EnterTheBowser]No, don’t go looking to Kent Hovind for anything! (Aside from amusement, that is). The man is a quack. If you want an apologist, go to one who is respectable.
[/quote]

who would you then say is respectable?? The man (dr.kent) did have some really good evidence. Made my strength in the bible even more devoted. so then how can that be bad?? Is that bad??


#7

[quote=freesoulhope]Its true, after every thing god has done for me i still lack in faith, i pray that god has mercy. And as for the idea that science started in the church, i had read about christian scientists that where around when “morden” science was in its early stages, hence the assumption. I think that i may be mistaken. The rainbow doesnt support my faith it strengthens it, this maybe becuase i have a weak faith, but i take pride in things like jesus reserection and the miracles he performed, the miracle in fatima and so on. if miracles where not performed to destroy doubt in us simple human beings, then why where they performed? god comunicated with us through miracles so that we might believe. if there where no miracles performed then i might still believe based on the love i feel from god( on a nesesertie for him, since he saved me from death, if he isnt real then i have no reason to live). i am not totally enslaved by the idea of miracles. when i was baptised i was expecting a miracle, but it did’nt happen, but i still went on believing even though i was being crushed by ridicule and other soul destroying things. However if the bones of jesus was found tommoro i would be destroyed, becuase my belief in jesus and new everlasting life in him, is based on a “miracle”. my faith is so weak that, Any augument that eats away at the foundation of the church of jesus Christ, usely ends up in me allmost having a panic attack. if this is weaknes, prey for me that i may live, becuase i continue to exist only for christ.
[/quote]

yes, you are in my prayers. But can I ask you a question? You said if Jesus’ bones were found, you’d be destroyed, right? But why?? Do you think you would actually believe whatever that anthropologist or whoever over your own Savior?? No, I think you just need to pray for the power of discernment and for God to give you his heart. If you continue to exist only for christ, then you are doing good. You could just be under attack! And we have to always fight those and we do win, when you do trust God!


#8

I respect you dragonfly. Even if that guy might be a quak (which we dont know) you are not bullied by populour science, and you look at all possibilitys even if they are discredited by the main body of scientists today. Thats cool man, i personally look at both sides of the argument, and to be Quite honest, i have tryed to take in the possibilty that science is right in some respects, but it seems to me that alot of the main science ideas concerning “evolution” looks to me like they found a coincidence and have built a inteligent story around it(thats not to say thats true). alot of there ideas dont necceraly follow the laws of physics and rely on faith themselves and a miricale that god can only perform anyway. i dont know the truth, but keep seaching. I will definetly read some stuff on dr kent and see if it holds any keys to the mystery. god bless :thumbsup:


#9

[quote=dragonfly]who would you then say is respectable?? The man (dr.kent) did have some really good evidence. Made my strength in the bible even more devoted. so then how can that be bad?? Is that bad??
[/quote]

Well, for one, it’s “Dr.” Kent, not Dr. Kent. He’s about on par with Jack Chick when it comes to good arguments. It is bad to go to Hovind for information because his arguments are so bad that they’re funny. (What do they call that? Irrisio infidelium?). The man is a young-Earth creationist; if that’s not enough to convince you, most of the arguments he deploys have actually been repudiated by other YEC’s, such as Answers in Genesis. TalkOrigins also has an article or two regarding Dr. Dino.

Who would a respectable apologist be? Swinburne, or Craig, (I’m sure there are more); at least they try to be rational.


#10

[quote=freesoulhope]I respect you dragonfly. Even if that guy might be a quak (which we dont know) you are not bullied by populour science, and you look at all possibilitys even if they are discredited by the main body of scientists today. Thats cool man, i personally look at both sides of the argument, and to be Quite honest, i have tryed to take in the possibilty that science is right in some respects, but it seems to me that alot of the main science ideas concerning “evolution” looks to me like they found a coincidence and have built a inteligent story around it(thats not to say thats true). alot of there ideas dont necceraly follow the laws of physics and rely on faith themselves and a miricale that god can only perform anyway. i dont know the truth, but keep seaching. I will definetly read some stuff on dr kent and see if it holds any keys to the mystery. god bless :thumbsup:
[/quote]

Thank you freesoulhope. I most deffinately believe that science is right in some aspects; take DNA for example. That had to take some pretty smart scientists to figure out one’s DNA and then also be able to use it to catch convicts!! I think that is awesome! Science, like the law of gravity, can be good. And then there is science that can also be deceiving. But whenever I am told something or I hear it, I ALWAYS devote it to prayer first, and then I go see if I can go find a similar subject in my bible. This is what first started to strength my faith. It is our job and our duty to question! Faith is not to be blind. I really feel that if you walk into an organized religion and you do not find out all their beleifs and put them to the test(prayer) then you are letting strangers decide your salvation! No, we must be aware of the false things of the world. Because Jesus tell us, I tell you of worldly things and you do not understand, so how will you understand if I tell you of Spiritual things.
You are on the right track. Just stay close to God, always ask him and stay in the word, it is his Love Letter to you!!


#11

i dont believe in an old earth, i am currantly looking it up, to see if what you say holds any weight. if what you say is true, then respect to the fact that it is unlikley that the earth is young. but This does’nt mean that all his arguments are wrong. some people find it hard to reject a young earth, becuase when the bible is qeustioned it is a frightening experience. Any way i will look it up and get back to you. worst comes to worst. i would have at least found out for my self instead of being lead blindly by opinion. :thumbsup:


#12

[quote=EnterTheBowser]Well, for one, it’s “Dr.” Kent, not Dr. Kent. He’s about on par with Jack Chick when it comes to good arguments. It is bad to go to Hovind for information because his arguments are so bad that they’re funny. (What do they call that? Irrisio infidelium?). The man is a young-Earth creationist; if that’s not enough to convince you, most of the arguments he deploys have actually been repudiated by other YEC’s, such as Answers in Genesis. TalkOrigins also has an article or two regarding Dr. Dino.

Who would a respectable apologist be? Swinburne, or Craig, (I’m sure there are more); at least they try to be rational.
[/quote]

I do not know of Jack Chick and what are YEC’s?? So what are some of Kents findings that you find amusing or false?? And this is really just out of my own curiosity. I like to hear it all, Learn it all, then teach it all.


#13

Just a thought on rainbows:

Before the Flood, it had never rained – the earth was watered by water coming up from the ground (Genesis 2:5-6). Usually, we see rainbows after or during a rain shower. Perhaps the rainbow after the Flood was the first time a rainbow was able to appear because it had never rained before? God said to Noah, “Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant.” God doesn’t seem to be saying the rainbows are in themselves miraculous, but they are a naturally-occuring phenomenon that He has chosen to use a sign of His covenant with Noah, to promise to never destroy the whole world with a flood again.


#14

I do not know of Jack Chick and what are YEC’s?? So what are some of Kents findings that you find amusing or false?? And this is really just out of my own curiosity. I like to hear it all, Learn it all, then teach it all.

OK, so when you say young-earth creationist are you talking about “creationism” and “fundamentalism” where we say(biblical) the earth was made in six days, but these scientist say that they were 6 chronological days and as trying to prove scienfifically w/ whatever means available that the earth is 6,000 yrs. old which Cardinal Schonborn said it is impossible for the earth to be 6,000 yrs. old?? So then what about kents time line, that thing looked pretty accurate, or would you consider that to be “whatever means avail.” catagory?? so then how old is the earth really?? And does it even matter?? I don’t really think it pertains to my salvation to know that answer. I know where I’m going when I do, so is it really important to know how old the earth is??
Dragonfly


#15

[quote=freesoulhope]i dont believe in an old earth, i am currantly looking it up, to see if what you say holds any weight. if what you say is true, then respect to the fact that it is unlikley that the earth is young. but This does’nt mean that all his arguments are wrong. some people find it hard to reject a young earth, becuase when the bible is qeustioned it is a frightening experience. Any way i will look it up and get back to you. worst comes to worst. i would have at least found out for my self instead of being lead blindly by opinion. :thumbsup:
[/quote]

Hey freesoulhope,
Did you think I wrote about the young-earth creationist?? No, no that was that guy Enterthebowser. But I think he was reffering to “creationism” and “fundamentalism” and the provoking of the “irrisio infidelium” is the scorn of the unbelievers. I haven’t come across that in the bible yet. I AM a believer! And I KNOW my scripture that whoever believes that Jesus Christ is their Lord and Savior and Died for their sins, they will have ever-lasting life!!! So let me see if I got this straight and you can help me out here soul hope, I believe Christ to be my savior, so he told me in the bible I will see everlasting life, but then if I believe the earth to be young then i am scorn of unbelievers?? Now doesn’t that contridict the bible?? Bc I’ve already accepted Jesus!! so what’s up w/ that, any thoughts, suggestions, could i bring wrong here?? Sure I could, nobody is perfect!! LOL


#16

[quote=Veritas41]Just a thought on rainbows:

Before the Flood, it had never rained – the earth was watered by water coming up from the ground (Genesis 2:5-6). Usually, we see rainbows after or during a rain shower. Perhaps the rainbow after the Flood was the first time a rainbow was able to appear because it had never rained before? God said to Noah, “Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant.” God doesn’t seem to be saying the rainbows are in themselves miraculous, but they are a naturally-occuring phenomenon that He has chosen to use a sign of His covenant with Noah, to promise to never destroy the whole world with a flood again.
[/quote]

Hello Joan, very interesting thoughts. My take on it is God told Noah that the rainbow is a symbol of his promise! So, now we know why we have rainbows AFTER rain showers, because God put it there AFTER the flood. which is no great miracle, but what IS THE MIRACLE is that his promise is still seen today!! We still get to look at all the wonderful colors that Noah got to look at! Have you ever wondered, “man I wonder what they saw in biblical times?” Well, here is one thing Noah saw and it was in biblical time and is still in modern times! the miracle to me, I am looking at the same KIND (not same one!) of rainbow that a great man of God got to look at. And all really doesn’t matter bc all we NEED to know is what is written. It’s just interesting when emotions get involved.


#17

Haven’t you ever made a rainbow with the spray of a hose on a sunny day? It is a natural occurrence due to refraction of light through the water droplets. Thus rainbows in the sky are due to the rain refracting sunlight.

But as someone else mentioned, either it had not rained before the flood, or else God merely pointed out a natural phenomenon to be used as a message for us.

But really, the existence of even a speck of dust is a miracle that no one can duplicate from total nothingness, and which proves that there is a Creator who has always existed.

Once you come to know by natural senses and human reason that there must be a Creator who has always been, then it follows that since we have not always been around that He created us and our ability to know, to believe, and to love Him. We have free reign to exercise that towards Him. And in our nothingness, He fills us according to our desire, proven by our willing to wait on Him with patience.

hurst


#18

My question is why is dragonfly conversing with him/her self (freesoulhope)?

Peace

Tim


#19

[quote=Orogeny]My question is why is dragonfly conversing with him/her self (freesoulhope)?

Peace

Tim
[/quote]

Tim, I am not freesoulhope, so no, I am not conversing w/ myself!! LOL


#20

Hello Joan, very interesting thoughts. My take on it is God told Noah that the rainbow is a symbol of his promise! So, now we know why we have rainbows AFTER rain showers, because God put it there AFTER the flood. which is no great miracle, but what IS THE MIRACLE is that his promise is still seen today!! We still get to look at all the wonderful colors that Noah got to look at! Have you ever wondered, “man I wonder what they saw in biblical times?” Well, here is one thing Noah saw and it was in biblical time and is still in modern times! the miracle to me, I am looking at the same KIND (not same one!) of rainbow that a great man of God got to look at. And all really doesn’t matter bc all we NEED to know is what is written. It’s just interesting when emotions get involved.

I agree with you! *Every *time I see a rainbow I remember God’s promise to Noah, and I tell myself and my children that rainbows are proof that God keeps His promises


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.