Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Inerrancy of the Bible 2
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 118 (179557)
01-22-2005 4:39 AM


Ahaz and Big Bang references
Not to go against my own advice (about not bringing up things I haven't fully researched).
1) Anybody know anything about multiple civilization's ancient "sun" temples being oriented to degrees no longer applicable in today's "modern" world? Also, historical differences in star locations (relative to Earth observers) over the years? Start searching the concept of "Earth Tilt" and you get some interesting articles. The reason I bring this up is that sundials work on a principle of angles, if you change the angle of the Earth enough you could potentially "move the dial back 10 degrees) without "stopping" the Earth's rotation. Might answer the Ahaz "problem" without the destructive consequences...
2) NosyNed, not that they've finalized it, but "String Theory" Scientists promote a Big Bang origin that sounds an awful lot like Biblical Creation (i.e. almost instantaneous).
3) Brian, yes my point on ancestors was weak, but regardless, there are many "events" that we have to rely on references (even Biblical) because we have no other records. Just because a Biblical book is the only place it is referenced, doesn't automatically mean it didn't happen... As "Old-Earthers" are always finding, it's hard to write history you've never witnessed... Kind of like the laughable science-contrived "giant snow-ball" Earth...
4) What does proof of Biblical non-"error" entail? If something like the Dial of Ahaz is proven possible is that good enough? Because if "possibility" isn't good enough, than we might as well tell researchers to call it quits since most of their work is based in speculation/assumptions to establish their theories...

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Brian, posted 01-22-2005 5:39 AM Incognito has not replied
 Message 40 by NosyNed, posted 01-22-2005 11:03 AM Incognito has not replied
 Message 53 by ramoss, posted 01-22-2005 10:43 PM Incognito has not replied

  
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 118 (179819)
01-23-2005 12:34 AM


I guess I gotta pick up for Tom
Hmm, Tom’s gone, let's see what I can pull off...
1) Brian, please don't quote authors who aren't mathematicians... 70 people would only produce about 10,000 in 400 years? Is this guy serious? His roughly 10% growth rate would indicate a doubling period of 7 years under the Rule of 70 for exponential growth... But this involves people, not money, so let's be conservative and assume the original 70 people could only make 35 couples most... If each couple waited an average of 20 years to have kids and each couple averaged a 4 kid survival rate. You'd be looking at a population over 10,000,000 (not 10,000) in less then 400 years...
The other problem your author runs into is the fact that the Sinai, as I mentioned previously, was not always a sandy wasteland paradise. Applying today's population assumptions to it is flat wrong (for example, Egypt didn't have 5.5 million land mines in the Sinai back during Exodus)
A better error would be how 3,000,000 people got lost for 40 years
2) Sidelined, please don't bring up Religious ignorance and atrocities unless you can answer for the fact that Atheism/Evolution has spawned 100 years of modern warfare/atrocities/academic suppression that have killed a combined 200 million people, ruined economies, and sent some nations' knowledge levels into the stone age.
3) NosyNed, I will not state Genesis supports the traditional Big Bang because that allows too much room for OEC to inject their billions of years timelines. String Theory hypothesizes that the universe pretty much dispersed to its present positions in a fraction of a second. But you are correct; we are years from formulating an "agreed-upon" String Theory. I'm putting my money on YEC...
4) Nighttrain - bring on the trivia.
5) Sidelined - so you are providing astronomical data to support that Orion is not bound and that the Pleiades (a group of stars I think) are bound? If that is your point, I have no problem with that, in fact that is just what the text says.
6) Ramoss, read up on your cyclical String theories, they should all have the same near instantaneous initial expansion regardless of end state...
7) Ifen and Jar the 1-liners and lack of meaningful points aren't enhancing your credibility...
Seriously though, keep bringing up what you would label errors. I have a feeling anything error related is just due to our current scientific/historical ignorance, but I’m curious just the same. 36 Christians if you’re still reading, all of you should plan on studying Physics to help us prove Ahaz/Joshua’s Long Day, etc.
Again, thank all of you for helping my Faith grow, the more "errors" that turn out not to be "errors" the more I Believe...
This message has been edited by Incognito, 01-23-2005 00:35 AM
This message has been edited by Incognito, 01-23-2005 00:37 AM
This message has been edited by Incognito, 01-23-2005 00:39 AM

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by lfen, posted 01-23-2005 1:00 AM Incognito has not replied
 Message 56 by sidelined, posted 01-23-2005 1:06 AM Incognito has replied
 Message 57 by sidelined, posted 01-23-2005 1:17 AM Incognito has not replied
 Message 58 by Nighttrain, posted 01-23-2005 1:33 AM Incognito has not replied
 Message 65 by Brian, posted 01-23-2005 7:44 AM Incognito has not replied

  
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 118 (179831)
01-23-2005 1:39 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by sidelined
01-23-2005 1:06 AM


Wrong forum for this topic...
Ifen/Sidelined. This forum is not the place for atrocities disputes...
But, please do a little research into "history." Evolution provided the catalyst for "Master Race" thinkers to murder millions (Nazis against non-Aryans, and Japanese in China). Not to mention the atrocities towards Aborigines in Australia ("specimen"-taking by SCIENTISTS) or the Apartheid regime in South Africa. Or the whole concept of "evolving out of Africa" and its racist connotations that Europeans are the last/most "evolved."
Yes, there have always been racist people, but Evolution was their "golden ticket" to give scientific "credibility" to their actions/thoughts/deeds (in case you forgot, it was "SCIENTISTS" not Christians packing rocks into skulls to compare brain sizes/evolutionary growth)
Atheism (under Communism) led to the mass killings of millions under Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot.
The Crusades and the Inquisition (a couple thousand deaths over a few hundred years) can't even compare...
Back to topic though - bring on the Biblical "errors" if indeed there are any...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by sidelined, posted 01-23-2005 1:06 AM sidelined has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by arachnophilia, posted 01-23-2005 2:00 AM Incognito has not replied
 Message 62 by lfen, posted 01-23-2005 2:08 AM Incognito has not replied

  
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 118 (179894)
01-23-2005 9:56 AM


"Sweet Influences"??? "36 Christians" help?
Ok, I'll concede KJV "error" to "Sidelined" on Pleiades... I'm still working on a plausible Ahaz time scenario though.
1) "Sweet Influences" in Job 38:31 is not something I can explain as I don't really buy into Astrology. The NIV translation of "bind the beautiful Pleiades" makes sense in regard to their consistent grouping (they travel away from us). FYI, your Orion chart doesn't seem to show historical movement of stars (it's just a current snapshot in time). I can only speculate; it is possible that Orion's belt has been slowly "loosening" due to historical star movement in different directions (opposite of the "bound" Pleiades). Unless the Pleiades really "influences" us, I think I'd have to say the KJV might have an error here, because "binds" makes more sense (changes the meaning though).
2) "Nighttrain" - your exponential growth isn't always a guarantee - many factors play into it (especially in the Bible where God rained down punishment on people). Wars, famines, environmental factors all weigh in. All we know about the 430 years in Egypt is that the Hebrews "had it good" which implies high growth rates are possible then, but past that we can't infer anything. Also, a modern day example for you - Japan is projected to lose 30% of its population if current negative growth rates continue. Even today, growth isn't guaranteed.
3) "Ifen," I have a feeling the Flood discussion won't fit under KJV inerrancy without getting too off-topic - but on a serious note - your "scientists" believe the Earth was a giant snowball multiple times in history even though there is almost no evidence for it. I "believed" scientific accounts for 24 years before too many "stupid theories" made me realize science had been bending the truth... Snowball Earth - Wikipedia
The Flood on the other hand can be backed on all the levels you claim you want evidence for and is therefore, not an error but historical fact, but one topic at a time, this is KJV inerrancy...
4) "Brian," your 11.69 is not a percent by your description but is in actuality a number. By 1.169%, you are telling me that either 1000 people only had 11.69 kids a year, or else so many people moved out of the Sinai (or died) each year that it only increased in population by 11.69 people annually. You think that this is too high even for 1500 B.C.? Sorry to burst your bubble, but the only place/time this is too high for is modern day Japan/Europe. Not to mention you are applying 20th century Bedouin population data to Exodus era Egyptian Nile Valley agrarian culture? Sorry again, but completely different populations that can't be compared; civilizations originated on fertile rivers for a reason (resources to grow).
As with "snowball earth," statistics like your Lucas quote are why I no longer respect "scientists." They can't even utilize basic math.
Papyrus Anastasi VI. This is apparently a satire, which if I'm not mistaken, is not a good reference for historical accuracy...
Your page 1041 quote supports the idea that there were millions of people... Please read the article word for word (this seems to be a problem on this forum)
5) Anymore "errors" for "36 Christians?" At this point I'm just curious as to what other "errors" people can dig up. I will concede that "sweet influences" seems to be an "error" because the NIV "binds" makes more physical sense. Although it does change the meaning/intent of the verse.

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by ramoss, posted 01-23-2005 11:43 AM Incognito has not replied
 Message 73 by lfen, posted 01-23-2005 2:28 PM Incognito has not replied
 Message 113 by Brian, posted 01-28-2005 5:43 AM Incognito has not replied

  
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 75 of 118 (180078)
01-23-2005 11:25 PM


Errors have been weak at best, any of you believers yet?
1) Ifen/Anybody else, I’ll try and tackle everything that’s thrown out here; but by all means, please make a list of errors, I think it would benefit all involved (both skeptics and supporters) to know what errors exist and what can be answered. If I don’t respond for a day, I haven’t given up, just take it as a good sign that you’ve stumped me. Possible positive/negative outcomes from this discussion:
a. Inerrancy beliefs reinforced
b. Inerrancy beliefs degraded
c. Skeptics strengthened
d. Skeptics weakened
2) Ifen, Until this last year, I too thought the Bible was poetic/metaphorical in nature, not scientific or historical Then I started looking into the assumptions science/history is based on — I now realize the errors of my ways — Literal is the only way to go.
3) Personally, I’m not quite sure I believe the KJV is inerrant, but with the errors I’ve seen on this forum, my beliefs in literal Biblical interpretation has been strengthened (i.e. the Bible’s message is inerrant, even if the English translation isn’t). A general thank you to all
4) Ramoss, The Luke/Matthew Nativity problem apparently isn’t a problem if you objectively analyze the facts. As the Res Gestae states, Augustus had the people proclaim him The Man in 2B.C. Historically tyrants, have a habit of forcing everybody to officially vote them The Man instead of just declaring it. If you don’t believe this, go look up Saddam, Tito, and most every other dictator we’ve seen in the last 100 years. Their actions parallel our historical evidence of Augustus’ statement. Not to mention the fact that the Herods had been paying tribute to Pompey and later the Caesars for at least 50 years prior. In fact, best I can tell, the only reason the proof isn’t there, is because people with are trying to claim that every Roman census was ONLY a direct taxation on Roman citizens (not to include non-Romans). I find this funny because there is no historical document that says all Roman census = tax Romans only. This is an assumption, kind of like the Earth being old
5) Ramoss, What should replace Pierced in this sentence? Does lion really fit? Apparently the Hebrew word pierced means lion? I guess your interpretation would fall under which side of the coin you are on (Christ vs. Non-Christ). KJV Psalm 22:16 Yea, dogs are round about me; a company of evildoers encircle me; they have pierced my hands and feet?
Although, the Hebrew definition of the word "pierced" means "lion", this has little translation effect on the Scriptural meanings themselves.
Psalm22:16
6) Ramoss, You have not dealt with the lack of resources 2 million people in the desert would need for 40 years. Actually, I think this is dealt with twice. First God provides them manna for 40 years, and as I said before — the Sinai was not a barren wasteland before — it actually had water/food potential. Yes, if you are an OEC type then there probably wasn’t food, but then again, if OEC was true, why did they just find a 70 million year old modern duck in Antarctica? BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Cretaceous duck ruffles feathers
7) Ramoss, How did Judas die? The Acts account on its own makes no sense unless you believe in people spontaneously exploding But on the other hand, this website gives a reasonable enough explanation without resorting to miracles. As we all know from Job and Psalms: the Bible is not always straight to the point (some times you have to use your thinking skills)
By putting the two accounts of Judas' death together we get a clearer idea of what happened. Both events are true, but they did not happen at the same time. Matthew writes that Judas "hanged himself." Luke explains what happened later, after Judas' body began to decompose. The corpse slipped from the rope, "falling headlong, . . . burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out"the ignominious, yet deserved end of "the son of perdition" (John 17:12).
http://bibletools.org/...n/Library.showResource/CT/BQA/k/129

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by lfen, posted 01-24-2005 12:58 AM Incognito has replied
 Message 78 by Gilgamesh, posted 01-24-2005 2:08 AM Incognito has replied
 Message 80 by ramoss, posted 01-24-2005 9:32 AM Incognito has replied

  
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 118 (180092)
01-24-2005 1:42 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by lfen
01-24-2005 12:58 AM


Re: Errors have been weak at best, any of you believers yet?
In my narrow viewpoint, I am personally limiting "errors" to the following (I can't answer for "36 Christians"):
1) Wrong word used in reference to KJV-era English. If a word was incorrectly used when written it is an error, our modern definitions have no relevance here. Again, we're not debating "most up-to-date."
2) Biblical contradictions that are actual contradictions, reader misunderstanding doesn't equal KJV error
3) Historical inaccuracies - i.e. we have historical proof, not just speculation that the Biblical account is wrong.
4) Physical Phenomenon is a tough line to walk. How much evidence does one need before we accept "God did the rest?" If you can prove that the Earth could have tilted, or other civilizations noticed a "sun change" do you then accept it? I would argue that the key to miracles is not 100% proof, but the plausibility of it happening given our knowledge of conventional time/space. For example - we don't need proof the Earth tilted on a particular day - we just have to know if it could have tilted in 1 day...
5) Anything else we can't logically explain. I'm more stumped as to how the Hebrews got lost for 40 years then I am by the likelihood of manna falling from the sky.
Those limits too unreasonable for you?
Yes, the duck comment was flippant (although relevant for anybody believing OEC)
The Bible is not a refutation of science and history. The Bible is a written history that includes aspects of science as well as being God's Word. I think of science and history as a way to better understand God's Creation/Word/history - not as tools to destroy it. That said, if there is a historical/scientific discrepancy with the Bible, I'm going to side with the Bible until it's proven wrong (just as many of you will side with anti-Creation science before accepting Biblical accounts). Christians who buy into OEC/Evolution are just as bad as the Christians who bought into Greek Earth-Centered science (never mix God's Word with unproven/faulty science)
What is absurd? To think that Nile Valley Egypt only had a 11.69per1000 growth rate or to point out the error in thought? How about "40,000 stalls OF horses" for "4,000 stalls of chariots and horses?" It's more absurd to think that wrong then it is to point out the reader's erroneous interpretation. As I said before, if I can't explain it, I won't - like the Influences of Pleiades. I'm not sure how that can be explained without reverting to Astrology...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by lfen, posted 01-24-2005 12:58 AM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by lfen, posted 01-24-2005 2:16 AM Incognito has replied

  
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 118 (180694)
01-26-2005 3:26 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Gilgamesh
01-24-2005 2:08 AM


These are tough...
Hmm... These are tough... I've looked but came up empty-handed.
1) The stalls issue holds if you recognize the fact that the 40,000 horse stalls are for the 4,000 chariot stalls - no contradiction or need for speculation - the wording speaks for itself.
2) How old was Jehoiachin when he began to reign? I think it was Tom who tried to answer this by saying that nobody reigns at age 8 and must have had a "Royal helper"... I will admit this answer is extremely weak but it is the only thing I can come up with... Unlike Noah and his sons, I can't argue this is a case of specifics vs. generalities because the 2 Chronicles 36:9-10 is more specific on the reign yet more vague on when Nebuchadnezzer sent for him. I will have to concede this one unless somebody can give me reason to believe that the ancient Hebrews just liked to play word games.
3) How many talents? The only way to answer this one is to get nit-picky and make an extremely futile argument that the Chronicles account seems to indicate that both servants brought talents while the Kings account could be interpreted as just one set of servants bringing talents.. Again, a very weak argument unless it can be proven that the Hebrews liked word games.
4) This would have to be an error. I won't even bother trying.
5) Can't dispute it. Even looking for verbal holes I'm at a loss.
6) The Shem issue is easily disputable... "And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth." It doesn't say Noah was 500 years old when he begat Shem, it reads like he was at least 500 years old before begatting three kids. They seperated the thoughts to emphasize this point...
Alright, I'll give the KJV has 3 errors of what I've seen so far from this forum. 1) Sweet Influences 2) Famine years 3) Horseman numbers. I'm on the fence on the Jehoiachin and the talents - I think you can "read into them." I will no longer back "36 Christians" claim of KJV inerrancy, although I would still be willing to back the claim of "Biblical message inerrancy."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Gilgamesh, posted 01-24-2005 2:08 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

  
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 118 (180700)
01-26-2005 4:05 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by lfen
01-24-2005 2:16 AM


Re: Errors have been weak at best, any of you believers yet?
Ifen,
1) No relevancy for the duck? If Macro-Evolution is legitimate - how has the duck barely changed in 70 million years? I guess you could argue that the duck reached a "perfect" zenith 70 million years ago, but if that were the case, nothing would ever evolve. I will not dispute that small dinosaurs could possibly glide - squirrels can.
2) What did I find? Nothing new, I just looked into the massive amount of assumptions that Dating techniques and evolution are built on and realized that it wasn't all as factual as scientists have led us to believe. In fact, best I can tell, the only evidence that the Earth is old is that "Evolution takes a long time" so therefore the Earth must be old. It's just circular reasoning.
But again all of the following points are for another forum:
3) I used to think the flood was crazy too. But looking at the big picture - it is actually more logical then all the other "theories." Evidence of a global flood would be: much sediment movement, many dead things, and a lot of water involved. The facts speak for themselves - we have a lot of sediment movement, and many dead things, not to mention the fact that Japanese scientists are convinced the Earth's mantle contains 5 times as much water as the surface... http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...7_0307_waterworld.html
4) I'm no archaeologist but this AIG answer on Solomon works for me
False HistoryOut with David and Solomon! | Answers in Genesis
5) The millions of slaves exiting I don't have a problem with - it's how they possibly could have gotten lost that confuses me.
6) How do I discredit science in favor of the Bible?
a. All dating techniques are built on assumptions that have been proven wrong multiple times. If they really were reliable they'd be correct almost all the time - not just occasionally.
b. Historical accounts outside the Bible are either non-existent or written by people that even historians don't quite trust.
c. Archaeology relies on dating techniques that are questionable at best.
7) How did multiple nations exist during the time of the flood? We don't even know how old most of these civilizations (dating techniques are faulty at best) are nor why they all seemed to "magically" appear around rivers at roughly the same time... Kind of like Babel...
8) Not enough water? Check my above National Geographic link - I used to believe that there wasn't enough water too...
9) Uniform dispersion... Ever been to the beach? Ever seen how sand loses its firmness when you hit the water table? I'll buy into the argument that different objects (animals, etc) would sink to different depths. Not to mention the fact that we don't know if there were any repeat local floods (like Lake Missoula) after the main flood.
10) The evidence speaks for itself? Scientists came up with "snow-ball Earth" off of some rocks in Scotland and at the equator - somehow that was enough evidence for a theory? The Flood is much more plausible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by lfen, posted 01-24-2005 2:16 AM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by CK, posted 01-26-2005 4:14 AM Incognito has replied
 Message 86 by MangyTiger, posted 01-26-2005 4:31 AM Incognito has not replied
 Message 93 by lfen, posted 01-26-2005 2:35 PM Incognito has not replied

  
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 84 of 118 (180702)
01-26-2005 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by ramoss
01-24-2005 9:32 AM


I think it says it in Exodus 16:35
Exodus 16:35 - And the children of Israel did eat manna forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat manna, until they came unto the borders of the land of Canaan.
Water? There are wadis, and the terrain was obviously different if you are a YEC (all that "ancient" terrain can't be that ancient).
Where'd they camp? Not sure - I can't imagine they'd have left much evidence though since they didn't have much reason to cook...
You don't like the Judas explanation? Please explain how a "living" Judas tripped on his toes and then exploded when he hit the ground...
How would a present day Rabbi know anymore about ancient Hebrew then anybody else? He wouldn't. In fact, it doesn't matter what your faith/ethnic background, we're all starting from the same place (history books)...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by ramoss, posted 01-24-2005 9:32 AM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by ramoss, posted 01-26-2005 8:16 AM Incognito has not replied
 Message 116 by Brian, posted 01-28-2005 10:18 AM Incognito has not replied

  
Incognito
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 118 (180703)
01-26-2005 4:24 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by CK
01-26-2005 4:14 AM


It sounds like I need to read the rest of your forums...
Eventually. One topic at a time for me though. Gotta live life too.
I'll now concede that the KJV has "errors" but if anybody wants to post anymore I'd like to see them...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by CK, posted 01-26-2005 4:14 AM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by CK, posted 01-26-2005 4:48 AM Incognito has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024