Biblical contradictions II

The following recently touched-upon topics are valid for this thread:

1. Joshua's stopping of the sun contradicts known physical laws.
2. The Genesis flood is contradicted by the evidence.

Any other topics related to supposed contradictions in the Bible are also valid.These other topics should be taken up in other threads. Please post a message here as to which thread you'll be using to address them:

3. Archeological evidence supports the veracity of the Bible.
4. The Bible can be trusted because it contains God's word.

This thread has been reopened.

But the question is whether Joshua's stopping of the sun contradicts physical laws, and the answer is that it does. Scientifically, it couldn't have happened. Unless you have evidence of a miracle, as opposed to faith in a miracle, scientifically this is a Biblical contradiction. I wonder if it might be possible to stop with the mini-sermons and the veiled personal comments. If I am a fool then it is rude of you to say so, and if I am not then you are making a false statement, both of which are violations of the Forum Guidelines. You apparently don't know whether or not I believe in God. And acceptance of the validity of any particular Biblical account or miracle is not the measure of belief in God.--Percy

"But the question is whether Joshua's stopping of the sun contradicts physical laws, and the answer is that it does."
True, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. And I would say YES, it was a miracle. AGAIN, I believe GOD made all physical laws ergo HE can change them or supsend or do ANYTHING HE wishes to them.
As far as calling you a fool. Those are God's words and I never said "Thou fool" or even called you a fool. I just quoted from the Bible. I find the Bible to be a valid source for ALL my arguements yet you and the others have failed to cite supporting evidence SOURCES. I will limit my comments to the topic at hand.

quote:

---

True, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. And I would say YES, it was a miracle. AGAIN, I believe GOD made all physical laws ergo HE can change them or supsend or do ANYTHING HE wishes to them.
...... I find the Bible to be a valid source for ALL my arguements yet you and the others have failed to cite supporting evidence SOURCES.

---

I don't think this is really true. The physics alluded to here can be found in any high school text and is accepted by all scientists working in the field. Given that such basic physics accurately describes the observed universe in all other respects, for what reason do you think such a source is wrong about this particular issue? I would like a reason external to the bible.For example, an external reason for why it *didn't* happen would be the lack of corroboration of such an amazing global event in other cultures' histories or myths. Do you know of any? (I haven't researched this so I don't know.)------------------
o--greyline--o[This message has been edited by greyline, 08-09-2003]

"I don't think this is really true. The physics alluded to here can be found in any high school text and is accepted by all scientists working in the field"
We're not talking about physics but rather a miracle. Something that defies the natural laws. Many cases of stigmata exist (see an encyclopedia) which defy natural law. I don't deny there existence although I don't believe their source is from God. I doubt if they follow the laws of physics or even chemistry but they exist. Many would consider them a miracle. Why is okay to accept a modern occurrence of breaking the laws of physics but not an event that happened thousands of years ago?
Again, we are OUTSIDE the bounds of physics or any other scientific law when it comes to miracles. Do you DENY the existence of miracles today?

"If I am a fool then it is rude of you to say so, and if I am not then you are making a false statement, both of which are violations of the Forum Guidelines."Percy,
I checked the guidelines and they say NOTHING about little sermons or suggesting you are a fool for not believing in God. I was merely quoting a scripture. Those are God's words NOT mine. I didn't say "Thou fool" or "You are a fool Percy." All I did was quote a scripture. If it's just a book, why get upset over what it has to say? Maybe this is one of the contradictions you seem so eager to point out.
Your "violations" comment is unsupported since I didn't directly slander you or call you a name. ANd I don't recall false statements being a violation of the guidelines either. This place is FULL of false statements. We make them because we are fallible. If you take exception to this scripture, then take it up with God. HE wrote it!
I WILL try to limit my comments to the topic being discussed."And acceptance of the validity of any particular Biblical account or miracle is not the measure of belief in God."I disagree. If you discount portions of the Bible then you say God is a liar or Jesus is or many of the authors, speaking under inspiration of God, are. How can a person be a believer and think that GOD lies? Why would a person trust in an untrustworthy deity?

Theologian,269, please.Mark[This message has been edited by mark24, 08-10-2003]

Mark,
If you are referring to this: "the bible is logically flawed on the following grounds: argument from anonymous authority." It's fallacious since we know MANY of the biblical authors. To discount the WHOLE bible because of one anonymous author is illogical as well as unintelligent. I will give you that the author of Genesis is not KNOWN but James wrote James, JOhn wrote Revelation, and I-III John (hence the name)and David wrote many of the Psalms. I discount your grounds for disagreement on those items alone. Don't you think your reason should support the issue and not take in a whole?------------------
"Thy word is truth"

Theologian, Then using Genesis as evidence of creation is fallacious.I repeat, "The evidence is that the universe is billions of years old, the bible reckons about 6k years. Surely the critical thinker you claim to be would go with the logically sound, evidentially consistent, & predictively correct theory?Mark------------------
"I can't prove creationism, but they can't prove evolution. It is [also] a religion, so it should not be taught....Christians took over the school board and voted in creationism. That can be done in any school district anywhere, and it ought to be done." Says Kent "consistent" Hovind in "Unmasking the False Religion of Evolution Chapter 6."[This message has been edited by mark24, 08-10-2003][This message has been edited by mark24, 08-10-2003]

I repeat WHAT EVIDENCE? Give me one book that states the earth is billions of years old and has IRREFUTABLE proof of said age. As for the Kent Hovind quote, I'm not sure of the relevance."Then using Genesis as evidence of creation is fallacious"I beg to differ. Jesus often referred to Genesis and the creation account; Mark 13:19. . He talked about Lot's wife ;Luke 17:32. He talked about the flood and Noah ; Matt. 24:38-39. Now, are you going to tell me that Jesus is a liar? Or that HE never existed? I have historical proof to his existence. What do you have?

Theologian, You really mean to tell me you haven't examined the evidence?Here's one:The Hubble constant and the expansion age of the Universe, another, more, & more. All of which rest on observations consistent with an old universe.As for requiring "IRREFUTABLE" proof? I claimed the evidence supported a billions of years old universe. Since when have you been able to provide irrefutable proof of a 6,000 year old universe? All you have is an unverifiable book written by middle eastern pastoralists thousands of years ago. Nothing in science is irrefutable, there is always room for improvement. What would Jesus, Mark, John etc know about Genesis any more than you? They never knew who wrote it either, & are guilty of exactly the same Appeal to Anonymous Authority you are. Assuming they exist.The best explanation, given the body of current evidence is that the universe is billions of years old, compared to NO valid evidence suggesting that the universe is 6,000 years old. There is a reason science thinks the world is ~15 billion years old, if you were critically thinking, you would have availed yourself of this evidence long ago & assessed it's merit vs the biblical account.The truth is, theologian, is that you are not critically examining evidence within a logical framework. You don't care what evidence contradicts your evidenceless assertions, yopu believe the biblical account, & no amount of evidence will change your mind.If I said I believed that the Galactic Goat sneezed the universe out of it's nose 1.5 million years ago, despite all contradictory evidence, wouldn't you agree that this is not a good intellectual place to be?Markps The Hovind quote is my signature & doesn't impinge on our discussion at all.------------------
"I can't prove creationism, but they can't prove evolution. It is [also] a religion, so it should not be taught....Christians took over the school board and voted in creationism. That can be done in any school district anywhere, and it ought to be done." Says Kent "consistent" Hovind in "Unmasking the False Religion of Evolution Chapter 6."

Mark,
"Currently, for a wide range of possible cosmological models, the Universe appears to have a kinematic age less than about 142 billion years"I AGREE. 6,000 IS less than 14.2 billion years. The word APPEARS is evidence? It seems like a guess to me. Did you ever stop to think that the Big Bang could have been God creating space from nothing? Instantaneous creation would leave evidence very similar to an explosion. Have you heard of helio-polomic rings? Also, the Bible says that God expanded the heavens or stretched them out (Is.42:5, 45:12,51:13) which would account for the apparent age of the universe being in the billions."What would Jesus, Mark, John etc know about Genesis any more than you? They never knew who wrote it either, & are guilty of exactly the same Appeal to Anonymous Authority you are. Assuming they exist."You can't be serious? THIS iS critical thinking? It sounds more like an opinion to me. First of all, Jesus IS GOd so HE knows ALL. He knows WHO wrote Genesis and what the content is. I'm pretty sure an Omniscient being would know the author of a book. I have refuted your Fallacious argument objection by telling you MOSES wrote Genesis. (see H Halley, Halley's BIble Handbook) Did you NOT see that? And you CAN'T be serious to doubt that Jesus ever lived? If you are, here are some sources that attest to Him being alive: Cornelius Tacitus(historian) C. 52-54 AD, Falvius Josephus 37AD, Tertullian, Thallus, Simon Greenleaf, Frank Morrison. How many do you need?
Because I'm NOT agreeing with you I'm NOT critically examining? You have discounted Jesus' reference to Genesis on the grounds of his non-existence so I am challenging you to refute this body of personal testimonies. BTW, Simon Greenleaf set out to disprove the resurrection and conclude that it is the most recorded even in all of history. How did Jesus rise from the dead if HE never lived?

Hi Mark, hows it goin?Regarding the authorship of Genesis, Jesus said that Moses wrote the Torah.John 5:46-47: 'If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?'Matthew 8:4: 'And Jesus said to him, "See that you tell no one; but go show yourself to the priest, and present the offering that Moses commanded, for a testimony to them.’Any first year student knows that Moses did not write the Torah so Jesus, if he did say these words, was either just repeating a commonly held belief of the time, a time of ignorant peasants of course who didnt question anything and this made Jesus as gullible and ignorant as the rest of the them. However, if Jesus is God then he would know that Moses didnt write the Torah so therefore he was lying through his teeth, again.Brian.

"What would Jesus, Mark, John etc know about Genesis any more than you? They never knew who wrote it either,"Objection your honor. Is counsel suggesting HE knows the amount ofknowledge contained in the minds of these men? How do you KNOW what they knew? That doesn't seem like an intelligent statement to me. Can you PROVE this? Maybe it wasn't important to cite the author. Just the content.

"Any first year student knows that Moses did not write the Torah"
This is fallacious on the ground of Heresay.
Can you provide a source that says Moses did not write the Torah?"Moses, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, selected and compiled these, along with his own comments, into the book we now know as Genesis" P.J. Wiseman, Creation Revealed in Six Days, Marshall, Morgan & Scott, London, 1948, pp. 45-53.[This message has been edited by Theologian63, 08-10-2003]