|
Author
|
Topic: Does the Errancy of Fundamentalism Disprove the God of the Bible?
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
Message 121 of 154 (416890)
08-18-2007 11:21 AM
|
Reply to: Message 120 by Refpunk
08-18-2007 10:30 AM
|
|
Refpunk writes: You assumption is based on the claim that one species came from another. I'm not making any assumptions at all. I'm simply suggesting a way to refute (or confirm) the flood story. Your claim was that we can't refute any of the Bible unless we understand the whole Bible. I'm demonstrating how we can examine individual parts of it.
So claiming that the genes of animals being passed down exculdes the possibility of a flood is as ludicrous as claiming that there couldn't have been a flood since King Kong couldn't have then passed his genes along to my neighbor. It's not about genes being passed down, it's about what genes were passed down. A genetic bottleneck with, say, only two giraffes surviving, would be noticeable in the genes of giraffes living today. It's not about evolution at all.
“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels -------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 120 by Refpunk, posted 08-18-2007 10:30 AM | | Refpunk has replied |
|
Admin
Director Posts: 13017 From: EvC Forum Joined: 06-14-2002 Member Rating: 1.8
|
|
|
Message 122 of 154 (416895)
08-18-2007 11:39 AM
|
|
|
Topic Reminder
The opening post of this thread, Message 1, provides information about a Niclas Berggren and his claims that Biblical errors lead to the conclusion that the Christian God does not exist. It goes on to ask, "If errors can be shown to exist in the Bible, as Berggren asserts, does it then follow that God, at least as an omnipotent Supreme Being, cannot exist?" Anyone interested in discussing the topic?
| -- | Percy | | | EvC Forum Director |
|
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 6074 days) Posts: 60 Joined: 08-17-2007
|
|
|
Message 123 of 154 (416898)
08-18-2007 11:55 AM
|
Reply to: Message 121 by ringo
08-18-2007 11:21 AM
|
|
All one has to do is understand the birds and the bees in order to know that humans pass along human genes, monkeys pass along monkey genes, giraffes passs along giraffe genes, to their offspring and on and on. So I suggest you study elementary biology to get an understanding of how the REproduction system in each species works. Then we can talk. Edited by Refpunk, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 121 by ringo, posted 08-18-2007 11:21 AM | | ringo has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 124 by ringo, posted 08-18-2007 12:17 PM | | Refpunk has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 124 of 154 (416904)
08-18-2007 12:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 123 by Refpunk
08-18-2007 11:55 AM
|
|
Refpunk writes: All one has to do is understand the birds and the bees in order to know that humans pass along human genes, monkeys pass along monkey genes, giraffes passs along giraffe genes, to their offspring and on and on. I haven't said otherwise. I suggest you study elementary English to get an understanding of what I am saying. But, as Admin had pointed out, the topic is about whether or not errancy disproves God. Since you apparently don't recognize any errors in the Bible or in fundamentalist dogma, I suppose you don't have anything to say on the topic. In my opinion, no amount of error in the Bible or in the beliefs of any given sect has any effect on the existence of God.
“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels -------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 123 by Refpunk, posted 08-18-2007 11:55 AM | | Refpunk has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 125 by Refpunk, posted 08-18-2007 6:46 PM | | ringo has replied |
|
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 6074 days) Posts: 60 Joined: 08-17-2007
|
|
|
Message 125 of 154 (416943)
08-18-2007 6:46 PM
|
Reply to: Message 124 by ringo
08-18-2007 12:17 PM
|
|
Since humans are fallible and God isn't, then the fact that the bible is without error proves that God exists. But as the bible tells us and atheists prove, one cannot believe in God or believe the bible without the indwelling Holy Spirit. So unbelievers are left having to contradict themselves to claim that God doesn't exist. They are also left with having to go round and round in circles in their minds & always end up back where they started from with the statement; "Prove that God exists." So atheists can never move on from that statement because most of them don't want to. But we Christians have moved on because we know that all the evidence leads to God's existence and none leads away from it. So we can now know the answers to: 1) God's plan and purpose for humanity 2) How when and why God created the universe 3) What sin is 4) Why sin is evil and will be punished 5) Who God will punish and why 6) The solution to sin 7) What happens after we die.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 124 by ringo, posted 08-18-2007 12:17 PM | | ringo has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 126 of 154 (416945)
08-18-2007 7:08 PM
|
Reply to: Message 125 by Refpunk
08-18-2007 6:46 PM
|
|
Refpunk writes: Since humans are fallible and God isn't, then the fact that the bible is without error proves that God exists. Well, that's close to the topic, but you're looking at it backwards. The question is: If there were errors in the Bible, would that prove that God doesn't exist? Saying that there are no errors in the Bible doesn't answer the question. It's like you're being asked, " If you had a million dollars, would you buy a new car?" and you're answering, "I don't have a million dollars." The question is hypothetical. It requires a hypothetical answer. Also, we're not talking about unbelievers here. We're talking about the difference between fundamentalist believers and non-fundamentalist believers. Hence the title: Does the Errancy of Fundamentalism Disprove the God of the Bible?
“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels -------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 125 by Refpunk, posted 08-18-2007 6:46 PM | | Refpunk has not replied |
|
Refpunk
Member (Idle past 6074 days) Posts: 60 Joined: 08-17-2007
|
|
|
Message 127 of 154 (416980)
08-18-2007 10:19 PM
|
Reply to: Message 121 by ringo
08-18-2007 11:21 AM
|
|
One can't refute something unless his refutation is true. So why try to refute the flood story, especially when there've been so many accounts by ancient peoples all over the world as to its veracity? Why try to refute the flood story when the sedimentary rock layers all over the world prove that theworld was at one time covered in water? Why try to refute the flood story when bones of hippos and sea animals have been found in places like Nebraska? The answer is simple; to try to make God go away. The only problem with that, is that one has to invent even more bizarre and impossible stories such as the notion that monkeys once bred human descendants, or that humans came from volcanic debris or from Martians, or there was once a global tsunami (as I heard one scientist claim of the Science Discovery Channel) to deny God. But to their chagrin, all those false stories can never make God go away. All it does is make the story-tellers look foolish in trying to do so.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 121 by ringo, posted 08-18-2007 11:21 AM | | ringo has not replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
|
|
Message 128 of 154 (416986)
08-18-2007 10:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 125 by Refpunk
08-18-2007 6:46 PM
|
|
Since humans are fallible and God isn't, then the fact that the bible is without error proves that God exists. But the Bible is demonstratively not without error. It is, indeed, jam-packed with errors; more or less depending on which translation you use. Out of curiosity, which translation is, in your view, errorless? Since the Bible has errors in it, does that prove that there is no God, by your logic?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 125 by Refpunk, posted 08-18-2007 6:46 PM | | Refpunk has not replied |
|
Chiroptera
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 129 of 154 (416987)
08-18-2007 11:00 PM
|
Reply to: Message 127 by Refpunk
08-18-2007 10:19 PM
|
|
...when there've been so many accounts by ancient peoples all over the world as to its veracity? Because there aren't "so many accounts" that verify an old dude building a big boat and loading all the animals into it to escape a big flood that covered the tallest mountains. -
Why try to refute the flood story when the sedimentary rock layers all over the world prove that theworld was at one time covered in water? Sure, the whole world was covered with water. Different places at different times. -
Why try to refute the flood story when bones of hippos and sea animals have been found in places like Nebraska? Why would hippos in Nebraska be evidence of a flood? Hippos supposedly drowned during the flood wherever they were living. If there were hippos in Nebraska, then it is because they were living in Nebraska, flood or no flood. You're not thinking very deeply about this. -
The answer is simple; to try to make God go away. No, because that's what the evidence indicates. -
The only problem with that, is that one has to invent even more bizarre and impossible stories such as the notion .... No, there is no need to invent anything. There was no single global flood within the past few thousand years. That is what the evidence indicates. Period. Nothing else is relevant to this.
I've done everything the Bible says, even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff! -- Ned Flanders
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 127 by Refpunk, posted 08-18-2007 10:19 PM | | Refpunk has not replied |
|
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3069 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: 11-21-2003
|
|
|
Message 130 of 154 (419813)
09-04-2007 9:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 128 by crashfrog
08-18-2007 10:56 PM
|
|
But the Bible is demonstratively not without error. It is, indeed, jam-packed with errors; more or less depending on which translation you use. While any given translation contains hundreds of grammitical and punctuation and translation errors, the Bible contains no factual errors. Can you name even one factual error? Ray
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 128 by crashfrog, posted 08-18-2007 10:56 PM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
anglagard
Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: 03-18-2006
|
Factual Errors in Bible
CFO writes: Can you name even one factual error? From CH101: Inerrancy
quote:
There are several aspects of the Bible that show it is not inerrant. These include factual errors: * Leviticus 11:6 states that rabbits chew their cud.
* Leviticus 11:20-23 speaks of four-legged insects, including grasshoppers.
* 1 Chronicles 16:30 and Psalm 93:1 state that the earth is immobile; yet it not only revolves and orbits the sun but is also influenced by the gravitational pull of other bodies. and contradictions: * In Genesis 1, Adam is created after other animals; In Genesis 2, he appears before animals.
* Matthew 1:16 and Luke 3:23 differ over Jesus's lineage.
* Mark 14:72 differs from Matthew 26:74-75, Luke 22:60-61, and John 18:27 about how many times the cock crowed.
* 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 differ over who incited David to take a census.
* 1 Samuel 17:23,50 and 2 Samuel 21:19 disagree about who killed Goliath.
* 1 Samuel 31:4-5 and 2 Samuel 1:5-10 differ over Saul's death.
* The four Gospels differ about many details of Christ's death and resurrection (Barker 1990). For example, Matthew 27:37, Mark 15:26, Luke 23:38, and John 19:19 have different inscriptions on the cross.
* Matthew 27:5-8 differs with Acts 1:18-19 about Judas's death.
* Genesis 9:3 and Leviticus 11:4 differ about what is proper to eat.
* Romans 3:20-28 and James 2:24 differ over faith versus deeds.
* Exodus 20:5, Numbers 14:18, and Deuteronomy 5:9 disagree with Ezekiel 18:4,19-20 and John 9:3 about sins being inherited. Inerrantists are familiar with these and find rationalizations for these and other errors and contradictions, but they are unconvincing. The rationalizations merely make the point that what the Bible seems to say is not what it means, which defeats the whole concept of scriptural inerrancy.
Of course you have this as well: Introduction to the Bible and Biblical Problems » Internet Infidels Notice that in any contradiction, at least one statement must be false, otherwise it violates Rob's favorite new statement of philosophy. I think once one makes excuses for rabbit cud and grasshopper legs, the problem becomes not so much the claim of Biblical inerrancy but rather the claim of personal inerrancy. But if any stricture against bearing false witness can be ignored, I'm sure that any claim to personal omnipotence above and beyond God is not much of a problem either.
Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza
|
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: 08-30-2003
|
Factual error you say?
Cold Foreign Object
Joshua 10:12 Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. (10:12-13)
In a divine type of daylight savings time, God makes the sun stand still so that Joshua can get all his killing done before dark.
10:13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. Factually in error. I made mention of this in a post a few years back. Although in that I referenced the passage of Isaiah 38:8 the effect is the same.
Now it appears Tom is under some illusion of what is entailed in the physics behind a god stopping the earth and reversing the rotation. Besides the fact that no other nation recorded this event,nor,I might add did they notice that the sun now came up on the horizon it used to set on.{Remember,the earth is never stated as being returned to its original spin.} The earth rotates at 1000 mph at the equator. It rotates at about,say, 450 mph at the level of the Middle East.Now if you stop the earth all the people and animals and anything to varying degrees according to their composition and mass will still be rotating at 450 mph eastward.Mountains would move less as the shearing forces began to acquire sufficient energy to break and melt rock. So basically you would be sitting in your fields tending your sheep when you are suddenly find the ground beneath you grinding the flesh off your bones from the friction as you are now moving across it at 450 mph.The pain would be short lived as you quickly slam into a nearby hillside as it is turning into slag from the heat produced by inertial forces.Let us nor forget the wind at earths surface would now be experiencing similar disaster as it now moves at similar velocity along with you.The waters of the ocean are fluid so they would now be under some weird shifts since the gravitational forces are unbalanced towards the moon along with the surge as the oceans continued to move at the same speed. It would be general chaos on a planetary scale. This and the Joshua 10:12 passage reflect a complete misunderstanding of solar system dynamics not to mention the interconnection of the fundamental forces of nature which is to be expected from the writings of primitive people. Edited by sidelined, : No reason given.
It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.
Charles Darwin
|
iceage
Suspended Member (Idle past 5936 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: 09-08-2003
|
|
|
Message 133 of 154 (419838)
09-05-2007 12:37 AM
|
Reply to: Message 132 by sidelined
09-04-2007 11:56 PM
|
|
Re: Factual error you say?
sidelined writes: This and the Joshua 10:12 passage reflect a complete misunderstanding of solar system dynamics not to mention the interconnection of the fundamental forces of nature which is to be expected from the writings of primitive people. Not to mention all this effort and suspension of the physical laws for what? So that Joshua could continue "killing them with a very great slaughter". Why not just send a precise meteor hit with a lasting crater demonstrating God's divine justice? Or why not just interrupt the millivolt signals to the heart of these evil people? It seems that if true this alleged god wanted the children of Israel to experience the joy of putting others to the sword - women, children, the aged. Imagine a being with such abilities and yet requires his loving subjects to experience the trauma of war - but there is truth in advertising as this God is a Man of War and the lord is his name. I have never received a good response on why this supposed god of OT requires his subjects to become holy hitmen. This is the same primitive flawed thinking of the modern day Islamic sewerside bomber.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 132 by sidelined, posted 09-04-2007 11:56 PM | | sidelined has not replied |
|
Cold Foreign Object
Suspended Member (Idle past 3069 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: 11-21-2003
|
|
|
Message 134 of 154 (419971)
09-05-2007 6:47 PM
|
Reply to: Message 132 by sidelined
09-04-2007 11:56 PM
|
|
Re: Factual error you say?
Your entire post is built on the assumption that the Bible says the sun revolves around the Earth. Negative. The Bible REPORTS that a person who lived in the 15th century BC believed that the sun revolves around the Earth. Since Joshua grew up in Egypt this makes sense. The Bible has reported a fact: persons living in said time period thought the sun revolves around the Earth. Next.... Ray
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 132 by sidelined, posted 09-04-2007 11:56 PM | | sidelined has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 139 by sidelined, posted 09-05-2007 9:28 PM | | Cold Foreign Object has not replied | | | Message 140 by iceage, posted 09-06-2007 12:08 AM | | Cold Foreign Object has not replied |
|
Cold Foreign Object
Suspended Member (Idle past 3069 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: 11-21-2003
|
|
|
Message 135 of 154 (419976)
09-05-2007 7:05 PM
|
Reply to: Message 131 by anglagard
09-04-2007 11:25 PM
|
|
Re: Factual Errors in Bible
Leviticus 11:6 states that rabbits chew their cud. Yes, they do. http://www.tektonics.org/af/cudchewers.html
Rabbitsdo they chew their cud? Oct 27, 2005
| Answers in Genesis
1 Chronicles 16:30 and Psalm 93:1 state that the earth is immobile; yet it not only revolves and orbits the sun but is also influenced by the gravitational pull of other bodies. 1Chron. 16:30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved. Psalm 93:1 The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved. Neither verse is talking about a stationary planet. In context they are talking about God's control over the Earth. The rest ASAP. Ray
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 131 by anglagard, posted 09-04-2007 11:25 PM | | anglagard has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 136 by crashfrog, posted 09-05-2007 8:09 PM | | Cold Foreign Object has not replied | | | Message 137 by iceage, posted 09-05-2007 8:11 PM | | Cold Foreign Object has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2