Investigation of Biblical science errors

Okey doke. While you're at it I'd like you to explain how science will confirm that space is a metallic (or solid anyway) sphere, and that everything revolves around the earth.It is well known that the Bible not only suggests this, but that the Xian church fought to stop heliocentric theory because it was incongruous with those writings.And moving on from space, I have had a longstanding question that no Xian has ever adequately answered...In a portion of the Bible which discusses marriage "laws", it states that a groom may accuse his wife of not being a virgin on their wedding night. If he is right then he gets a divorce and she gets stoned to death.The woman proves her innocence (and remember this is the BIBLE talking) by showing bloodstains on the marriage bed's sheets. The idea being that virgins have hymens that will break on first penetration by a man.This is an old wive's tale that has been debunked every way AND Sunday. There just is no truth to this. Women can lose their hymen without sex, and may not lose it even after several sessions of sex.So is God, or his (holy)ghostwriters, mysogynistic or are they just clueless about women? I mean the Bible puts innocent women's lives on the line with that fairytale.Maybe if it said men who have erections in their sleep are always dreaming of commiting adultery and so should have their balls cut off, men would start questioning more readily the scientific credibility of the Bible.By the way, the Egyptian creation mythos scores more points of accuracy with science than the Xian mythos, right from in the beginning on down. Does that mean the Egyptian mythos is more right?And how many errors do we allow for any creation myth, before we say it is "not scientific"?This message has been edited by holmes, 06-11-2004 09:57 AM

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I want you to explain how my post did this. I have not claimed that there are no statements within the bible regarding the universe which science eventually came to regard as similar (or if you want to make it stronger... true).My post was about the scientific ERRORS contained in the Bible for which there is absolutely NO HOPE that it will be discovered to be true by science.Its description of the nature of the univers around the earth was patently false. Okay, so someone could argue that was humans misinterpreting the poetic imagery of God and so it is not incorrect. Fine.But one cannot get around that hymen problem. It is there in black and white, and red for all the poor innocent women stoned to death, and it is completely wrong. There is no "poetics" excuse... nada.With such errors in the Bible the question becomes how many are necessary to question whether writers happened to get some things right (just as some ancient Greeks did with no instrumentation for knowing what they did) and sometimes they didn't know what they were talking about?I went on to suggest that your argument actually seems to provide more support for other ancient religions which had better (or more similarities to science with their) creation myths. How should we judge them then?I predict a continued nonanswer from you, Darkstar. Prove me wrong.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

You said the latest posts. Not some of the latest post, or a few of the latest posts. Mine was in the last 4 posts critical of your position. I guess I was assuming that would put me in the latest posts category.I guess if you are going to criticize posts so thoroughly, and USE THEM TO SAY YOUR POINT WAS PROVEN, you should make clear who you are criticizing, and explain why the others which disprove your point have not been addressed. So you feel there is no objective criteria on which to judge the scientific merits of creation myths? That seems to be opposite of the stand you have taken in previous posts.By the way I am not going to ignore the fact that you dodged the hymen question. That is a complete error which science will never suddenly find to be true, unless one day evolution or scientists create "first sex detector" breakaway hymens.Does the fact that the Bible holds old wives tales true when constructing its laws have no implications for its actual scientific content?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Sorry to create a false illusion. I sometimes clip a longer quote, using the first portion to let you know what part I am addressing of a post, and NOT to suggest that was all that was said.If I missed the point of any of your posts then I apologize.I do get that you say people shouldn't use the Bible as a science book, but there is a vast distance between THAT (which suggests it doesn't list all truths), and admitting it also includes grievous ERRORS.Given that the Bible not only doesn't have enough details to be used as a science book, but that it also contains ERRORS, seems to undercut a belief that the knowledge contained within is heavensent.It also tends to make one skeptical for holding out that any particular thing which it says may turn out to be scientific fact at some point in the future. Well you are wrong. It seems that if you make arguments regarding positive correlations between Biblical passages and scientific discoveries, you are arguing that there is some form of objective criteria with which to judge its truth.If not, what are you arguing? What is the point of making statements regarding Bible passages that describe similar phenomena to what science has discovered?If this is what you are arguing, then my question holds enough weight that you can toss off a "I can't tell you how to judge something" answer. How would YOU assess a creation mythos that does a better job, or is more consistent, with scientific discoveries? If that has no impact on you, then why not?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

My statements weren't indefensible.Are you going to have some closure on the nature and meaning of definite errors within the Bible, as opposed to simply not having all scientific facts?If you give up then fine, just say so.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

You're the guy that's telling people to be honest?Okey-doke. I'm going to pretend like you honestly have no clue that the church fought heliocentric science theories based on quotes THROUGHOUT the Bible regarding the nature of the earth and universe. I mean you can look through things like Job and Psalms and well... just about anywhere the Bible describes God's manufacture of the earth and its relation to the stars.But hey, you don't have to actually know the Bible, or Xian history, you just have to claim it contains science facts that science reveals later! Darkstar indeed, the lights seem out to me.Anyhoo, we'll set those aside as I'm pretty confident you can turn anything like that into mistakes of men regarding poetics... until they are similar to science and then it is fact, oh yeah and GOD HIMSELF isn't poetics apparently.Yeah, I'll set those aside to have you address something which cannot be poetics. It is the rule of law. It is sex=broken hymen. It is a WIVE'S TALE.deuteronomy 22:13-21Now let's keep it HONEST and see where it goes...This message has been edited by holmes, 06-17-2004 05:43 AM

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Look, maybe you are the most honest guy in the world. But if so, you are a bit confused. For time's sake I have already dropped this specific charge, acknowledging that such passages are within text which can be said to be mistaken poetics. This argument has already been used by diehard Xians to defend the accuracy of the Bible despite having had the church be "sure" of meanings for centuries.Thus, in a way I conceded defeat on this point within my first post. I'm a bit perplexed how Xians never seem to remember where passages are, or have an interest in seeking them out on their own, or just read up on the historical understandings of their Bible. But that is neither here nor there.You can ignore the question of the Biblical description of the universe (around the earth) all you want for right now.Even in my first message I said the main thing I wanted to hear about, because it was NOT in a poetical area, was why God doesn't seem to know how women work? Message 31 is MINE, and I have received no response on that issue that I am aware of. I already gave you the reference for bloody sheets = proof of virginity. Once again: deuteronomy 22:13-21Pull yourself together man.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

And it asks for a reference. I gave you a reference. It is deuteronomy. Are you now going to tell me that deuteronomy is not instruction from god, despite deuteronomy being the expression of God's laws to the people by his reps?This is in the Bible in order to express God's laws!Your only out is if you are about to admit that humans wrote the Bible and so some if not all of it may have no bearing on God's wisdom or wishes.Damned if you do and damned if you don't on this one.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Please do explain why I get no points. Moses passed on the teachings of God and that is what is found, especially within those sections.While Xians may claim exemptions from those laws at this time, that is not the same as being able to claim God didn't say what he said, or Moses was not saying what God told him to say at the time.Deuteronomy contained the laws of God for his people, and that lasted until Jesus came around to shake things up.If you have some evidence of some kind to refute this, I am more than happy to look at it. Maybe there is an explanation. But you have not provided one. I'm sorry if you did not understand the real meaning of the question. It was not simply a question of if human hands wrote the Bible, but rather whether human misunderstandings regarding the world made it into the Bible through those hands.The common claim made by those who follow "the Book" is that the writings, while written by men, were compelled or influenced by divine sources and so impervious to error.This is not surprising as an admission that a Holy Book contains any error opens the door to questioning many other claims within that faith.I am surprised that a person who uses a word like "hebetudinous" could not understand the deeper meaning of my question. Though I guess I wasn't so shocked to discover a person who missed my meaning, also used the word "hebetudinous" incorrectly.Here's a second chance to actually answer my question and to use your word correctly. Wow, I never caused a person's brain to melt before.Or did you just get a thesaurus and decided to use it without double-checking their true meanings using a dictionary?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Well, you at least get some points for finally answering my question properly.Unfortunately, you missed the more subtle aspects of this issue.It does not matter that one can define two sets of laws within Judaism/Xianity. I have already addressed this point and your own excerpt from the Bible proves my position. This talks about the REASON for a law having been given. It does not explain the lack of understanding real biology that went into the law.I understand that God originally did not intend for there to be many laws at all (in the garden there was none), and Jesus came to remove the numerous laws that came to be under Moses. But that is not the same thing as saying they were ERRONEOUS. It merely sets them in perspective.If one accepts the logic of your argument it will lead to many conclusions I do not believe most Xians and Jews would readily accept. If Jesus was not only saying that Moses was in ERROR for making the laws he did, and even ERRONEOUS in the facts used to write those laws, what does that say about almost the entire Judeo-Xian faith and history?Who is to say then that the writers of Genesis were also not simply in error?Moses is a pretty big figure to be knocking down with errors.In the end, while Mosaic law has been nullified to Xians by the acts of Jesus in order to restore what (according to Jesus) was God's original desire for mankind, that does not (and better not) imply that there were factual errors within Mosaic law. That has much greater implications for that faith as a whole.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Thank you for admitting that the Bible does indeed contain scientific errors, and that is because it was written by men and not Gods.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I apologize if I didn't correctly understand your post. I thought you were answering my question. You see if you had been answering my question honestly, then that would have been what it meant.However, if you were being deceitful, something I do not appreciate, and avoiding the real implications of deuteronomy, then you owe ME an apology.I was not asking whether the Bible contained stories of human fallibility and you KNOW it.If MOSES WAS WRONG IN LAYING DOWN THE LAWS IN DEUTERONOMY then that puts a pretty big fly in the matzo ball soup.If the point of deuteronomy was that he could be wrong in explaining the laws that God had given him to give to his people, then not only are all of those laws bankrupt (which I might point out means he could be wrong about promiscuity and even homosexuality), but puts into doubt why we should believe Moses about anything else.Suddenly you have pulled the rug right out from under all of Moses' teachings and claims. After all he was alone on that mountain top. If we can't trust simply relating the laws as God spelled them out to him, then why can we not doubt he ever talked to God at all?Now answer the question, or admit you don't know jack.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

You seem to miss the point.First of all, even in what Jesus said about Moses, it was not to say that the law of Moses was contrary to the laws of God.I think it is pretty clear that he was explaining that God had set down some simple rules, but because of the nature of man he was forced to set down more rules through Moses, until another time came.He was discussing the temporary nature of the Mosaic laws not the errancy of them.But let's assume you are correct. If Moses, after the Bible clearly states that God instructed him in the laws he relates to his people in deuteronomy, ends up contradicting God... I mean let's get real here. Are you really suggesting the message of the Bible is that Moses was CONTRARY to GOD?Can you not see the dire implications of this? How is one even to believe the ten commendments. He walked up alone and he came down alone. Whose to say he didn't make the laws himself against God's wishes. That is after all what you are saying he did shortly afterward.This is a particularly tortured position you are taking, just to avoid admitting that the Bible contains very real scientific errors.Second, this continues to say nothing about the errancy. Fine. Let's say you are correct. Moses defies God and manages to set into the Bible (and over Jews for quite a while) laws he claims came from God. But they are all fake.The errancy, apparently, came from Moses then and not God. That still undercuts the Bible's claims about anything. Even in the beginning there was nothing and then there was light can go right out the window as lucky guesswork on the part of who wrote it. For he, like Moses, may have been half-assing it with the facts.By the way I don't owe you an apology about jack. My apology would not hinge on whether Mosaic law was contrary to God's law. My apology hinges solely on whether I was being mean in attributing an incorrect meaning to your post.As I pointed out, if you answered my question properly and not assigned incorrect meanings to it, then my read of your post was just fine.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Given your post in the other thread, where you never answered my reply, I'd suggest spending some time on your own with some books of physics, chemistry, and biology.You can move on to whatever "websites" you think will help you, but you have not shown a grasp on the very basics of science theories.Very important on that list will be actually understanding the 1st and 2nd Law of thermodynamics, as well as abiogenesis and evolutionary theories. Cosmological models would help as well.I'm not trying to simply insult you. The statements you made were contrary to the theories you said you were talking about. You NEED to get them straight if you want to put them in cirtical perspective.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)