I have come to the conclusion that there is no need for anyone to go to university to study the subject of their choice. All you have to do is believe in Jesus and the inerrancy of the Bible and you automatically know everything about archaeology, biology, geology, sociology, anthropology, history, philology, philosophy, climatology, ecology, ethnology, meteorology, palaeontology, topology, and every other ‘ology’ that you can think of.
At least this is the impression that I get from
most (not all ), of the creationist/inerrantists that post here. Most of these people readily admit that they have no formal training in the subject that they are discussing, yet do they listen to the people who have studied the topic under discussion, do they listen to the people who are qualified to talk about the subject, do they listen to the people who actually teach the subject, no they don’t. They ‘find’ Jesus and suddenly they are geniuses, they know absolutely everything there is to know about everything, and the poor souls who have spent a lifetime slaving over books and attending lectures and seminars, writing essays, taking exams, writing dissertations and a PhD thesis or two, are actually idiots who haven’t a clue what they are talking about.
I would like to stress that not all posters here are like this, but there are a few who read a very poor quality website and then conclude that they are experts even although they often show complete ignorance of the subject. Take as an example certain posters who keep citing Ron Wyatt’s ‘archaeological’ discoveries as being ‘proof’ that the biblical events happened as the Bible describes them.
Now this shows complete and utter ignorance of archaeological methodologies,
if these people knew the first thing about archaeology then they would know that archaeology
proves nothing, it cannot prove anything at all. However, what archaeology
can do very well is to disprove.
What we have to keep in mind is that, like all methods of research, archaeology has its limitations. Archaeology can be extremely helpful on many occasions but there are some things it cannot do at all. What it can never do is prove a historians hypothesis, it can refute it, but it can never prove it
If we realise that all history writing is done in three stages. The historian examines evidence, then he/she sets forth a hypothesis, then, as new evidence or new interpretations about the evidence surface, the hypothesis will be tested. Hypotheses that survive continual rounds of testing tend to be elevated to the status of theory, which is the highest level of probability one can achieve in the study of the past. Most hypotheses do not survive such testing without being changed in some way, and archaeology is only one of the means we can use to test and refute a hypothesis
It does appear that many people think that if an artefact is found then everything associated with that artefact automatically becomes true, this is not the case. However, a quick search of ‘biblical archaeology’ websites shows how widespread this misconception is, with many websites happy to preach that ‘they’ have found Noah’s Ark, ‘they’ have found Jericho’s fallen walls, or ‘they’ have found Sodom and Gomorrah! What these people do not seem to realise is that ‘they’ can find a massive boat with ‘Noah’ emblazoned on its hull, ‘they’ can find seven trumpets complete with seven attached priests, and ‘they’ can find as many sulphur suffocated cities as ‘they’ want, archaeology still does not confirm that anything associated with these events in the Bible is true
Archaeologists can only excavate the material reality of the past, in whatever form that reality takes. Any interpretation of this recovered material data is in
addition to the material remains themselves. The problem is that artefacts and I include inscriptions and texts here, do not interpret themselves and are usually open to more than one meaning. All such interpretations are highly subjective, which is why different archaeologists can see the same things but disagree, sometimes very aggressively, on what these things mean.
Do any of the posters that I am talking about show any knowledge of what archaeology can do? No. They constantly say that Wyatt found Chariot wheels in the Red Sea, or that he found a city covered in sulphur or he found Noah’s Ark, what they don’t seem to realise is that even if he did find these things it doesn’t necessarily follow that everything else written about them in the Bible is true. If these artefacts have been found then all it does is give some
support to the Bible, it supports the theories that biblical scholars have about these vents, it never ever
proves them though.
Now this is very basic archaeology, yet none of the posters that I am talking about indicate that they have knowledge of this basic fact. Archaeologists do not claim that artefact ‘X’ of artefact ‘Y’
proves anything, they will say that it
‘implies, infers, suggests, support, proposes, or even strengthens’ but archaeology is not a ‘yes or no’ discipline.
So if these people show no knowledge of this basic foundation of archaeology then it is understandable that they can be taken in by a charlatan such as Ron Wyatt.
But wouldn’t it be more sensible for these people to educate themselves before they blindly accept Wyatt’s claims as being accurate?
Why don’t they do a little research of their own and then look at Wyatt’s claims again?
Where are Wyatt’s published surveys? Has he provided details of his finds, does he give information on layers, floors, strata, phases, locus, find numbers, levels, squares, areas, or sections, what dating methods does he use, which chronology does he use, what were his preliminary observations, what method of excavation did he use, what excavation techniques did he use, does he have any documentation such as notes taken by an area supervisor, architectural drawings, photos, index of finds, area plans, daily list of finds, locus diary, locus list, locus map drawings of sections, scientific analysis, analysis of animal bones, analysis of plant remains, classification of wood types, pottery analysis, metal analysis, has his excavation findings been published?
The truth of the matter is that what Wyatt was doing was not archaeology.
If these people are really interested archaeology and the Hebrew Bible then why don’t they sign up for an introductory course at a college or university? Some universities have introductory courses for people with no prior knowledge of the subject and these course usually allow the student a way onto a degree course if they wish to continue studying, so why don’t these people do that instead of wasting everyone’s time by thinking that Wyatt has anything worthwhile to contribute?
It appears that these people think that once they have put their trust in Jesus and the Bible that they do not need to educate themselves any further, they are experts in every field of research overnight. Well I got news for them; all they are doing when they clumsily barge into a thread with Wyatt’s amateur claims is to reinforce my opinion of inerrantists. It is the same when I see a creationist ranting on in an evolution thread about Kent Hovind or Carl Baugh or any of their ilk, you just know that they haven’t a clue what they are talking about when they mention these guys, yet they continue to dictate to others, who are clearly well educated in a science, and inform them that they have no idea what they are talking about!
I know that this is a discussion forum and debate is encouraged in an attempt to educate everyone, the site is here to promote a ‘better understanding’ but these people show no signs of learning anything. They are saying the same tired old arguments now that they were shouting about when they first arrived, why are they ignoring what people who really do know what they are talking about tell them? Some members here actually provide reading material for these people, you can bet your last dollar that they have no intention of reading it.
Is it true that once you find Jesus that you really do know everything?
Well, I have a theory of my own.
I personally think that these people are terrified to study archaeology, biology and all the other ‘ologies’ mentioned because they think that it will destroy their faith, their faith must be very weak anyway if they are looking for external validation of the Bible, they appear to forget what ‘faith’ means.
I think that these people look at others who were believers and who changed their opinions of Jesus and the Bible through studying various subjects and they think to themselves
‘oh, maybe there is airtight evidence for evolution, maybe the Exodus didn’t happen, maybe the New testament authors really did mutilate the Old Testament. Best not get too involved here just in case! .
Finally, to the creationists and Bible inerrantists out there, what is the score?
Do you suddenly become ‘enlightened’ when you accept Jesus and you become an expert on every academic discipline, or is it true that you really terrified to study a particular subject to a high level in case your creationist and bible inerrancy beliefs would be shattered.
Brian.
Oh, and Happy New Year!
™ Version 4.2