Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8943 total)
29 online now:
DrJones*, Theodoric, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (3 members, 26 visitors)
Newest Member: LaLa dawn
Post Volume: Total: 863,983 Year: 19,019/19,786 Month: 1,439/1,705 Week: 245/446 Day: 43/98 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does the rabbit chew the cud? Bible inerrancy supported!
Yaro
Member (Idle past 4787 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 16 of 89 (79696)
01-20-2004 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Yaro
01-20-2004 8:17 PM


Anyone else out there want a bite at this bait?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Yaro, posted 01-20-2004 8:17 PM Yaro has not yet responded

  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 89 (79701)
01-21-2004 12:06 AM


VERY IMPORTANT TO READ: especially the beginning explanation
PLEASE READ THESE QUESTIONS THEY WILL PROVIDE INVALUABLE ASSISTANCE IN CLARIFYING THINGS AND CLEAR UP MOST IF NOT ALL YOUR QUESTIONS.

Below is a string of questions I gave for a gentleman I had a discussion with:

PLEASE NOTE:

Do not answer the transcript questions unless you are being difficult! LOL

I ASKED THESE QUESTIONS BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT SOMETIMES THE SOCRATIC METHOD (ASKING QUESTIONS) IS THE BEST WAY TO EXPLAIN OR TEACH CONCEPTS. IF I WERE TO FORCE MY POSITION THROUGH NON-QUESTIONS IT WOULD HAVE ONLY BROUGHT RESENTMENT. I REALIZE I ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS BUT SOMETIMES SCIENCE ISSUES AND ISSUES OF TRANSLATION OF ANCIENT TEXT WHERE PHRASES AND WORDS HAVE LIMITED/DATA ARE DIFFICULT TO ANSWER. PLEASE IGNORE THE DIPLOMA/TRANSCRIPT QUESTIONS (UNLESS I THINK YOU MAY BE CHOOSING TO BE DIFFICULT!)

Dear Sir:

I have come to the conclusion you are perhaps doing the best you can. I will make it easier for the you and the audience to discover how certain you are in declaring Leviticus 11: 5-6 to be in error. I also realize it is definitely my fault to some degree the lack of clarity in our debate. To be honest it is hard to tell over the internet since communication is more difficult. When you answer my questions please put the number of the question next to your answer.

I think this list will clarify things for yourself and the audience. I put the questions in a certain order so they could be a teaching tool for yourself.

1) How important is it for this debate from 1 to 100 where 100 is super important that Professor Ruetimeyer,the authority on ruminants, said, "a animal can chew the cud and still not be a ruminant" for an animal that has a fermentation chamber plus has a peer science journal saying it chews the cud (this is of course the hyrax)

Please justify your answer

2) How important is it for this debate from 1 to 100 where 100 is super important that professor Ruetimeyer, the authority on ruminants said, "a animal can chew the cud and still not be a ruminant" for the hare who has:

a fermentation chamber, it shares in common that fact it has fermentation chamber with the hyrax, it has professsor ruetimeyer declaring it chews the cud and he is an expert in rumination, it has cowper declare he watched its "cousin" the rabbit minutely and it chewed the cud, and jules carles, the world famous geneticist says that based on a comparative study between its "cousin" the rabbit and a cow that "it is hard to declare the rabbit is not a ruminant."

Please justify your answer

3) How could you tell the difference between an animal just moving its teeth and it ruminating?

Please elaborate

4) How sure could you be regarding question 3 from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty.

Please justify

5) when did hendrichs say the hyrax chewed the cud? How was it distributed throughout the day according to Hendrichs?

6) Is 24 hour continous study for several days better than non- continuous study in order to determine rumination for the hyrax?

Yes? No?

7) How important to have careful empirical data such as hendrichs which was 24 hour continuous monitering for several days if you want to be a careful scientist on a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is very important (please keep in mind that he was published in a peer reviewed science journal)?

Please fully justify your answer.

8) do you have comparable data to hendrichs in terms of his 24 continuous study for several days?

yes? no?

9) How likely is it that the hyrax does chews the cud on scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty?

Please justify your answer.

(please consider Hendrich data compared to others and hendrichs was published in a peer reviewed science journal, please consider the hyraxes fermentation chamber, please consider that an animal can be ruminate but still not be a ruminant according to ruetimeyer))

10) How likely is it that you are wrong about the number you gave in question #9 on a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty.

Please fully support your answer

11)How confident should the audience reading this post be regarding the number you gave in question 10 from a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty.

please fully support your answer.

12) Is it preferable to have 24 hour continuous study to determine if hares chew the cud?

Yes? No?

13) if it is not preferable then please state why.

14) How important is it on a scale from 1 to 100 to study hares for a 24 hours continuously in captivity for several days if you want to be a careful scientist where 100 is really important?

please justify your answer

15) do you have any data where hares where closely monitered for 24 hours continuously and they did not chew the cud?

Yes? NO?

How much does your reply to this question matter on a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is really important?

16) do you have any data for Middle eastern hares where they were continuously monitered for several 24 hour periods and no cud chewing was observed.

Does it matter? Please justify your answer.

17) How likely is it that the hare chews the cud on scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty?

(please considers Hendrich data compared to others, please consider the hyraxes fermentation chamber, please consider that the hare also has a fermentation chamber,please consider that an animal can be ruminate but still not be a ruminant according to ruetimeyer, please consider that jules carles said it is hard to say that a rabbit does not ruminate and a rabbit could be similar to a hare, and the hyrax and hare both have a fermentation chamber)

Please fully support your answer.

18) How likely is it that you are wrong about the number you gave in question 17 on a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty.

Please fully support your answer

19)How confident should the audience reading this post be regarding the number you gave in question 18 from a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty.

please fully support your answer.

20) How likely is it that the hare does chews the cud on scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty?

(please considers Hendrich data compared to others, please consider the hyraxes fermentation chamber, please consider that an animal can be ruminate but still not be a ruminant according to ruetimeyer, please consider that one science reference source says the hyrax is a ruminant)

Please fully support your answer.

21) How likely is it that you are wrong about the number you gave in question #20 on a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty.

Please fully support your answer

22)How confident should the audience reading this post be regarding the number you gave in question 21 from a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty.

please fully support your answer.

23) How likely is it that the hyrax does chews the cud on scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty?

(please considers Hendrich data compared to others, please consider the hyraxes fermentation chamber, please consider that an animal can be ruminate but still not be a ruminant according to ruetimeyer, please consider that one science reference source says the hyrax is a ruminant)

Please fully support your answer.

24) How likely is it that you are wrong about the number you gave in question #23 on a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty.

Please fully support your answer

25)How confident should the audience reading this post be regarding the number you gave in question 25 from a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty.

please fully support your answer.

26) On a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is very competent how competent are you in hebrew?

27) If you gave a high number for question 26 please describe for the readers your Hebrew education or self study.

ONLY ANSWER THIS QUESTION IF YOU ARE BEING DIFFICULT OR i THINK YOU MAY BE BEING DIFFICULT!

28) if it is self study how do you propose showing the readers you are competent?

SEE INSTRUCTIONS FOR QUESTION 27

29) If you had hebrew education can you send the transcripts to the moderator or verify it somehow.

SEE INSTRUCTIONS FOR QUESTION 28

30) if you have transcripts can you please post them on the internet.

SEE INSTRUCTIONS FOR QUESTION 29

31) How well could you explain why each of the other 5 plus rabbinical/christian scholars were wrong for each individual scholar on a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is fantastic.

please justify your answer

32) did you explain why each of the other 5 plus rabbinical/christian scholars were wrong or more likely to be wrong for each individual scholar?

yes? no?

33) on a scale from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty how confident are you that "malah gerah" ONLY means chews the cud?

please justify

34)How confident are you in the number you gave in question 33
from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty?

please justify

35) How confident should the readers be in the number you gave in question 34 from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty and why?

Please justify

36) are you taking into account your combined uncertainty regarding the language and the science issues if you determine that the Leviticus 11: 5 is in error and taking into a account the opinions of the commentators Samuel Clark, Saruk and JP Holding in your opinion?

Who is samuel clark? why did saruk say what he said and why did he say what he said? Please do the same for Holding as you did for Saruk.

37) How confident from 1-100 are you that the Bible made a mistake in Leviticus 11: 5 where 100 is absolutely confident taking answers 1- into account.

Please state why and justify

38) How confident are you that the number you gave in question 37 is correct where 100 is absolute certainty and 0 is no certainty at all .

please justify

39) How confident should the audience be for the number you gave for question 38 where 0 is not confident at all and 100 is complete certainty.

Please justify

40) How confident are you taking into the opinion of samuel clark that Leviticus 11: 6 made a error from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty?

please justify

41) How confident are you in your opinion in #40 from 1 to 100 where 100 is complete certainty?

please justify

42) How confident should the audience be in your answer to question 41 where 0 is not certain at all and 100 is very confident.

please justify

[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 01-28-2004]

[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 02-19-2004]


  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 89 (79702)
01-21-2004 12:07 AM


to yaro
Dear Yaro:

I did not look at your most recent post but if you have reasonable questions I will be very happy to answer them

Sincerely,

Ken


Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Yaro, posted 01-21-2004 12:34 AM kendemyer has not yet responded

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 4787 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 19 of 89 (79706)
01-21-2004 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by kendemyer
01-21-2004 12:07 AM


Dear Kendemyer,

I read your last post and would like to assure you that I have raised some interesting issues which I think merit further discussion. I would be glad to go thrugh them with you further.

Best Regards,
Yaro


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by kendemyer, posted 01-21-2004 12:07 AM kendemyer has not yet responded

  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 89 (79821)
01-21-2004 12:58 PM


to Yaro and all readers
Dear Yaro:

I am glad my post cleared some things up. I am going to be very busy in the next 30-45 days but I would suggest reading my essay and the endnoted links to further assist you. Also, if you answer the questions it will force you to reread my essay and claify things. I realize it is a fact filled essay and rather dense reading material.

Sincerely,

Ken


Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Yaro, posted 01-21-2004 1:28 PM kendemyer has not yet responded

  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 89 (79824)
01-21-2004 1:02 PM


ANSWERS TO READER QUESTIONS
Dear Readers:

HERE IS AN EXPLANTION OF THE PREVIOUS POSTS:

Why did you ask all those questions?

I believe that asking questions which is called the Socratic method is sometimes the best way to convey concepts particularly ones that are complex.

Why so many questions? Do you have a mean streak a mile wide?

I think issues that involve science and complex translation issues with ancient text in cases where a word and phrase is used in limited context are more difficult and require more questions. I also think that followup questions to test the validity of key questions are important.

Isn't asking so many questions similar to what a prosecuting attorney would do and isn't likely to breed resentment?

Perhaps. I do think, however, that repeating yourself and trying to force your ideas on others would breed far more resentment. It also clarfies things in the mind of both parties.

When will you have more answers on the Hebrew issues?

I am not well versed in the Hebrew. All my information regarding the Hebrew came from: 3 Jewish sites ( I did not mention one of them), JP Holding, Pastor Schultz, and Strong's concordance. I am self taught. If anyone has further questions regarding the Hebrew I recommend contracting some Jewish sites or local sources.

When will you have more answers on the science issues?

My essay is being peer reviewed by a Christian organization that explores science issues that relate to the Bible. The process could take 2-4 months. They said they would get back to me in the beginning part of 2004. How much they will additional research they will do I do not know. I do know that I am not that familar with doing biological research using the science journals. Most of my science/ mathematics/statistics/logic knowledge comes from high school and the math, statistics and science courses I took to get a Bachelors in Management although the internet has been helpful too.

When will you have more answers regarding the German sources you used in your essay (Pasche, Bettex, Ruetimeyer, Hendrichs)?

The Christian organization that is peer reviewing is worldwide. I am hoping they can provide German translation assistance.

How confident are you in the sources you used and the claims you made?

I believe the sources I used were conservative in the claims. I fact checked each article and then revised my essay after I did some fact checking on my essay. Also, Mr. Stett corrected a misreading of the Schaller data. So I am very confident in the claims I made and I tried to be conservative in those claims so I could be confident. I asked myself all the questions I asked in the above post.

[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 01-21-2004]


  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 4787 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 22 of 89 (79830)
01-21-2004 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by kendemyer
01-21-2004 12:58 PM


I understand this forum is not your life Kendemyre. Take all the time you need. I have been looking thrugh your matterial. And my last post does adress much of this issue.

I hope to see a reply to them from you at some point.

No pressure of cource.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by kendemyer, posted 01-21-2004 12:58 PM kendemyer has not yet responded

  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 89 (79915)
01-21-2004 8:59 PM


to yaro
Dear Yaro:

I believe my string of questions answered all your questions (the first two questions especially). did you have more?

also, arnab is hare in arabic. arnebeth being hare in Hebrew is not a stretch.

re: identification of hyrax.

i don't think 100% certainty is necessary. I take actions all the time every day without 100% certainty. I think there is moral certainty but not absolute certainty.

Sincerely,

Ken


Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Yaro, posted 01-21-2004 9:18 PM kendemyer has not yet responded

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 4787 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 24 of 89 (79917)
01-21-2004 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by kendemyer
01-21-2004 8:59 PM


I think what I am trying to say is, what does this prove? How does this whole issue support inerrancy?

1) We aren't sure what the animal is, a Hare, Hyrax, Rabbit, or something else entirely.

2) The animals above do not ruminate. They may do something which superficialy resembles rumination, but they lacks the necissery anatomy to actualy chew cud.

So, how does this prove inerrancy? It proves ambiguity, and a lack of anotomical understanding, but deffinetly not inerrancy.

[This message has been edited by Yaro, 01-21-2004]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by kendemyer, posted 01-21-2004 8:59 PM kendemyer has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Abshalom, posted 01-22-2004 5:58 PM Yaro has not yet responded

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 89 (80148)
01-22-2004 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Yaro
01-21-2004 9:18 PM


That Ain't Cud Bud
Rabbits and hares do not have a chambered stomach like cattle do. They also do not regurgitate their food. What they do is called coprophagy.

Vertebrates lack enzymes to digest cellulose in plant material. Some bacteria can fully digest plant material, and are harbored by animals for that purpose. Rats and rabbits redigest cellulose another way ... they eat their partially digested feces and redigest the material. The efficiency of coprophagy (poop eating) approaches the digestive efficiency of ruminants.

Consequently, rabbits are sometimes called "pseudo-ruminants." Coprophagy is practiced by all rabbits, and allows utilization of microbial protein and fermentation products, as well as recycling of certain minerals.

The droppings commonly seen excreted by rabbits are fairly large, dry and ovoid, excreted singly (called "smart pills" down South), and consist of fibrous material, while cecotrophs are smaller, occur in moist grape clusters stuck together with mucus, and are finely textured and stinky (yummy). Cecotrophs are seldom seen because the rabbit nibbles them as they emerge from the anus and swallows them whole Normal rabbits don't allow cecotrophs to fall to the ground unless the rabbit suffers from a mechanical problem (obesity) or illness (indegestion?).

So here we have the difference between kosher mammals (vomit eaters) and and shagetz mammals (poop eaters).

Now, I think anyone with a lot of time on their hands, even 3,000 years ago, and nothing better to do than watch animals eating would have had the observatory skills to have distinguished the difference.

And apparently someone did.

Peace.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Yaro, posted 01-21-2004 9:18 PM Yaro has not yet responded

  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 89 (80205)
01-22-2004 11:00 PM


to: abshalom
Please read though my 40 something question survey. You do not have to write down your answers. Just go through it. it will answer your questions. also, i do not think you read my essay. I also think you did not read my first post. I do think yaro did though.

Please read my essay first. Then post to the string. I just ask for informed criticism.

[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 01-22-2004]


Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Abshalom, posted 01-23-2004 1:59 PM kendemyer has not yet responded

  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 89 (80209)
01-22-2004 11:06 PM


To: Yaro
Dear Yaro:

I do not want this string to go into a general discussion of Bible inerrancy. I don't want that because I do not have the time to delve into ansering people's questions since the Bible is a very big book.

But I do want to give you the courtesy of answering your question. Here is the answer:

(This is taken from one of the endnotes links to one of my hyrax articles. It is the authors last few paragraph).

So the Bible turns out right regarding an observation on the Hyrax and people who disagreed turned out wrong — so what?

One isolated case of the Bible being proved right and people disagreeing with it proved wrong would not be significant. But what if it happened often? What if there are hundreds of examples in many areas of study including astronomy, futurology, geography, history, biology, psychology, oceanography, geology, medicine, etc?

A book that seems wrong in hundreds of points but always seems to turn out correct in the long run would be a peculiar book indeed. Could any human write such a book?

(A)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This website has hundreds of investigations into the Bible's accuracy:
www.adam.com.au/bstett/

[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 01-22-2004]


  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 89 (80213)
01-22-2004 11:13 PM


To Yaro:

Here is a more precise answer:

The Arab word for hare is arnab. The Hebrew word is arnebeth. Very similar. For reasons I cannot get into I think the arnebeth is the hare. I suggest reading my endnoted reference of Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia if you want more assurance it is the hare. Also, if you review my essay there are a lot of other indications the other animal is the hyrax. Plus I think your article shows it is the hyrax (the one you cited).

But here is a even better answer:

http://ohr.edu/special/books/gott/truth-3.htm
(Jewish site, I am a Christian not a Jew but I think it is a great article)

[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 01-22-2004]

[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 01-22-2004]


  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 89 (80216)
01-22-2004 11:21 PM


IMPORTANT NOTICE
The Bible is a big book.

I have limited time. I have no interest in discussing general Bible inerrancy. Please go to the helpful posting on that subject inside this post should you want sources to go to.

Sincerely,

Ken

[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 01-22-2004]

[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 01-22-2004]


  
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 89 (80219)
01-22-2004 11:24 PM


To Yaro
Dear Yaro:

If you want to correspond about general questions I am willing to correspond via email. I cannot promise to be timely but I can promise to get back to you.

Sincerely,

Ken


Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Yaro, posted 01-22-2004 11:39 PM kendemyer has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019