Jeremy Pallant

Seeing as Vanderzyden appears to have abandoned the <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001553" target="_blank">Evolutionary Theory and Medicine</a> thread, before he could respond to schalldampfer's single example of something the Bible gets wrong, I thought I'd give a few examples. They're all real chestnuts, but what the hell.

So, here goes.

1) Hares chew the cud. (Leviticus 11:6)

2) Bats are birds. (Leviticus 11:19 and Deuteronomy 14:18)

3) Insects have four legs. (Leviticus 11:23)

4) Some birds have four legs. (Leviticus 11:20)

5) Genetics can be altered by looking at sticks. (Genesis 30:37-39)

6) The cockatrice is a snake that can kill you by looking at you. (Isaiah 11:8)

There are, of course, many, many more things the Bible gets wrong, but this is a start. I'm sure Vanderzyden will respond by saying that "the Bible isn't a science book", but he initiated this with his remark:

[ October 18, 2002: Message edited by: Jeremy Pallant ]</p>

Bible Humper

Along with the cockatrices, inerrantists have to swallow their pride and declare belief in unicorns, giants, dragons, etc.

Jeremy Pallant

Indeed. Let us not forget satyrs also. (Isaiah 34:13)

Blinn

Nor do dead men walk:

1 Corinthians 15:12
Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?

But you gotta' give them goatherders credit - they do clarifiy:

15:13
But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:

15:14
And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.

wade-w

One of my favorites is II Chronicles 4:2.

These dimensions are physically impossible (unless pi = 3). Now, if the Bible was written by bronze age goat herders, I'd say that the circumference of 30 cubits given a diameter of 10 cubits was a fair estimate. But for a book that is supposed to be divinely inspired, they are off by over 1.4 cubits. It looks like god doesn't know much about biology, and he isn't very good at math either.

Jeremy Pallant

To be honest, Wade-w, the pi=3 argument is one I don't like because the simple answer is that bronze-age goat-herders probably couldn't make it perfectly circular.

atrahasis

Let also not forget :::
Remarkable contradictions

God is all powerful

Matthew 19:26

God is not all powerful

Judges 1:19

God is unChangeable

Malachi 3:6

God is Changeable

1Samuel 2:30

.....and many more that make the bible a book full of lies and crap...This, i abhor so much..
So let no Vanderzyden or anybody else try convince us of anything esp from the bible....

Best
Black Moses

[ October 19, 2002: Message edited by: Black Moses ]</p>

wade-w

That is a good point. I would counter by commenting that if they made an elliptical sea instead of a circular one, and we assume that the major axis is 10 cubits with a perimeter of 30 cubits, the the resulting ellipse has an eccentricity of .42, which is seriously distorted. I suppose you could then argue that it was an oval shape, not a true ellipse either.

I think that we can reasonably assume that it was at least close to circular, and therefore the given dimensions are still off by a significant factor. This is a good approximation if the account was written by bronze age goat herders, and not divinely inspired.

MrDarwin

Let's not forget the prize-winning exchange in the <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=50&t=000635" target="_blank">Why would god send me to hell?</a> thread:

Which eventually led to some very interesting gymnastics about how the two completely different stories of Judas are neither contradictory not mutually exclusive.

I did try asking Vanderzyden what, if anything, could possibly--even hypothetically--be an example of something he would consider a clear contradiction in the Bible, but he ignored my question. Which merely underscores my conclusion, that any error or contradiction can be reconciled if you truly believe, because they must be reconciled. (It also underscores my belief that many Christians have very interesting definitions for such words as "error", "contradiction", and "inerrant", quite at odds with the commonly understood meanings of those terms.)

Vanderzyden

General comments:

1. Go back and read these in, say, the New American Standard Version (not the King James)

2. Do not subject miracles to your narrow definition of "science".

3. Read the context.

4. Realize when you are reading prophecy (e.g. Isaiah)

5. Do not unfairly impose modern taxonomic constraints upon the content of ancient texts.

If you are going to be a Bible critic, then you should understand what you are reading. The same pettiness shown in touting "contradiction" claims is apparent here in your topic.


Vanderzyden