Asha'man

Ahh, perfect. Vanderzyden has obviously failed geometry along with biology, astronomy, logic, and English.

A circle is a two-dimensional shape, it is distinctly different from a sphere. And every tent I have ever set up is on a flat section of ground.

Asha'man

Ok, how about numbers? Is there any possible way that the bible can mess up simple numbers?

Sure there is! Take a look at the number of people returning from Babylon after the exile. Read Ezra 2. Now look at Nehemiah 7. Notice anything different? If not, read again, you aren’t paying attention!

Not only do the numbers differ between the two accounts, they also don’t add up to the total listed at the bottom. Ezra lists 29,818 people, Nehemiah lists 31,139, but both make the identical claim that “the whole congregation together was forty and two thousand tree hundred and threescore” (42,360)

blakader

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

This had been anwered already very well I think.


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

Birds and Bats both fly and both have wings.. I dont see the problem. Ancient Hebrews were not scientists. God got the point across

---3)Insects have four legs. (Leviticus 11:23)
The back legs of Locost were not counted as "legs" ther function is different and were counted diffently.


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

the word used here is 'owph which merely means a creature with wings ..not a bird reference but still insect

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

A process is described but not endorsed. The fact that it became true still doesn't endorse it.Yes Jacob was being a bit silly here. God did it.. Look at Chapter 31 to see God set him straight

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

This could be an allagory of a child putting his hand in the den of a poisonous snake. Indeed a lot of transaltions say snake or adder. The ancient King James translaters could have rendered it as cockatrice to get that point across


If we understood more about the context of the ancient Jews all these errors seem really silly to me. How can we judge how these people lived and the laws they lived by, by our standards of today. Things were really diffenent back then.

Mageth

If we understood more about the context of the ancient Jews all these errors seem really silly to me. How can we judge how these people lived and the laws they lived by, by our standards of today. Things were really diffenent back then.

Yeah, look at those creation myths, flood stories, dead men rising, etc. that they made up. You've got to view those in the context of the ancient Jews and the laws they live by, not by standards of today. We now know by the standards of today that those are mythical stories - things were really different back then.

blakader

All this proves is that Judah was not all powerfull. He was the one who couldn't drive out the people of the valley

[ October 22, 2002: Message edited by: blakader ]</p>

blakader

I would say that if the bible today did not record the account of miracles it would be regarded as the best historical record of these ancient peoples. So it comes down to do you believe in miracle. I do. Even the Jews who didn't belive in Jesus the Christ belived he had power to do miracles or somthing

Jeremy Pallant

You sound just like a Muslin, Vanderzyden. They make the same claims about the Quran.

<a href="http://members.fortunecity.com/miracles/science/" target="_blank">Here's</a> a web page with a few samples.

Here's an example:

See, Vanderzyden. You're no better than they are when it comes to making claims about your holy book, and like them, your claims are just as spurious.

Jeremy Pallant

It has also been refuted, and remains unanswered.

Bats are mammals, not birds. The Bible is in error. So what you're really saying is that God is deliberately imprecise.

Unsupported assertion. Prove it. Furthermore, the text doesn't specifically refer to locusts. There are plenty of flying insects.

Prove it. Of course, you're still admitting that the Bible, in the versions many of us read, is in error.

It's still incorrect. God's correcting Jacob says nothing at all about the fact the the Bible still says that genetics in livestock can be altered by looking at pattered sticks.

"Could be?" There's still no snake that can kill at a glance.

[ October 22, 2002: Message edited by: Jeremy Pallant ]</p>

Jeremy Pallant

There's virtually no archaeological conformation of events in the Bible until after Solomon, and much refutation. Events like the Exodus, the invasion of Caanan are entirely lacking in evidence department.

As for the Jews believing that Jesus could do miracles, the gullability of people was as great, if not greater 2000 years ago as it is now. However I challenge your statement that you believe in miracles. What you really mean is that you believe in Christian miracles. Do you believe in Hindu miracles, Islamic miracles, the prophecy of the Aztecs that they would be visited by bearded, light-skinned people, or the miracles and divine intervention in the Illiad and the Odyssey?

[ October 22, 2002: Message edited by: Jeremy Pallant ]</p>

Jeremy Pallant

...and so no longer apply now, or aren't as valid now? Is that your argument?