Quick Note On Irony Before Regular Schedule Kicks In Again

Before any more armchair theologians pummel my article on Biblical Pi, allow me to elucidate on the reasons why I tackled it this way:

First off, there is a controversy. The most compelling argument against the idea that the Bible says Pi = 3.0 probably resides in examining the Torah and the original Hebrew version. This line takes one to a fairly impressive value of Pi,

The most compelling argument for the idea that Pi = 3 lies in taking the ratio of the circumference against the diameter as it’s stated in the Bible, which is 30:10 i.e. 3. Any other values of Pi would, under this line of thought, either be interpretations (thereby denying the validity of Biblical inerrancy) or gross assumptions that eventually result in another approximation. The key point of this argument is that the value of Pi is never stated as infinite or irrational in the Bible, which would have been pretty compelling evidence for a supernatural being (since the mathematicians of the time were not familiar with infinites like we are today).

The point of the article was to point out that Biblical inerrancy is a crock of horse shit, mildly put. Thank you for your time, the reactions were certainly very interesting (those which didn’t descend into petty name calling). Some people got it: this comment on Reddit was particularly succinct:

“Personally, I think it highlights the deeper issue: the fundamentalists who say the Bible doesn’t support evolution would be just as wrong to say that the Bible says pi is exactly 3.”

Advertisements

74 Responses

  1. First comment!!

    Still need help with the overly religious relative, that I can’t just ignore.

  2. Help is on it’s way. Tomorrow I have mucho exams however, so I’ll drop the rate of posting || this much until I’m free-er.

  3. Mildly put, huh? =_=

  4. If Pi was indeed 3.0, the human race could never go into space like it did 30+ years ago.

  5. Hmm, I did see a lot of people saying “Pi was never mentioned”. Sure, some Greek symbol doesn’t appear in the English version of the Bible. I’m really glad that that wasn’t the point. The point was the concept of circumference / diameter = 3.0.
    If the Bible had been handed down directly from Heaven, then there would be a serious problem. God would be saying “Pi is equal to 3.0”. Obviously, this leads to trouble. Either God would be wrong, or we’d need to seriously rethink our concept of division. Either way, it’d be very messy.
    Surely this evidence suggests that it’s ridiculous to say the Bible’s text should be taken literally. Surely Christ Himself used figures of speech!

    Thanks for pointing out that saying the Bible should be taken literally is exactly as sensible as saying that pi is equal to 3.0.

  6. @ Miguel

    Yeah we could have. God blessed America, so we can do whatever the hell we want. Including but not limited to: Eliminate Habeas Corpus, Legalize Torture, Drown Kittins In Old Potato Sacks, Let Freedon Ring, Outsource Our Whole Friggin Economy, Believe That (Even If God Did Exist) That He’d Talk To George W. Bush, Say No To Ghey Marriage and Yes To Divorce, Let Arrested Developement Get Canceled, Build A Creationist “Museam”, Kill A Whole Buttload of Native Americans, Racial Profileing, Install The Most Worthless Boarder Security EVER … EVER (I mean even at airports where rent a cops doze while I put my shoes through the xray thing), Start A Wars For Fun and Profit, Vote George W. Bush Into Office… TWICE, and last for this list but not last of ALL, Go From “The Land Of The Free” to “The Once Great Nation” in the span of a few years.

    Yes sir, us Amrikkkans kan do whatever the hell we want cause we’re sweet baby Jesus’ special little snowflakes all waiting for the rapture, if only them jews would all get back to Israel. (darn jews, them and their fancy “Testament”)

    In short, we don’t need no friggin Pi, we’re Americans.

  7. You’ll still have to explain sometime, when you’re freed up, how something can be in error when it never made the literal claim in the first place.

  8. The Book of Revelations makes that claim. That some people choose to listen to it is astounding and worthy of the argument Pi = 3.

  9. When I read your argument that pi disproves Biblical inerrancy, I nearly fell out of my chair because it is the stupidest argument against the Bible that I have ever heard of.

  10. I will not pummel your article or attac your thought. I find them interesting, aldo I do belive in God. I think that everyone have the right to belive in there own way. I think God gave us a free mind to belive or not belive in Him.
    But of cause, I think your wrong. But that is an other issue.

    What do you think about this

    http://sofiawinterborn.wordpress.com/2007/06/13/sofiawhat-is-a-ghost-and-medium-who-are-they-talking-to/

    Do you have any mathematician answer to this issues.

    A serious question from me; sofia

  11. By the way, this is me:

    I am a singing voice on big, empty plains,
    Where no ear, where no echo lives.
    I am a wandering light over the lake on black nights,
    An erratic fire, dieing down in darkness…
    I am a drifting leaf in the wide land of autumn,
    My life is a play to the choir of winds

    My name is Sofia, and I was born in the decade that entitles me to join “some special mailing lists”
    I was raised in Stockholm, but originally come from the Northern parts of Sweden.
    My professional education is towards medical care, and I have also studied behavioural science at university.
    My interests are reading, painting, and writing. I ponder a lot about life, and the existential questions that man has always put to himself. When? How? and Why? Is constantly spinning in my head.
    I have done a lot of travelling, and have visited around 50 countries. My commentary is that this planet is a fantastic place to live in. The Earth seems to hold the most of both good and evil.
    Besides I am a lot ”in” the universe. I try to be updated concerning discoveries that cosmologists, physicists, astronoms make. Brian Greene, mathematician and physicist, named his book The Elegant Universe. That is what I also think. The universe is elegant and beautiful.
    Well, that will do about me for the time being.

    Greetings from Sofia

    http://sofiawinterborn.wordpress.com/

  12. when reading the Bible, we’ve always got to look at what the author intended. i don’t think the author ever intended to explain pi as equaling 3 — the author’s aim was anything BUT the math.

    likewise, i don’t think the author of Genesis ever intended to argue against evolutionary theory. in actuality, the author was writing an argument against the polytheism of their day (while others deified various elements in nature, Genesis points to deity apart from creation).

  13. Eh. All right. Personally, I am an atheist, and I must say I have been continually harassed by religious friends and relatives… But that is besides the point of what I want to say.

    Thank you for pointing out that the Bible should not be taken literally. If it were, I think that women’s rights, for one, would never have happened. The argument proposed (concerning pi), may be “the stupidest argument against the Bible that [you] have ever heard of”, but…

    These are excerpts from a sermon given to the Unitarian Church of Charleston on Feb 6, 2005, by Herb Silverman:

    “I find it strange that so many religious people think atheists are either immoral or fools just because we subject religious belief to the same kind of scrutiny as any other belief. After all, the person making the claim is responsible for providing appropriate evidence on it.”

    “Faith that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, cheated death and rose bodily in heaven, and can now be eaten in the form of a cracker called Communion. A few Latin words spoken over a cup of wine and you can also drink his blood. Is there any doubt that if just one person held such beliefs he or she would be considered crazy?”

    “And if my atheist position is wrong and there really is a judging god, I hope she will judge me on my behavior rather than on whether or not I believed in her existence.”

    One more quote:

    “Even a superstitious man has certain inalienable rights: the right to harbor and indulge his imbecilities, provided only that he does not try to inflict them upon others by force; he has the right to argue for them as eloquently as he can. But he has no right to be protected from the criticism of those who do not hold them. He has no right to demand that they be treated as sacred. He has no right to preach them without challenge.” – H.L. Mencken, social critic

    I don’t think the bible is WRONG, per se – no doubt it has more than a few good points. But consuming the contents wholesale won’t make you any “holier”. I’m not saying that it’s wrong or stupid to be Christian. I’m asking you to please think before you take everything the Bible says as true. Granted, most Christians don’t do that – but I have two personal friends who do.

  14. Quick note on your quick reply. What would have happened if the Bible had indeed given the exact specifications as to what the measurements are for ‘pi’? Would you then be a believer?

    Jesus taught in Luke 16 that there are some people who, even if someone rose from the dead and told them the truth about the afterlife, still wouldn’t believe. These people the Bible describes as “scoffers.” I believe that these people, even if God Himself revealed Himself to them, they still wouldn’t put their trust in Him because they have a problem with His character, not His existence.

    I suppose the question is this: What would it take for you to put your trust in the God of the Bible? Some unexplainable miracle in your life? Peace in the Middle East? What? If you reject the light your given, why expect more light?

  15. Your wonderful cacophony of opinions and rubbish is duly noted. The sheer ludicrousy of trying to quantify the kingdom of God our heavenly father to a mathematical equation. You people are absolutely clueless and totally lacking any understanding of the things of God. It all boils down to an absolute rejection of the reality of God. People are running around thinking they’re so sophisticated and enlightened they can quantify and explain and justify all things in a neat little fits all scientific explanation. People are just as pagan just as evil and vile today as any ancient
    culture which allowed itself to degenerate into a pagan heathen lifestyle. Wake up there was a war in heaven and we were there! One third of the host of heaven was cast out,they are in the world with us ,however they are denied
    what we have a physical body. They only have spiritual bodies and because of this will never have the opportunity to return unto our heavenly father. We were spiritual also
    and our spirit still is dwelling within these mortal bodies in this our second estate the mortal existence.We have this body and we fought for the lord and our heavenly fathers plan of salvation and the fact we have our body testifies we were on the side of the lord and our heavenly father. We shall return from whence we came when our estate here is over that is the spiritual world. What we do in this estate will determine the degree of glory we obtain in the next world. Not all in this world will keep their second estate and receive a kingdom of glory. Some will not and will be cast out. All will be resurrected which is the reunification of our physical body and spirit into an immortal imperishable physical being as Jesus and God are. How can we even hope to fathom the mysteries of the creator of the universe when we can’t even fathom the truths of our own world. Believe me friends and neighbors there are millions of worlds out there with men and women just like us. We and they are in the image of our heavenly father and physically the same. It’s not quantifiable but it’s real!
    Faith is belief in things that are not seen but are true.You can have faith or be like the third who were cast out in fear. The choice the free agency is yours!

  16. Aerin:
    “Thank you for pointing out that the Bible should not be taken literally. If it were, I think that women’s rights, for one, would never have happened.”

    You might want to have a closer look at the Gospels, in which Jesus breaks every cultural taboo in the book by including women so closely in His ministry.

  17. To thor27: Dude! Chapter and verse Man! Keep on topic of the Bible! Don’t try to add the Book of Mormon into the mix! Wassup with that?!

  18. Robert: Why not the Old Testament, where a woman is traded off to the citizens of Sodom in exchange for leaving a man alone?

  19. Joe: I would believe in the existence of God if something truly, truly remarkable happened. I’m not talking about someone turning water into wine 2000 years ago, I’m talking about raising continents out of the water from sheer will, I’m talking about suspending the natural order of things on a whim. I would only accept the supernatural if, after scientific scrutiny, it turns out it really is supernatural. That’s not to say I would worship it either, though.

    As far as the eternal question of “What would you do if you saw God in the afterlife?” goes, I can only, like Thomas Jefferson, say that if there really is a God, then surely he respects reason far more than unwavering faith.

  20. thor27: (Kind of ironic, don’t you think? It’s as if instead of eltower my handle were stmatthew or something)
    Your wonderful cacophony of opinions and rubbish is duly noted.
    You’re going to have to explain that one to me.
    The sheer ludicrousy of trying to quantify the kingdom of God our heavenly father to a mathematical equation.
    Science has always been about looking for where the current frontiers of knowledge are and pushing them back. It’s always worked. Its progress is inexorable. 700 years ago, if you had told someone you would be launching satellites today, you would probably be burnt at the stake for heresy of some kind. But look at where we stand now. I personally find the illumination of the dark corners of knowledge something beautiful. I do, however, respect your need for bliss through ignorance.
    You people[It’s only one writer in here but I think I know what you mean] are absolutely clueless and totally lacking any understanding of the things of God. It all boils down to an absolute rejection of the reality of God.
    If God were a reality, I would not reject its existence. There is no, however, evidence for it being a reality, so for all intents and purposes, I carry out my life as if it there was nobody ‘up there’.
    People are running around thinking they’re so sophisticated and enlightened they can quantify and explain and justify all things in a neat little fits all scientific explanation. People are just as pagan just as evil and vile today as any ancient culture which allowed itself to degenerate into a pagan heathen lifestyle.

    Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Who said anything about paganism? And what’s this ‘running around’ being scientific? How is it possibly bad? Again, I apologise, respect your need for bliss in ignorance.
    Wake up there was a war in heaven and we were there!
    I’m pretty sure I’ve never been there.
    One third of the host of heaven was cast out,they are in the world with us ,however they are denied what we have a physical body. They only have spiritual bodies and because of this will never have the opportunity to return unto our heavenly father. We were spiritual also and our spirit still is dwelling within these mortal bodies in this our second estate the mortal existence.We have this body and we fought for the lord and our heavenly fathers plan of salvation and the fact we have our body testifies we were on the side of the lord and our heavenly father. We shall return from whence we came when our estate here is over that is the spiritual world.
    I beg to differ. In the beginning of life was fire and ice, with the existence of only two worlds: Muspelheim and Niflheim. When the warm air of Muspelheim hit the cold ice of Niflheim, the giant Ymir and the icy cow Audhumbla were created. Ymir’s foot bred a son and a man and a woman emerged from his armpits, making Ymir the progenitor of the Jotun, or giants. Whilst Ymir slept, the intense heat from Muspelheim made him sweat, and he sweated out Surtr, a giant of fire. Later Ymir woke and drank Audhumbla’s milk. Whilst he drank, the cow Audhumbla licked on a salt stone. On the first day after this a man’s hair appeared on the stone, on the second day a head and on the third day an entire man emerged from the stone. His name was Bure and with an unknown giant he fathered the three gods Odin, Vili and Ve.
    When the gods felt strong enough they killed Ymir. His blood flooded the world and drowned all of the giants, except two. But giants grew again in numbers and soon there were as many as before Ymir’s death. Then the gods created seven more worlds using Ymir’s flesh for dirt, his blood for the Oceans, rivers and lakes, his bones for stone, his brain as the clouds, his skull for the heaven. Sparks from Muspelheim flew up and became stars.
    What we do in this estate will determine the degree of glory we obtain in the next world. Not all in this world will keep their second estate and receive a kingdom of glory. Some will not and will be cast out. All will be resurrected which is the reunification of our physical body and spirit into an immortal imperishable physical being as Jesus and God are.
    I find it far more fulfilling to lead your life like it really is: a brief and intense moment in the depths of time. It makes everything worth it, no matter how small. Everything else is self-deceptive.
    How can we even hope to fathom the mysteries of the creator of the universe when we can’t even fathom the truths of our own world.
    But we’re doing our best and a damn good job for that matter! It all just undoes itself when faced with the terminal answer of ‘ah, its inexplicable, stop looking for answers’. Quite frankly, that argument is a little bit defensive.
    Believe me friends and neighbors there are millions of worlds out there with men and women just like us. We and they are in the image of our heavenly father and physically the same. It’s not quantifiable but it’s real!
    I am compelled to believe you but something tells me its a bad idea.
    Faith is belief in things that are not seen but are true.You can have faith or be like the third who were cast out in fear. The choice the free agency is yours!
    No. I know that atoms are there although I cannot see them. You can measure atoms. You can play around with them.
    There is, however, nothing similar for God. You could say you ‘hear’ his voice, but a psychologist would very quickly give you treatment for schizophrenia. You could say you ‘feel’ him, but I ‘feel’ tingles down my spine every time I play Bill Withers’ “Aint no Sunshine”.
    Faith is belief in the total absence of evidence, sometimes even in face of evidence.
    You are absolutely entitled to your faith and your beliefs – one thing that separates us is that I would be willing to die defending your right to believe whatever you wanted. But please don’t assume everyone else needs to have the same set of beliefs as you do *whispering>frankly, it doesn’t say much for your faith in god if you need everyone else to pray with you in unison in order to have peace of mind.

  21. Eltower: “You are absolutely entitled to your faith and your beliefs – one thing that separates us is that I would be willing to die defending your right to believe whatever you wanted. But please don’t assume everyone else needs to have the same set of beliefs as you do *whispering>frankly, it doesn’t say much for your faith in god if you need everyone else to pray with you in unison in order to have peace of mind.”

    Agreed. People have a right to believe what they want to believe. One of the reasons why I dislike some people is that they knock on my door and try to convert me to something that I don’t see any reason to believe in.

    thor27: “How can we even hope to fathom the mysteries of the creator of the universe when we can’t even fathom the truths of our own world.”

    Eh. I had no idea that people who think scientists corrupt Biblical truth would be concerned with any of that.

    “What we do in this estate will determine the degree of glory we obtain in the next world. Not all in this world will keep their second estate and receive a kingdom of glory. Some will not and will be cast out. All will be resurrected which is the reunification of our physical body and spirit into an immortal imperishable physical being as Jesus and God are.”

    Fine. What we do in this estate will determine the degree of glory we obtain in the next world. Very well, assuming that I believe there is a world to come. What, then, is required of us to obtain glory? Blind belief in a god that we cannot see, feel touch, hear…? Again, if there is indeed a judging god, I hope He will judge me on my actions rather than on whether or not I believed in his existence.

    “People are running around thinking they’re so sophisticated and enlightened they can quantify and explain and justify all things in a neat little fits all scientific explanation. People are just as pagan just as evil and vile today as any ancient culture which allowed itself to degenerate into a pagan heathen lifestyle.”

    Never read the witches’ creed have you? It says to do what you please as long as it harms no-one. I can hardly say that religionists believe in the same thing, what with crusades and burning innocent people at the stake. Evil and vile, huh? I suppose that includes you… And the Chinese, heathens as the Christians might call them, were sophisticated enough to have invented things like paper. The Egyptians, who were most certainly not in agreement with your religion, build great pyramids that we are still puzzling over.

    “You people[It’s only one writer in here but I think I know what you mean] are absolutely clueless and totally lacking any understanding of the things of God. It all boils down to an absolute rejection of the reality of God.”

    Eh. We wouldn’t be arguing about this if we weren’t “reject[ing] of the reality of God”.

    “Faith is belief in things that are not seen but are true.You can have faith or be like the third who were cast out in fear. The choice the free agency is yours!”

    Faith in that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, cheated death and rose bodily in heaven, and can now be eaten in the form of a cracker called Communion. A few Latin words spoken over a cup of wine and you can also drink his blood. If faith is believing in obviously irrational things like the ones stated above, you’re very welcome to it. I will gladly take my choice and be the third who were “cast out in fear”, knowing that I have spent my life gaining useful knowledge and being moral not because I fear God, or love God, but because I see life as it is and can judge morality based on real-life moral grounds.

    What would it take for me to believe in God? Nothing. Absolutely nothing – if he does exist, I will believe. Until now I have seen no solid proof of his existence, therefore I do not believe.

    As for women’s rights:

    “If a man [meets] a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her … He must marry the girl … He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”
    — Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (NIV)

    I don’t know about you, but why should a woman marry the man who raped her? Because he committed a gruesome and immoral act? (Refer to the Rights Theory, Utilitarianism and Kant.)

    “”Have you allowed all the women to live?” he [Moses] asked them…. “Now … kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.””
    — Numbers 31:1-18 (NIV)

    It is quite obvious as to what this quote suggests.

    Out of point, but:

    “If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son … Then shall his father and his mother … bring him out unto the elders of his city … And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die.”
    — Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (AV)

    ” … thou shalt take an [awl], and thrust it through his ear…, and he shall be thy servant for ever.”
    — Deuteronomy 15:17 (AV)

    “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother…”
    — Matthew 10:34-35 (AV)

    Oh, and on Jesus:

    “The next day…, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.” … In the morning…, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter … said to Jesus, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree … has withered!””
    — Mark 11:12-14, 20-21 (NIV)

    It is worthy of note that it was no fig season. So Jesus withered a fig tree for not bearing fruit when it was not in season. Is that in any way a reasonable thing to do?

    All right. I have defended my beliefs as well as I can with a headache and no caffeine. Feel free to defend yours. You may have no right to preach your belief without challenge, but far be it from me to take away your right of challenging mine.

  22. […] Ae’s Rants Aerin 11:06 am Right… Here are my two (so far) responses to Quick Note On Irony Before… […]

  23. Joe, I would consider believing if double-blinded studies of prayer would show that it works more than mere chance, if someone would regrow a limb, or if Lord Jebus would come down and prove that he’s the authentic Creator of the Universe by killing pigs, curing women of menstruations and raising people from the dead, like he did in the NT. Alas, your deity seems really intent on hiding himself (or is just deceptive), so you’ll have to excuse me for rejecting your feel-good beliefs together with Odin, Zeus and the Easter Bunny.

  24. It was said in the comments of the previous post several times, but everyone’s been missing it between all the superfluous and over-intellectualized analysis.

    Quite simply it can be stated:
    Being circular does not a perfect circle make.

    You can debate significant digits, the precision of a cubit, whether this was a blueprint vs. a general description (to which I actually contributed a long winded allegory), or anything else you want *all day* and get nowhere. However, it is quite easily put to rest by simply realizing:
    Being circular does not a perfect circle make.

    As a skeptic I still have yet to find anywhere that the Bible truly contradicts itself internally, when read in proper context and without the clouding of faulty traditions. As for its contradictions of external science and mathematics, this argument does not apply because:
    Being circular does not a perfect circle make.

    The question isn’t “Pi = 3, or abandon your beliefs.” It is “Something circular could be 10 across and 30 around, or else abandon your beliefs”, which obviously is no actual dilemma at all.

  25. Sigh: You’re completely missing the point.

    The Bible makes a pretty rotund statement on the nature of the circle. Taking aim at Biblical literalists, I contend that through reading that passage you can either:

    – Realise you can interpret and analyse the Bible
    – Stick to the fallacy of Biblical down to the word literalism and change the world of Maths.

    You can read the passage literally as Creationists would in theory do and conclude that Pi = 3 or interpret it in terms of historical context, which is what you’re doing, and then the whole literalism thing goes out the window.

    I never said the question was “Pi = 3 or abandon your beliefs”. I reiterate for the fifteenth time that my post was a tounge in cheek critique of Biblical literalism, which is almost by definition fallacious and self-contradictory.

  26. @eltower

    No I get it exactly.

    It says, down to the word literally, circular.

    There is no reason to believe that something that is literally, down to the word, “circular”, is an object to which c = (pi)d should remotely apply.

  27. Hm, you make a fair point.

    Yet God, being perfect, would conceivably allow for a perfect circle to manifest itself in His word…

    And here I open the door of thick and heavy theology, a door I am not prepared to cross.

  28. @eltower
    “You can either accept that the word of God is fallible and men have improved upon it, therefore casting into doubt your claims of Creation.
    Or you could hold steadfast to your God-given beliefs. Stand by in the face of scientific persecution and shout loud to the heavens that PI, goddammit, is equal to 3.0 because God said so.”
    That looks like an ultimatum to make one of the following choices:
    1. Pi = 3 (the second choice you list)
    2. Since Pi is not equal to 3, doubt other beliefs
    So maybe not abandon, but at least doubt. Regardless, since there is still no claim in the Bible that Pi = 3, there is no true dilemma.
    This comment was guided by a maternal hand

  29. ^gaining my namesake of sigh
    I used lessthan-greaterthan as a not-equals sign. Shoulda known better than to use VB6 notation. edit:
    2. Since Pi != 3, doubt other beliefs

  30. A Biblical literalist would doubt other beliefs very quickly.
    Argh we’re commenting at the same time. I’ll correct your comment.
    If Pi != 3 then you can only really doubt literal interpretations of the Bible.

  31. @eltower

    My previous post “since there is still no claim…”, I realize could get frustrating to you due to the wording. It could be read that I still don’t “get your point”. Let me rephrase.

    Even when taken literally and down to the letter, there is still no claim that Pi = 3. It’s not a matter of interpretation, but simply a matter of looking up the definition for the word “circular”.

  32. @eltower

    LOL yes we sure are. But I still don’t think that a literal interpretation yields Pi = 3. I think the literal interpretation says that circular objects can be 10 across while 30 around. And this is perfectly valid.

  33. You make a pretty good point, yes. Now we’re either into theology: the perfection of things uttered in God’s name and word (I do not want to get into that) or the meaning of ‘circular’.

  34. As a skeptic I still have yet to find anywhere that the Bible truly contradicts itself internally, when read in proper context and without the clouding of faulty traditions.

    Oh, boy. You haven’t been looking very hard, because the number of contradictions in the Bible is indeed big. Off the top of my head, I can name the differing orders of creation in the creation stories (man and woman together vs. man first, then animals, then the woman from his rib); discrepant details in both flood stories; the differing genealogies of Jesus; Mosus describing his own death and so on. There are also errors like saying that bats are birds and whales are fish, the Earth is immobile, daemons cause illness, that there were giants etc. And then there are weird things like talking donkeys, zombie hands, unicorns in the KJV, windows in the sky causing rain and so on. Googling for “Bible errors” or “Bible contradictions” would probably give you more. Quran, by the way, has much less of these, since it didn’t have so many authors.

  35. @eltower

    As a third-party not claiming any religion I would prefer to stay objective and look at the word circular. A circular route through the office, I’d expect, you would not hold to calculations using pi.

    The perfection of things uttered in God’s name, if we want to go there, is pretty easy to refute. In God’s name in no way implies endorsement by God, if you’ll permit the assumption for this statement that one exists.

    If you go back and read all my comments in the previous post, it describes a certain personal mission I’ve put myself on to truly understand the Bible and what it says before passing any judgment on it. I will be doing the same with other religious texts as well as scientific ones. For too long I have, and I believe many have, taken what is exposed to us about a given topic and made a judgment without ever actually looking at the thing itself. And since most of the people doing the exposition have done so to further their agendas, really, the only way you can trust anything is to dive deep into it yourself.

  36. @Manly Tears

    I’m well aware of the supposed contradictions that do not hold up against intense study of their context, history, and culture. Most of the time this includes going back to the words of the original text, in the original language.

    When you take them at face value with the intention of saying “told ya so!”, it is indeed quite easy to find these things. The more difficult path is scrutiny, which has provided in the examples you’ve given (and many others) nothing but increased clarity.

  37. @Manly Tears

    In case you would like an example, the creation accounts follow the same order. As I’m not a Biblical scholar, let me know if I’m missing something, given that you are willing to objectively and intellectually review the text. I assure you, it won’t turn you into a crackpot just to study it.

    Genesis 2 does not show animals created after man. It shows man naming each beast in turn. (“Now the LORD God *had* formed” all beasts, i.e., it was done before now).

    Genesis 1 never says that man and woman sprouted out of dust simultaneously. It only says they were created on the same (sixth) day.

    So in all accounts, it is beasts, followed by man and woman, all on the same day. The “close-up” view provided when Genesis 2 repeats the account of the sixth day provides additional details (woman came after man, between which man named the beasts). However these additional details in no way contradict the general order provided in Genesis 1.

    The fact that this one does not even require deeper study, just a shoestring + thumbtack time line, only goes to illustrate that some of these supposed contradictions boil down to nothing more than a failure to read properly.

  38. @Manly Tears:
    Also the Quran is significantly shorter. I would wonder, however, if the error-rate normalized to the length of the text is higher or lower than the Bible’s.

    @sigh:
    Forgive me for generalizing, but in my experience most people who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible extend that belief to the translators as well: “God’s hand guided the translators, too.” Obviously changes in the meaning across languages are easier to spot than original mistakes, and yet this belief persists.

    Perhaps a more basic question is whether it matters to the “true-believers” at all? A frontal, logical approach is mostly useless coming from someone outside their range of beliefs. I’ve had better luck by first convincing them that if God exists in the traditional form, He gave us this intelligence because he wanted us to use logic and science to study His creation. Only then does the, “Hey, look at these errors in the bible,” tack seem to stick.

  39. Sigh, I disagree. Gen. 2:18-19 says the animals were made at that point, and then taken to Adam to be named. Here are the verses from NIV:

    The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air.

    And KJV:

    And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air;

    I think the meaning is obvious.

    Something else to marvel upon is how the vegetation is created a few days before the fauna or the Sun. Clearly, biology wasn’t their strong point.

  40. loljesus, if I had to guess, I’d say it’s lower for Quran. It also fares better in an another metric, how many people were ordered to be killed by the creator diety. It’s millions in the Bible, and just thousands in Quran. However, the many explicit calls for martyrdom and killing of infidels more than offset that.

  41. @loljesus

    The translations are not protected. They try to say this because of Jesus’s claim that no jot nor tittle will pass from the Law, but a literal translation there implies that the claim only applies to the Torah (first 5 books of the OT as we know it), and only those written in Hebrew (as English uses neither jots nor tittles). Their own claims to take it to the letter defeat them.

    @Manly Tears

    You can’t be serious. Apart from the fact that you could take “formed” to mean “formed into a group”, which God would *have* to do to bring them all to Adam at once, the Hebrew word is yatsar. This is very easily translated into “had formed”.

    Note again that the translated texts are not protected, nor do they claim to be. So the KJV could be mistaken, but let’s assume it’s not. You wouldn’t still say “an help meet for him” when you meant “a suitable helper”. Similarly, at the time this was written, “formed” was equivalent to what we know as “had formed”. Just as in Old English only two verb tenses were recognized, so here the past is the past.

  42. It looks to me like those against the Bible are just as unwilling to accept contrary evidence as those that are for it.

    Open minds and higher intellects indeed.

  43. @lolmorons

    /sigh

    @Manly Tears

    Also keep in mind that the aim of the KJV was not to be as accurate as possible but to be an aesthetically pleasing work. Shakespeare would go to great lengths to preserve iambic pentameter, and whereas the KJV is obviously not held to that criteria, some allowance must be made for style.

  44. I will likely not be checking back over the weekend, so don’t think I’ve run off. If the thread gets cluttered please make anything you want me to see pretty easy to find. Thanks.

  45. Before I go for good, I actually found a quote in regard to the purpose of the KJV:

    “That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek; and this to be set out and printed, without any marginal notes, and only to be used in all churches of England in time of divine service.”

    So, my claim about their purpose (regardless of whether the purpose was achieved) is clearly questionable, and I’ve found that many do not agree that Shakespeare or any purely literary consultant was on the committee. That said, I retract the post sigh – June 16th, 2007 at 12:43 am as I am no longer sure of the foundation upon which it was built.

  46. You can’t be serious.

    That’s a good one. Yes, I am serious, and your arguments actually start to look disingenuous. The obvious sense there is “to shape or mold”, because “to form into a group out of the ground” is just incomprehensible. The last bit is in both versions. The NIV also has the word “now” that supports the reading that it didn’t happen earlier. If you then look at the context that the creation of fauna isn’t yet mentioned in the second story, your interpretation becomes more and more far fetched. Further, looking at the translation of “yatsar”, I see “to form”, “to frame” and “to fashion”. Looking up the last two in an English dictionary tells me that they commonly refer to molding, creating or “an act or process of making”. It’s not completely conclusive, as for that I would need to be able to read Ancient Hebrew myself, but I think I’ve made my point that your explanation is not nearly as evident or clear-cut as you’re making it out to be.

    It looks to me like those against the Bible are just as unwilling to accept contrary evidence as those that are for it.

    I am not in any way against the Bible. I am for honest, straightforward textual criticism and against literalism. The Bible and its translations are a part of the literary heritage of our civilization and should be studied and read by everyone.

    Also keep in mind that the aim of the KJV was not to be as accurate as possible but to be an aesthetically pleasing work.

    I also looked at that part in the other languages that I know. German uses “machen” or “to make”, Russian has “образовать” which too means “to make” or “to create”, and in Latvian there is “veidot” which means just the same. They all also say that the animals were created from earth and use a present tense.

  47. Sigh, the KJV translators failed at it anyway, because it has frigggin unicorns. 🙂

  48. @Manly

    I realized this weekend that the “formed into a group” claim was errant, but as I’m only just now back here, I can only say you’re right on that point. However do note that it was an aside separate from the main point of my post, so its error has no effect except to prove whether I’m willing to accept that I was wrong. I am.

    Quick review is all I had time for but I found evidence that what are called unicorns in the KJV were rimu, or reem, which are wild ox. The symmetrical nature of the horns when viewed from the side appeared to be one horn and they were thus depicted this way, often for the sake of art. Again research of the language(s) easily dismisses this “error”.

    So let’s now revisit “Now” and verb tense.

    Even up to 5 years ago in college I heard professors use “Now” when leading into discussion of a new point, regardless of how long ago that point had been generally established. For example, in a proof, they’d say
    “Now, equilateral triangles are of such a nature that all sides are equal…”
    But clearly this didn’t mean that we were only just then coming into that knowledge. We had studied that in elementary school. It simply meant “Please note or recall…”

    I am perplexed at how we moved into a discussion of anything in the present tense. That would be “forms” or “is forming”. Formed / had formed are clearly past and past perfect.

    In the NIV, the pattern “Now…had (verb)ed” is followed. I think we have no reason to question that the intent here is “Please note…had (verb)ed sometime even previous to the time frame in which the events of this report take place.” This is called past perfect and is the generally accepted meaning of the “had x-ed” verb form.

    In the KJV, we don’t even have “Now”. We have “And”. Similarly, it is used as a transition to a new point. Your confusion seems to stem from the fact that “had” is not used here, implying past instead of past perfect. While I haven’t verified 100% from all angles, my understanding is that in Old English only two tenses (present and past) were used. Inflection and context were used to make more significant distinctions, and I believe that while this isn’t Old English by the most strict definition, the English form used here has similar nuances.

    With that I have to delete my bookmark to this page and resume my regularly schedule life and employment. While I haven’t wasted too much time on this thread, I did on the other, and it’s getting to a point where I’m losing ground on other responsibilities. I have no problems if you continue to disagree with the above, but I won’t be back to answer again. I do hope that my explanations of this supposed discrepancy might prompt you to investigate it and the others more deeply.

  49. Quick review is all I had time for but I found evidence that what are called unicorns in the KJV were rimu, or reem, which are wild ox.

    I know that; however, it’s again not as clear as you try make it, because, if I remember correctly, the horns were referred to in singular at some places. Though I don’t want to waste time nitpicking the details again.

    It’s a shame that you won’t to read my answer, because you are again wrong, and your entire point seems still as feeble. The usage of “now” you sport isn’t supported by the grammar of the sentence, because it’s not separated by a comma. It is not past perfect, but present perfect, and refers to something that happened just now. All the other translations I checked support this, and not your view.

    I do hope that my explanations of this supposed discrepancy might prompt you to investigate it and the others more deeply.

    Actually, it just supported what I said earlier, that your motives might be disingenuous. It’s also amusing that you consider your own explanation “deep”.

  50. Eltower: “I would believe in the existence of God if something truly, truly remarkable happened…That’s not to say I would worship it either, though.”

    Untums: “Joe, I would CONSIDER (emphasis mine) believing if double-blinded studies of prayer would show that it works more than mere chance, if someone would regrow a limb, or if Lord Jebus would come down and prove that he’s the authentic Creator of the Universe by killing pigs, curing women of menstruations and raising people from the dead, like he did in the NT.”

    Forgive several quotations from the Bible, but they directly apply to your quotes. Jesus said to a crowd who watched Him perform mircales,”But I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe.”

    Even some people who saw Jesus face to face and saw “miraculous” things didn’t believe in Him. James put it this way in His letter, “You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe–and tremble!” Ok, so even if Christians, Buddists, Hindu’s, or the worshipers of whatever, convinced you that their God is real, what’s the point?! You wouldn’t put your trust in Him anyway. You wouldn’t change one thing about yourself and you surely wouldn’t start obeying what the Bible tells you, so what makes you think that God is going to do something supernatural or awe inspiring to show you He is real?

    Solomon puts it this way in His book on wisdom, “Then they will call on me, but I will not answer;They will seek me diligently, but they will not find me. Because they hated knowledge and did not CHOOSE (emphasis mine) the fear of the LORD, They would have none of my counsel and despised my every rebuke.” (Prov. 1:28-30).

    Don’t be surprised when you never get an answer in your quest for God. Until you’re ready to bow your pride, admit that you need Him, and be willing to submit yourself to His authority, don’t be expecting any bells and whistles anytime soon. He knows your motives, intents, and reasonings, so why would He stoop to a level simply to prove a moot point for your curiosities sake. He’s not only looking for affirmation to His existence, He desires (and deserves if He’s really God) our worship.

  51. My quest for what? You crack me up. Saying that a perfect being desires worship is nuts too, or that he is a trickster god that makes prayers stop working just while we try to do controlled studies, or that he can’t even impress some credulous peasants in the pre-scientific age enough to believe him. I think it’s profound anti-intellectualism and stupidity to blame others for not buying this made-up crap. The Bible is also full of magic done by people not claiming to be God, like Simon the Magician or the Egyptian necromancers. They could actually do the same tricks as the friggin’ Creator of the Universe, but he just out-magicked them. I mean, sheesh, how come today we assume that guys like that are just frauds? How come putting the same stuff in the Iron age suddenly makes it any more believable?

    In the end, the most arrogant thing you said is that you know what God wants. Wasn’t humility supposed to be one of the Christian values? I’m sure you’d turn around and claim that “you can’t understand God with your limited human mind” the moment it became convenient for you anyway.

    “Unthinking faith is a curious offering to be made to the creator of the human mind.” – John A. Hutchinson

  52. Manly Tears:
    “You crack me up. Saying that a perfect being desires worship is nuts too…”

    Um, do you want me to fill pages with the God of the Bible’s not just desire, but command to worship Him, and only Him? This idea didn’t just pop into my head or originate with me, no matter how much credit you give my ego. Call the Bible nuts if you wish, but time and again God asks for our worship.
    Here’s a couple of examples for sake of argument, 1 Chronicles 16:29, “Give to the LORD the glory due His name;Bring an offering, and come before Him. Oh, worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.” Ps. 95:6, “Oh come, let us worship and bow down; Let us kneel before the LORD our Maker.” John 4:23, Jesus states, “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.” If you desire other references to look up on your own time let me know.

    “In the end, the most arrogant thing you said is that you know what God wants. Wasn’t humility supposed to be one of the Christian values?

    Forgive me if I came across arrogant. That was not my intent. However, if God is the author of the Bible (I know you don’t believe He is, just for sake of argument go with me here) then He did a pretty good job of revealing His will for us. If the Bible is true, then I must say that I only know God’s desire for my life based on what the Bible says. Oh boy, here it comes, another verse! 😦 Michah 6:8, “He has shown you, O man, what is good; And what does the LORD require of you but to do justly, To love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God?” I’d say if any person get’s that list down fairly well they’re in pretty good shape.

    “I think it’s profound anti-intellectualism and stupidity to blame others for not buying this made-up crap.” I don’t claim to be an “intellectual elite” by any stretch of the imagination. I have no desire to be that out of touch with humanity. However, it is not a viable defence to dismiss any argument based on the intelligence of the one posing the question. Even my four-year old has asked me some pretty deep theological questions that I had to think twice about.

    “The Bible is also full of magic done by people not claiming to be God, like Simon the Magician or the Egyptian necromancers. They could actually do the same tricks as the friggin’ Creator of the Universe, but he just out-magicked them.”

    I’d like to see these necromancers part the sea, give food and water in the desert, raise the dead, call down fire from heaven, flood the entire earth, change everyone’s language structure, allow people talking to be heard in another language, etc. The Bible makes some pretty bold and if true, impressive claims that go way beyond turning water into wine. If you choose not to believe that it really happened, that’s fine Dude, just give the Bible a little bit more credit to the audacity of it’s claims.

    “I mean, sheesh, how come today we assume that guys like that are just frauds?”
    I haven’t heard of anyone recently raising someone from the dead after they’ve been dead for four days, so if you hear of it, let me know and we’ll talk.

    I’ll let Jesus defend Himself here when He says in John 20:29, “Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

    “I’m sure you’d turn around and claim that “you can’t understand God with your limited human mind” the moment it became convenient for you anyway.”
    Why do so many atheists mock religions by saying that their deity came from their own minds and that god is no bigger than the box we’ve created for him/her/it? Then in turn they mock the God of the Bible because He doesn’t fit into a box? I find that ironic.

    “How come putting the same stuff in the Iron age suddenly makes it any more believable?”

    Do you believe Caesar existed? Do you believe in Hammurabi? No one has a problem believing they existed though they have never met them and they lived such a long time ago. Yet, people have such a hard time with the Bible, especially the Old Testament, when Jewish scholars have been so carefully copying it down for millenia. I thought that the Dead Sea Scrolls put an end to such ridicule. There’s over 5,000 pre-600AD manuscripts and parchments (an unheard of number) of the New Testament from three regions on the ancient world. The farthest they disagree with each other is more or less 10%, and most of those are “ands” and “buts”. Within those different regions there is a 98% agreement (unheard of in ancient literature), so it makes textual criticism usually very easy. You know how many ancient copies of Homer we have? Six. You know how much agreement those six copies have? 50%. Yet no one says, “Homer never existed.” The Bible is a verifiable, historal document, in every way that any other ancient document and has been checked for accuracy, dependability, and credibility. There is no credible reason for rejecting it as a historical document (even if it’s intent wasn’t history, it got it’s history right.)

  53. By the way, please forgive the length of my posts. I work an overnight job so I have a lot of time to write tonight. I won’t be able to really write again for a while. And all the atheists said, “amen!” 🙂

  54. Um, do you want me to fill pages with the God of the Bible’s not just desire, but command to worship Him, and only Him?

    The key here is the word “perfect”. A perfect being does not need anything, because he does not lack anything.

    However, if God is the author of the Bible (I know you don’t believe He is, just for sake of argument go with me here) then He did a pretty good job of revealing His will for us.

    Yeah, except for thousands of years it was misinterpreted in blatant ways like the Earth being fixed in space and so on (look at the number of apologies the last pope of the biggest Christian church, which also claims to be “infallible”, made); was only revealed to the inhabitants of a small patch of desert and did not reach places like Japan or Australia for more than thousand years, leaving those people in the dark not just about their messiah, but about the concept of monotheism in general; and even now Christians make up only a third of the entire world’s population, and they are split up in mutually excommunicating sects almost none of which share your ecumenical beliefs. Good job indeed, considering this is the guy who made the entire fucking universe.

    However, it is not a viable defence to dismiss any argument based on the intelligence of the one posing the question.

    I was just pointing out how trite your reasoning was. You are blaming people for being skeptical that your particular religion, one of the thousands that are still being followed and the thousands that have been forgotten, is true, and they refuse to accept that truth out of their own personal failings.

    The Bible makes some pretty bold and if true, impressive claims that go way beyond turning water into wine.

    And you know what’s the biggest miracle? There is no evidence for all that shit ever happening, and things like flooding the Earth are just absolutely impossible by our current understanding. There’s so much discrepancies with that story, like how do you build a boat so huge in the Bronze age out of wood and with primitive instruments, which would be impossible to build and sail even today, get all the animals on board, not kill the fish that need salt water or fresh water, get the dinosaurs on board, deal with the species that live for very short periods of time or have very specific diet requirements lest they die, and so on. So, you’re right, the claims are audacious, but I must point out that such creation myths have been recorded since the invention of the written word, many of them even making more sense than this one.

    The necromancers did things like turn the Nile into blood and cover the Egypt with frogs, but are finally out-jujued by God when they can’t conjure lice.

    Simon, in turn, can perform miracles too. He levitates, and Peter prays to God to make him fall (how very Christian of him), and he breaks his legs and the crowd stones him.

    Do you believe Caesar existed? Do you believe in Hammurabi?

    The contemporary evidence for Caesar, including his own writings, is relatively good. The contemporary evidence for your Lord Jebus, on the other hand, is not just flimsy, it’s non-existent. Hammurapi is from a completely different age, so he’s not relevant.

    Bible with its extraordinary claims of miracles has as much credibility as the works of Homer, whom you mentioned. Both contain real historical settings, and both are mostly unsupported by external evidence. There’s even no evidence that Nazareth existed in the early 1st century. There are also many discrepancies in the stories, which I won’t list now.

    The fact that there are real street names used in Harry Potter doesn’t make wizards and dragons real, m’kay. As Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you make such assertions without that evidence, they can be just as easily dismissed without any counter-evidence, because the onus is on you.

    Why do so many atheists mock religions by saying that their deity came from their own minds and that god is no bigger than the box we’ve created for him/her/it? Then in turn they mock the God of the Bible because He doesn’t fit into a box? I find that ironic.

    Isn’t that historically the theists who wanted to keep their god small? Look at the YECs, they still think that the world is less than 10 thousand years old. Much of the discoveries of science were fiercely resisted because they contradicted the then-true theology, and things like evolution are still rejected, even though being a part of billions of years of history and connected to the rest of the three of life is much grander than being created out of dirt or a rib.

    By the way, what is “our deity” supposed to be? Haven’t you received the memo that our epistemology doesn’t include supernatural beings?

  55. Oops, I apologize for the grammatical mistakes, should have reread it before posting.

  56. quick reply to my mistake:

    I did not mean “your deity” I meant that they usuauly say that various world religion’s deity(s) fit in a box. My apologies.

  57. lowerleavell: Even though one could take the New Testament as documenting Jesus’ life, therefore evidence, there are plenty or arguments against it being a reputable source, mainly that most, if not all of the books were written up to centuries after Jesus’ death.

    And evidence for Caesar or Hammurabi don’t have them violating the laws of the Universe on a whim. For that matter, evidence that Jesus could perform miracles is no more convincing than the evidence that hobbits walked the Earth.

  58. “The key here is the word “perfect”. A perfect being does not need anything, because he does not lack anything.”

    I did not say that He “needs” us or anything for that matter. I said He “desires” us. Two totally different things. Before they were born I did not need my children. My wife and I had kids because we “wanted” to have children. I still don’t “need” them, but I love them and “desire” to have them around. From the Bible’s perspective (and you’ll sneer at this I’m sure) we “get” to serve God. It is our priviledge because we are unworthy but He loves us and because of His mercy hasn’t destroyed us as we deserve.

    “Yeah, except for thousands of years it was misinterpreted in blatant ways like the Earth being fixed in space and so on (look at the number of apologies the last pope of the biggest Christian church, which also claims to be “infallible”, made);”

    Um, I’m not Catholic. My heritage is not Catholic, and as a matter of fact, my religous ancestory was the one’s the Catholics were burning in the Inquisition, so don’t expect me to defend “the Church” because they have hijacked the name.

    “was only revealed to the inhabitants of a small patch of desert and did not reach places like Japan or Australia for more than thousand years, leaving those people in the dark not just about their messiah, but about the concept of monotheism in general;”

    This “small patch of desert” was the center of the known world, a very strategic place to “drop your message”. Also, the inhabitants were supposed to carry their message to the entire world and got selfish with it thinking it was only for them. Jonah found out otherwise the hard way. Many prophets like Joel, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and others spent time preaching to “Gentile” nations and the Bible records conversions of Gentiles to “Yahweh”.
    Also, if (and I know you don’t believe it anyway but…) if the geneologies in Genesis are even halfway correct, at least one of the Noah’s sons was still alive during the time of Abraham, Isaac, and even Jacob. The whole world would have had first hand accounts from “experiencing” God. This is seen in the hundreds of different “legends” and flood acounts that you see all over the world.

    “and even now Christians make up only a third of the entire world’s population, and they are split up in mutually excommunicating sects almost none of which share your ecumenical beliefs. Good job indeed, considering this is the guy who made the entire f*n universe.”

    Free will Dude. We can’t enforce our beliefs on anyone (idiot self-servers already tried that in the middle-ages and see where it got them). By the way, not everyone who names the name of Jesus is a Christian. Jesus said that on the day of judgment there will be many who say they “did things for God” and they will be rejected because they never put their trust in Jesus’ sacrifice for them. I know the “Gospel” and the resurrection are other things that makes you mad, but they are the crux of the Christian faith. Without them “Christianity” is virtually nothing.

    “You are blaming people for being skeptical that your particular religion, one of the thousands that are still being followed and the thousands that have been forgotten, is true, and they refuse to accept that truth out of their own personal failings.”

    I believe it is healthy to be skeptical. Never put your trust in anything that’s not trustworthy. I would think you even look every time before you sit down on something. The truth is that we put our faith in things every day. From our fellow motorists, to our chair. This trust simply involves an “informed” decision that I’ve made concerning my world-view as well as my destination after my departure from this world. All I have ever asked anyone is that they simply make an informed decision regarding the God of the Bible instead of just assuming they know everything based on a “world religion survey” class they took once a few years back.

    And you know what’s the biggest miracle? There is no evidence for all that s*t ever happening, and things like flooding the Earth are just absolutely impossible by our current understanding.

    This is simply just not true. There’s even ample evidence for the crossing of the Red Sea because they’ve found chariot wheels on the bottom! I can send you links for pictures if you wish. As far as evidence for the flood, it’s everywhere! You just won’t except any evidence because of the people who pose the evidence for a flood. Just in the US, where did the Grand Canyon come from, where did the frozen mamoths come from, where did the fossilized forests come from, where did the badlands come from, where did the mountains come from? Choosing to believe the Bible’s “story” on how it happened explains a WHOLE lot that I see almost every day here in the USA.”

    With that, I’m back off to work.

  59. Um, I’m not Catholic. My heritage is not Catholic, and as a matter of fact, my religous ancestory was the one’s the Catholics were burning in the Inquisition, so don’t expect me to defend “the Church” because they have hijacked the name.

    Great, so Christianity apparently didn’t even exist until the reformation. Good job, Jebus, you really got your message out. How many different Protestant sects were there, again?

    Needing something is just the urgent version of wanting, so, you are wrong again.

    The “chariot wheel” is just a steamship valve from a material the ancient Egyptians didn’t even use for their wheels. Also, Ron Wyatt has no credibility amongst serious historians and scholars.

    Just in the US, where did the Grand Canyon come from, where did the frozen mamoths come from, where did the fossilized forests come from, where did the badlands come from, where did the mountains come from?

    OK, I suddenly feel sorry for your kids. The mountains, fossilized forests and Grand Canyon certainly didn’t form in 40 years. “A big flood” explains nothing, and just raises more questions, like where the fuck did all that water come from, or the ones I mentioned earlier.

  60. “Great, so Christianity apparently didn’t even exist until the reformation. Good job, Jebus, you really got your message out. How many different Protestant sects were there, again?”

    Something you may not understand is that Biblical Christianity transends denomination, sect, race, gender, whatever. According to the Bible, a Christian is simply someone who has heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ, understands their position before God and is genuinely repentant of their sin,accepts Christ’s payment on cross for their sin, and put’s their eternal destination in His hands. This can be true of you no matter who you, where you are, or when you’ve lived. A Christian isn’t a member of any particular church or denomination, a Christian is someone who’s accepted Christ as their Savior. People have become Christians since the resurrection and will continue to do so until His return.

    Regarding your statement about those persecuted in the reformation, I simply believe that many of those were the genuine Christians rather the organized church. This may come as a surprise, but I have a big problem with 90% of organized denominations out there, because they’ve forsaken the Bible and made themselve their authority. Not cool.

    “Needing something is just the urgent version of wanting, so, you are wrong again.”

    Semantics Dude. Really. Wanting chocolate and needing chocolate are two totally different things. If you’ve ever been poor you know what the difference between a “want” and a “need” is.

    “The “chariot wheel” is just a steamship valve from a material the ancient Egyptians didn’t even use for their wheels.”

    I haven’t heard this before. I’ll check into it. You may be right, but it still doesn’t disprove the crossing of the Red Sea. Also, about Ron Wyatt, just because you don’t accept the person giving the information, that doesn’t necessarily make the information invalid. Otherwise I could sweepingly say Darwin wasn’t a credible source and totally dismiss evolution because of it, apart from verifying any evidence.

    “OK, I suddenly feel sorry for your kids.”

    Please, leave my kids out of it. They are being taught to love their neighbors, give to the poor, turn the other cheek, be responsible, obey those in authority, etc. Even apart from my teaching them about a creator they may have a chance to be normal and responsible adults.

    “The mountains, fossilized forests and Grand Canyon certainly didn’t form in 40 years. “A big flood” explains nothing, and just raises more questions, like where the f* id all that water come from, or the ones I mentioned earlier.”

    Do you know that conclusively? You have the same evidence I do. By the way, in 1980 a canyon over 200 ft. deep was formed in a matter of days. It’s right next to Mt. St. Hellens and proved to the world that catastrophy can change the outline of nature very, very quickly, not requiring billions of years.

    Here’s your bottom line on creation vs. evolution. On the one hand you have “in the beginning God” and on the other hand you have “in the beginning dirt.” That’s what it boils down to. That’s something you can dance around, but while evolution may attempt to explain the origin of species it does not explain the origin of origins. If you do not attest to a creator you attest to the eternality of the universe. Forgive me while I find it unscientific to understand how intelligence and reason came from dirt. While my scientists are telling me that things go from order to disorder, my evolution friends tell me that we are progressing and evolving. Science tells me “cause and effect” yet there is no “first cause” simply because it is not “scientifically examinable?” Forgive me, but logic, science, and reason do NOT point to evolution being the answer.

    The water is the same water we have today! The oceans sank, the mountains rose, the ice age happened and got trapped up at the poles. Where’s the mystery here? If the highest peaks were less than 100-200 ft high, it wouldn’t require any more water than we have today to cover the globe. Again, why is this hard?

  61. “…so much discrepancies with that story, like how do you build a boat so huge in the Bronze age out of wood and with primitive instruments, which would be impossible to build and sail even today, get all the animals on board, not kill the fish that need salt water or fresh water, get the dinosaurs on board, deal with the species that live for very short periods of time or have very specific diet requirements lest they die, and so on.”

    In order of argument: Noah was “pre” Bronze age and pre-flood technology would have been much better than after. If God picked just one person today to build an ark and the same thing happened we would lose 90% plus technology that we know today because one person and one family does not hold all the technological knowledge. He also had over 100 years to build the ark and had three boys which even with primitive tools would have been plenty of time to build it. The animals got on board on God’s command, and they weren’t required to get two of every animal, just two of every “kind.” It would be much easier to just get two dogs instead of every breed of dog. Next, even salt-water fish can live in fresh water for a period of time, as we saw here recently with whales swimming lost up the Sacramento River and were there for an extended period of time. Next, they didn’t need to get daddy and mommy dinos, they could have gotten babies. Many animals hibernate and would be easy to handle. Also, the dimensions of the ark provide ample space for every “kind” of animal. Next, not sure what kind of species you’re talking about that live a short period of time or have diet restrictions, so I’m not sure how to answer. I’m sure though that they brought plenty of food on board for every variety of animal.

    “The fact that there are real street names used in Harry Potter doesn’t make wizards and dragons real, m’kay. As Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

    If you’ve ever read Harry Potter you’ll notice it says, “fiction”, m’kay. The Bible claims to be true, not fiction. One major difference. Also, let me illustrate how well the Bible got their history right and show you one instance that it is reliable. In Luke 2:2, Luke says the census of Caesar was, “Cyrenius was governor of Syria.” For a long time people who didn’t believe the Bible rubbed it in that Cyrenius was NOt governor of Syria at the time because He was gorvernor earlier and someone else was governor. Recently they’ve found out that Cyrenius was governor twice and that Luke got his timing right after all.
    But it goes beyond just street names. It extends to places, names, locations, dates, statistics (like pi for example, just kidding) etc. This whole discussion on pi was because the arguments against the Bible have gotten so petty people who seek to get rid of the Bible have started reading the dimensions of the Temple to find ways to get rid of the Bible.

    It’s interesting that the more archaelogy they do, the more they discover that the Bible got it right all along. Surprise, surprise. You know it’s true that if someone found something that could discredit the Bible it would be plastered everywhere, all over the world news with glee. You saw how fast they posted “the gospel of Judas” and the recent “finding” of “Jesus’ ” tomb? People are desperate to disprove the Bible and put us “Bible thumper’s” beliefs in the grave where they belong. ‘Been 2000 years and they still haven’t succeeded.

    “…but I must point out that such creation myths have been recorded since the invention of the written word, many of them even making more sense than this one.”

    You’d think that with so many stories by unrelated witnesses it would attest to some truth to the stories, even if they’ve been “myth”esized by time and big imaginations.

    “The necromancers did things like turn the Nile into blood and cover the Egypt with frogs, but are finally out-jujued by God when they can’t conjure lice.”

    Are you saying God’s motivation was to “out do” the necromancers? His motivation was “let my people go!” If Pharoah had simply obeyed God in the first place it would have saved a LOT of trouble. There’s a sermon in there somewhere I’ll leave well alone.

    “Simon, in turn, can perform miracles too. He levitates, and Peter prays to God to make him fall (how very Christian of him), and he breaks his legs and the crowd stones him.”

    Did you get that from the Bible??? Please re-read Acts 8 and get back to me. Simon the socreror became a Christian according to the Bible, he was not stoned. Where did you here he got stoned?

    “The contemporary evidence for your Lord Jebus, on the other hand, is not just flimsy, it’s non-existent.”

    Only because you don’t count the gospels. Even if they were written a couple decades after the time of Christ, they were still written by eye witnesses who were contemporaries of Christ. Are you really suggesting that Christianity sprung out of thin air with no Jesus ever existing? Why? Who would go to their deaths believing in someone who never even existed? Oh yeah, you guys are the ones who are saying matter and life just “popped” into an eternal universe from nowhere. Of course there was no Jesus despite a definite point of time when the world was turned upside down. My mistake.

    “Much of the discoveries of science were fiercely resisted because they contradicted the then-true theology, and things like evolution are still rejected…”

    Oposition of views does not make them valid and holding to a view likewise does not make it valid. Your argument is a fallacy.

    This may be the truest statement I have made yet: I’m going to bed.

  62. OK, lowerleavell: There are countless holy book apart from the Bible which make far more accurate prophecies about the world they were created in.

    At any rate, that a book claims to be infallible is only reason not to take it seriously. You’re trying to adapt reality to conform to your views.

    Two different NT Gospels have the ancestry of Joseph from David with completely different generations in between. In any case, if Jesus really was born of a virgin birth, then Joseph’s ancestry is irrelevant and Jesus could not have been the Messiah.

    The Bible is full of contradictions, but it’s only natural since it’s a book written over the span of thousands of years by hundreds of different people at different points in time. If you read Greek mythology, it would make just as much sense as the Bible because it describes very accurately the world we live in, perhaps even more so than the Bible. That you take one holy book over another is merely a product of chance that you were born where you are.

    Biblical literalism is a fallacy.

    P.S. Quick thought: If God is omnipotent, why did he have to order the Pharaoh to ‘let his people go’? Couldn’t he have done it himself?

  63. Pandas die if they don’t have fresh eucalyptus foliage to eat. Many other animals and insects require specific diets to survive too. There are many insects whose life span is just days or less. Many species that develop slowly require their parents attention or they can’t survive later. Either the dinosaurs outgrew the boat fast, or they were incapable of surviving. Actually, that’s the least of your problems if you want to assume that they lived together with humans, because they are never found in the same strata as other animals, nor there is any evidence that ancient people knew them. I think they would be noteworthy enough to be at least mentioned in the written culture.

    Being an European, your ignorance is astonishing. I wonder how can you finish school in the States and know so little about geography and biology. I am still sorry for any kids whose parents are bamboozled by such utter bugfuck ideas as creationism. If they are being taught that, they are being flagrantly lied to about the state of our knowledge. It is mis-education and nearing child abuse.

    Needing chocolate is an urgent version of wanting it, not “totally different”. Any dictionary will support this.

    There is no evidence that the gospels were written by eye-witnesses. Some of them don’t even mention who the author is. The later ones would have required the authors to survive to an extremely improbable age, particularly for common people, and also raise the question of why didn’t they write anything earlier. Textual criticism also reveals that some books might have more than one author, and that some parts are probably unauthentic.

    Ron Wyatt has no credibility for good reasons (even frauds like AiG concede to this), and the theory of evolution doesn’t rely on the authority of Darwin anyway. It’s attributed to him because he was the first to publish this discovery, together with Wallace.

    I’ve read all the Harry Potter books, and they’re all in-universe, meaning that there aren’t references to them being fiction inside the text, just like in the Bible. And speaking of Bible, it doesn’t really claim that it is the “word of God” either. There are some rather weak references to this, for example, in 2 Timothy, but 2 Timothy’s authenticity is disputed anyway.

    Your self-satisfied babbling about the Bible being historically accurate is amusing. If you read any non-apologetic works, you will see that this is entirely not the case. You have no evidence of the Ten Plagues or Exodus, no evidence of early 1st century Nazareth, no contemporary evidence of Jesus and so on. Granted, this does not disprove anything, but then there are also things like the saints raising from graves en masse that would certainly have caused an uproar and leave at least some records. There is Pilate, who is incorrectly being called a procurator, although he at that time was a prefect. These are just off the top of my head, but there are more.

    You are not giving any concrete archaeological evidence, by the way, just waving your hands.

    About the Jesus Tomb and your victim pose again, I am at a loss of words how out of touch with reality this is. Things that reflect bad on the truth of any religion aren’t too popular with the media because it’s a sensitive subject, and the celebrity atheists and authors that write about this are just a recent phenomenon. Religion still enjoys a special and undeserved status.

    Yes, I know conclusively that mountains can’t form in such short time spans. For one thing, the energy released would boil all the water and Noah with his stupid ark. The Grand Canyon formed because of erosion during millions of years. It is the scientific consensus, it is shown by stratigraphy, by radiometric dating, by common sense and by all the other interrelated evidence. Also, where did the water go afterwards?

    Saying that the pre-Flood technology surpassed ours is, well, nuts. Where did it go after the flood, anyway?

    Idiots like you discard large portions of human history like the Sumerians who were discovering beer about the same time God was supposedly creating Earth, ancient Egyptians who were building pyramids around the time of the “genesis” and so on. Venus of Willendorf alone is dated at being about 20 thousand years old.

    On the one hand you have “in the beginning God” and on the other hand you have “in the beginning dirt.” That’s what it boils down to.

    This requires special attention because of how wrong it is. First, it is in creationism where humans are created out of dirt and a rib. Second, the theory of evolution does not deal with how life itself originated, but how biological complexity arose. It is an elegant explanation of all the facts about life we see, and posits that all life is related. It explains what we observe in the fossil records, it explains atavisms (including wisdom teeth, goosebumps, whale leg bones, flightless birds and so on), it explains how do you go from a wolf to, say, a pug, and why artificial selection works, and so on. It has done immense good in agriculture, medicine and pharmacology, and to reject it you have to be either uneducated or crazy. I’ll bet you’ll whine that this is unfair, but that’s how it is. You should just shut your mouth in shame.

    About the necromancers, the point of that show was to convince the Pharaoh that Moses has the true god on his side, and it was a contest between him and the guys who practiced magic. They could repeat the same miracles as God.

    It says in several places that God “hardened Pharaoh’s heart”, so he wasn’t the one to blame for what happened anyway. God just wanted to show off how powerful he was, and what plagues he could create. Not that the people believed him much. They were still doubting him even after crossing the Red Sea.

    Simon Magus’ death is described in Acts of Peter (that is not part of any canon, though).

    Oposition of views does not make them valid and holding to a view likewise does not make it valid. Your argument is a fallacy.

    Is this supposed be a response to anything I said?

    It’s interesting how you only respond to the things that seem like easier targets, and somehow ignore all the instances where you were wrong. The questions in the other thread are still unanswered too. Although it might be for the best, because your answers are lousy.

  64. If God is omnipotent, why did he have to order the Pharaoh to ‘let his people go’? Couldn’t he have done it himself?

    He actually did the opposite, he “hardened his heart”. It’s mentioned several times, including when he sends his army after Moses.

    lowerleavell, by the way, there are more things that you were wrong about, but I can’t be bothered to keep writing.

  65. “The questions in the other thread are still unanswered too. Although it might be for the best, because your answers are lousy.”

    Time Dude, I don’t have much of it. For that reason I’ll go back to the other thread and write before returning to this one.

    I am glad too that we’ve resorted to calling me names too. Not that it offends or surprises me, it just usually means the other side of the aisle is running low on arguments and is getting frustrated.

  66. I am glad too that we’ve resorted to calling me names too. Not that it offends or surprises me, it just usually means the other side of the aisle is running low on arguments and is getting frustrated.

    Yeah, because the other alternative, that you actually deserve it, is impossible, right?

  67. It’s the ultimate scapegoat: “Aha! Namecalling! Therefore you’re wrong and I’m right”.

    It evades the burden of argument. Quite handy, actually.

  68. “It’s the ultimate scapegoat: “Aha! Namecalling! Therefore you’re wrong and I’m right”.”

    I didn’t say that. I’m just saying that whatever you call me or think of me does not make my statements untrue. You must examine evidence, not just the source.

  69. We did. You evaded the arguments.

  70. Guys, I’m in the process of moving and working 50 hours a week to boot. Please have a little grace with my reply time. Thursday night I’ll have a lot more time to reply since I am working my other job. I’ll write more in depth then, if I can.

  71. “These are just off the top of my head, but there are more.”

    Again, I will say that the Bible is historically accurate. I went to the link on wikipedia (a great source for getting truth by the way) and saw these arguments against the Bible. Again 9 out of 10 of them took the Bible out of context to find a problem with it. For instance, taking New Testament passages that said we are no longer under the law and that all is now clean, and quoting an Old Testament law that says what is clean and what is not, then saying the Bible is inconsistent.

    There were, however, several good arguments that people have wrestled over. Though I have taken the apologist’s view point and have chosen to trust the Bible as true based on the facts, not just belief, I do understand why others may not choose to. If someone demonized my wife the way that article demonized the Bible I would never have gotten married!

    Eltower, “OK, lowerleavell: There are countless holy book apart from the Bible which make far more accurate prophecies about the world they were created in.”

    That’s one difference between Christianity and Atheism, as C.S. Lewis states. Christianity can see the truths that are found in all religions and still be true, whereas Atheists must disprove every single religion in order to be true. It would only take on god (among the zillions “invented” by man) for your theory to be incorrect. I simply happen to have put my trust that that the one true “God” is the God of the Bible.

    “At any rate, that a book claims to be infallible is only reason not to take it seriously. You’re trying to adapt reality to conform to your views.”

    Not at all. The views I take are a result of studying reality. It is possible to study the supposed discrepencies and “errors” in the Bible and still come out putting your trust in the Bible because once you are intellectually honest, you’ll notice that 9/10 of the arguments against the Bible are flimsy at best. Like, a loving God wouldn’t have caused the flood, therefore there must be no God.
    That’s like me saying the Queen Elizabeth I believe in would have never allowed Charles and Diana to divorce, therefore Queen Elizabeth does not exist! Do you see how silly this logic is? Yet I don’t know how many people I know who have become either atheist or agnostic simply because they can’t understand why God allows suffering, etc. God existence and His character are two totally different subjects.

    “Two different NT Gospels have the ancestry of Joseph from David with completely different generations in between. In any case, if Jesus really was born of a virgin birth, then Joseph’s ancestry is irrelevant and Jesus could not have been the Messiah.”

    You’ll notice that in both Gospels Joseph has two different dads. I could see if they got their history wrong then they would get maybe the “judges” era wrong, but Joseph’s dad?! You’d think someone at that time would have remembered. As you know, most apologists beleive that Luke was talking about Joseph’s father-in-law, and so Luke is a geneology of Mary, not Joseph. If not, you’d think they’d at least got the dad right, and I would soundly say the Bible is inacurate if they couldn’t even get that one fact straight.

    “That you take one holy book over another is merely a product of chance that you were born where you are.” Not necessarily. Tell that to the countless converts in China, Vietnam, and other Asian countries. To them it is much more than chance that they have accepted the Gospel, it is providential. Perhaps because I’m an American and have many influences in my life that have discussed Christianity with me it made it easier, but I know many, even pastor’s kids, who are not believers. Where you’re born doesn’t decide what you put your trust in.

    “P.S. Quick thought: If God is omnipotent, why did he have to order the Pharaoh to ‘let his people go’? Couldn’t he have done it himself?”

    Again, God’s mercy on Pharoah and Egypt is clearly shown by Him giving Pharoah a chance to obey and trust in the Lord.

    Manly Tears:
    “I think they (dinos) would be noteworthy enough to be at least mentioned in the written culture.”

    Wow, this is not an informed statement! Have you ever heard of the countless dragon tales? Have you ever heard of sea monsters? Have you ever heard of Loch Ness? Have you ever heard of Behemoth and Leviathan? Sure, they didn’t have the term “Dinosaur”, but there are countless stories and legends of dinosaurs living with man, as recently as the 20th century. I’m nor saying all of the culture stories are correct, just don’t tell me there is nothing “in the written culture.”

    “Either the dinosaurs outgrew the boat fast, or they were incapable of surviving.”

    That is an asumption that dinosaurs grew quickly. We don’t know their growth rate, we just have their bones. Sure, some of them grew to large sizes, but many they find are about the size of a cow (these just aren’t as popular to look at). Lizards continue to grow until they die, so perhaps dinosaurs were in the reptilian family and lived to a long, healthy age, which made them very large indeed.

    “Being an European, your ignorance is astonishing. I wonder how can you finish school in the States and know so little about geography and biology.”

    So it’s because I’m an American? 🙂 That’s funny. I’m sorry if we’re not all as “englightened” over here as over there. Please don’t let this be a debate over how much “better” European education is than the States, because besides getting one currency, Europe hasn’t done much but make the world go through two world wars in the past century. Thanks guys, but if that’s enlightenment, I’ll pass.

    “Needing chocolate is an urgent version of wanting it, not “totally different”. Any dictionary will support this.”

    So? Again, semantics. You find the usage of “need” to fit your agenda and say that God “needs” His creation, but have changed the definition of “need” to one of it’s less primary definitions. God doesn’t “need” us in the same sense that we “need” air. He simply has a great desire and love for us, and if that’s a “need” then sure, God needs us.

    I’ll have to write more later.

  72. I typed that last post very quickly, with my son on my lap, so please forgive any spelling errors or typos. I didn’t get a chance to proofread it much before I submitted it.

  73. “If they are being taught that, they are being flagrantly lied to about the state of our knowledge. It is mis-education and nearing child abuse.”

    No, American kids aren’t being taught creation in school. I was just taught both sides and was given the freedom to make the choices on my own. Many people simply see how ludicrous it is to say all this happened by chance, the universe is eternal, and that life sprang from nowhere.

    “The later ones would have required the authors to survive to an extremely improbable age, particularly for common people…”

    The Book of Revelation, written by John, is dated as the last written book of the Bible, about 95 AD. Either John lived an extraordinary length of time, or he was simply a young teen about 30 something AD when he became a disciple. Since a twelve year old was considered an adult in that culture, that’s not a stretch at all.

    “Textual criticism also reveals that some books might have more than one author, and that some parts are probably unauthentic.”

    Much of this “textual criticism” about more than one author is simly speculation. However, books like Psalms, Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles probably did have more than one author. Other books like Peter’s works (Mark [John Mark being a protoge’ of Peter], and 1,2 Peter) were more than likely written with an amanuenses, or one of his “disciples”, especially since we don’t even know if Peter could read or not. Why do things like these make the Bible un-authentic?

    “Ron Wyatt has no credibility for good reasons (even frauds like AiG concede to this)…”

    I won’t argue Wyatt’s credibility, because I can definitely see and concede your point. However, Nuweiba, a large beach in the Gulf of Aqaba does exist, and after doing some research, your claim that those “chariot wheels” are from a steam ship needs some evidence. From what I understand, coral can’t grow on gold and there is one picture of a “chariot” wheel that has no coral on it, which makes me wonder what steam ships are doing with gold. While I’m not saying it’s so, I’m saying the evidence seems legit.

    As far as his evidence on Noah’s Ark, the Turkish government seems pretty convinced since they opened a visitor’s center at “Noah’s Ark National Park, at the site attesting to the site’s authenticity. Intersting…

    “And speaking of Bible, it doesn’t really claim that it is the “word of God” either. There are some rather weak references to this, for example, in 2 Timothy, but 2 Timothy’s authenticity is disputed anyway.”

    This really shows you’ve never read the Bible, just “studied” it from an outside perspective. Many times in the Old Testament it says, “the word of the Lord came unto..” and then the person proceeds to say what the Lord tells him to say. Also, you forgot one verse on prophesy from 2 Peter 1:21, “for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”
    To say the Bible never claims to be written by God is just hilarious.

    “You have no evidence of the Ten Plagues or Exodus, no evidence of early 1st century Nazareth…”

    I’ve already mentioned the plagues and the Exodus, but are you really surprised there’s no evidence of 1st cnetury Nazareth? I spent seven years in a town of 250 people (probably a similar size to Nazareth). If someone asked 2,000 years from now for evidence that this town existed at this precise time would any expect any evidence? Why? Every large city the Bible says exists is there, and the more they dig, the more evidence they find that confirms the Bible’s accuracy. You’d think if the Bible was all messed up, the more they find, the more they would disprove it, not the other way around.

    “…no contemporary evidence of Jesus and so on.”
    Again, you don’t count the Gospels, since they were written as “memoirs” later in the disciple’s lives.

    “…but then there are also things like the saints raising from graves en masse that would certainly have caused an uproar and leave at least some records.”

    Perhaps it did, but obviously the records have been lost. I’m sure there is a lot of things written in the Library of Alexandria that we’d like to know about too, but just because we don’t have more than one record doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. You have to remember too that those who rejecting Jesus, because they wanted a political messiah, were actively trying to destroy anything Christian. Rome also tried to destroy anything Christian as well, so it’s a miracle in and of itself that the Bible survived, let alone writings from early church fathers.

  74. These items will enhance the appearance of your chest.
    Plus size dresses with lace insets in the sleeves, or on the bodice of the dress, are stunning and flexible choices for busy
    ladies. Dresses can bring out the female side of women or needing
    to show up at a formal event like a wedding ceremony or
    prom might be the time when finding the right dress
    is most crucial.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: