The Inerrancy of the Bible

moved here: http://EvC Forum: Lucy and Secular Humanism -->EvC Forum: Lucy and Secular HumanismThis message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 01-19-2005 21:27 AM

Let's get your closing arguments in folk. We're approaching the witching hour.

---

Incognito Incognito,my boy,there are obvious delineations between what is considered miracles and what is the act of men. The gold burning ,grinding ,and strawing was accomplished by Moses as it plainly ststes to anyone not intent on deflecting from the issue.Perhaps you do not wish to have such impossibilities posed to you as you have some emotional stake in maintaining a lie.Miracles have the inexplicable property of dissolving away under critical examination,go figure. Not at all. I arrived here due to sexual relations between my Mom and Dad.It was not in the least miraculous,but a process of nature,one I have participated in and as a result have a family of my own whom I love dearly. On a sterner note it does indeed disprove the innerancy of the bible since such a feat is not possible in the way it was described.That you have a difficulty with laws of physics is fortunately a problem of yours and not mine.I do not suspect you will even own up to far greater errors in the bible without fuming in indignation as opposed to rational discussion.

---

A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun
Said, "Pray, which leg comes after which?'
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell distracted in the ditch
Not knowing how to run.

It just occurred to me: powdered gold? The most malleable of all metals, beaten to a powder? I'll bet that was difficult.

Ned, The bible says knowledge is increasing, don't get left behind, trying to fill your mind with knowledge. Your strong correlations only support an old earth not an old fossil. What matters in respect to genesis interpretation is that the believer believes in Christ, not that they understand the Wisdom of the Word. Even so Repent!The Word says it pleased God that by the "foolishness" of the preaching of the gospel to save them that believe because by the wisdom of the word they believed not. It does not say you will get saved by taking a bible correspondence course, knowledge will not save you unless from your spirit you accept Christ. So are yours Bud.

For "36 Christians:"In case you haven’t noticed yet, the only errors brought up were those self-admitted by yourselves (the typographical errors caused by the type-setters). The rest of these posts are just folks with their own agendas who’ve never actually done any research beyond surfing the Internet. To sum them up:1) Misunderstood words that were correct when written and still are understood by most "intelligent" people today. This includes the Horse Stall-Guy who doesn’t understand what of means. "Stall-Guy," if you still don't get my comments in posts 205-208, reread them.
2) Historical comparisons to mysteriously missing/questionable secular histories like Josephus and the fragmented Roman history text. And statements like Romans never would (because we all know civilizations are never corrupt/inconsistent)
3) Attempts at bringing in Creation/dating arguments that nobody, including scientists fully understand. Ned, just because we don’t understand it; it doesn’t make it wrong As for your class message: The only way you are ever going to get through to the world is by going and becoming the next generation of scientists/researchers so you can knock the critics off their evolutionary/old-earth high horse and put a little more doubt under their skeptical foundations. This means if you waste time in college — get hard science/engineering degrees — not junk like philosophy and/or video games. Don't let them feed you crap like "you're too young, un-educated, not scientists, etc." Most of you are probably smarter at 16 then these guys are at their current ages: Seriously, an adult is just a kid with more life experience, not more brainsAnd if any Evolutionists tell you that only "ignorant" people are Creationist: My name's Wes, I'm 25, and I graduated from the US Air Force Academy with a Bachelors of Science degree in Economics and a minor in Mandarin Chinese. I may not be "a scientist" but I have enough science/engineering background to understand what I'm reading. I’m also finding there are more of us non-ignorant Creationists than the media leads you to believeIf you really want to do some class research: Print out Evolutionist arguments and break them down line by line. Most of their arguments fall apart with some simple research on the Net... BTW, Evolutionists, "Hovind is stupid" isn't valid scientific evidence...Finally, don’t put yourselves on the defensive by stating things like the KJV is perfect; take the fight to your critics by making them prove their own points. BTW, an intellectual Storm's brewing, too many of us folks with brains are figuring out Old-Earth/Evolution is just a scientific Potemkin Village...But who am I to talk? Just a guy in an Internet forum

Coragyps, It said they threw it into the fire, so would it not of melted into the ashes amid the sands. So then its gets less pure, but mingled with impurities. Why would this not make it easier to grind it into smaller pieces, if the gold becomes mingled with impurities.kjv Psalm 12:6 It says the Words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

Incognito Since you have a science/engineering background perhaps you could propose a process whereby impurities could get into gold and allow it to be ground to powder?Perhaps you could explain the reason for putting it into the fire in the first place if not to melt it at least?Perhaps you can explain how they burnt gold in order to grind it to a powder?The melting point of gold is 1947 degrees F.Show us the means of and evidence for the ability of nomadic desert people to produce this high a temperature.Such a task should be childs play for you and the best thing is it uses the hard sciences.Have fun.

---

A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun
Said, "Pray, which leg comes after which?'
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell distracted in the ditch
Not knowing how to run.

Who talks a lot but has yet to go to the dating correlations thread and supply any actual rebutal to it. This is a very common behaviour.

Sidelined, good try, but unlike the rest of you I'm not about to propose I know the details on processes I've not personally worked with...But let's break your gold powder problem down using some good ol' common sense:1) Does somebody make gold powder? Yes, a simple search of the net will tell you that much.2) Is gold dust edible so that the Hebrews could have consumed it in a drink? Yes, besides hard alcohol, apparently they put it on desserts: http://www.originalchristmasgift.com/MoreaboutOCG.html3) Could ancient people have made gold products let alone powdered gold? Answer again is yes: "Around 2000 BC, Egyptian craftsmen were producing gold leaf 1 thick"
http://www.geology.ucdavis.edu/~cowen/~GEL115/115CH6.html4) Could ancient people have turned the gold leaf to a drinkable form? "In the process of fire gilding, a technique widely used on silver in the Roman world, gold powder or gold leaf was dissolved in hot mercury." Hint, disolved gold turns to powder when the mercury evaporates...
Page Not Found5) Would the Hebrews in the desert possessed technology capable of producing a hot enough fire? It's hard to say, the Bible doesn't give a temperature, but apparently a back-yard set-up is fairly easy using rocks, a bellows, and charcoal (or a lot of coals from a large bonfire). I imagine they had access to rocks to build with and wood to burn."Early iron smelters were small furnaces built from rocks that could withstand repeated heating. These furnaces looked like beehives with a vent in the top and an entry portal on the side. To create the high heat needed to smelt iron, smiths pumped air from a bellows through the tuyere (nozzle). The furnace was filled with charcoal and iron ore and the charcoal was then set afire. When the temperature rises above 2,800F, the iron flows from the ore and forms blooms."
Appaltree: All Ohio hotels6) Ok, so now we know it's possible to make gold physically consumable, the only problem from #4 is that mercury has the potential of killing those who consume it. But on the other hand, gold leaf also tears and things that tear can normally be ground (even metal's bonds break) so nothing here is beyond Earthly physical possibilities.7) The only question left is if the Hebrews possessed the technology in the desert? That's a good question, based on the blacksmithing history I'd say yes. But let's look at it from another angle. The Egyptians could build pyramids without modern technology and work with gold in 2000 B.C. - to assume the Hebrews couldn't melt gold using rocks and coals, even on the move, seems kind of ridiculous...Sidelined, that good enough for you? By the sounds of things a high school student could melt gold, it doesn't really take any scientific background 36 Christians, notice nothing they present you is ever really an "error" if you do a little research

sidelined, They took all the Gold and made the golden calf, so they had the means to melt the gold.

In my opinion, which is ONLY an opinion, mind you...they never had a solid gold calf to begin with. They were able only to heat the gold ornaments enough to soften them and beat them flat, covering another framework. Based on the heat calculations, it is either this or a supernatural miracle that melted the Gold.

"NosyNed," one topic at a time please First off though, thank you and your mates for attempting to shoot "36 Christians" and "Tom" down. I was previously unaware of a few of these alleged "errors" and am now happy that I will not be caught off guard with them in real life discussions.I do appreciate the chance to practice - you gotta learn the opposition's material to win this game. A question like 40,000 stalls vs. 4,000 stalls almost seems legitimate until you read all OF the words. You could say that the devil is in the details So you want more Creationists to take you on over historical dating issues next? Ok, I'll see what I can dig up...

quote:

---

Even though the Bible may seem to contain errors and contradictions, it is our steadfast belief that if one would study the passage in question thoroughly, his study would only prove that the Bible is without error.

---

This belief has been proven false. What is required is not study or knowledge but the invention of excuses and a willingness to accept the same no matter how unreasonable they might be. Nobody van ever FIND that the Bible is without errors - there is no reasonable doubt that the Bible does contain errors. Inerrancy must be a dogma held in the teeth of the evidence as we have seen.

quote:

---

This is our belief because of two reasons: 1) In John 17:17 the Bible states that God’s Word is truth. 2) We have never found an error or contradiction in the Bible.

---

Reason 1 has not been shown to apply. The idea that the Bible is "Word of God" was shown to rely on a highly questionable interpretation of a single verse which does not even specifically mention either the Bible or the Word of God.Reason 2 simply indicates either a refusal to seriously search or a dismissal out of hand of all the evidence of errors. Neither can be considered a valid reason.

Paul, can you please elaborate as to what was proven false or in "error?" Maybe you should go back and re-read all these posts. The only thing that you have proved is there is academic controversy over different events/claims, not that anything is actually in error. In case you don't know, raising an issue/question does not prove an "error," it just proves you had an issue/question. Furthermore, explaining said issue/question does not represent excuses - it just means others see the answer you apparently missed It's ok to be wrong once in a while, that's how you learn I myself won't be bold enough to claim the KJV is without errors, but on the other hand, until you actually find an "error" that's provable (not just conjecture or speculation on your part) I can't argue with "36 Christians" claim.