Inerrancy of the Bible 2

think he's messing with us?repeated bible quoting in improper conext, after proper context has been shown (often by posting the entire section), mentions of dr dino, falwell, and bush? he's gotta be kidding, right?

incognito,There have been so many Flood threads I don't know if further discussion will be fitting here. I take it you would defend a world wide flood as factual? I will further guess you will point to some areas of dispute in current geological theories to suggest that there might be room for some alternate account for strata?At any rate I would be interested in what approach you would take to support a worldwide flood as I find that one of the least supportable in terms of geology, history, archeology, or biology.lfen

That is correct. It is the wrong forum.Please get back to topic.

ok, will do.

Hi Incognito, I think you need to read my quote again Incognito, as you have read it incorrectly, that is okay because we all do that now and again.My quote from Lucas’ article actually said: informs us that between 1907 and 1937 the average annual rate of population increase per 1000 people was 11.69%.11.69% per 1000 people works out at 1.69%, which is still a figure way to high when viewed in the context of 1500 BCE near east.Here is the formula for working out population growth, it works in Excel if you have it:70*1.01169^430, if you use this formula you can see that it comes out (when rounded) at 10 363 But, you know that this is not how population growth works, you need an average population growth rate and then apply it to the group.How would you respond to the Mendenhall figures of 20 000 soldiers in the Egyptian armies at this time? Or Redford’s information about the total population being around 3-4.5 million? Your link seems to be talking about 600 million years ago, and it doesn’t give any date for when the lush land existed: Less old, though more expressive in some ways of the antiquity of Sinai, are the dozens of Wadis, or fossilized riverbeds, that define the terrain all over the peninsula. From the depth and frequency of the Wadis, we can tell that Sinai was at one time a lush and fertile region. All it says is ‘less old’ that could be any time at all.I do not see any evidence in your link that suggests that there were any settlements in the Sinai or that it is known to have supported extremely large groups of nomads all year round. Although it may be possible, there is no evidence that large groups of people could live off solely what they found in the Sinai. Even the Bible says that God had to provide manna for the group because of the poor resources.To support how unlikely it is that a huge group could live in the Sinai, there are extent Egyptian documents that speak of allowing groups into the eastern delta during times of famine to keep
themselves and their animals alive.Papyrus Anastasi VI informs us that: Another communication to my [lord], to [wit: We] have finished
letting the Bedouin tribes of Edom pass the Fortress [of] Mer-ne-Ptah Hotep-hir-Maat--life, prosperity, health--which is (in) Tjeku, to the pools of Per-Atum) [of] Mer-[ne]-Ptah Hotep-hir-Maat, which are (in) Tjeku, to keep them alive and to keep their cattle alive. (ANET, page 259)If the Sinai was a lush oasis then why would the Bedouins go to Egypt and subject themselves to taxes? But, we can estimate the possible growth rate from the remains of cities, villages, other settlements, and the extension of cultivated land. I would argue that no other area in the world has been excavated more than Egypt and near east, and the information that has been gained has helped to build up an extremely good idea of what the area was like.The World Book Encyclopedia, World Book Inc, Chicago, 1999.
Page 673. Causes: For thousands of years, birth rates were high. However, the population increased slowly and sometimes declined because death rates also were high. Then, during the 1700’s and 1800’s, advances in agriculture, communication, and transportation improved living conditions in parts of the world and reduced the occurrence of many diseases. As a result, the death rate began to drop, and the population grew rapidly. This seems to be a perfectly reasonable explanation of why we have had a rapid increase in the world population growth in the last 200 years or so. The population before this simply must have been lower or today’s population would be far higher.The New Encyclopaedia Britannica explains better: Volume 25, Macropaedia, 1993. Entry Population Page 1041 Before considering modern population trends separately for developing and industrialized countries, it is useful to present an overview of older trends. It is generally agreed that only 5,000,000-10,000,000 humans (i.e., one onethousandth of the present world population) were supportable before the agricultural revolution of about 10,000 years ago. By the beginning of the Christian era, 8,000 years later, the' human population approximated 300,000,000, and there was apparently little increase in the ensuing millennium up to the year AD 1000. Subsequent population growth was slow and fitful, especially given the plague epidemics and other catastrophes of the Middle Ages. By 1750, conventionally the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in Britain, world population may have been as high as 800,000,000. This. means that in the 750 years from 1000 to 1750, the annual population growth rate averaged only about one-tenth of 1 percent. The reasons for such slow growth are well known. In the absence of what is now considered basic knowledge of sanitation and health (the role of bacteria in disease, for example, was unknown until the 19th century), mortality rates were very high, especially for infants and children. Only about half of newborn babies survived to the age of five years. Fertility was also very high, as it had to be to sustain the existence of any population under such conditions of mortality. Modest population growth might occur for a time in these circumstances, but recurring famines, epidemics, and wars kept long-term growth close to zero. From 1750 onward population growth accelerated. In some measure this was a consequence of rising standards of living, coupled with improved transport and communication, which mitigated the effects of localized crop failures that previously would have resulted in catastrophic mortality.

​

Occasional famines did occur, however, and it was not until the 19th century that a sustained decline in mortality took place, stimulated by the improving economic conditions of the Industrial Revolution and the growing understanding of the need for sanitation and public health measures. Also from Massimo Livi-Bacci’s A Concise History of World Population Blackwell, Malden MA 1997.
pp 30-32 In many parts of the world before this century, in Europe prior to the late Middle Ages or in China before the present era, one can only estimate population size on the basis of qualitative information - the existence or extension of cities, villages, or other settlements, the extension of cultivated land - or on the basis of calculations of the possible population density in relation to the ecosystem, the level of technology, or social organization. The contributions of palaeontologists, archaeologists, and anthropologists are all needed.

​

The data on world demographic growth in tables 1.2 and 1.3 are largely based on conjectures and inferences drawn from non-quantitative information. Table 1.2 presents a synthesis of these trends. The long-term rates of growth are, of course, an abstraction, as they imply a constant variation of demographic forces in each period, while in reality population evolves cyclically. Following Biraben's hypothesis, according to which human population prior to the High Paleolithic era (30,000 -35,000 BC) did not exceed several hundred thousand, growth during the 30,000 years leading up to the Neolithic era averaged less than 0.1 per 1,000 per year, an almost imperceptible level consistent with a doubling time of 8,000-9,000 years. In the 10,000 years prior to the birth of Christ, during which Neolithic civilization spread from the Near East and Upper Egypt, the rate increased to 0.4 per 1,000 (which implies a doubling in less than 2,000 years) and population grew from several million to about 0.25 billion. This rate of increase, in spite of important cycles of growth and decline, was reinforced during the subsequent 17 and a half centuries. The population tripled to about 0.75 billion on the eve of the Industrial Revolution (an overall rate of growth of 0.6 per 1,000). It was, however, the Industrial Revolution which initiated a period of decisive and sustained growth. During the following two centuries population increased about tenfold, at an annual growth rate of 6 per 1,000 (doubling time 118 years). This process of growth was the result of a rapid accumulation of resources, control of the environment, and mortality decline, and has culminated in the second half of the current century. In the four decades since 1950 population has again doubled and the rate of growth has tripled to 18 per 1,000. In spite of signs that growth may be slowing, the present momentum will certainly carry world population to eight billion by about the year 2020 and ten billion some time during the upcoming century. The acceleration of the growth rate and shortening of the doubling time (which was expressed in thousands of years prior to the Industrial Revolution and is expressed in tens of years at present) give some indication of the speed with which the historical checks to population growth have been relaxed. It looks as if the consensus of opinion is that a sustained growth rate, of the amount needed for the Bible to be accurate, simply wasn’t possible before the advances made by science. Of course, for us to accept that there was 3 million people lost for 40 years would mean that you have to provide some decent evidence that these people existed in the first place, and, as we all know, there is not a single solitary shred of direct evidence for an Israelite Exodus or Conquest.Finally, it is good to have you aboard here, at least you try to answer peoples’ questions. All the guys who are replying to you are decent people, you should try to get along with them because everyone would benefit.Brian.

HI Arach,The sad thing is, it is perfectly possible that he is entirely genuine and that repeated bible quoting in improper context, after proper context has been shown (often by posting the entire section), mentions of dr dino, falwell, and bush? are convincing factors for him.I wouldnt be surprised if he was winding us up, but it is perfectly possible that he isnt.I have also noticed a trend in Christians that have went through a profound personal religious experience. They seem to be completely oblivious to any contrary evidence and they also often just ignore the problems that have been higlighted in their arguments.Remember 'Wise' and 'Desdamona', they both had a profound experience and they were both very strange people. Some of the arguments that they were convinced of were extremely frightening. Who could forget 'Wise's' pics of the 'Eye of God' (complete with catracts)in some nebula. As for Des, I think she had trouble stringing two words together.I would like to think that Tom is messing with us, but it is possible that he isnt.Brian.

The kids at Christian schools don't seem to get much computing time do they?

Ok, I'll concede KJV "error" to "Sidelined" on Pleiades... I'm still working on a plausible Ahaz time scenario though.1) "Sweet Influences" in Job 38:31 is not something I can explain as I don't really buy into Astrology. The NIV translation of "bind the beautiful Pleiades" makes sense in regard to their consistent grouping (they travel away from us). FYI, your Orion chart doesn't seem to show historical movement of stars (it's just a current snapshot in time). I can only speculate; it is possible that Orion's belt has been slowly "loosening" due to historical star movement in different directions (opposite of the "bound" Pleiades). Unless the Pleiades really "influences" us, I think I'd have to say the KJV might have an error here, because "binds" makes more sense (changes the meaning though).2) "Nighttrain" - your exponential growth isn't always a guarantee - many factors play into it (especially in the Bible where God rained down punishment on people). Wars, famines, environmental factors all weigh in. All we know about the 430 years in Egypt is that the Hebrews "had it good" which implies high growth rates are possible then, but past that we can't infer anything. Also, a modern day example for you - Japan is projected to lose 30% of its population if current negative growth rates continue. Even today, growth isn't guaranteed.3) "Ifen," I have a feeling the Flood discussion won't fit under KJV inerrancy without getting too off-topic - but on a serious note - your "scientists" believe the Earth was a giant snowball multiple times in history even though there is almost no evidence for it. I "believed" scientific accounts for 24 years before too many "stupid theories" made me realize science had been bending the truth... Snowball Earth - WikipediaThe Flood on the other hand can be backed on all the levels you claim you want evidence for and is therefore, not an error but historical fact, but one topic at a time, this is KJV inerrancy...4) "Brian," your 11.69 is not a percent by your description but is in actuality a number. By 1.169%, you are telling me that either 1000 people only had 11.69 kids a year, or else so many people moved out of the Sinai (or died) each year that it only increased in population by 11.69 people annually. You think that this is too high even for 1500 B.C.? Sorry to burst your bubble, but the only place/time this is too high for is modern day Japan/Europe. Not to mention you are applying 20th century Bedouin population data to Exodus era Egyptian Nile Valley agrarian culture? Sorry again, but completely different populations that can't be compared; civilizations originated on fertile rivers for a reason (resources to grow).As with "snowball earth," statistics like your Lucas quote are why I no longer respect "scientists." They can't even utilize basic math.Papyrus Anastasi VI. This is apparently a satire, which if I'm not mistaken, is not a good reference for historical accuracy...Your page 1041 quote supports the idea that there were millions of people... Please read the article word for word (this seems to be a problem on this forum) 5) Anymore "errors" for "36 Christians?" At this point I'm just curious as to what other "errors" people can dig up. I will concede that "sweet influences" seems to be an "error" because the NIV "binds" makes more physical sense. Although it does change the meaning/intent of the verse.

Let's see, you haven't dealt with the luke/matthew nativity problem yet.Then, the translation of Psalm 22.. (k'ari does not mean pierced).You have not dealth with the lack of resources 2 million people in the desert would need for 40 years.For that matter, how did Judas die?

Tom, I am a Christian, and, I am commanded to pray for ALL leaders be they good or evil. It is only interesting to me that George W. Bush and "last days" are in the same sentence! Talk about belief! Perhaps God allowed Bush to bring about the Last Days! He is definitely no Messiah!

I will agree with you to a point, Brian. You must remember that from the perspective of a new believer, God is the new King on the Throne of the intellect. The very action of believing in God is not just admitting that the supernatural is real==it is admitting that ones internal wisdom is incapable of perfection. I myself will not admit that the Bible is innaccurate, but I WILL concede that is certainly seems inaccurate numerous times.
It is my philosophy that if I have a problem with something, I don't chuck it until and unless a better solution is found.
With the Bible, the only "better" solution appears to be bowing to human "wisdom" and science as the "new" solution for my future problems.This conflicts with my belief. Yes, I have "met" God in my heart. I have determined that He is bigger than just me and my internal perceptions. He is able to represent a better message of hope to humanity than anything that humans by themselves can come up with...be they scientists, philosophers, or teachers.He is the anchor to my world view. He is as personal to me as my own Mother! Lets say that a man wanted to believe and then prayed when his Mother became ill. She died nonetheless, and the man became bitter---not only to God but to the very concept of a god. The reaction is typical. Often, we can become angry with God. How could I as a mere human help this man? By telling him that death is a natural thing? By showing him that God still loves him, or by telling him that God is not real? Do you expect me to believe that psychology could have helped this man with his pain any more than God can?Perhaps others comforted him in his loss. No doubt this man may have had many good friends. Some are well meaning drunks. Some are religious fanatics. All are human, of course. See...to me, love is more than creature bonding. Humans alone recognize the concept of a future...a destiny...and a purpose.For me as a Christian, God is eternal...loving, powerful, and "in charge". I can relax knowing this.For the man who lost a loving Mother, there will be moments...perhaps alone at the Pub after his buddies get too drunk to make sense...when he too will question whether human wisdom and creature bonding will itself be enough to give him a full and total confidence in the future. (and comfort in the present) To you, Brian...I ask you a question. You have asked Christians why they keep denying reality and continue to believe in God despite the evidence to the contrary.And so I ask you---what is the motive within you that gives you a passion for stomping out this myth? You are 100% sure, of course. Is it that you want young minds to be critical thinkers? I know that to be true.Is it that you never want anyone to get hurt by a "false promise?"
I also think that you know where I am coming from.I can only say this: Science in its strict cold logic form will tell us that our loved ones who are gone are literally gone!My Dad died when I was 17. He is gone. I do not believe that the essence of my Father is dead. Nor do I believe that God has ever let me down. He loves me at least as much as my natural Father ever did.I don't need Jerry Fallwell to prove to you that the absolute proof is the absolute love in my heart! Keep the Faith, Brian!This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-23-2005 12:03 AM

Brian,He could be an example of the extremely rare truly intelligent troll. Whether put on or genuine his obliviousness was a wondrous thing to behold and I enjoyed the tone of his responses immensely. If he is genuine it appears he is greatly enjoying life, and if he was trolling he still seems to be genuinely enjoying life. I hope he finds time to visit again.lfen

Incognito,It appears we are compiling a list of claimed errors. Are you wanting to tackle them all at once or one at a time? I'd like to suggest that we get a list and then you select one error at a time so we can all focus in detail.As to the inerrancy of the KJV I'm not sure if we are confining this to errors unique to it i.e. corrected or not found in other translations, or bibical errors in general. If the later the Flood would be legitimate but it has been discussed along with the Exodus at great length in multiple threads here. Well science differs from religion in that beliefs are based on evidence and evidence changes as does understanding. When a theory is disproved that is a confirmation of science not a rebuttal of it. What is being contrasted is a process of knowledge vs. an individual having some private experience that they proclaim as a revealed truth.Now my sister didn't like the uncertainty of science. She wanted to live her life believing something once and for all and being done with it. I understand that and yet remain uncomfortable with it. It was her choice and she found what she wanted in the Lutheran Church. Her attitude was if the Bible had errors she didn't want to know about it.As to the Pleiades and Orion this sounds like poetic expression not astronomical science at all. I personally think that much of the Bible contains material that is literary poetical imagery and not scientific fact or historical data. There are people who appear to regard almost everything written as having only literal meaning.My opinion is that those who wish the Bible to be regarded as literally true do the greatest damage to it because they are projecting backwards in time modern scientific processes and requiring the authors of the books of the Bible to do something that they couldn't do nor had any intention of doing. The exodus and the flood are very dramatic stories with rich meanings. When treated as historical facts they are then moved from the realm of expression to the realm of data and verification and then... we have the kind of carnival atmosphere that Ron Wyden turned into an enterprise, etc.lfen

Phat,I'm not sure what distinction you are making with "internal wisdom" but I want to point out that it is YOU who are believing that your "internal wisdom is incapable of perfection" this puts you in the same circular reasoning of someone's sig that says in effect if you believe there are no absolutes you can't be absolutely sure of that.My point is that when we trust an authority whether it be religious or secular, ourselves or another we are still evaluating that authority and we could be making a mistake. This isn't an either/or. You are making use of a computer, telephone, I will assume modern medicine to solve some problems, no bowing required. To understand what you are referring to I would need to have you sort out more explicitly your "inner" experience from your religious beliefs. Science doesn't offer paradise, but humans beings have come up with quite a few ideas about paradise, and the version that is Christianity has appealed to you and you find it satisfying and it gives you hope. I've no problem with that. It's when believers in whatever religion claim exclusive truth and righteousness that I think the process becomes dangerous. When they go further and state that beliefs that disagree with theirs are evil or the result of evil beings then the situation has degenerted into something potentially pernicious.lfen

1) Ifen/Anybody else, I’ll try and tackle everything that’s thrown out here; but by all means, please make a list of errors, I think it would benefit all involved (both skeptics and supporters) to know what errors exist and what can be answered. If I don’t respond for a day, I haven’t given up, just take it as a good sign that you’ve stumped me. Possible positive/negative outcomes from this discussion:
a. Inerrancy beliefs reinforced
b. Inerrancy beliefs degraded
c. Skeptics strengthened
d. Skeptics weakened2) Ifen, Until this last year, I too thought the Bible was poetic/metaphorical in nature, not scientific or historical Then I started looking into the assumptions science/history is based on — I now realize the errors of my ways — Literal is the only way to go.3) Personally, I’m not quite sure I believe the KJV is inerrant, but with the errors I’ve seen on this forum, my beliefs in literal Biblical interpretation has been strengthened (i.e. the Bible’s message is inerrant, even if the English translation isn’t). A general thank you to all 4) Ramoss, The Luke/Matthew Nativity problem apparently isn’t a problem if you objectively analyze the facts. As the Res Gestae states, Augustus had the people proclaim him The Man in 2B.C. Historically tyrants, have a habit of forcing everybody to officially vote them The Man instead of just declaring it. If you don’t believe this, go look up Saddam, Tito, and most every other dictator we’ve seen in the last 100 years. Their actions parallel our historical evidence of Augustus’ statement. Not to mention the fact that the Herods had been paying tribute to Pompey and later the Caesars for at least 50 years prior. In fact, best I can tell, the only reason the proof isn’t there, is because people with are trying to claim that every Roman census was ONLY a direct taxation on Roman citizens (not to include non-Romans). I find this funny because there is no historical document that says all Roman census = tax Romans only. This is an assumption, kind of like the Earth being old5) Ramoss, What should replace Pierced in this sentence? Does lion really fit? Apparently the Hebrew word pierced means lion? I guess your interpretation would fall under which side of the coin you are on (Christ vs. Non-Christ). KJV Psalm 22:16 Yea, dogs are round about me; a company of evildoers encircle me; they have pierced my hands and feet?Although, the Hebrew definition of the word "pierced" means "lion", this has little translation effect on the Scriptural meanings themselves.
Psalm22:166) Ramoss, You have not dealt with the lack of resources 2 million people in the desert would need for 40 years. Actually, I think this is dealt with twice. First God provides them manna for 40 years, and as I said before — the Sinai was not a barren wasteland before — it actually had water/food potential. Yes, if you are an OEC type then there probably wasn’t food, but then again, if OEC was true, why did they just find a 70 million year old modern duck in Antarctica? BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Cretaceous duck ruffles feathers7) Ramoss, How did Judas die? The Acts account on its own makes no sense unless you believe in people spontaneously exploding But on the other hand, this website gives a reasonable enough explanation without resorting to miracles. As we all know from Job and Psalms: the Bible is not always straight to the point (some times you have to use your thinking skills)By putting the two accounts of Judas' death together we get a clearer idea of what happened. Both events are true, but they did not happen at the same time. Matthew writes that Judas "hanged himself." Luke explains what happened later, after Judas' body began to decompose. The corpse slipped from the rope, "falling headlong, . . . burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out"the ignominious, yet deserved end of "the son of perdition" (John 17:12).
http://bibletools.org/...n/Library.showResource/CT/BQA/k/129