My Enoch Challenge

Jazer · Jun 22, 2011

Nostromo said:
Except Genesis.

I suppose different things work out for different people. For me a day in Genesis is 1,000 years and it all works out just fine with what we currently know from science. But just because it all works for me does not mean it is going to work for you. We all have to discover truth for ourselves.

For me all the work they have done on the J1 and J2 Haplotype works out just fine with what is known in the Bible. So for me all of Genesis is true and it is can all be verified by Science as true. I know Science is very limited in what they can do. But as much as they are able, then science does indeed verify the Bible as being true.

If you look our understanding of Science or our understanding of the Bible 500 years ago, we have clearly come a long way in both areas. Just as the Bible says, as we get close to the end of this age or era, then knowledge and understanding will increase.

Prince Lucianus · Jun 22, 2011

I will dig up this old one:

According to Luke (somewhere) Jesus went to the city of Nain and walked through the town gates, etc etc.
Now, Like Troy, Nain has been excavated and the archaeologists found out that the city/town never had a city wall (neither a wooden pallisade, since even that leaves traces). Anyway, no wall, no gate.
The story does resemble an OT story which is practically the same (A prophet story in Kings I believe). So, it looks like Luke copied the story and attributed the miracle to Jesus, even copying the town gate part, although we know Nain didn't have one.

It's he same with Troy. We have found Troy and it's still being excavated. But we haven't found evidence concerning the war, the characters or most of what Homer has written down.

When stories are written by those who neither lived during the events, live somewhere else or who use Xth hand knowledge, then mistakes are bound to creep in the stories.

Lucy

DontTreadOnMike · Jun 22, 2011

Jazer said:
I suppose different things work out for different people. For me a day in Genesis is 1,000 years and it all works out just fine with what we currently know from science. But just because it all works for me does not mean it is going to work for you. We all have to discover truth for ourselves.

For me all the work they have done on the J1 and J2 Haplotype works out just fine with what is known in the Bible. So for me all of Genesis is true and it is can all be verified by Science as true. I know Science is very limited in what they can do. But as much as they are able, then science does indeed verify the Bible as being true.

If you look our understanding of Science or our understanding of the Bible 500 years ago, we have clearly come a long way in both areas. Just as the Bible says, as we get close to the end of this age or era, then knowledge and understanding will increase.

If the days of creation were 1,000 years long then the earth would be roughly 13,000 years old instead of 6,000, which isn't much of an improvement. For the Bible to agree with science, each day would have to equal about 642,000,000 years.

Also, the Bible says that the animals came about in the following order: Fish, birds, land animals, then humans. Well..actually that depends on which chapter of Genesis you read. The order is different in chapter two. The point is, this does not agree with science. Sure, scientists believe that life originated in the oceans (though there were plenty of creatures before the ones that swim) but birds did not come before land animals.

That's like claiming that the Enuma Elish agrees with science because it says that Marduk made Babylon and Babylon is the oldest city known to man. Well first of all, no it's not so your premise would be wrong, but even if it wasn't, that wouldn't prove the supernatural stuff like the giant cosmic dragon, Tiamat, or that Marduk is the god of storms.

See what I'm getting at? Not only does the story of Genesis not agree with science, but even if it did, that wouldn't prove anything supernatural.

Now, you're free to choose what you believe, but don't pretend that the two, science and the Bible, agree with each other.

Nostromo · Jun 22, 2011

Jazer said:
I suppose different things work out for different people. For me a day in Genesis is 1,000 years and it all works out just fine with what we currently know from science. But just because it all works for me does not mean it is going to work for you. We all have to discover truth for ourselves.

As DTOM said, it isn't even close to the answer that science gives us. Even if every day between 4004BC and now were a thousand years, you'd still only have 16% of the total age of the universe.

Jazer said:
For me all the work they have done on the J1 and J2 Haplotype works out just fine with what is known in the Bible. So for me all of Genesis is true and it is can all be verified by Science as true. I know Science is very limited in what they can do. But as much as they are able, then science does indeed verify the Bible as being true.

I'm not sure why you think that supports the Bible unless you're willing to ignore the prior history of humanity which genetics tells us about.

Just as the Bible says, as we get close to the end of this age or era, then knowledge and understanding will increase.

Isn't that the case throughout history?

Tiberius · Jun 22, 2011

Tiberius said:
On the topic of motivations, what was God's motivation to make the world show no evidence of the flood if he wanted us to know it happened?

Don't forget my question, AV!

AV1611VET · Jun 22, 2011

Tiberius said:
On the topic of motivations, what was God's motivation to make the world show no evidence of the flood if he wanted us to know it happened?

His motivation wasn't 'to make the world show no evidence of the flood' -- otherwise, He would not have documented it in His Diary for us to read.

Again, He cleaned up the earth for safety & sanitary reasons, clearing the way for [quick] repopulation.

Jazer · Jun 22, 2011

Nostromo said:
As DTOM said, it isn't even close to the answer that science gives us. Even if every day between 4004BC and now were a thousand years, you'd still only have 16% of the total age of the universe.

The Bible is not a book about the universe. It is a book about the Hebrew people. The Bible only talks about the age or era that we currently live in. There was a mass extinction around 13 thousand years ago and that was when the world we now live in began. I have been explaining this over and over again in the last few months on here. I do not think I want to continue to repeat myself again and again because I have found that people are not interested in learning the truth. Maybe I need to learn AV's trick of just giving people the link to the posts that he has already written on the subject.

Split Rock · Jun 22, 2011

AV1611VET said:
His motivation wasn't 'to make the world show no evidence of the flood' -- otherwise, He would not have documented it in His Diary for us to read.

Again, He cleaned up the earth for safety & sanitary reasons, clearing the way for [quick] repopulation.

After killing off all those poor little coccolithophores and sweeping their dead bodies up into the White Ciffs of Dover.

Nathan Poe · Jun 22, 2011

AV1611VET said:
Again, He cleaned up the earth for safety & sanitary reasons, clearing the way for [quick] repopulation.

So God's basically your private janitor?

Nathan Poe · Jun 22, 2011

Split Rock said:
After killing off all those poor little coccolithophores and sweeping their dead bodies up into the White Ciffs of Dover.

Apparantly Dover was the designated coccolithophore dumping ground.

Jazer · Jun 22, 2011

Prince Lucianus said:
Anyway, no wall, no gate.

This is a translation issue. Some of the more modern translations use the word entrance.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
As he came near the entrance to the city, he met a funeral procession. The dead man was a widow's only child. A large crowd from the city was with her.

Often there was only one road in and out of a city. The Law required them to take the dead body outside of the city. This is where Jesus met up with the funeral procession.

Understanding and translating a 2000 year old book can be a challange, but we have it under control for the most part. Still we learn new things and that can help us to have a more accurate translation from the origional language into the modern language we use today.

Jazer · Jun 22, 2011

DontTreadOnMike said:
If the days of creation were 1,000 years long then the earth would be roughly 13,000 years old instead of 6,000, which isn't much of an improvement.

Yes that is exactly what we have. 13,000 years ago you will find mass extinction, that age or era came to a end. The modern age we now live in began. We are told that "earth was without form, and void; and darkness" gen 1:2 The world that was here before was in ruin and only a small remenant remained to begin the new age or the new era. Later on in the Prophecy books we see a time when Isreal was in ruin. The language is the same as the language here in Genesis.

Also, the Bible says that the animals came about in the following order: Fish, birds, land animals, then humans. Well..actually that depends on which chapter of Genesis you read. The order is different in chapter two. The point is, this does not agree with science.

Then science is wrong. They have been known to make errors, but eventually they get it figured out.

Jazer · Jun 22, 2011

Prince Lucianus said:
then mistakes are bound to creep in the stories.

Of course man makes mistakes. But the Bible is inspired by God, so we do not have mistakes in the Bible. It is the people who are NOT inspired that try to interpret or translate the Bible that seem to make all sorts of errors. But the Bible itself in the origional language does not have errors. In fact God watches over it to perform and to do what He says He will do. Jer 1:12 (AMP), "God is watching over His Word to perform it"

Nathan Poe · Jun 22, 2011

Jazer said:
Of course man makes mistakes. But the Bible is inspired by God, so we do not have mistakes in the Bible.

Inspired, but not written.

So long as man is fallible, there are errors in the Bible.

It is the people who are NOT inspired that try to interpret or translate the Bible that seem to make all sorts of errors.

People such as yourself, for instance?

But the Bible itself in the origional language does not have errors.

And have you ever read the Bible in its original language? What is its original language, anyway?

AV1611VET · Jun 22, 2011

Split Rock said:
After killing off all those poor little coccolithophores and sweeping their dead bodies up into the White Ciffs of Dover.

Yup -- those poor, defenseless things didn't stand a chance, did they?

AV1611VET · Jun 22, 2011

Nathan Poe said:
Apparantly Dover was the designated coccolithophore dumping ground.

It may have been a 'dumping ground' to you, but God sees things differently:

The cliffs have great symbolic value for Britain because they face towards Continental Europe across the narrowest part of the English Channel, where invasions where invasions have historically threatened and against which the cliffs form a symbolic guard. Because crossing at Dover was the primary route to the continent before air travel, the white line of cliffs also formed the first or last sight of the UK for travellers.

SOURCE

AV1611VET · Jun 22, 2011

Nathan Poe said:
And have you ever read the Bible in its original language? What is its original language, anyway?

Who cares?

I doubt you could handle it anyway, professor.

And even if you could, what's wrong? getting tired of insulting the English One?

Nathan Poe · Jun 22, 2011

AV1611VET said:
Who cares?

I'm going to take this as an across-the-board "no" to the binary question, and disregard the meaningless twaddle attached to it.

Nathan Poe · Jun 22, 2011

AV1611VET said:
It may have been a 'dumping ground' to you, but God sees things differently:

God is British? I'm sure the Brits think so.

Davian · Jun 22, 2011

Jazer said:
Of course man makes mistakes. But the Bible is inspired by God, so we do not have mistakes in the Bible. It is the people who are NOT inspired that try to interpret or translate the Bible that seem to make all sorts of errors.

So there are errors in the translations.

Jazer said:
But the Bible itself in the origional language does not have errors.

The original texts are long gone. And even if you had them, what would you verify them against? Do you have The Original Bible Grammar and Spell Checker (Ancient Languages Edition) program on your computer?

Jazer said:
In fact God watches over it to perform and to do what He says He will do. Jer 1:12 (AMP), "God is watching over His Word to perform it"

It is not a fact, it is just written in the bible. Circular logic much?

My Enoch Challenge

Jazer

Guest

Old Goth

Eddaic Literalist

Brian Blessed can take a hike

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Jazer

Guest

Conflation of Blathers

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jazer

Guest

Jazer

Guest

Jazer

Guest

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

fallible

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency