Religions > Atheism > Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com?
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jim Spaza" |
| Date: |
10 Jun 2005 04:20:04 PM |
| Object: |
Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
This challenge was issued by GlennGlenn (655321) -- aa#825.
What is wrong with the Christian apologetic website
www.answersingenesis.com ???
Please be courteous and specific.
.
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
23 Aug 2005 08:05:22 AM |
|
|
On 22 Aug 2005 21:29:51 -0700, in talk.origins , "Jim Spaza"
<spaza9@yahoo.com> in
<1124771391.180156.261980@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 08:04:21 -0700, in talk.origins , "Jim Spaza"
<spaza9@yahoo.com> in
<1123772661.832644.147750@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> wrote:
[snip]
I am unfamiliar with any Biblical passage which allows or requires
polygamy. Help me out here please.
Jacob. Rachael. Leah.
I could find no verses dealing with these Biblical persons that detail
how God ordered or condoned polygamy.
<blink>
This is the same Bible that the Christians (mis)use, right? The one
that starts with a book (mis)called Genesis? Try chapter 29:1-30. I
am finding just a bit difficult to accept that you did not know that
Jacob had two wives.
[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
And now our bodies are oh so close and tight
It never felt so good, it never felt so right
And we're glowing like the metal on the edge of a knife
C'mon! Hold on tight!
C'mon! Hold on tight!
Though it's cold and lonley in the deep dark night
I can see paradise by the dashboard light
Paradise by the dashboard light
Jim Steinman
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
15 Jul 2005 05:07:21 PM |
|
|
On 15 Jul 2005 13:01:43 -0700, in talk.origins
"Jim Spaza" <spaza9@yahoo.com> wrote in
<1121457703.732917.148660@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
Mark Isaak wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 11:38:10 -0700, "Jim Spaza" <spaza9@yahoo.com> wrote:
[cut to the chase]
Well, some of the assertions made above would be incompatible with
sections of the Bible. And if those sections of the Bible are proven
false, then the entire Biblical account and its divine inspiration
aspect is then called into question.
Do you believe people ever get divine inspiration directly from God
(i.e., not via the Bible)? If so, do you believe those people are
completely accurate and truthful in every aspect of their lives? If
you answered no to the latter question, then you have said that a
source can be divinely inspired but still be wrong in part. Why
cannot the same be true of the Bible?
Inspiration directly from God? All I know is what the Bible says and
from personal experience.
What evidence is there that a god exists?
From God actually speaking verbally to a human?
Very, very rare.
No evidence exists at all that a god exists or has spoken to people.
From God using His Spirit to drive/inspire a person?
Routine for
Christians who really try to do God's will and pray a lot. Very rarely
for everyone else, including Christians who just show up on Sunday and
sing a few songs.
Routine for them to assert. But then, we have people who assert that God
has told them to be bigots and kill those with whom they disagree, often
folks who claim to follow the same god and same religion.
From God through an angel to a human?
Not a very common event, but
does happen.
No evidence exists that there are angels.
There is no one alive today who is completely accurate and truthful in
every aspect of their lives...all of the time. People can work towards
being honest in everything that they say and do. It is possible.
Yes.
Yet, humans are limited, fallible creatures who make honest mistakes.
The same COULD be theoretically true of the Bible. On the other hand,
if one supposes that a Supreme Being is guiding the authorship of such
a book, then human fraility is irrelevant and 100% accuracy can be
achieved. This is what I believe happened when the Bible was being
written.
Why would I suppose that there is a supreme being when no evidence
supports that claim? There is fairly persuasive evidence that the Bible
is completely man-made and no evidence to support the assertion that a
god had anything to do with it.
I ask because it is absolutely certain that the Bible is false in
part. That is easily seen from the fact that some parts of the Bible
contradict other parts. (Try to arrange the four gospels into one
consistent narrative if you don't believe me.) If what you say is
true about the whole Bible being called into question if part of it is
false, then the whole Bible must be called into question. Is that
where you want to go?
If parts of the Bible are indeed shown to be conclusively and
hopelessly in error, then the Bible should not be relied upon as God's
Word to humankind.
Honestly, I came into this forum with the evolution/creation debate in
mind. However, if you would like to do so, we can debate each and
every asserted contradiction in the Bible.
Same think with creationism. It is an assertion that has no evidence to
support it. It is a religious invention of men, unsupported by anything
but the assertions of those who are too full of hubris to accept the
idea that the god they invented isn't at their beck and call.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Spaza" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
18 Jul 2005 11:01:11 AM |
|
|
David Jensen wrote:
On 15 Jul 2005 13:01:43 -0700, in talk.origins
"Jim Spaza" <spaza9@yahoo.com> wrote in
<1121457703.732917.148660@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
Mark Isaak wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 11:38:10 -0700, "Jim Spaza" <spaza9@yahoo.com> wrote:
[cut to the chase]
Well, some of the assertions made above would be incompatible with
sections of the Bible. And if those sections of the Bible are proven
false, then the entire Biblical account and its divine inspiration
aspect is then called into question.
Do you believe people ever get divine inspiration directly from God
(i.e., not via the Bible)? If so, do you believe those people are
completely accurate and truthful in every aspect of their lives? If
you answered no to the latter question, then you have said that a
source can be divinely inspired but still be wrong in part. Why
cannot the same be true of the Bible?
Inspiration directly from God? All I know is what the Bible says and
from personal experience.
What evidence is there that a god exists?
Let me copy and paste a summary from my response to this same question
in a different forum:
One design:
66 books, 40 different writers of various backgrounds, period of about
1,600 years, writers were kings, peasants, philosophers, fishermen,
herdsmen, poets, statesmen, scholars, soldiers, priests, prophets, a
tax collector, a tentmaking rabbi, and a Gentile doctor, written in
Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, and written as history, law, poetry,
educational discourses, parables, biography, personal correspondence,
and prophecy. How diverse with still one message!
Supernatural origin:
Some of the writers recorded their own embarrassing sins. Their lives
were imperiled because of what they wrote. Not an example of human
nature. The writers claim a supernatural origin for their writings.
Nearly 4,000 times expressions like "Thus says the Lord," "The word of
the Lord came unto me," etc., are recorded in the Bible. If not God's
Word, then the Bible is full of lies. Could a book so filled with lies
cause millions of people to turn from their sins, including lying about
it?
Accuracy of prophecy:
Hundreds of prophecies of future events were recorded in the Bible well
before, sometimes centuries, any of them had occurred. Skeptics have
zero refuting facts. All that some can offer is the standby "prophecy
of self-fulfilling events" which would only offer an alternative
possibility if the prophecy and actual event where only vaguely
related. We're talking about historically verified prophecies in Old
Testament literature which came true as recorded in independent New
Testament books. Few skeptics nowadays claim that there was no Jesus
who was born in Bethlehem. Even most atheistic organizations have
given up trying to show that the naturally-occurring events and places
in the Bible never took place or existed.
Non-Biblical literary evidence:
Just one example...
"To dispel the rumor, Nero substituted as culprits, and treated with
the most extreme punishments, some people, popularly known as
Christians, whose disgraceful activities were notorious. The originator
of that name, Christus, had been executed when Tiberius was emperor, by
order of the procurator Pontius Pilatus. But the deadly cult, though
checked for a time, was now breaking out again not only in Judea, the
birthplace of this evil, but even throughout Rome, where all the nasty
and disgusting ideas from all over the world pour in and find a ready
following."
- Tacitus, unsympathetic pagan Roman historian writing in his "Annals"
around 115 AD, Annals 15:44
Please note the following:
1) Jesus was executed while Tiberius was emperor (14-37 AD).
2) Jesus was executed by order of Pontius Pilate (procurator from 26-36
AD).
3) Christianity had its origins in Judea.
4) There were sufficient followers of Jesus with enough influence in
Rome by AD 64 to be made scapegoats by the Nero.
So it is with similar writings from confirmed non-Christian sources
such as Pliny the Younger, Suetonius, Babylonian Talmud, Josephus, and
Islam's Koran.
Witness of changed lives:
Given the millions of people who personally verify that the God of the
Bible is active in their lives, one would be hard pressed to state as
fact that NOTHING spiritually is occurring.
Corraborating evidence of archaeology:
Herod's temple Jerusalem Luke 1:9
Herod's winter palace Jericho Matthew 2:4
The Herodium (possible site of Herod's tomb) Near Bethlehem Matthew
2:19
Masada Southwest of Dead Sea Luke 21:20
Early synagogue Capernaum Mark 1:21
Pool of Siloam Jerusalem John 9:7
Pool of Bethesda Jerusalem John 5:2
Pilate inscription Caesarea Luke 3:1
Inscription:
Gentile entrance of temple sanctuary Jerusalem Acts 21:27-29
Skeletal remains of crucified man Jerusalem Luke 23:33
Peter's house Capernaum Matthew 8:14
Jacob's well Nablus John 4:5-6
Asia Minor
Derbe inscription Kerti Huyuk Acts 14:20
Sergius Paulus inscription Antioch in Pisidia Acts 13:6-7
Zeus altar (Satan's throne) Pergamum Revelations 2:13
Fourth century BC walls Assos Acts 20:13-14
Artemis temple and altar Ephesus Acts 19:27-28
Ephesian theatre Ephesus Acts 19:29
Silversmith shops Ephesus Acts 19:24
Artemis statues Ephesus Acts 19:35
Greece
Erastus inscription Corinth Romans 16:23
Synagogue inscription Corinth Acts 18:4
Meat market inscription Corinth 1 Corinthians 10:25
Cult dining rooms in Asklepius and Demeter temples Corinth 1
Corinthians 8:10
Court (bema) Corinth Acts 18:12
Marketplace (bema) Philippi Acts 16:19
Starting gate for races Isthmia 1 Corinthians 9:24, 26
Gallio inscription Delphi Acts 18:12
Egnatian Way Kavalla (Neapolis), Philippi, Apollonia Thessalonica
Acts 16:11-12, 17:1
Politarch inscription Thessalonica Acts 17:6
Italy
Tomb of Augustus Rome Luke 2:1
Mamertime Prison Rome 2 Timothy 1:16-17, 2:9, 4:6-8
Appian Way Puteoli to Rome Acts 28:13-16
Golden House of Nero Rome Acts 25:10; 1 Peter 2:13
Arch of Titus Rome Luke 19:43-44, 21:6, 20
Biblical knowledge of science:
The Bible confirms a great deal of modern paleontology, astronomy,
meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology, and
physics...sometimes centuries before the scientific community made any
discovery.
It's easier if I just give a hyperlink than try summarize this myself:
www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
Here's an example, though. "He stretches out the north over empty
space; He hangs the earth on nothing." - Job 26:7
How would even the best minds in Old Testament times understand the
Earth as a mass in the vacuum of space?
From God actually speaking verbally to a human?
Very, very rare.
No evidence exists at all that a god exists or has spoken to people.
Millions of Christians disagree with you.
From God using His Spirit to drive/inspire a person?
Routine for
Christians who really try to do God's will and pray a lot. Very rarely
for everyone else, including Christians who just show up on Sunday and
sing a few songs.
Routine for them to assert. But then, we have people who assert that God
has told them to be bigots and kill those with whom they disagree, often
folks who claim to follow the same god and same religion.
Unfortunately true as well. Yet, are we going to say that all
assertions of a divine being's guiding a person must be 100% in error?
From God through an angel to a human?
Not a very common event, but
does happen.
No evidence exists that there are angels.
My supernatural encounters prove to me otherwise. Can I scientifically
prove those encounters to you? No. I wish that I could.
There is no one alive today who is completely accurate and truthful in
every aspect of their lives...all of the time. People can work towards
being honest in everything that they say and do. It is possible.
Yes.
Yet, humans are limited, fallible creatures who make honest mistakes.
The same COULD be theoretically true of the Bible. On the other hand,
if one supposes that a Supreme Being is guiding the authorship of such
a book, then human fraility is irrelevant and 100% accuracy can be
achieved. This is what I believe happened when the Bible was being
written.
Why would I suppose that there is a supreme being when no evidence
supports that claim? There is fairly persuasive evidence that the Bible
is completely man-made and no evidence to support the assertion that a
god had anything to do with it.
Well, you could always try to ask God yourself for evidence of His
existence. You could always ask God to give you a new ability to see
things as they are. You could always prove the Bible by doing what it
says as far as a relationship with God is concerned just to make sure.
The revelation, which I guarantee that you will receive, is not
scientifically provable to other people. Yet, it may very well
convince you that God exists.
I ask because it is absolutely certain that the Bible is false in
part. That is easily seen from the fact that some parts of the Bible
contradict other parts. (Try to arrange the four gospels into one
consistent narrative if you don't believe me.) If what you say is
true about the whole Bible being called into question if part of it is
false, then the whole Bible must be called into question. Is that
where you want to go?
If parts of the Bible are indeed shown to be conclusively and
hopelessly in error, then the Bible should not be relied upon as God's
Word to humankind.
Honestly, I came into this forum with the evolution/creation debate in
mind. However, if you would like to do so, we can debate each and
every asserted contradiction in the Bible.
Same think with creationism. It is an assertion that has no evidence to
support it. It is a religious invention of men, unsupported by anything
but the assertions of those who are too full of hubris to accept the
idea that the god they invented isn't at their beck and call.
Please understand that this is not my thinking nor the thinking of my
Christian friends and family.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herb Huston" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
19 Jul 2005 06:49:08 AM |
|
|
In article <1121702471.137288.34780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Jim Spaza <spaza9@yahoo.com> wrote:
}Witness of changed lives:
}
}Given the millions of people who personally verify that the God of the
}Bible is active in their lives, one would be hard pressed to state as
}fact that NOTHING spiritually is occurring.
This is the logical fallacy of "argumentum ad populum."
--
-- Herb Huston
--
-- http://www.radix.net/~huston
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
19 Jul 2005 07:57:56 PM |
|
|
Herb Huston wrote:
In article <1121702471.137288.34780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Jim Spaza <spaza9@yahoo.com> wrote:
}Witness of changed lives:
}
}Given the millions of people who personally verify that the God of the
}Bible is active in their lives, one would be hard pressed to state as
}fact that NOTHING spiritually is occurring.
This is the logical fallacy of "argumentum ad populum."
Especially since there are many millions more that reject the Bible
entirely.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "OvC" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
19 Jul 2005 11:18:56 AM |
|
|
On 18 Jul 2005 09:01:11 -0700, Jim Spaza posted in article
<1121702471.137288.34780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> ...
Non-Biblical literary evidence:
[...]
Corraborating evidence of archaeology:
[...]
Inscription:
I am reminded of the documented exploits of Leonard Zelig.
Biblical knowledge of science:
The Bible confirms a great deal of modern paleontology, astronomy,
meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology, and
physics...sometimes centuries before the scientific community made any
discovery.
It's easier if I just give a hyperlink than try summarize this myself:
www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
Do you actually believe that, in the first passage quoted under
"Statements Consistent With Geology," 'foundations of the earth' is an
accurate description of the Earth's crust, as that site asserts? Are
humans limited to measurement by drilling? If not, did the Lord cast
off all the seed of Israel in 1909?
BTW, that site appears to draw heavily upon a dead link to an ICR page
referenced as footnote [1]. Perhaps ICR no longer supports its
contents.
Here's an example, though. "He stretches out the north over empty
space; He hangs the earth on nothing." - Job 26:7
How would even the best minds in Old Testament times understand the
Earth as a mass in the vacuum of space?
Your question suggests a profound incompetence on the part of the best
minds in Old Testament times. How about if the Lord started off with
something simple, like "He hangs the earth like a stone in empty space
and maketh it to spin," corrected His earlier obfuscations, gave some
dimensions in cubits, and went on from there to something more
Copernican?
[...]
--
OvC
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Spaza" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
19 Jul 2005 02:23:22 PM |
|
|
OvC wrote:
On 18 Jul 2005 09:01:11 -0700, Jim Spaza posted in article
<1121702471.137288.34780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> ...
Non-Biblical literary evidence:
[...]
Corraborating evidence of archaeology:
[...]
Inscription:
I am reminded of the documented exploits of Leonard Zelig.
Biblical knowledge of science:
The Bible confirms a great deal of modern paleontology, astronomy,
meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology, and
physics...sometimes centuries before the scientific community made any
discovery.
It's easier if I just give a hyperlink than try summarize this myself:
www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
Do you actually believe that, in the first passage quoted under
"Statements Consistent With Geology," 'foundations of the earth' is an
accurate description of the Earth's crust, as that site asserts? Are
humans limited to measurement by drilling? If not, did the Lord cast
off all the seed of Israel in 1909?
It's a very good assessment of the Earth's crust for that time period.
Humans are no longer limited to measurement by drilling. But, there is
far more to "searching out" than a measurement of distance using sound
waves.
What does the founding of Tel Aviv in 1909 have to do with this
Biblical passage?
BTW, that site appears to draw heavily upon a dead link to an ICR page
referenced as footnote [1]. Perhaps ICR no longer supports its
contents.
Perhaps. I don't know. I reported the broken link.
Here's an example, though. "He stretches out the north over empty
space; He hangs the earth on nothing." - Job 26:7
How would even the best minds in Old Testament times understand the
Earth as a mass in the vacuum of space?
Your question suggests a profound incompetence on the part of the best
minds in Old Testament times. How about if the Lord started off with
something simple, like "He hangs the earth like a stone in empty space
and maketh it to spin," corrected His earlier obfuscations, gave some
dimensions in cubits, and went on from there to something more
Copernican?
Then, it would have made your analysis, as a skeptical scientist, much
easier. Given the way the verse is right now, you would be forced to
learn some Hebrew, study the surrounding passages, and [GASP!] pray for
wisdom...if you really wanted to understand the verse.
It's like studying evolutionary theory. You can't just take one or two
sentences and try to completely understand them on their own without
doing some research.
[...]
--
OvC
.
|
|
|
| User: "OvC" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
19 Jul 2005 07:45:28 PM |
|
|
On 19 Jul 2005 12:23:22 -0700, Jim Spaza posted in article
<1121801002.239305.214760@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> ...
OvC wrote:
On 18 Jul 2005 09:01:11 -0700, Jim Spaza posted in article
<1121702471.137288.34780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> ...
[...]
Biblical knowledge of science:
The Bible confirms a great deal of modern paleontology, astronomy,
meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology, and
physics...sometimes centuries before the scientific community made any
discovery.
It's easier if I just give a hyperlink than try summarize this myself:
www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
Do you actually believe that, in the first passage quoted under
"Statements Consistent With Geology," 'foundations of the earth' is an
accurate description of the Earth's crust, as that site asserts? Are
humans limited to measurement by drilling? If not, did the Lord cast
off all the seed of Israel in 1909?
It's a very good assessment of the Earth's crust for that time period.
Humans are no longer limited to measurement by drilling. But, there is
far more to "searching out" than a measurement of distance using sound
waves.
Nope, that won't work, it's not close to very good for that time or
any other, nor does it provide any assessment; contrary to the site's
statement, there's no description whatsoever in that passage, let
alone information that permits identifying the crust.
I agree, searching out or exploration entails a lot more than distance
measurement (or perhaps less, and only the attempt matters), but
measurement by drilling is what the referenced site chose to focus on.
In any event, searching out doesn't appear to have anything to do with
the passage's purported identification of the crust.
What does the founding of Tel Aviv in 1909 have to do with this
Biblical passage?
I dunno. But in 1909, Andrija Mohorovicic recognized the seismic
discontinuity (now bearing his name) -- for which depths had already
been calculated -- as the crust-mantle boundary. That's
some serious searching out and measurement directly related to the
crust, and apparently one of the conditions by which the Lord would
cast off the descendants of Israel. At least, it's a big deal to the
site you linked to.
BTW, that site appears to draw heavily upon a dead link to an ICR page
referenced as footnote [1]. Perhaps ICR no longer supports its
contents.
Perhaps. I don't know. I reported the broken link.
Here's an example, though. "He stretches out the north over empty
space; He hangs the earth on nothing." - Job 26:7
How would even the best minds in Old Testament times understand the
Earth as a mass in the vacuum of space?
Your question suggests a profound incompetence on the part of the best
minds in Old Testament times. How about if the Lord started off with
something simple, like "He hangs the earth like a stone in empty space
and maketh it to spin," corrected His earlier obfuscations, gave some
dimensions in cubits, and went on from there to something more
Copernican?
Then, it would have made your analysis, as a skeptical scientist, much
easier. Given the way the verse is right now, you would be forced to
learn some Hebrew, study the surrounding passages, and [GASP!] pray for
wisdom...if you really wanted to understand the verse.
I presume it would have made the reality of the Earth spinning in
space clearer for the credulous non-scientists of the time as well.
It's a simple statement. The words "hangs," "earth," "like," "stone,"
"empty," "space," and "spin" are already in the Bible in translation,
so presumably they translate from words meaningful to the best minds
of Old Testament times. Would the Lord find it difficult to inspire
scribes to use those terms describing that aspect of the Earth
accurately?
It's like studying evolutionary theory. You can't just take one or two
sentences and try to completely understand them on their own without
doing some research.
So based on your research, what in the verses before and after mention
of 'foundations of the earth' enables you to consider that phrase to
be a very good assessment of the crust? Does the passage refer to
both oceanic and continental crust, which have dramatically different
properties? Why the crust and not just the few feet of sediments and
volcanics accessible to well diggers and miners of the time? Why
aren't the mantle and core, representing more than 97% of the Earth's
volume, included as foundations of the Earth?
Wouldn't it be more honest to admit that 'foundations...' is
allegorical and doesn't in fact refer to the crust?
--
OvC
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Spaza" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
20 Jul 2005 11:54:25 AM |
|
|
OvC wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 12:23:22 -0700, Jim Spaza posted in article
<1121801002.239305.214760@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> ...
OvC wrote:
On 18 Jul 2005 09:01:11 -0700, Jim Spaza posted in article
<1121702471.137288.34780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> ...
[...]
Biblical knowledge of science:
The Bible confirms a great deal of modern paleontology, astronomy,
meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology, and
physics...sometimes centuries before the scientific community made any
discovery.
It's easier if I just give a hyperlink than try summarize this myself:
www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
Do you actually believe that, in the first passage quoted under
"Statements Consistent With Geology," 'foundations of the earth' is an
accurate description of the Earth's crust, as that site asserts? Are
humans limited to measurement by drilling? If not, did the Lord cast
off all the seed of Israel in 1909?
It's a very good assessment of the Earth's crust for that time period.
Humans are no longer limited to measurement by drilling. But, there is
far more to "searching out" than a measurement of distance using sound
waves.
Nope, that won't work, it's not close to very good for that time or
any other, nor does it provide any assessment; contrary to the site's
statement, there's no description whatsoever in that passage, let
alone information that permits identifying the crust.
I agree, searching out or exploration entails a lot more than distance
measurement (or perhaps less, and only the attempt matters), but
measurement by drilling is what the referenced site chose to focus on.
In any event, searching out doesn't appear to have anything to do with
the passage's purported identification of the crust.
First, the Hebrew word in use is "mocadah" which comes from "yacad"
meaning found, fix, establish, or lay foundation. So, we know that the
author is referring to something harder than top soil. And, if the
"foundations of the earth" are being spoken of, it must mean something
deeper than just the crust of the earth for the crust doesn't hold the
planet together.
Second, I'm not sure how you determined that measurement by drilling
nor particular attention given to the crust is what the Biblical author
meant in this verse. Maybe the article in the website wanted to show
that the crust of the earth hadn't even been explored yet, much less
anything deeper.
What does the founding of Tel Aviv in 1909 have to do with this
Biblical passage?
I dunno. But in 1909, Andrija Mohorovicic recognized the seismic
discontinuity (now bearing his name) -- for which depths had already
been calculated -- as the crust-mantle boundary. That's
some serious searching out and measurement directly related to the
crust, and apparently one of the conditions by which the Lord would
cast off the descendants of Israel. At least, it's a big deal to the
site you linked to.
Well, taking seismic measurements is a step in the direction of having
the conditions met. It would be circular reasoning to say that the
author obviously didn't mean just seismic measurement since the Jewish
people haven't been "cast off". So, let me reiterate that "searching
out" (Hebrew "chaqar" - to search, search for, search out, examine,
investigate) means more than to measure.
BTW, that site appears to draw heavily upon a dead link to an ICR page
referenced as footnote [1]. Perhaps ICR no longer supports its
contents.
Perhaps. I don't know. I reported the broken link.
Here's an example, though. "He stretches out the north over empty
space; He hangs the earth on nothing." - Job 26:7
How would even the best minds in Old Testament times understand the
Earth as a mass in the vacuum of space?
Your question suggests a profound incompetence on the part of the best
minds in Old Testament times. How about if the Lord started off with
something simple, like "He hangs the earth like a stone in empty space
and maketh it to spin," corrected His earlier obfuscations, gave some
dimensions in cubits, and went on from there to something more
Copernican?
Then, it would have made your analysis, as a skeptical scientist, much
easier. Given the way the verse is right now, you would be forced to
learn some Hebrew, study the surrounding passages, and [GASP!] pray for
wisdom...if you really wanted to understand the verse.
I presume it would have made the reality of the Earth spinning in
space clearer for the credulous non-scientists of the time as well.
It's a simple statement. The words "hangs," "earth," "like," "stone,"
"empty," "space," and "spin" are already in the Bible in translation,
so presumably they translate from words meaningful to the best minds
of Old Testament times. Would the Lord find it difficult to inspire
scribes to use those terms describing that aspect of the Earth
accurately?
No. While I have faith that everything written was written that way
for a reason, I openly admit that I don't have all the answers. I'm
still searching myself.
It's like studying evolutionary theory. You can't just take one or two
sentences and try to completely understand them on their own without
doing some research.
So based on your research, what in the verses before and after mention
of 'foundations of the earth' enables you to consider that phrase to
be a very good assessment of the crust? Does the passage refer to
both oceanic and continental crust, which have dramatically different
properties? Why the crust and not just the few feet of sediments and
volcanics accessible to well diggers and miners of the time? Why
aren't the mantle and core, representing more than 97% of the Earth's
volume, included as foundations of the Earth?
How would anyone at the time of the writing of Jeremiah know that there
was a foundation of the earth at all? There were a widespread
erroneous beliefs at the time that there was a canopy of water over the
earth. People didn't know about atmospheres and geology. How the
author of Jeremiah know that there was more earth far under the soil on
which he was standing, as opposed to water or air?
Clarifyingchristianity.com mentions the crust to show that this
relatively easily accessible layer of the earth has not been explored,
much less the deeper portions of the planet. The website is not saying
that the "foundations of the earth" refer only to the crust itself. It
is just saying that the conditions created by God for casting off the
Jewish people have not been met very much at all.
Wouldn't it be more honest to admit that 'foundations...' is
allegorical and doesn't in fact refer to the crust?
God may have been referring to our understanding the very molecular
structure of the core of the earth as a condition for His casting off
of the Jewish people. In other words, God will not be casting off the
Jewish people in the forseeable future. I think that we might be
making a mountain out of a molehill here, in my opinion.
--
OvC
.
|
|
|
| User: "OvC" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
20 Jul 2005 10:55:06 PM |
|
|
On 20 Jul 2005 09:54:25 -0700, Jim Spaza posted in article
<1121878465.462579.211810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> ...
OvC wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 12:23:22 -0700, Jim Spaza posted in article
<1121801002.239305.214760@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> ...
OvC wrote:
On 18 Jul 2005 09:01:11 -0700, Jim Spaza posted in article
<1121702471.137288.34780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> ...
[...]
Biblical knowledge of science:
The Bible confirms a great deal of modern paleontology, astronomy,
meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology, geology, and
physics...sometimes centuries before the scientific community made any
discovery.
It's easier if I just give a hyperlink than try summarize this myself:
www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
Do you actually believe that, in the first passage quoted under
"Statements Consistent With Geology," 'foundations of the earth' is an
accurate description of the Earth's crust, as that site asserts? Are
humans limited to measurement by drilling? If not, did the Lord cast
off all the seed of Israel in 1909?
It's a very good assessment of the Earth's crust for that time period.
Humans are no longer limited to measurement by drilling. But, there is
far more to "searching out" than a measurement of distance using sound
waves.
Nope, that won't work, it's not close to very good for that time or
any other, nor does it provide any assessment; contrary to the site's
statement, there's no description whatsoever in that passage, let
alone information that permits identifying the crust.
I agree, searching out or exploration entails a lot more than distance
measurement (or perhaps less, and only the attempt matters), but
measurement by drilling is what the referenced site chose to focus on.
In any event, searching out doesn't appear to have anything to do with
the passage's purported identification of the crust.
First, the Hebrew word in use is "mocadah" which comes from "yacad"
meaning found, fix, establish, or lay foundation. So, we know that the
author is referring to something harder than top soil. And, if the
"foundations of the earth" are being spoken of, it must mean something
deeper than just the crust of the earth for the crust doesn't hold the
planet together.
It looks like we're in agreement, then: the clarifyingchristianity
website is in error, and the quoted passage doesn't refer to the
Earth's crust.
Second, I'm not sure how you determined that measurement by drilling
nor particular attention given to the crust is what the Biblical author
meant in this verse. Maybe the article in the website wanted to show
that the crust of the earth hadn't even been explored yet, much less
anything deeper.
Let's be clear. *I* didn't make that determination -- the page you
referenced (<www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml>) brought up
drilling into the crust, following its claim that "[t]he Bible
describes the Earth's crust..." in Jeremiah 31:37.
What does the founding of Tel Aviv in 1909 have to do with this
Biblical passage?
I dunno. But in 1909, Andrija Mohorovicic recognized the seismic
discontinuity (now bearing his name) -- for which depths had already
been calculated -- as the crust-mantle boundary. That's
some serious searching out and measurement directly related to the
crust, and apparently one of the conditions by which the Lord would
cast off the descendants of Israel. At least, it's a big deal to the
site you linked to.
Well, taking seismic measurements is a step in the direction of having
the conditions met. It would be circular reasoning to say that the
author obviously didn't mean just seismic measurement since the Jewish
people haven't been "cast off". So, let me reiterate that "searching
out" (Hebrew "chaqar" - to search, search for, search out, examine,
investigate) means more than to measure.
I'll buy that. Any exploratory tool into rock, whether it's
excavating, drilling, seismics, thermal probes, conductivity, etc.,
satisfies the searching out bit, whether or not a measurement results.
That's why, after reviewing the context of Jeremiah 31, I think 31:37
is a bluff.
[...]
Here's an example, though. "He stretches out the north over empty
space; He hangs the earth on nothing." - Job 26:7
How would even the best minds in Old Testament times understand the
Earth as a mass in the vacuum of space?
Your question suggests a profound incompetence on the part of the best
minds in Old Testament times. How about if the Lord started off with
something simple, like "He hangs the earth like a stone in empty space
and maketh it to spin," corrected His earlier obfuscations, gave some
dimensions in cubits, and went on from there to something more
Copernican?
Then, it would have made your analysis, as a skeptical scientist, much
easier. Given the way the verse is right now, you would be forced to
learn some Hebrew, study the surrounding passages, and [GASP!] pray for
wisdom...if you really wanted to understand the verse.
I presume it would have made the reality of the Earth spinning in
space clearer for the credulous non-scientists of the time as well.
It's a simple statement. The words "hangs," "earth," "like," "stone,"
"empty," "space," and "spin" are already in the Bible in translation,
so presumably they translate from words meaningful to the best minds
of Old Testament times. Would the Lord find it difficult to inspire
scribes to use those terms describing that aspect of the Earth
accurately?
No. While I have faith that everything written was written that way
for a reason, I openly admit that I don't have all the answers. I'm
still searching myself.
A reasonable attitude. That pretty much sums up a scientist's
approach to the natural world.
It's like studying evolutionary theory. You can't just take one or two
sentences and try to completely understand them on their own without
doing some research.
So based on your research, what in the verses before and after mention
of 'foundations of the earth' enables you to consider that phrase to
be a very good assessment of the crust? Does the passage refer to
both oceanic and continental crust, which have dramatically different
properties? Why the crust and not just the few feet of sediments and
volcanics accessible to well diggers and miners of the time? Why
aren't the mantle and core, representing more than 97% of the Earth's
volume, included as foundations of the Earth?
How would anyone at the time of the writing of Jeremiah know that there
was a foundation of the earth at all? There were a widespread
erroneous beliefs at the time that there was a canopy of water over the
earth. People didn't know about atmospheres and geology. How the
author of Jeremiah know that there was more earth far under the soil on
which he was standing, as opposed to water or air?
Presumably from divine inspiration -- isn't the Bible the word of God?
Frankly, the foundation reference is easy to accept. It's a solid
stratum on which to build, something engineers today refer to as a
bearing stratum (should Jeremiah 31:37 be considered an engineering
reference? Hardly). It's also something that Old Testament stone
masons would be aware of, the successful ones anyway. So an
allegorical usage of 'foundations of the earth' makes perfect sense as
something the best minds in Old Testament times could grasp. As a
description the Earth's crust, it's silly. Which is why I asked about
research that could support 'foundations of the earth' as a very good
assessment of the Earth's crust for that time period. Apparently,
there isn't any.
Clarifyingchristianity.com mentions the crust to show that this
relatively easily accessible layer of the earth has not been explored,
much less the deeper portions of the planet.
Well, then, they've made yet another foolish mistake. Even in Old
Testament times (by the literalist Biblical time scale), exploration
of the crust sufficient to locate and mine precious and base metals
and gemstones had occurred.
The website is not saying
that the "foundations of the earth" refer only to the crust itself. It
is just saying that the conditions created by God for casting off the
Jewish people have not been met very much at all.
How, exactly, are they able to know the mind of God with respect to
those conditions?
And, in fact they refer *only* to the crust; the bullet heading, in
its entirety, reads "The Bible describes the Earth?s crust (along with
a comment on astronomy".
Wouldn't it be more honest to admit that 'foundations...' is
allegorical and doesn't in fact refer to the crust?
God may have been referring to our understanding the very molecular
structure of the core of the earth as a condition for His casting off
of the Jewish people.
So that makes the 'foundations...' reference allegorical, right?
BTW, I think we now have a model for the crystalline (and by
extension, molecular) structure of the inner solid core; I'm sure we
do for various depths of the mantle. But that's just another kind of
measurement. From your statements above, it's my understanding that
searching out/exploring is the condition, not the measurement itself.
In other words, God will not be casting off the Jewish people in the
forseeable future. I think that we might be
making a mountain out of a molehill here, in my opinion.
Possibly, but that's pretty standard for Usenet. On the other hand,
it's now clear that using the clarifyingchristianity site as
support for your arguments isn't a good idea. That's progress.
--
OvC
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Attn: Atheists & Skeptics - What's wrong with answersingenesis.com? |
18 Jul 2005 12:01:07 PM |
|
|
On 18 Jul 2005 09:01:11 -0700, in talk.origins
"Jim Spaza" <spaza9@yahoo.com> wrote in
<1121702471.137288.34780@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>:
David Jensen wrote:
On 15 Jul 2005 13:01:43 -0700, in talk.origins
"Jim Spaza" <spaza9@yahoo.com> wrote in
<1121457703.732917.148660@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
Mark Isaak wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 11:38:10 -0700, "Jim Spaza" <spaza9@yahoo.com> wrote:
[cut to the chase]
Well, some of the assertions made above would be incompatible with
sections of the Bible. And if those sections of the Bible are proven
false, then the entire Biblical account and its divine inspiration
aspect is then called into question.
Do you believe people ever get divine inspiration directly from God
(i.e., not via the Bible)? If so, do you believe those people are
completely accurate and truthful in every aspect of their lives? If
you answered no to the latter question, then you have said that a
source can be divinely inspired but still be wrong in part. Why
cannot the same be true of the Bible?
Inspiration directly from God? All I know is what the Bible says and
from personal experience.
What evidence is there that a god exists?
Let me copy and paste a summary from my response to this same question
in a different forum:
One design:
66 books, 40 different writers of various backgrounds, period of about
1,600 years, writers were kings, peasants, philosophers, fishermen,
herdsmen, poets, statesmen, scholars, soldiers, priests, prophets, a
tax collector, a tentmaking rabbi, and a Gentile doctor, written in
Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, and written as history, law, poetry,
educational discourses, parables, biography, personal correspondence,
and prophecy. How diverse with still one message!
Not one message. The Christian interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures
is notably different from that held by the Jews. The fact that various
stories were selected for (and edited for) the canon by priests is not
evidence for anything, except that priests controlled the canon. A large
number of the stories of the Bible do not square with the evidence
Supernatural origin:
Some of the writers recorded their own embarrassing sins. Their lives
were imperiled because of what they wrote. Not an example of human
nature. The writers claim a supernatural origin for their writings.
Nearly 4,000 times expressions like "Thus says the Lord," "The word of
the Lord came unto me," etc., are recorded in the Bible. If not God's
Word, then the Bible is full of lies. Could a book so filled with lies
cause millions of people to turn from their sins, including lying about
it?
We are told that is the case. There's really little or no evidence that
any of the traditional writers were actually the writers.
Accuracy of prophecy:
Hundreds of prophecies of future events were recorded in the Bible well
before, sometimes centuries, any of them had occurred. Skeptics h | | | |
