Re: Bible inaccuracies
Originally posted by kgkg
Does anyone here know where in the bible it is stated that the world is roughly 6,000 years old?
No where. Several hundred years ago a theologian estimated how the length of a generation and then counted up how many there seemed to be between Adam and Jesus. Hardly a reliable method by any standards.
Here is a good web site for this kind of information.
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
Check it out.
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonAwesome link thanks
Here is a good web site for this kind of information.http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
Check it out.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Here is a good web site for this kind of information.http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
Check it out.
I would avoid sites where Militant Atheists reign.
Use more academic sites.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Really? Post some of those academic sites, please. 😄
Originally posted by inimalist
and few academics or academic publications would waste article space with a going over of biblical inaccuricies.
Right.
Besides, having an agenda does not necessarily make one untruthful. A website run by atheists is still as susceptible to scrutiny as any other, thus giving them a reason to use actual unedited Biblical quotes. The fact that they have an agenda behind their posting such quotes does not invalidate the source. Besides, I dare anyone not to find an academic source on this, but to find a source from someone without a vested interest in one side or the other. All sources for this will be biased toward one viewpoint or another.
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
By that same rationale a christian running a bible website does not necessarily make him untruthful. Open to scrutiny yes, untruthful? nope.My logic is simple...avoid argument with militant atheists and christians. These people care about been right..not about learning.
Well, I disagree, with a caveat. If someone is not well grounded in what they believe, then using extremist sites can be hazardous. However, they can be enlightening when wanting to know what the extremes are.
I would only agree with that IF the person is indeed "Open minded" which at times is hard to prove. However, over critical individuals are easy to spot...thus raising suspicions for me. There is also of course misconceptions...but these are easy to detect...when people base their judgements on misconceptions THEN there is the risk of extremes. But then again, certain people like to act like A-holes to cover up their pseudo intellect. So, take things with a pinch of salt.
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
I would only agree with that IF the person is indeed "Open minded" which at times is hard to prove. However, over critical individuals are easy to spot...thus raising suspicions for me. There is also of course misconceptions...but these are easy to detect...when people base their judgements on misconceptions THEN there is the risk of extremes. But then again, certain people like to act like A-holes to cover up their pseudo intellect. So, take things with a pinch of salt.
Snap!
😆
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
By that same rationale a christian running a bible website does not necessarily make him untruthful. Open to scrutiny yes, untruthful? nope.
Agreed.
Originally posted by WickedDynamite
My logic is simple...avoid argument with militant atheists and christians. These people care about been right..not about learning.
Not necessarily. I became an ardent atheist because I cared deeply about learning. Once I became one, it didn't negate that interest.
Not every atheist (or atheist website) is about sticking it to Christians. Some are, granted. But sometimes it's just honestly what they believe to be truthful, and their criticisms are a search for that. It happens to be an affront to many peoples' religion, yes. But it is not purely to attack but to present their own position.
Also, perhaps more importantly, you can avoid arguments with the militant types on either side while still listening to their words.
And be careful with the term "open-minded." Most of the time I get accused of not being open minded, it's when I don't believe in something that the accuser does. Being open-minded is about being open to reasonable positions, not fanciful suppositions. And also being open to the possibility that something is bull pucky.
Originally posted by Ordo
There are no innacuracies in the Bible. It is infallible.
Though the Bible cannot hope to be useful or informative on all matters, it does make the reassuring claim that where it is inaccurate, it is at least definitively inaccurate. In cases of major discrepancy it was always reality that's got it wrong.