If the bible were truly inspired by God then it should not be inaccurate when dealing with facts even if not understood by bible writers.
Which proves the bible was a book written by men influenced by the intellect of the time
smiddy
Is the Bible Really Scientifically Accurate?
by FreeAtLast1914 126 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
hamilcarr
Leave it to scientists then to be accurate.
Like they were in the global climate hoax?
How can we obtain accurate knowledge if such essential information as the age of the universe is so inaccurately described in the Bible. It could be thousands of years, millions of years, billions of years, that's an incredibly high margin of error, with no equivalent in modern science.
The truth is we have no idea how long one of God's creative "days" really was. It could mean epochs long for all that we know.
According to this statement, the Bible leaves us in complete darkness as to the timeline of our universe.
-
Perry
hamilcar,
How can we obtain "accurate knowledge"
Hamilcarr this sounds so watchtoweresque .... giving me the heebie jeebies with a quiver I cannot tell you how many times I heard the phrase "accurate knowledge" around my house growing up. BTW, why does your account say that you've been a member since Jan of last year? You've been here for many years haven't you?
the age of the universe is so inaccurately described in the Bible.
Where?
Mark,
And calling a man "god" certainly isn't impressive (especially when you're trying to "fulfill" some old text). Jesus probably wasn't the first and certainly wasn't the last to have that distinction.
I think you'll agree that that is not evidence of supernatural foreknowledge.
Maybe not to you. A man called "God" in the Jewish Theology was absolutely UNIQUE. Never happened before or since. You can minimize all you want. It will not change that fact. No Jew was looking for the great "I AM' to make an appearance in the flesh. No one.
If the bible were truly inspired by God then it should not be inaccurate when dealing with facts even if not understood by bible writers.
Smitty,
Where is this inaccuracy ?
-
-
AK - Jeff
No. It is clearly a book of myths. And that book of myths has 'inspired' a few million followers who grasp to believe it.
After all, it started with a TALKING SNAKE for God sake. Men who lived almost 1000 years. Men of war and whoremongers who were praised as annointed of God. A GOD who killed nearly two million men women and children in vengeful, hate filled rage. Talking donkeys. Fire from heaven licking up water . Red Sea parting. Entire cities collapsing due to a few jews walking around it seven times. Evil opposers of God being swallowed up in the earth. Big fish swallowing a man who lived there for three days under the sea. Sandals that did not wear out.
Then viola:
Here comes a meek man named Jesus who is 'in the image of his Father' [what?]. All he has to do is to die and be raised to heaven to save all of mankind. All of whom are still not saved 2000 years later. WHile he was here he did miracles, restored sight, made water into wine, raised the dead. He is supposedly sitting in heaven waiting to reward his faithful who believe the Bible fairy tale, and he will send the evil non-believers either to an eternal burning fire in hell, or just to death because they did not believe the fairy tale that was accorded holy status hundreds of years after he died.
Yep. Totally Scientific and totally believable. How could anyone ever doubt such reasonable writings.
Jeff
-
-
-
-
-
Perry
AK - Jeff said :
And that book of myths has 'inspired' a few million followers who grasp to believe it.
Darwin's False Predictions are universally undisputed. So, why kiss the ape without the blind-fold? Unless a person just likes it.