Is Bible chronology true?

by Fisherman 57 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Fisherman

  cofty, my fine feathered friend. That is not proof:

  Multiple lines of evidence

  You mean interpretation of evidence which is not the same as the evidence.

  prove beyond ALL doubt

  Disagree with your belief. There is reasonable doubt. Also, using preponderance as the standard, there isn’t enough evidence to convince. By definition, proof means enough evidence. Also, interpretation is not evidence. For example, in the CE book, wt challenges the dating method.

  as risible as flat earth.

  Nah. A flat earth is debunked with empirical evidence.

  scientific evidence on this many times.

  No you haven’t. (Although, I do enjoy your posts and your personality.) You often confuse evidence, proof, interpretation, conclusion, argument, theory, and your personal belief: what you feel should be sequitur.

  That is not proof. Myself and many others are not convinced.
  
  
  
• 

  BluesBrother

  The Bible does not really provide chronology, only in certain cases where it states a time period for something.

  Nowhere does it say that Adam was formed around 4000 years before Christ came. It does give ages of some people and age when they produced a child, but was that intended to be a complete record of mankind ? Are the numerologists reading more into it than they should?
• 

  smiddy3

  The Bible was written by people who were brought up with religious beliefs mainly handed down from their parents ,primarily Israelite / Jewish people .

  And as a people they were welcome to their beliefs just as any other body of people were.

  And they just like us are imperfect and can have their own biases .

  No GOD had a hand in writing the Bible ,and no GOD has endorsed the Bible as his word.
• 

  Jeffro

  Fisherman:

  According to JW interpretation of Bible chronology, the earliest human, Adam, came into existence some 6,048 years ago compared to scientific dating of human fossils believed to be much older.

  JW interpretation isn't consistent with Bible chronology, so that would be a different question to the one implied by the thread title. Bible chronology, which is wrong anyway, would place the creation of Adam in 4168 BCE, not 4026 BCE as asserted by JWs. (The discrepancy is primarily a result of omitting 213 years from the period between Abraham and the fictional Exodus by starting 430 years from fictitious Abraham's 75th year, inserting 48 years into the Divided Kingdom period because of their incorrect interpretation of Ezekiel's 390 years, and inserting 20 years into the Neo-Babylonian period because of their numerological superstitions about 1914, along with some additional minor errors introduced by not recognising that the relevant ancient societies counted ages ordinally starting from the first year.) Back in reality, we know that various human societies definitely predated the Bible's creation myth by many thousands of years.
  

  Since Jesus validated the creation of Adam and Eve as historical people and JC’s own lineage is traced all the way back to Adam, Bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.

  Special pleading. There's no evidence Jesus said anything attributed to him, or that he did not consider Adam and Eve to be allegorical characters, but if he believed that Adam and Eve were literal people, then he was just wrong. The spurious and contradictory 'genealogies' of Jesus conveniently appeared only after Jerusalem and its temple was destroyed.
  
• 

  markweatherill

  

  cofty13 hours ago

  To claim that the human race only goes back 6,000 years is every bit as risible as flat earth.
  

  JWs should be challenged on why they don't believe the earth is flat. It seems inconsistent of them.
• 

  cofty

  Myself and many others are not convinced

  But I don't care. I'm not the one trying to sell BS.

  Study the books or don't - your choice.
  
  
• 

  cofty

  JWs should be challenged on why they don't believe the earth is flat. It seems inconsistent of them

  I agree. The bible presents a flat earth cosmology. Why do they reject it?
  
  
• 

  smiddy3

  The bible presents a flat earth cosmology.

  I have never heard of this before ,can someone elaborate this for me ?
  
  
• 

  TonusOH

  Smiddy, the idea is based on verses that can be interpreted either way, but there are no definitive statements in the Bible that state that the Earth is flat. For example, it is described as a circle at least once, but it is also described as having corners. It is described as having foundations and not moving, but also as being hung upon nothing.

  Certainly, you can get the impression that it was thought of as a flat plain with a clear dome stretched over it and serving as the sky, where the sun, moon, and stars were displayed. But I don't think there is any one verse (or group of verses) that settles the matter one way or another.
• 

  TonusOH

  I'm more interested to know if the concept of Bible chronology has been defined in a way that all Christian denominations agree upon, or if they have reached agreement on parameters for its use. If it is used differently by anyone who relies on it, then it's unreliable by definition. Is there a set of guidelines that all organizations use? Does any organization publish any sort of guidelines?