Bible wrong about camels
- This topic has 6 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Research has confirmed that biblical tales about camels in ancient times cannot be true:
This report is interesting also as an unconscious matter-of-fact application of the materialist conception of history to biblical times.
We already knew that the bible is a concoction of later stories, but this is more ammunition to use the next time a couple of Jehovah's Witnesess knock at your door (and you open it).
Although some people thought he shouldn't do it, Bill Nye (The science Guy) debated Ken Hamm of the Creation Museum.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6kgvhG3AkIPersonally I think it's a worthwhile thing for people to see how weak this guy's case is: it shows how debate is always something to be encouraged. It also helps keep ideas focussed, even if bopping down whackos…
i watched the debate (suffering the 15 minute countdown to it ) and was disappointed to find Nye rather ineffective in certain areas.Several times, Ham took liberties with the Bible as his authority and Nye could only respond that he was not a theologian and did not challenge what was written in a book (actually a compilation of scores of books) that has been 'translated into American English' which Nye repeated several times.If the source of a person's case is what is said in the Bible, it is that which should exposed as unreliable evidence. As you link to, the Bible is full of errors. Nye didn't even highlight the breaking of natural laws that Ham liked to be seen agreeing with when it suited about when the sun and moon stood still just to assist in a battle. Surely Nye could have pointed out the physical effect of such an event. Nor did i enjoy Nye's justifications of his own case…we need a scientific approach to maintain America's lead in technology. Nor did he really counter Ham's definition of what science was except to say it was of Ham's own creation.I think the right approach is one of riducule and the Bible is full of ludricous propositions. Nor do we need to resort to unproved speculative scenarios. Taking the Bible literally as the creationist claim to do is suffice.
Did they ever get one through the eye of a needle? I hope not! I wouldn't like to think that I have stayed poor all these years for nothing.
Vin Maratty wrote:Did they ever get one through the eye of a needle?That's a myth too. See how they wriggle here to explain that it didn't mean that a rich person couldn't get to heaven (the conclusion in the last line):http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/camelneedle.htm.
The latest theory on the Turin Shroud as an example of making science fit the theologyhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/turin-shroud-could-earthquake-dating-back-to-time-of-jesus-solve-the-mystery-9123727.html
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.