reply to post by CHA0S
The premise of your post is incorrect and false. The Bible DOES NOT say that the earth is only 6000-10000 years old. There are no ancient texts of
any book in the Bible that claims the age of the earth nor the universe.
The first English translation of the original Hebrew and Greek texts available were created by a group of men at the request of King James. In their
zealous attempt to figure out a time-line of events, they came up with dating system and placed these dates at the top of the pages. Not only that,
but they also altered the order of many of the books in relation to older manuscripts AND created chapters and verse numbers for them.
Your second error is to heap all those claiming to be Christian into one theological heap. Some Christians do believe what you claim. But not all,
and probably not most. I would admit that I have not looked at the breakdown of how many people are in each sect of Christianity lately, however, I
do know the Roman and Greek Orthodox Catholics do not teach the age of the earth and universe.
The Fundamentalist and Evangelical Christians that often post all over the internet and seem to have the need to engage atheists and others in silly
debates, usually belong to Non-Denominational protestant sects.
Just as quantum physics has shown us the likelihood of parallel universes and the idea that our present reality is barely understandable, the Bible
also can be read and described on multiple levels of understanding. The error almost all Christians make is the lack of being able to rightly divide
the Bible into what is literal and what is spiritual. Christians have a big problem with this, and atheists even more so.
All this, and I have not even begun to get into the translation errors and translation choices from Ancient Hebrew and Greek into modern languages.
As an example of "translation choices", it would not be incorrect to translate Genesis 1.2 as "And the earth BECAME void and without form". When
one looks at the ancient Hebrew languages and what scholars know for sure the words that can be translated correctly, the word "create" in 'English
from the Hebrew actually is two different words. One means to create from nothing, another means to mold or reshape just as a sculptor would create a
statue from marble or some other stone...but the sculptor did not create the stone from nothing.
If people would take a look at the Jewish Publication Society's english translation of the Old Testament, they would find that there are many words
and phrases in ancient Jewish texts that scholars do not know the meanings of. The breadth and depth of the language was lost during the Babylonian
Anyone that claims the entire Bible is literal obviously has not studied the Bible. It is written in the New Testament that Jesus made use of
parables to explain a moral or spiritual lesson in the same vein as an Aesop Fable. If the whole Bible is to be understood literally, the parables
Most Christians are unaware of Bullinger's scholarly work on the Figures of Speech utilized throughout the Bible. They are unaware of the acrostics.
They are unaware of the meanings of people's names, the meanings of the cities, towns and other locations. These things all lend to a deeper
understanding and sometimes a different understanding. Most Christians do not even know that the word "Jesus" is a Latin translation of the Hebrew
name that is elsewhere translated as "Joshua" in English, "Ioseus" in Greek.
Then there are the translation problems I mentioned earlier in this post. In addition, anyone that is truly multilingual knows that it is can be
difficult to accurately translate from one language to another. Transliteration often leads to mistranslation and the idea being brought forth can be
lost. Throw into this ancient euphuisms, figures of speech, and slang