BIBLE CHALLENGE

In various posts, I have read allegations that the Bible contains inconsistencies, scientific errors, geological errors, geographical errors, and archaeological errors. Now if you were to make allegations in a court of law, you must be able to prove your allegations with evidence. Therefore, I challenge those who have made such allegations to prove their case and state their evidence. My contention is that these errors do not exist in the Bible. Now I serve this as a formal document to those members of this forum who have made such allegations that no such errors exist in the Bible. Since this is an on-line forum, I also put forth that it is proper to shorten the normal time to respond to my contention from thirty days to ten days. I also invoke the legal principle "Silence is Assent". Therefore to those who have made such allegations (Bible errors), I challenge you to state and prove your case. The following Rule of Evidence applies: You must reference the passage in the Bible which contains the error and you must specify the type of error. Merely stating that an error exists will not be considered proof.

How about Job, Chapter 39, where we have a nice discourse on the parenting methods of the common ostrich that the Israelites were familiar with:

39:13
Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich?
39:14
Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust,
39:15
And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them.
39:16
She is hardened against her young ones, as though they were not her's: her labour is in vain without fear;
39:17
Because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath he imparted to her understanding.

Ostriches are not the brightest bird in the bushel, but they don't scoop out nests in the ground, lay eggs, and then wander off like turtles do.

The male scoops out a hollow for the eggs, which are incubated by the females (generally the dominant female) during the day and by the darker colored male at night -- an arrangement that helps to conceal them from foes. After the eggs are hatched, they are cared for by the mother for over a month, at which time the chicks can keep up with running adults.
www.bartleby.com...


More about ostriches NOT abandoning their nests after egglaying:

Ostriches nest in the dry season. The male ostrich makes several shallow scrapes in his territory. The lead female then lays up to 12 eggs over the next 3 weeks. Other females may lay eggs in this same nest, but only the male and lead female will guard and incubate the eggs. The incubation period is six weeks. Despite the constant watch of the male and female, less than 10 percent of the eggs will hatch. Those that do are fully developed when hatched. They are fawn-colored with dark brown spots and a cape of bristly down on the back. By the time they are one year old, they will reach their full height. Ostriches live to be 40 years old or more.

www.thebigzoo.com...

From ostrich breeding sites (who should know their birds' habits):

Peaceful when left alone, ratites become very aggressive when they or their families are threatened. Both parents are active in defending the nest and chicks. Observing a potential enemy, an ostrich father will cause a distraction by "fleeing" in another direction, pretending to be sick or injured. With limp wings he sinks lower and lower to the ground, swaying to and fro in his "struggle" to escape, finally "collapsing." He repeats his act, just beyond reach of the intruder, until satisfied that his charges are safe, whereupon he "recovers" and lightly dashes away. The female ostrich will similarly playact to defend her nest, but if she is already brooding while the male stages confusion, she will stretch out her neck and head on the ground in camouflage with the surrounding scrub and stones. If all these stratagems fail, the male will lash out furiously at the enemy with his deadly, karate-like kicks, large foot and gouging toenail.

www.upc-online.org...

They don't abandon them, they don't damage their own eggs, and they stay to defend the eggs and the young.

The parents keep close watch over the chicks constantly. They will leading them to food (seeds and vegetation), water and they will provide shade for them. Even with the protection of the parents only about 1 chick in 10 will survive its first year of life

www.cstwp.co.uk...


I saw one report on a Christian website that ostrich adults run when confronted by predators, but this is not confirmed on any zoological or professional breeding site.



From an article on an ostrich breeder:

SEQUIM � He's tall and dark, but you wouldn't call him handsome.

Weighing in at 450 pounds, with two prehistoric claws each the size of a Bowie knife, his 9-foot frame covers ground at 40 mph, driven by a brain that's smaller than his eye.

And he gets upset � really upset � when anyone puts the grab on his "significant other's" egg.

John Spoelstra, owner of Cedarfield Farm, says, "He has only one thing on his tiny mind � protect that egg at all costs."

www.clallam.org...


[Edited on 23-5-2003 by Byrd]

(and the concordances say that ostrich=ostrich; it's not a name for another bird or a name that they're guessing means ostrich.)

Are you saying that these passages imply that the Bible states that ostriches abandon their nests? This is part of a poem - but ostriches lay their eggs on the ground, not in nests in trees. On the ground, there is a risk of been crushed yet the ostriches are unmindful of this threat. If one of her chicks dies (apparently most do), the female shows no emotion (as with other animals). Even though the odds of a chick reaching maturity are small, the ostrich continues on because she doesn't understand that the odds are against her (less than 10 per cent hatch). Where does it say that ostriches abandon their nests in these passages?

In the book of Genesis the patriarch Abraham is described as living in �the land of the Philistines� at Beersheba, in what today is southern Israel. According to Genesis 21, Abraham makes a treaty with �Philistine� king Abimelech from nearby Gerar. And as described in Exodus 13:17, the Israelites, while escaping from Egypt, deliberately avoid the route called �the road to the Philistines�. It is as if, both before and during the time of the Exodus, Philistines were already occupying the land we call Israel. Yet, as evident from the biblical books of Judges and Samuel, The Philistines did not begin any serious invasion until some time after the Israelites had already settled in there promised land. Egyptian records provide a most helpful cross-check, since they show the time of the main incursion by the Philistines (referred to as the P-l-s-t, among the so called �sea peoples�), to have been during the reign of Pharaoh Ramesses III(1194-1163 BC), well after any time when the Exodus may actually have occurred.

As expressed by the Christian monk Cosmas in his book Christian Topography in the year 535AD.. based upon a literal reading of the bible he wrote that the earth had no North or South poles and was a flat parallelogram which had a length double its width.
here are a few verses i found:
Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ends of all the earth

Matthew 4:8
8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them

Both of these are impossible since the earth is actually a sphere.

And here the Bible says that the earth revolves around the sun:

"The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises. (From the NIV Bible, Ecclesiastes 1:5)"


this book is actually online.. read it here: (christian monk - literal translation of the bible)
ccat.sas.upenn.edu...


[Edited on 23-5-2003 by quango]

Ummm .... In Genesis it say's there was a world wide flood. Where's the evidence or wich world? Also, major inconsistancy here ... All that water, where'd it come from and where'd it go? Did god poof it in and out of Earth? If that's the case, why doesn't the bible say he just poofed thing's for fun?

Oh oh oh oh ... Adam and Eve ... first two people EVER ... So does this mean science is fully wrong about inbreeding and it IS ok for me to screw my sister or cousin's?

Noah's ark ... landed on ONE mountain top, of which we've been to most if not all ... did the ark disappear or was it the mountain that did that?

The ark of the convenant .... Why did god tell his people to make a giant capacitor anyway's?



religous people

Moses, as a single author of Genesis seems to be quite confused when he does not know the nationality of the people to whom Joseph's brothes sold joseph, who took him down to Egypt. In on version it was the Ishmaelites (Gen. 37:25), and in another it was the Midianites (Gen. 37:28). They are not the same.

Further, in Exodus 20, Exodus 34, and Deuteronomy 5 there seems to be tree versions of the Ten Commandments that cannot be reconciled. To rub more salt in the wound, Moses can't seem to remember which mountian he recived the Commandments. In Exodus it is Mount Sinai and in Deuteronomy it is Horeb. Though some will say that they are the same.



[Edited on 23-5-2003 by Maddas]

[Edited on 23-5-2003 by Maddas]

Well Illmatic presented some good contradictions in the bible in a post a while back. Of course the hardliners wouldn't even listen or try to explain the contradictions. I think the main reason for most of them is the mistranslation over the years.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



[Edited on 23-5-2003 by abstract_alao]

Also if you want to I can post verses that contradict the belief that many "Christians" hold.

Originally posted by jagdflieger
Are you saying that these passages imply that the Bible states that ostriches abandon their nests?

Actually, the verse says it plainly:
39:14 Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust,
39:15 And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them.

If you'll check your blue letter bibles and your concordances, you'll see that this means what it says: the ostrich supposedly lays her eggs and lets them alone, similar to the way reptiles do.

This is part of a poem

Let me repeat your challenge here:
I have read allegations that the Bible contains inconsistencies, scientific errors, geological errors, geographical errors, and archaeological errors. Now if you were to make allegations in a court of law, you must be able to prove your allegations with evidence. Therefore, I challenge those who have made such allegations to prove their case and state their evidence

Your contention, we assume, is that the Bible is completely true, otherwise you'd say "well, heck. I know parts of it must not be interpreted literally. In fact, parts of it are just Jewish legend and folk beliefs and can be as wrong as any of the myths and folk beliefs of the other people of the time." And you'd list the parts of the book that YOU claim are poetry.

NOW -- if you're saying this, then I'm sure we'd all agree that the apparent errors and mistakes and bad science and so forth are just problems with writing down legends as they are remembered (which is how they got locations and so forth wrong) and writing down what passed for "science" in a semi-nomadic, people where many in the tribe were unable to read or write.

I don't think anyone would dispute that at all.

This is part of a poem - but ostriches lay their eggs on the ground, not in nests in trees. On the ground, there is a risk of been crushed yet the ostriches are unmindful of this threat.

Apparently you didn't read the quotes by the ostrich breeders that I placed there for you with proper citations: Weighing in at 450 pounds, with two prehistoric claws each the size of a Bowie knife, his 9-foot frame covers ground at 40 mph, driven by a brain that's smaller than his eye. And he gets upset � really upset � when anyone puts the grab on his "significant other's" egg. John Spoelstra, owner of Cedarfield Farm, says, "He has only one thing on his tiny mind � protect that egg at all costs."

They are quite mindful of the eggs that are theirs (a hen will ignore eggs that are NOT hers, however. But the Bible talks about HER eggs being ignored.)

If one of her chicks dies (apparently most do), the female shows no emotion (as with other animals). Even though the odds of a chick reaching maturity are small, the ostrich continues on because she doesn't understand that the odds are against her (less than 10 per cent hatch).

You're assuming here. You don't breed ostriches, or you'd know the standard nesting behavior and the way that both parents are hyperprotective of eggs (which makes it a challenge for the breeder to get the eggs away from the sitting hen so they can be put in an incubator.)

And you're assuming that birds don't exhibit grief.

Where does it say that ostriches abandon their nests in these passages?

Right here:

Job 39:14 Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust,
Job 39:15 And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them.

And it is not some friend of Job's answering him, but part of God's sermon to Job: Job38:1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,

God preceeds the observations about the ostriches with a lot of other scientific gibberish, including that the Earth is flat and has cornerstones. heavenly storehouses for snow and hail (mentioned elsewhere in the Bible).

But if you're going to call all the mistakes "poetic license" then you have NO case, sir, for your claim that there are no mistakes in the Bible. The defense, arguing that the Bible is outright wrong for whatever reason on a lot of points, wins.




BTW, If you check Bible concordances (I did), MOST of them point out that this is Jewish folklore about ostriches and is, in fact, quite wrong.

so I don't have a Bible handy, but almost any Christian knows that there are several books of the bible, and these were written by different authors, hence they are rife with contradictions.

Even the life of Jesus, the biggest celebrity of the Bible, is constantly contradicting. For example, in one book, he'd only been to Jerusalem once, in another, it was upwards of seven times, etc.

God states that Vanity is one of the deadly sins, yet he himself is the most guilty of it, as he demands that he alone be worshipped.

God is said to be infallable, yet he created a flawed species, and not out of desire for the flaws. Therefore, he is not infallable.

In one verse, God will be described as kind and loving, in another he will be described as promoting the ripping open of pregnant women, and taking of virgins

He commands men to Go Forth and Multiply, yet only those 144, 000 men who have not been intimate with a woman will be saved during the Rapture.

These are just off the top of my head....

there are passages in the gospels that portray Jesus as a narrow-minded, vindictive, and even hypoctitical. Jesus extorted people to love their enemies and to pray for their persectors (Matt.5:44) and never to call others by demeaning or hurtful names (Matt. 5:22), yet he called his enemies a "brood of snakes" (Matt. 12:34), "sons of vipers" (Matt. 23:33), "Blind fools" (Matt23:17), (a s-h-i-t in a wall of bricks (ATS)). He called gentiles "dogs" (Matt. 15:26). He said he had come to set a man against his father and a daughter against her mother (Matt. 10:35). He disownned his own family (Matt. 12:46-50), hardly obeying the commandment to "honor your parents."

He would destroy a herd of pigs and presumably a persons livelihood in order to exorcise a deamon (Mark 5:13)?. He curses a fig tree for not bearing fruit out of season (Matt. 21:18,19)? How divine is the message that says that for your finite failings you will be cast into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 25:30)?

Is eternal punishment the plan of the all-merciful God? Was Jesus mistaken? Is Matthew a reliable source for the teachings and interprations of Jesus.

Both the Old and New Testaments are riddled with contradictions of this sort.

Genesis 24 prominently and persistently features camels in the long story Isaac�s marriage to Rebecca, an event theoretically a long before the Exodus, and therefore some time in the first half of the second millennium BC. Genesis 37:25, also referring to this same time, describes a camel train bringing gum, resin and other commodities from Gilead to Egypt. Yet in the Biblical Near East the Camel was quite unknown as a beast of burden virtually throughout the entire second millennium BC. Cuneiform tablets from Cappadocia and Mari make frequent mention of baggage trains of asses, but never camels. Although the wall paintings in Egyptian tombs teem with every tiniest detail of the way of life four thousand to three thousand years ago, they fail to feature domesticated camels. Not until the time of Solomon, long after the Israelites had indisputably begun to settle in their promised land, was the camel first used as a means of transport.

However there are some contradictions to this view, with claims of a depiction of a load carrying camel from Egypt c.3000B.C. and archaeological evidence from Mari c.5000 B.C, but the general absence of references to the camel in pictorial and literary material seems to indicate late domestication.

Additional reply to Byrd:

Strong's Ref. # 5800
Romanized `azab
Pronounced aw-zab'
a primitive root; to loosen, i.e. relinquish, permit, etc.:
KJV--commit self, fail, forsake, fortify, help, leave (destitute, off), refuse, X surely.

It is still not definite that the ostrich abandons their nests from this passage; however, ostriches do abandon their nests under certain circumstances:www.tektonics.org...

Reply to Maddas:
www.tektonics.org...

''The main issue appears to be that it is merely assumed that this is an anachronism because no one else mentions the Philistines until c. 1200-1190 BC (in this case, the Egyptians, in an inscription; see Trude and Moshe Dothan, Peoples of the Sea, 23), and as is often the case, the Bible is assumed to be in error (rather than being instead the first bona fide mention of the term!)."
"John Wenham remarks in his commentary on Genesis that there is "ample archaeological evidence of Aegean contact with the Levant as early as the third millenium BC" [189]. Hindson confirms this in his work, The Philistines and the Old Testament [15], noting particularly an expansion of Aegean trade in 1900-1700 BC and objects of Aegean origin at Ras Sharma, Hazor, and Megiddo. What we would find here, then, are peoples who would become the Philistines in later years: immigrants from the same place or area, and therefore, in the Israelite view, deserving of the same name."
But I prefer that it is a reference to a people who lived in a certain geographical location (the land of the philistines).





[Edited on 24-5-2003 by jagdflieger]

Reply to Quango:

Cosmas misconceptions are not my problem. Just because some one misread the Bible almost 1500 years ago, doesn't make the source wrong (just that they were wrong).
Daniel 4:11 - a part of Nebuchadnezzar's dream. Dreams are not based entirely on reality. Perhaps in his dream Nebuchadnezzar was high enough to see the entire globe of the world.
Matthew 4:8
This verse in Matthew by no means implies a flat earth, nor a monstrous mountain large enough to oversee the earth. It doesn't specify the mechanism Satan use to show Jesus the nations. It could have been through visions (maybe Satan even have a big projector screen on the moutain.) Also you cannot determine if Satan is doing this physically or through the use of visions.
Ecclesiastes 1:5 - One of songs of Solomon. Allegorical literature. Shakespeare did it, Dylan Thomas did it, every poet who has ever lived did it. So when Solomon did it (write allegorical prose), you get bent out of shape. Read some Shakespeare.
I hate to say but it sure looks like you are "proof texting" here.

alright -

just from genesis 1 and 2

in the beginning god created the heavens and the earth then seperated light and dark - not likely, see Big Bang theory.

God seperated dry land from the water - no.. The earth was too hot to sustain water, it all became clouds, which would later rain down and collect.

From the beginning of the universe to the dawn of man was a little bit longer than 6 days.

Garden of eden - no such place

Tree of Life - no such thing

Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil - no such thing

Eve made from Adam's rib - impossible. Even if god were cloning it would create another adam, not an eve.

TALKING SERPENTS - no such thing.

Moses. That is proof. No Moses lived 900 years. Can one prove me wrong???

No.


End of discussion.


Abe

Well abe the bible itself proves you wrong Moses was 120 when he died. I think you are refering to Noah who lived to be 950 accorrding to the bible.

I expect Jag to quote some far out Hugh Ross crap about a divine radiation barrier. And lack of radiation material and a predominatly vegetarian diet to explain this one.

One of the most undeniably untrustworthy features of the Old Testament is it numbers. Can we really believe that Noah lived for 950 years (Genesis 9:29), or that 3,000 Hebrews were put to death for Dancing around the golden calf (Exodus 32:28). Through out the Old and New Testament certain numbers recur time and again -particularly six, seven, ten, twelve, forty, one thousand.
Each has a certain symbolic meaning. Six being less than perfect since seven is perfection. Ten possibly because there are ten fingers on a pair of human hands, the number ten seems to have been thought representative of human frailty: hence the ten plagues and ten commandments. Perhaps because there are twelve months in the lunar year, the number twelve seem to have also been believed to be prefect, so we have the twelve tribes of Israel and twelve disciples of Jesus. The number forty seems to have been associated with individuals or whole groups being put to the test. Accordingly we find the world flooded for forty days, Moses Obliged to spend forty days on Mount Sinai, the Israelites wandering for forty years, Jesus spending forty nights� in the wilderness.
So the same considerations seem to have applied even to the multiples of such numbers. Was Moses really 120 years old when he died, or did some one attribute that age to him because: 12X10=120, suggests perfection within the limits of human frailty?. Similarly, 1 Kings 6:1�s �Four hundred and eightieth year� from the Exodus to Solomon�s Temple is a multiple of twelve and forty. The Septuagint, the famous third-century translation of the Old Testament into Greek, offers an alternative reading of four hundred and forty years. The 144 000 that will make it into heaven, (12X12)+1000=144 000.

For this task, prove beyond a doubt that the Israelites did infact wander in the wilderness for Forty years and the years you suppose they and reasons.
Who where phrahoahs who confronted first Joseph and secondly Moses.
When did the Exodus happen.
At what time in history did Joshua and the Isrelites take Jericho.
Finally who wrote the Pentateuch.

[Edited on 24-5-2003 by Maddas]