The Bible and its fallacies and contradictions

[Paul the Human]

Lol Sorry to shank ya there, Paul!

Yeah. I got my eye on you, Watson. Heh!

[superstarr]

Heh. I also wonder why some people still believe that the story of creation is the way to go. There's just no proof that god had anything to do with creating anything. I know that it's just their belief and that believing only means to think or suppose that something is what it is, but one guy got offended by how science tells of the scientific way of creation: Big Bang, Earth being formed by a large collection of rocks and debris. It was from this one video we watched in my physics class. Lol, he started rambling on about the bible, and how it's the real truth, and I had to make him shut up by explaining some contradictory sayings of the bible. When he just won't admit it, I asked him for the proof. He then said that it was obvious that a great being was at work because the scientific facts were just some bullshiat. Then I asked him "If someone came up to you and said that he was god, you would want proof, right?" He finally shut up. I still think that he went over-board with the whole thing, and still attempts to challenge me with those things. he is now annoying the hel* out of me these past few days.

[Rev. Rye]

Those dates are one crazy monks diversion, which than got added as a side note to some versions of the KJV. Much to the amusement of serious Christians, and adopted as law by stupid creationist halfwits.

The bible's style is one of seemingly contradictory information. Those cheeky middle easterners huh? I love the way you line up a fallacy that turns out to actually not be a fallacy. That happens a lot. I guess that's wishful thinking for you. Perhaps you think believing that bullshit strongly enough will make it true.

Yeah, the Ussher chronology is interesting. According to it, the Great Flood occurred in 2348 BC, over two centuries after the building of the Great Pyramids of Giza, and surprisingly enough, the Egyptian empire managed to get along fine, despite the earth being flooded and there being only eight survivors on earth.

[Ryft]

According to the Bible, the earth is about 9,000 years old.

Please show me where the Bible states this.

According to the Bible, the first two humans were Adam and Eve.

And this is false?

Biblical professionals have come to claim that [Adam and Eve] were alive 4004 BC.

Please explain how a "Biblical professional" being wrong equals the Bible being wrong. (Unless you think the Bible states that the first two humans were alive at 4004 BC, in which case, please show me where the Bible states that.)

According to the New Testament, Jesus was God in some way.

And this is false?

And if [Jesus] is as perfect as many percieve him to be, then he doesn't tell lies.

Did Jesus say the person will always receive the answer they wanted, immediately, and without condition? Please show where.

Praying to God is just nonsense, since you don't ever get an answer.

I would be interested to find out just how much study you've done on what the Bible says about prayer, which never portrays God as a genie lamp we rub using prayer. The "Santa Claus" mentality that your comments appear to indicate about prayer is simply not supported by the biblical texts, which makes me suspect you haven't studied very much at all.

[ARMS]

Some say less than 5,000 years by then the agricultural revolution was well in place.

Genetic Adam and Eve lived millions of years apart, the last common ancestor of all living males, living a few hundred thousand years ago, males do like to compete! Plus there was that genetic bottleneck when that supervolcano went off in Africa.
The ancestor known as genetic eve was about 4 million years ago..

[tackattack]

---

Extremely doubt that the bible was meant to be read and understood literally.

Very few people attempt it. It can only lead to full blown insanity. It can't be taken literally any other way. Most theists will actually tell you that (edit: See, Watson did).

What the extremists do is take specific parts of the bible(s) and interpret them in extreme ways. Sometimes that means taking a verse and/or chapter literally, sometimes it means believing that their interpretation should be forced on everyone else.

---

Full Kudos on this Paul.. I'd just like to point out extremists of either atheism or theism.

@Adam Shaw- Are you speaking of the first genetically male/ female homo sapien Could you be more specific about your topic and to the millions of years between male and female homo spaiens?

[ARMS]

---

Extremely doubt that the bible was meant to be read and understood literally.

Very few people attempt it. It can only lead to full blown insanity. It can't be taken literally any other way. Most theists will actually tell you that (edit: See, Watson did).

What the extremists do is take specific parts of the bible(s) and interpret them in extreme ways. Sometimes that means taking a verse and/or chapter literally, sometimes it means believing that their interpretation should be forced on everyone else.

---

Full Kudos on this Paul.. I'd just like to point out extremists of either atheism or theism.

@Adam Shaw- Are you speaking of the first genetically male/ female homo sapien Could you be more specific about your topic and to the millions of years between male and female homo spaiens?

The first Homo Sapien women lived 4 million years ago, the dawn of our species, the woman that didn't become a Chimp or Bonobo, or die out, is genetic Eve, however the last common ancestor of all men, genetic Adam lived only thousands of years ago. The Y cromosome from this one man millennia ago is in all living males today. There was obviously males living alongside him and before him, but somehow only this one mans descendants are alive today. Could have been to do with the supervolcano in Africa, or perhaps racial wars..

The Adam and Eve story is immoral by biblical standards since it tells us that we are all inbred!
They had two sons did they not, so they had to have had kids with their mother!

[tackattack]

You didn't cite your references, but I'll accept that as the way i is for the purpose of this conv. So how did the eve's populate? So obviously there were other Males for eve to populate with. The fact that the exact genetic marker all males have now wasn't present doesn't mean there wasn't a male opposed to eve at the same time we denote as Adam. I'll have to research the historicity of genetic gender. References would be great.

[Minimalist]

Going back 4 million years puts one into the australopithicus afarensis ( Lucy) range.

Generally the first "species" to get the designation Homo is Homo Habilis about 2.2 million years ago.


The recent announcements from the Neanderthal genome project cast serious doubt on all these "species" designations. Or, we are going to have to dump the idea that a species cannot successfully interbreed with another species.

[ARMS]

Clickme

Found were I read it, got my numbers wrong, but then I did read the article when I was 12!