50,000 Errors in the Bible...Is Bible God's Word??

@Krumple,

Well, I guess I do have a question. Why do you think that the statement about building a tower to the heavens is literal?

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Krumple
I thought a bit more about what you said about the tower builders and thought that this background might help in making clear what is meant regarding their building a tower to the heavens.

In Biblical archeology the history of tower building goes back to the time shortly after the Flood when men on the Plains of Shinar declared: “Come on! Let us build ourselves a city and also a tower with its top in the heavens.” (Ge 11:2-4) That tower is thought to have been styled along the oblique pyramid lines of the religious ziggurats discovered in that part of the earth.—See BABEL; ARCHAEOLOGY(Babylonia).

0 Replies

@anthony1312002,

anthony1312002 wrote:

Well, I guess I do have a question. Why do you think that the statement about building a tower to the heavens is literal?

Here is my take on the story.

They built the tower and it collapsed. Confused as to why they assumed it was the wrath of god to explain why it collapsed. What they didn't know was the failing of the materials being used. Certain materials can only withstand so much strain before they fail. They were not aware of this fact, instead assumed it was god's wrath. That was the only way they could explain it, like everything else in nature they didn't understand. They just assumed god when they couldn't explain it.

1 Reply

I'd be willing to bet that early hominids had at least rudimentary languages by the time they left Africa.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

It was Og of Olduvai who invented REBAR

1 Reply

@farmerman,

The first engineer?

1 Reply

@FBM,

I heard he had a PE (professional ngineer) after his name OG O' OLDUVAI PE

I dont know how tough the licensing tests were back then.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

It probably had something to do with making a club to beat the other test-takers over the head with. He was the first to do it with iron, maybe. Ta-da. Rebar.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

neologist wrote:

But that was not the point. The object of the builders was to avoid submission to heavenly authoriy, one command of which was to spread over the earth.

Krumple wrote:

It still doesn't make any sense to destroy the tower. For one an all knowing god would have previously known that his authority would not be followed so reacting after the fact is idiotic.

Knowing that the people would fail
Knowing that the tower would fail

To get upset is nothing less than childish. It is as if you knew that neither would happen. It doesn't make any sense if you are the creator of the universe to behave like that. How can you expect your creation to ultimately 100% follow a set of arbitrary rules? When you give them the ability to not? Statistics alone would reveal that there will always be a certain % that wouldn't. A god would have to understand this. To get upset by it would just be silly.

The bibles portrayal of god is not consistent with a divine being or some being with superior intellect.

As I said. The tower was not the primary issue. Heavenly sovereignty was (and still is, BTW) the issue. Ancient mythological stories often relate ideas that the heavens exerted too much authority over earth. One ancient tribe recalls a time where the heavens were so close, people could not walk upright. And, what do you think of the myth of Atlas, who labored to keep the heavens in their place?
Of course, the mythology makes no logical sense. But it underscores the ages long struggle of mankind to set their own standards apart from Godly interference. The confusion of language did not destroy the tower.It simply caused the builders to disperse.

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

neologist wrote:
But that was not the point. The object of the builders was to avoid submission to heavenly authoriy, one command of which was to spread over the earth.
Krumple wrote:
It still doesn't make any sense to destroy the tower. For one an all knowing god would have previously known that his authority would not be followed so reacting after the fact is idiotic.

Knowing that the people would fail
Knowing that the tower would fail

To get upset is nothing less than childish. It is as if you knew that neither would happen. It doesn't make any sense if you are the creator of the universe to behave like that. How can you expect your creation to ultimately 100% follow a set of arbitrary rules? When you give them the ability to not? Statistics alone would reveal that there will always be a certain % that wouldn't. A god would have to understand this. To get upset by it would just be silly.

The bibles portrayal of god is not consistent with a divine being or some being with superior intellect.
As I said. The tower was not the primary issue. Heavenly sovereignty was (and still is, BTW) the issue. Ancient mythological stories often relate ideas that the heavens exerted too much authority over earth. One ancient tribe recalls a time where the heavens were so close, people could not walk upright. And, what do you think of the myth of Atlas, who labored to keep the heavens in their place?
Of course, the mythology makes no logical sense. But it underscores the ages long struggle of mankind to set their own standards apart from Godly interference. The confusion of language did not destroy the tower.It simply caused the builders to disperse.

You have only dodged around the point. Why would they disperse in the first place?

Okay so a tribe wants to construct a majestic city and construct a power to serve as a symbol of their accomplishments. Why would their language all of a sudden change over night? Even if it wasn't over night just how long would it have taken? If it took ten years or more than the biblical account doesn't make any sense in the terms of telling a story. If it is less than ten years then what brought it on? They didn't think it odd at all?

"Hey last year I use to be able to understand you but now I can't. I guess I will leave this wonderful city because I can no longer understand what anyone is saying."

Your point about humanity wanting to reduce the influences of religious ideology doesn't make sense as a motivation either. It only serves as an indirect way of saying god got involved because he didn't like that people were trying to separate themselves from his enforced guidance.

Here is the thing. The bible is so vague that many interpretations can arise which leaves the stories completely valueless. If you say to me that I am misunderstanding the story then WHAT good is a story if I can't understand it in simple terms? Why must it be convoluted? Surely if a god was behind the construction of the bible as a means to provide some guidance surely it should be easier to comprehend or understand without the constant need to connect arbitrary dots for it to make sense.

There is a great example of the simplicity of a doctrine. Within Buddhism many of the sutras are so easy to comprehend they go straight to the core without all this useless fat of, "what does it mean?" The Buddha spoke on some really deep concepts as well but had a very simplistic way of explaining them. He even goes into subjects that don't exist in any other religion and still can explain them that it doesn't require any overly arbitrary mental gymnastics to understand.

It is clear to me that the bible actually was only an attempt to explain aspects of society that didn't have a clear explanation. They just made up a story to explain why there are multiple languages and this is where the story of babel comes from. It has no real theological value, but this doesn't stop theists from attempting to implant their own. Because the details are so vague it allows them to implant these ideas.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Krumple wrote:

...
It is clear to me that the bible actually was only an attempt to explain aspects of society that didn't have a clear explanation...

Don't forget the political mind control bit. Wink

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Krumple wrote:

...
It is clear to me that the bible actually was only an attempt to explain aspects of society that didn't have a clear explanation...

Don't forget the political mind control bit.

Yeah of course. I have addressed this before. It makes sense if you are a growing tribe and want this tribe to function constructively to put for rules for it's members to follow. The problem is if a man hands another man a set of rules he has a choice, he can challenge them or accept them. If he challenges them then you already fail at creating a system where people have decided to work together.

If people are constantly challenging the rules then nothing gets done and there will be a lot of infighting among the members. However; if you are a clever leader you will invoke a deity. If it was a god who handed down the rules then it becomes increasing difficult to challenge the rules. Who do you go after to challenge them? Are you going to fight a god? And humans are superstitious by nature so it is easy to trick people into believing that natural events were caused by an angry god who doesn't like that you are challenging the rules.

Just look at modern society we still have these things creeping in. Any time there is a major natural disaster, who invokes the wrath of god? God caused the hurricane because he doesn't like that he is being forced out of schools or because people are accepting gay rights to marry. Ect, ect, ect. They completely ignore all the data that these natural occurrences have a perfectly reasonable explanation that doesn't require a god's wrath to explain.

Even within the Biblical accounts you can see this process unfolding. With Abraham going up the mountain to receive the ten commandments. If god was all knowing he would have known that by the time Abraham got back to the people he was going to just destroy the tablets anyways. So what would be the point in going through the whole thing? It is clear the bible is trying to send the message that people should just obey the laws of Abraham period. To do otherwise will bring on the wrath of Yahweh.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

It is kind of perplexing that they say on the one hand that everything happens according to their god's will/divine plan, but at the same time claim that it gave us free will. And when people pray, they're asking their god to change its divine plan just for their sake. If you believe in the putative divine plan, why bother praying for that god to do something special for you? It's either already in the plan or it ain't. Too many conundrums there.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

It is kind of perplexing that they say on the one hand that everything happens according to their god's will/divine plan, but at the same time claim that it gave us free will. And when people pray, they're asking their god to change its divine plan just for their sake. If you believe in the putative divine plan, why bother praying for that god to do something special for you? It's either already in the plan or it ain't. Too many conundrums there.

Yeah the conflicting views happen because the believers want two aspects. The bible promotes the idea that you can petition god to change some outcome. It says multiple times that if two or more believers ask for something it will be done. Or if you have faith and request something it will happen. But at the same time they need a way to explain why bad things happen to good people. The only way to do this is by claiming god has some plan for everyone's life. That nothing is up to chance or random, god willfully has everything sorted out. So when bad things happen to good people there was some underline good reason for it.

It's odd though because if prayer actually worked why don't these believers unite to get rid of the really big things effecting humanity? Why is it only small petty things like paying a bill, getting a new job, or healing some illness? Why not go for the bigger picture? Pray for something useful for all of humanity instead of these insignificant things that only impact them personally?

I remember seeing a youtube video a few years back. This young girl was claiming she needed a way to pay for college and was worried that she won't be able to but she kept praying to jesus and magically a check arrived in the mail for her to pay for her tuition. I was like that's great, Jesus will pay for your college but won't feed starving children in the US. A believer never really looks at the consequences of their statements when they talk about prayer.

I always get a laugh when ever I see a news report when there is a tornado that caused a lot of destruction. The survivors will say they thank god their are alive and they prayed to Jesus for security. Meanwhile there are families who were probably doing the same but instead they died. It's a slap in the face to those who lost their lives by saying those things. This video just makes it even more interesting.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Quote:

if two or more believers ask for something it will be done.

A: My friend and I would like to take out a loan for $1 million.
Loan officer: Fine. What do you have as collateral?
A: Well, we're both going to pray, you see.
LO: Oh! Well, no problem then! I'll get the paperwork started.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Quote:
if two or more believers ask for something it will be done.

A: My friend and I would like to take out a loan for $1 million.
Loan officer: Fine. What do you have as collateral?
A: Well, we're both going to pray, you see.
LO: Oh! Well, no problem then! I'll get the paperwork started.

This must have been what they were doing in Greece the last couple of years.

0 Replies

Name 1 error in the Bible right now, and I will clarify it for you. There are zero.
List your misconceptions.

3 Replies

@GorDie,

GorDie wrote:

Name 1 error in the Bible right now, and I will clarify it for you. There are zero.
List your misconceptions.

I am not even sure if I should take you up on this. If it was anyone else on this forum I would but I'm pretty sure it is a waste of time. You are either a troll or you have your head buried in a hole that anything said you are completely blinded to.

Here is one of the many aspects and errors in the bible. The multiple accounts of the resurrection. There are five major stories about the resurrection but all of them get the details different. If the event actually took place why would the witnesses get the details wrong or inconsistent? How can you say there were X many people present but every X number is different? If you actually were there to witness it, you wouldn't get it so inconsistent.

It is like if a house is burning down in your neighborhood and the next day you decide to record the event but four other people do the same thing. One of you said it was a two story house, but the rest of the people said it was single story. Then another person claims it was a red house but everyone else said it was a different color. Then everyone gets the occupants wrong. One person states the house belonged to a single elderly man. Another person claims it belong to a young couple and another person says the house was abandoned and no one lived there. Finally one person records that there was one body found in the ashes and everyone else says no one was injured and no body was found.

How can you get so many details inconsistent if you are claiming to be an eye witness? There are five accounts of the resurrection but all the details between the five are not consistent.

But why are the details consistent? Isn't the resurrection the important detail in the story? Isn't the resurrection the consistent part of the story? Sure but since no one got the other details consistent it calls into question the validity of the actual event.

It proves one thing. These stories were not eye witness events. They were fables told and retold and circulated and then finally recorded. But in the mean time as the story was spread around the details got jumbled, some details were added or omitted. But so what? So people got some details wrong, who cares right? Well if the bible is suppose to be a divine work it should be consistent.

Also between the gospels the time of the actual resurrection is NOT even consistent. One will claim it happened before passover, another will say it happened on the passover and another will say it happened the day after the passover. How can it be all three? Which one is the correct one? If one person recording the event got the details wrong, why were they not corrected?

It shows the books were assembled at different times, in different locations with different understanding of the events. It makes the entire event less likely to have occurred. If they couldn't be consistent then how can you even believe the event took place at all?

It would be much more believable if the data was consistent. It would be a miracle of sorts to have five separate records which each got the details exactly the same. This is how it should be if a divine hand was involved.

2 Replies

@Krumple,

And of course, as you pointed out earlier, there is that story about "Abraham" going up the mountain to get the Ten Commandments!

Right?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

And of course, as you pointed out earlier, there is that story about "Abraham" going up the mountain to get the Ten Commandments!

Right?

I'm not sure what you are trying to spur me on here. But I like the story of Abraham going up the mountain. It is so convoluted of a story. Abraham leads a group of people and then goes up the mountain a lone (suspect). Can't bring an eye witness with you when you are about to visit with god. Has a little discussion with god and the first set of commandments were made. WHAT? The first set? We don't even know what was on this first set because as he returned to the people he saw they were worshiping a golden calf and got upset and destroyed the tablets.

I find this interesting that he would do such a thing. But it calls into question motivation for creating a second set and if you look at the very first commandment, not to have other gods. Hmm how convenient that this all of a sudden appears as a rule. Perhaps it wasn't in the first set and Abraham realized his first set wasn't good enough and needed to be reworked, so he destroyed them.

The other funny thing is, how long was he gone up the mountain? I know humans are fickle with beliefs but I can't buy that he was only gone a day or two before they started worshiping a golden calf and had one constructed. It surely should have taken time to collect the materials to build the alter.

It would also make sense if Abraham was gone a long time. They assume that he isn't coming back, that he died or abandoned them which is why they took up a new faith.

Also if Abraham was only gone a day or two it doesn't really make sense that he would destroy the tablets however; if he was gone for much longer it means he had more investment in his intentions to trick the people into believing god handed down these rules. This would make things more tense for him. Being gone so long only to discover that the people were following a pagan god in his absence. He would regret being gone so long as well as upset that they were so fickle.

It gives him motivation to revise the old list and come up with a new one. Suspect because the first five of the ten deal directly with god. Now why would these rules need to be so central? It is clear he was trying to empower them, but how come he didn't go back up the mountain to create the second set? Didn't he need god to verify them? If god was not necessary to verify them, why would he need to go up the first time?

It's clear he was trying to trick the people who clearly needed a set of guidelines and clearly him asking them to do something would never be good enough unless the commands were empowered by a deity. But unless people invest in the deity the rules don't work either, which is why the first five commands empower the deity who can then empower the latter five commands.

1 Reply

50,000 Errors in the Bible...Is Bible God's Word??

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know