The Bible - God's word or Man's (Part 2)

by SickofLies 4 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • SickofLies
    SickofLies


    First I want to thank everyone who's e-mailed me or posted links either to other websites or threads in this form dealing with these issues. I am making careful documentation of responces from people on both sides of the fence. Please feel free to contribute no matter how you feel on the subject, if you feel God inspired the bible please to contribute reasons and if possible include scriptures to back up your point of view.

    The creation account in Genesis 1 lists ten major events in this order: (1) a beginning; (2) a primitive earth in darkness and enshrouded in heavy gases and water; (3) light; (4) an expanse or atmosphere; (5) large areas of dry land; (6) land plants; (7) sun, moon, and stars discernible in the expanse, and seasons beginning; (8) sea monsters and flying creatures; (9) wild and tame beasts and mammals; (10) man. The odds of getting that order correct by chance are one in 3,628,800. - Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, p. 37 .

    A common misunderstandint of how Gensis should be read, in any case according to science; the real order is: (1) a beginning; (2) light; (3) sun and stars; (4) primitive earth, moon, and atmosphere; (5) dry land; (6) sea creatures; (7) some land plants; (8) land creatures and more plants and sea creatures; (9) flying creatures (insects) and more plants and land and sea creatures; (10) mammals, and more land and sea animals, insects, and plants; (11) the first birds, (12) fruiting plants (which is what Genesis talks about) and more land, sea, and flying creatures; (13) man and more of the various animals and plants. That is nothing like the order endorsed by Jehova's Witnesses. The odds of choosing that particular order are not one in 3,628,800. Much of the order is constrained. For example, the beginning must have been first, and land had to exist before land animals and plants. When these are taken into account, the chance of getting that order are one in 5,760 at worst.

    The claim contradicts what Genesis says. Genesis does not say when the sun and moon became visible (which would not have been until after eyes were created in any event); it tells when they were created. Genesis also refers to fruiting plants, which came after the first sea and land animals.

    Ancient people thought that the water from rivers flowing into oceans spilled over the ends of the earth. On the other hand, Ecclesiastes 1:7 says, "All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full. To the place the streams come from, there they return again." This shows the Bible's unexpected accuracy. - Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, p. 201-202.

    Accuracy on one point does not show overall accuracy. Job 38:22, for example, says that snow and hail are kept in storehouses. Genesis 2:5-6 contradicts the water cycle. Ecclesiastes 1:7 does not describe the water cycle. It merely says that water returns to the source of streams; it does not say how. It was once believed that the water returned underground. Interpreting that passage literally completely rejects its context. The chapter says, briefly, that "there is nothing new under the sun," and gives several examples. If, in fact, knowledge of the water cycle were interpreted as a new bit of knowledge, it would contradict the chapter as a whole. Attributing a requirement of some special knowledge to account for this verse assumes the ancient Hebrews were idiots. Knowledge of a spherical earth is ancient, and with it no edge for water to spill over. It is theologically reasonable to assume that God is not constantly creating new water (Gen. 2:3). It is easy to see mists rising from waters and rain coming from clouds. A water cycle would be difficult not to deduce.

    Ok, here a very common one: The Bible's internal harmony around a central theme testifies to its divine authorship. It is sixty-six books written over sixteen centuries by some forty different writers of diverse backgrounds, but every part follows the same theme. - Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, p. 215.

    The Bible's harmony can also be attributed to the fact that its contents were selected and edited, by people, to make it harmonious.The Bible is not harmonious on some very important points. For example:

    Many people have noticed the difference between the Old Testament God, who is vengeful and bloodthirsty (e.g., Gen. 6-8; Exod. 7-11) and commands and aids the slaughter of one's enemies (e.g., Exod. 32:27-28; Deut. 3:6; Num. 31:1-18), versus the New Testament God, who preaches peace and commands people to love their enemies. Some parts of the Bible say the sins of the father are inherited by future generations (e.g., Exod. 20:5, Deut. 5:9). Other parts (Ezek. 18) says they are not. Much of the Bible emphasizes the unity of God. Genesis 1, for example, stresses that all of creation came from the same God, not different gods as other contemporary religions taught. However, the New Testament, particularly Revelation, introduces a good/evil dualism akin to Zoroastrianism, which has become particularly common in Christian tradition.

  • Legolas
    Legolas

    http://www.freethought.mbdojo.com/stupidbible.html

    And runningman's threads on Atheist's Book of...are good, and he can email the whole book to you if you want!

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/member/5589/topics/4.ashx

  • DavidChristopher
    DavidChristopher

    The problem again....Is that true to what was foretold...the Bible is full of many words that are easially twisted by men. How else would you expect them to be fooled into making a show of worshiping their mortal enemy? By allowing Himself to be their puppet for 2,000 years...what happens when Bill Gates pops up from the dead, and starts calling the shots again? How are the execs going to greet Him in front of everyone?

    Doesn't anyone else see what happened?

    Or are you "blind"? (Someday I will be able to cure "blind" people I hope.)

  • JCinme
    JCinme

    I responded up at part 1 because I didn't see this. Any responces? I'm curious as to what others have to say.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia
    The creation account in Genesis 1 lists ten major events in this order: (1) a beginning; (2) a primitive earth in darkness and enshrouded in heavy gases and water; (3) light; (4) an expanse or atmosphere; (5) large areas of dry land; (6) land plants; (7) sun, moon, and stars discernible in the expanse, and seasons beginning; (8) sea monsters and flying creatures; (9) wild and tame beasts and mammals; (10) man. The odds of getting that order correct by chance are one in 3,628,800.

    LOL, the odds that a "beginning" would occur at a beginning is one in one.

    And yeah, the Society imposes a sense foreign to the text for (7) in order to avoid the obvious geocentrism and contradiction with the actual order of development. An even bigger flaw in such erroneous computation of "odds" is that the 10 items are not independent of each other but depend on each other in various ways.... (7) must follow (4) [i.e. there must be an expanse for the luminaries to appear in], (6) must follow (5) [i.e. there must be land for land plants], (6) must precede (9) and (10) [i.e. animals and man must eat something], (5) must precede (9) and [i.e. terrestial animals must live on land], etc. It makes no sense to talk about the odds of getting that order "by chance" because much of it is not shaped by chance but is logically dependent on the requirements of its constituent items...

    And where did this allusion to "heavy gases" come from? That's not in the Bible. So why mention it in something that is being compared to what is known through science? Looks like they're staking the deck again....

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit