A) Your point is moot. You’re arguing that your method is better because it works better, within itself, than another system.
All those words are saying this “The Scientific Method is better because the Scientific Method proves it”. You’re 100% right.
B) But at least proves that the whole Bible isn’t wrong even by “your” method and that you might try to lighten up just a notch.
No one has ever said that everything in the Bible is wrong. But, if just one thing, just one minute little detail can be proven wrong, where does that leave you and the inerrant, divinely inspired, perfect “Word of God”?
Lemme guess. No cable?
I totally agree and still believe in Biblical inerrancy.
To be perfectly clear. If just ONE thing that the Bible asserts (as intended by God, the human author, context, audience and literary genre) as true is wrong then the whole Bible is wrong, definitely.
(there is a debate about biblical inerrancy on the SDMD so I’ll leave it there and not hijack this “dinosaur” thread)
No, I don’t believe the Earth was created 6000 years ago nor do I think the Bible says so. (not that I really care when it was created). Nuff said.
If you will take the time to go here, here , here , here , or perhaps here , or my favorite Josh McDowell debunking site, here , and study these sites with true intellectual honesty – then perhaps you will finally understand that your inerrantist position is absolutely indefensible.
Wait, I just opened this trainwreck for the first time, and I’m still stunned by something a few pages ago. The contention that there can be a King James Version of the Bible…in SPANISH or FRENCH! Just sit with that for a minute.
All you have to do is translate the King James Version into spanish, and you’ve got a spanish language King James Version. What with the who there? People don’t really believe this, do they?
I can almost understand the people who believe that the King James Version is a divinely inspired translation of the original text of the Bible. But are there really people who believe that the King James Version supercedes the original text of the Bible, in Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic? That we could just throw away the ancient scrolls, since the KJV is more authoritative than some musty old scraps of parchment? That seriously argues that if English was good enough for Jesus it should be good enough for everyone?
Please tell me it isn’t true.
What can you expect from a site called “infidels.org”? Singing the Akathistos?
I won’t even bother posting webpages debunking your debunkers, we’ll end in a webpage frenzy, we’re deadlocked.
Just for you to know I’ve read several times things like that and “intelectual honesty” is often lacking. (this is not an “Inerrancy forum”)
Can I still hold my inerrant ways?
I guess we’ll have to way till the day we both die to find out. The good thing is that I’ll never know if I was wrong (and nothing happens) and you’ll only know if you were wrong (when you see St. Peter:D )
I won’t talk about inerrancy as a whole here any more, I’ve already done it in another thread.
Who cares about dinosaurs?
They aren’t in the bible and neither are Llamas. if you base your belief (or lack thereof) on that, do so.
Rodrigo,
it’s foolishness to suggest that the scientific method only works “within itself”, which you assert with no backing evidence. What are your examples that show this limitation?
When “science” theorized that splitting the atom would unleash a violent chain reaction, and constructed a bomb dependant on these hypotheses, did it only validate itself within the theoretical confines of the scientific method itself, or did the real-world results in Hiroshima bear out the validity of that theory?
The scientific method explains REAL events and characteristics of the REAL world-- it’s the exact opposite of the pie-in-the-sky system you would place more trust in.
To say that the scientific method can only “validate” itself within a circular reasoning pattern is the absolute height of irony, given what you would replace it with.
The strawman that you create by pointing out that “not EVERYTHING in the bible can be proven false” (using the existance of Athens as an “illustration”) tears down a point that hasn’t been made in this thread.
It’s easy to paint your opposition as not believing simply because dinosaurs, or llamas, aren’t mentioned in the bible – yet no one has made such a claim. The fundamental logic faults, outright contradictions, and falsehoods contained in the bible go a hell of a lot deeper than that, Rodrigo…
Check those websites with an unjaundiced eye…and you’ll see that they aren’t lacking in intellectual honesty as you claim – their only “problem” is that they don’t jive with your 2000 year-old scripture.
Well, I care about dinosaurs.
But, aside from that, there are a few reasons why they are often brought up in discussions of YEC (Young Earth Creationism). First, they are extinct, and by all indications, they have gone extinct loooooong before man ever arrived on the scene. Yet, YECers (most, anyway) will acknowledge that dinosaurs existed, but that, given the time frames involved, they couldn’t have gone extinct prior to Man’s arrival (being that there must have been but a mere matter of days separating the creation of the two). Therefore, they must have co-existed, despite the utter lack of evidence to support this idea. If the Bible can be used to support YEC, it stands to reason that one ought to find reference to something clearly at odds with YEC in such an allegedly Divine, inerrant book to support such a claim that man and dinosaur lived contemporaneously. And yet, such evidence is lacking even there.
Unfortunately, there exists zero evidence for the claim. But there is instead a whole lot of tortured logic which attempts to link fanciful descriptions within the Bible, like those given for Leviathan and Behemoth, to dinosaurs in an attempt to validate YEC.
The “dinosaurs in the Bible” question has more to do with addressing the illogic of YEC than it does with addressing the validity of the Bible in general. Llamas and muskrats and mooses may not be mentioned within, either, but they do not present the problems to the idea of a very young Earth that dinosaurs do. Of course, one could just as easily substitute any other extinct group, but dinosaurs are well-known and, given the sizes of the largest members, would very likely have had a significant effect on the lives of any humans who allegedly would have co-existed with them.
It’s hard to debate against misconceptions. I am not a Fundamentalist (although I’d rather be one than not believing) and I’m not a YEC—FINCH.
A) You’re still wrong. Science predicted the real-world outcome of splitting the atom using Science, which is based in observable causes and effects. The queston is not wether it works or not. The question is if the system can be validated outside itself, i.e. how do you prove the Scientific Method is right without using the Scientific Method.
I use Science everyday and have no problem with it, I just don’t think it is everything.
B) Can I still believe in my Pie in the Sky? I haven’t convinced you and neither have you, that’s no reason for name-calling (Pie in the Sky is code for Moron).
C) It wasn’t a strawman, I was trying (unsuccessfully) to be ironical with the fact the some people, not you, hold th Bible in such contempt that they won’t even grant the “Athens” thing.
D) If you and I live to be 2000 years old would I be able to hit you with the phrase “2000-year old method”?
I will no longer debate the Scientific method, that’ll be for another thread.
Lighten up everybody!
I did not intend to imply that you were. I was merely commenting on some of the “whys” behind the “dinosaurs in the Bible” question. The people who do posit a connection are, in my experience, YECs.