“To All of Those Taking Religion Literally”

Van

It has been asserted: "Likewise, both Abraham and Isaac are said to spend time in the land of the Philistines with King Abimelech, but there were no Philistines in Canaan until the 10th century."

Many scholars assume since there is a lack of extra-biblical evidence for the Philistines prior to the 10th century, that the references are anachronistic (added later).
But the lack of supporting evidence does not indicate the Bible has been altered. A small group among the "Sea People" might not be mentioned. And there is evidence for traders, sea people in the time frame. We should keep digging and not assume the Bible is unreliable.

[This message has been edited by Van (edited 02-04-2003).]

dole · Tadpole Joined: 02 Feb 2003 Posts: 27

Moses was a mere human.
But he was in the presence of God when he went up on the mountain and received the law. He came back glowing and wore a veil on his head so the Israelites wouldn't get too scared. Saying tht God couldn't have had him write it down is a fallacy. The whole Bible is inspired by God. The Bible is the Word of God. Just because certain people don't want to believe certain parts and dismiss them as impossible doesn't mean we are given the right to label chapters as mere parables. Jesus used parables for many different reasons. When he did, it said so. Jesus spoke to them in parables saying... Introductions like that. In fact, the Good Samaritan story is quite possibly a real story because Jesus began it different than most of his stories. The point is, the Bible is incredibly accurate considering it was written by over 40 authors over 1000 thousand years. As long as there are people who don't want to believe, people will point to something.

Van

Jim S, You continue to assert the camels were added but without basis. Moses compiled Genesis around 1450 BC. Some things have been added or changed but the effect is insignificant, the bible is sufficently accurate for God's purpose and is reliable. 2Timothy 3:16.

Nobby

quote:
Originally posted by rv581:
[quote]Some people are really stupid.

If you think that I'm "stupid" for believing sovereign Word of God! Thank You!
God made ever thing that you see. The "story of Noah" as you labeled it would have been impossible without the help of God. We can't just pick out the parts of the Bible we want to believe. The call the rest of it impossible. As far as Jesus's parables, they
are only found in the New Testament!
As far as I know they didn't use parables in the Old Testament. There were many that prophesied of things to come! They told of the coming of Jesus years before He came!

quote
Quote:

The story of Noah is absurd to the point of being laughable.

I wonder if it was laughable to those that drowned in the flood!

quote
Quote:

Noah, at several hundred-years-old, managed to round up all the animals on earth

He didn't God did!
As far as water as food Noah's family & the animals, God provides! He would not have gathered them all together on the ark to let them die! Now would He? You're just looking at the situation with the eyes & knowledge of a human being, not the power & knowledge of God!

quote
Quote:

which is physically impossible,

quote
Quote:

There simply wasn't enough manpower aboard the ark for this fable to have a realistic shot at working.

I agree. Man power couldn't have done it!

quote
Quote:

I know… it must have been another one of those “miracles” I’ve heard so much about

Again you're right!

No where in my Bible can I find all these horrible things you have mentioned that the terroist have done, in the name of my Lord.
The Lord tells to watch out for false teachings.
Nobby

[This message has been edited by Nobby (edited 02-04-2003).]

Van

It is one thing to accept the real possiblity that copiest may have added to or altered the text to help make it clear (in their misguided view) to their generation.
It is another to assert that Moses did not compile the first 11 chapters of Genesis.
I think it is possible that Moses, acting under the guidance of the Holy Spirit used both oral and written information to put down the accounts prior to his life time.

Listen again to the Words of Jesus: For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote of Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words? John 5:46-47

Van

It was asserted: "And there are also many references in Genesis to the camel, yet camels were unknown in the Middle East as beasts of burden until about the 10th century."

The short answer is Albright got it wrong.
A domesticated camel (GAM MAL) is mentioned on a 18th century BC cuneiform from Alalah in North Syria. Lambert says the Camel is in Old Babylonian text from Ugarit circ 19th century BC. There is a picture of a kneeling camel (rejected by Albright who again was wrong) from Byblos circ 19th century BC. We have a camel jaw dated prior to 1500 BC from a tomb in Tell el Fara. We have a camel skull dated in the period of 2000 BC to 1400 BC from Egypt.

To repeat, Albright was wrong. Yes the donkey was the primary beast of burden but that does not mean it was exclusive. Genesis does not indicate that camels were the primary beast of burden either.