Article, “Internal Proofs of Bible Authenticity”

[Bible_Student]

Great article, covering many facets!
I think it deserves its own thread:

Internal Proofs of Bible Authenticity | 2001 Commentaries

That is quiet an amazing resume of proofs that evolutionism is misleading people about the true origin of humans and all life.

Thank you very much for sharing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is quiet an amazing resume of proofs that evolutionism is misleading people about the true origin of humans and all life.

Thank you very much for sharing.

You lose a debate when you use unjustified name calling. There is no such thing as "evolutionism". There are only people that understand and follow the scientific evidence. If God is not a liar then the book of Genesis cannot be read literally.

 

[Coder]

Humor:
A scientist told his colleagues that he determined the answer to the question of whether we evolved from the apes.
So they asked him "Well, did we evolve from the apes?!"
He replied "No, not yet."

 

[Hockeycowboy]

That is quiet an amazing resume of proofs that evolutionism is misleading people about the true origin of humans and all life.

Thank you very much for sharing.

You’re welcome.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

That is not so at all. There is a lot of bad "archaeology" that may seem to do that. Every few years you hear of a find that "verifies the Bible" and then those claims disappear as the article is refuted.

Post them.

If anything the opposite has happened.

Post them.

Ask a real archaeologist, that is one that works and publishes in the field about the Exodus. Almost all of them will say that archaeology tells us that it did not happen.

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence.
The government of Egypt has been hindering any searches relating to the Exodus for ages, since the account puts Egypt in a bad light (although it’s been thousands of years.) As for the Red Sea, they don’t allow retrieval of artifacts from the waters, and neither does Saudi Arabia on its eastern side.

Actually, evidence is not absent.
Heard of the Ipuwer document? That is just one piece, of quite a few. The engraving recently discovered by Dr. Titus Kennedy on a temple wall in N. Sudan (once S.Egypt) is another.

“Almost all”, does not a consensus make.

Do you remember a few years back there was a claim about either an asteroid or comet that caused the destruction of Sodom? That only lasted a month or two before it was thoroughly refuted.

Yeah, I agree that was wrong Lol.

Your comment doesn’t refute the Biblical Account. The Bible says nothing of a meteor or asteroid.

You should ask yourself, what did they find? What evidence were these researchers trying to interpret, motivating them to use such a rarely occurring explanation?

It requires a lot of heat to create the caliber of sulfur they’ve found, and that area lacks volcanic activity.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Unanswered questions do not help you. In fact it shows a major flaw in your beliefs.

Yeah, it sure does. But that doesn’t stop you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Post them.

Post them.

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence.
The government of Egypt has been hindering any searches relating to the Exodus, as it makes Egypt look bad (although it’s been thousands of years.) They don’t allow retrieval of artifacts from the Red Sea, and neither does Saudi Arabia on the eastern side.

Actually, evidence is not absent.
Heard of the Ipuwer document? That is just one piece, of quite a few.

“Almost all”, does not a consensus make.

Yeah, I agree that was wrong Lol.

Your comment doesn’t refute the Biblical Account. The Bible says nothing of a meteor or asteroid.

You should ask yourself, what did they find? What evidence were these researchers trying to interpret, motivating them to use such a fantastical explanation?

No need. They have been well discussed before. If you did not get them then you will not get them now.

And please note. I never said that the Bible is always wrong. It is only wrong quite often. The Bible account was refuted a long long time ago. If you want to make demands you have a duty that you need to satisfy. You need to learn the basics of science and the concept of evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeah, it sure does. But that doesn’t stop you.

What? You seem to have gotten that backwards again.

 

[Audie]

Well, I certainly don't want to be impolite, I am sorry about that. Science can observe and find patterns etc. but not fully explain. Agree?

That your response has zero relevance to what I said
probably explains a lot.

 

[Audie]

Post them.

Post them.

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence.
The government of Egypt has been hindering any searches relating to the Exodus for ages, since the account puts Egypt in a bad light (although it’s been thousands of years.) As for the Red Sea, they don’t allow retrieval of artifacts from the waters, and neither does Saudi Arabia on its eastern side.

Actually, evidence is not absent.
Heard of the Ipuwer document? That is just one piece, of quite a few. The engraving recently discovered by Dr. Titus Kennedy on a temple wall in N. Sudan (once S.Egypt) is another.

“Almost all”, does not a consensus make.

Yeah, I agree that was wrong Lol.

Your comment doesn’t refute the Biblical Account. The Bible says nothing of a meteor or asteroid.

You should ask yourself, what did they find? What evidence were these researchers trying to interpret, motivating them to use such a rarely occurring explanation?

It requires a lot of heat to create the caliber of sulfur they’ve found, and that area lacks volcanic activity.

Your "absence of evidence" thing is so
shallow and trite.

But maybe you'd be content, in 3rd world
court, charged with capital crime, if the
prosecution offered no evidence.
Judge and jury agree thats no reason not to
hang you.

Amusng and so revealing too is your
inadvertantly demonstrating how intellectual
dishonesty is a centerpiece of your worldview.

Look only at what does confirm your views.
We've seen this throughout your posts.


You even tossed in that others hinder, obstruct, and are
the scientificaly dishonest ones.

Ron Wyatt also used that " they won't let us look" gambit.


Sulfur doesn't come in calibers. Those must be terrif
researchers who use such terms. Ron Wyatt?

Show us a real research paper on this " caliber" of
sulfur.

 

[Audie]

We have "authentic" "proofs" including actual times and places in Roman empire of:

• Belief in "gods" and "sons of gods"
• Temples to the "gods"
• Emperors called "divine" and "divi filius"
• Roman destruction of Jewish Temple
• Then Roman destruction of temples upon new religion

I don't believe in Greco-Roman "gods". I believe in one God.

None of that proves / disproves anything about
reality of god(s).
It's just more of your so- typical irrelevance.

If you want to believe something, terrif for you.

Pretending to have " proofs" for the 100% unevidenceced
is dishonest and serves only to discredit all it touches.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Archaeology has consistently verified [the Bible] is reliable.

Howdy, Hockeycowboy.

Sometimes archeology supports a specific biblical claim, and sometimes it doesn't. That doesn't imply (much less verify) that scripture is reliable.

Furthermore, other scientific disciplines have shown multiple instances in which it is in error, although maybe not to you.

I don't recall a single believer saying that the scripture contains errors. Disagreement with science is called something else, like allegory.

Where do you get your (mis)information? All you have to do, is find an unbiased, reliable stele or relic that refutes a Biblical Event.

That's not the sole criterion involved in deciding scriptural reliability.

“Yom” (Hebrew word for ‘day’) isn’t limited to a literal 24-hr.-day meaning.

I think that that is what the Bible writers believed and meant. The six days of creation were considered literal days, which is why each contains an evening and a morning, and why the seventh day is imitated with the Sabbath, which is also one astronomical day.

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence.

The absence of expected evidence is evidence of absence. Modus tollens in logic refers to the idea that if P implies Q (if P happened, Q would be evidence of that) so that if Q if is not the case, nether is P. The absence of Q, the expective evidence, argues against P.

“Almost all”, does not a consensus make.

Consensus is general agreement and does not require unanimity.

 

[Audie]

That is quiet an amazing resume of proofs that evolutionism is misleading people about the true origin of humans and all life.

Thank you very much for sharing.

Some day- maybe- you will understand
that it's impossible to simultaneously be a
well informed creationist and intellectually honest.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I think that that is what the Bible writers believed and meant. The six days of creation were considered literal days…

See, I don’t think so, because on Day 6, too much was going on! And as Adam was engaged in his assignment, ie., giving the animals their names (arbitrarily? I doubt it), Jehovah said at Genesis 2:18, ““It is not good for the man to continue to be alone.” (After 1 day? I doubt that, too.)
And then, after Eve was created, Adam says, “This is now (as in finally, or as many translations say, “at last”), bone of my bone….”

Again, indicating some time had gone by.

And furthermore, the Seventh Day was not written as having an end …. the Apostle Paul in Hebrews 4, spoke of God’s rest day (quoting Genesis) as continuing into his day (over 4,000 yrs. later)!

…which is why each contains an evening and a morning,

But that isn’t the Jewish day! Their 24-hr day does not end in the morning.

The absence of expected evidence is evidence of absence. Modus tollens in logic refers to the idea that if P implies Q (if P happened, Q would be evidence of that) so that if Q if is not the case, nether is P. The absence of Q, the expective evidence, argues against P.

Ok, youre applying this to the Flood, right? The problem is, it was a controlled event. Did God want the vegetation destroyed? That would have worked against Noah & his offspring… that was food, they would have died off. Some things we shouldn’t expect, from reasoning on the account.



But there is much resultant evidence, i believe.

You know I’m not a YEC, the Grand Canyon’s strata were laid down over millions of years.
But the Flood cut through those layers & removed the over 1,000 cu.mi. volume that’s missing.

The creation of the vast Buttes and Mesas in the western US. (What happened to the surrounding land?)

I could go on.

Consensus is general agreement and does not require unanimity.

Ok, I made a wrong comment. My apologies. Thanks for your kind correction.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence.

That is shallow at best. See, for example, the Wikipedia entry.

 

[blü 2]

Great article, covering many facets!
I think it deserves its own thread:

Internal Proofs of Bible Authenticity | 2001 Commentaries

Statements like this ─

Further, experts have dated the engraving to around the time of the death of Ahmose I, who lived right in the middle of the period we estimate for the Exodus. Indeed, several things (not just that) lead us to conclude that Ahmose I was indeed the pharaoh of the Exodus. For example, there even seems to be records of the Hebrew population living in Egypt during that very same time period. For a more in-depth discussion, please see our commentary, Who was Pharaoh during the Exodus?.

The point is this: there is no lack of evidence. The problem is that many secular and religious authorities deliberately ignore it. Why?

Secular historians ignore it because they don’t want to be seen supporting the Bible.

Atheists ignore it because they wish to discredit the Bible for their own personal reasons.​

are highly destructive of the authors' credibility.

If they have evidence for (to stay with this example) an actual captivity and an actual Exodus, let them submit that evidence to historical criticism, and see if it withstands informed scrutiny. And let them submit their work for publication in respected journals of ancient history, not just among their friends.

 

[Audie]

See, I don’t think so, because on Day 6, too much was going on! And as Adam was engaged in his assignment, ie., giving the animals their names (arbitrarily? I doubt it), Jehovah said at Genesis 2:18, ““It is not good for the man to continue to be alone.” (After 1 day? I doubt that, too.)
And then, after Eve was created, Adam says, “This is now (as in finally, or as many translations say, “at last”), bone of my bone….”

Again, indicating some time had gone by.

And furthermore, the Seventh Day was not written as having an end …. the Apostle Paul in Hebrews 4, spoke of God’s rest day (quoting Genesis) as continuing into his day (over 4,000 yrs. later)!

But that isn’t the Jewish day! Their 24-hr day does not end in the morning.

Ok, youre applying this to the Flood, right? The problem is, it was a controlled event. Did God want the vegetation destroyed? That would have worked against Noah & his offspring… that was food, they would have died off. Some things we shouldn’t expect, from reasoning on the account.



But there is much resultant evidence, i believe.

You know I’m not a YEC, the Grand Canyon’s strata were laid down over millions of years.
But the Flood cut through those layers & removed the over 1,000 cu.mi. volume that’s missing.

The creation of the vast Buttes and Mesas in the western US. (What happened to the surrounding land?)

I could go on.

Ok, I made a wrong comment. My apologies. Thanks for your kind correction.

"I could go on" making up nonsense.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

that isn’t the Jewish day! Their 24-hr day does not end in the morning.

The scripture doesn't say that the six days of creation and the day of rest ended with mornings, just that they contained one.

the Seventh Day was not written as having an end

Neither was yesterday. But it ended.

it's impossible to be a well informed and intellectually honest creationist.

Agreed provided that we're talking about an intact creationist, by which I mean one who believes that a deity constructed the word in an original form that included structure, like both the young earth creationist and the old earth creationist who believes that the earth was fashioned de novo and intact sometime in the past. Those people are at odds with modern science.

As I was thinking about your comment, I considered another type of creationist, which I call a latent creationist, such as the deist, which god is described as creating the seed that unfolded on its own according to inherent physical laws which it determined following a Big Bang and disappearing from its creation before that expansion began. Is that not also a creator god, and those who believe in such a thing also creationists (supernaturalists), but not in conflict with science?

The deist is still guessing that the Big Bang was designed and intended by an intelligent designer, but otherwise could be as informed and intellectually honest as any naturalist. We could call such a person a latent creationist rather than an intact creationist.

 

[Audie]

Statements like this ─

Further, experts have dated the engraving to around the time of the death of Ahmose I, who lived right in the middle of the period we estimate for the Exodus. Indeed, several things (not just that) lead us to conclude that Ahmose I was indeed the pharaoh of the Exodus. For example, there even seems to be records of the Hebrew population living in Egypt during that very same time period. For a more in-depth discussion, please see our commentary, Who was Pharaoh during the Exodus?.​

​

The point is this: there is no lack of evidence. The problem is that many secular and religious authorities deliberately ignore it. Why?​

​

Secular historians ignore it because they don’t want to be seen supporting the Bible.​

​

Atheists ignore it because they wish to discredit the Bible for their own personal reasons.​

are highly destructive of the authors' credibility.

If they have evidence for (to stay with this example) an actual captivity and an actual Exodus, let them submit that evidence to historical criticism, and see if it withstands informed scrutiny. And let them submit their work for publication in respected journals of ancient history, not just among their friends.

Oh, you know, the WWCOSSTDG* will mock them
and refuse to publish.

* world wide conspiracy of satanic scientists to deny god

 

[Audie]

The scripture doesn't say that the six days of creation and the day of rest ended with mornings, just that they contained one.

Neither was yesterday. But it ended.

Agreed provided that we're talking about an intact creationist, by which I mean one who believes that a deity constructed the word in an original form that included structure, like both the young earth creationist and the old earth creationist who believes that the earth was fashioned de novo and intact sometime in the past. Those people are at odds with modern science.

As I was thinking about your comment, I considered another type of creationist, which I call a latent creationist, such as the deist, which god is described as creating the seed that unfolded on its own according to inherent physical laws which it determined following a Big Bang and disappearing from its creation before that expansion began. Is that not also a creator god, and those who believe in such a thing also creationists (supernaturalists), but not in conflict with science?

The deist is still guessing that the Big Bang was designed and intended by an intelligent designer, but otherwise could be as informed and intellectually honest as any naturalist. We could call such a person a latent creationist rather than an intact creationist.

"Intact" meaning without integrity.
Odd use of the word but sure.
That's the essential difference.