The Bible Code

[Ruteger]

I want one person here to give me an example of ANY Old Testament account that had been dis-proven by archaeology. Just give me one. I dare you. EVERY archaeological discovery has always proven the OT accounts to be factual.

[Ben Shockley]

I want one person here to give me an example of ANY Old Testament account that had been dis-proven by archaeology. Just give me one. I dare you.

"Proving" or "disproving" religious accounts isn't the purpose nor a realistic goal of empirical science, nor will it be even if you "triple dog dare."

EVERY archaeological discovery has always proven the OT accounts to be factual.

They occasionally prove that there were settlements or battles or whatever at certain named locations.   So what?   Even at that, they seem to show that the biblical writers mixed up a lot of stuff and botched a lot of details.
They don't and can't prove that a big, psychotic, bearded Bedouin Chief In The Sky caused anything to happen or had any direct hand in anything, which I think is sort of the point of a Bronze-Age tribal "religious document."

[onan]

EVERY archaeological discovery has always proven the OT accounts to be factual.

No, no it hasn't not by a long shot.

[BobGrau]

I want one person here to give me an example of ANY Old Testament account that had been dis-proven by archaeology. Just give me one. I dare you. EVERY archaeological discovery has always proven the OT accounts to be factual.

What, like... Adam and Eve? 'Let there be light'? Making the earth in seven days? Gods, angels, hybrids?  :

I'm guessing you mean more the geo-political stuff, names of pharoahs and dynastys etc. But you did dare.

[Rasputin]

I want one person here to give me an example of ANY Old Testament account that had been dis-proven by archaeology. Just give me one. I dare you. EVERY archaeological discovery has always proven the OT accounts to be factual.

Adam and Eve. Its impossible for 7 billion people to be decended from just two people. I also find it hard to believe that one of their boys went off and married another women...where did she come from?

The so called Bible code is interesting, but total bullshit. I suppose you think that someday "they" will try and give us the mark of the beast too.

[The General]

Adam and Eve. Its impossible for 7 billion people to be decended from just two people.

I got no dog in this fight, but sure it is.  Whether by creation or evolution, it has to begin with a few individuals at least. 

[Rasputin]

A few individuals maybe, but not two. It does not explain the variations between Homo Sapiens such as dark skin, different hair ect.

[The General]

A few individuals maybe, but not two. It does not explain the variations between Homo Sapiens such as dark skin, different hair ect.

Oh, actually I watched a great series on that if you're interested.  According to this documentary, we all looked the same at first and then as we spread across the globe we took on different characteristics from DNA mutations and different environmental influences...

Called "The Incredible Human Journey" with Dr. Alice Roberts
BBC - The Incredible Human Journey -1 of 5 -Out of Africa_arc.avi

[Ben Shockley]

A few individuals maybe, but not two. It does not explain the variations between Homo Sapiens such as dark skin, different hair ect.

That's a lot easier to explain when we remember that those Mesopotamians who came up with the "Garden of Eden" business knew nothing about different races.   Just like "all humanity descended from 3 Semitic brothers within the last 4,000 years."  WOW!
The Bible and associated texts might not tell us much about "Creation," but they're a revealing snapshot of the culture(s) that created them.

[Ben Shockley]

...we all looked the same at first and then as we spread across the globe we took on different characteristics from DNA mutations and different environmental influences...

Obviously.  But not within as short a time span as anything like the Bible decrees.
Not to mention all the human artifacts that are a lot older than the Bible even says the Earth is, but I know the counter to that one -- "the devil created all those bones and cave paintings etc. to test your faith!"

[The General]

Obviously.  But not within as short a time span as anything like the Bible decrees.
Not to mention all the human artifacts that are a lot older than the Bible even says the Earth is, but I know the counter to that one -- "the devil created all those bones and cave paintings etc. to test your faith!"

Well, personally, I don't doubt creationism OR evolution.  Obviously evolution is real, we have the evidence.  But as a person that believes in a Creator, I don't find evolution and creationism to be mutually exclusive.  I don't take the Bible literally.  Evolution was just the method employed by the Creator.  Just my humble opinion. 

[Ben Shockley]

...I don't find evolution and creationism to be mutually exclusive.  I don't take the Bible literally...  Just my humble opinion.

I can dig it.
Here's an anecdote about someone not so ~ open-minded.
I "taught" college for some time, some years ago.   One day after class, not too far into a lower-level course in one of the social sciences, a young woman approached me to tell me how concerned she was that my lecture on theoretical modeling hadn't included or addressed God.
I was in there trying to talk about an empirical social science and this chick seriously thought I should be modeling the influence of God.
So, bending over backwards to be nice to someone who probably shouldn't have even been there wasting my and her time, I actually showed her how, if she really wanted, she could include intangibles like "God" in a theoretical model.
I guess it wasn't enough for her.   She never came back, and she dropped the class.   Apparently, she thought that that class, and presumably every college class, should have just been pure gospelizing. 

How 'bout that?     Why even go to college, right?   Just go to church; it's a lot cheaper, and you won't be bothered by any pesky new facts or perspectives.   Yet that chick and others like her get to vote and operate heavy machinery.    THAT scares me.

[Zircon]

Well, personally, I don't doubt creationism OR evolution.  Obviously evolution is real, we have the evidence.  But as a person that believes in a Creator, I don't find evolution and creationism to be mutually exclusive.  I don't take the Bible literally.  Evolution was just the method employed by the Creator.  Just my humble opinion. 

I happen to agree with your statement where evolution and creationism may be the same thing. After all, whose time scale are we referencing? If time is a meaningless restriction to a creator as one who has always been and will always be, then a billion years as we humans understand such a staggering stretch of time may very well be but a single day to a divine creator.

The problem with evangelicals and literal Bible thumper folks is they think a day to God is a limited to the 24 hour (plus a tad bit more) day we currently experience. During the earlier days when dinosaurs roamed the earth a day was but 18 hours long. Scientists can verify this and that is good enough for me. Also Lead (Pb) is one of the final decay products of Uranium (U) and Uranium's half life is a very, very long stretch of time so these "literalists" insistance that we're but 6,000 years old is clear nonsense.

Over millions of years the sun has grown larger and hotter as it continues to fuse hydrogen into helium via the proton-chain process. Our planet is rotating more slowly. One day we'll be in a tidal lock but that is slated for billions of years from now long after our galaxy has already collided with the Andromeda galaxy and disfigured/splayed both galaxies orderly arms.

I don't adhere to the idea that Adam was created out of a lump of clay and Adam's rib led to Eve explanations. It is symbolic in that Adam is of this earth. Relegating Eve to a part of Adam had to be included to place women in a lesser, subjugated role by those who wrote the Bible handed down by men in an oral tradition. I also do not discount the notion that "God" might have been an actual physical being. Obviously he was never known personally by those who wrote the Bible. It is a conflicted belief because it would nullify all religions. As a moral code, religious doctrine is a very good thing. Because religion was actually founded by humankind it will be flawed and abused as perfection can't be created by imperfect beings. Perhaps all of it is true. We'll all find out as our time to leave this life arrives.

We now tinker in genetic engineering. Who is to say that we're not the finished product so to speak resulting from genetic engineering? Nephelim (sp?) and Elohim? Sons of God took human women as wives ... all might be poetic license or might be fact. These capabilities would appear to be "divine" to us back then. Who knows?

Hell Jericho was inhabited 9.200 years ago and this temple they found recently is even older than that. Ruins in the South American Andes range is dated to approx. 15,000 BC.

All peoples speak of a flood. Well, the last Ice Age ended about 11,000 BC. If one considers Jericho and many excavations in Turkey, Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East it should then come as no surprise that gatherings of people and the reintroduction of agriculture and eventually civilizations occurred not too long afterwards.

So much information and so many examples. Seeking knowledge is great. That and artistic expression make us human. We should be happy about that.

[ziznak]

Ok so I downloaded a biblecode prog and did the search we all have on our minds... I searched for the words "Noory" and "Loser" in the book of Ezekiel.  This is a screenshot of the program results. 

There's a further step as well where you can view each matrix for the results and it shows you both words in different colors as well as their relation to each other.  I'm gonna have some fun with this.

[Ben Shockley]

Ok so I downloaded a biblecode prog and did the search we all have on our minds... I searched for the words "Noory" and "Loser" in the book of Ezekiel.  This is a screenshot of the program results.

Okay, someone please tell me that the program translates all search terms into ancient Hebrew before it does the search.   Then tell me about how the experts translated and programmed every possible modern word, of all languages, into ancient Hebrew, so that the program wouldn't constantly be giving "unable to process"-type messages.
No?  Neither of those?   You mean the program just searches for whatever words you enter, regardless of language?   So much for the 0.0000000001% credibility that the "Bible code" concept had.


I only mentioned "ancient Hebrew" because from what I had heard, only the Old Testament is where the "code" supposedly works.   If it's supposed to work in the New Testament too, well-- then you have to bring in the complications of translating into Greek, Latin, whatever else.  Making it all that much less likely

[ziznak]

All English and only "Old Testament."  No disclaimers as well.  I can predict that the next Harold Camping is out there clicking away already.  I'm thinking up all of the funny little Christmas cards I can make with it.

[Ruteger]

Onan,


Hmm....we all know what "Onanism" is right?   We are all guilty of that sin - at least the Men are...


Still, your response is not a response.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


You haven't given me a

No, no it hasn't not by a long shot.

[Ruteger]

Harold Camping is a fool and and a false prophet. Show me one legitimate Bible scholar that agrees with him


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All English and only "Old Testament."  No disclaimers as well.  I can predict that the next Harold Camping is out there clicking away already.  I'm thinking up all of the funny little Christmas cards I can make with it.

[Rasputin]

The Bible code just said Obama will win in November.

[onan]

Onan,


Hmm....we all know what "Onanism" is right?   We are all guilty of that sin - at least the Men are...


Still, your response is not a response.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


You haven't given me a

OK, I am not going to give a history lesson here. I am not going to attempt to dissuade anyone from their beliefs.

That being said it is real easy to take a cursory look at archeological digs and make speculative statements. Even easier with the desire to believe rather than really learn something. I don't know what evangelical mouthpiece first made the statement that the bible is proven by archeology but it isn't. Is there evidience to point to historical sites? hell yeah, but not so much for snakes from staves. Just because there are pyramids doesn't mean Isrealites actually fled from there. Archeologists are pretty sure the actual exodus is more story than fact. Was there some basis in fact? yes but not to the extent your bible tells you. Do some real research read a few books written by archeologists.

The bible is too full of contradictions and flat out incorrect information. Some of it trivial some of it more compelling. When people spout that the bible told them, it shows a definite lack of critical thought.
And I have said before... oh hell if you wanna think I jerk off to piss off god I am ok with that.

[Harmness]

I once went to work for a guy who raised registered cattle.  He'd done so for over 40 years at the time.  The whole reason I went there was to learn how to do AI, embryo transfer, I really wanted to learn from this guy.  And he was a pretty good teacher, and he really knew his stuff, could talk with complete fluency about genetics, phenotypes and genotypes, alleles and genetic expression and put it into practice every day.  But when this man, who had practiced Artificial Selection his entire life, heard the word "evolution," his eyes would roll back in his head, spittle would fly from his mouth and he would deliver a fire-and-brimstone sermon worthy of William Jennings Bryan, completely denying that such nonsense could possibly be true.  He truly believed the earth to be 6000 years old.

When I started this post I think I had some sort of trite point to make about the human mind being able to believe damn near anything, but I misplaced said point somewhere along the way. 

I ain't getting no younger.

[analog kid]

I want one person here to give me an example of ANY Old Testament account that had been dis-proven by archaeology. Just give me one. I dare you. EVERY archaeological discovery has always proven the OT accounts to be factual.

If you believe the Noah's Arc fable is at all feasible in any way, shape or form, then you're not too familiar with archeology or science in general.

Not OT related, but according to science, this is the correct ethnicity and facial structure of Jesus, going by his birth place and skulls found there.

[ziznak]

LOL looks like your regular ol run of the mill allah snackbarist... what no suicide jacket?

[Rasputin]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[b_dubb]

i believe Darwin had the equivalent of a PhD in Divinity.  i'm too lazy to check wiki right now

[Ruteger]

Still. Not one iota of refutation from any of you Wizards of Smart. Give me ONE example where the OT said this king ruled when/where, or this historical event happened when/where and archaeology has disproved it. I DARE you.


I hear crickets...


60+books written over a span of thousands of years yet they never disprove/contradict each other.



FACT is, the OT is 100% reliable.

[Ruteger]

Big whoop - so did Satan.

New International Version (©1984)You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder.

[/size][/font]

i believe Darwin had the equivalent of a PhD in Divinity.  i'm too lazy to check wiki right now

[RealCool Daddio]

I want one person here to give me an example of ANY Old Testament account that had been dis-proven by archaeology. Just give me one. I dare you. EVERY archaeological discovery has always proven the OT accounts to be factual.

The Great Flood.  Never happened.  Satisfied?


Need proof?  There is enough water in Earths atmosphere to cover the planet in about 1 inch of water.  The old testament says that Mount Arrarat, approximately 17,000 feet in height, was submerged.  Where did the water go? How did it escape Earth's atmosphere?  Where is the fossil record for the mass extinctions it caused?

[ziznak]

The Great Flood.  Never happened.  Satisfied?


Need proof?  There is enough water in Earths atmosphere to cover the planet in about 1 inch of water.  The old testament says that Mount Arrarat, approximately 17,000 feet in height, was submerged.  Where did the water go? How did it escape Earth's atmosphere?  Where is the fossil record for the mass extinctions it caused?

Well, it's my understanding that the "great" flood did actually happen but it wasn't as great as it is written in the bible.  It was probly much more localized and through time the story just got stretched. 

Rutger's claim of 100% is amusing.  So Ezekiels "wheel within a wheel" ufo story is all true and proven?  How about Noahs grand-pappy Methuselah? when you say 100% you mean like... just some of the battles and shit right?

[onan]

some things speak for themselves.

The bible is an amalgamation of stories from older cultures. the flood is from the Babylonian myth of Gilgamesh. But what the hell?

The bible in historical accuracy is similar to the nightly sports cast. Reporter gives details about last nights glorious battle. Accuracy in hindsight isn't that amazing. The bible was written long after the story of the Israelites.

Do an academic search for the Moses story. Heck I am not a biblical scholar. I know the story is sketchy. Rutegar gets it wrong with the constitution and he gets it wrong here too.

Pointing to archaeological evidence of an historical site is only evidence that there was a specific place. Not to the characters that supposedly lived there and even less to any evidence of any divine being.

There is no consensus to be had though, no matter what is provided as proof will be refuted... I curse myself to have spent the time I did writing this.