• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

10 laughably erroneous claims of the bible

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Ah I see, a "properly written prophecy' is actually an acedemac term specific to TitFotTatology.
No, it is merely an attempt to apply rational thought to the irrational. The problem with biblical prophecies is that they fail when deal with honestly. They either fail outright such as the Tyre prophecy, which even owns up to its own failure and then added another failed prophecy or the failure of Jesus to come back while some of those that he spoke to were still alive (unless one believes in the Wandering Jew) to the very vague prophecies of Revelation which people have said were confirmed multiple times and showed that "the end is near" almost since the birth of Christianity.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
This is a good example, where one could say that science got it wrong, if you play the same word game. I know of no human queen who has directly given birth to thousands of her subjects. Why did the atheist scientists call the queen ant a queen, when this ant's reproductive prowess is totally unlike any human queen in recorded history?

The short answer is the term queen ant was used as a descriptive term to help students remember the official biology cataloging, easier. It is was not intended to be taken as a literal parallel to human queens. It is good not to read too much into this.

If you ever watched a locust eat (se below) they use their two smaller front legs, like arms with hands, to grasp their food. Again you are assuming scientific cataloging standards is an objective bottom line, and therefore locust eat with their front legs and feet, even if the front legs look different and are used like arms. Before humans walked upright, did they eat with the front legs feet or with their arms? There is no real answer, other than using subjective convention.

one-locust-eating-stock-photograph_csp14519699.jpg


Another interesting insect is the praying mantis. This is another insect with four legs and two powerful arms, or six legs, depending on your cataloging POV.

Praying-Mantis-on-hierba-santa.jpg
The term queen as applied to eusocial insects, like, ants, bees, wasps and termites is derived from early naturalist descriptions. I am unsure what you mean by atheist scientists, since most of those early naturalists were theists. Eusocial insects have a complex social structure, but they do not have human social structure or behavior and the queen is not a leader of the colony. Rather she is the sole reproducing unit of a colony. Through her, the entire colony is related. The term probably was derived based on an interpreted comparison to a model that was well recognized by early naturalists who were describing common inhabitants of the natural world.

As I posted recently, all insects have six legs, with no exceptions to that. I think the point of all of this is to show that the Bible is not a modern science text and it demonstrates the limitations of the writers who were using the available knowledge of the time a particular portion was written.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Revelation of John, the original Jewish version ...
historical-jesus.info/rjohn.html
The Jewish original version of Revelation (or Apocalypse) of John, much more coherent than the final one, was written very likely (in Greek) late 70 or 71 C.E. in Syrian Antioch by a temple of Jerusalem ex-priest named John. This work offered an explanation for the holocaust of 70 C.E., with the destruction of Jerusalem & its temple, all of that at the hands of the Romans, and also a badly needed hope for the …
Uh, yes, it was written in Greek, Koine Greek. It was written on Patmos, as the author states. From the very beginning it is obviously written by a Christian, as the author states, ẗhe vision took place on ¨ the Lords day¨ Christian identification of sunday, the day of Worship. Jews never used this term, it was unique to Christians. There are many other ternms used unique to Christians alone.

As the author states, it is about the end of time, not about the end of the temple. John knew Christ had said the temple would be destroyed, so it was no surprise to him,

If this alleged Jewish version exists, what are the dates for the extant copies of it ?

I know the dates for the extant copies and scraps of papyrus scrolls of the original and I will virtually guarantee the alleged ¨Jewish version¨ was written after the true Christian Book.
 

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
It is obvious that Leviticus 11:20-23 is not saying that insects have four legs but is a blanket term for things that walk on the ground, we know this because Hebrew has a more precise word for four legged beasts: BEHEMA! English has several words and phrase like the term used in Lev. 11:20-23 such as "jackpot" which means a soldier's pot, now when we say "I hit the jackpot" does that mean you are striking a soldier's cooking utensil?

This thread is dumbing the entire board up. We are all going to need to go back to English 101.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
The term queen as applied to eusocial insects, like, ants, bees, wasps and termites is derived from early naturalist descriptions. I am unsure what you mean by atheist scientists, since most of those early naturalists were theists. Eusocial insects have a complex social structure, but they do not have human social structure or behavior and the queen is not a leader of the colony. Rather she is the sole reproducing unit of a colony. Through her, the entire colony is related. The term probably was derived based on an interpreted comparison to a model that was well recognized by early naturalists who were describing common inhabitants of the natural world.

As I posted recently, all insects have six legs, with no exceptions to that. I think the point of all of this is to show that the Bible is not a modern science text and it demonstrates the limitations of the writers who were using the available knowledge of the time a particular portion was written.
Correct, but it is important to know that insect is an English word substituted for a Hebrew word. Further, our English word, according to how we classify animals means creatures with six legs and a body of head, thorax, and abdomen. They did not necessarily use the same classifications.

As explained to me by someone versed in Biblical Hebrew, They classified flying animals with feathers in one group, and all other flying animals in another group, translated as insects. Most notably this group contained bats, which are unclean.

I could be wrong, I neither speak or read Hebrew, but this is my understanding.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
I

I ran your OP through 4 different plagiarism checkers and all of them suggest that there is significant plagiarism in your post. What do you have to say about that in your defense?

Uh, gee, maybe that's because I directly quoted many verses from a book called the Bible, which happens to be found on various websites.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Uh, yes, it was written in Greek, Koine Greek. It was written on Patmos, as the author states. From the very beginning it is obviously written by a Christian, as the author states, ẗhe vision took place on ¨ the Lords day¨ Christian identification of sunday, the day of Worship. Jews never used this term, it was unique to Christians. There are many other ternms used unique to Christians alone.

As the author states, it is about the end of time, not about the end of the temple. John knew Christ had said the temple would be destroyed, so it was no surprise to him,

If this alleged Jewish version exists, what are the dates for the extant copies of it ?

I know the dates for the extant copies and scraps of papyrus scrolls of the original and I will virtually guarantee the alleged ¨Jewish version¨ was written after the true Christian Book.

Apocalyptic literature was very popular for about 300 years. Why do you think John of Patmos was a Christian?

"The great day of the LORD is near;
It is near and hastens quickly ...
There the mighty men shall cry out.
That day is a day of wrath,
A day of trouble and distress,
A day of devastation and desolation ..."
Zephaniah 1:14-15 (written 6th century B.C.E.)
 
Last edited:

sooda

Veteran Member
"The Book of Daniel was written during the persecutions of Israel by the Syrian king Antiochus Epiphanes." (Jewish Encyclopedia)

It has been mentioned that 'Revelation' is the result of Christian additions on a thoroughly Jewish text:
- "the main [part of the] apocalypse [of John] actually belongs to Jewish apocalyptic literature." (Jewish Encyclopedia)
- "... German scholar Vischer .. holds the Apocalypse to have been originally a purely Jewish composition ... we think, it cannot be objected to ... The Apocalypse abounds in passages which bear no specific Christian character but, on the contrary, show a decidedly Jewish complexion." (Catholic Encyclopedia)
I never saw any detailed reconstruction of the original Jewish Revelation. Well, this is just what I attempted, carefully sorting out the Christian parts. What is left had to be written by a non-Christian, definitively a Jew, for obvious reasons that I will explain within the text.

Daniel and Revelation, critical study on their dating, prophecies & mysteries
 

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
Uh, gee, maybe that's because I directly quoted many verses from a book called the Bible, which happens to be found on various websites.
It connected your "Original" Posting directly to a specific website not necessarily connected to any online Bible study tool but a website that debunks the Bible. Now admit it, you were reading similar list like yours on another website and felt inspired to use some of their material. And I am not buying that you yourself made an extensive study of the Bible all on your lonesome and discover these "errors" on your own. These list of "errors" have been collected and used over and over again many times, you can even find list exactly yours in this forum. I really don't think you made any sort of effort to read the Bible yourself.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
1:1 (NKJV) The Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave Him to show His servants--things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John,

Notes:
a) But in the Christian version, the first "revelation" (the seven letters) to John is not from an angel, but from Jesus Christ himself (according to 1:17-3:22, "He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore" (1:18, also 2:8) and "Son of God" (2:18, also 2:27,3:5,21)).
Furthermore, in the Christian letters (about admonitions rather than prophecy), there is no hint that any "revelation" here was initially delivered from God to Christ.


Revelation of John, the original Jewish version. Apocalypse composition, dating & authorship
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
It connected your "Original" Posting directly to a specific website not necessarily connected to any online Bible study tool but a website that debunks the Bible. Now admit it, you were reading similar list like yours on another website and felt inspired to use some of their material. And I am not buying that you yourself made an extensive study of the Bible all on your lonesome and discover these "errors" on your own. These list of "errors" have been collected and used over and over again many times, you can even find list exactly yours in this forum. I really don't think you made any sort of effort to read the Bible yourself.

I pasted some verses from a Christian site, some from an atheist site, some directly from biblegateway.com. Of course others have compiled similar lists of verses. You, like several others, are just making a pathetic attempt to change the subject since you know the verses contain errors. How they were discovered is irrelevant. They are erroneous regardless.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Sometimes things are hard to understand because the symbolism is complex.
Sometime, things are hard understand because the author is babbling.

I am glad you appreciate the fact my posts are full of complex symbolism that might be hard to understand. That alone takes you one step closer to realizing i am always correct.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
All insects have six legs. There are no exceptions. The front legs of many species have evolved with modifications adapting them to different lifestyles, but that does not change the genetic and developmental origin of those appendages as legs.
The only thing I would add, so as to forestall any objection, is that we're talking about adult forms of insects. Sometimes various forms of larvae such as caterpillars, which have additional prolegs, are thought to be an exception.

.
 
Last edited:

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
How they were discovered is irrelevant
How they were discovered is very relevant because you were trying to imply that YOU made a thorough investigation of the Bible and that YOU were some sort of authority and therefore YOU could determine whether or not these are actual errors or mere figures of speech because YOU have knowledge of the Bible.

But the simple facts are YOU don't know what YOU are talking about.

So tell me, Mr. Bible Scholar how do you know these are not merely figures of speech? YOU should know.
 

Road Warrior

Seeking the middle path..
Posts that shift the subject from the bible to me and their speculations about the flaws in my personality deserve ridicule.
Now you're just shifting position again since that's not what you said the first time.

Mature adults will stick to a point of view unless facts presented change their mind then they admit the change.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
How they were discovered is very relevant because you were trying to imply that YOU made a thorough investigation of the Bible and that YOU were some sort of authority and therefore YOU could determine whether or not these are actual errors or mere figures of speech because YOU have knowledge of the Bible.

But the simple facts are YOU don't know what YOU are talking about.

So tell me, Mr. Bible Scholar how do you know these are not merely figures of speech? YOU should know.

How do you know the existence of Jesus wasn't just a "figure of speech?" The only reason you're dismissing the verses as figurative is because they're so obviously wrong.
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
I have been telling people for ages: I am always correct, if for some odd reason you think I am not then you are just not interpreting me metaphorically enough.

And once again, Koldo goes on a campaign to wage war against a point that nobody made. :D

I am glad you appreciate the fact my posts are full of complex symbolism that might be hard to understand. That alone takes you one step closer to realizing i am always correct.

Hey man, when your parents take you to a restaurant, do you press your face against the window and make faces at the people passing by?
 
Last edited:

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
No, it is merely an attempt to apply rational thought to the irrational.

Making up your own terms based on standards that most educated people would consider unrealistic and then expecting everyone to accept the term and it's implied standards is an attempt to "apply rational thought to the irrational"?

The problem with biblical prophecies is that they fail when deal with honestly. They either fail outright such as the Tyre prophecy, which even owns up to its own failure and then added another failed prophecy or the failure of Jesus to come back while some of those that he spoke to were still alive (unless one believes in the Wandering Jew) to the very vague prophecies of Revelation which people have said were confirmed multiple times and showed that "the end is near" almost since the birth of Christianity.

Not to mention the fact that most aren't "properly written". :D
 
Top