Contridictions in the Bible

[VanReal]

Man-ofGod vs Evolution, etc.
by Recusant » Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:31 pm

Re: Contridictions in the Bible
 by Man-ofGod » Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:54 pm

Meh.  I tried.

To McQ:  Feel free to delete this post when and if you split the threads.

Hehe, but wait, didn't he agree to get back on topic?  Good try.

Back to contridictions in the bible, which I never debate because I don't know the bible and quite frankly don't want to have scriptures given to me, I guess I am not sure why when people say "but what about the contridictions in the bible" christians don't just answer with "because it was written by men and men are fallible".  No one ever seems to say that god wrote the bible, and I never hear anyone claim that men didn't write it.  Why do they even argue about this then?  It's the account of men and there are tons of studies on how fallible the human mind and memory is when trying to recount events.  On the flip side, non-christians point out contradictions knowing they will be told some excuse or explanation that either makes it not an inconsistency , why it was written that way or what it really means.

[Man-ofGod]

For a neat example of some related species thats intermediates have not died off, and can thus breed with an unbroken chain of living species, but not each other, see Ring Species.

As for the information question, this requires that you understand some information theory as well as some computer language, and how the genome stores information.

Dawkins puts it pretty simply that if you imagine a genome like a computer hard drive, and the same bit information system, then in theory, the storage system has far more potential information than it has information. New genes are generated from genetic mutation, which is a kind of copying error when a gene is being copies.

Basically, how specific bodies are made, and which phenotypes will present themselves is governed by things like natural selection, sexual selection, artificial, luck, and such, but the genes by which these forces can act upon come about quite randomly through mutation, and genetic drift.

With respect to the moderators decision to move thread to science forum, I will respond there. Thanks.

[Man-ofGod]

Man-ofGod vs Evolution, etc.
by Recusant » Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:31 pm

Re: Contridictions in the Bible
 by Man-ofGod » Tue Apr 28, 2009 4:54 pm

Meh.  I tried.

To McQ:  Feel free to delete this post when and if you split the threads.

Hehe, but wait, didn't he agree to get back on topic?  Good try.

Back to contridictions in the bible, which I never debate because I don't know the bible and quite frankly don't want to have scriptures given to me, I guess I am not sure why when people say "but what about the contridictions in the bible" christians don't just answer with "because it was written by men and men are fallible".  No one ever seems to say that god wrote the bible, and I never hear anyone claim that men didn't write it.  Why do they even argue about this then?  It's the account of men and there are tons of studies on how fallible the human mind and memory is when trying to recount events.  On the flip side, non-christians point out contradictions knowing they will be told some excuse or explanation that either makes it not an inconsistency , why it was written that way or what it really means.

Men are fallible, and the Bible is very clear on this point.  In fact the only person who did not sin in all of the Bible is Jesus.  But that is what makes the Bible amazing, thats the miracle, that fallible men wrote infallible documentation.

2 Peter 1:21
for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

The Bible says they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.   But the content itself is evidence of the infallibility of the Bible.

[VanReal]

Men are fallible, and the Bible is very clear on this point.  In fact the only person who did not sin in all of the Bible is Jesus.  But that is what makes the Bible amazing, thats the miracle, that fallible men wrote infallible documentation.

2 Peter 1:21
for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

The Bible says they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.   But the content itself is evidence of the infallibility of the Bible.

I stand corrected.  I didn't realize that the argument was that there are no contradictions or inconsistencies in the bible and that it is indeed infallible.

For you Curio

[PipeBox]

OK, MOG (dunno if you've ever played Final Fantasy games, but, well, I just saw the acronym in you name and decided I had to use it    ), you clearly are asking the tough questions because you don't want to be "mislead" into believing evolution.  That's fine, but the tough questions entail tough answers, and you really have to understand the underlying basics.

Evolution, at its most basic, is just descent, under pressure of natural selection, with modification (mutation).  Don't just read it, understand it.  Now, let's look at DNA.  DNA is "read" (reacts with) by special special proteins, that create more proteins in turn.  The actual process is very complicated, but even creation scientists can observe it if they wish.  Now, if the DNA is altered, the proteins will likely be altered, too.  The vast majority of our DNA is non-coding junk, it has special chemical modifiers that prevent it from being "read", and these unread sections will not produce proteins at all.  Most mutations are harmless and do nothing for this reason.  There are many types of mutations, though: deletions, insertions (new information), frame shifts (I'll explain in a minute), and plain ol' duplications (harmless in most circumstances, but gives an organism more room to be mutated without dying, so while it helps by allowing possible benefits to manifest, it is a benefit in itself as it prevents important stuff from being destroyed).

Natural selection is pretty straightforward.  Everyone, even creationists, can observe natural selection via unnatural selection (selective breeding) used on crops or in breeding dogs or cattle.  If you only breed the tallest corn stalks over many generations, the end result is taller corn.  Do the same for bigger kernels, and then only yellow kernels, and you end up with a far different strain that you see in the wild.  This is done in only a very short time, too, demonstrating how constrained breeding can quickly differentiate things over just a few generations.  As a reminder selective breeding applied to humans is called eugenics, we know, and it isn't necessarily a good thing because it is acting directly against the environment.  That is, we're harming the genepool.  This isn't true only of humans, though, since anything we apply selective breeding to, we do in spite of the environment.  Bananas no longer have seeds, transplantation being the method used to create more trees.  Single viral strains have nearly wiped out the fruit because of this.  A chihuahua without people to feed it is a grossly inadequate dog that will likely parish.   Nonetheless, it's all more proof that selective pressures, environmental or not, can change life forms, and the ethics of selective breeding of other animals we can discuss elsewhere.

Back to genetics in regards to mutations, I'll briefly go over frame shifts and cover duplications in more detail.  The term "deletion" is used whenever an entire gene is wiped out, from stop codon to stop codon (those make the proteins that read DNA stop reading, and define the entirety of the protein produced).  Frame shift, on the other hand, describes the deletion or insertion of single base pairs.   Base pairs are coded for by the reading protein 3 at a time, like this:
ACA GAT CCA GCA GCA ...
Each one results in a different "protein piece," which is actually just another amino acid (those things are handy).  Now, if you add or delete a single base pair, the protein will now read:
CAG ATC CAG CAG CA. ...
or TAC AGA TCC AGC AGC A.. ...
Which, depending on where it falls in a gene, can alter a lot or a little.  If a base pair is added in the last three, almost no difference will occur.  The first three, though, and the resulting protein will be totally different (probably, there are sequences which would be unaffected).  Substitutions may also happen, which doesn't involve adding or subtracting base pairs, just changing one.  Depending on the sequence left behind, a different amino acid may be coded, and the protein may be altered, or nothing may happen.  Keep in mind that if any of this happens in a deactivated portion of the DNA, nothing happens.  And if it happens in a duplicated region of active DNA, then, at the least, the organism is unlikely to die from a lack of something.  Duplications can actually give room for this "new information" to arise, a safe(r) testing ground, in a manner of speaking.

Now, understand that there is no second, uncorruptable, DNA copy for total parity.  There is nothing, natural at least, to guard how much an organism may change over time.  Now, keeping in mind how long it takes these powerful changes to accrue and be selected for, tell me now what makes it impossible for an animal's legs to get a little longer, and its arms a little shorter, and its jaw a little wider.  What is there, then, to prevent it from getting a little less hairy and a little smarter?  And again and again?  Is it really that hard to see, that with a lot of very small changes, things will eventually look totally different?  Let's say you have a screen 1600 X 1200 pixels, and you can only recolor one pixel at a time.  Is there anything that will eventually prevent the screen from being a completely different color?  So, look at our ancestral apes and tell me you still don't see how it could have happened.

97-98% of our DNA matches that of a chimp's.  We have 16 ERVs (endogenous retroviruses, that is, deactivated viral matter present in our genome) that we share with chimps!  We're not telling you this because we want to be primates, we're telling you this because we are primates.  This is confirmed genetically, obviously, but it is also confirmed from the bottom up by examining our traits!  Our physical form is so closely related: same number of teeth (and incisors, canines, premolars, and molars, to boot!), tetrapoidal (possessing 4 limbs), body-wide hair follicles, lungs and heart enclosed inside a ribcage, backbone supporting 12 cranial nerves, skull with dual enclosed eye-sockets and a single temporal fenestra, and so, so much more.  

Demonstrate that evolution is impossible and you can rewrite the science books.  But we're seeing apparent speciation, even now!  Living ring species that can no longer interbreed, bacteria that can digest nylon, a chemical that did not exist 50 years ago!  Even the need to get more flu shots is evidence of viral evolution.  You asked earlier what the benefit of viruses evolving.  The benefit is that they continue to exist, because obviously if they didn't evolve they would cease to exist.  The benefit is theirs, not ours.  Their evolution to suit their environment clearly happens, and evolution just explains how.  If you want to ask why (not how) they might evolve to thwart our vaccines, then you might ask the same of God.

Evolution, though, is not an attack on God.  Sure, it isn't compatible with the allegorical Genesis (and neither is the Sears Tower, far taller than Bable ever was), but even as a Christian I knew it was allegory.  Evolution may not make you feel special, either, like you would if your lineage was specially created in opposition to nature.  Neither is a requisite for it being true.  It happens.  The Theory of Evolution describes the mechanism we actually observe, and it can be used with brilliant accuracy to make predictions throughout biology.  Please, take a strong interest in finding out the facts.  I will assist you with any questions, you have.

[McQ]

Pipebox, please note that you have posted your evolution argument in the bible contradictions section. Would you mind retyping it word for word in the correct section please?  

Thanks.

[PipeBox]

Argh.  Sorry, this topic has gone so far off topic.  

[NearBr0ken]

Evolution, at its most basic, is just descent, under pressure of natural selection, with modification (mutation).  Don't just read it, understand it.  Now, let's look at DNA.  DNA is "read" (reacts with) by special special proteins, that create more proteins in turn...

PipeBox, I love molecular biology.  I read everything I can find about it; I discuss it with friends and debate it with family...I simply can't get enough of it.  Since reading your post, I have a much clearer understanding of evolution and the process of natural selection.  That was an impressive post.  

[MikeyV]

Men are fallible, and the Bible is very clear on this point.  In fact the only person who did not sin in all of the Bible is Jesus.  But that is what makes the Bible amazing, thats the miracle, that fallible men wrote infallible documentation.

2 Peter 1:21
for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

The Bible says they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.   But the content itself is evidence of the infallibility of the Bible.

This is why it's pointless to argue with the "True Believers".

His stance is "The bible is infallible because the bible says it's infallible".

When one couples that tortured circularity with the belief that god is axiomatic, no amount of argument, persuasion, evidence to the contrary, reason, or anything else will sway that person. All arguments are arguments to the periphery of the problem.

That is why we see the emoticon used so much in these types of discussions. No argument that anyone presents actually addresses the heart of the problem.

That the bible is infallible is easily disproved, PI != 3. There, done. The problem is, MOG's worldview is blinded by a false premise - that god's existence is an axiom - therefore, any argument he makes flows from this false premise. Any conclusion he reaches is therefore flawed.

Besides, by saying

Men are fallible, and the Bible is very clear on this point.  In fact the only person who did not sin in all of the Bible is Jesus.

I'm not even sure MOG understands the difference between fallible (to make errors), and sin (to disobey god).

So again, what is the point of arguing with the willfully ignorant?

[PipeBox]

PipeBox, I love molecular biology.  I read everything I can find about it; I discuss it with friends and debate it with family...I simply can't get enough of it.  Since reading your post, I have a much clearer understanding of evolution and the process of natural selection.  That was an impressive post.  

[rlrose328]

So again, what is the point of arguing with the willfully ignorant?

I've missed you, Mikey.  

[Man-ofGod]

Men are fallible, and the Bible is very clear on this point.  In fact the only person who did not sin in all of the Bible is Jesus.  But that is what makes the Bible amazing, thats the miracle, that fallible men wrote infallible documentation.

2 Peter 1:21
for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

The Bible says they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.   But the content itself is evidence of the infallibility of the Bible.

This is why it's pointless to argue with the "True Believers".

His stance is "The bible is infallible because the bible says it's infallible".

When one couples that tortured circularity with the belief that god is axiomatic, no amount of argument, persuasion, evidence to the contrary, reason, or anything else will sway that person. All arguments are arguments to the periphery of the problem.

That is why we see the :brick: emoticon is used so much because you think something is flawed in the Bible when its not, and then when its explained you just throw your hands up,  people like to be right, but you cannot argue with perfection. The Bible is that perfection, infallible, from beginning to end.  So all arguments against it are shot down.  Logical people will begin to consider what this means, illogical will continue to be willfully ignorant. In fact this very topic is a major theme in the Bible itself.

List of things I believe testify to the Bible's perfection,

The uniformity - despite 66 books being written by 40 different authors in a vast time span, the Bible is incredibly uniform.
Historical accuracy (not even an argument btw w/ secular scholars) watch the history channel lately?
Scientifically accurate (not even talking creation here, just normal facts that weren't known in that time.)
Prophecy fulfillment (but the willfully ignorant will just look past this)
Health ethics - The health ethics in the Bible are flawless. Another testimony to the truth of the Bible.
Moral ethics - again, perfection and the reason most people rather not believe in the Bible IMO
Not patronizing - the Bible does not try to win you with concessions, its either all or none w/ the Bible
The contents - the Bible is written just like an encyclopedia, just reporting the facts.

thats all I got for now.

[Hitsumei]

Guy, the bible says that PI is equal to 3, bats are birds, and that all living land species lived within walking distance of Noah's house...

[SSY]

Maybe the earth was smalle back then, what you obviously fail to understand Hitsumei is that all geologists have an evolutionist mind set, and therefor are blinded by the obvious conclusions any reputable ( read, Christian ) scientist could deduce from observations.

Mathmeticians and Chiropterologists are the same.

[Man-ofGod]

Guy, the bible says that PI is equal to 3, bats are birds, and that all living land species lived within walking distance of Noah's house...

You said this before, what do you mean by the Bible saying PI = 3?

The other stuff is creation arguments, which I am avoiding on this thread. Their is already a Man-ofGod vs Evolution thread if you care to discuss that there.