If the Bible was written by God..

If the Bible was written by God, and is 100% truth, and contains nothing false, how do Christians explain the inconsistencies and scientific falsehoods listed here:

http://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/bible-inconsistencies.pdf

http://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html

There can be no possible explanation for these inconstencies and comments that we know to be scientific falsehoods, except for one thing: the Bible was not written by a perfect spiritual super-natural being, but instead written by imperfect men.

Who unknowingly included inconsistencies and scientific falsehoods in their religious book.

 

Do you know somebody who thinks the Bible wasn't written by people? I mean that some of the books are named after people who wrote them should be a clue as to something. A false premise perhaps. Not sure, but definitely sumpin..

 

So you admit the Bible was written by men, and is not a perfect document?

 

I support the adage, "You can't believe everything you read."

 

Well...I won't cut your fingers off to make you state you believe it. Just move on to things you do believe.

 

How do some non-theists come to the conclusion that God wrote the 'Bible'?

 

it is the view of Orthodox Jews, that the Old Testament are God's literal words on paper.

 

And you have proof of what other people hold as a mental image?

 

I'm only telling you what I know.

Orthodox Jews believe that the Old Testament is God's literal word.

The Talmud, no. But the Old Testament aka Torah/Neviim/Ketuvim yes.

 

And you have spoken to every member of that group of people and you therefore KNOW with absolute certainty that all Orthodox Jews hold such a belief?

 

The Bible was inspired by God, directed by God and it is the truth. I read some of what you had...and it seemed convoluted and twisted. The opposite of God.

The Bible is written to be followed or disdained. Personally, I think that the Koran is lies and untruthful. Yet, I don't beret muslims over it. So I don't understand your motivation here with this thread.

 

how can the Bible be the truth if it has soo many historical inconsistencies and scientific falsehoods?

 

Was the 'Bible' written as a scientific journal or a scientific course of study? Is the 'Bible' even considered by the scientific community to be 'scientific' in its writings? As to historical inconsistencies.... perhaps it is the various interpretations of 'history' that are inconsistent. After all, the people who wrote the 'Bible' are the ones who would have a more accurate accounting of that historical period and of the things that they were conveying in their writings.

 

I didn't see anything truthful in your link. It all seemed. More like petty then enlightening.

My question is, why do you care?

 

the Bible cannot be the literal word of an all-knowing, all-seeing supernatural force, cause it is full of inconsistencies and scientific falsehoods.

 

I dont believe it is as you say. I believe it is the most truthful book on this earth.

 

so you didn't read my links with all the inconsistencies and scientific falsehoods?

how could there be plants on Earth before the sun was created?

how could there be light, before there was the sun?

 

Perhaps light can come from God in the way God sees fit. Actually....light before the sun hasn't been reversed or changed in the Bible. If it was man inspired....why did it not? Do you think Hebrew farmers in 100 bc didn't see a correlation between Sun and light?

 

maybe the authors of the Bible were just ignorant.

 

Perhaps some of the readers of the 'Bible' are not interpreting what they read in the 'Bible' in a manner that is consistent with Theological views.

 

so the Bible is not to be taken literally?

I see.

 

I, for one, do not take all of the 'Bible' literally. It is full of metaphors and similes.

 

well then clearly, EVERYTHING in the Bible up to maybe Solomon, is metaphorical.

 

"everything" is an absolute. As such your suggestion is false. Egypt was mentioned as early as the book of Genesis whereas Solomon was not mentioned until the book of 2nd Samuel. Be careful how you use those 'absolutes'.

 

I hope you do, but I am not sure theological insight is really your game here. I sense another anti-theist seeking validation of his atheistic credentials. Where are the atheists on this site secure enough in who they are, that they don't have pretend they are Madaline O'Hare's Crips?

All you have to do, to be a really good atheist, is just be a good person who is an atheist.