Poll: 63% of Americans think Bible literally true

[Mr. P]

It isn't a matter of what I approve, but he brought up the topic of science, specifically dinosaurs. I thought we could have a respectful discussion. ....

I'm sure we can..

 

[Nienna]

I'm sure we can..

Cool! So why do people think that dinosuars disprove the Bible? I'm laboring under the assumption that you espouse this viewpoint.

 

[Mr. P]

Cool! So why do people think that dinosuars disprove the Bible? I'm laboring under the assumption that you espouse this viewpoint.

Don't know..wasn't my post..I'll think about it..

 

[MissileMan]

Another point of interest is cave drawings depicting dinosaurs (One in White River Canyon, Utah comes to mind) along with other animals these people hunted or observed.

I don't believe there are any cave drawings depicting any reptilian dinosaurs. I have seen depictions of mammoths and sabertooth cats.

Here's a brief explanation of how they have dated fossils:

Because the half-life of carbon-14 is 5,700 years, it is only reliable for dating objects up to about 60,000 years old. However, the principle of carbon-14 dating applies to other isotopes as well. Potassium-40 is another radioactive element naturally found in your body and has a half-life of 1.3 billion years. Other useful radioisotopes for radioactive dating include Uranium -235 (half-life = 704 million years), Uranium -238 (half-life = 4.5 billion years), Thorium-232 (half-life = 14 billion years) and Rubidium-87 (half-life = 49 billion years).

The use of various radioisotopes allows the dating of biological and geological samples with a high degree of accuracy. However, radioisotope dating may not work so well in the future. Anything that dies after the 1940s, when Nuclear bombs, nuclear reactors and open-air nuclear tests started changing things, will be harder to date precisely.

 

[Fmr jarhead]

Thanks for jumping in Missile Man.....

The existence of celestial bodies that predate the word of the Bible has always perplexed me.

Adam and Eve were the beginning of the world (or the beginning of consciousness, as Manu described it)

There is no mention of the dinosaurs (T-Rex Brontasaurus....Pteradactyl's etc), Cro-Magnun man (like the one that drew the earliest drawing found in a cave in France)

I have never seen a depiction of dinos older that 100,000 or so years ago, like the drawings in France....I doubt the drawings in Utah are older, but probably a similar time frame.

Very interesting information, that predates the bible, if I am not mistaken....but do correct me, if I am wrong.

I just think the stories of the bible are too similar to other religions, to have been descended from one source...

To each his own, I applaud your right to worship as you please, but it just doesn't sit right with my reasoning. Maybe you can explain how the dinosaurs existed, and how the Hubble telescope is finding the existence of universes that are millions of years old....and that, would no doubt, pre-date the bible, wouldn't it?

 

[Mr. P]

If you have never seen "The power of myth" by JOSEPH CAMPBELL
on PBS you should, it's on DVD too..It's amazing how many cultures throughout the ages have parallel beliefs, and how they explained/delt with the UNKNOWN.

 

[nakedemperor]

63% of Americans think the earth is <10,000 years old?

 

[Nienna]

I don't believe there are any cave drawings depicting any reptilian dinosaurs. I have seen depictions of mammoths and sabertooth cats.

Here's a brief explanation of how they have dated fossils:

I have seen photos of a cave drawing depicting an apatasaurus. I have one in my possession, and if I knew how to use our scanner, I would upload it!

I understand that there are different radiometric dating methods. Simply explained, a parent isotope decays to a daughter isotope. The relative concentrations are measured, and based on these, a date is fixed. However, all radiometric dating methods use these assumptions:

1) The starting conditions are known. For example, there was no daughter isotope present initially, or the amount of the daughter isotope was known.
2) Decay rates have always been constant or the decay rates are known.
3) Systems were closed or isolated so that no amount of parent or daughter isotopes were added or subtracted.

1) Especially in specimens which are assumed to be millions or billions of years old (but also for most specimens), no one was present to measure the initial ratio of parent/daughter isotopes.
2) As you mentioned, scientists have observed that many factors can alter decay rates, things like nuclear testing, or a massive catastrophic upheaval such as the Genesis Flood.
3) One never finds a closed system in nature. One cannot verify that a system, if isolated, was always thus.

 

[Avatar4321]

Again, all the major versions of the Bible - King James, New International Version, English Standard Version, Holman Christian Standard - say the same thing, even though the translation is slightly different.

Actually i disagree with this. I have a NIV and a KJV. I prefer the KJV. I see alot of denominational interpretations in the NIV that I dont see in the KJV since the KJV was done before alot of the Denomination splits.

 

[Nienna]

Thanks for jumping in Missile Man.....

The existence of celestial bodies that predate the word of the Bible has always perplexed me.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean here. All of nature existed before people observed it and wrote it down, or received divine revelations and wrote them down.

There is no mention of the dinosaurs (T-Rex Brontasaurus....Pteradactyl's etc), Cro-Magnun man (like the one that drew the earliest drawing found in a cave in France)

The Bible is not an exhaustive list of all animals that walked the planet. Even so, The word "dinosaur" is not mentioned in the Bible, but the word "dragon" is. The Hebrew word "tan" (tannin, tannim, tannoth) was used several times in the Bible, and is usually translated to the English word "dragon." There also very detailed descriptions of some of these animals (see Job 40, 41), which jive quite well with assumed descriptions of dinosaurs.

As for Cro-Magnun Man, Man is Man, and always was Man. Man is, of course, mentioned in the Bible.

I have never seen a depiction of dinos older that 100,000 or so years ago, like the drawings in France....I doubt the drawings in Utah are older, but probably a similar time frame.

Very interesting information, that predates the bible, if I am not mistaken....but do correct me, if I am wrong.

What methods have the scientists in these resources used to obtain these dates?

I just think the stories of the bible are too similar to other religions, to have been descended from one source...

Isn't that fascinating? Most cultures in the world each have their own similar version of a flood legend! One might conclude that somewhere in the history of mankind, a small group of people survived a worldwide flood. These people were then left to repopulate and spread out, each group carrying a cultural memory of the event. I find this so exciting!

To each his own, I applaud your right to worship as you please, but it just doesn't sit right with my reasoning. Maybe you can explain how the dinosaurs existed, and how the Hubble telescope is finding the existence of universes that are millions of years old....and that, would no doubt, pre-date the bible, wouldn't it?

Dinosaurs were created on the sixth day of Creation, along with other land animals and mankind. The exceptions, perhaps being flying dinosaurs and water dinosaurs (or plesiosaurs), which were created on the fifth day.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by the phrase "predated the Bible," but, one must ask the question, how is it that these dates were assigned?

 

[Nienna]

63% of Americans think the earth is <10,000 years old?

Probably not. The question asked if they believed the Bible was literally true. People have different ideas about what the phrase "literally true" means, as we can see by reading this thread.

 

[Avatar4321]

63% of Americans think the earth is <10,000 years old?

I was unaware that you were over 10,000 years old to verify that.

 

[Avatar4321]

I think the different versions do matter. One thing I've learned alot in law school is words mean something. If you mistate something you can seriously change what was meant by it.

Reminds me of the joke of the Pope who died and asked Peter if he could read the scriptures as they were originally written and when Peter heard him yell he asked him what was wrong and the Pope said. "It says Celebrate."

We have to be careful when reading what it says.

 

[Nienna]

I think the different versions do matter. One thing I've learned alot in law school is words mean something. If you mistate something you can seriously change what was meant by it.

Reminds me of the joke of the Pope who died and asked Peter if he could read the scriptures as they were originally written and when Peter heard him yell he asked him what was wrong and the Pope said. "It says Celebrate."

We have to be careful when reading what it says.

This is true. The most accurate "version" is, of course, the original. Different copies in the original languages are virtually unchanged over time. What a miracle! Since most of us cannot read, Hebrew, Aramaic, and/or Greek, the best thing to do is cross-reference several translations to get a better idea of the original meaning.

 

[nakedemperor]

I was unaware that you were over 10,000 years old to verify that.

I mean.. touche? Come on. Its scientific. Empirical. The fundamental tenents of chemistry, biology, history, geology, botany, paleontology are all based on the knowledge (not assumption) that the Earth is billions of years old, let alone greater than 10,000 years old.

Plus, how helpful is the "if you didn't see it you don't know it happened" argument? Not very.

 

[dilloduck]

This is true. The most accurate "version" is, of course, the original. Different copies in the original languages are virtually unchanged over time. What a miracle! Since most of us cannot read, Hebrew, Aramaic, and/or Greek, the best thing to do is cross-reference several translations to get a better idea of the original meaning.

So true--do you have ANY idea how many scholars have studied for decades trying to determine just what the OT says for example----it's the national sport in Israel !

 

[Fmr jarhead]

Hey, MOM, I prefer to not get into a semantcis thing with you....the stories of the bible are widely held beliefs by a number of humans, as is Hinduism, Buddhism, and many other "isms" that you would consider heresy.

You have your belief, and that's great for you.

I would like to see evidence of a worldwide flood that occurred at the same time around the entire globe...most theologians have come to accept a localized flood as the most plausible explanation to Noah's plight....how large a boat would have to be built to house ALL the creatures of the world? Wouldn't it make the super cruise liners of today look small (or maybe some of the critters that didn't get on the boat were able to hide in a whale's belly)

How do people actually turn to salt? I have always pondered that one, as well.

 

[dmp]

How do people actually turn to salt? I have always pondered that one, as well.

...that would require no more faith - less faith, imo, than to believe life happened here on earth by 'chance'.

 

[Nienna]

I mean.. touche? Come on. Its scientific. Empirical. The fundamental tenents of chemistry, biology, history, geology, botany, paleontology are all based on the knowledge (not assumption) that the Earth is billions of years old, let alone greater than 10,000 years old.

Plus, how helpful is the "if you didn't see it you don't know it happened" argument? Not very.

What is the "scientific method''?

1. Observe some aspect of the universe.
2. Invent a tentative description, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with what you have observed.
3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions.
4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations and modify the hypothesis in the light of your results.
5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and experiment and/or observation.

When consistency is obtained the hypothesis becomes a theory and provides a coherent set of propositions which explain a class of phenomena. A theory is then a framework within which observations are explained and predictions are made.

It appears that empirical science (mechanical science, operational science) include both observing (aka "seeing it"), and repeatable testing. When dealing with the issue of origins, no one can observe what happened in the past or do repeated testing on what happened in the past. We can only take the phenomena we observe around us and make assumptions. Some people choose to believe that there was no supernatural influence in the beginning of the universe, others choose to believe that there was. And so we have theories stemming from these a priori assumptions.

Also, most of science is not at all affected by the assumption that the earth/universe is billions of years old. Most of the branches of modern science were founded by men who believed that the earth was thousands of years old and created by God over a period of six days. Theories of origins do not affect the scientific method, unless of course, one assumes that since the universe came into being by random chance, all processes are random and therefore unreliable as to ability to be repeated. I do not know of any scientist who believes this. It would render the scientific method moot.

 

[Nienna]

Hey, MOM, I prefer to not get into a semantcis thing with you....the stories of the bible are widely held beliefs by a number of humans, as is Hinduism, Buddhism, and many other "isms" that you would consider heresy.

You have your belief, and that's great for you.

I would like to see evidence of a worldwide flood that occurred at the same time around the entire globe...most theologians have come to accept a localized flood as the most plausible explanation to Noah's plight....how large a boat would have to be built to house ALL the creatures of the world? Wouldn't it make the super cruise liners of today look small (or maybe some of the critters that didn't get on the boat were able to hide in a whale's belly)

How do people actually turn to salt? I have always pondered that one, as well.

Yikes! I'm running out of time before I have to make dinner! But I'll give it a shot...
First, I am not at all arguing your right to hold whatever beliefs you choose. I am simply trying to present evidence to defend mine.

All around the world in rock layer after rock layer, we find billions of dead things that have been buried in water-carried mud and sand. Even to the tops of the highest mountains. Here is a great link for you; it even covers questions about Noah's ark if you scroll down far enough.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp

Sadly, you are right, most theologians accept the theory of a localized flood. Not all the animals of the world had to fit on the ark. The dimensions of the ark are described here...

http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search=Genesis6;&version=31

As for a person turning to salt, you'd have to ask God that one! CHristians accept the fact that the God who created the universe from nothing certainly has the power to "tweak" little things like the chemical make-up of one person's body.


I'll try to answer more later, and if I am able. I certainly don't know everything. I'm just a stay-at-home mom. But perhaps these things clarify this point of view. Thanks for the great debate!