Fundamentalists and the Bible 01

22 everything on dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died.

23 He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the ground, human beings and animals and creeping things and birds of the air; they were blotted out from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those that were with him in the ark.

24 And the waters swelled on the earth for one hundred and fifty days.

With this last, "one hundred and fifty days", we now have one hundred and ninety seven (197) days in the ark, seven prior, forty as it rained, and one hundred and fifty with the waters swelling. Definitely not the forty we all think of.

There are 5 major, and 1 probable errors in chapter 7.

Chapter 8

The Flood Subsides

1 But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and all the domestic animals that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind blow over the earth, and the waters subsided;

2 the fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained,

"Windows of the heavens"? If this is literal as the Fundamentalists say it is, are the heavens opened up to allow rain? His calls into question chapter 1, and "the firmament", or "dome" as is translated in some bibles, along with other verses here.

Did they truly believe that there was a literal shutting off of the heavens and the rain? This sounds as if they (the writers of the Bible) believed that the earth was flat, and tripartite as was believed by many in days of antiquity well before the Christian era began.

3 and the waters gradually receded from the earth. At the end of one hundred and fifty days the waters had abated;

4 and in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.

5 The waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains appeared.

If we take the tenth month at its word, then that is three hundred days, and we might even have to add the seven days before the rains began.

6 At the end of forty days Noah opened the window of the ark that he had made 7 and sent out the raven; and it went to and fro until the waters were dried up from the earth.

Now we have another forty (40) days to add to the time in the ark for a total of three hundred and forty days in the ark, and the seven before the waters came.

8 Then he sent out the dove from him, to see if the waters had subsided from the face of the ground;

9 but the dove found no place to set its foot, and it returned to him to the ark, for the waters were still on the face of the whole earth. So he put out his hand and took it and brought it into the ark with him.

10 He waited another seven days, and again he sent out the dove from the ark;

11 and the dove came back to him in the evening, and there in its beak was a freshly plucked olive leaf; so Noah knew that the waters had subsided from the earth.

This adds another seven (7) days for a total of three hundred and forty seven (347) days in the ark, plus the seven before the rain.

12 Then he waited another seven days, and sent out the dove; and it did not return to him any more.

This makes for three hundred and fifty four days in the ark, plus the seven before the rains came.

13 In the six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and saw that the face of the ground was drying.

14 In the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry.

Add almost two months, or about fifty-five days (55) (to be conservative), and we now have over a year in the ark, plus seven (7) days before the rain.

Over a year!

For any that disbelieve this and need biblical confirmation of it being at least a year in the ark, re-read verses 6 and 11 of chapter 7 that specifies that Noah was six hundred years old when the flood started, and verse 13 of this chapter above that says that "In the six hundred and first year...", having to mean that as Noah's age, that Noah looked out and saw the waters had dried up.

How in the world were they supposed to have food in the ark to feed themselves as well as all the animals, for over a year? It's impossible. Rain brings moisture, and moisture brings mold, and moisture, mold, and age, makes food rotten and inedible. This is another humongous error in the Bible no matter whether there were two pairs, or seven pairs plus another pair of unclean animals. *****

15 Then God said to Noah,

16 'Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons' wives with you.

17 Bring out with you every living thing that is with you of all flesh—birds and animals and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth—so that they may abound on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the earth.'

18 So Noah went out with his sons and his wife and his sons' wives.

19 And every animal, every creeping thing, and every bird, everything that moves on the earth, went out of the ark by families.

Wherever they were, most likely high on Mount Ararat, how was it that the animals were all to go back to their normal places where they lived? The hippos and giraffes weren't anywhere near to Africa, nor were the leopards, chimps, monkeys, etc. This too, has to be an error. *****

God's Promise to Noah

20 Then Noah built an altar to the Lord, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt-offerings on the altar.

And if you believe that the two pairs stated in chapter 6 is right, now it's only one clean pair, plus one without a mate. Also, this makes a lot of offerings of every clean animal and bird. This too is a ludicrous error. *****

21 And when the Lord smelt the pleasing odour, the Lord said in his heart, 'I will never again curse the ground because of humankind, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth; nor will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done.

22 As long as the earth endures,

seedtime and harvest, cold and heat,

summer and winter, day and night,

shall not cease.'

There are 3 major errors in chapter 8.

Summation of the first eight chapters of Genesis

There are at least sixty-four (64) major errors in the book of Genesis through the first eight (8) chapters alone, and at least eight (8) other probable errors.

It takes just one error in the Bible to disprove the Fundamentalists claim that the Bible is inerrant—without error—and is the work of God thus guaranteeing it.

Just one!

Just one error is enough to refute the Fundamentalist's claim to inerrancy in the Bible (no errors); that it is the definite word of God and must be followed and accepted without question. With this many errors, one has to question the claim of the Fundamentalists that the Bible is inerrant, and the word of God. Any who still believes the inerrancy of the Bible has to be willfully blind otherwise.

But why, oh why was it found necessary to dig up all of these errors in the Bible, and through only the first eight chapters of Genesis? Why go to such extremes to dig this all up and possibly destroy the faith of so many? One word:

Fundamentalists!

As information, many that are called Evangelicals (who cross many denominations) are the same in their strict interpretation of the Bible, but they are all often simply known as Fundamentalists.

Okay, everyone is entitled to their beliefs, and that's what we've all thought, and acted as if it was sacrosanct, and that's exactly how it's always been treated.

However, many of these Fundamentalists not only believe that every word in the Bible is God's inerrant word—is without error—but also that this nation is supposed to not only be a Christian nation, but to obey all of the laws of the Old Testament, including the killing of any who violated many of those silly and arbitrary laws that were said to be written by Moses, at God's direction, or by God's hand, after the so-called Exodus from Egypt..

Maybe those laws were necessary for the Jews of those days; I have no idea since I wasn't around then. But to say we must now all obey them, as well as punish offenders in this day as they were punished back then in the supposed day of Moses, is patently ridiculous. And worse, they mean it, though they are very selective in which laws to enforce.

Who is saying we must follow those laws, or who is trying as best they can to make it our way of life?

Many preachers and politicians of today, and people of power and money that call themselves Fundamentalists!

Here are a few more examples of this grab for power in the name of their inerrant God (who has been proven above to be not so inerrant):

Pastor Suggests Gays Should Be Prosecuted Like They Were Historically

Ron Baity, founding pastor of Winston-Salem's Berean Baptist Church and head of the anti-marriage equality organization Return America, referred to homosexuality as "a perverted lifestyle" in a Sunday sermon before telling his congregation that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people should be prosecuted, Good as You is reporting. "For 300 years, we had laws that would prosecute that lifestyle," he is quoted as saying. "We've gone down the wrong path. We've become so dumb that we have accepted a lie for the truth, and we've...discarded the truth on the shoals of shipwreck!"

In part, he's right, and yet he's very wrong. It should be that"We've become so dumb that we have accepted a lie for the truth for nearly two thousand years!"

Or:

Victoria Jackson: Homophobia Is 'Buzzword Of Liberal Agenda'

The former "Saturday Night Live" star and now Tea Party activist sparked national furor when she [criticized Glee for showing a same-sex kiss—was a link] in a column for WorldNetDaily. In the column, Jackson wrote in response to an emotional, long awaited kiss between Kurt (Chris Colfer) and Blaine (Darren Criss). "Did you see "Glee" this week? Sickening! And, besides shoving the gay thing down our throats, they made a mockery of Christians - again! I wonder what their agenda is? Hey, producers of "Glee" - what's your agenda? One-way tolerance?" She later appeared on "Showbiz Tonight" to clarify her thoughts. "Well, it doesn't matter what I think," Jackson said."What matters is what the Bible says.[Bold mine.]And I'm really concerned about our country because immorality is, well, let's see: secular humanism rules the airwaves, and it's stealing the innocence away from this whole generation of children. My daughter is a teenager and I can't find any show that she can watch." With that diatribe, Jackson was asked, based on her remarks, both in the column and in the interview, whether she was homophobic. "That's a cute little buzzword of the liberal agenda," Jackson smirked."Basically, the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin." [Bold mine.]

Yes, "homosexuality is" the "sin" against God's word that they home in on.

Why would a book that is proven to have lies and contradictions be a book that "matters" to anyone? This is trying to shove personal beliefs down the throats of everyone else whether they agree with you or not.

Does the Bible really say that homosexuality is a sin? It can't be said that the Bible explicitly says homosexuality is a sin. Yes, it says a man with another man is sinful, but it says nothing about a woman with another woman, or a transvestite, or a transgender, or a transsexual. In fact, as stated earlier.

I'm concerned about Ms. Jackson straining at gnats of her own personal choosing, and all from a book that is not the work of her God, or anyone else's god.

As Pat Robertson says, "The Bible doesn't make that sinful."

What a clever way to enforce one's ways on others, but then again, it also condemns one for saying it's inerrant when it obviously isn't.

Look at this other recent news posting:

Posted by John Celock: 05/19/2012 12:55 pm

[A Mississippi state lawmaker quoted a Bible passage on]Facebook calling for gay men to be "put to death" has taken to the social networking site again to refuse to apologize for the remark.

Rep. Andy Gipson (R-Braxton) Friday to say that although he has been receiving emails and calls with regard to his statement],he will not say he's sorry. The emails have come in response to a petition calling on the lawmaker to issue an apology and to meet with LGBT groups in Mississippi.

"To be clear, I want the world to know that I do not, cannot, and will not apologize for the inspired truth of God's Word. It is one thing that will never 'change,'" Gipson wrote. "Anyone who knows me knows I also believe that all people are created in God's image, and that all people are loved by God, so much so that He gave us the truth of His Word which convicts us of the reality and guilt of our sin, and He gave us His Son Jesus who paid the full penalty for all our sins, by His grace through our faith in Him as we repent of our sin. It is this message that I preach every Sunday. I sincerely pray God will reach someone through this message."

Gipson is a Baptist minister and a business lawyer when not serving in the Legislature. He notes... that his family are "of the Christian faith, and are affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention."

The passage from Leviticus that Gipson first cited reads: "If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

On Facebook at least, Gipson has received overwhelming support for his original comments and his refusal to apologize. Eighty-three people have "liked" his post, and he's received dozens of supportive comments, including praise for supporting God and sticking to his original message.

"I stand with you my friend. ... GOD is in control ... no place for Gays," Ted W. Cole.

Gipson, 35, has served in the Mississippi Legislature since 2008. He chairs a judiciary committee.

Calling for gay men to be put to death because it's in the Bible. Oh, mercy, and all because it's "...the inspired truth of God's word. It is one thing that will never change."

Neither will the blindness of most Fundamentalists!

Gipson is: A Baptist minister affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention (about as Fundamental as they get, or nearly so); a business lawyer, and is in the Mississippi Legislature since 2008 where he chairs the judiciary committee. Judiciary committee? Uh, that has to do with justice I believe, where the truth has to be proven. I wonder if he's looked at the major errors mentioned in this essay, or if he's like lady justice, but not just blind, but willfully blind.

Again, just as Ms. Jackson above, has only picked her choice "sin" to rail against, so does Mr. Gipson, all the while ignoring the other so-called sins in the "Law" of Moses, and, supposedly, of God. Does he mow the lawn on the day of rest (or have it mowed thereby bringing sin on another)? And if so, does he stone himself, or others, to death as prescribed by God in his Law?

Does he make offerings as prescribed in the Law? Do any of them do that, or have they made up special laws for themselves?

Does he, or any of them, have clothing of two fabrics?

Did he demand death to the priests and preachers who violated young children?

Did he demand death for the minister in Hammond, Indiana who had an adulterous sex with a far too young woman of his congregation?

No, of course neither he, nor anyone, cry out loudly against any of this, nor demand their death.

This is a part of why this had to be written.

These people are hypocrites! Whited sepulchers!

And this is a madness that they are pursuing!

This essay was written to counter in the minds of reasonable people the idiocy that is being pushed onto a nation, and filling it with hate.

Yes, hate!

But this hate is not from any loving God. It is hate from people who pick and choose what they will condemn and how, and then show one and all just how perfect their own piety is. They are every bit as malicious and mean as any inquisitor from the Catholic church, and maybe worse. They try to destroy the perfectly good lives of innocent girls who are taught from the cradle to believe in the lies that are being perpetrated in this day.

It is madness and it has to stop. The lies must end or we will all face the consequences that their lies will bring to all of our doorsteps, theirs included.

A hidden agenda

Yes, most of these preachers have hidden agendas. One of them is the hope for Armageddon to come. Armageddon is the Great War that will initiate the coming of Jesus and the Rapture according to some. The Rapture is when they think that Jesus will take them up to heaven and the rest will be left behind to suffer and die. And if they can find a way, they will hasten it, and never mind the rest of us, or so they say and think. Just think, many of them are willing to push an atomic war of desolation to force Jesus to come and rapture them to heaven. That is so selfish of them, and deadly to others of us even if they're wrong. But they don't believe that they're wrong, so whatever they can do, they will do it to make it happen.

The poison of this idea has been around for thousands of years, and hit our shores with the Pilgrims who gladly put people in stocks simply for not attending church, or whatever other frivolous rule they might think up, and probably more than just put people in stocks, they were so rigid in their beliefs, and that everyone else must be just as they were.

This Fundamentalism raised its ugly head about the mid 1840s. Christine Garwood, the author of a book: "Flat Earth", writes that there were Flat Earthers, a group begun by a man who called himself Parallax (Samuel Birley Rowbotham) among other names he used, and he taught that "...the earth lay at the center of the universe" and was "... a flat disc with the North Pole at its center." and "that the disc-earth was stationary with neither axial nor orbital motion, while the sun spiral-circuited overhead once every twenty-four hours at a distance no greater than seven hundred miles."

Then after Charles Darwin's first book on evolution, The Origin of Species, there was a debate between Thomas Henry Huxley and Samuel Wilberforce, the Bishop of Oxford, in June, 1860 with regard to whether or not evolution was true.

A follower of Parallax, John Hampden, publicized a bet against any who thought the earth a sphere as opposed to being flat. Alfred Russel Wallace, the man who co-discovered evolution at the same time as Darwin, took the bet. That set off the literal creationists against science that was beginning to bloom in the 1870s.

With the Huxley/Wilberforce debates, and the Hampden/Wallace bets, the Fundamentalists were off and running as science, as we know it today, was in its infancy. In time, the Fundamentalists diminished, but then came alive again with a bevy of preachers keeping it alive.

To this day, with all the science and knowledge we now have, these Fundamentalists still insist that all that the Bible says is true even when it is easily seen that their Bible has many errors.

The latest revival of Fundamentalism seemed to stem from two sources, the first, an Armenian, Rousas John Rushdoony who advocated we be a nation subject to the laws and penalties of the book of Leviticus in Mosaic Law of the Bible, including the penalty of death for homosexuality, adultery, idolatry, lying about virginity, blasphemy, etc. The second source was Jerry Falwell, and his moral majority, who was the more popular and publicly known of the two.