The Hebrew Scriptures are scientifically inaccurate

Thanks Con:I believe Con has misread my previous debates:Con states: "I do agree that the Bible is not a scientific book. I do not agree that it does not contain scientific elements. You believe it contains scientific elements, else you wouldn't be arguing the things you are about the nature of earth. Oh, and I'm not a Young Earth Creationist as you seem to think. "I have only pointed out in the past to Young Earth Creationists, that their claims of Bible being scientific are Nonsensical. That is the reason for my attacks on the Bible as making scientific claims. Not because it really is making Scientific Claims, but because my opponent in those debates are making such claims of the Bible. My other debates have been against YECs. Thus my attacks on the unscientific rot that the Bible that they point to as inerrant. Also the Leviticus passage that states flying creeping things have four feet, is not that which the ICR reference cited, it was a couple of lines later: Leviticus 11:23"But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you. "Not the grasshopper line, so ICR was wrong in it's contention, as the Bible really does say flying creepy things (insects) have four feet. Because they were referring to all other insects, not grasshoppers. Con also states: "Bar Ehrman is in the vast minority of historians who make the claim that Yeshua (Jesus) never existed. "Correction Con: Bart Ehrman never stated that Jesus Christ never existed, Ehrman states that he believes Jesus lived, but his legend in the Gospels is entirely mythical, so Bart is in the Majority of Biblical Scholars there. The likes of Richard Carrier are the ones stating Jesus never existed, and there is truly not enough evidence to prove Richard Carrier wrong in a court of law, nor via Scientific Enquiry. So it is possible that Richard Carrier is right also. Con states: "The Samaritans had a different version of the Torah than the Jews did,"No they did not: The Sumerian texts were the Anunnaki not a Torah, which it is believed possible that the Torah scribes borrowed from the Anunnaki stories, in formulating the book of Genesis, but they are not exactly the same, just similar in plot. But then again, humans have similar traits and activities all over the world, so the likeness may be simply coincidental. Humans fight about similar things and gain pleasure from similar things also, so many human tales have similarities. As to many God tales have similarities, so Yahweh's character may be a composition of other Gods, such as Amun Ra and Zeus. Con States: "See my links in my previous round about the resurrection being historical fact. History does not show people who die for a lie they invented, but the apostles died in the name of Yeshua. "That is entirely subjective and not a point of Historical Fact at all. To make people believe in a savior, the may have attributed the deaths of the Apostles (if they existed also) to Yeshua. Truthfully, nobody knows how much contrived information exists in the Bible and to make a hero seem more realistic, of course they will have people die for the cause. It makes a story appear more convincing, but it truly may simply be a ruse! Saying that the Resurrection is true because it is unlikely that people will die for a Lie they created, is Fallacious. It's an Argumentum ad martyrdom fallacySource: . http://rationalwiki.org...,It is also An appeal to Emotion Fallacy & Begging The Question Fallacy. The question remains whether the people who died created the Lie they died for and you don't know if those people even existed. Many people in History died for lies they fabricated, because the lie becomes bigger than themselves. Such lies become delusions and those who are victims of the lie (martyrs) do not see that it is a Lie, even though it really is. David Koresh and his followers all died for the lies of Koresh, including himself, though he may have started off knowing he was lying, but, tell a lie enough times and eventually the lie teller will believe in his own lies. "Martyrdom has always been a proof of the intensity, never of the correctness, of a belief. "— Arthur Schnitzler (1862–1931) . http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com.au... Con Stated: "Your evidence that the Bible says the earth is flat is based on common cosmological beliefs of the non-Jewish people. However, if it is possible for the rabbis who were contemporaries of the Torah's writing to conclude that the scriptures indicated a spherical earth, then obviously the Torah does not assert these scientific falsies which you claim. Even if the common Hebrew people did believe in the picture which you describe, that would not mean that the Bible stated them. "Historical Evidence proves that the Jewish people and The Christians all had the Flat Earth view of the Cosmos. It was such that people were executed for challenging this view, such as Bruno and the case against Galileo. Had the Bible been accurate Cosmologically, Galileo would have been redundant, as such knowledge would already exist via the Bible. So History destroys your case there entirely. The Flat Earth Society is still trying to make a comeback, what was their source for their worldview, The Bible of Course! That is the basis for the Flat Earth Belief. Nowhere in the Bible does it describe the Earth as a sphere, their description is Round, like a Coin. Not like a Ball. There is no word for ball describing the Earth, only the word for Disc. "The universe of the ancient Israelites was made up of a flat disc-shaped earth floating on water, heaven above, underworld below. ["Source: . http://en.wikipedia.org... Many of Con's sources are extremely biased, as the Biblical Chronology site is an Apologetics site, not one of genuine Historical Scholarship, thus the statements it uses to assert the existence of Moses are destroyed by those Archaeological sources I cited. Such as many of the places and events mentioned in the Genesis and Exodus, didn't exist nor occur for centuries, some not until the 6th Century BCE, so Moses could not write about something occurring in 600 years time as if he witnessed it during his life time. That makes his story too twisted to be true. Besides, they borrowed King Sargon's baby in the reeds story and attributed it to Moses, also making him appear quite Fake! Moses is a Euhemerized hero, a composition of many heroes from other cultures. Just as Richard Carrier considers Jesus Christ as being, and there is not enough evidence to prove him wrong. Citing the Martyrdom Fallacy, never proves anything, except some may have been unaware that they were lied to, or so delusional that they eventually believed their own lies that strongly. As the character Jesus Christ appears to have done, if he did exist, that is? Con Stated:< You are reading into the passage things that aren't there. "Genesis 1:16: And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. ">Yes, the passages are there, I just highlighted them from your own argument. Two Great Lights. The moon is not a Great Light, it is just a body that emits no light. You and Bible wrong! Me Right! . http://chatpilot-godisamyth.blogspot.com.au... "Bill Nye Booed In Texas For Saying The Moon Reflects The Sun"Yes, such is the blatantly naive stupidity of Creationists in Texas. No hope for Texas education while they hold positions in school boards. Source: . http://www.thinkatheist.com...Thanks