From: bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver)
Subject: Re: Proofs of the Bible (Long, but filled with information)
Date: 13 Nov 92 03:22:12 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.



/6) The Life of Jesus - That Jesus existed is virtually indisputable.  The
/    testimony of those closest to him indicated His sinless perfection.

Using the testimony of the Bible to prove the Bible is correct is nothing
but circular reasoning and will not be accepted as evidence.

The testimony of those people who were around Muhammad says that he is 
the Prophet of God.  Should we take their testimony, just because they
knew him?  

The testimony of the followers of Charles Manson (or Jim Jones, or any other 
religious leader) all say that their leader was either a god or a perfect 
man.  Do we believe them also, based on the "testimony of those closest to 
them"?





/7) The Fulfillment of Prophecy - Modern self-proclaimed "prophets" usually
/    get about 10-20% right; the Bible's all come true in exactly the way
/    predicted.  The odds of Jesus fulfilling (whether accidentally and/or
/    by design) the prophecies applying to Him are beyond calculation.


Name the prophecies. And the fulfillments.




/8) The Bible's Scientific Foreknowledge - One of the areas I personally
/    find fascinating.  Being pre-scientific, it should attribute the
/    workings of nature to colorful myths and be woefully inaccurate - if it
/    was written by man. 

It is inaccurate.  Check the FAQ for this newsgroup.  When you are through 
with that, check the FAQ for talk.origins.




/    In the 19th century, Herbert Spencer first
/    announced the 5 fundamental facts of science; yet the Bible covered all
/    5 in the first 2 verses: "In the beginning [time - jdb] God created the
/    heavens [space] and the earth [matter].  And the spirit of God moved 
    [force] upon the face of the waters [motion]."

This is ridiculous.  This verse is in no way a description of the "5
fundamental facts of science".  And, these mystical "5 fundamental facts"
are clearly outdated and nonscientific (not including energy, for example).
There is more matter than the earth, and there was no time before the 
creation of the sun and moon.




/      The Bible said the earth was round (Is 40:22, Prov 8:27, Lk
/    17:34-36).  

It also says it is flat:  reference the verse where God will send his
angels to the "four corners of the earth".  Circles and spheres don't
have corners.  Only flat surfaces and 3D objects do.




/Not too long ago, great minds were convinced the earth was
/    held up by Atlas or something like him; read Job 26:7 to hear what the
/    Bible claimed.  Moses knew about a plurality of seas, all with one 
/    common bed (Gen 1:9-10).  Solomon knew about the rain/evaporation cycle
/    (Eccl 1:7), as did Amos and Job (Amos 9:6; Job 36:27-28).  


Everyone who lived in the ancient world knew that there was more than
one sea; Phoenician traders were well aware of that fact since they had
sailed on those seas.  Caravans from the Arabian Gulf and the Red Sea
brought back stories of other bodies of water.  Why is this supposed
to be something special?

The rain/evaporation cycle is well known by most children.  It is 
intuitively obvious how it happens, especially in times of drought.  Other 
ancient sources have commented on the "water which returns to the skies"..
Why do you consider this to be so spectacular?



/After read-
/    ing Psalm 8:8, Matthew F. Henry charted the sea currents which are still
/    recognized today.  Until recently, doctors had no idea how that blood
/    contained, in essence, the life of man, but the Bible did (Lev 17:11,
/    14).  Scientists cannot distinguish between the blood of races of 
/    people, just like God said in Acts 17:26.


I'm sorry, but under no circumstances can any of this be considered as the
bible "knowing" science.  These verses do NOT support the claims you are
associating with them.