New China find. What say young earthers?

I didn't say anything about the water cycle because it was observed correctly they the writers of the bible. The point is they based their writings on their observation and point of view as it was then. Using your own critic method as explained in your post the 6 day creation account doesn't need be literal. If you suggest that it needs be then following your critic method again you must believe in a flat earth, a geocentric universe, etc.. there is not extremety here. Just consistency. The bible is speaking in relation to the observation of the writer. You just don't want to admit that. Think for instance. Moses is traditionally thought to have written the Torah. So the information must have been passed orally in methods that were common of the day. Like Atra hasis and Gilgamesh the biblical account is using the same literary form. Doesn't mean its not true just not in the sense you're taking it.

 

You bring up a good question. God uses people to do his will as can be seen in the bible. He does't possess them and make them dictate. He inspires them through the Holy Spirit using their gifts and abilities. David was a poor example of a man save in one point. He loved God. But would we follow his example on child rearing? I hope not. Archer in his Encyclopedia of Bible difficulties indicates that Inerrant does not equal impeccable. There are all sorts of transcription errors through out the bible. Does it make the message less real? Or less truthful? Not at all. The bible is truthful about science and history as it was understood at the time of its writing. I'm sure if one of the prophets knew about black holes at the center of galaxies he would used it as an analogy for something. But they did not and thus there is no mention of them. The bible is the story of Salvation. The miracles described there happened. God created the Heavens and the Earth. God created man. God saved Noah and his family from the flood and is liken to a type of baptism. God led the Israelites through the sea. Does it matter if its the Read Sea or The Reed Sea? Not at all. The story doesn't change. Was Ramseys II the Pharoh at the time of Moses? Most likely not. Would there have been a city of Rameseys in Egypt when the bible describes it? No. But certainly that city was there when that particular passage was writen as is noted by the observer. Truth is truth. I find that my faith is not so thin as to be disuaded by an unknowledgable observer nor by a transcription error.

 

Now you're being silly. The Egyptians use water and its evaporation rate to create the Pyramids at Giza. People weren't stupid. Just like the Greeks were able to create the appreance of strait lines on their great Acropolis using complex mathmatics. Job was obviously wealthy. He may indeed have been a genius. After all without walking the whole circumferance of the Earth aristotle came pretty close to determining it.

 

Salvation isn't science. Jesus is a real person who actually said the things that were recorded. IT was correctly observed. Not only that But Jesus ensured the Apostles knew what he was tallking about. Its a nonsequitur. I think you should spend time with Archers Encyclopedia it might clear up a few things.

 

We have four different accounts based on eyewitnesses. Better than most historical documents.

 

Just to be clear what is it you're trying to say exactly? Things were taught to the Apostles Orally who in turn taught things orally to the first churches. The gosple of Mark wasn't thought to be written until 55AD over 20 years since Jesus died, Rose, and acended into heaven. Strangley enough the Didache was written close to the same period. Mark supposidly got his information directly from Peter and a few others Luke actually did a lot of research. So, I'm not certain what you're trying to say. Each of the Gospels were written in a way to emphasize the Theology Jesus taught rather than an attempt to be a biography in the modern sence (the closest being Luke). all the churches had consistent teachings so if one church went off on its own outside the orally passed on teachings the community of believers would know. There are the writings of the apostles. Keep in mind that they didn't have pocket NT then. (It wasn't even entirely written as yet) The LXX or the greek version of the OT was the most used document but only a minority of believers could actually read it. So, what are you trying to say?