How come biblical literalists are sure day means 24 hrs. but week means 6.8993839 years?

2 Peter 3:8
But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

With God, time is not a constraint or limitation, as it is with Man.
The extremist Biblical literalists are frequently wrong. Many disagree with the concepts of the Virgin Birth or the Resurrection.
I will mention that even Atheists often don’t agree with each other.

Because biblical literalists aren’t very bright.

@filmfann “I will mention that even Atheists often don’t agree with each other.”

You mean atheists aren’t some collective hivemind? Really?

One minor point:

Jesus was allegedly born around 6 BC. The BC/AD idea happened before anyone bothered counting, and using a different calendar than we currently use. That’s according to the timeline of John the Baptist, Tiberius Caesar, and the building of the Jerusalem temple.

Edited. BC not AD, and dating facts.

I don’t think that anyone can take anything that the bible says LITERALLY!

^ You would be surprised.

@Linda_Owl Yet many people do.

I’ve actually never heard about that week thing before.

How do fundamentalists know when to shift between absolute, inerrant literalism and loosey-goosey allegorical interpretation of time?

The latter is best used when actual historical events are involved. But if it’s regarding something that happened so long ago there are no historical events associated with it, literalism is easier to use.

Another irrelevant fact perhaps?
We are looking at four different calendars: the lunar calendar of twelve months each of 28 days still used in both Judaism and Islam to calculate their holy days; the Babylonian calendar of 360 days (still with us as the number of degrees in a circle); the Julian calendar of 365 days; and the current Gregorian calendar which puts in an extra day every 4 years.

Biblical literalists aren’t sure of anything. They only think that they’re sure.

Lack of consensus? Hmm

@filmfann The disciples and their understudies who wrote the new testament were not well educated in the Talmud. They tried their best to spin the story of Jesus’ birth, life and death in light of the Talmudic prophets. But they often misinterpreted what they were trying to match their story to, and thus they translated numerous Talmudic texts incorrectly, then attempted to spin a story making their cult leader fulfill a prophecy that was actually never given.

For instance, they grabbed on Isiah 7:14, which Christian Bibles translate as “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call his name Immanuel.” But the followers of Jesus did not know that the word they assumed was Virgin was actually ”almah,” which is more accurately translated simply as “young woman.” The Hebrew word ”bethulah” means “virgin.” Isiah used bethulah four times in his writings, so he clearly knew both words and the different between them; something the authors of the New Testament did not know. But the larger problem with this prophecy is it is taken out of context. If you read the entire Seventh chapter of Isiah, it becomes patently clear that the child in question is to be born as a sign Ahaz, King of Judah, that he will not be defeated in battle by Rezin, King of Syria, and Pekah, son of the King of Israel. The sign in question is 700 years before Jesus was supposedly born. Isiah could not have been talking about Jesus.

We can go through prophecy after prophecy and they all fall to such nonsense. The poorly educated men who wrote the New Testament did their level best to make their cult leader appear to be God, but they failed miserably. Fortunately, even more poorly informed acolytes didn’t care about all the obvious flaws.

@Darth_Algar What I just said here ^^^/

”@”;http://www.fluther.com/166891/how-come-biblical-literalists-are-sure-day-means-24-hrs-but/#quip2858897Darth_Algar You’ve heard or herding cats? Getting atheists and freethinkers to march lockstep is more like herding Siamese Fighting Fish.

@Seek_Kolinahr Another excellent point.

@Linda_Owl I am sure you also know that despite that clear fact, many do.

@DWW25921 Now you know. See how much fun Fluther can be?

@DominicX I think that’s a dead ringer. GA!

@basstrom188 Yes, while the Omniscient God was telling man that the Earth was the center of the Solar System, and stood stationery while the Sun revolved around it, He also neglected to give them any clue how long a year took. Not too surprising, because if the Earth was the center of the Solar System, there would be no such thing as years.

@AstroChuck Boy, are they ever. The less they know, the more they seem to think they know.

@RocketGuy That at least.

Ooh Ooh, remember when god made the sun stop in the sky for three days?

…how did they know it had been three days? Someone invent the Swatch Watch shortly prior?

@Seek_Kolinahr Yeah, when a sundial is all you keep time with, that would be a problem.

@ETpro “You’ve heard or herding cats? Getting atheists and freethinkers to march lockstep is more like herding Siamese Fighting Fish.”

Ok.

@ETpro It amazes me when someone can say that people who wrote something 2000 years ago were uneducated, and therefore, that you know more than they do. The lack of humility will not serve you well.
Whatever!

@filmfann Those people 2,000 years ago thought that a cold sore was a mark of God’s anger. We do know more than they did.

Okay, let me give you an example.

ETpro says that the prophesy indicates the Savior will be born of a young woman, not a virgin.
Wow! There is a prophesy! The Savior’s mom is a young woman! That should be easy to do!
Why is it so clear the intention of the word did not mean virgin? Is it possible the language has changed?
By the way, Peter was from a very well educated family. He knew the Old Testament well, but didn’t correctly interpret it until God smote him with blindness, and told him His plans for him.
I hope you all can find your faith in God. It gives me no pleasure to see people so wrong.

If the language has changed then the Bible is not infallible now is it?

“I hope you all can find your faith in God. It gives me no pleasure to see people so wrong.”

And what if you’re wrong? What then?

Any failure would be in translation, not in the original book. The failure would be man’s, not God’s.

@filmfann But if it’s the infallible word of God how can their be errors? Regardless, God’s failure or man’s the Bible, as it stands now, is not inerrant is it?

We’ll never know what the original writings of what is now bound together as “the Bible” said, as we do not have the source material. At best, we have copies several generations old.

OK. I think I might agree with @filmfann on this.

Here comes my religious history lesson O_o…
Jesus was put to death for no other reason than being the “King of the Jews”, so obviously He had done something at that time that changed the Romans minds and allowed them to execute Jesus and seeing as He was murdered, yes I said murdered because he did not die from sickness or old age, but ultimately by the order of Pontius Pilate, and Pilate is a historical figure, Pilate was also a prefect to be exact, so this means that Pilate found something Jesus had done serious enough to warrant the death penalty.

I also happen to know that during an excavation an archeological find was made and Pilate was referred to in Latin on a 2’x3’ limestone inscription found at the site of ancient Caesarea in Israel, therefore linking him to the reign of Tiberius Claudius Nero. This inscription also refers to Pontius as prefect (Praefectus civitatium) and also links Jesus’s death with Pilate. Not long ago I originally thought that Pilate was a procurator which I have learned recently after my continual need for learning on the subject of Christianity that he was not.

Anyway this just proves to me even more that Jesus was a real person.

According to those who have seen the inscription it asserts that Jesus didn’t simply die but he was killed. Pontius Pilate was the Roman governer of Judea from 26CE to 36CE.

Before you say “he was tried and convicted of treason for being the ‘King of Jews” and so He was crucified rightfully for that”. Yes, sad to say He was and that is the coup d’etat so to speak and also the way it was foretold by Jesus Christ in the scripts.

In Roman times death by crucifixion was reserved for particular crimes and particular classes.

Why was Jesus crucified and shamed in the first place? Why could He not of had Roman citizenship and an honorable death? Well, the fact of the matter is that Jesus Christ created problems and He is still creating problems today. If you look at the verses He was condemned because He made a lot of claims, claims like:

John Chapter 8 verse 23

And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. These claims were blasphemy, like many people think they are even today, but Jesus kept making the same claim over and over again.

So anyway,

Those with proper Roman citizenship were supposed to be immune from crucifixion, and of course Jesus did not have Roman citizenship, but they could be executed by other means and crucifixion was not only supposed to be frightening and painful but the most shameful of deaths. At the time of Jesus’s death they even went as far to inscribe His crucifixion cross with the initials INRI which has led many to believe this was a further shaming of Jesus on Pilates part.

John chapter 19:18–22 states and backs up the story:

18 Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.

19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was Jesus Of Nazareth The King Of The Jews.

20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

21 Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews.

22 Pilate answered, What I have written I have written.

If people were witness to someone of that time standing up against Roman rule then Crucifixion was reserved for them or for those who in some other way seemed to challenge the social order. Jesus was bold and He challenged the order but He also knew the outcome, which is stated in the scripts. “It is finished” John 19:30

If the accounts in the Bible are true then Jesus did challenge or even put some fear into Pontius and the Romans and that time it had to be because he had followers maybe he had followers from the Roman Empire maybe they were followers that were close to Pontius Pilate which threatened Pilates status but He obviously had Pontius Pilate believing and afraid that He may actually be the “King Of Jews” because he created a division between the people.

John chapter 8:2–13

8 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

13 The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true.

Now if that is not enough, remember I said “Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from 26CE to 36CE” the dead sea scrolls have been given various dates between 408BCE to 318CE. CE is the Christian Era and can also be abbreviated as AD(Anno Domini).

Even more powerful evidence is that when we discovered the dead sea scrolls we would find despite the gap from the time they were created to the Old Testament, scholars found the Masoretic Text and Dead Sea Scrolls to be nearly identical.

IMHO the Dead Sea Scrolls provide relevant evidence for us that the Old Testament was meticulously preserved.

How does Pilate’s historicity equate to Jesus Christ being real? Almost all myths incorporate real people, places and events to one extant or another.

And the words ‘nearly identical’ and ‘meticulously preserved’ are pretty much opposites.

Also, re: the dead sea Scrolls – there are 972 documents. 40% are canonical Bible entries. 30% are Bible like entries that don’t count because the council of Nicea didn’t know about them, and the rest are random stories, historical records, pretty much anything you’d find in a library in the first century of the common era.

They don’t mention Jesus at all, though. And they were found with coins dating to about the year 75 AD.

CE is common era, by the way. Not Christian era. You’ve been reading answers in Genesis again.

Also also, Jesus (according to Matthew and Luke) was hanged between two theives. So probably not that uncommon a punishment.

If you really want to be pissed off, ask me why I think he was actually executed for stealing a Roman citizen’s horse.

@Seek_Kolinahr Are they ‘pretty much’ opposites or are they opposites.

“They don’t mention Jesus at all, though.”

I wasn’t talking about the scrolls mentioning Jesus, you mentioned that.

These are the real dates for the coins.

Now if you will also recall I said “the dead sea scrolls have been given various dates between 408BCE to 318CE” which proves that not even I can confirm or deny any one certain date.

By the way? You may want to stop now, before this gets worse…

@Darth_Algar Well for one Pilate was real. So maybe it’s just the greatest myth ever, thank you so much Starbuck! But for now the proof that Jesus existed and was a real person is much better than Him not existing. The problem in that time was the claims that Jesus was making, and surely you could see that too if you looked a little harder, it’s not about “if” a man existed, but about what that man could accomplish that has people in an uproar.

I like how I am accused of reading answers in Genesis…because quite honestly each time I answer a question about Christianity I feel like we are doing a scene from the latest Saturday Night Live special. It’s laughable to say the least “so why ask PIGFUCK!”
quoted from the movie The Master

All we need for Christmas is a mockingbird. XD

@Seek_Kolinahr I actually find it alarming that your whole goal is to piss me off, actually I take that back, I am not alarmed.

@KaY_Jelly “Well for one Pilate was real. So maybe it’s just the greatest myth ever, thank you so much Starbuck! But for now the proof that Jesus existed and was a real person is much better than Him not existing.”

No it isn’t. Evidence for Pontius Pilate is not evidence for Jesus Christ. There’s no real evidence outside the Bible for the existence of Jesus Christ.

@Darth_Algar What’s your argument? Because at this point you’ve proven nothing other than a few slight attempts to disprove my arguments.

And again I didn’t say it was proof of Jesus’s existence, obviously though the fact that you feel the need to argue the point of that speaks true of the facts that I was obviously pointing out. Denying them doesn’t make them less true.

I SAID AND I QUOTE: “But for now the proof that Jesus existed and was a real person is much better than Him not existing.”

WOW! Looks like some people really do read what they want, only know half the story, and/or make it up as they go along..with that, it’s pretty amazing considering the time gap that the masoretic text and the dead sea scrolls are even nearly idententical!

Oh, you didn’t claim there was proof that Jesus Christ existed you just claimed that the proof that he existed is better than the the “proof” of him not existing. Almighty then….

BTW: there is not, and never will be proof that Christ did not exist. You cannot prove a negative. But the burden does not fall on proving that Christ did not exist, the burden is in proving that he did exist.

@Darth_Algar

‘But the burden does not fall on proving that Christ did not exist, the burden is in proving that he did exist.”
WOW again. Because it is exactly what I did. You have no arguments just comments from the peanut gallery.

“there is not, and never will be proof that Christ did not exist” OK. Actually I find that remark completely and utterly ignorant on your part, I mean scientists and archeologists make many new discoveries everyday, I would of at least thought you could of come up with some kind of argument for crying out loud, I mean you could of been rooting for the ‘mythological’ wookiee creatures by now, I mean there must be some really great evidence on that since you want to go with the “myth” idea….maybe you’d like to change that argument that never was.

But I am done debating with you about it, because between you and I, sorry to say there really is nothing you can give me to move us any further from this point here.

And you still managed to add words to what I said that don’t belong and I am still amazed at the idea that many years later masoretic text and the dead sea scrolls are even nearly idententical!

I’m sorry, where was this proof of Christ’s existence?

Involuntary ignorance is not charged against you as a fault; but your fault is this——you neglect to inquire into the things you are ignorant of.

~St. Augustine of Hippo

Why are so many Christians so terrible at arguing their points?

They don’t have any.

They are discouraged from studying on their own, and instead are encouraged to rely on authority figures to inform them off what their opinions should be. This inherently prevents them from effectively debating their position with people who do not follow the pre determined script their religious authority figures prepared them for.

The focus is on converting the weak minded, not defending the theology against critical thinkers.

“The focus is on converting the weak minded, not defending the theology against critical thinkers.”

Are you calling non believers ‘weak minded’? That’s new. You said it. I think you better take a step back and start wondering who really is critical around here.

And don’t be discouraged because I don’t want to provide you with the information that you want…it certainly doesn’t mean you couldn’t stick your own nose in a few history books from the library and source this stuff for yourself.

So I can see you are confused @Seek_Kolinahr, and we all know who loves confusion because in one moment you say, “they don’t have any.”

Meaning Christians have no points to what they say.

Then you say: “and instead are encouraged to rely on authority figures to inform them off what their opinions should be.” who’s opinions are you talking about? And your own ‘opinion’ is sounding very athe_ish_.

And then you say: “The focus is on converting the weak minded,” so for some reason you personally see Christians in a stronger position otherwise no need to say that or use the word weak.

How can Christians defend theology if the very right to rely on the authority figure in better preparation to silly atheists questions is not part of the deal? That is basically what you are saying.

None of what you said really makes sense. You are holding Christians up to these standards that you are basically making impossible for them to fulfill.

Obviously you don’t see that in your own confusion, but I do believe I made some points here, and as for the historical part I could do that also, but I hit a wall of ignorance and I refuse to do all of the work, so yes if you are this interested you could go and learn yourself because I’m definitely not here to convert anyone.

When God “made” the Earth, a day was six hours.

@KaY_Jelly You “don’t want” to provide the information because you don’t have the information. The “I don’t want to” bit is a classic cop-out used by people who know they can’t defend their points.

@KaY_Jelly You’re continuing to display a striking lack of reading comprehension skills. I’m done.