To help your children (and yourself) combat "Socratic" logic similar to that in the videos I discussed in my previous blog, you need a good course in Christian apologetics. I highly recommend Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics by Norman L. Geisler.
Here are some samples from the book that are relative to those videos. You will need to read the book for a complete explanation. I just wrote some excerpts to give you the idea.
Rabbit chewing cud: "Rabbits do not chew the cud in a technical senses, they engage in a chewing action called 'reflection' which looks the same to an observer. . . They are listed with animals that chew the cud so that the common person could make the distinction in everyday observation. . . This is a good example of why the Bible has no factual erros, but it is not a scientific textbook in the modern sense." (page 696)
------------------------
"The opening chapters of Genesis (1-11) are typically thought to be mythological explanations derived from earlier version of the story found in the ancient Near East. But this view chooses only to notice the similarities between Genesis and the creation stories in other ancient cultures. If we can propose derivation of the human race from one family, plus general revelation, some lingering traces of the true historical account would be expected.
The recent discoveries of creation accounts at Ebla (16,000 clay tablets that predate the Babylonian account by about 600 years), bears a close resemblance to the Genesis account. The people at Ebla believed in creation from nothing.
Flood accounts have been written throughout the centuries and world. The Epic of Gilgamesh is one such account. The Greeks, Chinese, Mexicans, Algonquins, and the Hawaiians have flood stories. "One list of Sumerian kings treats the flood as an historical reference point. . . Only the Biblical account; however, is the year of the flood given as well as dates for the chronology relative to Noah's life. . . The cubical Babylonian ship could not have saved anyone. . . the biblical ark is rectangular - long, wide, and low - so that it could ride the rough seas well. . . The length of the rainfall in the pagan accounts (seven days) is not enough time for the devastation they describe. . . The Babylonian idea that all of the flood waters subsided in one day is equally absurd. Another striking difference between Genesis and the other versions is that in these accounts the hero is granted immortality and exalted. The Bible moves on to Noah's sin. Only a version that seeks to tell the truth would include this realistic admission.
How did Moses write Genesis? ". . . the history of Genesis was originally written on clay tablets and passes on from one generation to the next with each 'clan leader' being responsible for keeping them edited and up to date. The main clue . . .is the periodic repetition of words and phrases, especially the phrase 'This is the generation of.' . . Many ancient tablets were kept in order by making the first words of the new tablet a repetition of the last words of the previous stone. A literary evaluation of Genesis compared to other ancient literature indicates that it was compiled no later than the time of Moses. It is quite possible that Genesis is a family history recorded by the patriarchs and edited into its final form by Moses." (page 49-50) "from the earliest know rabbinical records, these books have unanimously been ascribed to Moses. this is true of the Talmud, as well as works of such Jewish writers as Philo and Josephus." (page 588)
------------------------
Alleged errors in Bible: (pages 74-80)
"Why the Bible cannot err. The argument for an errorless (inerrant) Bible can be put in this logical form:
God cannot err.
The Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, the Bible cannot err.
"Logically, the argument is valid. So, if the premises are true, the conclusion is also true. If the theistic God exists, then the first premise is true.
"it is helpful to specify more clearly what is meant by 'truth' and what would constitute an 'error.' Truth is what corresponds to reality. Error is what does not correspond to reality. . . .As Augustine said, 'Mistakes come not in the revelation of God, but in the misinterpretation of man.' Except where scribal errors and extraneous change crept into textual families over the centuries, all the critics' allegations of error in the Bible are based on errors of their own. Most problems fall into one of the following categories:
1. "Assuming the Unexplained is Unexplainable. No informed person would claim to be able to fully explain all Bible difficulties. However, it is a mistake for the critic to assume that the explained cannot and will not be explained. . . Until recently, scientists did not know how the bumblebee could fly . . . scientists do not now know how life can grow on thermovents in the depths of the sea. But no scientist throws in the towel and cries 'contradiction!' The true biblical scholar approaches the Bible with the same presumption that there are answers to the thus-far unexplained. . . the student goes on with research, looking out for the means to discover an answer. . . Critics once proposed that Moses could not have written the first five books of the Bible, because Moses' culture was preliterate. Now we know that writing had existed thousands of years before Moses. . . Critics once believed that Bible references to the Hittite people were totally fictional. . . Now that the HIttites' national library has been found in Turkey, the skeptics' once-confident assertions seem humorous."
2. Confusing Interpretations with Revelations
3. Forgetting the Bible's Human Characteristics
4. Assuming Divergent Accounts are false.
5. Presuming that the Bible approves of all it records.
6. Forgetting the Bible is Nontechnical. To be true, something does not have to use scholarly, technical, or so-called 'scientific' language.
7. Assuming round numbers are false.
8. Neglecting to note literary devices.
9. Forgetting that only the original text is inerrant.
10. Confusing general with universal statements.
11. Not recognizing progressive revelation (God not revealing everything at once similar to assuming a parent is self-contradictory for allowing a sixteen-year-old to stay up later at night than a six-year-old.)
(page 75-76)
------------------------
Virgin Birth myth - read pages 201-202.
------------------------
God's existence: page 251-253. ". . . if something exists and if nothing cannot cause something, then it follows that something must exist necessarily. For if something did not necessarily exist, then nothing would have caused the something that does exist. Since it is impossible for nothing to cause something, then it is necessary for something to always have been."
------------------------
Pascal's wager - page 584-585.
------------------------
Supposed scientific errors in the Bible - page 692-700
Example: "The earth is round. Isaiah spoke of God who 'sits enthroned above the circle of the earth.' This is a remarkably accurate description for an eighth-century B.C. prophet." See also Proverbs 8:27.
------------------------
Sun stood still - "no more unscientific than the phrases used by meteorologists today - "sunrise" and "sunset". It is simply an observational statement from the vantage point of a person on the face of the earth, which is, after all, where we are." (Page 698
------------------------
Problems with Genesis 1 & 2 - page 693-694.
"unacceptable assertions that the animal kingdom began with creatures of the sea and winged birds. However, birds did not appear until after reptiles and other land animals. The Bible does not actually say that God created feathered birds before reptiles. It refers to winged creatures (Gen. 1:21) This is often translated 'birds' (i.e. flying animals) but is nevered rendered 'feathered creatures.' And, according to science, winged creatures did exist before feathered birds.
"view that Genesis 2 contradicts the account given in Genesis 1. The charge here is that Genesis 1 declares that animals were created before humans, while Gene 2:19 seems to reverse this, saying, "the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field . . .He brought them to the man to see what he would name them,' implying Adam was created before they were. The solution to this problem, however, becomes apparent when we take a closer look at the two texts. The difference appear from the fact that Genesis 1 gives the order of events; Genesis 2 provides more content about them. Genesis 2 does not contradict chapter 1, since it does not affirm exactly when God created the animals. He simply says he brought the animals (which he had previously created) to Adam in order that he might name them. The focus on chapter 2 is on naming them, not on creating them."
"Genesis 1 - chronological order, outline, creating animals
Genesis 2 - topical order, details, naming animals"
Page 694
------------------------
Virgin birth of Christ - page 759-764. |
