Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Pat Robertson is a heretic, a blasphemer, perhaps the Anti-Christ

Timothy Kincaid

December 10th, 2012

From James Gurney’s charming children’s book Dinotopia, which has nothing to do with Pat Robertson or young earth creationists.

From our dear dear friends at the American Family Association:

On a broadcast of The 700 Club late last month, Pat Robertson disputed the belief that the earth is about 6,000 years old, suggesting billions instead.

“I know people will probably try to lynch me when I say this,” he stated, “but Bishop Ussher — God bless him — wasn’t inspired by the Lord when he said it all took 6,000 years. It just didn’t …. There was a time that [dinosaurs] were on the earth and it was before the time of the Bible. So don’t try to cover it up and make like everything was 6,000 years. That’s not the Bible.”

Well! I declare!

Can’t he read the simple English in which the Bible was written? It’s right there in black and white, to be taken literally and exactly!

My oh my!

But not to worry:

Moreover, the AIG researcher notes that Robertson’s claim that dinosaurs existed before biblical times is illogical, because there is no pre-biblical time; the Bible starts with the creation of the world.

Nuff said.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

markanthony
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

This article is hilarious. The AIG guy notes that bible says the earth is approx. 6,000 years old, but then mocks Pat for using carbon-14 dating which shows the earth is at least 80,000. So he contradicts himself in the same paragraph. These bible literalists are so strange.

Ben in Oakland
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

“Pat Robertson is a heretic, a blasphemer, perhaps the Anti-Christ”

Why is this news? We’ve known it for decades.

revchicoucc
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

The Bible does not say the earth is 6000 years old. The literalists, inerrantists and young creationists who insist on such a number are interpreting the Bible, which pre-dates any scientific way of measuring the age of the earth, to reach that number. Such interpreting has been going on for several thousand years, and not just by Biblical literalists or, for that matter, Christians.

The point I emphasize is this idea requires interpreting the Bible. Inerrantists and literalists like to claim they are just following a plain text reading of the Bible, but they ARE interpreting it.

ZRAinSWVA
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

And reading the comments on the above linked website just make me want to weep.

There’s no discussion with folks like those. None.

Michael C
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

It’s frightening how many Americans buy into this anti-science. If you’re up for a good laugh (or a good cry), check out the heated debate that went on at One News Now.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/culture/2012/12/10/christian-broadcaster-straying-from-scripture

Sandhorse
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

Ok,

I’m not so much of a biblical literalist to see the bible as a science book, nor a book about astronomy.

However, I have a hard time believing the earth is ‘billions’ of years old.

This assumption just doesn’t jive with the observable facts about the Sun increasing in size and radiation output and the moon measurably moving away from the earth.

Take the second fact for example.

The moon is moving away from the earth at a rate of 3.8 centimeters per year, or one foot approximately every 8 years. (30.48 cm divided by 3.8 cm = 8.02)

The moon is 238,900 miles away from the earth or roughly 1,261,392,000 feet from earth. (238,900 x 5,280 = 1,261,392,000)

If the above numbers are correct, (and I will freely admit math was never my strong suit) the earth was moving along the surface of the earth (or being birthed from the earth depending on your theory) near about 150 million years ago, or put in evolutionary terms, when man was walking upright and making rudimentary tools.

What a sight either spectacle would have been to behold by early man. I should hope they knew how to swim as the tide must have been a real drowner..er downer as well.

I suppose I must be missing something…

Frank
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

A scientific fact: The “Christian Bible” was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek NOT ENGLISH. English is a translation of the before mentioned languages. People who deny or fail to recognize that a translation, without the “sitz en liben” is flawed.

I hope this information will be helpful to others.

Priya Lynn
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

Sandhorse, man was not walking upright and making tools 150 million years ago, man did not exist 150 million years ago.

The first tool making humans were homo habilis which appeared aproximately 2 million years ago and the first upright walking proto-humans appeared about 4 million years ago.

The rate at which the moon moves away from the earth has varied considerably over the history of our solar system, so one cannot take the current rate and extrapolate to a time when the moon was formed.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_moon_moving_away_from_earth

Priya Lynn
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

Humans as we are today appeared about 200,000 years ago.

Timothy Kincaid
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

Sandhorse,

As Priya Lynn illustrates, your assumptions were incorrect. However, your point is a good one.

I think that we need to be careful not to be dogmatic about any beliefs about which we simply cannot know.

I think that the evolutionary model seems like a logical one and that it is our best guess at present. The evidence to date seems to support that model.

But it may all be swept away in twenty years by compelling evidence of some other explanation. For all I know, the Flying Spaghetti Monster may show up and explain it all.

Which is to say, never trust those who are absolutely certain about that which cannot be certain.

Timothy Kincaid
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

Theory currently is that all humans are descended from one woman 150,000 to 200,000 years ago, “Mitochondrial Eve”. Our matrilinial lineage (mother’s mother’s mother, etc.) goes back to the same female protohuman.

We don’t really know that this Eve was unique in any way or that there was some genetic advantage that resulted in her mitochondria being passed on. And, for all we know, there were other women from whom we all descend (for example, supposing that Eve was monogamous, her mate’s mother would also be the mother of all humanity – we just wouldn’t have her mitochondria).

But this Eve theory is one that was unknown until the late 80′s. Prior to that time, it was not believed that all humanity evolved from one woman.

For me, this is fascinating as it “makes true”, in a sense, both the evolutionary model and the “Adam and Eve” story (I don’t take Genesis literally – I see it as allegorical and descriptive of things that were conceptually beyond the thinking of a nomadic bronze age tribe).

I don’t need to believe in a common ancestor to all humanity in order to see truth and value in the Genesis story, but it is astonishing to me how closely some aspects of the two ideas mirror. I wonder how much was known by Egyptians and recorded in story form in Hebrew scripture.

Sandhorse
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

Well, just for the record, I wasn’t making an assumption so much as using bad Google search criteria.

Looking back in my search history I asked ‘where were humans 2 million years ago?’ as apposed to the 200 million for which I was looking. So Priya’s timetable is 100% correct.

I had also considered that the moons rate of orbit decay may be increasing with time which would of course affect the outcome.

But again, 6,000 or 6,000,000,000; I am not threatened by either. I’m just not convinced of the latter and skeptical of the former.

But I agree Tim, anytime someone states their conclusions are absolute piques my incredulity.

Sandhorse
December 11th, 2012 | LINK

Piggybacking on your second reply Tim there is something to be said for the Pre-Adamite hypothesis. Especially considering how the pre-adamite earth environment may have been involved in the flood of Noah. And how said environment would have affected the human physique and lifespan.

Not to mention the ‘high drama’ contained in the pre-adamite storyline.

If nothing else, it would no doubt make an interesting sci-fi movie.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.