Gosh... so affected?

Well, just got a comment here from a certain KaM about the bat, the ostrich and uh...a Hebrew word. (I'll just post it as a screen-capture)...

Anyways, I guess that's how it ends. But why so pissed?

My issue still stand: if the preacher was correct that ancient Hebrews doesn't have any idea regarding taxonomy, then the claim of the so-called "scientific foreknowledge of the bible" is questionable.

The "ancient Hebrew word defense" doesn't really improved the situation. If the ancient Hebrew word ('owph) means bird, then the bat is not a bird. If the ancient Hebrew word ('owph) means "things that fly" or "flying creatures" then having an ostrich in the list is a big boo-boo.

Since KaM said that he will post his rebuttal on his page (which I really don't give a damn) then go ahead.

Time to move on.

Ciao!

Bird Bat, Bird Brained

Remember the post I made about a certain television preacher who said that ancient Hebrews doesn't have any idea regarding taxonomy (AKA animal classification) that's why they included the bat in a list of birds?

Well, my issue here is that if the preacher was correct, then the claim of the so-called "scientific foreknowledge of the bible" is questionable.

I received a comment on that post - a sort of an apologetic response - but, it really didn't tackle the issue. Instead, it tried to justify the list of "birds." According to the comment, Leviticus 11:13-19 was talking about "flying creatures" not just birds, because the "original Hebrew text" says flying creatures.

OK, so let's take a look at this.
Lev 11:13 'These, moreover, you shall detest among the birds;

Hmmm...
So, Leviticus 11:13 is a start of a list. A list of 20 "birds" that you should not eat. On that list, in Leviticus 11:19 it says that  "...and the bat.” The twentieth, and only the twentieth in the list, is not a bird. The bat is a mammal.

Other bible translations use the word fowls instead of birds. Well, according to the New Oxford American Dictionary, a fowl is a bird.