The Bible

Wrong, I have lots of evidence, very strong evidence that a donkey cannot talk for instance, where as you have exactly none to the contrary.
There is very strong evidence that the world wide flood as described in the bible did not happen, YOU HAVE NONE THAT IT DID.
You are confusing proof with evidence.
Now before you go further lets remind people what your assertion was,

Now again there is lots of scientific evidence that the world wide flood as described in the bible did not happen, there is lots of scientific evidence that refutes the biblical account, got that?

 

I've read the Bible cover to cover. I'm on my second read. I don't need a better source to tell me Christianity is not for me. I will emphasize again, if Yahweh demands worship and a relationship with his creations, he wouldn't throw us into confusion with cryptic texts like Revelation.

I would suggest you look up the leaked Jehovah's Witnesses video dubbed "Pillowgate". I promise you it's hilarious!

As for everything else you have stated, I summarize it as "Don't listen to that person/group, listen to me! Listen and look up MY sources!" You assume every professing Christian online and in real life I've encountered to this point has not given me the REAL truth or the WHOLE truth but guess what? You have the truth that will bring me back to the church pews!

 

It's not a matter if you think something is for you as if you're shopping for a pretty sweater. It's a matter of if there's reasonable evidence if it's true or not. Two different things. Thus far, you've basically been complaining it's not to your personal tastes. Faith isn't about your personal tastes, Christianity isn't the Altar of You. If you want to worship your own feelings and deify your own beliefs, then Christianity definitely isn't for you.

"Throw us into confusion" because the Bible isn't written in a manner you personally demand? To much "me me" there.

Why would I? I don't follow them.

I didn't say that. I said to do research for scholarly sources and studies on topics rather than asking gotcha questions of a few people. That's what earnest research looks like. I merely mentioned Cold Case Christianity as a resource I found helpful.

You'd probably end up with the same view of mathematics if you randomly asked people on the street about specific Calculus questions that you found confusing. Do you think that's a smart way of answering those questions? And if you didn't like the answers the people gave you on the street about mathematics, would you then mock mathematicians?

Since we all know that randomly asking people things is going to expose a good number of misinformed, then it seems clear you're just using this as an excuse to reject the faith and that your real reasons are unstated.

I'm saying your methodology is poor, you can't base something on conversations with laypeople and need to do earnest research. Your attitude and reasoning are so poor on this - due to obvious emotional upset which is coming out through hostility - that you think it's acceptable to "mock" all Christians because a small percentage of them are young-earth creationists. Where else do you apply such poor reasoning? Some Jews are also young-earth creationists, do you mock all Jews as well? Do you mock Muslims because the Quran teaches the earth is flat? Probably not. That's always how it is, especially with people on the political left - they love mocking Christians and refuse to apply the same standards to other faiths because they're "minority."

 

Oh but it is a matter of me thinking something is for me or not! It's called freedom of choice and free will which many if not all Christians claim to cherish. And by free will, I have chosen to reject Christianity because there is no truth within it compelling enough for me to eat the bread and drink the wine ever again. You can claim that you have THE truth. People of other religions think exactly the same of their religion.

To get a good laugh watching a man talking about tight underwear and lap dances!

 

Good advice. Try it..

 

You're too closed minded to consider it seriously for personal reasons which have nothing to do with your claim that it's a false religion. That's obvious a mile off.

 

Since your so open minded which other religions have you studied and what was the reason for your rejection?

 

All that does is explain current phenomena, under current climatic conditions. It is a flawed assumption to insist that these conditions have been homogeneous throughout earth's history. Not even the most hysterical universalist does that. How can you assume uniformity throughout earth's history?

Archaeology confirms or gives evidence for historical claims. It is the hard evidence for historical beliefs. You have no archaeological evidence for your accusations against the bible.

Again, you conflate beliefs with facts, and assume ONLY naturalism is possible. That is your belief and assumption, that i am not compelled to follow. A belief in supernaturalism allows for suspension of physical laws, or an override. Therefore, a talking donkey, the sun paused in the sky, someone rising from the dead, or other 'miracles' are explainable by supernatural intervention.

Empiricism, and scientific methodology is useless in such a claim, because it is outside of material laws and explanations. It is a faith issue, with the believer accepting the claim based on internal, subjective factors, not empirical science.

The skeptic may doubt the supernatural claims, but he cannot DISprove them, either, as they are outside of empirical analysis.

The only valid criticism is that supernatural claims are not natural, and thereby not subject to scientific methodology. That does not disprove, or debunk the claims of supernatural intervention, it only exposes the limits of empiricism.

The claim here is that the miracles described in the bible COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED. This is an unproven and unprovable assertion. I am not trying to PROVE that the events DID happen. That is empirically impossible, too. I am refuting the illogical claim that they could not have happened, based only on arguments of incredulity and assumptions of uniformity and naturalism.

You cannot prove, that the events described in the bible did not happen. There is no 'evidence!' proving supernatural intervention to be impossible. You may be skeptical, which is a valid response. But dogmatic insistence based only on incredulity and assumptions only reveals bias, not reason. A majority of human beings, from the birth of man, have believed in an unseen, spiritual dimension. You cannot disprove this belief. You can define it as non empirical, which is the same as supernatural, but you cannot disprove it.

Therefore, the statement stands, unrefuted:

There are no proofs that the bible is 'full of errors!' That is a prejudicial smear, false accusation, and unbased assertion.

Or, as you quoted from my post,
No historical accounts recorded in the biblical manuscripts have been disproved or refuted by any evidence.

If you believe the bible to be flawed, or useless to the human condition, that is your right. But there is no evidence for the absurd, pejorative, accusations of 'error!'

 

But we're not talking about 'throughout earths history'. Unless, of course, Noah existed millions of years ago. We have a good understanding of geological conditions for hundreds of thousands of years. None of those conditions would allow a 'Noah's flood' of Biblical proportions

Archaeology confirms or gives evidence for historical claims. It is the hard evidence for historical beliefs.

What's that got to do with it. Archaeology also can disprove historical claims. The walls of Jericho certainly fell down - several times. No one disputes that fact. It's been conquered more than once and is on an earthquake belt. Nothing surprising about that. Why would Joshua be bothered about a small town like Jericho. His supposed army would have been 10 times the whole population of the town. Archaeology shows just how small it was. You could walk round it in approx 30 minutes.
The Joshua invasion is just a story.

Some events in the King Era - 1000 - 650 BCE - have been identified by archaeology and also by artifacts outside the Bible. But often comparing the 2 we have different descriptions and outcomes of battles In one we have 800,000 Israeli soldiers facing 500,000 Judean soldiers. If you know anything about Palestine of the time that figure probably exceeds its total population. Palestine could not support vast numbers. The event may have been a skirmish between the 2 but greatly exaggerated to create a greater impression. This happens often in the Bible. 2.5 - 3 million leaving Egypt sounds better than a mere tribe leaving after feeding their flocks. And Egyptians treated their slaves well, knowing their value. Until late Egypt when Ptolemy ruled under Rome. Far later than the Exodus story.

 

No by using what you call reasoning and logic you cannot call anything false since you cannot prove anything. It works both ways.

Incorrect again you cannot claim anything to be false since you claim supernaturalism can happen therefor using your logic and reasoning it is quite possible the Bible does not even exist. Please stop saying anything is false when you cannot prove it to be so or even your own existence.

Again you cannot make any claims of anything being false, you only have your faith that it is not false, please be consistent with your arguments.

Again you over reach yourself you cannot claim anything is false, that is one of the limitations of having only faith to base your logic and reasoning on. There is no credibility in ancient book, quotes, manuscripts or anything else. When you choose supernatraulism you chose a world in which there are no facts, no evidence, no falsehoods, nothing but blind faith, quite literally anything is possible in your world.
God commanded that planes be flown into the twin towers and you cannot say false or claim they are guilty.
Your bible does not even keep to your principles since it claims that there are false gods and as you have shown you cannot prove that to be true or false.
I have always struggled with how religious fanatics can do the terrible things they do, and I thank you for the insight into why people murder, slaughter, rape and behave the way they do when they abandon the logic and reasoning man has developed and have only faith. Thank you.

 

Not if your world view states that the supernatural can happen at anytime, Usfan cannot even prove he exists! That is the incredible world that people like him exist in, no laws, no morals, nothing but blind faith. You cannot argue that anything has ever happened since he believes anything can! Only when he denies other gods and other interpretations can you call him out, since he cannot prove it never happened.

 

Nice strawmen, but little reasoning. I see nothing rational for my points, just caricatures, assertions, ad hom, and fallacies.

There is nothing for me to debate.. No facts, and no reasoning.

The epistemology and reasoning on display here is disturbing.. better for me to pass.

 

No you have had your reasoning turned back on yourself and cry foul! Prove that the bible was not written yesterday using supernaturalism. We were all created seconds ago, prove that is not true, using you own logic and reasoning as you have tried to use it in this thread.

 

Nevermind. You have abandoned reason and turned to straw men, ad hom, and other fallacies. I can only dismiss your assertions and ignore your fallacies. If that is all you have, i see no benefit in continuing this discussion...

 

That is a speculation, with no facts to compel that conclusion. It is your belief, only.

That is speculation, inference, and plausibility, not archaeological evidence. It is your belief, only.

So you speculate, without basis. So you believe, prejudicially.

You have assertions, inferences, assumptions, and speculations. These are not facts, to compel your beliefs.

 

First of all there are no ad hom, I have not insulted you in any way.

I have simply shown that if you only have faith and dismiss empirical evidence because supernatraulism can change it at any time then it works both ways, you cannot have any truths, logic or reasoning since supernatralism trumps them. I can understand how you do not want to argue that point, since using supernatralism it cannot be argued.

This was what you stated, supernaturalism allows for the suspension of physical laws.

Therefore by your own argument how can you argue any law is absolute?

 

By your adoption of supernaturalism there can be no facts, please be consistant in your argument.

No facts supernaturalism allows for the suspension of facts.
This is your logic and cannot be proved or disproved.

 

Your problem is that you lack the knowledge to counter the points. What I have posted can be confirmed with a bit of study.

that figure probably exceeds its total population. Palestine

Not speculation at all. Just study Palestine of the time. Its geology, geography, and cultivation methods. It could not support the indigenous population and a further 2'5+ million invasion force.

The problem is that like many others you think you know the Bible. But to know that you need to know the background on which it was written. Little in the Pentatuech
was new at the time of supposed Moses. All the 'god given' regulations were in operation in contemporary, and earlier, civilisations. You can see the by reading ancient codes and texts prior to 'supposed' Moses. They were simply adopted by the Jews - as were 9 of the 10 commandments.
.

 

Ad hom is a poor substiture for reason.

Assertion and opinion is not empirical fact.

There is no hard evidence for your pejorative claims of 'error!', just unbased assertion and speculation.

Show me. Provide hard evidence for your claims, not just plausibility.

 

Ad hom.. 'to the man', instead of to the topic.

 

No, just as you are content to fling accusations without proof, i am content to defend myself from them without proof. Take your conman tactics walking, friend.

 

False. Not only is there a well known collection of self contradicting "historical" factoids in the Bible, many of the supernatural myths are demonstrably false.

Wrong again . Both the Canon collection and the content of the Bible has been changed and edited. This is known fact.

Wrong again. This error is clearly evidenced by the many sects of Christianity, and by the fact that there is no method, imagined or otherwise, to discern the truth of their competing and contradictory claims.

So what? That doesn't refute the fact that most of it was, indeed, related verbally. It literally says right in the Bible that much of the content was passed on verbally.

 

I've given you evidence. You just can't be bothered to check it - like many other Christians. You believe what you're told.

usfan said: ↑
3. The bible can be translated in many ways, and can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean.
False.

The Old Testament was written 2600 years ago. It was written by Hebrews, in the Hebrew tongue, and with Hebrew understanding of the time. And you understand its meaning? That's a joke.
Even Jesus spoke to his disciples in OT parables because, as he says 'you understand what I am talking about'. The Gentiles didn't.
To have some understanding you need to immerse yourself in the culture and times.
If you were walking down the street tomorrow and saw a 17 year youth idling around you would want to know why he wasn't working. 2600 years ago you wouldn't see that. The young man would have been married for several years and probably have a family to provide for. If you were invited to a family wedding the bride could easily be 13, 14, 15 years old having reached puberty, and the young man around the same age. Both would be far more mature than the equivalent child today. The girl would have spent years at home watching, learning and participating in running a home in preparation for an early marriage The bpy would have learnt a trade, probably working with his father. . They would have been prepared, even at that early age. Why? The importance of having children - particularly sons - was paramount.Carrying on the family name and tradition was indoctrinated in a child. We don't have the same attitude today. Our mortality rate is lower. We have an education system.
Would you marry your brother's wife if he died childless? You would have to have a good reason why not back then. For the same reason as above.

What was Jesus doing at the Well in the heat of the day? Why didn't he go to a house and ask for water?

When did the Jews actually become Monotheistic? They certainly weren't for many centuries as witnessed by archaeology's discovery of idols in Jewish homes.(Teraphim). What changed them?

Even today the West does not understand Eastern traditions, etc

Bible Colleges are just beginning to realise the need to understand the conditions and ideas of the time. Not interpret them with 21st century minds.

Interestingly. The Masoretic Bible - on which the King James is based, contains references in margins of alternative meanings of words. The Septuagint - earlier - mistranslated several words - including the notorious 'virgin' instead of 'maiden' - in regard to Mary. Words have been added where, in translation, there isn't a word to match the meaning of the original. Lastly, Hebrew had no vowels and the meaning of a word could only be translated by the context of the sentence.
th. m.n w.r. . sh.rt The man wore a shirt
th. m.n w.r. sh.rt The men were short.

The Mistranslation of Bible Revisionists and dates of Revision;
is shown in the EnglishBibles and scriptures, which were published in the Middle English. The number of biblical mis-translations and corrections are listed in the thousands and inconsistencies are innumerable, theywere either poorly translated or deliberately mistranslated from the Greek and early HebrewScriptures. The few terms I am bringing into question are the words or

terms of Witch andWitchcraft and their respective meanings, which were never found in the original Hebrew text.They were found to be later superimposed over scriptural translations that referred to words thatimplied a person to be an "Herbal Poisoner."The original phrase in Hebrew is

, ' M'khashephah lo tichayyah' which translated means, 'May am'khashephah not live'. A m'khashephah is the feminine noun for a practitioner of a form ofmagic called k'shaphim, this type of magic was characterized by the projection of psychic energythrough the use of words and sounds (ie. spell casting) a practice that was carried out in complete privacy and secrecy. Men also
practiced k’shaphim
but Exodus 20:18 uses only the female nounexclusively.Differences in concepts of the languages and cultural bias produced negative expressions such asin the present King James Version of the Bible where in Ex. 22:18 it states, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live", which never existed in that context before that time!

From the Website Academia - if you belong to it.

 

no evidence given. Just ad hom & assertions. You bluff with nothing given as fact.

ad hom

this is a 'bible error!' to you?

How can you dogmatically insist that Jesus can only do what you expect, based on your assumptions and beliefs of the times?

And past commentators... long before some Johnny-come-lately critic 2000 years removed.. have THEORIZED, that Jesus went there precisely at that time to meet an outcast, who would go to the well at off times to avoid the judgementalism of the respected citizens. Considering the woman He met, and the subsequent conversation, this seems plausible. I have no idea how you can conclude, 'Error!', based on this.

And? The Jews were CONSTANTLY berated by the prophets for idol worship. That gives evidence for the prophet's accusations. It is an unimaginable stretch to conclude, 'Error!'

False accusation. Textual variants exist, but they are minor points, not differences in content. A collection of books, translated over thousands of years would necessarily have typos or mistakes. These are not, 'Errors!', except by prejudice. The manuscripts have been validated by centuries of archaeological findings, confirming their historicity and refuting the prejudicial charge of error.

List these alleged 'errors,' if you can. Biblical scholars, translators, and apologists have scrutinized the manuscripts over the centuries much more than some trendy armchair skeptic, with nothing but made up assumptions and distortions from centuries old revisionist lies.

I am not clear about your objection, which seems to be directed at olde English translators from the 1500s. 'Witch' is your problem? It seems to me to be a valid term to translate the original to something English readers in the 1500s could understand.

If this is the best shot your copy and paste site has, on the 'bible is full of errors!' charge...

You haven't given ANY evidence of errors, just possibilities of mistranslation.. Nobody is saying that every translation of the bible, in every language, for all time, is perfect. That is inhuman and absurd.

Your charge is 'Errors!' Not typos.. not mistranslations, but historical, archaeological, falsehoods that have clear, irrefutable evidence for the charge. Merely alluding to, or speculating, or inferring error based on some assumption is not textually or historically valid. It certainly is not factual, just prejudicial opinions from hostiles.

You impugn my knowledge, which is not the issue, but an ad hom fallacy. You allude to, 'thousands of errors!', and have produced none. Your examples are not errors, by any stretch of reason. The absurdity of that claim should be evident to all but the most blinded, hostile hater of the bible. ..and i don't even see how your points would fuel his hatred and rage...

 

BTW, i have a few of the more hysterical MADAs on ignore. I see, sometimes, that there is ignored content, but i cannot see your posts. If you wish to have a rational debate on this subject, contact me & we can do a reset and try again. Otherwise I will assume you only want to heckle and disrupt the thread.

It seems to me, that an intelligent, critical, historical, archaeological, and cultural examination of The Most Significant Book in the History of Mankind, and especially western civilization, would be of interest, to see our roots and cultural influences, if nothing else. Add to that the POSSIBILITY, as some claim, of Divine origin and explanations for some of the mysteries of the universe, and our interest in this collection of books, should be piqued.

I offer civil, rational, scholarly discussion about this book, from decades of study. I don't claim to know all the answers, but they are there for us to find. Sorry i have to ignore some, and sorry to constantly point out fallacies. If we can avoid them, and address the topic rationally, i would not do it!