Credibility of the Bible

M

Mystech

Adult Supervision Required
Registered Senior Member
So, we have this book. It was written over thousands of years, by many different authors, all of whom had clear biases and motives in writing what they did. In this book the supposed word of God is given. The book is infallible because it is the word of God. We know it is the word of God, because it says so within the book. We know God’s word is infallible, because it says so in the book. We know God exists, because it says so in the book.

Does anyone here see a problem with this reasoning? Its circular logic, it’s all completely self referential. We know that everything in the bible must be true, because it says so in the bible that it is true. Does this mean that if I clam my own words and opinions are the revised opinions of God, and that you know it must be so because God is infallible, and as such so are my opinions, and you know that my opinions are those of God, because I have said so (and if I say so that means God does, too, in case you forgot), does that, then give me just as much credibility? Well in theory, yes, (though unfortunately not in practice). Why, then are so many people hip to MY scheme, but completely blind to the lies of the bible?
 
Last edited:
True or not, it's not words in the bible that are important but rather the message! Only then will understanding and taking to heart this message will goodness flow through you. I was a Christian thru molding and shaping by my parents and later dropped it when I studied the foundations of the bible(history and mythology). I studied Eastern religion and soon became a Buddhist and saw this world without bias and one-sided logic. Only then did I discover the message of the bible (as a non-Christian at that)! For those who do not fully comprehend the message they use the bible as a means to answer questions without answers, a way to justify actions, and as a refuge.
 
To quote the late, great Douglas Adams, "...and god disappeared in a puff of logic"

Did you know that the King James version of the bible has a documented minumum of 36,191 errors in translation alone?

Goodnight christians everywhere

:m: Peace
 
True Wisdom, a good point. One shouldn't simply accept what they read in the bible because it is God's law. I myself have studied the bible (I don't like arguing out of ignorance!), and in doing so I must admit that there are at least a few things in there that do make good sense. If you are going to accept anything in the bible, though, you should do it because you've thought it through and seen for yourself if it's true or not, and not accept it simply because it's the word of the lord.

My point is to show that one can't even rightly come to the conclusion that it is the word of God (or that the word of God even adds credibility to anything). It would simply be fallacious. Even if you believe in God, then I’d argue he gave you the ability to use logic for a reason, don’t just take everything at face value because of some elaborate appeal to authority. You should live your life according to how it makes sense to you, not according to how others have told you to live it.
 
we've gone over this before but here goes again...

There is evidence that the stories in the bible are correct outside of the bible itself. I am familiar with the proof found in archaeology, but i'm sure there's some in other disciplines too.

Archaeologists (especially Ron Wyatt) have found the remains of what is believed to be Noah's Ark in the mountains in turkey, and where the red sea crossing took place as well as sodom and gammorah....plus other stuff. Thats why I believe in the bible.
 
The only archeological evidence is that of ancient cities which where in the bible, this does not prove anything about any events which have happened there.

If you believe that to be proof of the bibles stories, then you must also admit that the story of the Trojan war, as it is told in the Iliad is completely true, that gods and goddesses were involved and ultimately decided the outcome. It is the exact same line of reasoning.

The fact is that simply because a location existed, and even if an event depicted happened in some form or another (such as the fall of Jericho or the like) it does not prove divine intervention, don't try to draw lines that aren't there, if there is no evidence of God's hand, don't try to see it there.
 
Originally posted by New Life
There is evidence that the stories in the bible are correct outside of the bible itself.
Click to expand...
Name one piece of evidence.

Originally posted by New Life
I am familiar with the proof found in archaeology, but i'm sure there's some in other disciplines too.
Click to expand...
There is zero proof and your assurance is simply naive.

Originally posted by New Life
Archaeologists (especially Ron Wyatt) have found the remains of what is believed to be Noah's Ark ...
Click to expand...
There's this bridge in Brooklyn ... :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by Mystech
The only archeological evidence is that of ancient cities which where in the bible, this does not prove anything about any events which have happened there.

If you believe that to be proof of the bibles stories, then you must also admit that the story of the Trojan war, as it is told in the Iliad is completely true, that gods and goddesses were involved and ultimately decided the outcome. It is the exact same line of reasoning.

The fact is that simply because a location existed, and even if an event depicted happened in some form or another (such as the fall of Jericho or the like) it does not prove divine intervention, don't try to draw lines that aren't there, if there is no evidence of God's hand, don't try to see it there.
Click to expand...

no, finding the places there isnt going to prove that what happened really happened or that there was divine intervention, but it DOES show that the writers got the details (ie geography, history) right so it stands to reason that they would be even more careful about the bigger stuff, especially in the NT.

with the cities in particular, part of the proof is found in the way the city appears to have been destroyed. There were a bunch of sulpher balls in and around the city, where sulpher balls shouldnt have existed....things like that.

ConsequentAtheist quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by New Life
There is evidence that the stories in the bible are correct outside of the bible itself.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Name one piece of evidence.

~~~~ the evidence that i'm suggesting is the cities, the ark, and the red sea crossing


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by New Life
I am familiar with the proof found in archaeology, but i'm sure there's some in other disciplines too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


There is zero proof and your assurance is simply naive.

~~~are you sure?


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by New Life
Archaeologists (especially Ron Wyatt) have found the remains of what is believed to be Noah's Ark ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


There's this bridge in Brooklyn ...
 
Originally posted by dickbaby
To quote the late, great Douglas Adams, "...and god disappeared in a puff of logic"

Did you know that the King James version of the bible has a documented minumum of 36,191 errors in translation alone?

Goodnight christians everywhere

:m: Peace
Click to expand...

King James comissioned Sir Francis Bacon to re-translate the bible to strengthen the stand point of the king. Its odd that most christians now accept this bible as the true divine word of god, when it actually differs significantly from the source text.

It's little known but King James could barely read at all, and most likely never completely read the bible named after him.
 
Originally posted by New Life
no, finding the places there isnt going to prove that what happened really happened or that there was divine intervention, but it DOES show that the writers got the details (ie geography, history) right so it stands to reason that they would be even more careful about the bigger stuff, especially in the NT.
Click to expand...

So using your "logic" let us see what you believe (be prepared for a mocking)

Let us say that I write a book called "The REAL bible" that claims that I, ZERO MASS, actually created the cosmos and existence. Let?fs say that I also put in this book a detailed map of the entire world with coordinates for all the major cities and landmarks.
Why in the hell would my having a knack for geology give my arguments of religion ANY validity?

You believe in the bible because of the evidence that people and places existed? Do you also believe in other written religious texts if they have the same "evidence", like the Koran?
You have a stupid reason for believing in the bible. Evidence is not proof, and bad evidence like a "possible" Noah?fs ark is no reason to put ANY faith in the bible's inane and puerile fairy tails about ghosts and gods.

Originally posted by New Life
with the cities in particular, part of the proof is found in the way the city appears to have been destroyed. There were a bunch of sulpher balls in and around the city, where sulpher balls shouldnt have existed....things like that.
Click to expand...

I would like to see actual evidence of this. Do you know this for a fact? Even if that were true, is that enough reason to believe in the bible?

Originally posted by New Life
~~~~ the evidence that i'm suggesting is the cities, the ark, and the red sea crossing
Click to expand...

Cities existed, although I have seen no proof that they are the same ones from the bible.
The ark is possibly the actual ark written about in the bible, also no actual evidence.
Red sea crossing, there could be a place where it was supposed to take place, but is there ANY evidence that it actually did?

Think about what you believe in before you invest yourself into a foolish and idiotic life of superstition and myth.

ZERO MASS
 
Originally posted by New Life
no, finding the places there isnt going to prove that what happened really happened or that there was divine intervention, but it DOES show that the writers got the details (ie geography, history) right so it stands to reason that they would be even more careful about the bigger stuff, especially in the NT.
Click to expand...

Once again as posted earlier to belive this you would have to believe in other stories. Like Spider-Man, he lives in New York the place exists, but that doesn't mean that there is a superhero swinging from building to building.



~~~~ the evidence that i'm suggesting is the cities, the ark, and the red sea crossing
Click to expand...

Wow, the cities exist. Do yoo have any evidence or the ark, that what they found was actually the ark. No they just think it is. Exactly how can you have proof that a sea parted since it came right back together, it's not like there is a permanent part down the middle.



I am familiar with the proof found in archaeology, but i'm sure there's some in other disciplines too.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to understand what you are tryng to prove by not being sure, but it just seems like you have no proof for anything. The bible is the least credible piece of print ever written.
 
New Life-

no, finding the places there isnt going to prove that what happened really happened or that there was divine intervention, but it DOES show that the writers got the details (ie geography, history) right so it stands to reason that they would be even more careful about the bigger stuff, especially in the NT.
Click to expand...

The evidence that certain places recorded in the bible existed proves nothing. This is not an issue of us (Zero Mass, myself and C-Atheist) being stubborn and overly critical. On the contrary, the fact that they wrote down locations has no bearing on the validity of the concepts and events written.

I could give another analogy like those already given. In my bible it gives many detailed descriptions of Fire breathing dragons and unicorns living in Los Angeles. See I feel the selling point of my bible is the fact that a city called Los Angeles exists!! Therefore they must believe in fire breathing dragons and unicorns! I dont think you want to believe anyone would be so naive, so dont follow suit and do the same for a 2000 yr old fable ridden book.

Simply the message to you is- do not confuse the two issues.
 
I remember seeing a video documentary about evidence of the events in the bible. In one part they were claiming to have found wagon wheels and the remains of chariots on the floor of the red sea. Yes there was very clear images of the coral encrusted wagon wheels and divers swimming around them... it didn't look like 2000 years worth of coral however. The images happend to be exactly the same footage from a national geographic channel documentary with a piece about a ship that sank around WWI carrying artillery.
 
New Life / Old Silliness

Originally posted by New Life
~~~~ the evidence that i'm suggesting is the cities, the ark, and the red sea crossing
Click to expand...
Good grief! :rolleyes:

~~~~ the cities ...

Every piece of folklore and legend is grounded in the experiences of the cultures that spawn them. There are real geological/geographical references to be found in the mythos of the Summerians, the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Celts, etc.

There are similarly real references in virtually every work of fiction. Kansas is known to be farm country and a center for tornadic activity. This does not constitute evidence for the Wizard of Oz.

In fact, many geographic references have been retrojected back into the folklore. For example:
... we can now genuinely speak of unanimity of the evidence. Whoever supplied the geographic information that now adorns the story had no information earlier than the Saite period (seventh to sixth centuries B.C.). The eastern Delta and Sinai he describes are those of the 26th Dynasty kings and the early Persian overloards: his toponyms reflect the renewed interest in the eastern frontier evidence for this period by fort building and canalization. He knows of "Goshen" of the Qedarite Arabs, and a legendary "Land of Ramessses." He cannot locate the Egyptian court to anything but the largest and most famous city in his own day in the northeastern Delta, namely Tanis, the royal residence from about 1075 to 725 B.C., ...

-- Egypt, Cannan, and Israel in Ancient Times by Donald B. Redford
Click to expand...
~~~~ the ark ...

Again, there's not one piece of evidence. See, for example, Reason and Revelation and Ron Wyatt.

~~~~the red sea crossing...

What red sea crossing? That's every bit like telling us the 'skipping down the yellow brick road' is evidence of the Munchkins! Do you even know what "evidence" means?

First of all, the Torah refers to the Sea of Reads, not the "Red Sea". Secondly, as suggested by the quote above, there is zero evidence for such an Exodus.

I suggest that you stop exposing your ignorance and gullibility, and spend the time instead exposing yourself to peer reviewed science.
 
you know what....im sick of this. why do all you people look for errors in the bible, try in every way to dissaprove it and stuff like that.
one of you posted that their was 36ooo errors or something in that range.....how do you know. what if the person was lying? what if the person who counted was biased as you claim the authors were...why do you believe in big bang, mulitverses etc. just cuz it sounds logical? what if some one made it up? have you done the reserach with the proper scientific equipment?do you have 100.00000000% proof that those theories explain the way things are?
 
Here we go again edgar...

Originally posted by edgar
you know what....im sick of this. why do all you people look for errors in the bible, try in every way to dissaprove it and stuff like that.
Click to expand...

I'm sick of your ignorance Edgar, sick of it!
People look for errors in the bible for many reasons, one excellent reason: Because there ARE multiple errors that you cannot overlook if you are to believe that the bible is the infallible word of god.
The fact that there are errors, thousands of errors, is reason enough not to base your whole life on what the entire biblical text states.

I would go to great lengths to disprove the events in the bible because people have got it through their heads that the bible is a true account of events that have happened in the past.
There is no such thing as a giant, the earth is not flat, and there is no god in the sky. It is all lies that people die for and I'm sick of the ignorance present in this world for people like you to believe the bible is truth.

Originally posted by edgar
one of you posted that their was 36ooo errors or something in that range.....how do you know.
Click to expand...

Many millions of people have read the bible and have read the ignorant crap that is there, and people can count...

Originally posted by edgar
what if the person was lying? what if the person who counted was biased as you claim the authors were...
Click to expand...

What if the people who wrote the bible were lying? What if they were biased? Would it matter one iota to you edgar? No because you accept blindly that the bible is the word of god.
I find it easier to believe that somebody counted the layers of bullcrap in the bible than if somebody told me there was an invisible man in the sky watching every move I make.

Originally posted by edgar
why do you believe in big bang, mulitverses etc. just cuz it sounds logical? what if some one made it up?
Click to expand...

What if somebody made it up? Well of course somebody made it up, every single piece of information we have in the sphere of human knowledge has been thought up at some point or another, the big bang THEORY is the best explanation that we have right now for the creation of the cosmos.
I am worried about you, you dim-witted ignoramus, are you actually challenging science on such a broad scale to say that somebody "made it up"?
If you are then I am worried about you, please go read a book.

Originally posted by edgar
have you done the reserach with the proper scientific equipment?do you have 100.00000000% proof that those theories explain the way things are?
Click to expand...

No, Edgar, I myself have not proven in the laboratory every piece of scientific data ever discovered, sorry I don't have that much time on my hands. Good thing that I don't have to prove everything, there have been people all over the world documenting science for hundreds of years, I'll take their word for most of that stuff.
What theories are you talking about here? Your blanket accusation of there being a lack of proof for "those theories" not only sounds weak, but also childish. Please actually form a complete thought before you post your opinions.

ZERO MASS
 
Re: Here we go again edgar...

Originally posted by Zero Mass
What theories are you talking about here? Your blanket accusation of there being a lack of proof for "those theories" not only sounds weak, but also childish. Please actually form a complete thought before you post your opinions.

ZERO MASS
Click to expand...

I am forced to agree with you here Zero Mass. Edgar and many people like him are the one main reason these debates go on. I mean I like to debate about religion, but c'mon the bible as a credible book! Who in their right mind could dismiss all the errors. Sometimes people make my head hurt a lot.
 
Re: Here we go again edgar...

Originally posted by Zero Mass
The fact that there are errors, thousands of errors, is reason enough not to base your whole life on what the entire biblical text states.

ZERO MASS
Click to expand...


:D

Please guys ...this is too easy ...we need some competitive reasoning to even argue and validate whether Bible is factual or fantasy....

I ask a simple question ...if God had to help Mankind ..would he have given us stories which are lame or would have given us some scientific knowledge which would help us in creating wonder drugs and eternal power generators...

The guys who questions the validity of scientific proven theories should be not allowed to type on his Computer as that is not mentioned in Bible ... he should be using some old parchment paper and ink....

Damn...how can religious people be so damn gullible and narrow minded....Wake up guys ...there are many things in the universe which might be better than reading some stooopid story book...

Peace Out!!
 
OK, somewhat in Edgar's defense (but mostly in my own opinion), the Bible was meant to be interpretted SYMBOLICALLY. Religious people who try otherwise are idiots, and atheists/those not religious who try to disprove the bible logically are idiots.

I am an atheist; always have been always will be. But seriously I am interested in all mythology (lol; ok, no religious jokes, promise). I've done a lot of studying on Medieval Philosophers (Augustine and Eurigena in particular), and they all speak how the word of God cannot be understood by humans... makes sense, right? So God can only have the Bible be written through humans he *inspires* :)m: hehe), so that we can *begin* to understand the word of God. We can only understand it indirectly (through metaphor, symbolism, simile etc.), so of course it's going to sound like a bunch of cat scat if you try to analyze it logically or scientifically! Religious people who try are idiots! Non-religious people who try are not only idiots, but hypocrites! :D

If you approach the Bible like that, it's a much nicer fiction. LOL, approach it like you would any other fiction book, try and read between the lines... I can't imagine why you wouldn't welcome any change, my friend... lol, sorry.

M
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top