Scientists and scholars refute the Bible

M

Medicine*Woman

Jesus: Mythstory--Not History!
Valued Senior Member
*************
M*W: Just about every story in the bible (O&NT) has been refuted by scientific discovery (or the lack thereof), and bookstores and libraries are rife with the publication of their studies. That means to me that everything in the bible is false. Why, then, do christians not know about recent studies such as the finding (or lack thereof) an historical Exodus, for example? If there was no Exodus, then there is no manna from heaven, so that story discounts another story. These falsehoods beget other falsehoods, and the the whole shebang turns out to be all lies. I just don't understand why christians continue to believe. Is it that they don't read-up on the scholarly research? Do they just have lollipops for heads (i.e. suckers)? Why is it so hard to get through to christians? Are they really THAT dependent on the belief of eternal life, or are they just afraid they might make Jesus angry? What is it with those christians?
 
I once visited a Christian website where the guy totally disagrees with evolution. He supports this with another claim, that dinosaurs still exist. He then took it upon himself to get proof of dinosaurs, and got a picture of a stegasaurus foot ( which looked remarkably like an elephant foot).

Some people just cant be reached with reason, that is what makes religion so powerful.
 
Medicine Woman said:
Just about every story in the bible (O&NT) has been refuted by scientific discovery (or the lack thereof),...
Click to expand...
I hear what you're trying to say, MW... but claims can not be refuted merely by a current lack of scientific discovery supporting them, which is why the onus is on the one making the claim to support their claim. :)

So, just because noone has yet discovered evidence for the Exodus does not provide any evidence that it didn't happen. It is only evidence that no evidence has yet been found.
 
Sarkus said:
I hear what you're trying to say, MW... but claims can not be refuted merely by a current lack of scientific discovery supporting them, which is why the onus is on the one making the claim to support their claim. :)

So, just because noone has yet discovered evidence for the Exodus does not provide any evidence that it didn't happen. It is only evidence that no evidence has yet been found.
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: I see your point. Archeologists set out to dig the Sinai looking specifically for evidence of the Exodus, but they came up empty-handed. They even dredged the Red Sea and certainly didn't find any golden Egyptial chariot wheels as having been claimed previously by a member of this forum who just couldn't hack the truth.

Similarly, there is no tangible evidence that a man named Jesus was anything more than a rabbi who shirked his duties and his faith. So, that brings us back to square one. The absence of evidence is not proof of fact, but it sure leaves the gun smoking.
 
If you want to know the mindset of the Religions believer you only need to look at the Psychology behind 'Type 1' errors.
 
Last edited:
Sarkus said:
I hear what you're trying to say, MW... but claims can not be refuted merely by a current lack of scientific discovery supporting them, which is why the onus is on the one making the claim to support their claim. :)

So, just because noone has yet discovered evidence for the Exodus does not provide any evidence that it didn't happen. It is only evidence that no evidence has yet been found.
Click to expand...

What you're saying is basically that should I decide to make up a God or write some book full of crappy theories about a made up God and prophecies and prophets, people would be right to accept it as truth until scientific evidence is found proving my theories untrue...
 
I have wondered this too recently. When people were wandering around celebrating Easter... lets have a look at what they were celebrating: A MAN WHO CAME BACK FROM THE DEAD AND ASCENDED TO HEAVEN.

Is that not just fucking stupid? And they get their beleif from a book which is exposed as a fictional story book?! I just don't understand how people can be so willfully gullible, ignorant and stupid.

I'm sure it would take a LONG time if someone here went through the Bible word by word and explained how we know through evidence, science, common sense etc that they are wrong. Perhaps there is a book that does that... That would make an interesting read.
 
Medicine Woman said:
Is it that they don't read-up on the scholarly research...
Click to expand...

That's part of it. Alot of them don't care about the results of research and you'd be surprised how many of them think 'science' is a work of the devil (with that mindset, anything in reality could be conveniently ignored as the work of the devil and cognitive dissasociation is achieved). Also there is the attractive / authoritative portion of their belief. Extreme positive and negative reinforcement (eternal bliss / damnation) leads to strong desire and fear.

Many christians don't realize that their personal relationship with 'God' is really a relationship with themselves. Removing 'God' from the picture threatens to remove their 'Ego', and the Ego is something that will fight to the death to survive. I've had the opportunity to partially remove 'Ego' from an athiest and partially remove 'God' from a believer. The behaviors were identical.

IMO, a big part of what's missing in a believers' life is education about how to have a healthy realtionship with themselves and others.

Lastly, there is spirituality. This is a very healthy and often pleasurable activity of intense appreciation for the attractive. It can be anything (fact or fiction). Sunsets, Music, dreams, atoms, big breasts, turkey, dogs, star trek, vampires, math, psychology, etc. Spirituality applies to everyone (no exceptions) and often a Christian will appreciate fiction and not realize that it is fiction. The problem with spirituality is the word used to describe the it. It contains 'Spirit' and that immediately get's associated with the 'divine', 'non-physical', 'afterlife', etc. I don't know if there is a reasonable way to fix the word or disassociate it from the 'God' stuff.
 
Last edited:
Acctually there are several theories on the whole exodus story... perhaps they passed the Reed Sea, not the Red Sea, and another part on the northern parts of the red sea where it is the smallest distance between the two shorelines where coincidentally the sea bed is completely flat and walkable, while most of the rest of the red sea has so much sea weed and reefs, impossible to cross (say it dried up), and this spot matches many descriptions of where they crossed in the bible... if i find the link, ill supply it...

By the way, if anyone here knows of the story of Samson killing a thousand Philistines with the jaw bone of a donkey... i have read articles and seen videos and heard arguments that it was a mistranlastion and that the number was quite smaller... around 10 or 20... cant remember, been a while... if i find that, ill give it too... and yes, 10 people is still alot... but maybe it was a sharp bone :p

Im not saying the Bible is true, all im saying is there are scientific arguments FOR it too...
 
s0meguy said:
What you're saying is basically that should I decide to make up a God or write some book full of crappy theories about a made up God and prophecies and prophets, people would be right to accept it as truth until scientific evidence is found proving my theories untrue...
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: No, I don't think that was it at all. In fact, that book full of crappy theories about a made-up God has already been written and believed as truth. It's called the Bible.
 
KennyJC said:
I have wondered this too recently. When people were wandering around celebrating Easter... lets have a look at what they were celebrating: A MAN WHO CAME BACK FROM THE DEAD AND ASCENDED TO HEAVEN.

Is that not just fucking stupid? And they get their beleif from a book which is exposed as a fictional story book?! I just don't understand how people can be so willfully gullible, ignorant and stupid.

I'm sure it would take a LONG time if someone here went through the Bible word by word and explained how we know through evidence, science, common sense etc that they are wrong. Perhaps there is a book that does that... That would make an interesting read.
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: That's exactly why I propose my theory that the Bible and God are explained through astro-theology. When looking at it at this angle, the Bible makes sense.
 
Provita said:
Acctually there are several theories on the whole exodus story... perhaps they passed the Reed Sea, not the Red Sea, and another part on the northern parts of the red sea where it is the smallest distance between the two shorelines where coincidentally the sea bed is completely flat and walkable, while most of the rest of the red sea has so much sea weed and reefs, impossible to cross (say it dried up), and this spot matches many descriptions of where they crossed in the bible... if i find the link, ill supply it...

By the way, if anyone here knows of the story of Samson killing a thousand Philistines with the jaw bone of a donkey... i have read articles and seen videos and heard arguments that it was a mistranlastion and that the number was quite smaller... around 10 or 20... cant remember, been a while... if i find that, ill give it too... and yes, 10 people is still alot... but maybe it was a sharp bone :p

Im not saying the Bible is true, all im saying is there are scientific arguments FOR it too...
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: Yes, Provita, you are more on track than the christians. It was considered to be the Sea of Reeds, but unfortunately, archeologists didn't find anything there either. Incidentally, those people were nomads, so yes they would have 'wandered' and spent several generations wandering in the desert, so that was no feat in itself. There were said to be following a 'wandering star' or movement of a planet. The same with the story of the Magi. Neither were they real people. They are considered the three stars in Orion's belt. However, I still contend that the entirety of the bible, what's not poetry, is astrology.
 
Medicine Woman said:
*************
M*W: Just about every story in the bible (O&NT) has been refuted by scientific discovery (or the lack thereof), and bookstores and libraries are rife with the publication of their studies. That means to me that everything in the bible is false. Why, then, do christians not know about recent studies such as the finding (or lack thereof) an historical Exodus, for example? If there was no Exodus, then there is no manna from heaven, so that story discounts another story. These falsehoods beget other falsehoods, and the the whole shebang turns out to be all lies. I just don't understand why christians continue to believe. Is it that they don't read-up on the scholarly research? Do they just have lollipops for heads (i.e. suckers)? Why is it so hard to get through to christians? Are they really THAT dependent on the belief of eternal life, or are they just afraid they might make Jesus angry? What is it with those christians?
Click to expand...

The Bible (OT at least) is the oral tradition of one race of people (the Isrealites), and their involvement with their God YHWH. Part is allegorical. Part may be based on historical events, passed down through stories told and retold, that were not written down for many years. Some are songs and sayings (e.g. Psalms, Song of Solomon, Proverbs etc.). It's a whole rag-bag of stuff.

Certainly most of the places mentioned in the Bible existed, so what is the problem M*W? It seems to me unlikely that "everything in the Bible is false", (unless you can produce evidence it was a forgery) on the other hand much is probably mythologised. The King Arthur stories are a similar example from romano-british culture of historical events/characters that have become mythologised.This does not invalidate such tales, it makes them psychologically more powerful.

The NT as a set of collected stories about the person Jesus (or Joshua), and the actions of his followers is even less likely IMHO to be entirely made up. I know the argument that there should be more corroborative evidence. There is corroboration (albeit controversial) and the reason there is not more is that Jesus may have been a very minor religious figure among many - wandering from town to town and active for a relatively short time. Many sects today never hit the newspapers unless they do something newsworthy like commit mass suicide or gas the Tokyo metro (which the early christians didn't), and our media churns out huge volumes compared to the few surviving historical texts from then.

It seems unlikely that the gospel stories are nothing but fiction - they were written by people about people alive at the time, are presented as factual by more than one author and are detailed and corroborative accounts. A more likely explanation is that there is an argument to be sold in the here & now - courting controversy is the business of making your name and making money. So, my advice is - use your lollipop and be skeptical.
 
Last edited:
Medicine Woman said:
*************
M*W: No, I don't think that was it at all. In fact, that book full of crappy theories about a made-up God has already been written and believed as truth. It's called the Bible.
Click to expand...
Did I say that one such book wasn't written already? I was merely disproving the statement you seemed to agree with. I am curious though, do you believe in the possibility of a God? Why?
 
I think a large part of their belief comes in the comforts of religion. I was amused when I asked two different people why they believe in heaven and they each used the word comforting. I translate this into fear of the possibility of Hell. It is comforting to know that if you live a good life then you will spend eternity in Hell. If you are being bad knowingly possibly fear of Hell will make you change your actions. Since in fact science can not disprove the existence of God then how can it hurt to accept what the church has to say and believe just in case it is true? Plenty of exceptions to what I just said, but I wouldn't be surprised if this is the underlying cause of a lot of peoples belief even if they do not realize it.
 
oxypunk101 said:
I think a large part of their belief comes in the comforts of religion. I was amused when I asked two different people why they believe in heaven and they each used the word comforting. I translate this into fear of the possibility of Hell. It is comforting to know that if you live a good life then you will spend eternity in Hell. If you are being bad knowingly possibly fear of Hell will make you change your actions. Since in fact science can not disprove the existence of God then how can it hurt to accept what the church has to say and believe just in case it is true? Plenty of exceptions to what I just said, but I wouldn't be surprised if this is the underlying cause of a lot of peoples belief even if they do not realize it.
Click to expand...

"Comforting" is a bit weak, and fear of Hell is very mediaeval theology. The reason people believe is despite everything we have achieved in science and philosophy, medicine or psychology - we have not discovered a method to find joy, peace of mind, love or fulfillment in life other than through some religious belief (I include Buddhism). "I have come that you may have life and have it to the full" said JC. Theism promises what as humans we truly desire but seem unable to find, not through more material things but through revealed knowledge of the "light within" us - our own essential being.
 
we have not discovered a method to find joy, peace of mind, love or fulfillment in life other than through some religious belief (I include Buddhism).
Click to expand...

Hmm. I think many atheists would have something to say about that.
 
KennyJC said:
Hmm. I think many atheists would have something to say about that.
Click to expand...

If you know of one KennyJC, spill the beans! Psychological studies on happiness and on longevity all indicate a religious belief is a major factor in both.

Psychotherapy probably comes nearest and indeed some (e.g. CBT) may help if you are unhappy e.g. depressed. Many psychotherapies (e.g. Gestalt, TA) also model healthy psychological functioning. Indeed I believe such therapies may tap into similar forces to the best theism (e.g. the "I-thou" moment). However, many psychotherapists are either theists (especially Buddhism) or are searching for a spiritual model complimentary with their discipline.

We are spiritual beings (as well as physical, emotional and psychological), and only some aknowledgement of our spiritual nature and needs will bring true fulfillment. This seems an irrefutable statement of the obvious to me.
 
s0meguy said:
What you're saying is basically that should I decide to make up a God or write some book full of crappy theories about a made up God and prophecies and prophets, people would be right to accept it as truth until scientific evidence is found proving my theories untrue...
Click to expand...
No - I am not saying that.
I am saying that absence of evidence is not evidence of non-existence.
Likewise, onus of proof is on the one making the claim (in this case, existence of God, Jesus etc).
But you can not, and should not, jump from a lack of evidence to belief in the non-existence. That is irrational.
Likewise ,if you made up a God then it would be irrational to believe in that God due to lack of evidence.
It is irrational to believe in anything for which there is no evidence.

My point, that I think MW accepts, was that she was appearing to use absence of evidence as evidence for non-existence.

For some reason you have made the illogical jump from that to thinking I am saying "belief in anything for which there is no evidence is okay".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top