Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Youngin

The bible is a work of fiction

422 posts in this topic

everytime i hear someone say the Bible is fiction, all I respond with is this...Prove it. Give me 100% evidence you can prove its false. About anything.....

I hope this helps free you from your mental slavery:

Introduction to the Bible and Biblical Problems

Bible Inconsistencies: Bible Contradictions?

Bible Absurdities

Fatal Bible Flaws?

Bible Atrocities

Bible Precepts: Questionable Guidelines

Bible Vulgarities & Obscenities

And a two part video destroying the Noah's Ark myth, since you asked for any evidence disproving even one part of the bible's accuracy:

Part 1 -

Part 2 -

People who try to claim the bible is not full of inaccuracies, contradictions, and historical impossibilities have clearly never read the thing all the way through: I have, several times. It's one of the main reasons I'm no longer a christian.

By the way, the burden of proof does NOT rest on the people that claim something to NOT exist. The burden of proof rests on those that claim something DOES exist. And extraordinry claims require extraordinary proof: which has never been provided in the case of any of the 100's of gods in any of the 100's of religions that have permeated the world since the beginning of recorded history some 4500 years ago. You can say, "thats why it's called 'faith.'" But then that will be why people who have embraced their critical thinking skills and make rational decisions based on evidence and logic will not take your arguments seriously.

You are an atheist regarding the 100's of other gods that have been invented by the imagination of mankind, excluding one: the one god that you believe is the true god. However, I sincerely hope you can recognize you believe in that god because thats the one you were indoctrinated in at a young age. If you had been born in Iran for example, what are the odds you would believe that Allah is the one true god, and that Jesus was a fraud? Think about it, and make the world a better place for our future. Thank you.

And while we're at it, I'll introduce you to some YouTube scientists that are combating the absurd Creationist movement in America today. Of the 34 first world industrialized nations of our planet, the USA ranks 33rd out of 34 in accepting the Theory of Evolution as the extremely well established FACT that it is. We rank only ahead of Pakistan. That is an embarrassment! And it's a testimony to the religiousity of our country clouding the judgement of our citizens. There is a reason the brightest, most intelligent, and most educated members of our society are mostly atheists. There is also a reason that 2 of the most secular nations of the world, Denmark and Sweden (over 90% atheistic), are two of the top countries when monitoring overall societal health. This includes much lower rates of murder, rape, divorce, abortion, teenage pregnancy, among many other negative indicators, than the USA has.

AronRa's Foundational Falshehoods of Creationism

From Big Bang to Us -- Made Easy - Potholer54

Why do people laugh at creationists? - by Thunderfoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope this helps free you from your mental slavery:

Introduction to the Bible and Biblical Problems

Bible Inconsistencies: Bible Contradictions?

Bible Absurdities

Fatal Bible Flaws?

Bible Atrocities

Bible Precepts: Questionable Guidelines

Bible Vulgarities & Obscenities

And a two part video destroying the Noah's Ark myth, since you asked for any evidence disproving even one part of the bible's accuracy:

Part 1 -

Part 2 -

People who try to claim the bible is not full of inaccuracies, contradictions, and historical impossibilities have clearly never read the thing all the way through: I have, several times. It's one of the main reasons I'm no longer a christian.

By the way, the burden of proof does NOT rest on the people that claim something to NOT exist. The burden of proof rests on those that claim something DOES exist. And extraordinry claims require extraordinary proof: which has never been provided in the case of any of the 100's of gods in any of the 100's of religions that have permeated the world since the beginning of recorded history some 4500 years ago. You can say, "thats why it's called 'faith.'" But then that will be why people who have embraced their critical thinking skills and make rational decisions based on evidence and logic will not take your arguments seriously.

You are an atheist regarding the 100's of other gods that have been invented by the imagination of mankind, excluding one: the one god that you believe is the true god. However, I sincerely hope you can recognize you believe in that god because thats the one you were indoctrinated in at a young age. If you had been born in Iran for example, what are the odds you would believe that Allah is the one true god, and that Jesus was a fraud? Think about it, and make the world a better place for our future. Thank you.

And while we're at it, I'll introduce you to some YouTube scientists that are combating the absurd Creationist movement in America today. Of the 34 first world industrialized nations of our planet, the USA ranks 33rd out of 34 in accepting the Theory of Evolution as the extremely well established FACT that it is. We rank only ahead of Pakistan. That is an embarrassment! And it's a testimony to the religiousity of our country clouding the judgement of our citizens. There is a reason the brightest, most intelligent, and most educated members of our society are mostly atheists. There is also a reason that 2 of the most secular nations of the world, Denmark and Sweden (over 90% atheistic), are two of the top countries when monitoring overall societal health. This includes much lower rates of murder, rape, divorce, abortion, teenage pregnancy, among many other negative indicators, than the USA has.

AronRa's Foundational Falshehoods of Creationism

From Big Bang to Us -- Made Easy - Potholer54

Why do people laugh at creationists? - by Thunderfoot

A-mother****ing-men!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What, nothing to say? No responses to the asked for evidence? Someone brings facts into the discussion and the bible apologists duck and run for cover?

Typical...

As someone else already said, nothing more than a work of fiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm no Bible apologist (as I said before, I don't take any of it literally), but I will again object to your claim that the Bible is "nothing more than a work of fiction".

This is from some non-religious site called The Skeptical Review:

Has archaeology confirmed the historical accuracy of some information in the Bible? Indeed it has, but I know of no person who has ever tried to deny that some biblical history is accurate. The inscription on the Moabite Stone, for example, provides disinterested, nonbiblical confirmation that king Mesha of the Moabites, mentioned in 2 Kings 3:4-27, was probably an actual historical character. The Black Obelisk provides a record of the payment of tribute to the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III by Jehu, king of the Israelites (2 Kings 9-10; 2 Chron. 22:7-9). Likewise, the Babylonian Chronicle attests to the historicity of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and his conquest of Jerusalem as recorded in 2 Kings 25. Other examples could be cited, but these are sufficient to show that archaeology has corroborated some information in the Bible.

http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/982front.html

Furthermore, different versions of the Bible from different time periods serve as valuable historical documents that shed light on the beliefs and politics of rulers long-gone to history.

I'm not advocating that the entirety of the Bible is fact, or that it doesn't contain myths and parables from earlier cultures, but to flatly say the Bible is a work of fiction is WRONG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm no Bible apologist (as I said before, I don't take any of it literally), but I will again object to your claim that the Bible is "nothing more than a work of fiction".

This is from some non-religious site called The Skeptical Review:

http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/982front.html

Furthermore, different versions of the Bible from different time periods serve as valuable historical documents that shed light on the beliefs and politics of rulers long-gone to history.

I'm not advocating that the entirety of the Bible is fact, or that it doesn't contain myths and parables from earlier cultures, but to flatly say the Bible is a work of fiction is WRONG.

As something touted to us as the undeniable and infallible word of "god," you would expect to see the entire thing accurately describe each and every one of its historical events, wouldn't you? I mean, IF it were a true historical record.

Instead, what we get are a book chocked full of inaccuracies, authors disagreeing on the supposed same events, wrong time periods for events, contradictions, moral inadequacies, and a WHOLE lot of wishful thinking surrounded by some events that are physically impossible. Ya, good job on getting a handful of dates and events correct, out of the thousands contained in it. Thats not a very good track record for historical authenticity if you ask me. When over 80% of it can be proven factualy incorrect, that sums up to me as fiction...

I know you said your not a bible apologists, and I take your word for it. You do seem more like a Deist to me: believe in a higher power that created everything but not a religion with a scripture that can be proven factualy incorrect. (Interestingly, most of the Founding Fathers of the US were Deists - it was still political suicide to come out as an atheist in their time, so a Deist was the only viable alternative when trying to distance themselves from religiosity) I find it quite insulting the Christion right wingers are trying to claim the Founding Fathers as die-hard Christians and that this country was founded on Christianity. Hogwash! The very first treaty we signed as a new nation with Tripoli clearly stated "The United States is NOT founded on the Christian religion." Yes, that treaty was written and signed by our very own Founding Fathers.

Back to my point about understanding where you are coming from; I do, perhaps calling the entire bible a work of fiction is a little harsh. It does have a few nuggets of actual historical accuracy. Perhaps it's the anti-theist in me coming out that wants to crush any and all hope people have in accepting the validity of the book on the whole.

I am opposed to blind faith at every turn. Where science looks to advance our understanding of the world, blind faith often tends to hinder that venture. Blind faith in many different religious scriptures helps to maintain a level of seperation and segregation between the 6 billion people of our planet: where none really exists. We can ALL trace our ancestral roots to a tiny area of Africa under 100,000 years ago; every single living person on the planet is a direct descendant of the black people (I'm white btw)from that area. It has been proven; it's a FACT. Moreso, the Theory of Evolution is a FACT. One supported by a mountain of evidence, far more than the Theory of Gravity, or the Atomic Theory. You don't see the two latter theories having the defend themselves against bigotry and intellectual dishonesty like you do with Evolution. And why is that? Because the FACTS that we have discovered conflict with some Bronze Age myths about how we got here. Reason, evidence, and logic wins, blind faith never does.

Blind faith, while somewhat harmless in moderation, allows it to be ok for the more militant and aggressive forms of faith to exist at all. I'm speaking of the Islamic funamentalists who fly planes into buildings, and the christion fundamentalists of the US who think it's ok to murder an abortion doctor, among other atrocities carried out in the name of faith. Without the acceptance of blind faith as "reasonable" in the worlds societies, these types of insane faith would not have the fertile breeding grounds to flourish like they currently have. When I hear people retort with that old chestnut, "that's why it's called faith," with that condescending tone like faith is something to be proud of, it makes me want to shake that person and wake them up to reality.

I have faith that I'm going to be able to drive down my side of the road and the oncoming traffic is going to stay on their side. Most of the time that faith is warranted. That faith is based on reason, logic, and past evidence of times when people did in fact stay on their side of the road. That is not the same as blind faith. When I believe that the world is under 10,000 years old because a book tells me it is, contradicting the overwhelming mountain of physical evidence that it is actually around 5 BILLION years old, THAT is a problem.

Faith is a virus folks, a virus that has infected our population since humans first looked at their environment and wondered how things worked, and why things are the way they are. Gods have always been invented to explain things that we did not have the technology or knowledge to explain. Our civilization has advanced to the point where we no longer need those arcane god inventions to explain why the sun rises and where lightening comes from. Where we no longer need a creation story when we know from demonstrable evidence how long we've been here and how the process of evolution shaped us and every other living thing on the planet into what it is today. Blind faith is what tells people to hold on to those arcane god inventions in the face of evidence and reality. It's time for blind faith to fade away from our society and become a mere footnote in our history, opening the door for a much brighter future.

Everything I do here is an attempt to encourage that outcome. To encourage people to think instead of accept the same old routine without ever questioning if it makes sense or not. To illuminate people to how wrong and harmful it is to simply say that it's ok for people to have blind faith beliefs in the face of contradicting evidence. The world needs a quick wake up call before some religious fundamentalist gets his hands on a nuclear weapon and decides it's a good idea to do his god's work and eliminate the infidels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As something touted to us as the undeniable and infallible word of "god," you would expect to see the entire thing accurately describe each and every one of its historical events, wouldn't you? I mean, IF it were a true historical record.

Instead, what we get are a book chocked full of inaccuracies, authors disagreeing on the supposed same events, wrong time periods for events, contradictions, moral inadequacies, and a WHOLE lot of wishful thinking surrounded by some events that are physically impossible. Ya, good job on getting a handful of dates and events correct, out of the thousands contained in it. Thats not a very good track record for historical authenticity if you ask me. When over 80% of it can be proven factualy incorrect, that sums up to me as fiction...

I know you said your not a bible apologists, and I take your word for it. You do seem more like a Deist to me: believe in a higher power that created everything but not a religion with a scripture that can be proven factualy incorrect. (Interestingly, most of the Founding Fathers of the US were Deists - it was still political suicide to come out as an atheist in their time, so a Deist was the only viable alternative when trying to distance themselves from religiosity) I find it quite insulting the Christion right wingers are trying to claim the Founding Fathers as die-hard Christians and that this country was founded on Christianity. Hogwash! The very first treaty we signed as a new nation with Tripoli clearly stated "The United States is NOT founded on the Christian religion." Yes, that treaty was written and signed by our very own Founding Fathers.

Back to my point about understanding where you are coming from; I do, perhaps calling the entire bible a work of fiction is a little harsh. It does have a few nuggets of actual historical accuracy. Perhaps it's the anti-theist in me coming out that wants to crush any and all hope people have in accepting the validity of the book on the whole.

I am opposed to blind faith at every turn. Where science looks to advance our understanding of the world, blind faith often tends to hinder that venture. Blind faith in many different religious scriptures helps to maintain a level of seperation and segregation between the 6 billion people of our planet: where none really exists. We can ALL trace our ancestral roots to a tiny area of Africa under 100,000 years ago; every single living person on the planet is a direct descendant of the black people (I'm white btw)from that area. It has been proven; it's a FACT. Moreso, the Theory of Evolution is a FACT. One supported by a mountain of evidence, far more than the Theory of Gravity, or the Atomic Theory. You don't see the two latter theories having the defend themselves against bigotry and intellectual dishonesty like you do with Evolution. And why is that? Because the FACTS that we have discovered conflict with some Bronze Age myths about how we got here. Reason, evidence, and logic wins, blind faith never does.

Blind faith, while somewhat harmless in moderation, allows it to be ok for the more militant and aggressive forms of faith to exist at all. I'm speaking of the Islamic funamentalists who fly planes into buildings, and the christion fundamentalists of the US who think it's ok to murder an abortion doctor, among other atrocities carried out in the name of faith. Without the acceptance of blind faith as "reasonable" in the worlds societies, these types of insane faith would not have the fertile breeding grounds to flourish like they currently have. When I hear people retort with that old chestnut, "that's why it's called faith," with that condescending tone like faith is something to be proud of, it makes me want to shake that person and wake them up to reality.

I have faith that I'm going to be able to drive down my side of the road and the oncoming traffic is going to stay on their side. Most of the time that faith is warranted. That faith is based on reason, logic, and past evidence of times when people did in fact stay on their side of the road. That is not the same as blind faith. When I believe that the world is under 10,000 years old because a book tells me it is, contradicting the overwhelming mountain of physical evidence that it is actually around 5 BILLION years old, THAT is a problem.

Faith is a virus folks, a virus that has infected our population since humans first looked at their environment and wondered how things worked, and why things are the way they are. Gods have always been invented to explain things that we did not have the technology or knowledge to explain. Our civilization has advanced to the point where we no longer need those arcane god inventions to explain why the sun rises and where lightening comes from. Where we no longer need a creation story when we know from demonstrable evidence how long we've been here and how the process of evolution shaped us and every other living thing on the planet into what it is today. Blind faith is what tells people to hold on to those arcane god inventions in the face of evidence and reality. It's time for blind faith to fade away from our society and become a mere footnote in our history, opening the door for a much brighter future.

Everything I do here is an attempt to encourage that outcome. To encourage people to think instead of accept the same old routine without ever questioning if it makes sense or not. To illuminate people to how wrong and harmful it is to simply say that it's ok for people to have blind faith beliefs in the face of contradicting evidence. The world needs a quick wake up call before some religious fundamentalist gets his hands on a nuclear weapon and decides it's a good idea to do his god's work and eliminate the infidels.

64021719.CHPTbjAb.applause.gif

Legendary Falcon likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had this nice response written out and then the computer took a crap and I lost it. <_<

Basically, I guess I would consider myself a "Christian" just for lack of knowing a better term.... certainly I'm no beaten path Bible thumping one. I was raised in the highly religious southern atmosphere.... back and forth between Georgia and Tennessee. But it was about the age of 16 or 17 I'd say when I began to question it... really began to seek more knowledge, more answers, and a wider array of opinions and beliefs on the matter of religion and spirituality. I fully understand that this is how we are raised in the US - or at least in certain places in the US - and that the vast majority of people do not take the time to make their beliefs truly their own. Many people seem content to go with what the cookie cutter organized religions tell them to believe. And I suppose that's alright if it leads people to live good lives. But there are many who live what I would say are vile lives... and they wash away their guilty conscience through established religion without trying to understand or make the beliefs their own.

What I've come to believe myself... through my short experience in this world, research, and much much thought... is that the Bible is not a work of fiction, but a grossly incomplete collection of books used as a basis for religion. There are missing Gospels, missing translations, and far too much corruption surrounding the creation of the Christian Bible for me to believe otherwise. The fact that the Catholic church so very strongly opposes the view that there are missing books is enough for me to think there's more to it. Every version or translation that has ever been mass produced has been controlled by the Catholic church. Men in power have controlled the message of the Bible through their control of what is actually considered The Holy Bible. Of course this dates back many centuries, but it definitely brings into question the reason why certain writings were left out while most of the New Testament consists of the writings of Christianity's biggest establishmentarian... Paul.

However, to call the Bible a work of fiction is either ignorant or short-sighted. The Old Testament is not unique to the Christian beliefs. It is a chronology, history, and lineage of the Jewish people over a period of their existence. The New Testament is a collection of books and letters, known as Gospels, written by people who walked with Jesus and put together by the Catholic church... which claims to be started by Jesus himself as a direct result of his teachings to the 12 apostles.

rugger8 and Falconsken like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

everytime i hear someone say the Bible is fiction, all I respond with is this...Prove it. Give me 100% evidence you can prove its false. About anything.....

Anything false? OK, this is easy.

Noah could not possibly build a wooden ship the size of Canada with the tools of the time, all by himself. He also wasn't 900 years old. Common sense and human science can prove no man could live to 900.

The Bible says that the earth is the center of the universe, and everything revolves around us.

The bible lists 62 generations of man from creation (Adam) to Jesus, which is false since we know the earth is 4.5 billion years old, and we have proof of humans dating further back.

Should I keep going, or is this enough for you? It's fiction. It's found in the fiction section in the library and bookstores. Religion is based on faith not facts and thus nothing in the bible is true.

Konar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not to say the bible is true....but evoloution is far from fact scientist have been trying to proove men have evolved over millions of years AND CANNOT PROOVE IT ....yes some things have evolved? but man???? scientist still cant proove......just like christions cant proove the bible.......scientist have NO PROOF HOW MAN OR THIS EARTH CAME TO BE .......IF YOU CAN PROOVE HOW HUMANS CAME TO BE AND WHERE AND HOW THE EARTH STARTED....WE WILL ALL STOP BELIVING IN GOD....go ahead and proove it

I'll say it again, absolute proof only exists in mathematics. Outside of mathematics, things that are demonstrably true, or things that best explain a phenomenon are most often called "laws," such as the Law of Gravity for example. The law of gravity and other evidence that supports the theory make up the framework for what is identified as the Theory of Gravity. If new data or evidence is introduced to better explain one portion of the theory, the whole theory isn't thrown out and remade, it is simply refined due to out better understanding of the matter at hand. You can say the Theory of Gravity hasn't been proven either, and technically you would be correct. Because, once again, theories can't BE proven; they are simply a framework for our best understanding of something. However, if you doubt the validity of the theory of gravity because it hasn't been proven, you are invited to jump out of a 10 story window to test it for yourself.

The same is true for the Theory of Evolution. You can deny that evolution is a FACT because you simply don't understand what the term "theory" really means, but that doesn't change the FACT that evolution has 150 years and counting of withstanding the brightest and best minds of the world in attempts to poke holes in the theory through the peer review process that all scientific theories have to withstand. And it's still going strong, stronger than ever actually. The Theory of Evolution today is one of the most well supported theories in the history of mankind by a massive amount of evidence from numerous branches of science. It is the backbone of modern biology that is responsible for all the wonderful antibiotics, medicines, and modern healthcare that we all enjoy today.

And lets clear up another glaring misconception right now. Accepting evolution as the fact that it is, does NOT mean you are an atheist. It is still possible that a "supreme being" or "god" created the universe and set the whole evolution process in motion. While I say that is 'possible,' I'm not saying that it's probable. However, the theory of evolution has nothing at all to say about whether a god or gods exist or not. Evolution is simply a naturalistic observation on the process of how the complex life forms of today, including us, evolved from the single celled organism that began life on this planet. It doesn't even say anything about the origin of that cell (abiogenesis); again, it just simply describes how we evolved from that primitive form of life once it did exist.

Personally I feel since it totally disproves the Genesis story of Creation in the bible, along with the bibles other glaring problems, Evolution pretty much shoots down any credibility the bible has. Same for the Koran or any other supposed holy book. But there are other prominent people that are still christians, muslims, jews that recognize evolution for the well documented fact that it is, and still somehow resolve that with their religion.

I'll leave you with one further small comment to ponder: Just because you "want" something to be true has absolutely no bearing on if it actually "is" true.

And a short video to elaborate more on just how overwhelming the evidence for evolution really is:

MattyIce07 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically, I guess I would consider myself a "Christian" just for lack of knowing a better term.... certainly I'm no beaten path Bible thumping one.

What I've come to believe myself... through my short experience in this world, research, and much much thought... is that the Bible is not a work of fiction, but a grossly incomplete collection of books used as a basis for religion. There are missing Gospels, missing translations, and far too much corruption surrounding the creation of the Christian Bible for me to believe otherwise. Men in power have controlled the message of the Bible through their control of what is actually considered The Holy Bible. Of course this dates back many centuries, but it definitely brings into question the reason why certain writings were left out while most of the New Testament consists of the writings of Christianity's biggest establishmentarian... Paul.

However, to call the Bible a work of fiction is either ignorant or short-sighted.

You were somewhat on the right path until this last sentence. I'll give you credit for actually having some questions in the past and trying to make some sense of it all; and also for recognizing some of the flaws in the bible.

If I could just politely mention a few things. I'm sure through your investigations into the bible you noticed that some of the claimed historical facts not only are inaccurate when corrobarated with outside sources of that time, the bible itself has different authors that cant agree on the same timeline and occurences for the same event. For example, when detailing the ancestry of Adam down to David, the two gospels that supposedly document this have an entirely different list of decendants, one of them much longer than the other, and the names that they actually do have the same most of the time don't even overlap each other. This is just one small example, but it illustrates the greater point that even the supposed historical records aren't even accurate, for the most part. THIS is why we call it a work of fiction; it gets a few things right just out of sheer luck it seems like, but the overwhelming majority of the supposed historical facts of the bible have been proven inaccurate.

Something that is mostly made up is, consequently, mostly fiction. Something that is mostly fiction, IS fiction.

Since other people smarter and more talented than me have already put the legwork in on so many of these topics, I'll again point towards another video to elaborate on the origins of the bible and why it most certainly wasn't written by a supreme being of any kind:

MattyIce07 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I'll post this link again and the contents of the link since it pertains to the post above this one:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/intro.html

"The Bible consists of a collection of sixty-six separate books. These books were chosen, after a bit of haggling, by the Catholic Council of Carthage in 397 A.D.--more than three hundred years after the time of Jesus. This collection is broken into two major sections: The Old Testament, which consists of thirty-nine books, and The New Testament, which consists of twenty-seven books. (Catholic Bibles include additional books known as the Apocrypha.)

The Old Testament is concerned with the Hebrew God, Yahweh, and purports to be a history of the early Israelites. The New Testament is the work of early Christians and reflects their beliefs about Jesus; it purports to be a history of what Jesus taught and did.

The composition of the various books is thought to have begun around 1000 B.C., and to have continued for about 1,100 years. Much oral material was included. This was repeated from father to son, revised over and over again, and then put into written form by various editors. These editors often worked in different locales and in different time periods and were often unaware of each other. Their work was primarily intended for local use and it is unlikely that any author foresaw that his work would be included in a "Bible."

No original manuscripts exist. There is probably not one book which survives in anything like its original form. There are hundreds of differences between the oldest manuscripts of any one book. These differences indicate that numerous additions and alterations, some accidental and some purposeful, were made to the originals by various authors, editors, and copyists.

Many biblical authors are unknown. Where an author has been named, that name has sometimes been selected by pious believers rather than given by the author himself. The four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are examples of books which did not carry the names of their actual authors. The present names were assigned long after these four books were written. And--in spite of what the Gospel authors say--biblical scholars are now almost unanimously agreed that none of the Gospel authors was either an actual disciple of Jesus or even an eyewitness to his ministry.

Although some books of the Bible are traditionally attributed to a single author, many are actually the work of multiple authors. Genesis and John are two examples of books which reflect multiple authorship.

Many biblical books have the earmarks of fiction. For example, private conversations are often related when no reporter was present. Conversations between God and various individuals are recorded. Prehistoric events are given in great detail. When a story is told by more than one author, there are usually significant differences. Many stories--stories which in their original context are considered even by Christians to be fictional--were borrowed by the biblical authors, adapted for their own purposes, given a historical setting, and then declared to be fact.

The Flood story is an example of this kind of adaptation. Its migration from the earliest known occurrence in Sumeria, around 1600 B.C., from place to place and eventually to the Bible, can be traced historically. Each time the story was used again, it was altered to speak of local gods and heroes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But is the Bible, nevertheless, the work of God? Is it a valid guidebook? How can we know?

If the Bible were really the work of a perfect, all-powerful, and loving God, one would reasonably expect it to be obviously superlative in every respect--accurate, clear, concise, and consistent throughout--as compared to anything that could possibly be conceived by human intellect alone.

Fundamentalists, in fact, hold this to be true. Using a circular argument, they say that because the Bible is without error or inconsistency, it must be the work of God, and because it is the work of God, it must be without error or inconsistency. It seems not to matter which proposition comes first, the other is thought to follow.

Notwithstanding the fundamentalist viewpoint, however, the Bible does contain a number of real problems. And some of these problems are absolutely fatal to its credibility.

Many passages relate God-ordained atrocities; such passages are unworthy of the Christian God. Some biblical precepts are both unreasonable and unlikely since they are in obvious disagreement with common sense as well as the qualities of character which are attributed to God. Some biblical statements are absurd in that they represent very primitive beliefs. The believability of many biblical stories--stories that are crucial to Christianity--are discredited by numerous inconsistencies. The picture is further complicated by the many different and conflicting interpretations that are often given to a specific passage by sincere, well-intentioned believers.

While Biblicists are capable of offering some sort of explanation for nearly any biblical problem that can be uncovered, such explanations should be unnecessary. The point is not whether some explanation can be conceived, but rather that a perfect, all-powerful, and loving God certainly could, should, and would do a much better job of it were he to have anything to do with the writing of a book.

The evidence which follows, taken from the Bible itself, is but a small portion of that which exists. This evidence demonstrates that the Bible cannot be the literal, complete, inerrant and perfect work of a perfect, all-powerful, and loving God. It also demonstrates that the Bible is not especially useful even as a guidebook. In addition, because the Bible reflects every important belief of traditional Christianity--the foundation of Christianity itself rests on shaky ground.

Note to reader: this Introduction is but one of eight chapters which originally made up a single, unified document. For purposes of increased compatibility with the Internet, the document was broken into eight separate files. The evidence referred to above can be found in the related files using the links below."

MattyIce07 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe in evoloution in general and dont deny it as fact....but the problem with the theory that MAN evolved has been pretty much debunked because the process of evoloution takes millions of years.....scientist have found hard evidence of other organisims evolving...but have very little evidence of man evolving....also what did we evolve from? there has to be a starting point some where how did that starting point come into existence?? what if evoulotion is a tool used by god to create life? and not just a coinsidence???

there are to many things in this universe that just couldent have happened by luck......what are the odds for example that the earth is the proper distance from the sun and rotates at just the right angle to support life???? is it a stroke of luck that the ozone layer is here to protect us from the sun?? is it luck that plants produce enough oxygen to support life???? i could go on all night ...but iwill end at this.....if you dont see the evidenceat there is a god..then you are blinded

Alright then, what are the odds that Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus wouldn't be the right distance away. There were 8 chances for at least one planet to be in the habitable zone, Earth just so happened to be that planet. If Earth was destroyed a billion years ago and Mars took it's place, we would be living on Mars right now, but that's beside the point. The point is, we are lucky that this planet was just the right distance from the Sun in order for life to form here.

It is not luck that plants produce enough oxygen to support life. We cut down anywhere between 3 to 6 BILLION trees each year, but you don't see everyone walking around gasping for air do you? The simple fact is that we adapted to our environemnt, it didn't happen the other way around. The world didn't change what it was doing just because humans came into the picture, we have adapted for millions of years to the changing environment, which all leads back to evolution. If you think that the Earth adapted to us, then you shouldn't believe in evolution, but you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i didnt say the earth adapted to us...if we did evolve from something the earth had to be just right for what ever we evolved from to exist...the earth had to be created with love for life to exist in the first place...what ever we theoretically evolved from had to be created...organisms didnt spawn out of nothing.....what and how did the first organisms spring to life? they just pooofed out of thin air??? i find it more believable that something created the first life....then that NOTHING created the first life....it makes more sence if you think about it

So, it makes more sense to you that a being that needs as much, if not more explaining where it came from, just poofed life into existence, than say...the several other theories of abiogenesis under scientific research at this time that have shown very good promise and likely explanations for how the first cell-like organism actually developed from the chemicals available on the primordial earth, instead of "poofing out of nothing?"

You don't seem to understand that by simply claiming that "goddidit" doesn't actually explain a single thing. For a being to have the ability to create our universe, he would have to be complex beyond our understanding. A being that complex needs even more explaining where IT came from. Or did it just "poof" out of nothing, as you seem so averse to accepting?

And you clearly know NOTHING of evolution if you have the audacity to say we haven't proven where humans evolved from, and that we did actually evolve. We HAVE proven it, beyond a shadow of a doubt, for anyone not too lazy to actually look at the evidence in black and white. Pick up a freaking high school science book. Or look at the videos I already posted in this thread, which you clearly didnt' take the time to look at before uttering your ridiculous response. Look at embryology, physiology, genetics, taxonomy, or pretty much any other branch of biological science, and you'll find the exact same evolutionary tree explaining FOR A FACT that we DID evolve and where we evolved from. Saying you believe in evolution, BUT humans didnt evolve, no-no - we're too special for that! So typical of the religiously warped mind.

Bottom line, it's been proven. Stop repeating what your sunday school teacher has been telling you all your life and go out and look at the evidence for yourself. Use the brain that 3.5 billion years of evolution has given you, for once.

Please! I'm begging you for all that is good in this world, please take the time to educate yourself by watching this playlist of Potholer54 videos on "Our Origins Made Easy." These are constructed where everyone can understand them, and I can think of no greater gift than the gift of true knowledge. Please, if whoever is reading this thread, if you get nothing else out of all of this, please at least watch this series of videos. I promise you wont be disappointed.

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=DB23537556D7AADB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You were somewhat on the right path until this last sentence. I'll give you credit for actually having some questions in the past and trying to make some sense of it all; and also for recognizing some of the flaws in the bible.

If I could just politely mention a few things. I'm sure through your investigations into the bible you noticed that some of the claimed historical facts not only are inaccurate when corrobarated with outside sources of that time, the bible itself has different authors that cant agree on the same timeline and occurences for the same event. For example, when detailing the ancestry of Adam down to David, the two gospels that supposedly document this have an entirely different list of decendants, one of them much longer than the other, and the names that they actually do have the same most of the time don't even overlap each other. This is just one small example, but it illustrates the greater point that even the supposed historical records aren't even accurate, for the most part. THIS is why we call it a work of fiction; it gets a few things right just out of sheer luck it seems like, but the overwhelming majority of the supposed historical facts of the bible have been proven inaccurate.

Something that is mostly made up is, consequently, mostly fiction. Something that is mostly fiction, IS fiction.

Since other people smarter and more talented than me have already put the legwork in on so many of these topics, I'll again point towards another video to elaborate on the origins of the bible and why it most certainly wasn't written by a supreme being of any kind:

I'm sorry man, I'm afraid I didn't get my thoughts out clearly. I ended up having to try and rewrite my post and got more distracted and annoyed about it than anything else.

As has already been covered, the Bible was written and compiled by many many different people over a long period of time. I think the context of when these books were written, the general inaccuracy of many records (if records even exist) from those times, and the very art of storytelling all get lost in modern thinking. It's not as if we can go back in an Egyptian library and confirm numbers or even go to Rome and obtain accurate records of Christian executions. The Egyptians don't even know exactly how the gigantic pyramids exist in their land, let alone why they have such strange mathematical and structural coincidences with the rest of the world. The giant Goliath from the famous story of the Hebrew King David was no taller than about 6'7"... which is tall, but hardly by the proportions sensationalized in lore. Coincidentally the height of Goliath is also contested by two different numbers, but also explained as a mere CONFUSION of how a number was written through handed down stories and translations!

I don't mean to make any excuse for the Bible. I just think that calling it a work of fiction is an inaccurate statement in itself. The inability to prove something now that supposedly happened thousands of years ago does not inherently mean it is fictitious. Especially when the stories of the Old Testament were not recorded by first hand accountings of the events, but tales of the events passed through generations before they ever appeared on paper. A story can't go through 5 people in TODAY'S world without losing its accuracy.

And this is by no means an attempt to validate the contents of the Bible. I believe it is in whole an incomplete and misunderstood collection of books... and that we will never truly know or understand the background, accuracy, or missing pieces. Ever. But in spite of this I believe the book is full of valuable teachings. Men have done unspeakable evil in the name of their Christian beliefs, but men have also done abundantly beautiful things by those beliefs. Such is human nature and I believe as a society we have a very twisted view of how our lives should be affected by those beliefs.

I can only hope that some of these staunch Bible supporters on here will give an open ear. I was once in their same position, but approached it with a humble attitude that I don't know everything and neither does the swinging **** in the pulpit.

Great thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the bible we have today is mainly to teach christians there history. the entire book is full of historical facts many destroyed ciy's where discovered from the texts explantions of war. palsitinian wars isrealites canaanites samarians egyptians the list goes on and on. it contains all historical facts and is considered one of the best history books by many historians. there is an idealogical point to it in some books but mostly its history either handed down through spoken word and stories that shaped our beleifs. the bible was put together by the catholic church based on thousands of texts.

the bible has been changed several times, none the less historically it has been proven accurate as far as dates timelines and specific places. we would never have known severall of the leaders of the time or places where they ruled historically it is fact. ideology is what you are asking for and for that all i can say is. for a fact there is a creator and his design has proven to be pefect in everyway.

the creator is ultimately more intelligent than man and for some reason decided man would have inteligence and would attempt to understand him there may be others but we have yet to find them on this earth we are the top species only b/c of our ability to understand and think. our brain seperates us so i would assume the creator has this same feature and is much like us. at some point maybe man can become a god but that will be millions of years in the future when we understand and controll everything, we can live in robotic bodies forever or grow new ones, have unlimited knowledge and can travel instantly anywhere in the universe.if our society and humans can do this we will need to survive atleast 1-2 million more years without major setbacks. i doubt we will b/c that would mean some other race could be older than ours and prevent us from acheiving what they have so most likely there will be an appocolypse like one described in the bible where we will all be destroyed. by the higher level race the ones we call god or the devil. i mean it nly makes since. likely we will all die from our own hands or a plant sent here to ensure that human civilization will fail.

most of the bible is written in code. i have seen some of these and i will tell you they are extremely intresting. i am not talking about the bible code. this can only be shown to you by true scholars. it's full of cross refrencing books such as in revalation it says the beast will come from the sea and say ... and in hosea it says out of no where, the beast is... this code is all in the bible but we will never know the stuff. you can try to reference sunday enquirer for some but it is hard to find. and the bible has been edited and changed so these codes are probably mostly changed or altered but some are still intact.

basically most of the bible is fact. read it before you try and discredit it. i have and now i know my history very well b/c mostly that is all they talk about untill you get to the new testament. then it's still historical facts of jesus' life letters to differnt city's then finally the book i care for least revalation. you can't understand this book unless you know how to cross referance to find the bits of code hidden in the bible. there is some things you can get like there is only a small heaven now **** does't exist yet our loved one's and hated one's are all in a purgatory like place untill the rapture. what ever that means. we can't know b/c we can't go back and find the code that will tell us. it may be in the bible probably it was edited ou though. i could keep going but you get the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the bottom line is this random you like the rest of the scientist lovers have still done little to convince me or billions of other humans that there is no possibility of god . i could post youtube videos of religous scientist yes they exist..poking holes in every theory you propose as fact....but whats the point.??? i could care less what you think...because i know for a FACT....not theory.....that you have no clue how this universe came to be......the fact that it bothers you that other ppl check that the vast majority of ppl that ever lived dont share your views just reveals your insecureties...you post links to internet sights like you believe every thing you read on the net is fact just shows your ignorance....the fact that you cant admitt the possibility of a god....when every scientist on earth admits the possibilty of a god shows your agenda

The bolded text clearly shows your agenda, and that I'm pretty much wasting my time with you. I am going to respond to your points here, however. Not because I think you will actually entertain a thought that isn't given to you by your preconcieved notions, but because of my hope that others reading this thread might glean something from having your failed arguments addressed and thoroughly debunked. I'll quote you line for line and tell everyone else where and why just about every line of this quoted message is completely errant. And just like all the rest of the evidence I've posted in this thread that you have failed to take a gander at, you can still make the choice to take your blinders off and look at the actual evidence before you leap to your conclusions: something you have yet to do up until this point.

-- "the bottom line is this random, you, like the rest of the scientist lovers, have still done little to convince me or billions of other humans that there is no possibility of god." (I added commas for comprehension)

Who is trying to? The god hypothesis is something that can't be proven one way or the other, at this current time. Hopefully, one day our technology and understanding of the universe will allow us to test this hypothesis. But right now it is simply not possible.

I can't prove that there aren't little fairies at the bottom of your garden eihter. But does that mean you believe they are there because we can't prove they aren't? Of course you don't, or at least no sane person does. And why is that? Because everything we know about the universe points toward the conclusion that no fairies exist in your garden. That doesn't PROVE they aren't there, but any rational person lives there lives under the assumption that there aren't any fairies in your garden. This is a critical thinking skill; are you following along so far?

Yet, you people that claim god does exist seem unable, or unwilling, to grasp the concept that YOU are the ones that have something to prove, since you are the ones that claim something exists. The burden of proof rests with you, not the atheists. You fail to realize this. Back to the fairy example from above, because we can't say for certain that fairies don't exist, does that mean it's a 50/50 chance that they do or don't? No rational person would say the likelihood of fairies existing is 50%. So just because we can't PROVE 100% against the existence of something, we can still make probability assessments in one direction or the other. Any rational person would tilt the probability scale for fairies way down towards the 0% probability. Notice that we can't definitevly say with 100% certainty from a scientific perspective that there aren't fairies, but the likelihood that they do exist is so low, we might as well be saying "they don't exist" for all practical purposes. But this is not the same as saying "we have 100% proof that fairies don't exist." Because no real scientist would ever claim to know something as 100% fact, that can't be testable, falsifiable, or reproducable.

By the way, every scientist, EVERY ONE, will tell you that the existence of "god" is NOT impossible. But what they will tell you, the atheistic ones at least, is that the probability of the existence of god is extremely small, just like fairies. Again, not impossible, but not very likely at all. All the observable evidence points towards this conclusion. You can keep denying the evidence and dismiss it without ever actually looking at it and pretend it doesn't exist; or you can take off the blinders and actually evaluate it for yourself before you put your foot in your mouth again.

-- "i could post youtube videos of religous scientist yes they exist..poking holes in every theory you propose as fact....but whats the point.???"

Yep, religious scientists exist. Not one single scientist will dispute that fact. Although 99% of scientists in all fields accept evolution as the fact that it is. So I don't know who you are going to find to poke holes in the Theory of Evolution that is a scientist. Not one that hasn't already been ridiculed to no end in the brutal scientific review process, if they actually had the courage to submit their hypothesis to that scrutiny. The theory of evolution has withstood EVERY single test of it's credibility from the smartest people on this planet for 150 years and counting. It has never failed under even one condition. Every attempt by ceationists or proponets of Inteligent Design to poke holes in evolution have been thoroughly debunked by real scientists that follow the evidence, and not an agenda. Evolution is a fact, deal with it. Unless you can provide some evidence the rest of the scientific community is unaware of, you should stop trying to act like you do and stop misrepresenting your case. There is NO controversy regarding evolution within the scientific community.

-- "i could care less what you think...because i know for a FACT....not theory.....that you have no clue how this universe came to be......"

Actually, we have a pretty good idea how this universe came to be. Again, the evidence is out there if you take off the blinders and stop regurgitating the same old propaganda. And claiming you know something for a fact, and not just a theory, something that you, nor anyone else, could possibly know, well that just makes you a liar. Because some Bronze Age myths incorporated into a book we are supposed to revere as holy has told you where we come from, you honestly think that is a FACT? When over 80% of that book has already been discredited due to inaccuracies, contradictions, errors, and other gross misrepresentations of reality, you still claim the contents lead you to know something for a FACT? Even when what you supposedly "know" contradicts most of what the rest of the sane world has come to accept as what we actually DO know about the world we live in? OK then...prove it.

You can't, for the same reasons we can't prove god doesn't exist. And if you can't show it, you DON'T know it, and you should stop pretending like you do. Really really believing something isn't the same thing as knowing it. You are a prime example of religious dogma at it's worst. You know your conclusion beforehand, and nothing is going to change your mind. All the evidence in the world wont get through to you. And THIS is a prime example of what is wrong about blind faith.

--"you post links to internet sights like you believe every thing you read on the net is fact just shows your ignorance...."

Ad hominem attacks don't help prove your case. I post links to internet sites that provide evidence to support my arguments. Perhaps you should try it, instead of just presenting unsubstantiated claims without a shred of evidence and then acting as your claims are indisputable. If you choose to not look at the evidence provided, that is your choice. But don't expect anyone to take your opinion seriously when you continually make a claim, then that claim is refuted with evidence, and you still continue to make the same claim acting as if it was never refuted in the first place. And you are talking to someone else about ignorance?

-- "the fact that you cant admitt the possibility of a god....when every scientist on earth admits the possibilty of a god shows your agenda"

And this quote shows one of two things: 1) your reading comprehension is what is leading to your glaring miscalculations towards your worldview; or 2) you're a flat out liar in order to try and support your weak arguments. Either way, your claim here is 100% wrong. Allow me to elaborate by quoting myself from post #42 of THIS thread: "Accepting evolution as the fact that it is, does NOT mean you are an atheist. It is still possible that a "supreme being" or "god" created the universe and set the whole evolution process in motion. While I say that is 'possible,' I'm not saying that it's probable. However, the theory of evolution has nothing at all to say about whether a god or gods exist or not."

I think your agenda is pretty clear to everyone at this point. For everyone else reading this thread, please evaluate the arguments presented in this topic based on the evidence. Don't take my word for it, check it for yourself. But at the same time don't just keep repeating the same things that you might have always been told just out of repetition.

MattyIce07 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the bible we have today is mainly to teach christians there history. the entire book is full of historical facts

Fail. The abundant historical INaccuracy of the bible has already been documented in this thread. Unless you have some evidence to provide in support of this claim, other than personal opinion? As for the rest of your conspiracy theory drivle, well...I'm not sure if there was one coherant argument in the whole thing.

MattyIce07 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i would say 100% there is a god, in the word that we mean, god is the creator of life. whether he created the world to look 4 billion years old or it is 4 illion years old both are possibilities. no argument past that can be proved or disproven. the idea that life exists shows that "before there was", "there was" how is that how can something be before existense. clearly there was because we were all created.the main argument is how is there some being before that and frankly our minds and ideaology can't comprehend that.if we could 1 out of nearly 7 billion would have a reasonable answer, no one does. it is not comprehendable to our mind. but the fact is something existed first and reasonably all other forms of life spurred from it or was created by it. to us this is "god" all religeon try's to interpret this. to say the bible is 80% wrong shows you have never read it. i would agree if you said 10% is'nt possible or realistic but as i said before 85% of the bible is only history not idealogy or story's of amazing feats. to say that 80% is wrong i will tell you, you are flat out wrong! challenge me! facts are facts and when you assume you cannot win an argument or even have an argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fail. The abundant historical INaccuracy of the bible has already been documented in this thread. Unless you have some evidence to provide in support of this claim, other than personal opinion? As for the rest of your conspiracy theory drivle, well...I'm not sure if there was one coherant argument in the whole thing.

in this thread! there is much more! that has been proven accurate, pilot ruled parts of isreal. king herod did kill 1000's of babies, pharaoh thutmose ruled during mose's time, the bible is a proven historical marker all scholars will agree to this. i could go on about city placement and rulers in time periods but you have never read it so you don't know. but if you know your history you would understand about 80% of the bible and consider it fact. now the argument of a great flood is flawed. people living 900 years is flawed and jesus' miracles are flawed but that only accounts for about 10% of the bible. if you read it you would know. but you listen to others not read for yourself so how do you know. i will go chapter for chapter with you if you like. and debate from there but you will learn after genesis everything for about 1000 page's is history with some jewish law not outrageous story's of fantastic theories. i can clearly see you know not and have'nt read jack. you just assume bible stories are all the bible talks about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

99% of religeous scientists don't agree with evolution did you type that backwards b/c about 90% of teachers in america are christian and do agree that is is a strongly supported theory. you however use that as an aggument since you beleive it is fact! 100% of people know this is a theaory even darwin himself! please we beleive animals change to survive but it is far from fact as you state. and most christians agree that god put this law in place to keep life progressing so divine intervention is'nt necesarry. most of us beleive the creator set up a system so perfect that 1 organism can sprout all existing life forms all that was needed was the first energy in a system. once the system is powered everything that we know was produced and is still producing. we know the universe is still expanding we think most likely it started with the big bang in wich most scientist agree that nothing existed before that yet most know there was an energy that started the process. if you need i can go into how we know this and why most quantum theory scientist do beleive in god many are christian. not to say that christianity is right but it is an idea of a creator that is universal. if we find aliens do you think they will have religeon? my answer is most likely yes. why? i think it is obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Metatron, I don't see how you can keep digging yourself a deeper hole, but you are pulling it off. I provided numerous links in my very first post in this thread that point out the MANY instances in the bible where it is completely wrong: an overwhelming majority of it, in fact. I've already given my points that you could argue against, like you claim you will do if I want. Well, I want you too, thats why I posted them. I'll help you out, go to post #30 and click the links. Go ahead, be my guest, argue against each of those inaccuracies I've already made reference too. You can continue to make up your facts and claim i'm making up mine by ignoring them. Or you can actually look at the facts I've presented and critique them on their merit. In either case, your response will be evident for everyone to see. You may be able to lie to yourself, but others just wont buy it.

So you would say there is 100% chance there is a god. Cool, that means you have proof and I can change my mind and believe in god too, when presented with this proof. Would you please show it to me? Thank you. Oh, and by the way, I've read the bible from cover to cover twice; and certain passages countless times. As I said before, that is the main reason I came to the conclusion it was full of hot air and am no longer a believer in pretty much anything it has to say. What I do find ironic, however, is most of the christian people that take the greatest offense to any threat on their religion, have actually never read the bible themselves. Isn't that odd? Especially when it's considered a sin to not know the bible backwards and forwards. You know, like it says in the bible, if people actually ever read that part, which they apparently a large portion of christians dont.

--"99% of religeous scientists don't agree with evolution did you type that backwards b/c about 90% of teachers in america are christian and do agree that it is a strongly supported theory. you however use that as an aggument since you beleive it is fact!"

Lets see, can I present you with facts, yet again, to dispute this wrong argument from you? Almost too easily, with a quick google trip to Wiki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution

" Scientific support

The vast majority of the scientific community and academia supports evolutionary theory as the only explanation that can fully account for observations in the fields of biology, paleontology, anthropology, and others.[16][17][18][19][20] One 1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[21] An expert in the evolution-creationism controversy, professor and author Brian Alters states that "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution"[/u].[22] A 1991 Gallup poll of Americans found that about 5% of scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[23][24]

Additionally, the scientific community considers intelligent design, a neo-creationist offshoot, to be unscientific,[25] pseudoscience,[26][27] or junk science.[28][29] The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that intelligent design "and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life" are not science because they cannot be tested by experiment, do not generate any predictions, and propose no new hypotheses of their own.[30] In September 2005, 38 Nobel laureates issued a statement saying "Intelligent design is fundamentally unscientific; it cannot be tested as scientific theory because its central conclusion is based on belief in the intervention of a supernatural agent."[31] In October 2005, a coalition representing more than 70,000 Australian scientists and science teachers issued a statement saying "intelligent design is not science" and calling on "all schools not to teach Intelligent Design (ID) as science, because it fails to qualify on every count as a scientific theory".[32]"

One last thing, once again you have shown that you haven't actually read at least one part of what I've been saying. You try to throw out that evolution is "just a theory" when I've already devoted a good portion of time in trying to educate people just like you regarding exatcly what "just a theory" really means. Once again, outside of mathematics, where the only field that absolute proof exists, a well established theory, like evolution for example, is the absolute highest form of rock-solid proof available. I already clearly explained this in greater detail. Yet it appears you either have your bible blinders on when you read it...or you just didn't read it and came in here acting like you know what you are talking about - when it's clear that you don't.

MattyIce07 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe in evoloution in general and dont deny it as fact....but the problem with the theory that MAN evolved has been pretty much debunked because the process of evoloution takes millions of years.....scientist have found hard evidence of other organisims evolving...but have very little evidence of man evolving....also what did we evolve from? there has to be a starting point some where how did that starting point come into existence?? what if evoulotion is a tool used by god to create life? and not just a coinsidence???

there are to many things in this universe that just couldent have happened by luck......what are the odds for example that the earth is the proper distance from the sun and rotates at just the right angle to support life???? is it a stroke of luck that the ozone layer is here to protect us from the sun?? is it luck that plants produce enough oxygen to support life???? i could go on all night ...but iwill end at this.....if you dont see the evidenceat there is a god..then you are blinded

so you believe a god created the universe, then which one?: how can you just pick one over the other? Out of the millions of Gods thought to have existed how can you choose one and be sure? Using logic the odds are stacked against you, so how would you know which God to worship? Also, Why does everything need a starting point but God? You refuse to apply logic to your supreme being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you believe a god created the universe, then which one?: how can you just pick one over the other? Out of the millions of Gods thought to have existed how can you choose one and be sure? Using logic the odds are stacked against you, so how would you know which God to worship? Also, Why does everything need a starting point but God? You refuse to apply logic to your supreme being.

first ill reply to you. youngin, all monotheistic religions beleive there is 1 god and for the most part my christian god is the same as all the others a supreme being capable of creating something out of nothing. in polytheistic religions there are many gods that all do the same thing as our, my one god. so in essence all religion beleive the same thing except for 1 that what our friend here random fan beleive's. by no way am i promoting christianity as the 1 right religion. i am just saying, historically speaking 85-90% of the bible is accepted as historical fact. when people say god most people understan that as a supreme being in monotheistic religions they mean 1 "being" that possesed the power to create the universe. now how many universe's are there as far as we know 1 could there be others definately yes and so in my beleif they where all created by one being. some energy that we call "god".

and just to let you know that random does'nt know annything about what he has claimed to read he say's that not knowing the bible front to back is a sin. yet the bible did'nt exist until man, the cotholic church, put it together and we all should know if you read the bible back to back that there are only 10 commandments and one of them is not know the bible cover to cover. in fact christians beleive if you just follow 10 simple rules you will go to "heaven". a higher place . obviosly a guy who does'nt understand and has never understood christianity. he should read the bible and not lie to make his argument. i mean everyone in the world except a small minority knows there is a god some where that created everything. scientists know the when the universe was "created" about 15 billion years ago. and they all use the word "created" so that means there is what? a creator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites