Has the Bible ever been proven wrong?

[LOki]

There is absolutely no way of determining the difference.

I think you can let go of certain presumptions without becoming intellectually disingenuous about the issue, allowing a way to parse out God's words.

 

[CaffeineKid1988]

Oh yeah... and he didn't have a last name, Christ (which, I believe, is savior in latin) or otherwise. He'd have been Yeshua ben Yosef, which is Joshua, son of Joseph.

Actually...Christ comes from the Greek word χρίστος (Christos), which means "annointed." That's not really a last name as we consider it...it could be said to mean "the annointed one." And Jesus is the Latin translation of Yeshua.

 

[MissileMan]

I think you can let go of certain presumptions without becoming intellectually disingenuous about the issue, allowing a way to parse out God's words.

Provide a couple examples of each.

 

[LOki]

Provide a couple examples of each.

Examples of each "what"?

 

[MissileMan]

Examples of each "what"?

Parts of the Bible that are God's word and parts that are man's word?

 

[LOki]

Parts of the Bible that are God's word and parts that are man's word?

How about:

"Thou shall not steal."

and discard as man's words every bit of creation (for example) that is not preceded by something like, "Hi! I'm God, and I ...insert made the bugs. or the water, or the firmament, or whatever... and called it "good."

 

[MissileMan]

How about:

and discard as man's words every bit of creation (for example) that is not preceded by something like, "Hi! I'm God, and I ...insert made the bugs. or the water, or the firmament, or whatever... and called it "good."

And how did you arrive at the difference? A man is quite capable of coming up with "thou shall not steal", don't you think so?

 

[glockmail]

Thats' what the video does:
Explain the Genesis contradiction

Explain the feasability of the Flood and the Ark

Oh, here's a simple one: if the Bible is inerrant, then why does it give a value for pi (3.14159...) that, screw correctness, isn't even an approximation?

1. Perhaps the world was flatter then. Before tectonics.
2. Where does the Bible define pi?

 

[glockmail]

There is absolutely no way of determining the difference.

So you are giving up then?

 

[glockmail]

And how did you arrive at the difference? A man is quite capable of coming up with "thou shall not steal", don't you think so?

Where in nature does this occur?

 

[liberalogic]

I think you can let go of certain presumptions without becoming intellectually disingenuous about the issue, allowing a way to parse out God's words.

Man is the interpreter of God; ALL of God's words are therefore subject to the discretion of the interpreter. It's absolutely impossible to distinguish the difference. For all we know, the Bible could just be the words of man as attributed to divinity in order to emphasize their importance.

 

[MissileMan]

So you are giving up then?

Giving up what?

 

[MissileMan]

Where in nature does this occur?

WTF does that have to do with anything? The intellect of human beings is unparalleled by any other species. You can't compare the behavior of animals able to reason with the behavior of animals that can't.

 

[Mr.Conley]

1. Perhaps the world was flatter then. Before tectonics.
2. Where does the Bible define pi?

What about the Genesis contradiction? You didn't even attempt that one.

Now as for your answers:
1. What this doesn't make sense. Are you saying that plate tectonics stopped 3,000 years ago, the entire Earth flattened, flooded, drained, and then went on again. That's riddiculous. Plate tectonics has been around for billions of years, working continously. What you purpurt is impossible.

2. 1 Kings 7:23
And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.

 

[LOki]

And how did you arrive at the difference? A man is quite capable of coming up with "thou shall not steal", don't you think so?

Yes, of course I do--but that's not the point.

Man is the interpreter of God; ALL of God's words are therefore subject to the discretion of the interpreter. It's absolutely impossible to distinguish the difference. For all we know, the Bible could just be the words of man as attributed to divinity in order to emphasize their importance.

As I said earlier:

I think you can let go of certain presumptions without becoming intellectually disingenuous about the issue, allowing a way to parse out God's words.

I think an important presumption you'd have to let go of--the one you've both clearly refused to let go of--is that God is a fiction created by man.

 

[MissileMan]

As I said earlier:I think an important presumption you'd have to let go of--the one you've both clearly refused to let go of--is that God is a fiction created by man.

But your assignment of divine influence is based on a presumption also...that God isn't a fiction created by man.

 

[LOki]

But your assignment of divine influence is based on a presumption also...that God isn't a fiction created by man.

So what?

 

[MissileMan]

So what?

I think it's an important presumption that you need to let go of-- that so far, you've refused to.

 

[LOki]

I think it's an important presumption that you need to let go of-- that so far, you've refused to.

I have no idea what you're talking about, yet it is clear that you are obtusely missing the point.

 

[Gunny]

I think it's an important presumption that you need to let go of-- that so far, you've refused to.

Aren't you attempting this same position reversal tactic elsewhere?