Has the Bible ever been proven wrong?

[glockmail]

But you can't prove it, can you?

In a court of law I could. Your testimony against several others. we went through thisvery early on in this thread under "standard of proof". The fact that atheists like you refuse to believe beyond a reasonable doubt simply makes you unreasonable.

 

[MissileMan]

In a court of law I could. Your testimony against several others. we went through thisvery early on in this thread under "standard of proof". The fact that atheists like you refuse to believe beyond a reasonable doubt simply makes you unreasonable.

For every person that you can put on the stand that claims the Bible is true, I can come with at least two that would say it isn't. If your standard is based strictly on numbers, you can't win. And that's at the lowest legal standard of preponderance of the evidence.

 

[MissileMan]

So basically you gave up a long time ago.

Gave up what? Are you dense?

 

[Gunny]

It's a highly effective technique when arguing with hypocrits...I'm not responsible for their apparent rising numbers of late.

It is a technique of desperation in lieu of an argument that stands on its own merit.

 

[MissileMan]

It is a technique of desperation in lieu of an argument that stands on its own merit.

Baloney! It very rapidly and succinctly demonstrates the fallacy of the original statement.

 

[LOki]

Baloney! It very rapidly and succinctly demonstrates the fallacy of the original statement.

Nonsense. You demonstrated no fallacy--you just expressed your refusal of engagement wrapped in an unfounded accusation of hypocracy.

 

[MissileMan]

Nonsense. You demonstrated no fallacy--you just expressed your refusal of engagement wrapped in an unfounded accusation of hypocracy.

I've changed it to an accusation of trilingual.

 

[glockmail]

For every person that you can put on the stand that claims the Bible is true, I can come with at least two that would say it isn't. If your standard is based strictly on numbers, you can't win. And that's at the lowest legal standard of preponderance of the evidence.

Gave up what? Are you dense?

1. Yet another lie from you. Its common knowledge that the percent believers is about 10 times higher than you atheists.
2. By resorting to lies, it is obvious that you've given up all hope of rational argument.

 

[MissileMan]

1. Yet another lie from you. Its common knowledge that the percent believers is about 10 times higher than you atheists.
2. By resorting to lies, it is obvious that you've given up all hope of rational argument.

Last I checked, Christians only make up approximately 1/3rd of the world's population. The other 2/3rds of the world wouldn't be expected to testify that they think the Bible is true.

You're the one who keeps insisting that I've given up something that I haven't been engaged in. I've explained it VERY cleary, yet you appear too dense to grasp it.

 

[glockmail]

Last I checked, Christians only make up approximately 1/3rd of the world's population. The other 2/3rds of the world wouldn't be expected to testify that they think the Bible is true.

You're the one who keeps insisting that I've given up something that I haven't been engaged in. I've explained it VERY cleary, yet you appear too dense to grasp it.

1. Last I checked, this was US Message Board dot com, and Americans are overwhelmingly Christian. As an American, I don't recognize your international court.
2. How typical of you to refuse to address the premise of the thread. But I'll repeat it for you: Has the Bible ever been proven wrong? After hundreds of posts, it appears the collective answer is "no".

 

[MissileMan]

1. Last I checked, this was US Message Board dot com, and Americans are overwhelmingly Christian. As an American, I don't recognize your international court.

I expected this type of response. We can hold the trial in any U.S. court of your choosing. Of course now I expect you to tell me that you get to pick MY witnesses for me.

2. How typical of you to refuse to address the premise of the thread. But I'll repeat it for you: Has the Bible ever been proven wrong? After hundreds of posts, it appears the collective answer is "no".

I have addressed the premise of the thread, you refuse to acknowledge it. As I've stated, your premise that the Bible is 100% accurate because it's never been proven wrong is flawed. It is flawed because you can't prove or disprove the unproveable.

 

[Gunny]

I expected this type of response. We can hold the trial in any U.S. court of your choosing. Of course now I expect you to tell me that you get to pick MY witnesses for me.



I have addressed the premise of the thread, you refuse to acknowledge it. As I've stated, your premise that the Bible is 100% accurate because it's never been proven wrong is flawed. It is flawed because you can't prove or disprove the unproveable.

The flaw to your argument is it is not up to her to prove or disprove anything, based on the thread title. It is encumbent on YOU.

 

[Mr.Conley]

I think you'll have to first establish which part of the bible are "God's Words" and not a man's words inspired by God, and then demonstrate (in only those cases where we are discussing God's Words) that there is proof of error.

Ah, so you're a Christian who doesn't believe that the Bible is God's Word. I just assumed, my bad.

I for one don't think God wrote the Bible so I'm not going to bother trying to say otherwise. I guess the only other point that remains deals with contradictions and errors. I posted a few earlier, do you have a response?

 

[MissileMan]

The flaw to your argument is it is not up to her to prove or disprove anything, based on the thread title. It is encumbent on YOU.

So in order to present the argument I need to make another thread titled, "Has the Bible ever been proven to be 100% accurate?"

It would just be another case of inability to prove or disprove the unproveable.

Glock wants to put it to a legal test, but only under certain conditions. He wants to be the judge, hand-pick the jury, and for added good measure, wants to pick the witnesses too.

 

[manu1959]

So in order to present the argument I need to make another thread titled, "Has the Bible ever been proven to be 100% accurate?"

It would just be another case of inability to prove or disprove the unproveable.

Glock wants to put it to a legal test, but only under certain conditions. He wants to be the judge, hand-pick the jury, and for added good measure, wants to pick the witnesses too.

well he is in the us legal system.......can ya balme him...her... it....whatever

 

[Mr.Conley]

1. There is no contradiction in Genesis.

Here man was created after animals:

1:25 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

1:27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

Here man was created before animals.

18 The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.

That's not me, that's the Bible talking.

Oh and here God creates man and woman at the same time:

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

Here he creates woman later, from Adam's rib.

1:21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh.
1:22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

2. The Earth is way older than 3000 years. Where in the Bible is that age stated?

Aren't we talking about the flood here? Most estimates I've heard from Biblical scholars place it at around 3200-4000 years ago.

3. I’d say that is a pretty good approximation of pi for ancient man to understand. Did you expect God to say that the sea was perfectly round, and that the circumference was exactly 31.41592654 cubits? Even if He did, you’d complain that He didn’t provide more digits.

You'd think it'd be a pretty good approximation, but then you have to realize that the Egyptians, the Babylonians, and the Chinese had all calculated much more accurate versions of pi hundreds of years before the Bible was written. Two of these civilizations were right in the neighborhood of the Bible's writers, and Pi certainly wasn't a military secret. Plus, if the Egyptians, the Babylonians and the Chinese can all go at least a few decimal approximations closer, can't an all-seeing, all-powerful God do the same? Even then the Bible was behind the times.

 

[glockmail]

I expected this type of response. We can hold the trial in any U.S. court of your choosing. Of course now I expect you to tell me that you get to pick MY witnesses for me.



I have addressed the premise of the thread, you refuse to acknowledge it. As I've stated, your premise that the Bible is 100% accurate because it's never been proven wrong is flawed. It is flawed because you can't prove or disprove the unproveable.

Glock wants to put it to a legal test, but only under certain conditions. He wants to be the judge, hand-pick the jury, and for added good measure, wants to pick the witnesses too.

1. And as you traipse in your line of unwashed liars the jury will find the truth obvious.
2. What Gunny said.
3. **(points to my signature line)**

 

[glockmail]

Here man was created after animals:

Here man was created before animals.

That's not me, that's the Bible talking.

Oh and here God creates man and woman at the same time:

Here he creates woman later, from Adam's rib.




Aren't we talking about the flood here? Most estimates I've heard from Biblical scholars place it at around 3200-4000 years ago.

You'd think it'd be a pretty good approximation, but then you have to realize that the Egyptians, the Babylonians, and the Chinese had all calculated much more accurate versions of pi hundreds of years before the Bible was written. Two of these civilizations were right in the neighborhood of the Bible's writers, and Pi certainly wasn't a military secret. Plus, if the Egyptians, the Babylonians and the Chinese can all go at least a few decimal approximations closer, can't an all-seeing, all-powerful God do the same? Even then the Bible was behind the times.

Please provide correct references (chapter and verse, as in Genesis13:1), then agree that when I prove consistency here that you will acknowledge that you are wrong and not simply try another feeble example, then I will respond.

 

[LOki]

Nonsense. You demonstrated no fallacy--you just expressed your refusal of engagement wrapped in an unfounded accusation of hypocracy.

I've changed it to an accusation of trilingual.

I'm not sure trilingual means what you think it means, and I'm curious to find out, as you seem to still be avoiding the discussion by dropping unfounded accusations.

1. Yet another lie from you. Its common knowledge that the percent believers is about 10 times higher than you atheists.
2. By resorting to lies, it is obvious that you've given up all hope of rational argument.

"Liar, liar, pants on fire!" AWESOME!

Last I checked, Christians only make up approximately 1/3rd of the world's population. The other 2/3rds of the world wouldn't be expected to testify that they think the Bible is true.

HAHA! I'll see your Christian Nation argument from popularity, and raise you ... THE WHOLE NON-CHRISTIAN WORLD!!!! BRAVO!

You're the one who keeps insisting that I've given up something that I haven't been engaged in. I've explained it VERY cleary, yet you appear too dense to grasp it.

He has you there glockmail--he's dodging the discussion.

Ever been wrong about "what?" is my question.

If you say "Universal Flood," I'll just say, "So what? That's not what it needs to be right about", and your "mission" becomes pointless.

How about "The Supposed Infallability of God's Word in the Bible."

I think you'll have to first establish which part of the bible are "God's Words" and not a man's words inspired by God, and then demonstrate (in only those cases where we are discussing God's Words) that there is proof of error.

Ah, so you're a Christian who doesn't believe that the Bible is God's Word. I just assumed, my bad.

I for one don't think God wrote the Bible so I'm not going to bother trying to say otherwise. I guess the only other point that remains deals with contradictions and errors. I posted a few earlier, do you have a response?

First, I wouldn't place the label of Christian on me before you know exactly what a Christian is, and to whom; and more importantly, that I'm one of them. You can feel fully justified to pidgeon-hole my statements till our heart's content at that point, but not before.

Secondly, I'm not asking you to say God wrote the Bible (or otherwise)--I think the Bible itself indiates persons other than God did the Bible's writing. No divine post-it notes involved outside of the stone ones Moses inconveniently smashed.

Finally, if you're talking about things like plate tectonics and the value of pi, I'll refer you first to my suggestion that perhaps the Bible is not a geology or geometry textbook, and does not have to be right about those things, because that's not it's point, and geology and geometry are prescisely the kinds of things some rube from the hills might get wrong; and then I'll refer you to your "infallible word of God" and say, "Ok. Regular Joe gets shit wrong every day, excise the shit Regular Joe said from the issue and focus on what God said."

Feel free to excersise the MissileMan dodge if you don't feel up to it.

 

[glockmail]

....[MissleMan's] dodging the discussion......

That's been obvious for a long time, but I must say, as we are over 300 posts he may be setting some kind of record. The real question is: why? The only conclusion I can draw is that he must have some kind of psychological problem with this issue. But then that belies another question: why? Maybe he was boned by a gay priest?