• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Best Evidence of God -- Inerrancy of the Bible

paulm50

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2014
1,253
110
✟2,061.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
If there is a Creator out there who created the entire universe, and all therein (including the Earth), then said Creator would know His creation well enough to write a Book about it, and said Book would be a faithful representation of what He created.

Nothing in this Book should be untrue. If it were, then that would lead to either the Creator being a liar, or the Creator attempting to deceive His creations, or the author of the Book being someone other than the Creator.

Then, next thing people will bring up, is Evolution. Again, Evolution is a theory and has not been accepted as Scientific Law, therefore it is not True Science, as nobody has witnessed macro evolution before.

Barring those two things, has anyone proven the Christian Bible wrong? No, they haven't.

Well yes they have. Things like dinosaurs, and millions of other animals that have been and gone, prove god had nothing to do with it. The excuse often offered is they didn't get on the Ark. There wasn't enough room for 1 millions species, today's count to fit on the ark not to mention all the prehistoric fish and aquatic mammals.

If a god did create the universe. He certainly didn't tell the people who wrote the bible how it was done. It's been disproven so many times, it's no longer regarded as scientific fact.


There's also pretty strong evidence for a lot of the history elements of the Bible; the huge granary (and surrounding complex) where Joseph stored the grain for the 7-year famine was found, evidence was found of three types of chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea (there was only one short period of time in Egypt where those three types of chariot wheels would have been used simultaneously), I've seen pictures of ruins near the mountains that are thought to be Mt. Sinai, and the general geography of the area supports Scriptures.

Produce the evidence of the chariots, granary, and ruins. Along with corroborating documents from real archaeologists.

The problem with devout Christians is they can't accept the bible is just stories. Written by men with no real knowledge of how the world works. So anything like the melting of the Ice Caps at the end of the Ice Age, which flooded the area around the Black Sea. Is taken as an act of God. Same with the Plagues, they're all natural occurrences. When Israel was suffering from these plagues, it made sense to get rid of all the foreigners.

Though one has to think. If all these acts of genocide were gods work. He prefers death, slaughter and genocide to a far simpler and kinder solution. By staying quiet, 100s will die today, as they did yesterday and as they will tomorrow, To follow the millions who have already died. In wars over who worships this god the right way.

Or is god not responsible for them?
 
Upvote 0

paulm50

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2014
1,253
110
✟2,061.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
There's nothing circular about it. I've never met a person who's mother never had sex. The bible claims Jesus was such a person. Since we know that's impossible, we have no reason to believe that claim. The rest of what is claimed is predicated on that one claim. I have no reason to believe the rest.

I'm only following the logic of the OP.
There are sects that claim Mary remained a virgin all her life. But the bible tells of Jesus's Brother and Sisters. The believers dismiss this as being from Joseph's previous marriage, with no evidence to back it up. Others say Mary's Mother was a virgin, with no evidence to back it up.

Truth is all the evidence we had was in a man made compilation. Now copies of the gospels they tried to destroy, are shedding new better light on the times and the truth.

More and more evidence of a man made book.

Darwin has been proven right or near right over and over again, subjected to more scrutiny than the bible ever has been. Because scientist realised a long time ago, it's just a book. Written by Man to control the sheep into giving them money and power. Of that there's libraries of proof.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
42,764
13,593
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟866,292.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Well yes they have. Things like dinosaurs, and millions of other animals that have been and gone, prove god had nothing to do with it. The excuse often offered is they didn't get on the Ark. There wasn't enough room for 1 millions species, today's count to fit on the ark not to mention all the prehistoric fish and aquatic mammals.

There was no need for fish and aquatic mammals to be on the ark to be protected.

If a god did create the universe. He certainly didn't tell the people who wrote the bible how it was done. It's been disproven so many times, it's no longer regarded as scientific fact.

He did, in fact, tell how He did it. He spoke everything into existence.

The problem with devout Christians is they can't accept the bible is just stories. Written by men with no real knowledge of how the world works.

What they wrote is simply what happened. They recorded history. It wasn't their job to explain it. Only to document it.

Though one has to think. If all these acts of genocide were gods work. He prefers death, slaughter and genocide to a far simpler and kinder solution. By staying quiet, 100s will die today, as they did yesterday and as they will tomorrow, To follow the millions who have already died. In wars over who worships this god the right way.

He died on the cross to save us. All you have to do is look to Him and believe upon Him for salvation. No genocide necessary. ;)
 
Upvote 0

Joshua260

Well-Known Member
Oct 30, 2012
1,448
42
North Carolina
✟17,004.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Joshua260's paraphrase of Goldenboy89's comment:
"2. Therefore, a miracle did not happen.
3. Therefore, Christianity is false."
That's a leap.
Goldenboy89's original comment:
"Christianity claims that a man was born of a virgin. We know that can't happen so I guess that proves Christianity is false."

It sounds to me like your issue is with Goldenboy89 and not me on this one.
 
Upvote 0

TheQuietRiot

indomitable
Aug 17, 2011
1,583
330
West Yorkshire
✟27,002.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
There was no need for fish and aquatic mammals to be on the ark to be protected.

He died on the cross to save us. All you have to do is look to Him and believe upon Him for salvation. No genocide necessary. ;)

Oh the irony.
No genocide necessary? You say this while at the same time referencing the story about when God purged the entire Earth of every living thing including man women and child, condemning them to a terrible death of drowning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

GrimKingGrim

The Thin Dead Line of sanity
Apr 13, 2015
1,237
177
Isle of Who?
✟17,968.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Joshua260's paraphrase of Goldenboy89's comment:
"2. Therefore, a miracle did not happen.
3. Therefore, Christianity is false."

Goldenboy89's original comment:
"Christianity claims that a man was born of a virgin. We know that can't happen so I guess that proves Christianity is false."

It sounds to me like your issue is with Goldenboy89 and not me on this one.

With the premise of this topic in which small errors were nitpicked in order to completely invalidate other religions Golden boy was simply using the OP's logic against him.

And I'm saying it's still a large leap to invalidate a whole religion because of a minute flaw. So my problem is still with the OP
 
Upvote 0

paulm50

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2014
1,253
110
✟2,061.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
There was no need for fish and aquatic mammals to be on the ark to be protected.

Then where are all the fish and aquatic mammals from millions to 10,000s of years ago. Why wasn't the ark large enough to hold all the species of the time?

He did, in fact, tell how He did it. He spoke everything into existence.

Then why did the bible get it wrong? That's a scientific fact.

What they wrote is simply what happened. They recorded history. It wasn't their job to explain it. Only to document it.

No they didn't record it, writing wasn't invented when so much of it happened. And the people of the time had no clue about how things work in nature.

He died on the cross to save us. All you have to do is look to Him and believe upon Him for salvation. No genocide necessary. ;)

If he had got off the cross, appeared in Rome the next day and is still there. There would be a lot less Genocide at the hands of people who "look to Him and believe upon Him".

Jesus was a mortal man, he died, when he could of lived and saved billions from being slaughtered.

As for the virgin birth. It was a common myth of the time that some gods were born of a virgin birth. Too many to mention. Greco-Roman and Hellenistic literature is full of them.
 
Upvote 0

Xalith

Newbie
Apr 6, 2015
1,518
630
✟27,443.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Then where are all the fish and aquatic mammals from millions to 10,000s of years ago. Why wasn't the ark large enough to hold all the species of the time

They died off? *shrug* During the flood, HUGE changes happened to the world at that time. Not just the Flood, mind you. The Flood was more of a cover for God to do other things in the world while waters covered its surface.

Then why did the bible get it wrong? That's a scientific fact.

What's a "scientific fact"? Evolution? hardly, lol. "Micro-evolution happens, so macro evolution MUST be fact!"

Okay, well, an AA Battery can power a small fan motor, so I should be able to stick 500 of them and drive a car with it!

Except it doesn't quite work like that....

No they didn't record it, writing wasn't invented when so much of it happened. And the people of the time had no clue about how things work in nature.

But yet, passages of the Bible written earlier than 1000BC speak of things we didn't prove until 1000AD+ like the major air currents. Yes, people who sailed ships knew that wind existed, but how many people knew that wind circled the globe like water flows through rivers? lol.

Ecclesiastes 1:6: The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.

Keep in mind that this was written by King Solomon (who eigned c. 970-931BC).

How many people at the time understood how wind currents work? Back in those days, you'd hop on a ship, turn the sails to where you wanted to go and just hope the wind was blowing the right way. They didn't know that there were actual currents and circuits that wind followed.

If he had got off the cross, appeared in Rome the next day and is still there. There would be a lot less Genocide at the hands of people who "look to Him and believe upon Him".

Way to totally misunderstand what God was looking to accomplish. He gave everyone free will what to believe and what spiritual destiny to take.

Putting undeniable proof in the world, forever, kinda removes the Free Will aspect of it all.

Jesus was a mortal man, he died, when he could of lived and saved billions from being slaughtered.

The Crusades of course are a dark time of history when wars were everywhere, I'm pretty sure everyone can agree on that. And there are still wars today. In the end, Death is only the end of the first chapter of our existence, and what we did prior to Death will determine the Second (and last) chapter. Death itself isn't the end of everything.

As for the virgin birth. It was a common myth of the time that some gods were born of a virgin birth. Too many to mention. Greco-Roman and Hellenistic literature is full of them.

Satan of course knew what was about to happen (how could he not? It had been in the Bible since the early days of the Hebrew Language!), and of course since he is the author of most false religions, he would of course throw out this (among many other) stumbling-blocks to cause people to dis-believe the Christian faith, because that's Satan's ultimate goal.

Satan is doing everything he can to make sure as many people to go to Hell as possible. He Knows that it is God's desire that everyone retain their free will to choose their own destiny, and he Knows that God will not break his promises, and he Knows that God will not force people to choose Him over the world and the things in the world.

God wants faithful people to follow Him. He wants people to love Him and follow Him out of faith and yearning. You can't have this faith and yearning if God had placed scientific proof of His existence here on Earth. God Himself could step down out of the clouds and prove that He exists (and He will do that in time in the form of Christ Himself), but that would go against His designs that Mankind retain their free will to choose their destiny. No sane man would ever choose eternal separation from God if they knew the truth about what exactly that would entail, right? Therefore it wouldn't be a choice if God had done what you are saying He "should" have.
 
Upvote 0

paulm50

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2014
1,253
110
✟2,061.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
They died off? *shrug* During the flood, HUGE changes happened to the world at that time. Not just the Flood, mind you. The Flood was more of a cover for God to do other things in the world while waters covered its surface.

Where does it say that in the bible?

What's a "scientific fact"? Evolution? hardly, lol. "Micro-evolution happens, so macro evolution MUST be fact!"

Evolution is all around you, look at the food you eat, your pets. All made by man by speeding up the process of natural selection. Where's the proof god created everything?


But yet, passages of the Bible written earlier than 1000BC speak of things we didn't prove until 1000AD+ like the major air currents. Yes, people who sailed ships knew that wind existed, but how many people knew that wind circled the globe like water flows through rivers? lol.

Ecclesiastes 1:6: The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.

So people who relied on the wind came up with a wrong theory. Go study why winds blow in different directions.

Way to totally misunderstand what God was looking to accomplish. He gave everyone free will what to believe and what spiritual destiny to take.

Putting undeniable proof in the world, forever, kinda removes the Free Will aspect of it all.

So god wants people to sin and die at the hands of his followers, or other religions followers. Seem a crual god to me. I bring up my children better.

The Crusades of course are a dark time of history when wars were everywhere, I'm pretty sure everyone can agree on that. And there are still wars today. In the end, Death is only the end of the first chapter of our existence, and what we did prior to Death will determine the Second (and last) chapter. Death itself isn't the end of everything.

Because as you point out, god wants this.

Satan of course knew what was about to happen (how could he not? It had been in the Bible since the early days of the Hebrew Language!), and of course since he is the author of most false religions, he would of course throw out this (among many other) stumbling-blocks to cause people to dis-believe the Christian faith, because that's Satan's ultimate goal.

Satan is doing everything he can to make sure as many people to go to Hell as possible. He Knows that it is God's desire that everyone retain their free will to choose their own destiny, and he Knows that God will not break his promises, and he Knows that God will not force people to choose Him over the world and the things in the world.


So between Satan and God, we're in trouble. They both want t kill us. Seems Satan is strong enough to resist your god.

God wants faithful people to follow Him. He wants people to love Him and follow Him out of faith and yearning. You can't have this faith and yearning if God had placed scientific proof of His existence here on Earth. God Himself could step down out of the clouds and prove that He exists (and He will do that in time in the form of Christ Himself), but that would go against His designs that Mankind retain their free will to choose their destiny. No sane man would ever choose eternal separation from God if they knew the truth about what exactly that would entail, right? Therefore it wouldn't be a choice if God had done what you are saying He "should" have.

No god wants us to sin, kill others and be killed. I wouldn't give my child the free will to do what god has given us. As for him coming back, that's been a broken promise even by jesus himself. Still much of his story reflects other pagan gods.

As you see anything written by man, can be rewritten by man.
 
Upvote 0

GoldenBoy89

We're Still Here
Sep 25, 2012
25,930
28,547
LA
✟631,124.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
With the premise of this topic in which small errors were nitpicked in order to completely invalidate other religions Golden boy was simply using the OP's logic against him.

And I'm saying it's still a large leap to invalidate a whole religion because of a minute flaw. So my problem is still with the OP
Thanks, Grim. That was exactly my point. I was trying to illustrate how pointless the OP is in their attempt to write off other faiths and religions because they don't really match up with reality all that well.

My point is simply that by the same logic, Christianity fails the same test. It must not be true just like the other religions listed must not be true since they also claim fantastic things to have happened. And if you can say Christianity is true because miracles are possible, then the same would apply to all the other religions that were listed by the OP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GrimKingGrim
Upvote 0

The Cadet

SO COOL
Apr 29, 2010
6,290
4,743
Munich
✟53,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Okay, you know what, let me throw out all the scientific evidence for an old earth. Let me throw out every scrap of evidence (i.e. most of genetics, geology, zoology, and the like) that shows that Noah's Flood could not have happened. After all, if you can't recreate it in a lab, it's not real science (I seriously doubt you thought the implications of that statement all the way through, by the way). Let's also assume that Jesus was speaking in metaphor when he called the mustard seed the smallest seed. Let's throw out everything scientific.

Just answer me one question, based on scripture.

Who bought Hakeldama (the field of blood/the potter's field)?

The bible addresses this in at least two points, so you should be able to find a clear, simple answer fairly quickly. :)
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
If there is a Creator out there who created the entire universe, and all therein (including the Earth), then said Creator would know His creation well enough to write a Book about it, and said Book would be a faithful representation of what He created.
Why is it a necessity that the creator write a book?

Therefore, an easy thing to do, is to test the major religions' scriptures to see which ones hold up to Truth, and which ones do not. Buddhism: Their materials say that Earthquakes are caused by wind pushing the waters of the seas, and the waters of the seas pushing the landmasses. We obviously know this isn't true.
A misunderstanding of Buddhism, IMO. In the Buddhist scriptures, the earth, water, fire, air can refer to the ancient system of classification of the elements - today known as solidity, fluidity, temperature, and motion/pressure. The "wind" pushing the "waters" which push the "earth" can refer to the various subterranean pressures acting upon liquids in the earth (e.g. magma) which in turn agitate the earth above. This is not inconsistent with current science.

What about the Christian Bible, though? It has suffered a multitude of attacks against it over the years, many many attacks, and not one person has ever proved anything it says to be untrue.
A giant fish ... a deity who could not prevail against chariots of iron ... a deity who renames Jacob twice to Israel (Gen 32:28, 35:10), yet forgot that he "shall not be called any more Jacob" in Gen 46:2 ... shall I go on? :)

Well, here's a snippet that one might consider: Christ correctly predicted the fall of Jerusalem and its Temple in 70AD (~40 years later) just before He gave the Olivet Discourse, He said that "Not one stone would remain upon another" which is exactly what happened when the Romans destroyed the Temple.
How do you know that the book presents valid prophecies and is not merely a playbook?
 
Upvote 0

paulm50

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2014
1,253
110
✟2,061.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Reading Genesis, it's clear this was written by people who had no connection with any creator, or knowledge of how the Earth had arrived at that point in time.

To state any book, so wrong from the beginning as fact, is absurd. By the time of writing, the Earth was billions of years old and life on earth billions of years old. Scientists have discovered possibly the earliest signs of life on Earth are remains of bacteria that are almost three-and-a-half billion years old. OK still not a fully proven theory, so explain all the attempts to get us from the earliest branch of the Ape family, to Homo Sapiens. It took "god" a lot of tries to get it right, and got it wrong a lot more times.
 
Upvote 0

Xalith

Newbie
Apr 6, 2015
1,518
630
✟27,443.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There is actually a math error in chronicals or kings. Inerrantness refers to the fact that there is nothing in it unintentionally.

Are you talking about the diameter of the laver? That's actually not a math error. In fact, it is astoundingly correct as it calculates Pi to at least 4 decimal places.

EDIT: http://khouse.org/articles/1998/158/

That explains why 1 Kings 7:23 is correct and not wrong as many people think it is.
 
Upvote 0

Dre Khipov

Active Member
Dec 12, 2015
152
40
44
USA
✟23,007.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
There's nothing circular about it. I've never met a person who's mother never had sex. The bible claims Jesus was such a person. Since we know that's impossible, we have no reason to believe that claim. The rest of what is claimed is predicated on that one claim. I have no reason to believe the rest.

I'm only following the logic of the OP.

Well, that's demonstrably false. If you are wrong about this one, then why should we listen to anything else that you will say after now?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/hea...r-IVF-clinics-admit-taking-on-such-cases.html

Just following through with your login here :)
 
Upvote 0

Ratjaws

Active Member
Jul 1, 2003
272
37
69
Detroit, Michigan
Visit site
✟24,722.00
Faith
Catholic
So, a lot of people struggle with the belief that God exists, and/or which Religion worships Him the proper way, and/or which doctrine(s) are the best way of worshipping Him.

Huge debates, flame storms on the internet, even wars have been fought over this very subject, as it is a very passionate one.

I feel that a philosophical and scientific angle is a pretty good one to approach the Bible with, and such angle goes like this:

If there is a Creator out there who created the entire universe, and all therein (including the Earth), then said Creator would know His creation well enough to write a Book about it, and said Book would be a faithful representation of what He created.

Nothing in this Book should be untrue. If it were, then that would lead to either the Creator being a liar, or the Creator attempting to deceive His creations, or the author of the Book being someone other than the Creator.

Therefore, an easy thing to do, is to test the major religions' scriptures to see which ones hold up to Truth, and which ones do not.

Here's a few quick examples:

Christian Science Movement: Their "divine" writings say that man is not matter, and is not made of brain, bones, and other elements and that man is incapable of sin, sickness and death. Well, we obviously know this to be false.

Islam: Islam's materials (the Qu'ran and that other book of theirs) claim that the world is flat, and that Allah holds up the sky and heavens so that it doesn't fall down upon the flat earth. Well, the Creator of the Earth and the Universe certainly didn't write that.

Buddhism: Their materials say that Earthquakes are caused by wind pushing the waters of the seas, and the waters of the seas pushing the landmasses. We obviously know this isn't true.

Taoism: Their materials say that there are 13 members through which death can occur. We know from medical science that there are far more than 13 ways or places of the body that can be damaged that can kill you.

Mormons
: 2 Nephi 2 says "Adam fell that men might be and they are that they might have joy" and it also says "if man hadn't fallen, then they wouldn't have joy" (pp). Also, they say in Alma 7:10 that Jesus was born in Jerusalem. (There's enough historical documentation that most concede that He was a real person and that He was actually born in Bethlehem and grew up in Nazareth).

Hinduism: They say the Sun is the source of all energy in the universe. This is obviously false.

So, we can disprove all of these by using simple facts that we have come to know (and history for the case of Mormons). We know that if there were a Creator, that He certainly didn't write (or inspire man to write) any of the above.

What about the Christian Bible, though?

It has suffered a multitude of attacks against it over the years, many many attacks, and not one person has ever proved anything it says to be untrue.

Right away, someone is going to bring up Creation. There's a problem with that -- since Creation was not observed by anyone (other than God Himself), and since it cannot be reproduced by man, therefore it is not observable by True Science.

Then, next thing people will bring up, is Evolution. Again, Evolution is a theory and has not been accepted as Scientific Law, therefore it is not True Science, as nobody has witnessed macro evolution before.

Barring those two things, has anyone proven the Christian Bible wrong? No, they haven't.

Further aiding the Bible's (and Christianity's) cause, are things in the Bible that were talked about long before Man ever came to prove them, such as Conservation of Mass and Energy (the Bible mentions that there is 'nothing new under the sun' and other similar statements that says that nothing new is ever created), The Cycle of Water (the Bible talks about the water cycle, far before it was ever proven), Air Currents, and a couple other things I'm forgetting.

There's also pretty strong evidence for a lot of the history elements of the Bible; the huge granary (and surrounding complex) where Joseph stored the grain for the 7-year famine was found, evidence was found of three types of chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea (there was only one short period of time in Egypt where those three types of chariot wheels would have been used simultaneously), I've seen pictures of ruins near the mountains that are thought to be Mt. Sinai, and the general geography of the area supports Scriptures.

So, if we have a Book that cannot be proven false (among all of the other religions' books that can be proven false quite easily), a book that speaks of concepts that weren't proven by man until thousands of years later, a book which speaks of histories whose evidence can be found to this day, you have a pretty compelling case for this stuff being true.

This Book that cannot be proven false says that God exists, and that God authored all of this by guiding human hands, and God provided history, instructions, and reasons for those instructions, I really don't see any better evidence that says otherwise.

Now, the question comes up... "You didn't mention Judaism!"

Judaism, or the Jewish faith, as many know involve the Torah. The Torah consists of several books of the Old Testament of the Christian Bible, plus some stuff that was added by humans later.

Obviously, the Original Torah and the Christian Bible are in perfect agreement, until Jesus comes about. The Jews who did not convert to Christianity rejected Christ and His teachings, so Who is Right?

Well, here's a snippet that one might consider: Christ correctly predicted the fall of Jerusalem and its Temple in 70AD (~40 years later) just before He gave the Olivet Discourse, He said that "Not one stone would remain upon another" which is exactly what happened when the Romans destroyed the Temple.

EDIT: He also correctly predicted that the Gospel would be spread all over the world, and it would be heard everywhere, which is pretty amazing considered it all started from One man and twelve of His disciples in the middle of a nation that hated the message and considered it blasphemous.

Sources for the above about other religions are taken from this video:


I also highly recommend watching Pt2 where he talks about the Bible teaching us things we wouldn't prove with Science until much later.
Xalith,
Sorry but you are barking up the wrong tree. Sacred scripture was given to the Church by God to instruct Christians in "faith and morals." To believe the bible, which is a collection of books written over a long period of time, gives us a scientific manual is to fall into the heresy of Concordism. You also stand on the shakey ground of fideism, part of what Martin Luther taught. Fideism is the proposition that only faith is necessary for salvation. Ironically Luther coupled this heresy of "sola fide" with three other problematic tenets: sola scriptura, sola spiritus and sola gratia (all 4 in english: faith alone, scripture alone, spirit alone and grace alone). The only aspect of this proposition the Church holds to is salvation by grace alone. St. Peter, the first pope, said in the book by his name that some people attempt to interpret scripture privately, to their own destruction and to that of other people. St. Paul told St. Timothy to guard "the good deposit," and Christ gave St. Peter "the keys to the kingdom;" this latter point meaning St. Peter (and his successors) were to be guaranteed by Christ that God would not let them error in interpreting "the good deposit." So I am sad to say because you have accepted this idea of scripture alone supporting itself, impling that you are able to interpret scripture by yourself just because all you need is the Holy Spirit, you end up falling into heresy that you could avoid if you remained in context of the Church and her constant teaching.

The point being that God, who does not deceive or lie, utilizes whatever degree of knowledge a group of people have even though some of it may be erroneous. God works within this error while at the same time seeks to correct and clarify. He does so in order to instill faith that allows us to accept divinely revealed truth and not what empirical science gives us from natural revelation. In relation to salvation God is not worried about "how the heavens go but how to go to heaven," as St. Augustine put it.

So in putting forth this proposition that sacred scripture is inerrant in science or history you do the Christian faith a great disservice. You have only to read what atheists and humanists are saying here in correcting your misunderstanding of the scientific method and what it is able to prove. You evidently don't understand that evolution, when properly understood, does not dismiss a creator, nor sin or our need for grace and salvation. In fact the truth be fully known, if God has used an unfolding of creation (from the Latin, evolvere: to unfold, implies an existant being that slowly manifests itself more fully, as a flower that blossoms or a caterpillar that becomes a butterfly) to give us all that exists today, this in no way dismisses the need for a First Cause (an uncaused Cause). In fact the debate over evolution is not new to the Church since St. Augustine wrote about it back in 300AD. Really the more we may prove about the evolution of our world the more beautiful we see our Creator and his absolute power to create something from nothing (classical theologians used the term ex-nihilo to refer to this aspect of creation which only God is capable of).

You also need to realize that a scientific theory is an attempt to explain what scientific observation gives us... the latter being factual. Scientific laws are a description or codification of those observed facts. We first propose hypothesis to explain them, then move to theory when enough evidence has been organized to support such explantion of the workings of matter and energy, biology and life. Nevertheless, in the end no amount of empirical science can dismiss the Creator because it only works with the mutable aspects of nature and never gets to what is essential. The scientific observation that tells us how the universe of material being unfolds cannot tell anything directly about the form behind matter. It is this hidden form that allows us to point to any particular being because the form does not change even though it can manifest itself in different ways at different times. The forms are substantial and unchanging while the matter is accidental (Greek: accidens) and thus constantly in a state of flux. This latter aspect of being is what empirical science studies and is able to help us categorize and catalogue living being, and also manipulate and control inanimate matter.Therefore material science cannot directly observe or test form which comes in two kinds, material and immaterial (the latter type of non-material form we call a soul). Neither can material science by it's own nature directly prove or disprove the existence of God, who is a pure spirit.

At the same time we can infer from observation alone, by paying close attention to cause and effect, that God does exist. Looking around the universe we see everything that exists has a cause. If we go back from effect to cause we realize that there are two possibilities; either this chain goes on forever, or there must be an uncaused Cause...a First Cause. Since we don't find anything in this world that is infinite,, it is absurd to think cause and effect go on without limit. So we are left with one possibility, that all being inanimate and animate had a beginning. It must have a Cause that itself is not caused and this we define as God.

Finally, the main purpose of the Genesis creation account is to help the Isrealites realize that God is creator of the whole universe. It also was meant to cement in their minds that the sabbath is to be kept holy. God was trying to reach a prescientific culture of people and therefore spoke to them on their level. Sacred scripture presents a picture of our world that looks from a human perspective, on the ground, without aid of microscope or telescope, and as such, is a primitive view in relation to our highly scientific perspective.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
At the same time we can infer from observation alone, by paying close attention to cause and effect, that God does exist. Looking around the universe we see everything that exists has a cause. If we go back from effect to cause we realize that there are two possibilities; either this chain goes on forever, or there must be a First Cause... an uncaused Cause. Since we don't find anything in this world that is infinite,, it is absurd to think cause and effect go on without limit. So we are left with one possibility, that all being inanimate and animate had a beginning. It must have a Cause that itself is uncaused and this we define as God.
Hopefully you can see the error in saying that "everything has a cause... except this one thing, which doesn't, and which I will call 'God.'"
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
If there is a Creator out there who created the entire universe, and all therein (including the Earth), then said Creator would know His creation well enough to write a Book about it, and said Book would be a faithful representation of what He created.

Why would this creator write a book about it?
I'ld say that a creator this powerfull and intelligent would know better then to rely on text to pass on his message through the ages.

Such a creator would understand that it is unreasonable to expect people to rely on copies of copies of translations of copies of translations of copies.

A being so intelligent and powerfull would surely be able to come up with a far more reliable way to convey his message. A way that doesn't rely on people not making any mistakes or even forgeries, let alone in a format that makes a gazillion and one "interpretations" possible.

Nothing in this Book should be untrue. If it were, then that would lead to either the Creator being a liar, or the Creator attempting to deceive His creations, or the author of the Book being someone other than the Creator.

The bible is demonstrably wrong about various things and humans wrote the bible.

What about the Christian Bible, though?

It has suffered a multitude of attacks against it over the years, many many attacks, and not one person has ever proved anything it says to be untrue.

The bible said the world was flooded and that humans were created from dirt.

Both claims are demonstrably wrong.

Right away, someone is going to bring up Creation. There's a problem with that -- since Creation was not observed by anyone (other than God Himself), and since it cannot be reproduced by man, therefore it is not observable by True Science.

False. Evolution is extremely demonstrable.
Common ancestry of life is a genetic fact. Not mere theory. The theory is about the mechanisms that cause evolution to happen. That evolution happened (= common ancestry) is nothing short of a fact.

Then, next thing people will bring up, is Evolution. Again, Evolution is a theory and has not been accepted as Scientific Law, therefore it is not True Science, as nobody has witnessed macro evolution before.

Learn how to science, please...
Theories don't turn into "laws".

Theory is the graduation stage of a hypothesis and it is the highest status an idea in science can get to.

In a nutshell:
- facts: individual pieces of data or collections of data; observations (eg: apples fall down and not up)
- laws: abstractions of a "red thread" of a set of data (eg: objects with mass attract other objects with mass)
- hypothesis: a testable explanation of a set of facts and laws
- theory: A hypothesis that is commonly accepted and is supported by evidence

Theories don't become "facts" or "laws". Theories explain facts and laws.

Barring those two things, has anyone proven the Christian Bible wrong? No, they haven't.

Yes. Let's stick to just the flood story.
This makes 2 testable predictions:
- a global geological layer of sediments
- a genetic bottleneck in all of life, dating to the same period as the layer

Neither of both exists. Therefor, story is false.

See?

Further aiding the Bible's (and Christianity's) cause, are things in the Bible that were talked about long before Man ever came to prove them, such as Conservation of Mass and Energy (the Bible mentions that there is 'nothing new under the sun' and other similar statements that says that nothing new is ever created), The Cycle of Water (the Bible talks about the water cycle, far before it was ever proven), Air Currents, and a couple other things I'm forgetting.

There is nothing in the bible that wasn't common knowledge at the time it was written.

There's also pretty strong evidence for a lot of the history elements of the Bible; the huge granary (and surrounding complex) where Joseph stored the grain for the 7-year famine was found, evidence was found of three types of chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea (there was only one short period of time in Egypt where those three types of chariot wheels would have been used simultaneously), I've seen pictures of ruins near the mountains that are thought to be Mt. Sinai, and the general geography of the area supports Scriptures.

New York exists and several people named "Peter Parker" live there. I guess that means that one of them is Spiderman.

So, if we have a Book that cannot be proven false (among all of the other religions' books that can be proven false quite easily), a book that speaks of concepts that weren't proven by man until thousands of years later, a book which speaks of histories whose evidence can be found to this day, you have a pretty compelling case for this stuff being true.

Ignoring the science that demonstrates genesis to be absolute nonsense, will not make it go away.
 
Upvote 0