JohnR7, I don't know you. In fact, I'm pretty sure that if we met at a party, I'd probably think you were a blithering idiot and I wouldn't waste time on you. You remind me of my preacher brother-in-law: you think you've got all the answers, so you don't listen to others and consider what they say.
So I'd usually not engage someone like you in debate or discussion, but on this one, I'll make an exception.
JohnR7 said:
You can not falsify the Bible. You talk about truth, and the Bible is just that, absolute truth.
Ok tough guy:
prove it!
Given that we know that bats are not birds, that Pi does not equal three, and rabbits don't chew a cud, that shows, at least to some part, the Bible contains statements that aren't factual. In fact, they are just plain false.
This completely invalidates your statement that the Bible is "absolute truth"; one non-truth means that it cannot be absolutely true, and I don't care what kind of handwaving and nonsense you blabber.
So, do you want to backpedal? Do you want to talk interpretation? Quite simply, any appeal to interpretation or mistranslation is going to fail as well: absolute truth is...well, absolute. It never fails translation, interpretation or testing.
Take the Pi=3 statement:
2 Chron 4:2 "Also he made a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits the height thereof; and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about."
Any culture, any language, any resonable person can express that the ratio of the circumference of a unit circle to its own diameter through the center may be referred to as pi. And any person may demonstrate that that ratio is 3<pi<4.
The Bible is
wrong . In at least this respect it is not true. If there's at least one respect in which it's not true, it cannot logically be "absolutely true". You
must accept this as a plainly visible fact.
No doubt you will argue for a flawed understanding, since you accept the Bible as true
prima facea , but you have yet to show its "absolute truth".
I may even grant you that the Bible may contain truisms, statements made about generalized conditions of things or people, or maybe contain nuggets of factual, albeit highly prejudicial and distorted versions of historical facts. These do not rise to the degree of "absolute truth". Nor do they make the falsehoods in the Bible magically true.
Carl Sagan was known for saying that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and you have yet to provide the kind of evidence that leads to a conclusion of absolute truth.
Newton is also known for formulating a relationship with truth and claims (theory), namely that all manner of evidence can support the theory, but one contrary bit of evidence can destroy it. Your theory of "absolute truth" fails at the first bit of contrary evidence, and off the top of my head I can remember three.
