The Bible

[Kyrisch]

Often an atheist will say "believing in God is like believing in invisible pink unicorns" or something to that effect. This thread is not about that, specifically, because the obvious answer thereto is "no, because we have the Bible and the Bible says otherwise". In fact, any what-ifs about God can be answered by just referencing the Bible. The Scriptures are the verification of God.

Let us, then, consider a scenario in which the Scriptures themselves must be verified. I'm not asking for PROOF OF GOD, because that dead horse has been beaten dead again, but a scenario in which the Scriptures become invalid within their very context. How can any be sure that this alternate scenario is not the case, if they no longer have any Scriptures for verification?

For example, what if I held the belief that Satan actually wrote the Bible. How could I be proven wrong? Satan is not bound by the same restrictive truthfulness. In fact, he nothing short of loves fabrication and trickery. It follows suit with his proposed character to the letter to pull such a stunt. How can this idea ever be shown false?

 

[MrPolo]

Let us, then, consider a scenario in which the Scriptures themselves must be verified. I'm not asking for PROOF OF GOD, because that dead horse has been beaten dead again, but a scenario in which the Scriptures become invalid within their very context. How can any be sure that this alternate scenario is not the case, if they no longer have any Scriptures for verification?

For example, what if I held the belief that Satan actually wrote the Bible. How could I be proven wrong? Satan is not bound by the same restrictive truthfulness. In fact, he nothing short of loves fabrication and trickery. It follows suit with his proposed character to the letter to pull such a stunt. How can this idea ever been shown false?

I could argue that there is a pink flag on the planet Pluto with a picture of Donald Duck on it. And I could demand that you "prove" me wrong, and you won't be able to, so therefore it is probably true. No?

As to what if there were no Scriptures, the Church is the Body which authenticates the Scriptures. If every Bible and record of Scripture was destroyed, the faith would still be passed on. The faith is rooted in those witnesses of seeing a man die, and then alive again three days later.

As to proving God, one has to start with "First Cause" and go from there onto Christianity and the prophecies fulfilled from the Old Testament.

 

[ebia]

Often an atheist will say "believing in God is like believing in invisible pink unicorns" or something to that effect. This thread is not about that, specifically, because the obvious answer thereto is "no, because we have the Bible and the Bible says otherwise". In fact, any what-ifs about God can be answered by just referencing the Bible. The Scriptures are the verification of God.

Let us, then, consider a scenario in which the Scriptures themselves must be verified. I'm not asking for PROOF OF GOD, because that dead horse has been beaten dead again, but a scenario in which the Scriptures become invalid within their very context. How can any be sure that this alternate scenario is not the case, if they no longer have any Scriptures for verification?

For example, what if I held the belief that Satan actually wrote the Bible. How could I be proven wrong? Satan is not bound by the same restrictive truthfulness. In fact, he nothing short of loves fabrication and trickery. It follows suit with his proposed character to the letter to pull such a stunt. How can this idea ever been shown false?

Conspiracy theories, by their very nature, cannot be shown to be false. What you have suggested is essentially a conspiracy theory.

 

[wayseer]

For example, what if I held the belief that Satan actually wrote the Bible. How could I be proven wrong?

Your argument is fallacious - it appeals to ignorance (agumentum ad ignoratiam).

Example

No one can conclusively prove that there is no intelligent life on Jupiter (Premise)

Therefore there is intelligent life on Jupiter (conclusion)

 

[Kyrisch]

Your argument is fallacious - it appeals to ignorance (agumentum ad ignoratiam).

Example

No one can conclusively prove that there is no intelligent life on Jupiter (Premise)

Therefore there is intelligent life on Jupiter (conclusion)

I proposed no such argument. In fact, I concluded nothing. I didn't conclude that Satan wrote the Bible, my contention is why one should believe in something that is unverifiable.

 

[EricLBess]

As to proving God, one has to start with "First Cause" and go from there onto Christianity and the prophecies fulfilled from the Old Testament.

Which 'prophecies' would those be?

Thanks,
E.L.B.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Often an atheist will say "believing in God is like believing in invisible pink unicorns" or something to that effect. This thread is not about that, specifically, because the obvious answer thereto is "no, because we have the Bible and the Bible says otherwise". In fact, any what-ifs about God can be answered by just referencing the Bible. The Scriptures are the verification of God.

Let us, then, consider a scenario in which the Scriptures themselves must be verified. I'm not asking for PROOF OF GOD, because that dead horse has been beaten dead again, but a scenario in which the Scriptures become invalid within their very context. How can any be sure that this alternate scenario is not the case, if they no longer have any Scriptures for verification?

For example, what if I held the belief that Satan actually wrote the Bible. How could I be proven wrong? Satan is not bound by the same restrictive truthfulness. In fact, he nothing short of loves fabrication and trickery. It follows suit with his proposed character to the letter to pull such a stunt. How can this idea ever be shown false?

God is not something that can be proven by man. Man is Finite. God is Infinite. So how can a man explain or prove the infinite? One cannot.

But your example of the Bible is but a small piece of Christianity. It is but writings that were chosen by men and led by God to be used in The Liturgy. The Bible has become the "Be All" for those that believe in Sola Scriptura but that is not the belief of all that claim to be Christian.

Anyhow... this is a very broad question and needs to be narrowed down considerably or something.

But let me point out one thing. In the world we live in today with all it's scientific advances and all the new archeological finds, all the knowledge and tools we now possess... why is it that we cannot explain things that people claim are miracles?

I have many examples.

One would be something that happened to as many as 70,000 people less than one hundred years ago at Fatima. In 1917 on October 13th there was an event that no one could explain and has since been called "the Miracle of the Sun". This event was seen by those looking for a miracle and those looking to disprove any such thing and those that were simply there because they had to be. With 70,000 witnesses there was an event that took place that science and psychology cannot explain. So how do we explain these supernatural events when science cannot, especially when they have been foretold as going to happen because God wills it?

Quote from sources back then:

Columnist Avelino de Almeida of O Século (Portugal's most influential newspaper, which was pro-government in policy and avowedly anti-clerical), reported the following "Before the astonished eyes of the crowd, whose aspect was biblical as they stood bare-headed, eagerly searching the sky, the sun trembled, made sudden incredible movements outside all cosmic laws - the sun 'danced' according to the typical expression of the people." Eye specialist Dr. Domingos Pinto Coelho, writing for the newspaper Ordem reported "The sun, at one moment surrounded with scarlet flame, at another aureoled in yellow and deep purple, seemed to be in an exceeding fast and whirling movement, at times appearing to be loosened from the sky and to be approaching the earth, strongly radiating heat". The special reporter for the October 17, 1917 edition of the Lisbon daily, O Dia, reported the following, "...the silver sun, enveloped in the same gauzy grey light, was seen to whirl and turn in the circle of broken clouds...The light turned a beautiful blue, as if it had come through the stained-glass windows of a cathedral, and spread itself over the people who knelt with outstretched hands...people wept and prayed with uncovered heads, in the presence of a miracle they had awaited. The seconds seemed like hours, so vivid were they."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Fatima#Miracle_of_the_Sun

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

.........For example, what if I held the belief that Satan actually wrote the Bible. How could I be proven wrong? Satan is not bound by the same restrictive truthfulness. In fact, he nothing short of loves fabrication and trickery. It follows suit with his proposed character to the letter to pull such a stunt. How can this idea ever be shown false?

That would be interesting since he would also be writing about his own demise.

Job 2:2 And YHWH is saying to the Satan "where from this thou are coming"? And the Satan is answering YHWH and he is saying "from-to-and-fro/07751 shuwt in Land and from to walk of in her".

Romans 16:20 The yet God of the Peace shall be crushing/sun-triyei <4937> the Satan under the feet of ye in swiftness . The grace of the Lord of us, Jesus Christ, with ye.

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7283568
The Harvest of Matt 13/Reve 14

 

[MorkandMindy]

Conspiracy theories, by their very nature, cannot be shown to be false. What you have suggested is essentially a conspiracy theory.

So if you don't like a statement but have no evidence against it then you can totally discredit it by labeling it 'a conspiracy theory'.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

So if you don't like a statement but have no evidence against it then you can totally discredit it by labeling it 'a conspiracy theory'.

Na nu na nu.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Na nu na nu.

Yeah, that should convicne them!

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Yeah, that should convicne them!

I heard that "you just gotta speak their language". LOL

 

[bdgienger22]

First of all we can look at the Bible and attempt to verify who "wrote" the Bible through historical means which has proven shaky in some ways but for the most part we have the individuals pegged. However, as to who influenced the Bible now there is a tougher thing to tackle. I would say you must look at the fruit the Bible has produced... now granted there are many ugly areas in the history of Christianity, and not to be offensive to anyone but not all the hiccups in Christian History have come from Biblical sources.

I would say that if Satan had written the Bible we would see much more evil coming from the Bible. I would conclude that since the Bible has produced much Good, there is suggestive evidence that it comes from God. I will however say that it cannot be proven and that comes down to Faith.

As to JacktheCatholic's snub against those who claim the Bible as the "Be All":

John 1:1 - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (ESV)

I will say that Mork and Mindy is a fantastic show, so there is always that.

 

[ebia]

So if you don't like a statement but have no evidence against it then you can totally discredit it by labeling it 'a conspiracy theory'.

Yep. There are plenty of examples of just that out there.

 

[MrPolo]

Which 'prophecies' would those be?

Thanks,
E.L.B.

One example would be Isaiah 53, Wisdom 2, etc...there are a lot. Link2 Link3 etc... At least as good are the witnesses to His miracles and those who saw Him die and saw Him alive again 3 days later, revolutionizing the world.

 

[MrPolo]

Which 'prophecies' would those be?

Thanks,
E.L.B.

One example would be Isaiah 53, Wisdom 2, etc...there are a lot. Link2 Link3 etc... At least as good are the witnesses to His miracles and those who saw Him die and saw Him alive again 3 days later, revolutionizing the world.

 

[EricLBess]

One example would be Isaiah 53, Wisdom 2, etc...there are a lot. Link2 Link3 etc... At least as good are the witnesses to His miracles and those who saw Him die and saw Him alive again 3 days later, revolutionizing the world.

Ah, just the typical kind....

Anyway, since I have no propensity to go through all of those links and address every prophecy, why don't you pick one or two of your best examples, we'll go over them, and we'll see whether or not they stand in the presence of the simplest scrutiny.

Thanks,
E.L.B.

 

[MrPolo]

Ah, just the typical kind....

Anyway, since I have no propensity to go through all of those links and address every prophecy, why don't you pick one or two of your best examples, we'll go over them, and we'll see whether or not they stand in the presence of the simplest scrutiny.

Thanks,
E.L.B.

Ah, you would like to play a game with a predetermined reaction.

This is probably not the "best" example, but a good enough one.

Wisdom 2:18-20 For if the just one be the son of God, he will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes. With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him.​

realized in

Luke 23:35-37 And the people stood by, watching; but the rulers scoffed at him, saying, "He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, his Chosen One!" The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him vinegar, and saying, "If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!"​

 

[EricLBess]

Ah, you would like to play a game with a predetermined reaction.

This is probably not the "best" example, but a good enough one.

Wisdom 2:18-20 For if the just one be the son of God, he will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes. With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him.
​

realized in

Luke 23:35-37 And the people stood by, watching; but the rulers scoffed at him, saying, "He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, his Chosen One!" The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him vinegar, and saying, "If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!"
​

Please demonstrate this to be a genuine prophecy and not something other than possible literary dependence. The righteous mocking the wicked is not an uncommon theme in the Hebrew bible (already found, e.g., in Psalm xxii.8 and quoted in Matthew xxvii.43). I'm also doubtful of any direct relationship between these two passages. Wisdom ii isn't referring to any specific righteous person anyway, and can hardly be said to have anything to do with Jesus.

Not impressive. Surely you can do better.

Thanks,
E.L.B.

 

[MrPolo]

Not impressive. Surely you can do better.

Hey if you don't see it, that's up to you.