Has the Bible ever been proven wrong?

[Gunny]

We used to think that an atom was the smallest thing. Now we know that there are things smaller than atoms. This change in knowledge is vastly different than discovering that a day is not a day. A day is a day and it will always be a day. Face the truth. The Bible is wrong when it says that the God created the earth and man in 6 days.

Why don't YOU, just once face the truth? You're talking out your ass. The fact that you are an arrogant asswipe is common knowledge. I wasn't aware however that it went so far as presuming to understand and speak for God.

 

[Gunny]

Then why call a day a day?

Why not? You prefer an alternative?

 

[mattskramer]

Why not? You prefer an alternative?

Try “many days” or “many years” or “a very long time”. Your name-calling is quite telling. Oh, I forgot that Christians are not perfect – only forgiven. What a cop-out. Anyway, the writers of Genesis could have easily picked up on the evident mistake – unless God really created man in 6 days (man being Adam and some other people outside of Adam’s family). Keep trying.

 

[Gunny]

Try “many days” or “many years” or “a very long time”. Your name-calling is quite telling. Oh, I forgot that Christians are not perfect – only forgiven. What a cop-out. Anyway, the writers of Genesis could have easily picked up on the evident mistake – unless God really created man in 6 days (man being Adam and some other people outside of Adam’s family). Keep trying.

I haven't copped out of anything, Einstein. Show me where Christ says I shouldn't call things what they are. You're an idiot and I call you one.

There's nothing for me to "keep trying." My stance is the same and no evidence has been presented to prove it wrong. You on the other hand have based your rebuttal under the premise of presuming Man's definition of "day" -- Man's laws -- apply to God.

You got the omnipotent thing ass-backwards. Stupid.

 

[Hobbit]

Grump, you're either being deliberately obtuse or you're a moron. Either way, it's not worth talking to you anymore on this subject.

 

[mattskramer]

I haven't copped out of anything, Einstein. Show me where Christ says I shouldn't call things what they are. You're an idiot and I call you one.

There's nothing for me to "keep trying." My stance is the same and no evidence has been presented to prove it wrong. You on the other hand have based your rebuttal under the premise of presuming Man's definition of "day" -- Man's laws -- apply to God.

You got the omnipotent thing ass-backwards. Stupid.

Who wrote the Bible – God or man? If God wrote it, then he supposedly create man in 6 days. If man wrote the Bible, and man is not perfect, then perhaps God did not create man in 6 days. If you can’t take Genesis literally, then what can you trust?

 

[Gunny]

Who wrote the Bible – God or man? If God wrote it, then he supposedly create man in 6 days. If man wrote the Bible, and man is not perfect, then perhaps God did not create man in 6 days. If you can’t take Genesis literally, then what can you trust?

I do not take the Bible literally except where common sense and logic dictate that literalism applies.

I trust God through Jesus Christ. If it somehow turns out I am wrong, I'll never know it. If it turns out YOU are wrong, it's gonna' suck to be you ...for eternity.

 

[mattskramer]

I haven't copped out of anything, Einstein. Show me where Christ says I shouldn't call things what they are. You're an idiot and I call you one.

There's nothing for me to "keep trying." My stance is the same and no evidence has been presented to prove it wrong. You on the other hand have based your rebuttal under the premise of presuming Man's definition of "day" -- Man's laws -- apply to God.

You got the omnipotent thing ass-backwards. Stupid.

The word “Asswipe” is a euphemism for the word “toilet paper”. I am clearly not toiletpaper. I am clearly not toilet paper. An idiot is a person of the lowest order in a former classification of mental retardation, having a mental age of less than three years old and an intelligence quotient under 25. My IQ is over 110. Therefore I am not an idiot. Enough with the erroneous name-calling.

 

[Dr Grump]

Why not? You prefer an alternative?

No, it appears others do though...

 

[Dr Grump]

Grump, you're either being deliberately obtuse or you're a moron. Either way, it's not worth talking to you anymore on this subject.

No, just trying to prove how vacuous your argument is, and your reaction seems to have proven my point. Run along now Hobbit....

 

[no1tovote4]

What information from his house? How do you know it was fabricated? What evidence do you have it was fabricated? How do you know that he was in fact telling the truth, but only pretending it was fabrication in order to keep such a history such as Middle Earth in the realms of allegory in order to trick your or I into belieiving otherwise? As a complete aside, where does that leave Scientology and Hubbard and his Thetans? Or you and your Buddha?

His own notes that he used to create the languages, that clearly state that they were pretend languages. The trials and then the final "maps" of the pretend continent of Middle Earth. He clearly wasn't pretending to create what he did, he created it from his own imagination, carefully writing down each step as he went along...

Your particular analogy here is a terrible one, very few authors ever keep such meticulous notes on their creation.

As for where does it leave Thetans, etc. Or myself and "my" Buddha. Well, it leaves them in the same place they were before... Equally ready for reasonable discussion.

 

[Dr Grump]

His own notes that he used to create the languages, that clearly state that they were pretend languages. The trials and then the final "maps" of the pretend continent of Middle Earth. He clearly wasn't pretending to create what he did, he created it from his own imagination, carefully writing down each step as he went along...

Your particular analogy here is a terrible one, very few authors ever keep such meticulous notes on their creation.

I'm aware of what Tolkein did, but it does not negate my point. He might well have said those things to throw people of the track. Do I believe it is fiction? Of course I do. My point is there is nothing that can prove what happened in the bible didnt' happen, nor can anyone prove it did.

As for where does it leave Thetans, etc. Or myself and "my" Buddha. Well, it leaves them in the same place they were before... Equally ready for reasonable discussion.

Yep...that is does...

 

[no1tovote4]

I'm aware of what Tolkein did, but it does not negate my point. He might well have said those things to throw people of the track. Do I believe it is fiction? Of course I do. My point is there is nothing that can prove what happened in the bible didnt' happen, nor can anyone prove it did.



Yep...that is does...

That isn't true. One could look for sites that could prove/disprove the Bible such as King Solomon's Temple. We can see that there is something there that the Muslims are removing, that they are either destroying evidence or have clear evidence that the Temple was never built.

There are other things one could look for in an attempt to buttress or disprove certain thing in the Bible.

One cannot with Middle Earth. The whole he was pretending argument is extremely weak.

 

[Dr Grump]

That isn't true. One could look for sites that could prove/disprove the Bible such as King Solomon's Temple. We can see that there is something there that the Muslims are removing, that they are either destroying evidence or have clear evidence that the Temple was never built.

There are other things one could look for in an attempt to buttress or disprove certain thing in the Bible.

One cannot with Middle Earth. The whole he was pretending argument is extremely weak.

My point is:
1) There are quite a few things in the bible that are easily provable (IMO), such as people, countries existing etc.
2) There are huge tracts of the bible that are unprovable, especially when it comes to the actions of Christ.

The other thing is the spirit with which this thread was started. Was it started to say
1) There is nothing in the bible that can be proven wrong and that is it. IOW, yeah, that's true. You can say that about a lot of historical books that were written centuries ago. I spoke to an English guy quite a few years ago who taught English in Spain. Part of English history is that Spanish Armada was destroyed by Sir Francis Drake and a storm in 1588. He said when he was in Spain, according to them the Armada never sailed.
2) Or, was it started to say that nothing in the bible can be proven wrong therefore everything in it is correct.

If it is the former, this thread need only be one post long because of course nothing in the bible can be proven wrong, King Soloman's Temple or not.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Then why call a day a day?

why not. In spanish its Oy, so why not call it oy?

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Who wrote the Bible – God or man? If God wrote it, then he supposedly create man in 6 days. If man wrote the Bible, and man is not perfect, then perhaps God did not create man in 6 days. If you can’t take Genesis literally, then what can you trust?

It happens often where a term is used on one generation to mean "a" and in the next it means "b". For example, in the book AA, it talks about a group of stockbrokers who are gay. Guess what, they aint homosexuals. Does that make the description inaccurate?

Also, it seems as though what they considered a year could have been the moons cycle, since many in the Bible lived like 900 years or so.

I really feel sorry for all you Bible haters, what a terribly awful life you must lead.

 

[Gunny]

The word “Asswipe” is a euphemism for the word “toilet paper”. I am clearly not toiletpaper. I am clearly not toilet paper. An idiot is a person of the lowest order in a former classification of mental retardation, having a mental age of less than three years old and an intelligence quotient under 25. My IQ is over 110. Therefore I am not an idiot. Enough with the erroneous name-calling.

I have to admit ... for once you are correct and I was wrong. Clearly, t.p. has far and away more value to the human race than you.

Judging from your posts, any alleged ability to store data is negated by your inability to process and/or disseminate it properly. I would say, based on your definition of "idiot," the term fits you rather well.

 

[Gunny]

No, it appears others do though...

As I stated previously, the measurement of time as we know it is a product of Man's intellect. Our current process of measuring time is actually not that old.

http://physics.nist.gov/GenInt/Time/time.html

The argument that an omnipotent being is bound by Man's later measurement of time is nonsensical, IMO.

 

[8236]

It happens often where a term is used on one generation to mean "a" and in the next it means "b". For example, in the book AA, it talks about a group of stockbrokers who are gay. Guess what, they aint homosexuals. Does that make the description inaccurate?

Also, it seems as though what they considered a year could have been the moons cycle, since many in the Bible lived like 900 years or so.

And this is the big problem we face in debates like this. Not only can we not agree on a framework of definitions by which to discuss the content of the bible - we spend a lot of time on semantics - we also have the problem of discussing things in a 21st century context and trying to apply them to the mindset and logic of 2000 years ago. In addition to that, in the case of the bible we have the additional problem of translation from Aramaic into Greek then Latin and finally English.
All this makes it very difficult to establish exactly what was meant by for instance 'a day'. 'A day' in AD 100 as conveyed to us now could therefore mean something entirely different.

 

[8236]

Everything you said there is WRONG. Sorry.

So are you seriously saying that the bible was NOT written by human beings????