Has the Bible ever been proven wrong?

[glockmail]

I'll give you the lesser burden used in civil cases, preponderance of the evidence. You aren't allowed to use hearsay. For the purpose of this discussion, the definition of hearsay is: Evidence based on the reports of others rather than the personal knowledge of a witness and therefore generally not admissible as testimony. Present your case.

Simply:

 

[glockmail]

I met Ron Wyatt, an archeologist, on one of his return visits from Turkey when he was trying to negociate with the government to allow him to continue his excavation. And I saw the artifacts he claimed to be the ones he took from the Red Sea. I know his family as well. I had no reason to doubt him or his findings.
His story is quite interesting.

http://www.wyattmuseum.com/noahs-ark.htm

But coming from you its hearsay (according to MissleMan).

 

[dmp]

Actually, it kinda fits from the perspective of Earth. When the dust was still settling, you wouldn't have been able to see the stars, moon, or sun at all, just light in the daytime and darkness at night, like a continuous fog. Once the dust settled, you could see celestial bodies.

There might also be nuances of meaning in the original Hebrew where one word translated as "Earth" may have meant "universe."

But it was written from the perspective of God.

 

[Joz]

But coming from you its hearsay (according to MissleMan).

Hear say or heresy?

Maybe he's right. Maybe MM has to learn for himself, first hand...everything.
I never did drugs because I believed those who had when they told me the harm drugs could do. Have never smoked either, for the same reason. But some people have to do it & see for themselves.

 

[no1tovote4]

Hear say or heresy?

Maybe he's right. Maybe MM has to learn for himself, first hand...everything.
I never did drugs because I believed those who had when they told me the harm drugs could do. Have never smoked either, for the same reason. But some people have to do it & see for themselves.

I find that I prefer life with a clear head. Much like gambling, changing my perspective negatively doesn't seem to be much of a "thrill".

 

[MissileMan]

Simply:

Of course it is. You volunteer to use the legal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" and when presented with the opportunity to use the even lower legal standard of "preponderance of the evidence", you suddenly think the whole idea is lame. Perhaps you find it so because you don't really believe it yourself.

 

[MissileMan]

There you go with that 100% requirement. It doesn't surprise me that you dismiss beyond reasonable doubt, as I surmised in post 10.

How much of the Bible do you believe is accurate and true? If it's less than 100%, which parts are true and which parts aren't? How did you arrive at your decision of which parts are true and which aren't?

 

[MissileMan]

Hear say or heresy?

Maybe he's right. Maybe MM has to learn for himself, first hand...everything.
I never did drugs because I believed those who had when they told me the harm drugs could do. Have never smoked either, for the same reason. But some people have to do it & see for themselves.

An interesting argument. Do you accept the claims of Muslims without benefit of critical thought?

 

[glockmail]

How much of the Bible do you believe is accurate and true? If it's less than 100%, which parts are true and which parts aren't? How did you arrive at your decision of which parts are true and which aren't?

Why don't you stick to the issue as presented instead of trying to make up some argument. What are you afraid of?

 

[no1tovote4]

How much of the Bible do you believe is accurate and true? If it's less than 100%, which parts are true and which parts aren't? How did you arrive at your decision of which parts are true and which aren't?

This is an excellent question. The Christians that I know, which include most of my family, pretty much believe that anything specifically stated in a quote is absolutely true, while other parts like the Genesis are allegorical.

Much like the Revelations, if it says that it "will happen" they believe that it will, if it says that it is "like" something then it is allegorical.

 

[dilloduck]

How much of the Bible do you believe is accurate and true? If it's less than 100%, which parts are true and which parts aren't? How did you arrive at your decision of which parts are true and which aren't?

Test it out in real life.

 

[Mr.Conley]

Glock,
I think your misunderstanding MM. He is actually helping your case by allowing you an easier standard of proof.

What I believe MM is stating been he said:

The existence of places and people mentioned in the Bible doesn't make it 100% accurate in its entirety. There were real places mentioned in Homer's Odyssey. Most mythology .....

is that although there are parts of the Bible that describe historical locations, such descriptions are a commonality of numerous ancient texts, and don't outright prove the Bible inerrant.

In addition, Joz's statement was, by definition, hearsay. How could the statement 'I heard from this archaeologist friend of mine that Noah's Ark might be real' is hearsay. The link, however, was not.

 

[Mr.Conley]

On a second note: it looks to me like you all could have a serious debate here. Please try not to muck it up with insults.

 

[MissileMan]

Why don't you stick to the issue as presented instead of trying to make up some argument. What are you afraid of?

I am sticking to the issue. You claim the Bible has never been proven wrong. You seem to be inferring that the Bible is 100% accurate. One of your main arguments in support of this inference is the Bible containing references to real places. When I pointed out that other contemporary works of mythology contain references to real places and that in itself is not proof that a work is 100% accurate, you accused me of holding the Bible to an unrealistic standard. So I'll ask you again, do you believe that the Bible is 100% accurate and true?

 

[glockmail]

Glock,
I think your misunderstanding MM. He is actually helping your case by allowing you an easier standard of proof.

.....

MM said: "For the purpose of this discussion, the definition of hearsay is: Evidence based on the reports of others rather than the personal knowledge of a witness and therefore generally not admissible as testimony." [his emphasis]

The purpose of this thread is to test the preacher's assertion that "the Bible has never been proven wrong", not to let some atheist set the terms of a debate.

I'm not willing to let him hold the football.

 

[glockmail]

I am sticking to the issue. You claim the Bible has never been proven wrong. You seem to be inferring that the Bible is 100% accurate. One of your main arguments in support of this inference is the Bible containing references to real places. When I pointed out that other contemporary works of mythology contain references to real places and that in itself is not proof that a work is 100% accurate, you accused me of holding the Bible to an unrealistic standard. So I'll ask you again, do you believe that the Bible is 100% accurate and true?

**(points to my signature line)**

 

[MissileMan]

**(points to my signature line)**

I didn't say you said that, did I?

You debate like a person who doesn't believe anything they write. And, you still didn't answer the question. Do you believe the Bible is 100% accurate and true?

 

[The ClayTaurus]

**(points to my signature line)**

Glock: do you believe the Bible is 100% accurate and true?

 

[Joz]

An interesting argument. Do you accept the claims of Muslims without benefit of critical thought?

No, nor do I anything else. But what I think you're going to try & do here is ask, how can I believe in the Bible when so much depends on faith, right?
How can one believe the "stories" that are told?

Too many people believe that Christianity makes a person weak. That because we take the higher road, turn the other cheek....; a bunch of self-righteous do-gooders. But I will tell you, it takes ALOT of strength to stand for what you believe in; and when push comes to shove, we can be a bunch of tough S.O.B's, as the recent election bears out.

 

[dmp]

So I'll ask you again, do you believe that the Bible is 100% accurate and true?

Within Context, yes. The Bible does NOT fail...not in any area.