Is The Bible Evidence Of Anything?

[Meriweather]

So is everybody right? Or only those that agree with you?

Right about religion? This isn't math class. Religion is a philosophy, and both are based on reason. You have reasons--and possibly experiences--to think as you do about God. And so does everyone else. We come here to share experiences and perspectives. For me, agreement doesn't factor in to any discussion, basically because when all agree discussion usually ends quickly.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Fables, unlike myths, do no purport themselves to be TRUE.

An important distinction that gets lost on the apologists.

 

[The_Lyrical_Miracle]

As far as "evidence" of something being true in history is concerned, the bible astronomically fulfills the standard that all atheists subscribe to. hundreds of authors contributed to the bible, many unconnected.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

As far as "evidence" of something being true in history is concerned, the bible astronomically fulfills the standard that all atheists subscribe to. hundreds of authors contributed to the bible, many unconnected.

All atheists do not subscribe to that standard. I doubt many do at all.. What made up nonsense.

 

[The_Lyrical_Miracle]

All atheists do not subscribe to that standard. I doubt many do at all.. What made up nonsense.

I'm talking about the standard of acceptance of ancient history as fact.

If the bible wasn't religious or tied to the right wing.. atheists would flock to it as entirely legitimate based on exactly what it is. Many to most writings from antiquity with far less legitimacy are accepted by the non-religious as fact.

Don't let the things you hate get in the way of a discussion..

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm talking about the standard of acceptance of ancient history as fact.

Not sure that's the road you want to go down. The gospels were written by a very few people, long after Jesus died. Your standard would seem more to cast doubt on the Gospels than to support the truth of them.

 

[The_Lyrical_Miracle]

Not sure that's the road you want to go down. The gospels were written by a very few people, long after Jesus died. Your standard would seem more to cast doubt on the Gospels than to support the truth of them.

If you know what the standard was for accepting history, you'd know that's good evidence for that time period.

Of course, you don't know these things, and are just BS'ing.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If you know what the standard was for accepting history, you'd know that's good evidence for that time period.

Which means, dubious evidence.

 

[The_Lyrical_Miracle]

Which means, dubious evidence.

Welp, you're fine to reject most of everything that says what happened in the past, that's you're right.

Have fun!

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

The bible is evidence that the rulers of early civilization were having so many problems keeping people in line, that they had to conscript writers to concoct fantasy "ghost" stories to keep the superstitious population under control.

Whats a better way to control weak minded people, than by scaring them into believing that some "god" is "gonna get them" and send them to "hell" if they misbehave. And keeping them confused about the truth, with hypocrisy, lies, and coercion stuffed into just about every page.

 

[Clyde 154]

The bible is evidence that the rulers of early civilization were having so many problems keeping people in line, that they had to conscript writers to concoct fantasy "ghost" stories to keep the superstitious population under control.

Whats a better way to control weak minded people, than by scaring them into believing that some "god" is "gonna get them" and send them to "hell" if they misbehave. And keeping them confused about the truth, with hypocrisy, lies, and coercion stuffed into just about every page.

"Professing themselves to be wise.........they became fools." -- Rom. 1:22


Never read the Holy Scriptures...... Lazy? "He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear Him not, because you are not of God." Just who are these rulers that paid writers to induce revolution within their own kingdoms? Makes perfect sense............tell ghost stories and have your kingdom consumed by the readers of those ghost stories. What idiotic ruler would stir rebellion in their own kingdom to the point the patients take over asylum?

Rome once attempted to put down the religion called Christianity, how did that work out for them?

What's clear? You can't stand the thought of being judged. Regardless of what you can and cannot tolerate, the same word that you are attempting to discredit will judge you in the end. "He that rejecteth Me, and receiveth not My words; hath one the judgeth him; the word that I have spoken, the same will judge him on that day." -- John 12:48

Its also clear just who is afraid.............What do you fear? The truth. A religion that began with one Carpenter's son and 12 friends has grown to the point that it consumed over 1/3 the world's total population.

Of course you can't be wrong..........its the 93% of all civilized human beings that believe in God in one form or another that are wrong, the 7% pompous arrogant atheists are just too smart to be judged in this life or the next. Majority Consensus opinions make something true everywhere except a belief in God. A majority consensus opinion makes global warming true.

Of course believing something does not make one correct.............first you have to read and comprehend the scriptures.

Facts: There was a Gallup poll conducted among supposed religious folk........the findings were shocking. Six out of 10 Americans could not name the speaker of the "Sermon on the Mount"..........many suggested that it was Billy Graham's speech. 50% of the people polled could not name the 4 Gospels found in the Bible. 8 out of 10 thought the passage, "God helps those who help themselves" was in the Bible..........and 12% thought that "Joan of Arc was Noah's wife".

So you are not alone in your ignorance. What you have demonstrated is the fact that not many people are actually reading the Holy Scriptures.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Welp, you're fine to reject most of everything that says what happened in the past, that's you're right.

Have fun!

Non sequitur nonsense. Even works of fiction contain references to real people and places. Including the Bible.

 

[Michael1985]

I would have to ask what the Bible is evidence for exactly. If one wanted to ask if the events described can be verified historically, one has to use outside sources. Trying to use the Bible to prove itself is circular reasoning.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

They are not under oath.

You're on some other planet where everything is upside down, backwards and just wrong

 

[Penelope]

You're on some other planet where everything is upside down, backwards and just wrong

Witness testimony is without merit when you want to go with the defense of something.

 

[Leviticus]

The bible contains much witness testimony. Witness testimony is acceptable as evidence in every court of law.
In many cases, biblical events have more than one witness to say they happened.

No one who knew Jesus wrote any part books of the bible. and the OT was written thousands of years after the stories supposedly took place. The writers of the bible were writing about events that took place hundreds and thousands of years before their time. They aren't witnesses of anything. That's like calling a historian who writes a book about the civil war an eye witness to the war.

The writers were telling a story from the point of view of religious figures. They were transcribing actual accounts from people.

 

[Leviticus]

Rubbish. It was 'written' in the times it portrays, as textual analysis conclusively proves; there are no anachronisms at all, and the places and social situations and politics are all 100% contemporary with the times. This would not be possible if it was all fabricated several generations later, or by Constantine hundreds of years later, as some particularly stupid loons keep trying to peddle. The ortodox version is indeed the original and correct version; there are too many crosschecks and copies around to compare to, and anyone trying to rewrite anyting in it wou;d have been laughed at and marginalized, no matter who they were. They were not cowards and easily cowed or bullied, not even by Roman Emperors or anybody else, even under torture.

The earliest verified versions of the gospels were written about 80 years after the crucifixion. None of the aspostles actually wrote them. The last of them had died several years before.

 

[DudleySmith]

The earliest verified versions of the gospels were written about 80 years after the crucifixion. None of the aspostles actually wrote them. The last of them had died several years before.

That's because Jews used oral traditions for their religious teaching, so no, they weren't created 80 years later, they existed from the beginning, and some were copied down as little as 5 years after they were witnessed. When they were written down, there were already many thousands who could verify their provenance, and as we have learned over and over again from ancient discoveries the modern translations are indeed very accurate and consistent, so sorry, you won't get far in your dream of rewriting the Gospels to suit your own fantasies and delusions and get much support from real scholars.

The fact is if anybody tried to rewrite them some 300 years later, as is claimed for Constantine's synods, they would have been laughed out of their own churches by their congregations, and we know for an absolute fact none of the Bishops then were afraid of Romans or any Emperor. So many of them had been tortured already one commentator said the Synod of Nicea looked like a beggar's convention, there were so many crippled and scarred Bishops hobbling around.

There are zero anachronisms in the NT; this is verified by historians and scholars such as Joachim Jeremiah and Darrell Bock and many others.

 

[DudleySmith]

Which means, dubious evidence.

Says a dubious deviant. lol

 

[abu afak]

.....
There are Zero Anachronisms in the NT; this is verified by historians and scholars such as Joachim Jeremiah and Darrell Bock and many others.

Anachronism Blocks Understanding Scripture​

Anachronism is a widespread plague preventing millions of Western Christians from understanding the Bible or Jesus.​

Anachronism Is Killing Our Understanding Of Sacred Scripture!

Anachronism tries to force-fit Jesus and the Bible into our historical situation and problems! When we commit this crime on the Bible, we lose both the Scriptures and Jesus by distorting them into Americans.

www.patheos.com

`