by Morgan Matthew
Feb 3, 2012
You can't prove the non-existence of anything. Prove to me that Bigfoot doesn't exist. Prove to me that unicorns don't exist. See what I mean?
What we CAN point to is the inaccuracies and mistakes of the bible, which demonstrate that it isn't the "inerrant word of god", but rather the writings of primitive humans who didn't truly understand how the world worked.
Leviticus 11: "These are the birds you are to detest and not eat because they are detestable: the eagle, the vulture...and the bat." BATS AREN'T BIRDS.
"The rabbit, though it chews its cud..." RABBITS DON'T CHEW CUD.
"There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper." THOSE ALL ARE INSECTS AND HAVE SIX LEGS.
So do you still claim the bible to be "the word of god"? Do YOU AND I know more about "god's creatures" than he does?
Turn it around on this person:
1) Prove just ONE place in Cat in the Hat didn't exist
2) Prove that just ONE being in Cat in the Hat didn't exist
3) Prove that one event in the Cat in the Hat didn't happen
Can you prove just one, dear simple-minded xian?
Richard Johnson has given the correct reply to the challenge. One can only prove the existence of something, not the non-existence.
@Lotus and @Richard...awesome.
Haven't they proved that Nazareth never existed in the first century?
It may not be possible to prove a negative, but anyone who believes that a snake or a donkey has talked in a human language is a damn fool.
Well, lets go with 3. Jericho was uninhabited during both the early conquest proposed time, and the late conquest. The fall of Jericho told in that book never seems to have happened. Kathleen Kenyon excavated there, and her findings have consistently been re-confirmed. We know this because they didn't have bulldozers in ancient times, so all ruins were buried creating hills called tels. It leaves no question because pottery and the three types of dating used in archeology all work hand in hand. Though pottery alone can date things extrordinary well. The Wikipedia article on the subject is pretty thorough actually.
Not only that, but the book of Joshua and the book of Judges have different accounts of what cities were taken in conquest and what ones remained under Canaanite hands.
Done, and done.
Why do I have to disprove your claims? You made the claim, you back it up with evidence derived from repeatable, falseable experimentation that is subject to peer review. Until then stop bugging me with frivolous claims about your particular brand of sky-daddy.
Feb 4, 2012
By the way, what is ‘absolute proof’ supposed to be, anyway? First, most, if not all, knowledge is inferential, and second, the truth of every empirically based proposition is related to either the truth of other such empirically based propositions, or to certain kinds of fact (whatever facts may be). The latin verb absolvere, from the past participle of which – absolutus, a, um – the English adjective ‘absolute’ originates, means ‘to free’, for which reason the English adjective actually* means ‘viewed or existing independently and not in relation to other things’.** As concerns proof, evidence, and knowledge, this is obviously impossible, however.
* Unfortunately, many people use ‘absolute’ in the sense of ‘total’. Even Oxford Dictionaries Online lists this as the first meaning: http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/absolute?q=absolute. Maybe this awkward use originates from the meaning ‘to complete’ which absolvere can take in certain (Latin) contexts.
** Emphases by me.
Who cares? I don't feel the need to disprove the Bible. I also don't have to disprove all other religious texts in the world. They don't apply to me.
I love the response to the question, btw.
I'm with Diane....... It's not my place to disprove the Bible. I don't see my atheism as weapon against religion....it's my personal belief system. I would just like it to be recognised and not seen as deviant
Hmm. Well, the word "bible" comes from a Greek word meaning "library," so the The Holy Bible may be bound in a book format, but in fact it is a set of books, so each book in the library would need to be approached separately. There really is no such thing as a "book" that is The Holy Bible. It is a collection of stories. However, judged as a collection, so many of the books within it are so ridiculous that I can't recommend it to anyone with more than a few brain cells, except as a work of speculative fiction.
I thiink they are asking the wrong questions - the questions really are better addressed, in my opinion, as are any of the claims in the bible true and to what extent are they true, embellished, fabricated, etc.
Some critical reviews of the bible that I enjoyed include:
1) Who Wrote the Bible
2) Jesus, Interrupted
3) The Rejection of Pascal's Wager (decent web site as well)
4) The End of Biblical Studies
In my opinion, the chess analogy with the pigeon highlights a significant problem with many fundamentalists- they do not want to question their beliefs or critically evaluate the bible- the fundamental position for many is the bible is the infallible word of their god. Rather than treating it like any other book or any other claims, many begin with the assumption they are true rather than asking the logical questions of what are the claims, what is the evidence, etc.
Stupidity at it's finest...
Can you prove that the latest Spider-Man comic is FALSE?
Of course, if someone wants proof, the first question to ask is, "Okay, so what would you COUNT as proof?" If you can't tell me, your question is rhetorical and not serious.
1. Nazareth didn't exist in the first century
2. Moses is a mythical character
3. The sun didn't stop in the sky in the battle of Jericho (assuming that ever took place - probably not)
My response to this idiot:
"If a man begins with certainty he shall end in doubt, but if he begins in doubt, he shall end in certainty."
If you can wrap your mind around that, return and I might consider talking to you.
How about beginning in doubt and ending in doubt and beginning in certainty and ending in certainty?
The bible is an epic. I feel as if you guys care way too much about stuff that doesn't really matter.
ummmm I totally meant to answer this post as if I thought it was an actual question :) totally on purpose.
It's a trap! If you go ahead and try to prove something in the Bible is wrong, then it's either a metaphor, a translation error, or is taken out of context. Don't do it.
Feb 5, 2012
Not if the person asking is a literal interpreter. In that case, there are no metaphors (literalness excludes poetic interpretations), no translation errors (because God inspires translators), and it's all literally true, no context required.
Absolutely yes! To my complete satisfaction.
While not actually in the categories listed, I seem to recall that the Bible classifies bats as birds.
Feb 10, 2012
The Bible also refers to whales as fish, but this was all before genetics and modern taxonomy, and so it's understandable. Now, if they referred to dogs as birds or sheep as fish, then I'd say they were crazy, but for their time, it's understandable. UNLESS, of course, The Bible is regarded as the infallible word of God. In that case, bats ARE birds and whales ARE fish, because God says so.
I could ask him the same question, Prove to me without the words of the bible that anything happened. It seems history around that time was very well recorded in and on a multitude of different medias or mediums. Except occurrences of the bible seem only to be recorded in that one book.It seems likely that the Bible was written as a story book about one mans trials, triumphs and tragedies. Something that was taken by those with power and turned into a means of controlling the illiterate <-- this is proven if you actually study history (specifically art history).. Also in these history classes you will learn where all the different versions of the bible came from (except the "original"), who changed them and why they changed them and what made this change necessary.Included in all this history; you can take art history classes and learn about all the original belief systems that also were changed and manipulated by people of power that seem to have very similar stories; all predating the Bible. This will give you an idea of the origins of the Bible story.
Feb 15, 2012