EvC Forum: There is an appalling lack of historical evidence backing the Bible's veracity

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: There is an appalling lack of historical evidence backing the Bible's veracity

Huntard

Member (Idle past 2325 days)

Posts: 2870

From: Limburg, The Netherlands

Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 226 of 306 (485343)
10-07-2008 3:40 PM

Reply to: Message 224 by Me4Him
10-07-2008 1:30 PM

Re: Some recent evidence of the Bible's

Me4Him writes:

Just what is "Evidence"????

From a dictionary:

quote:
1ev·i·dence Listen to the pronunciation of 1evidence
Pronunciation:
\e-v-dn(t)s, -v-‘den(t)s\
Function:
noun
Date:
14th century

1 a: an outward sign : indication b: something that furnishes proof : testimony ; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter
2: one who bears witness ; especially : one who voluntarily confesses a crime and testifies for the prosecution against his accomplices

I'd say the bolded part is of importance when doing science.

Two people can "VIEW" the same "Evidence" and walk away with two different conclusions.

Yes, and it's up for other supporting evidence to see which one of them is correct, or if they are both wrong.

So, is evidence really evidence or a matter of "BELIEF"??????

Evidence is NEVER a matter of belief in science.

Atheist say there is no God, yet admit that Jesus existed.

I say jesus did not exist as he is portrayed in the bible. There were many men named jesus in that region at that time, but someone like in the bible NEVER existed. There is at least no evidence for this.

Scripture tells us that only "Believers" can understand the scriptures.

Wow, how convenient. First you have to accept it to be true and only then can you understand it. Nice....

Having a correct interpretation of evidence is "paramount" to arriving at the "TRUTH".

Strangely, I agree with you here.

Scripture tell us that without (PHYSICAL) "Signs and wonders", Jews won't "Believe".

Yet strangely, we see NO signs and wonders, and people STILL believe.

And much like Israel, today many people are still looking for "physical Evidence" to prove the scriptures.

And have yet to turn up ANY evidence that supports it.

As Atheist admit to the existence of Jesus, yet deny God exist, without "FAITH", man's interpretation of whatever evidence that does exist will never be "Correct".

Again, I deny the jesus of the bible existed. Furthermore, interpreting evidence doesn't need ANY faith to be correct.

Of course "Judgment day" will be the final "Proof".

Fairy tales can never be proof.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
	Message 224 by Me4Him, posted 10-07-2008 1:30 PM		Me4Him has not replied

Huntard

Member (Idle past 2325 days)

Posts: 2870

From: Limburg, The Netherlands

Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 234 of 306 (485428)
10-08-2008 12:42 PM

Reply to: Message 231 by olletrap
10-08-2008 6:34 AM

Re: The Bible's veracity

olletrap writes:

It amazes me how people argue about the bible.

That's because some people keep bringing it up and claiming the stupidest things about it.

Look at the fist few sentences that describe creation, pretty much as the big bang.

The first sentences in the bible are not "Lo and behold, from the singularity there did expand all space an time as we now know it" so I'm sorry to disappoint you, but that's the big bang and nothing about it in the bible.

There was chaos until light. at the introduction of light, came time.

Time was created INSTANTLY after the big bang, it didn't need light.

After that was day and night.

No there wasn't, since there were still no planets around on which to perceive this day and night cycle, that took quite a long time actually.

A day, is one rotation of the earth...so no one knows the length of time this really means, but creation is described just as we know the order had to be.

A day is one full rotation of the planet on which you currently are. I think I pointed out the story is NOTHING like what happened in reality.

Now look at the fulfillment of prophecy. I think the bible has been pretty accurate, and the only place this info could have come from, is outside space-time...thus from God.

The fulfilment of prophecy? NO prophecy in the bible has EVER been fulfilled.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
	Message 231 by olletrap, posted 10-08-2008 6:34 AM		olletrap has not replied

Huntard

Member (Idle past 2325 days)

Posts: 2870

From: Limburg, The Netherlands

Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 235 of 306 (485430)
10-08-2008 12:58 PM

Reply to: Message 233 by Me4Him
10-08-2008 12:21 PM

Re: The Bible's veracity

Me4Him writes:

I believe "Science" attempts to "TEST" each "theory" before coming to a conclusion about it's Veracity.

Yes, that's about how science goes about testing hypotheses.

however, in order to test a theory one would have to understand the "precepts" (prinicples) on which it is based to see if the "results" were the same as that "Prophesied" by those "precepts".

First of all, science doesn't "prophesy" it predicts, this is a different process. Second, the only principle one has to understand is that one has to follow the evidence WHERE EVER it leads.

Of course, failing to understand the theory's precepts would negate any possiblility of testing the theory.

Not at all, one can completely miss the theory, as long as one follows the evidence.

So, we have one group of "Scientist" (Christians) who have understood/tested the veracity of scripture and found the results to be precisely as "predicted". (prophesied)

Christians aren't scientists, some scientists ARE christian however. And here again you claim that you first have to accept something as true before you can start interpreting it, that's not how science works. On prophecies in the bible: NONE have EVER been fulfilled.

And another group of "Scientist" (unbelievers) that doesn't understand, and without the ability to test, deny it's verscity based on their "Belief", rather than the actual results of a test.

Again, "unbelievers" aren't scientists, some scientist however ARE "unbelievers". As for the inability to test, it's not our fault your god doesn't leave behind ANY evidence that can be tested.

Would you say that is "good Science"???

Good science is NOTHING as you described it here. Good science is following the evidence WHERE EVER it leads.

Scripture doesn't only prophecy future events, it also includes a "SCHEDULE" (timeframe) in which these events will occur.

No it doesn't, there's NO prophecy in the bible about future times whatsoever.

The "Economic meltdown" the world is presently experiencing has been prophesied from "Genesis", for our time period.

Really? Care to back that up with a quote from genesis? I seem to remember it being about creation and all, nothing in there about economic collapse.

Jesus condemned those of his day for being able to "read the signs of the sky", but not the "signs of the "TIMES".

Yes, sounds like a reasonable man this jesus chap, too bad he didn't exist.

Once understood/tested, the "Evidence" of scripture's verscity is without question, and the only evidence against it is an untested "BELIEF".

The "evidence of the scripture's veracity" certainly IS NOT without question, in fact, it fails tests against reality time and time again.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
	Message 233 by Me4Him, posted 10-08-2008 12:21 PM		Me4Him has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 238 by Me4Him, posted 10-08-2008 2:37 PM		Huntard has replied

Huntard

Member (Idle past 2325 days)

Posts: 2870

From: Limburg, The Netherlands

Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 248 of 306 (485460)
10-08-2008 4:23 PM

Reply to: Message 238 by Me4Him
10-08-2008 2:37 PM

Re: The Bible's veracity

Me4Him writes:

"IF" you don't understand the scriptures, and what they "Predict",

"HOW" are you going to "PROVE" your "theory"??? (Belief)

I understand the scriptures perfectly well, thank you very much, they simply don't say what you want them to say.

Your "belief" is based on an UN-provable "FAITH",

while mine "belief" is based on a "FAITH" that is provable, once the "principles" are understood.

ALL belief is based on faith, and faith is never provable.

The scriptures also tell us that some "Unbelievers" will still refuse to believe even when faced with hard evidence that is undeniable,

Then show me the hard evidence.

So, evidence to these really doesn't matter, their belief is based on "personal predilection" rather than allowing the "FACTS" of any evidence to speak for it's self.

I ALWAYS let the facts speak for itself. Once again, show me the evidence. I will join your cause.

This is where Bad Science, Bad Judgment, and Atheist originate.

First of all it's atheISM, second Bad science is NOT following the evidence where ever it leads.

The economic collapse is caused by the "Bank of International Settlement" which owns/control the "Federal Reserve bank", in order to gain control of the world through the "Financing of their Economies"

Don't know what you're on about here, so I'm not going to comment.

A "One World Government"..."predicted"....to be in place at the time of the Antichrist arrival, he "TAKES" control of it away from them to establish his dominance over the world.

Predicted, really? Where? Could you please show me.

Of course, this is "predicted" to occur at/very near the "end of time", which is where we are according to the "Schedule" given.

Again, show me where this is predicted.

Your belief is based on an ignorance of current events and their relationship to prophecies of the scriptures,

I have NO belief, I want everything corroborated by the facts. And once again, current events are NOT foretold in the bible. Nowhere does it talk of a small economic hiccup that we will eventually overcome.

"Facts" that are easily seen once the scriptures are understood, and the test results are precisely as "predicted".

How many times do I have to tell you this? It is NOT required to believe something to be true in order to understand what it says!

Since we live at the "end of time", most porphecies have already been fulfilled, there's still a few left

How do you know we live in the end of times, for I shall once again repeat: No prophecies in the bible have ever been fulfilled.

"IF" you were presented with a "Fact sheet" detailing Bible prophecies and their time frame, some thousands of years before they occurred, would you still deny the hard evidence???

If it were indeed hard evidence, I will join your cause immediately.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
	Message 238 by Me4Him, posted 10-08-2008 2:37 PM		Me4Him has not replied

Huntard

Member (Idle past 2325 days)

Posts: 2870

From: Limburg, The Netherlands

Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 284 of 306 (485618)
10-10-2008 7:15 AM

Reply to: Message 283 by olletrap
10-10-2008 6:13 AM

Re: The Bible's veracity

olletrap writes:

Funny that geology is simply thrown out as a science because it often doesn't match the accepted theories. Science is science and geology is as valid as any other. If it doesn't square with the other scientific evidence, clearly something is wrong. As for a global flood, I won't argue that, as it is clearly a reference to the Noah story, which certainly could be as true even if it was actually a regional flood.

Yes, the flood story was most likely inspired by a local event.

I will say that in the Noah story it states that before the flood, there was no such thing as rain. A mist covered the earth instead.

A mist? I can't seem to remember ANYWHERE in the bible where it says that, would you be so kind as to point it out to me?

So we are talking about a time very long ago, before any other recorded history.

Yes, which is why it shouldn't be taken for granted, oral transmission is very unreliable.

Apparently the atmosphere was quite different.

Please show evidence for this.

Gravity too may have been different.

Gravity has remained the same for earth since it was fully formed. It only changes if the earth's mass changed significantly, since that didn't happen, gravity remained the same.

It could actually have been before the continents divided.

No it couldn't, since man only emerged on the earth LONG after the continents divided.

I am pointing out that the evidence in the story itself would indicate a much earlier time frame, and thus your evidence against the flood is quite flawed.

It couldn't have been before modern man emerged (i.e. Homo Sapiens) , as there wouldn't have been anyone to orally transmit the story. Since the earliest Homo sapiens is thought to have emerged somewhere around 200.000 years ago, it would have to have been between that time and today. NO evidence exist to point to a global flood in that time period. Furthermore the more in the past it lies, the more unreliable it becomes, as oral transmission of stories is notoriously unreliable.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
	Message 283 by olletrap, posted 10-10-2008 6:13 AM		olletrap has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 289 by olletrap, posted 10-10-2008 7:58 AM		Huntard has replied

Huntard

Member (Idle past 2325 days)

Posts: 2870

From: Limburg, The Netherlands

Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 292 of 306 (485637)
10-10-2008 9:15 AM

Reply to: Message 289 by olletrap
10-10-2008 7:58 AM

Re: The Bible's veracity

olletrap writes:

I will look for my bible to point out that passage. It also states that before the days of Noah, the "sons of God" were mating with human women and creating offspring. They were Nephalim (giants, or men of great stature... intelligence?) Theoretically one reason for the cleansing of the earth. Extra biblical sources say that Noah's father suspected that Noah himself was the result of such a union. In any case these passages would indicate that it was a time long before the date you set, if indeed there ever were such a time.

Genetic evidence contradicts this, there is no sign of ANY intermingling of other species with the Homo Sapiens genes. Again, the EARLIEST estimates for Homo Sapiens is around 200.000 years ago, any earlier is not found credible at all.

As for man appearing after the continental divide, there is a school of thought that this is not true. bananas need to be cultivated and are found in both South America and Africa from the earliest times. there's other problems with the conventional wisdom as well.

Again, the earliest estimates for Homo sapiens are 200.0000 years ago. The continents separated LONG before that. There is evidence for this, please provide your evidence that this is not the case. ABE: As for bananas, see Asgara's explanation further down. (Thanks Asgara, you learn something everyday

)

As for gravity remaining the same, how could that be proven. A lighter gravity could account for the size and agility of the dinosaurs and the pterodactyl which would not be capable of flight today, yet obviously was a flying creature.

How could that be proven? Because gravity is dependant on the mass of an object, if its mass changes its gravitational pull changes, thus the earth’s mass had to change significantly for ANY effect to be felt. Please provide evidence the earth’s mass changed greatly in the past.

I realize that all this is outside any conventional science. The point is that anything is possible.

If everything is possible, everything is just as likely and thus nothing can be claimed to be right.

there are holes in all theories and we aren't at the point where we can be sure of anything. A global flood at some point in the earth's formation is a probability, given that it is 70% water and shows evidence of expansion. So to say that at some point it was 100% water doesn't sound improbable.

There is NO evidence for such a flood whatsoever, do you have ANY idea how much water is needed to flood the earth? There isn’t enough water BY FAR on this planet to do so. It’s not a question of adding another 30% of water either, you see the SURFACE is 70% water, however, to flood the earth you need to cover Mt. Everest, and that requires a whole lot of water.

The problem... as you demonstrate, for there to have been a Noah, or Gilgamesh.. is that this has to have happened at a time when some form of modern humans, in however scant numbers are also found.

Yes, this places the story from anywhere between 200.000 years ago and today.

Right now, science and the best evidence seems to discount this but I wouldn't say it's not possible.

Again, this is not about what’s possible, this is about what the evidence shows, and so far NO evidence supports the flood.

I myself just shy away from insisting that the Noah or Gilgamesh story is absolutely to be taken literally, There's quite a bit there to swallow if taken in it's entirety and I'm afraid that the whole truth might be lost to time and we will never understand it.

Good, at least you are more realistic then some others I have encountered here. Would it be a great problem for you to see the flood story as a morality lesson, with a big, but local, flood used to make it more impressive to people?

Edited by Huntard, : changed the bit about bananas

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
	Message 289 by olletrap, posted 10-10-2008 7:58 AM		olletrap has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 294 by Asgara, posted 10-10-2008 11:13 AM	Huntard has not replied
	Message 296 by olletrap, posted 10-10-2008 1:31 PM	Huntard has replied

Huntard

Member (Idle past 2325 days)

Posts: 2870

From: Limburg, The Netherlands

Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 300 of 306 (485668)
10-10-2008 2:07 PM

Reply to: Message 296 by olletrap
10-10-2008 1:31 PM

Re: The Bible's veracity

This post:

olletrap writes:

Actually, I think that at the time the flood happened it probably would have meant the known world. i don't think it was intentionally distorted.

But yes, the Gilgamesh story and the Noah story are similar enough to presume that they came from the same source, yet different enough that obviously the details were adapted for religions sake. Certainly, it is intended to be a morality teaching story.

Again it could very well have been a regional flood and that would not change the value of the story to the faith.

Together with this one:

Well I must concede that most of you have certainly researched the subject far more than I have. My belief in the flood is based on religion and little more, so I can't pretend to be able to offer hard evidence such a you have presented.

As for me, a worldwide flood is not all all a prerequisite for believing the important parts of the Noah story, so it doesn't shake my faith.

You are free to believe there was never such an event and I will stay with what I believe, but I have to say you have presented far more quality evidence for your belief than I can for my position.

Really put a smile on my face. I think you're absolutely right. The point of the bible is not to be an accurate depiction of the world's history, it is meant to be a moral guide to the people who have faith in it's god. Thank you for this debate, I enjoyed it very much and I hope we see you around some more here.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
	Message 296 by olletrap, posted 10-10-2008 1:31 PM		olletrap has not replied

Huntard

Member (Idle past 2325 days)

Posts: 2870

From: Limburg, The Netherlands

Joined: 09-02-2008

Normal Thread Display

Message 305 of 306 (485698)
10-10-2008 6:07 PM

Reply to: Message 303 by olletrap
10-10-2008 5:53 PM

Re: The Bible's boo-boo

Well, I'm not embarrassed to believe in the Bible and by extension God.

Nor should you EVER be.

I do realize that organized religions have gotten pretty over-zealous and some of what they insist on is unrealistic. Still I don't think there is a true conflict between science and belief in God.

There isn't, the conflict only arises when people insist on the bible being literally true and demanding it be taught as science.

Once again, glad to have debated with you and I hope you stick around

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
	Message 303 by olletrap, posted 10-10-2008 5:53 PM		olletrap has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

2 online now:	Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/1