U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-16-2017, 05:13 PM
 
435 posts, read 116,340 times
Reputation: 65

Advertisements

Is there any proof that the Bible is not 100% man made?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-16-2017, 05:40 PM
Status: "We The North" (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
25,750 posts, read 13,395,224 times
Reputation: 11665
None of which I am aware.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2017, 05:51 PM
 
13,450 posts, read 4,976,974 times
Reputation: 1363
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClementofA View Post
Is there any proof that the Bible is not 100% man made?
is there anything we did, do, or say that is not man made?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2017, 07:13 PM
 
4,410 posts, read 1,637,523 times
Reputation: 1528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
is there anything we did, do, or say that is not man made?
And the man himself is made by who?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2017, 07:24 PM
 
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
5,661 posts, read 2,865,682 times
Reputation: 2880
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
And the man himself is made by who?
Man was not made by anyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClementofA View Post
Is there any proof that the Bible is not 100% man made?
I would suggest that the bible is indeed 100% man made.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2017, 08:12 PM
 
39,014 posts, read 10,812,637 times
Reputation: 5080
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
And the man himself is made by who?
Even if man was made by a god, there no good reason to suppose the Bible was inspired by one. This is he point - like the evolution debate, First Cause argument doesn't do a thing to validate any particular religion or Holy Book.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2017, 09:36 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma
2,186 posts, read 789,666 times
Reputation: 1004
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
And the man himself is made by who?
We simply could have evolved or even been seeded here by advanced beings from another world. We don't know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2017, 11:59 PM
 
Location: Boston
3,732 posts, read 1,468,376 times
Reputation: 5802
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55 View Post
We simply could have evolved or even been seeded here by advanced beings from another world. We don't know.
That just moves the problem to another world, it solves nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2017, 12:07 AM
 
Location: Boston
3,732 posts, read 1,468,376 times
Reputation: 5802
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClementofA View Post
Is there any proof that the Bible is not 100% man made?
There is no objective proof for the subjective.

The bible is said to be the word of God but always written in the hand of man.
The reader is to filter the hand of man out and ask themself what the word of God means to them.

You are confusing proof with evidence.
One is inductive, the other deductive.
You can objectively prove the bible exists, but veracity for the claims of its inspiration must be deduced.

BTW, Jesus loves atheists but He's undecided about agnostics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2017, 12:46 AM
 
39,014 posts, read 10,812,637 times
Reputation: 5080
Well said, but I think we know what the OP means. As a couple of proper prawns here put it 'Crappy evidence is still Evidence".

What is looked for is sound and persuasive evidence. Now take the Gospels (wear gloves). That the nativities conflict pretty soundly is 'proof' (compelling sound evidence) that they were invented, separately. But that Jesus being from Galilee was an embarrassment that they had to try to get over by inventing these tales to have him born in Judea, as the Messiah (as they thought) ought to have been. So it is, on all persuasive evidence, proof that Jesus really was a Galilean.

So evidence that the Bible content came from God rather than just from men would be in the evidence put forward -true history, scientific facts unknown until later, and prophecy that came true. We know this because he Bible apologists constantly try to find them in the Bible.

However, these claims have been, or are being, debunked. Science in the Bible, quite easily. Genesis and now Exodus is pretty much 'proven' to be fables. History such as it is, turns out to be written by fallible men and indeed dishonest men, as example the historical fact of the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib being shown as victory for the Hebrews with God smiting the Assyrian army, whereas the more compelling evidence is that Hezekiah submitted to Sennacherib and paid tribute.

As to prophecy, the three Big Ones - Tyre, Babylon and Daniel, have been convincingly shown to be false in the case of Tyre and Babylon - neither were destroyed; Babylon thrived until post -Roman times and Tyre exists today. And Daniel can be convincingly dated to just before the Maccabean war. So it is retrospective history. That is pretty much the case with the prophecies about Jesus. They are retrospective, the gospel -writers adapting the Jesus story or inventing stuff to look like the fulfillment of a prophecy - which often has to be misinterpreted or fiddled to make it provide the basis.

For example, the prophecy of Rachel's children - a metaphor for the northern kingdoms destroyed by Assyria - was taken "woodenly" by Matthew as a prophecy of real children, which fitted nicely into his plot of Herod's attempt to remove a rival and thus dislodge Jesus from Judea (where the family lived) and get him into Galilee, whereas Luke has him as a Galilean wangled into Judea and born there.

But the one I like even better are the prophecies of the death of Judas in Matthew 27 and Acts 1. Compare the 'prophecies' with the OT originals and prepare to be shocked at the dogs' dinner the evangelists made of the OT passages to get them to work as prophecy.

These evidences, compelling enough for proof, thus bolster the already reasonable evidence that the big ones - Resurrection and 2nd coming - are, respectively, invented, and false prophecy.

That is what I mean by 'water under the bridge' when I get asked 'what evidence would convince me?' That is the evidence that convinces me, and there is now so much of it, and it is so compelling up to Proof, that there is no way back for the Bible. It is demonstrably debunked as the knowledge of God, and convincingly shown to be the work of men.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top