Did you know this about the holy scriptures?

Author: Mall

Posts

Total: 114
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
The holy scriptures or nominally the Bible itself teaches that Christian or Christianity for that matter is man made,man made invention.

Even the book that I guess is referred to as a "Christian " book shows in it was invented by man .

Does this mean or prove the bible was just made up or fabricated by man?

I continued to ask an individual on here has the bible been proven false?

Person avoided to answer.

I'll get your answers and feedback first .
RaymondSheen
RaymondSheen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 327
2
2
6
RaymondSheen's avatar
RaymondSheen
2
2
6
-->
@Mall
Yes, the Bible has been proven false. 
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@RaymondSheen
What's the proof sir?

Let me see.
RaymondSheen
RaymondSheen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 327
2
2
6
RaymondSheen's avatar
RaymondSheen
2
2
6
-->
@Mall
First, so that we know we are on the same page, define false.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Mall
Call me Zed.



N.B. to others.

I gave as succinct an answer as was possible to the aforementioned question.

The onus lies with the proposer of the hypothesis to prove it's accuracy.

Whereas all that I can do is counter-hypothesise.

If scripture were known to be accurate, then contention would be unnecessary.


Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Let's see if you can answer this straight.

If something hasn't been proven true, does this leave the possibility to prove that something false?
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@RaymondSheen
Not true.
RaymondSheen
RaymondSheen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 327
2
2
6
RaymondSheen's avatar
RaymondSheen
2
2
6
-->
@Mall
Anything can both be proven true and proven false at the same time. Proven doesn't necessarily mean true. A false passport, for example, or Satan. Prove is defined as to demonstrate the truth or existence of (something) by evidence or argument. Evidence and argument are falible, like all scientific theories are falsifiable. 


RaymondSheen
RaymondSheen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 327
2
2
6
RaymondSheen's avatar
RaymondSheen
2
2
6
-->
@Mall
Not ture. 
That's not a very good definition of false, especially in a Biblical context. It's the statement of a position of an ideologue, and pun intended, the definition is not true. The word science means the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained. The archaic term being propositional knowledge of any kind. The term ideology was coined by  Antoine Destutt de Tracy as "the science of ideas" in 1796. As I pointed out in another thread, Ideologues are people who have taken an idea and made it a part of them and so if you try to alter or remove the idea it's as if you are doing that to a part of them and they will fight it to the death. This is true of believers and unbelievers alike. Biblical study should be scientific, not ideological fixation. In science the investigation seeks what is false, not true. A Bible student should be scientific in their approach. 

The Bible is not true in a variety of ways. For example, it says things that aren't true. The illustrations Jesus gave weren't true in that they weren't literal accounts. There was no Lazarus and Rich Man. Abraham hadn't ascended to heaven where Lazarus could be in his bosom (favored) position for Jesus himself later said that no man had ascended to heaven except himself, who had descended from heaven. 

The Bible often gives opinions or testimony of people that aren't true. As I pointed out in another thread: You can't read one small portion of the Bible and assume that it means what it says. It gives you the story in other's perspectives. For example, Eve's perspective. She thought the snake talked. The Bible says the snake talked. The snake didn't talk. She was decieved by Satan making it appear as if the snake had talked. (Genesis 3:3-4; 1 Timothy 2:13-14)

Similar examples of the Bible saying something that wasn't true is the ass in the case of Balaam. (Numbers 22:22-30; 2 Peter 2:16) But also in the case where it appears that Samuel's "spirit" is summoned by the witch of En-dor, where the cowardly scouts sent out came back and said the Nephilim were in the land. (1 Samuel 28:3–25; Numbers, 13:31-33) Spiritism is prohibited by the Bible due to it's false demonic influence and the Nephilim had all perished in the flood. 

Sometimes the Bible even gives details of earlier events using references that didn't exist at that time. For example, at Genesis 3:24 the cherubs use a flaming blade of a sword to prevent Adam and Eve from returning. No such thing existed. At Genesis 2:10-14 the geographical details of Eden are given with reference to one river "to the East of Assyria" when Assyria certainly didn't exist then. But it was familiar to the reader who was reading it much later.

This is why you have to know the entire Bible before you start hacking at it like a blind woodsman. 

The Bible has proven itself false and it is fallible. The inspired word of Jehovah God is infallible, but the Bible itself is the imperfect translation of that. So, if you have a good reference Bible, at Mark 16:9-20, John 5:4, John 7:53-8:11 and 1 John 5:7 it will tell you that these verses didn't appear in earlier manuscripts. They are spurious, added on later.

The Bible also warns the reader to test rather than to just believe even the inspired expression (some translations read "spirit") because there are many false teachings or expressions. (1 John 4:1-3)

At 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12, where the KJV uses the term "a strong delusion" other translations use "working of error" (ASV) "a misleading influence, a working of error" (AMP) and "fooled into believing a lie" (CEV). The question is, what does this mean?

In a basic sense it means God will allow them to believe whatever they want, which in that case, was a lie. As it was with King Ahab at 1 Kings 22:1-38 and 2 Chronicles 18. If you prefer the lie there is nothing that God can do to change that except hold you accountable for it. Note that other translations use the term "judged" rather than damned as the KJV uses. Also note that, where most translations, including the KJV, use the term "found pleasure" in unrighteousness literally means in Greek "having thought well." They have given it thought and strive in an intellectual sense to come to the conclusion they desire.



zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Mall
NO.


I hypothesise that Carrots  are the dominant intellectual species on another planet.

Can you prove that this is an inaccurate hypothesis?



Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't know. 

I do suggest to you , if you're going to make a counterpoint, don't intentionally use a fictitious example. This is my point with you over the bible believing it is fictitious if you actually believe that.

You haven't proven it's fictitious and that's the bottomline as stone cold would say.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Mall
From my point of view, the popular Middle Eastern GOD hypotheses were just as fictitious as the carrot hypothesis.

And the bible is a mythical narrative, based around a fictitious hypothesis.



The bottom line is that neither of us can prove our respective fictitious hypothesis.
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't know what a " fictitious hypothesis " is .

If you're saying you can't prove what is fiction, you can or else it wouldn't be called fiction most likely.

Can you prove the bible false?

I don't know. I say that because I don't know everything.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Mall
We make distinctions.

A sincere hypothesis is respectfully not regarded as a work of fiction.

So conversely, a work of fiction is respectfully not regarded as a sincere hypothesis.

Though for sure,  if we are being cynical we can interchange words and meaning.

I sincerely regard the popular Middle Eastern GOD hypotheses as naive, and therefore inevitably fictitious.

Though the Bible is a genuine collection of ideas and recollections, put together in myth form.

The Bible is what it is.
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@zedvictor4
The bible has not been proven fictitious so it is incorrect to assert that it is.


Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,608
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Mall
The bible has [....] been proven fictitious so it is [...]correct to assert that it is.


I corrected that for you, Mall.

Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@Stephen
The bible has not been proven fictitious so it is incorrect to assert that it is.


FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,574
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Mall

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,608
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@FLRW
  1. God knew of one righteous man, Ut-Napishtim or Noah.

He (Daniel Miessler author of your link, FLRW) appears to have forgotten  Lot was also righteous and even called "godly". 

And when we take  translations of ancient Hebrew and Greek we can find that god/ the bible, reveals a few more biblical characters to be "righteous".

Hebrew-  Tsaddiyq is used to describe those that are called “righteous.”

As is;

 Greek - Dikaios.    Both these words are also translated as to mean "just" and "innocent". "righteous".  As Lot was said to have been.

Tsaddiyq Definition
  1. just, lawful, righteous
    1. just, righteous (in government)
    2. just, right (in one's cause)
    3. just, righteous (in conduct and character)
    4. righteous (as justified and vindicated by God)
    5. right, correct, lawful.
So armed with this information we can find a few other biblical characters that are said to be "Righteous". 

Off the top of my head we have;
Zacharias. Joseph Of Arimathea. Jesus. John The Baptist and Elisabeth. Able and no doubt a few others that I can't remember.

Here endeth the lesson.😁
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@FLRW
The bible has not been proven fictitious so it is incorrect to assert that it is.


IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,503
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Mall
The bible has not been proven fictitious so it is incorrect to assert that it is.
I'm not sure if fictitious but several biblical stories are clearly cheap copies of the sumerian, egyptian and greek mythology. Lol. 

IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,503
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Mall
By the way, what do you mean by false?

Not accurate?

Not believable?

Not reliable? 

Not authentic?

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
@Mall
The bible has not been proven to be either completely factual or completely fictitious.

So it's reasonable to hypothesise both options.

Therefore, it's neither correct nor incorrect to assert that it either is or isn't completely fictitious or completely factual.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,608
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
The bible has not been proven to be either completely factual or completely fictitious.

[A] Indeed, Vic. It is as I have always maintained: The bible- New Testamant in particular - is ambiguous and full of half to stories about a man that Christians have wrapped  in a myth.

So it's reasonable to hypothesise both options.
[B]
Not if one believes in so called "miracles",  i.e. that literally  three day old rotten stinking corpse coming to life, walking on water, feeding thousands with a few fish and a couple of slices  of Warburtons - even if the latter is said to be "the best a man can get".


Therefore, it's neither correct nor incorrect to assert that it either is or isn't completely fictitious or completely factual.

See [A] & [B]
 Have a nice day, Vic. Red Lion for me today.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
Have a pint for me.

We're up in Evesham until Wednesday visiting the daughters.

The youngest's (37th) Birthday bar-b-que Saturday so a few chilled beers for me too.

I'm cycling there Saturday morning...92 miles.

Mrs Zed is driving, with the dog.


All the best to you and yours.

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,608
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
Have a pint for me.

Bit late, I was already in the boozer by the time of your reply. With that said, mate, I always give you a thought when I put the glass to my mouth , Vic.


We're up in Evesham until Wednesday visiting the daughters.
Lovely. That's what counts . Vic


The youngest's (37th) Birthday bar-b-que Saturday so a few chilled beers for me too.

Nice. 

I'm cycling there Saturday morning...92 miles.

You are fitter than me then, Vic lad.


Mrs Zed is driving, with the dog.
Eh. Them dogs. had it all worked out from the day they first set eyes on a human didn't they, Vic?  They must have thought, thank you "god" for sending me a clever sucker like this biped.  

All the best to you and yours.
You too my mate.
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@zedvictor4
The scripture has not been proven partially fictitious or true either, except for those of us that believe.

I have to make an amendment there. It has been proven true to those that have as you say "seen the light".

But that just comes down to subjective experience and anyone is blind until their eyes are opened. This is according to the book.
Mall
Mall's avatar
Debates: 395
Posts: 1,784
4
4
4
Mall's avatar
Mall
4
4
4
-->
@IlDiavolo
All the above.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mall
The holy scriptures or nominally the Bible itself teaches that Christian or Christianity for that matter is man made,man made invention.

Even the book that I guess is referred to as a "Christian " book shows in it was invented by man .

Does this mean or prove the bible was just made up or fabricated by man?

I continued to ask an individual on here has the bible been proven false?

Person avoided to answer.

I'll get your answers and feedback first .

So I take it you've never read 2 Timothy 3:16? 
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,608
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
I'm cycling there Saturday morning...92 miles.

How's it work out, Vic?