Jump to content

A Simple Method To Prove The Bible Is Not Inspired By A God


EdwardAbbey
 Share

Recommended Posts

You don't need science to prove the bible was only written by humans and not inspired by a Deity.

 

The only thing that is needed is a dose of common sense, logic and rational thought.

 

When you get right on down to it, you don't even have to rack the brain to come to that conclusion.

 

Even a 10 year old will come up with challeging questions for the adults who believe in the stuff written in that story book.

 

In short, the bible and the Christian religion is a fairy tale for adults.

 

Commets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Keeping this site online isn't free, so we need your support! Make a one-time donation or choose one of the recurrent patron options by clicking here.



  • Replies 156
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Amen! Truth, facts, reason, rational thought, and common sense are the enemies of belief in the bible and religious belief generally. Glory!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't need science to prove the bible was only written by humans and not inspired by a Deity.

 

The only thing that is needed is a dose of common sense, logic and rational thought.

 

When you get right on down to it, you don't even have to rack the brain to come to that conclusion.

 

Even a 10 year old will come up with challeging questions for the adults who believe in the stuff written in that story book.

 

In short, the bible and the Christian religion is a fairy tale for adults.

 

Commets?

 

 

I missed the point, what DOES disprove the Bible then? And how?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't need science to prove the bible was only written by humans and not inspired by a Deity.

 

The only thing that is needed is a dose of common sense, logic and rational thought.

 

When you get right on down to it, you don't even have to rack the brain to come to that conclusion.

 

Even a 10 year old will come up with challeging questions for the adults who believe in the stuff written in that story book.

 

In short, the bible and the Christian religion is a fairy tale for adults.

 

Commets?

 

 

I missed the point, what DOES disprove the Bible then? And how?

 

A small dose of common sense. I guess you missed my opening post?

 

along with common sense you can also add, logic, reason and objective thought to the mix.

 

Without a doubt it works every time.

 

These days even a ten year old applies more objective thinking when opening the pages of that story book then the adults who actually/literally believe that stuff is true.

 

Ever hear some of those lil ten year olds questions?

 

Pretty amazing eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does it makes sense that Adam and Eve were held accountable for being able to discern between right and wrong before they even ate the fruit the would give them the ability?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does it makes sense that Adam and Eve were held accountable for being able to discern between right and wrong before they even ate the fruit the would give them the ability?

 

It was not a matter of discernment but a matter of ignoring God's simple instruction.

 

Can you think of any other examples of failing to follow simple instruction and thus challenging a sovereign authority without the need of discernment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they still were held accountable for not being able to know that difference. They didn't understand what they were doing was wrong.

 

*edit*

 

This is the Adam and Eve story:

 

Take a baby.

 

Tell the baby the gun is dangerous.

 

Give the gun to the baby.

 

The baby plays with it and shoot you in the leg.

 

Punish the baby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they still were held accountable for not being able to know that difference. They didn't understand what they were doing was wrong.

 

*edit*

 

This is the Adam and Eve story:

 

Take a baby.

 

Tell the baby the gun is dangerous.

 

Give the gun to the baby.

 

The baby plays with it and shoot you in the leg.

 

Punish the baby.

 

 

Thats a bit patronising, Adam and Eve were created with an intellect and the instruction was very simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't need science to prove the bible was only written by humans and not inspired by a Deity.

 

The only thing that is needed is a dose of common sense, logic and rational thought.

 

When you get right on down to it, you don't even have to rack the brain to come to that conclusion.

 

Even a 10 year old will come up with challeging questions for the adults who believe in the stuff written in that story book.

 

In short, the bible and the Christian religion is a fairy tale for adults.

 

Commets?

 

 

I missed the point, what DOES disprove the Bible then? And how?

 

A small dose of common sense. I guess you missed my opening post?

 

along with common sense you can also add, logic, reason and objective thought to the mix.

 

Without a doubt it works every time.

You left out honesty.

 

Embracing honesty is what gets you over the peak of the hurdle of cognitive dissonance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're saying Adam and Eve knew that they did wrong?

 

They were told to do something and they did not do it.

 

So I would say it is safe to assume they knew what they were doing.

 

Eve's conversation with the snake is proof they were aware of their actions and its consequences.

 

Genesis 3

 

1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"

 

2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "

 

4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't need science to prove the bible was only written by humans and not inspired by a Deity.

Although I totally agree that science isn't needed (I sure didn't need any), I don't think you could actually "prove" to a Christian that the Bible wasn't inspired by a deity. In other words, as ridiculous as we think the idea of, let's say..... God being his father and his son at the same time is, for a Christian with a lot of faith it makes perfect sense that a deity and not a human would think up something like this and they believe. Why they would choose to have the faith to believe something so absurd is actually from a deity is beyond me....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats a bit patronising, Adam and Eve were created with an intellect and the instruction was very simple.
You're missing his point.

 

Adam and Eve didn't have knowledge of good and evil. Therefore, they didn't know whether following or not following any instructions would have a good or bad outcome.

 

In short, God punished them for not knowing what they didn't know yet.

 

Yeah, I know, it's screwed up. But that's what "really" happened according to the bible. :mellow:

 

 

So you're saying Adam and Eve knew that they did wrong?

 

They were told to do something and they did not do it.

 

So I would say it is safe to assume they knew what they were doing.

 

Eve's conversation with the snake is proof they were aware of their actions and its consequences.

 

Genesis 3

 

1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"

 

2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "

 

4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

 

This makes it even more screwed up. The reason being, these verses do not follow with the information given. If they didn't (yet) know good and evil they never would have even questioned the TALKING SERPENT. <--- Please, apply the Simple Method™ to those words in red.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're saying Adam and Eve knew that they did wrong?

 

They were told to do something and they did not do it.

 

So I would say it is safe to assume they knew what they were doing.

How would they know it was wrong, when the fruit would give them the ability?

 

God said some words "it is wrong", they didn't even understand yet what wrong was, or what evil was or bad or good. They thought everything was good. They didn't know what evil or bad or wrong or disobediance was. The fruit would give them that ability. God didn't punish them for doing wrong, but treated them according to them becoming aware of those things. They didn't do wrong, and didn't get punished. They got rewarded for becoming aware of good and evil. Their minds expanded, and now they were a threat to God. That's why he did what he did. They become half-gods, and he couldn't keep them around anymore. Like in a court of law, intent is a major part of the trial. If you can't show intent to harm, then you get a lesser sentence. Adam and Eve didn't understand yet. They had not lived your life or my life. They had not seen the evil of the world yet. And they fruit would open their eyes to understand this. Before that, the could not know.

 

So, now I gave you the answer (just to be nice to you). :)

 

 

Next, why is our punishment for sin or unbelief to be tormented for eternity, while Jesus' sacrifice as a payment for our sins wasn't for an eternity, but only 3 days (or more like 2.5 days)?

 

And next, if Jesus paid for all sins, why do we have to believe that he paid for all sins? Did he pay for them or not? Did he wash the sins of the world away, or did he not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God created man to work and enjoy the garden and live in a relationship with Him.

 

God gave man dominion over everything.

 

God created man with an intellect.

 

God made a clear point about something.

 

You do not need to know good & evil to understand a simple warning:

 

Gen 2:15-17 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

 

They disobeyed and broke the relationship between God and man.

 

Having said all this, (and I don't want to appear to be taking a backward step here) all this I mention about Genesis is according to the Bible.

 

I am personally of the opinion that Genesis 1-11 may be symbollic, I am agnostic about this. However, it does have some excellent things we can learn from these chapters.

 

And next, if Jesus paid for all sins, why do we have to believe that he paid for all sins? Did he pay for them or not? Did he wash the sins of the world away, or did he not?

 

He washed the sins away of everyone who chooses to repent from their sins and live in a relationship with God.

 

Why wouldn't someone who is actively rejecting God be held accountible for their sins?

 

As for eternal torment, I don't understand if this is symbolic language or not and wether hell will be destroyed as written. I haven't studied this but I am not one to judge God when I am the chief sinner myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly disproves the Bible? Certainly not logic because everything, when studied, makes perfect sense and is fairly obvious most of the time.

Does it make perfect sense for a being to be his father and his son at the same time? What about this concept is logical? :scratch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys you're so quick! :HaHa:

 

God created man with an intellect.

But not knowledge what was good and what was evil, or what was right and what was wrong.

 

God made a clear point about something.

He made a clear point about something they didn't understand, since the knowledge and understanding was in the fruit.

 

You do not need to know good & evil to understand a simple warning:

 

Gen 2:15-17 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

They didn't know what death was. "I'm goint to blark you if you squark."

 

They disobeyed and broke the relationship between God and man.

But you do get that they didn't understand what "die" was. There were no death, they had never heard it before, they didn't know what eternal death was. They didn't know what disobediance was. They didn't know what "knowledge of good and evil" was. The words "good" and "evil" were totally unknown to them, right? Or did they know what good and evil was?

 

Having said all this, (and I don't want to appear to be taking a backward step here) all this I mention about Genesis is according to the Bible.

 

I am personally of the opinion that Genesis 1-11 may be symbollic, I am agnostic about this. However, it does have some excellent things we can learn from these chapters.

Okay, you're a agnostic about the story and see it more in symbolic scripture... good. That's better. :)

 

Yes, to see the story as a symbol or allegory kind of works, and my interpretation is more of anthropological nature.

 

And next, if Jesus paid for all sins, why do we have to believe that he paid for all sins? Did he pay for them or not? Did he wash the sins of the world away, or did he not?

 

He washed the sins away of everyone who chooses to repent from their sins and live in a relationship with God.

 

Why wouldn't someone who is actively rejecting God be held accountible for their sins?

Then he didn't wash away "all" sin, but only conditionally the sin that eventually you will accept to be washed away. So my sin is not washed away until I accept Jesus. So he didn't do it at the cross, he's doing it when you ask him to.

 

And what about if I don't sin, but live a perfect and righteous life, the punishment is still there. So it's not the sin he washes away for us to avoid the death, but we get punished only for not believing in him, regardless of his washing or not. So if I don't sin, but live a perfect life, then what will God do? Still send me to hell? (And of course now you will bring up everything that is called sin, as in active sin, things that we do that are "wrong" according to some list that someone made up. But then again, sin is supposed to mean the concept that we're missing the mark and not go with God. So again, the sin we have is not what we do or not, but if we believe or not. Unbelief=Sin. Which could bring us to the next point about prayer and answer/not-answere prayers.)

 

As for eternal torment, I don't understand if this is symbolic language or not and wether hell will be destroyed as written. I haven't studied this but I am not one to judge God when I am the chief sinner myself.

So what is sin? The actions you do on a daily basis that doesn't jive with the "sin-list", or is it your separation from God?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't someone who is actively rejecting God be held accountible for their sins?
This question shows a lack of "biblical" knowledge.

 

Biblically speaking, nobody can accept God unless he chooses to make that person accept him. (or something rather strange like that)

 

I haven't studied this but I am not one to judge God when I am the chief sinner myself.
Don't judge God. Nobody is asking you to do that. Try judging your bible though. Big differenece.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you do get that they didn't understand what "die" was. There were no death, they had never heard it before, they didn't know what eternal death was. They didn't know what disobediance was. They didn't know what "knowledge of good and evil" was. The words "good" and "evil" were totally unknown to them, right? Or did they know what good and evil was?

 

And I just read that your a bit agnostic about the story and see it more in symbolic scripture... good. That's better. :)

 

Yes, to see the story as a symbol or allegory kind of works, and my interpretation is more of anthropological nature.

 

 

Spiced with a bit of speculation :P

 

 

What exactly disproves the Bible? Certainly not logic because everything, when studied, makes perfect sense and is fairly obvious most of the time.

Does it make perfect sense for a being to be his father and his son at the same time? What about this concept is logical? :scratch:

 

What is logical is that God is beyond our understanding.

 

Can you explain to your dog why you need to wear a tie to work?

 

Why wouldn't someone who is actively rejecting God be held accountible for their sins?
This question shows a lack of "biblical" knowledge.

 

Biblically speaking, nobody can accept God unless he chooses to make that person accept him. (or something rather strange like that)

 

I haven't studied this but I am not one to judge God when I am the chief sinner myself.
Don't judge God. Nobody is asking you to do that. Try judging your bible though. Big differenece.

 

 

According to Calvin and I sort of agree with him although it's not etched in concrete.

 

Romans chapters 8 and 9 are interesting if you have a spare 15 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you do get that they didn't understand what "die" was. There were no death, they had never heard it before, they didn't know what eternal death was. They didn't know what disobediance was. They didn't know what "knowledge of good and evil" was. The words "good" and "evil" were totally unknown to them, right? Or did they know what good and evil was?

 

And I just read that your a bit agnostic about the story and see it more in symbolic scripture... good. That's better. :)

 

Yes, to see the story as a symbol or allegory kind of works, and my interpretation is more of anthropological nature.

 

 

Spiced with a bit of speculation :P

A logical outcome is not speculation. When and if you ever learn the difference, then you'll know where we're coming from.

 

What exactly disproves the Bible? Certainly not logic because everything, when studied, makes perfect sense and is fairly obvious most of the time.

Does it make perfect sense for a being to be his father and his son at the same time? What about this concept is logical? :scratch:

 

What is logical is that God is beyond our understanding.

Ahh! The asphalt that paves the road of bullshit!

 

Can you explain to your dog why you need to wear a tie to work?
Don't forget now, we're not Christians here. We don't usually enjoy putting ourselves on the same level as dogs.

 

According to Calvin and I sort of agree with him although it's not etched in concrete.

 

Romans chapters 8 and 9 are interesting if you have a spare 15 minutes.

 

:scratch:

 

Danny? :scratch:

 

It's you, isn't it? :Hmm:

 

:scratch:

 

Does one of the mods want to do an IP check here?

I'm thinkin' this guy is Daniel10_12.

 

Of course, I could be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you do get that they didn't understand what "die" was. There were no death, they had never heard it before, they didn't know what eternal death was. They didn't know what disobediance was. They didn't know what "knowledge of good and evil" was. The words "good" and "evil" were totally unknown to them, right? Or did they know what good and evil was?

 

And I just read that your a bit agnostic about the story and see it more in symbolic scripture... good. That's better. :)

 

Yes, to see the story as a symbol or allegory kind of works, and my interpretation is more of anthropological nature.

 

 

Spiced with a bit of speculation :P

Where's the speculation? Please elaborate.

 

According to Calvin and I sort of agree with him although it's not etched in concrete.

 

Romans chapters 8 and 9 are interesting if you have a spare 15 minutes.

Ouch. Calvin. Don't tell me you're following Calvinism?

 

With Calvin there's no hope for us anyway, since we are predestined to go to Hell. So why bother? And besides, you can't know if you one day will wake up and you've lost your faith, just because God's plan was such from the beginning and he already had you planned to die and go to Hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is logical is that God is beyond our understanding.

 

Can you explain to your dog why you need to wear a tie to work?

Why is this logical? So it would be illogical to you if we understood god?

 

BTW, my dog can't have discussions with humans so that would be silly. But supposedly humans have discussions with "god" all the time. So that's not a very good analogy....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.