Johnny Skeptic

That is false. There are lots of Bible claims that skeptic Bible scholars accept, as well as Muslim and Hindu scholars. For instance, skeptic, Muslim, and Hindu scholars believe that King Nebuchadnezzar was a real person.

Skeptic scholars do not accept any supernatural claims that the Bible makes, or any supernatural claims that any other religious book makes.

It is quite natural for people to record secular events that happen where they live. You most certainly would not expect for them to record secular events that happened where they did not live.

If the God of the Bible exists, he would not have any trouble at all showing up, tangibly, in person, and proving to everyone's satisfaction that he had abilities that no human had.

If Jesus had never left the earth, and had performed miracles all over the world though today, the vast majority of the people in the world would believe that he exists, but many people would question whether or not he was the only begotten Son of God. I do not care what the true identity of any being is, only how he treats people. If President Bush is an alien so what? The only thing that makes difference is how he treats people.

mountainman

Especially in outback Australia in summer.
See for example, the Acts of John:

.... Sometimes when I meant to touch him [Jesus], I met with a material and solid body; but at other times when I felt him, his substance was immaterial and incorporeal, as if it did not exist at all ... And I often wished, as I walked with him, to see his footprint, whether it appeared on the ground (for I saw him as it were raised up from the earth), and I never saw it. (§ 93)

Best wishes,



Pete Brown

aa5874

Surely you know that statement can be false and mis-leading?

The correct statement is All things considered non-existent, have no evidence.

Minimalist

Actually, the way to say it is

"Absence of evidence is not proof of absence....but it sure as hell is "evidence."

reniaa

But it still weakens your arguements if the only so-called 'evidence' you guys can produce is lack of evidence and nothing actually concrete.

Some of the offerings on here are even out of date now as prove of king david has been found now archaeology wise...

http://www.biblehistory.net/newsletter/king_david.htm

And that has been a problem for centuries you guys aren't the first to use evidence of lack as a reason to doubt the bible but previous ones were embarassed when it was found, so then they go onto something else that hasn't been found yet.

heres an example of how it's starts

'there is no jericho, therefore no joshua, therefore no bible!'

oops jericho found...

'ok maybe there is a jericho but no evidence of it falling down as described in bible, so no bible'

oops evidence that it did fall down with intact walls found as described..

'ok but it's still gonna be out on timing coz we got an event 1000's of years ago but we are so accurate that we can say you guys are 100 years out so no bible'

thats were the arguements are at atm on jericho and pretty much any other arguement is similar from the bible.

you can get it right down to the actual people mentioned as existing but they still argue that it doesn't mean the event happened.

It doesn't matter what you say it's always evidence of lack brought up because that all skeptics are left with!

aa5874

Again, in this case, the correct statement is The proof for an entity considered not to exist is no evidence.

Johnny Skeptic

On the contrary, if the God of the Bible exists, he could easily have convinced everyone that he can predict the future thousands of years ago. No God could possibly have any trouble convincing people to believe that he exists. Otherwise, he would not be a God.

Gullwind

How about the smooth, unbroken line of pottery found in Canaan throughout the time when the population was supposedly being wiped out to the last man, woman and child by the Israelites? Surely the nearly complete elimination and replacement of the native population by a foreign group would cause a shift in the types of pottery found. One could even predict that the new pottery would have strong Egyptian influences. Unfortunately, that's not what we find.

How's that for positive evidence that the conquest of Canaan didn't happen?

Wow, a stone with a mention of a major figure in Israel. Does that mean if I find a stone in Greece that mentions Hercules then all of the myths about him are true?

Sorry, not impressed.

Name one scholar who ever doubted Jericho existed. I'll bet you can't. It's hard to doubt the existence of a place that's been almost continuously inhabited for 8,000 years.

It was never lost.

It fell down several times. So have many other cities.

Which was found to be incorrect by later excavations.

Hard to argue with math, isn't it?

Spider-man comics mention real-life people. Does that mean Spider-man is real?

Not all (see above), but it works pretty well, especially when the bible makes claims that can be tested.

aa5874

Lack of evidence augments the case for non existence and erodes the case for existence.

mountainman

Or, either conversely or in addition, positive evidence indicating fraud at a specific epoch between then and now. Dont forget this option. It's only got to explain the facts. The emotional baggage will reattach itself elsewhere just as the sun rises and sets.

Best wishes,



Pete Brown