Freethought & Rationalism Archive

TerriNPA · 02-01-2005, 01:51 PM

I guess I'm lazy, and I really hope this is in the correct forum (heh), but there have been some religious posts on another board I frequent and I haven't actually read the entire bible (sorry but it easily bores me) to find these things.

Here's a quote:

Quote:

People over the course of centuries have tried to prove the bible to be incorrect and I do not know of an instance yet were they have succeeded. Please feel free to enlighten me if I am mistaken. That still however does not prove anything since every detail of the bible has not been proven to be accurate, but again the choice is ours to make.

I'm SURE there are things that have been disproven beyond a doubt with the bible, but my brain is so frazzled right now with other shit that I can't think straight to accurately debate that statement...

Phishfood · 02-01-2005, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TerriNPA

I guess I'm lazy, and I really hope this is in the correct forum (heh), but there have been some religious posts on another board I frequent and I haven't actually read the entire bible (sorry but it easily bores me) to find these things.

Here's a quote:

I'm SURE there are things that have been disproven beyond a doubt with the bible, but my brain is so frazzled right now with other shit that I can't think straight to accurately debate that statement...

firmament above the earth that held the heavens? global flood? a mountain from which you could see all of the earth (which goes right along with "flat earth?")stationary stars? creating light and darkness before celestial bodies? answered prayer? prophesies of jesus? young earth? man, where to start...

-Pf

funinspace · 02-01-2005, 02:31 PM

A key problem when dealing with such arguments is that the theist is using the word "prove" in the extreme theoretical sense. And since these event happened 2,000+ years ago, it's pretty hard to prove a Jennie god didn't waive his wand around and do lots of fancy stuff never mentioned in the canon to keep the Flood tale et.al. afloat. On the more minor tales/contradictions, they spin fanciful what if's into the story line to keep together. One of the points I try to make is that "is all the gerrymandering that is required to keep all of the tales true, a reasonable or plausible explanation?".

Diogenes the Cynic · 02-01-2005, 02:43 PM

These are some things which are not just "unproven" as true but are demonstably, provably false.

There was no six day creation of the earth, no "Adam and Eve," no Eden no special creation of animals, no talking serpent, no forbidden fruit and no fall.

There was no worldwide flood, no Noah, No Ark, no animals in either pairs or sevens, no global destruction of humans or animals and no repopulation of the earth from the region of Ararat (or any other region).

There was no enslavement of Israelites in Egypt, no Moses, no Exodus, no wandering in the Sinai, no influx of Israelites into Canaan (they were indigenous and never left), and no conquest of Canaan by the Isrealites.

There was never a unified Kingdom of Israel.

There was never a census of the world under Augustus. There was never a census in Palestine while Herod the Great was king. The Romans did not require anyoine to his hometown to register when they did impose a census.

There was never a slaughter of innocents by Herod.

The above list does not count the multitude of things in the Bible which are simply dubious (Davidic Empire) or ridiculous (talking donkeys, miracles) or unproven (Solomon's Temple). It also does not include the many, many contradictions between different books.

The truth is, we are very hard put to find much in the Bible that we can prove did happen.

Jack the Bodiless · 02-02-2005, 02:11 AM

The falsehood of the whole Genesis creation account is the biggie. If your opponent is a creationist, of course he'll object: but he can't argue that this part of the Bible isn't generally considered to be disproven. Though he might claim that: I've seen at least one inerrantist under the delusion that "skeptics know" that no part of the Bible has been disproven.

You could also try some failed prophecies:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptics Annotated Bible

The tribe of Judah will reign "until Shiloh," but Israel's first king (Saul) was from the tribe of Benjamin (Acts 13:21), and most of the time after this prophecy there was no king at all. (Gen.49:10) God promises to bring Jacob safely back from Egypt, but Jacob dies in Egypt (Gen.47:28-29) 46:3

God says that the Israelites will destroy all of the peoples they encounter. But according to Joshua ( 15:63, 16:10, 17:12-13) and Judges (1:21, 27-36, 3:1-5) there were some people they just couldn't kill. (Ex.7:24)

"I have sworn unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations." But the Davidic line of Kings ended with Zedekiah; there were none during the Babylonian captivity, and there are none today. (Ps.89:3-4, 34-37)

This verse predicts that there shall be five cities in Egypt that speak the Canaanite language. But that language was never spoken in Egypt, and it is extinct now.(Is.19:18)

These verses predict that there will be an alliance between Egypt, Israel, and Assyria. But there has never been any such alliance, and it's unlikely that it ever will since Assyria no longer exists. (Is.19:23-24)

Ezekiel conveys God's promise that Israel will reside in their homeland safely, never again to be tormented by neighboring nations. One need only look to the newspaper for evidence that this has not been fulfilled. Israelites continued to be scattered from the area and tormented by other powers, including the Romans and Turks. In the 20th century, they were given a large portion of their homeland back, only to have the recent residents (Palestinians) revolt. After that, the surrounding Arab nations invaded Israel, though they were turned back. Israel has had nothing near a peaceful existence, nor does it appear they'll enjoy one anytime soon. (Ez.28:24-26)

Ezekiel makes another false prophecy: that Egypt would be uninhabited by humans or animals for forty years after being destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar. But there was never a time when Egypt was uninhabited. Humans and animals have lived there continuously since Ezekiel's prophecy. (Ez.29:10-13)

Ezekiel (26:14, 21, 27:36) prophesied that Tyre would be completely destroyed, never to be built again. But it wasn't destroyed and continued to exist, as shown by this verse in which Jesus visits Tyre. (Mk.7:24, 31)

Ezekiel 37:24-25 is interesting, because apologists often pretend that it was a successful prophecy of the re-emergence of Israel in 1948. It actually refers to the return from the Babylonian Captivity:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ezekiel 37:24-25

And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them. And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.

This prophecy failed, of course. The Jews were subsequently driven out by the Romans and scattered. Israel did not exist as a nation for two thousand years.

Dean Anderson · 02-02-2005, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

There was never a unified Kingdom of Israel.

Most of what I know about the Documentary Hypothesis, I got from Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible. He seems to think that although there was no historical Exodus, wandering and conquest, there was still a unified Kingdom of Israel.

Is his view considered non-mainstream amongst archaeologists and non-conservative-Christian biblical scholars? (Obviously, I would not expect conservative-Christian biblical scholars to agree with him - some of them are still putting out apologetics saying that Moses wrote the Pentateuch...)

Trigger · 02-02-2005, 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pervy

Most of what I know about the Documentary Hypothesis, I got from Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible. He seems to think that although there was no historical Exodus, wandering and conquest, there was still a unified Kingdom of Israel.

Is his view considered non-mainstream amongst archaeologists and non-conservative-Christian biblical scholars? (Obviously, I would not expect conservative-Christian biblical scholars to agree with him - some of them are still putting out apologetics saying that Moses wrote the Pentateuch...)

There is debate as to whether or not Moses actually existed.Scholars already know Job never existed.

Dean Anderson · 02-02-2005, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trigger

There is debate as to whether or not Moses actually existed.

There is? I thought there was pretty much consensus that he did not exist.

When I mentioned the unified Kingom of Israel, I was talking about the David->Josiah period, not anything as far back as Moses.

Diogenes the Cynic · 02-02-2005, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pervy

Most of what I know about the Documentary Hypothesis, I got from Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible. He seems to think that although there was no historical Exodus, wandering and conquest, there was still a unified Kingdom of Israel.

Is his view considered non-mainstream amongst archaeologists and non-conservative-Christian biblical scholars? (Obviously, I would not expect conservative-Christian biblical scholars to agree with him - some of them are still putting out apologetics saying that Moses wrote the Pentateuch...)

In The Bible Unearthed, Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman make a strong archaeological case that the southern kingdom of Judah never had any miltary or political power over the far more powerful and developed northern region until the 8th century BCE.

Quote:

The authors add to this, however, the more controversial position that in fact there was never even a united monarchy: according to their view, this was a deliberate invention serving the interests of some of the kings of Judah (spearheaded by the ambitious Josiah, whom the Bible depicts actually "discovering" the book of Deuteronomy) who dreamed of conquering the northern territory of Israel. Finally, the authors make sense of this theory by advancing their own addition that Judah was an undeveloped rural backwater throughout its history until after the downfall of Israel to the north at the hands of Assyrian conquerers. According to this view, had Israel, which was a far more developed and sophisticated civilization, survived to tell its own version of Jewish history, we would have a very different story. This theory is not entirely new, for Finkelstein has been arguing it in the peer reviewed journal Levant since 1996, and it has merit, since it is based on sound archaeological evidence and arguments. But only time will tell if the scholarly community will find it persuasive, and expand upon it or demonstrate or refute it with further evidence. As to the other material, readers are advised to pay attention when the authors point out and discuss the different sides of various continuing debates, so as not to assume too readily that this is all cut-and-dried. But apart from that caveat, the evidence and arguments are persuasive and written in terms that anyone can understand.

Adsie from the disparity in development and wealth between the southern and northern regions, they also show distinctly different cultural identities and there is a complete lack of importation of resources from the north to the south. It would make no sense for a poor region to control a rich region (something that is not evidence in the archaeology) and to never try to acquire or move any of that rich region's wealth.

The argument in Israeli archaeology right now is about whether the Biblical kingdom of David and Solomon was a small. local chiefdom or whether it was a total myth. There seems to be no archaeological support at all for the northern region being controlled by the south until post-exilic times.

Diogenes the Cynic · 02-02-2005, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trigger

There is debate as to whether or not Moses actually existed.Scholars already know Job never existed.

There is no serious scholarly contention that the Biblical Moses was a real person. There is some debate as to whether he was partially derived from a real historical figure (like the Egyptian Pharaoh, Ahmose, e.g.) but that's it. There was no Exodus, after all, so no place for a Moses.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-01-2005, 02:31 PM	#3
funinspace Contributor Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: North West usa Posts: 10,245	A key problem when dealing with such arguments is that the theist is using the word "prove" in the extreme theoretical sense. And since these event happened 2,000+ years ago, it's pretty hard to prove a Jennie god didn't waive his wand around and do lots of fancy stuff never mentioned in the canon to keep the Flood tale et.al. afloat. On the more minor tales/contradictions, they spin fanciful what if's into the story line to keep together. One of the points I try to make is that "is all the gerrymandering that is required to keep all of the tales true, a reasonable or plausible explanation?".

02-01-2005, 02:43 PM	#4
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	These are some things which are not just "unproven" as true but are demonstably, provably false. There was no six day creation of the earth, no "Adam and Eve," no Eden no special creation of animals, no talking serpent, no forbidden fruit and no fall. There was no worldwide flood, no Noah, No Ark, no animals in either pairs or sevens, no global destruction of humans or animals and no repopulation of the earth from the region of Ararat (or any other region). There was no enslavement of Israelites in Egypt, no Moses, no Exodus, no wandering in the Sinai, no influx of Israelites into Canaan (they were indigenous and never left), and no conquest of Canaan by the Isrealites. There was never a unified Kingdom of Israel. There was never a census of the world under Augustus. There was never a census in Palestine while Herod the Great was king. The Romans did not require anyoine to his hometown to register when they did impose a census. There was never a slaughter of innocents by Herod. The above list does not count the multitude of things in the Bible which are simply dubious (Davidic Empire) or ridiculous (talking donkeys, miracles) or unproven (Solomon's Temple). It also does not include the many, many contradictions between different books. The truth is, we are very hard put to find much in the Bible that we can prove did happen.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.