Freethought & Rationalism Archive

diana · 01-02-2007, 10:19 PM

I thought this might be a fun exercise. (For those of you annoyed at how many threads I've been starting lately, worry not. The semester begins next week, so I'll disappear into the ether shortly.)

Given the following rules, I challenge you to find something we can't "prove" using the Bible:

1. Poetic license is allowed (and encouraged).

2. The Bible is figurative or literal as necessary.

3. Cultural context may be brought in to support your POV, but needn't be.

4. Any contradiction between our interpretation and other verses in the Bible are only apparent contradictions, and may be explained away using any means regularly employed by theists.

Go.

d

Smullyan-esque · 01-02-2007, 10:32 PM

Oh, THIS should be a hoot!

~~grabs popcorn~~

GakuseiDon · 01-03-2007, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diana

I thought this might be a fun exercise. (For those of you annoyed at how many threads I've been starting lately, worry not. The semester begins next week, so I'll disappear into the ether shortly.)

Given the following rules, I challenge you to find something we can't "prove" using the Bible:

1. Poetic license is allowed (and encouraged).

2. The Bible is figurative or literal as necessary.

3. Cultural context may be brought in to support your POV, but needn't be.

4. Any contradiction between our interpretation and other verses in the Bible are only apparent contradictions, and may be explained away using any means regularly employed by theists.

OK. How about: "Dogs shouldn't be brought into the house". Or alternatively "Dogs can be brought into the house".

Sven · 01-03-2007, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diana

I thought this might be a fun exercise. (For those of you annoyed at how many threads I've been starting lately, worry not. The semester begins next week, so I'll disappear into the ether shortly.)

Given the following rules, I challenge you to find something we can't "prove" using the Bible:

1. Poetic license is allowed (and encouraged).

2. The Bible is figurative or literal as necessary.

3. Cultural context may be brought in to support your POV, but needn't be.

4. Any contradiction between our interpretation and other verses in the Bible are only apparent contradictions, and may be explained away using any means regularly employed by theists.

Go.

I think it might be possible to prove using the bible, but have no idea how:
"Pi is not three"

(please note that I do not claim that the bible says that pi = 3)

Codec · 01-03-2007, 03:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

OK. How about: "Dogs shouldn't be brought into the house". Or alternatively "Dogs can be brought into the house".

Mark 6:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark 6

²⁷"First let the children eat all they want," he told her, "for it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."

²⁸"Yes, Lord," she replied, "but even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs."

If the dogs are under the table, they must be allowed to come into the house. That wasn't so hard.

Next: Prove that light is both a particle and a wave!

Jack the Bodiless · 01-03-2007, 05:07 AM

Quote:

3. Cultural context may be brought in to support your POV, but needn't be.

For the analogy to be complete, we should also be allowed to invent "cultural context" as needed (e.g. "the Midianite virgins in Numbers 31 could not have been sacrificed because human sacrifice was taboo": this is bullshit).

In contrast to the preceding post: dogs cannot be brought into the house. The table must have been in an open courtyard, because dogs were considered unclean in that culture (more bullshit, or rather dogshit).

douglas · 01-03-2007, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Codec

Next: Prove that light is both a particle and a wave!

What about this?

Quote:

John 1
5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

God is light. God is everything. So therefore, light is both particle and wave.

Codec · 01-03-2007, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by douglas

What about this?

God is light. God is everything. So therefore, light is both particle and wave.

Nice :notworthy: - also
Job 24:13

Quote:

13 "There are those who rebel against the light,
who do not know its ways
or stay in its paths.

Which seem to get to the heart of the debate on corpuscular v. wave theories. It probably also hints at the refraction of light by a prism too.

How about predicting that the

Exxon Valdez will go aground and "spill its load"?

douglas · 01-03-2007, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Codec

How about predicting that the

Exxon Valdez will go aground and "spill its load"?

How about...

Quote:

Isaiah 28:7
But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.

It was "strong drink" that did Cap'n Hazelwood in. He got drunk, "err'd in vision" and "stumbled" onto the reef in Prince Williams sound.

What about "Look both ways before you cross the street?"

windsofchange · 01-03-2007, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by douglas

How about...
What about "Look both ways before you cross the street?"

Maybe Psalm 91: "A thousand may fall at your side, and ten thousand at your right hand, But it shall not approach you."

How about a warning about the dangers of trans fats?

01-02-2007, 10:19 PM	#1
diana Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Colorado Springs Posts: 6,471	Prove anything using the Bible I thought this might be a fun exercise. (For those of you annoyed at how many threads I've been starting lately, worry not. The semester begins next week, so I'll disappear into the ether shortly.) Given the following rules, I challenge you to find something we can't "prove" using the Bible: 1. Poetic license is allowed (and encouraged). 2. The Bible is figurative or literal as necessary. 3. Cultural context may be brought in to support your POV, but needn't be. 4. Any contradiction between our interpretation and other verses in the Bible are only apparent contradictions, and may be explained away using any means regularly employed by theists. Go. d

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

01-02-2007, 10:32 PM	#2
Smullyan-esque Contributor Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: California Posts: 18,543	Oh, THIS should be a hoot! ~~grabs popcorn~~

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.