The Bible is the claim, not the evidence

[ThomM]

I've lately seen a rash of theists here, old and new alike, that when confronted with the question, "Do you have evidence for the existence of your god?" that proceed to quote biblical scripture as the source of their conviction. This is not a strange thing, as these particular theists called Christians more often than not perceive this text to be full of accounts that were directly-inspired by divine means, or tell the tale of historical events relating to their particular religious history. Taking such a stance is, in actuality, a non-answer to the question posed above.

The Bible is a book of divine claims, telling of a god (or gods, in some interpretations) that has yet to be proven to exist. Since evidence must be demonstrated to be true before it can be taken as fact, the Bible falls short in satisfying any demands of proof, as it can in no way be proven that the men who wrote were actually under any divine influence.

I know my request to theists to stop appealing to the Bible as evidence of a god (or gods) will fall on many deaf ears, but I feel this phenomenon has gotten a little out of hand as of late and really needed to be addressed. Thank you for taking a moment to read this, especially if you are a Christian member of this forum.

Actually - the Jewish god is not the only god named in the bible - there are many others listed as well - and not listed as being FALSE either.

---

I've lately seen a rash of theists here, old and new alike, that when confronted with the question, "Do you have evidence for the existence of your god?" that proceed to quote biblical scripture as the source of their conviction. This is not a strange thing, as these particular theists called Christians more often than not perceive this text to be full of accounts that were directly-inspired by divine means, or tell the tale of historical events relating to their particular religious history. Taking such a stance is, in actuality, a non-answer to the question posed above.

The Bible is a book of divine claims, telling of a god (or gods, in some interpretations) that has yet to be proven to exist. Since evidence must be demonstrated to be true before it can be taken as fact, the Bible falls short in satisfying any demands of proof, as it can in no way be proven that the men who wrote were actually under any divine influence.

I know my request to theists to stop appealing to the Bible as evidence of a god (or gods) will fall on many deaf ears, but I feel this phenomenon has gotten a little out of hand as of late and really needed to be addressed. Thank you for taking a moment to read this, especially if you are a Christian member of this forum.

If the bible 'claims' that if you do A, B, C and you will find 'X' the finding of 'X' (for over 2000 years) is then proof the bible is accurate.

If one were to closly follow the A, B, C, instructions and find nothing then the bible would have been discarded long before now.

Sorry - but the bible says MANY things that are not accurate - and yet the deluded have not discarded the bible - because religion is money making business.

Example - in the bible - it is said that the "devil" took the christ up to a high mountain from which he could see ALL the kingdoms of the world. That particular passage has a LOT of problems

1 - Of course - the earth is a sphere - and you actually cannot see the entire surface of the earth from any point anywhere. THe bible does NOT say that this would be a vision

2 - From any point in the Israeli desert - one could not see all the kingdoms mentioned in the bible itself - much less all of them on earth at that time.

3 - Then the question begs - where did THIS story come from? WHen the christ supposedly wandered the desert - he was supposed to be alone (Except fof the devil). IF the christ is a god - and all knowing - then he would know that he could not see all the kingdoms from one place - and would know the earth is a sphere. So he would have known the devil was wrong all along. Why would the god tell a story that is so obviously wrong - that if would be a LIE.

The devil - having existed before the earth - would also have known that as well.

SO - did Mark and Luke get an obviously false story from the christ - showing the christ was wrong - or from the devil - making the devil a source of the bible - either way - there is a problem.

So - where did Luke and Mark get that story from? Imagination?