The Bible is the claim, not the evidence

[Minimalist]

Sorry Minimalist I was refering to the what was in quotation marks at the top of what you wrote not to the entire passage. I thought the following passage was your commentary on the original quote.

So now that we've cleared that up, do you get it?

[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?

[Bad Writer]

I hear you.

You're not just saying that to get brownie points, are you?

And I never use the Bible as an authority if it's not mutually considered so; however, if when debating an atheist and scripture is used to bolster an atheist's claim, I will call them out on that.

In what way is atheist X using the Bible? If he's using it to wipe his ass, and you throw more passages at him, he's just going to use those new verses to collect the dingleberries.

Okay, all kidding aside, if there's a debate going on about how a particular verse or passage, by all means, unload with other supporting passages or counter argumentative passages. But at that point you have to admit that the argument isn't about proving god's existence, but about who's dick is bigger when quoting scripture. Am I right?

...I will consider the box to be open and the Bible used as evidence as it has been relented as an authority in some sense.

In some sense, but not the sense that's related to the OP. I feel you've been meaning to get that burden off your shoulder, and now that it's off, we can continue with the issue at hand here.

I don't care one wit if you use the Bible when arguing Bible claims. When arguing something that involves presuppositions, then we have a problem.

The belief in God is based on faith and is metaphysical which is in direct contention with empirical evidence and physical evidence; however, on the flip side, He cannot also be disproved under the same set of rules.

You're not related to our new, cool Xtian here, JacobSmooth, are you, because most theists (that I know) won't admit something like this. You're absolutely right in saying this, and I appreciate it, as I'm sure many of the atheists here do. We're not out to disprove god claims because that's not our burden to bear. I hope you tell your friends exactly that when they speak out of turn regarding what they think atheists are out to do.

[Chas]

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.

So, you have discarded it?

[Minimalist]

Why would the god tell a story that is so obviously wrong - that if would be a LIE.

Because the guy playing the role of god in the story did not know shit from shinola about geography...just like everyone else alive at the time?

[Michael Schubert]

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.

It's called the God Virus. It disables the critical thinking skills. It's also a book by Darrell Ray, and I highly recommend it.

[Bad Writer]

Why would the god tell a story that is so obviously wrong - that if would be a LIE.

Because the guy playing the role of god in the story did not know shit from shinola about geography...just like everyone else alive at the time?

Shinola? I had to look that one up. Shoe polish, eh?

[Minimalist]

I remember reel-to-reel tape recorders and black and white tvs, too!

[Tonus]

I remember reel-to-reel tape recorders and black and white tvs, too!

We grew up poor, so I remember B&W TV. We had a 5" BW TV with the little tubes that would glow bright orange and put out more heat than the Sun.

Got to mess with a reel-to-rell tape recorder once or twice, but we'd moved on to new-fangled shit like cassette tapes by then.

[Bad Writer]

The furthest back for me is trying to manually track a VCR. Every video tape was messed up to some extent or other, and I was the one in my family to fix the white lines.