Can You Technically Disprove the God of the Bible?

[Nope]

Nothing can be both invisible and pink,

Prove it.

It's invisible.  It could be pink or blue or magenta.  

Or it could be a beautiful mystery that only those who believe in the pink,invisible unicorn-may she blessed us with her rainbow, margarita sipping wonder- can understand.

[Hatshepsut]

One pink unicorn which has become invisible to us is how different ancient societies were from ours. They thought in a fundamentally different way than we do. Modern standards for evaluating documentary evidence simply did not exist in the Hellenistic world. And no, even were a miracle-worker walking about we shouldn't expect too much extant documentation about it. Few people read or wrote. Much of what was written has perished by now.

As far as I know, the doctrine of biblical inerrancy is a product of the Reformation, particularly John Calvin, and was not original to the New Testament despite quotations of 2 Tim. 3.16. The word "reproof" has more to do with mothers scolding their kids than with formal academic proof. "Inspired" doesn't mean "inerrant." The notion of infallibility in our modern absolute sense did not exist then, so that a thing was considered "true" if the person reporting it was "truthful," that is, not intentionally lying.

So what we have on both sides of a Christian/atheist bible debate are two people who have been raised amid a torrent of written words in a culture of long childhood education and science, anachronistically projecting their views and standards back onto the ancient world, to determine whether a text should be considered "true" or not. A silly endeavor, doomed to failure from the beginning.

[Razzle]

I'm not sure if it was me or not, but it's possible I accidentally rated this thread 1 star when on my phone earlier, sorry.

[Pyrrho]

I'm not sure if it was me or not, but it's possible I accidentally rated this thread 1 star when on my phone earlier, sorry.

Don't worry about it.  It is all a part of God's divine plan.

[Spooky]

Yes.


Moving on...

[Lek]

Psalm 19:7 7The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
Proverbs 30:5-65 “Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. 6 Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.


I found about 6 more or so that are very similar. Do you not agree the bible is the word of god? Is not every word flawless?

If I want to make a point or teach a truth and I create a story which achieves that objective perfectly, then my words are flawless. The words of the bible teach the truth that God wants to impart to us through our reading of the text.

---

Where does the bible claim that every word in it is true?

The following is an excerpt from your fairy tale book:

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,"  -2 Timothy 3:16

Most theists I have spoken to accept 2 Timothy 3:16 as proof that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God.  The text indicates that all Scripture is inspired by God and useful for teaching.  They say that every writing in the Bible is a revelation from God that can be trusted as factually true.  Clearly, if the Bible is given by revelation of the God of truth, then it can be trusted at every point as an accurate depiction.  The problem with answering the question this way is that it presupposes that the verse itself is truthful—which is the very claim at issue.

When I ask the simple question, "How do we know that that verse is true?"  I am always answered with: “Well it’s in the Bible." But how do we know the Bible is true? “2 Timothy 3:16 assures us that it is.”  This is a vicious circular argument. It must first arbitrarily assume the very thing it is trying to prove.  Circular reasoning of this type is not useful in a debate because it does not prove anything beyond what it merely assumes.  After all, this type of argument would be equally valid for any other book that claims to be inspired by a god or gods.  How do we know that book X is inspired by God? “Because it says it is.” But how do we know that what it’s saying is true? “Well, God wouldn’t lie!”

The verse is correct. It is inspired and profitable for those things. It's not inspired for scientific accuracy. It's inspired to be useful for the purpose God intended it for. The story of "the three little pigs" is not historically or scientifically correct, but it wasn't written for that reason. It was written to teach a lesson about life and that's what we read it for. God inspired the bible to lead us to Christ and that's what it's profitable for.

[Simon Moon]

If I want to make a point or teach a truth and I create a story which achieves that objective perfectly, then my words are flawless.  The words of the bible teach the truth that God wants to impart to us through our reading of the text.

Then why would such a god use such a poor mechanism to communicate such a message?

Texts, that contain metaphor, parable, myth, along with this 'truth' you say it contains, with no method to discern the difference. For every verse that one Christian claims is parable, other Christians will claim it is literal.

He does this in ancient languages, that he should know would die out and be open to broad interpretation, which only server to muddle his message further. Texts that were also open to edits, additions, copy errors, mistranslated, etc and not even written down for decades or longer. Not to mention internal and external contradictions. 

Couldn't a god come up with a much better method to transmit his message in order to assure it is communicated with 100% confidence that it is being interpreted correctly and is in the original form?

[paulpablo]

We can look at things from the bible starting at the beginning: There are two ludicrous, contradicting biblical creation accounts. About 6,000-10,000 years ago, the bible claims Adam and Eve were the first humans on this planet. That differs from scientific fact, that humans are at least 150,000 years old.. Need I go farther?

Also, just straightforward reasoning such as: Where are all the firsthand eyewitness written testimony of jesus's miracles he performed during his life? You would think if the only begotten son of god came to earth and performed miracles, someone would have written about it. Even if there were thousands of written statements, that shouldn't be good evidence to anyone anyway, but you would think at least that much would exist.

The bible disproves itself, that part is obvious. Would you go as far to say as the god of the bible can be disproved using the bible and/or logic? Feel free to quote more infallible passages.

There's one main complication that I can see relating to disproving the bible. I don't think anyone really knows what the bible says, hasn't it been translated and re translated, copied and re copied.

[Thumpalumpacus]

One can certainly disprove the Christian conception of god, logically. For instance, a perfect being has perfect mercy, obviously.

Yet the claim of perfect mercy is given the lie by the dogma of Hell.

There are many internal contradictions there which demonstrate that the Christian understanding of their god is uselessly flawed and cannot be as described.

[Darkstar]

One can certainly disprove the Christian conception of god, logically. For instance, a perfect being has perfect mercy, obviously.

Alternatively, if one was so inclined, they could say that a perfect being has perfect vengeance. Really, a lot of people probably just make up whatever they want to believe is true.

No one knows the mind of god... except when he agrees with everything they say. Which is always.