Why the bible ISN'T evidence.

[Socratic Meth Head]

[drfuzzy]

You do know that there are over 600 documented contradictory passages, right?  Listing all of them here would take some time.  

[Socratic Meth Head]

You do know that there are over 600 documented contradictory passages, right?  Listing all of them here would take some time.  

I am aware of this, I only listed three for the time being.

[Cecelia]

The Bible isn't evidence because nobody knows who wrote it, most of their claims aren't backed up by corroborating evidence, and it requires personal revelation to believe the bullshit. Personal Revelation is just a fancy term for 'confirmation bias'

[vorlon13]

and an eternal and unchanging 'God' has inspired, just in the christer orbit alone, 78,000 sects

Even 2 would call that particular 'God' theory into question . . .


Seems like the christers have done all the heavy lifting for us, bless their little hearts.

[Jackie]

The Quran nor Bhagavad Gita, or Vedas, nor Torah or Talmud nor Buddha nor Book of Mormon, ect ect ect are evidence for anything, besides a history of humans making up those claims and others blindly swallowing them.

Humans make up gods and religions, nothing more.

[Mister Agenda]

It isn't evidence, because it's actually the claim, isn't it?

[Minimalist]

If you look at the intellectual level of the morons who do believe it that gives you a window into its historical reliability, too.

Stupid people believe stupid shit.  That explains the bible's endurance.

[robvalue]

Even if it was evidence, it would be one more reason for me to steer clear of the whole religion. Trying to convince me they're worshipping a real evil fucker rather than an imaginary one doesn't do them any favours.

Of course, it's not evidence of anything except that people could write some stuff down. It offers some interesting insights about what society might have been like back then.

[KevinM1]

It isn't evidence, because it's actually the claim, isn't it?

*ding ding ding* We have a winner!

GD, the bible is the claim.  It's a series of assertions - god did this, is like that, etc.  There's no corroborating evidence to suggest those assertions have merit.  In fact, like you say, the assertions themselves fall flat on their face (funny how the almighty needed a day to rest, and all that).

And that's why it's always so funny to see theists of all stripes revert to various cherry picked verses in order to defend their point.  They try to bolster their assertion with the same assertion.  It doesn't work like that.  It's like me trying to convince the world at large that Wolverine is a real person who's also a superhero, and whenever anyone doubts me I simply refer to a particular issue of his comic book series.  Repeating references to the source material doesn't lend it validity.