It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Challenge to Christians: Prove the Bible is True

page: 7
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellspike

There are quite alot actually but dont take my word for it check this out.


I will not take anyone else's word but your own for you made the claim. If Christ contradicted himself, show me the scripture and tell me why you think it is contradictory.

With Love,

Your Brother




posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 


Incorrect, Aristotle's Dictum requires for those supporting the Bible to prove it is correct in the face of skepticism of it.

You cannot have "the Bible is correct" as the null position.

I can also quickly disprove the Bible: The Earth revolves around the Sun, there was never a global flood, bats aren't birds, there are no trees in the mustard family, the Sun and Moon predate plant life, the species of this planet including humanity never experienced a narrowing of the gene pool as described in the Noah account, the cure for leprosy isn't as described in the Bible, Jesus didn't return to usher in the end of days within the lifetime of any of his original disciples, the ship described as 'the Ark' wouldn't have been sea worthy, there is no evidence of the Jewish enslavement in Egypt, there is no evidence of the existence of Jesus of Nazareth, slavery is abominable, women are equal to men, etc.

I can go on for quite a while longer if you'd like. Even more so if you give me a year to highlight each and every part of the Bible that is either wrong or contradictory.



You sir do not know what you speak,

Aristotle's dictum
From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The benefit of the doubt is to be given to the document itself, not assigned by the critic to himself.



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golden Boy

Originally posted by ACTS 2:38
Sorry but Aristotle's Dictum is in play here and it is your responsibility to prove it wrong.


Aristotle's dictum assumes that the document in question has already been supported with other evidence.


The evidence is that people who wrote is did so at a time when others who had witnesses it would have made claim against the writing.

And also archaeology has only proved existence of these ancient areas. Science has never disproved anything in the bible and people who read with out research make claim of the bible as untrue.


Aristotle's dictum
From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The benefit of the doubt is to be given to the document itself, not assigned by the critic to himself.



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


I said the bible was full of contradictions i also provided the evedence.



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellspike
I said the bible was full of contradictions i also provided the evedence.


You did not provide any evidence. You provided third party testimony. As that third party is not available for me to cross examine, I threw out the testimony.

Now do you or do you not have any actual evidence to provide on your own?

Scripture, and why YOU think it is contradictory will suffice.

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
I did provide evidence the link i put up had references to verses contained within the BIBLE which i have checked and found to be contradictory so when you get a chance have a look again check out the contradictions yourself (time consuming i know but it there)



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellspike
I did provide evidence the link i put up had references to verses contained within the BIBLE which i have checked and found to be contradictory so when you get a chance have a look again check out the contradictions yourself (time consuming i know but it there)


Again, I do not do third party testimony that I cannot cross examine.

Either represent yourself or get out of the game. The days of finger pointing to others when we mess up are over. You made the claim, you defend it.

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
So you admit the bible is third party testimony then?



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 

You stated

"""I can also quickly disprove the Bible: The Earth revolves around the Sun, there was never a global flood, bats aren't birds, there are no trees in the mustard family, the Sun and Moon predate plant life, the species of this planet including humanity never experienced a narrowing of the gene pool as described in the Noah account, the cure for leprosy isn't as described in the Bible, Jesus didn't return to usher in the end of days within the lifetime of any of his original disciples, the ship described as 'the Ark' wouldn't have been sea worthy, there is no evidence of the Jewish enslavement in Egypt, there is no evidence of the existence of Jesus of Nazareth, slavery is abominable, women are equal to men, etc."""

No where does the bible claim the sun revolves are the earth,

You can not prove that there was not a global flood

The bible does not claim the bat to be a bird but that they animals described would and do produce after their own kind. Species if you will. Nothing not even plants can not produce something other then its own kind, variation and adaptation are still the same kind.

You can not prove that life is older then any other bodies in the sky. Any dating method you wish to use is flawed from the start as they assume the age of the test subject and assume the conditions have never changed and the changes do not have effects upon the method.

Mustard seed is a parable and makes no claim it is a tree so you are not very educated in what you claim against.

Where is your full scale model of the boat to make this claim that it would not float???

Because the Jews defeated the Egyptians you will not find the historical evidence, but you can find the evidence of their travels back to Israel.



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellspike
So you admit the bible is third party testimony then?


No it is not third party testimony, it is the subject of the trial.

We are not disputing the source of the subject, the authorship, the authenticity. None of this was your claim. Your claim was that the teachings of Christ contained within the Bible are full of contradictions. That is what you must now prove, or revoke the claim.

Proof is simple. Show the scripture that you feel is contradictory, and tell me how it is contradictory. That is all.

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


How about all of it is questionable.... how about that statement. How about the Counsel of Nicea. How about Constantine the Great and how the books of the Holy Scriptures changed after he died.There is a conspiracy in its self. How about the Conspiracy to remove the family lineage of Mosas after he died. How about the way the Apostal Paul saw the only way he could keep the Christian Religion of the time was to interject it with Pagan Roman belief so as to make it fly with the Romans who were the culture center of the time....You gotta read other than the bible to see real truth at all which aint much really.
edit on 20-2-2011 by mikeybiznaz because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-2-2011 by mikeybiznaz because: sorry should have proof read



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


Ok here you go

Luke 23.29-32
Mark 15.32
Matthew 27.44

Contradictory accounts of the same event



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikeybiznaz
How about all of it is questionable.... how about that statement. How about the Counsel of Nicea. How about Constantine the Great and how the books of the Holy Scriptures changed after he died.There is a conspiracy in its self. How about the Conspiracy to remove the family lineage of Mosas after he died. How about the way the Apostal Paul saw the only way he could keep the Christian Religion of the time was to interject it with Pagan Roman belief so as to make it fly with the Romans who were the culture center of the time....You gotta read other than the bible to see real truth at all which aint much really.


I know the counsel of Nicea distorted Christs teachings. I know they added traditions to Christianity that did not belong. However, the teachings of Christ are intact and present in the Bible. They were left there in plain sight because they knew people would not read them if they did horrible things in the name of Christ. If they would read them, they knew they would be afraid to see the truth that differed from what they told you. You were played and Christ was made a mockery, and I will show you how his teachings will liberate mankind and usher in a new age throwing down the religions and governments which enslave us.

To show you, YOU must make the effort to see.

Now, if that was your opening statement, will you be presenting any evidence in the form of scripture and the reason why you feel it is invalid?

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


I make the effort daily with education and appication...I dont make statements to say Prove this or that especially where the bible is concerned...because it cant be proved. Reason is, men wrote it after the fact. And that my friend is the No.1 reason it cant be proved. Faith based religion is just that.Based on Faith. Now you can make statements that say "I stand on may Faith" and live an example of the life of Christ and well you sir, are Human. He was a Demagod. Big freekin difference. You can only give your life for a person, he gave his life for all of mankind.Free gift no strings that is just the way it is. Live your life as an example. Dont get caught in debates and make ridiculious statements like "the whole Bible is true and I can prove it if you give me a verse" then make a statement like ,"well yes the counsel of Nicea" and "well its the Idea of Christ and his life"....bla bla bla and on and on you rant...you need to go back over what you say and see how you flip flop with the wind. Check out your own self dude, everybody else will be what they want. read this urantia.com that will keep you busy for a while



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikeybiznaz
I make the effort daily with education and appication...I dont make statements to say Prove this or that especially where the bible is concerned...because it cant be proved. Reason is, men wrote it after the fact. And that my friend is the No.1 reason it cant be proved. Faith based religion is just that.Based on Faith. Now you can make statements that say "I stand on may Faith" and live an example of the life of Christ and well you sir, are Human. He was a Demagod. Big freekin difference. You can only give your life for a person, he gave his life for all of mankind.Free gift no strings that is just the way it is. Live your life as an example. Dont get caught in debates and make ridiculious statements like "the whole Bible is true and I can prove it if you give me a verse" then make a statement like ,"well yes the counsel of Nicea" and "well its the Idea of Christ and his life"....bla bla bla and on and on you rant...you need to go back over what you say and see how you flip flop with the wind. Check out your own self dude, everybody else will be what they want. read this urantia.com that will keep you busy for a while


I do not flip flop my friend. I said quite clearly that the teachings of Christ are true. I never said the whole Bible was true. Even Christ said that certain parts were untrue. In The Sermon on The Mount the first things he says are what parts of the Old Testament are not true.

Yes the counsel of Nicea screwed up Christs teachings. They distorted everything he said. They veiled his teachings in a tradition of worshipping him like a Sun God which lives on today. None of this has to do with Christ. His teachings were clear that we are ALL Sons and Daughters of God. If you believe he is the Son of God, then he believes YOU are a Child of God. If you see him as THE King, then he sees YOU as King. It is about freedom from the bondage of religion AND Government.

I do what I do because this is what I have been told to do by the father who sent me. I reckon your father who sent you must be testing my sincerity to HIS cause.



That wind you feel in the air, that is the wind of Freedom.

For the record, I AM MAN. No greater, no lesser than you.

With Love,

Your Brother
edit on 20-2-2011 by IAMIAM because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellspike
Luke 23.29-32
Mark 15.32
Matthew 27.44

Contradictory accounts of the same event





29“For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts that never nursed.’ 30“Then they will begin TO SAY TO THE MOUNTAINS, ‘FALL ON US,’ AND TO THE HILLS, ‘COVER US.’ 31“For if they do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?” 32Two others also, who were criminals, were being led away to be put to death with Him.





32“Let this Christ, the King of Israel, now come down from the cross, so that we may see and believe!” Those who were crucified with Him were also insulting Him.





44The robbers who had been crucified with Him were also insulting Him with the same words.


Ok my friend, here are the verse you say are contradictory. What is the contradiction in your opinion?

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 



Originally posted by ACTS 2:38
No where does the bible claim the sun revolves are the earth,


Genesis 1:17. I didn't even have to turn a page.



You can not prove that there was not a global flood


There is simply not enough water on this planet to cause a global flood. There's also the entire lack of geologic evidence, the entire lack of genetic evidence (a bottle-necked gene pool would leave easy markers to trace, we can see this by studying the Cheetah's genetics), the entire lack of tree-ring data, the general insanity of the physics behind the event, etc.



The bible does not claim the bat to be a bird but that they animals described would and do produce after their own kind. Species if you will.


Yay, an opening, a dropping of the guard. *cue maniacal laughter)



Nothing not even plants can not produce something other then its own kind, variation and adaptation are still the same kind.


Ah, but you just used the word 'species' as a substitute for kind. We've observed speciation. Thus, the Bible is wrong.



You can not prove that life is older then any other bodies in the sky.


No, the Bible claims that. I'm claiming that the bodies in the sky are older.



Any dating method you wish to use is flawed from the start as they assume the age of the test subject and assume the conditions have never changed and the changes do not have effects upon the method.


No, we know the problems. Read up on radiometric dating, it works. It's the same process that they use to run atomic clocks. Radiometric dating has its flaws but we know how to calibrate against those flaws. We don't do C14 dating on marine life, mainly because we know that marine life has an odd carbon cycle that doesn't allow for it.

Anti-science propaganda won't be tolerated in here.



Mustard seed is a parable and makes no claim it is a tree so you are not very educated in what you claim against.


*Ahem* Matthew 13:31-32, Jesus claims that a mustard will grow into a tree.
Luke 13:19, Jesus, in the account of the same story, claims that a mustard seed will grow into a tree.



Where is your full scale model of the boat to make this claim that it would not float???


I didn't say that it wouldn't float, I'm saying it wouldn't be sea worthy. And you don't have to build a full scale model to determine these things, we have nautical engineering to model them using physics. Hell, just watch the videos I embedded in this post, they explain the exact issues with the vessel described in Genesis.



Because the Jews defeated the Egyptians you will not find the historical evidence, but you can find the evidence of their travels back to Israel.


Oh, I'm not asking for historical evidence, I'm asking for archeological evidence. People don't wander about doing whatever it is they happened to be doing for 40 years without leaving any garbage behind. And yes, garbage is one of the greatest things to find in archeology, because people tend to toss it all in the same place.

Hell, there isn't even any archeological evidence to show that Canaan was conquered in the manner described in the Bible (which would be a good thing, it would mean that the Jews aren't responsible for a horrid genocidal campaign).

Now, we still have:

The species of this planet including humanity never experienced a narrowing of the gene pool as described in the Noah account, the cure for leprosy isn't as described in the Bible, Jesus didn't return to usher in the end of days within the lifetime of any of his original disciples, there is no evidence of the existence of Jesus of Nazareth, slavery is abominable, and women are equal to men.

Why didn't you address or even mention that you failed to address, those points?
edit on 20/2/11 by madnessinmysoul because: Formatting



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Mustard tree -

Definition of Mustard tree

1. Noun. Evergreen South American shrub naturalized in United States; occasionally responsible for poisoning livestock.
Exact synonyms: Nicotiana Glauca, Tree Tobacco
Generic synonyms: Tobacco, Tobacco Plant

2. Noun. Glabrous or pubescent evergreen shrub or tree of the genus Salvadora; twigs are fibrous and in some parts of the world are bound together in clusters and used as a toothbrush; shoots are used as camel fodder; plant ash provides salt.

Mustard Tree

The second definition is native to Israel. The website at the link has pictures of this large and noble tree.

Just sayin.

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by IAMIAM
 


Oh no, don't shred the mustard shrub argument.



posted on Feb, 20 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Your post of Genesis 1:17 does not make claim as you say that the earth revolves around the sun.

Sorry on that one.

And have you measured all of the water that is in the earth also?

I think not so you once again have not shown proof against the global flood through presupposition.

I used species for your benefit not mine as you would say but what does "kind" mean.




top topics



 
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join