The Living Bible is a History Book

Whatever the opposite of "preaching to the choir" is - you're all doing it... The video above shows Joe Rogan debating with a guy about Noah's ark back stage, he destroys the guy with logic but the guy just won't hear him.

reply to post by DeadSeraph

Call "us" anything you like, but I usually have heard the name atheist or agnostic. Again, if I was off the direction of the thread, I apologize. I was talking about refuting the Bible as it pertains to be taken as a history book, as the thread suggest. The link was not intended to be emotional, but cites exact facts from the bibles. Or maybe the link just takes it out of context and misinterprets. Since that is what the bible is, an interpretation.

This thread is a joke. The only defense you guys have is by saying to stay on topic. You have shown zero proof ss your claims.

Mods should have either closed the thread or moved it to HOAX or skunk works the moment you posted the pic of the rock that Moses supposedly split in two with his staff.

What an absolute joke.

Congratulations. You succeeded in trolling the open minded clear headed individuals out of a debate because of idiotic responses and links/videos that still provide NO PROOF OF THE BIBLE BEING ACTUAL HISTORY!

reply to post by olliemc84


It's called "faith" for a reason. Otherwise, they'd call it fact. Actually, they still do...but we know better.

Originally posted by olliemc84
You have NO PROOF OF THE BIBLE BEING ACTUAL HISTORY!

You've already SEEN proof.

The REAL question is WHY are you asking for more?

You've ignored the proof that you've already been given, and you're asking for MORE?

You don't need proof of God's existence, all you need is faith, and you have it.

With faith you don’t need proof, but with proof you don’t need faith.

Originally posted by Murgatroid

Originally posted by olliemc84
You have NO PROOF OF THE BIBLE BEING ACTUAL HISTORY!

You've already SEEN proof.

The REAL question is WHY are you asking for more?

You've ignored the proof that you've already been given, and you're asking for MORE?

You don't need proof of God's existence, all you need is faith, and you have it.

With faith you don’t need proof, but with proof you don’t need faith.

Still doesn't change the FACT that the bible is DEMONSTRABLY wrong in many many cases

You might not like that...hell, you might ignore it on purpose to protect your blind belief...but it doesn't change the fact your belief is based on a book that's claimed to be 100% truthful when that's CLEARLY not the case.

reply to post by Murgatroid

You don't need proof of God's existence, all you need is faith, and you have it.

This is all we needed to read from you. If you don't care to provide or produce empirical evidence substantiating your claim, then your argument is moot.

A lot of the Bible may be proven to be possible, but you can never prove those conversations actually happened. You can never prove a single word was actually spoken. All you have is third-generation hearsay that's been re-translated and interpreted by power-hungry sharks looking to rule the next empire. As I said before, you don't even know that the stories weren't rewritten and the originals burned along with their garbage. You can't prove it did or didn't happen, so it's moot. All you have is faith. You want us to risk the world on a gamble of faith.

I don't know about the rest of ATS...but in all honesty, that just isn't good enough for me.

No it is not. It's a book of myth.

For example, it states that Jews were the slaves of ancient Egypt. Nothing could be further from the truth.

To date there has been absolutely no records ever found of Egypt ever having the thousands of slaves that that Moses freed. Here's but one small example:



There really is no proof that there were ever slaves in Egypt. But the bible claims so.

If the bible was an accurate book of history, why doesn't it reflect the facts as found by science and confirm scientific principles? That's one thing that would impress me, is that, for one example, that it claimed that there were no slaves in Egypt and they were all volunteers who worked on the pyramids and other structures.

Another great example is the flood. There is no scientific proof to support a world wide flood ever happened. And if it did, Noah would not have survived because there are many many problems with the story.

So no, I really can't accept the Bible as a book of accurate history.

However, what I can accept is that the stories are myths meant to illustrate the principles of the Bible. And I see nothing wrong with that. Stories are a great vehicle to illustrate concepts, and is done even in today. Star Trek is one great example of how stories can be used to illustrate the problems of a certain political situation and many of the stories are analogous to what's happening in today's world.

Just my .02c

Originally posted by olliemc84
This thread is a joke. The only defense you guys have is by saying to stay on topic. You have shown zero proof ss your claims.

Mods should have either closed the thread or moved it to HOAX or skunk works the moment you posted the pic of the rock that Moses supposedly split in two with his staff.

What an absolute joke.

Congratulations. You succeeded in trolling the open minded clear headed individuals out of a debate because of idiotic responses and links/videos that still provide NO PROOF OF THE BIBLE BEING ACTUAL HISTORY!

What's a joke is that you and your buddies are allowed to continually troll this thread, unchecked. Give me a freaking break. Your calling ME a troll? Look at what you and your little cronies just finished spewing, and yet I'm the troll?

None of you are interested in having an honest conversation on the subject or looking at the EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE you so desperately require that has been provided for you. There is a term for that sort of behavior. It's "willful ignorance".

reply to post by DeadSeraph

Been there done that. As a terrible Christian with a God given love of beer, I have done it all too often. Have some coffee in the morning, take care of the day's routine, and come back to it. If you mean what you say, apologies will be forthcoming

Agreed ! My humble apologies to all members. And I may as well post this one more time with it.

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
There really is no proof that there were ever slaves in Egypt. But the bible claims so.

History is a LIE, you ARE deceived.

The truth is ALWAYS covered-up.

You might want to remember that fact...

We've been lied to since the beginning of TIME about EVERYTHING that matters!

Billions of people on planet earth are living in TOTAL ignorance because of LIES.

Want answers? STOP believing the lies you have been listening to...

“the biggest cover-up in the history of mankind is the history of mankind itself”

"It was also illegal to record any history in Egypt that made the Pharaoh look bad. That is why they did not record the God of the slaves whooping their butts. If any scribe did that, he probably would have been killed. As an Atheist friend of mine who loved Egypt told me, Egyptian history was basically propaganda." Source

“There are two histories: official history, lying, and then secret history, where you find the real causes of events.” ~ Honoré de Balzac

"Human beings tend to be unthinking conformists and can't imagine that society has been thoroughly corrupted." Link

reply to post by Murgatroid


Your first and last quote are basically nonsense because just because conspiracies exist doesn't mean there's one here

And your source is as always complete biased crap...for crying out loud, read the "about" page (LINK).

The Youtube channel of that clown is even funnier

And that's what you consider a "credible source"? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

As for the quote in the middle:

It was also illegal to record any history in Egypt that made the Pharaoh look bad. That is why they did not record the God of the slaves whooping their butts. If any scribe did that, he probably would have been killed. As an Atheist friend of mine who loved Egypt told me, Egyptian history was basically propaganda.

Oh, an "atheist friend" of his said it...must be true.

Objective (!!) evidence matters, stop buying into clownish uneducated nonsense like that greenslug fellow

If the bible and Christianity is so irrelevant and just a bunch of fairy tales, why are there such emotional reaction from non belivers when presented with biblical evidence?

When I see a thread heading that says proof UFO exist, I don't go charging in there to call them all nuts and brainwashed into believing in aliens. I could but I honestly don't have anything invested in that argument.

So what I'm trying to say is that those who bark the loudest here have something invested in this argument, either there is past negative experience with the church and are lashing out in there bitterness, or have just blindly joined the hate Christians band wagon and posting ruthless comments, just like road rage to makes them feel better about themselves.

As far as blind faith. Are those who oppose the bible and Christianity are they blindly believing in the anti Christian agenda? Like the conservative who promot the their agenda with talk radio and their talking points. Conservative only appear more ignorant to the opposition due to the crap talking points spread by these entertainers. No one really wants to understand the other they just want to react, armed with misguided talking points. There is no learning no solutions no compromise. Only I'm right and you wrong.

Forgive me for generalizing believers and non believers I know it's more dynamic than that but Im not sure how to communicate all that. every one has there own stories about faith and being rejected. A forum like this is not a good way to change minds. The best way is through relationship, sitting down and having a face to face. The anonymous nature of the Internet makes it easy to react to the words and not consider the human behind them and their story.

I would encourage Chritians to read Proverbs 12 to be encouraged and inspired to communicate truth.

This whole debate has NOTHING TO DO WITH FACTS ANYMORE. Becoming a Christian doesn't work that way. It's not based on facts. It's just based on if God's chooses you to be one of his people or not. There's many verses that support this. And if not then you'll never see threw this strange spiritual vale. Your pride will always hold you back from wanting to learn or understand it. I don't see any minds changing here what so ever. SUCH A POINTLESS DEBATE.

reply to post by Observationalist

If the bible and Christianity is so irrelevant and just a bunch of fairy tales, why are there such emotional reaction from non belivers when presented with biblical evidence?

What you call "biblical evidence" isn't objective evidence...that's the whole point. So if you want to believe it anyway, fine...no one's stopping you. But if you attack facts it becomes a bit silly and you can't be surprised that people will speak out against that. If they didn't, this thread would basically be one giant preaching cycle jerk without any real debate.

reply to post by r2d246

It's just based on if God's choosen you to be one of his people or not

I think it's actually based on whether you choose to believe. It's not a matter of recognizing the truth, so much as accepting it as YOUR truth.

Everyone who believes, says they have been chosen by "God". So what we have on one side are the 'chosen', and on the other side, the 'damned'. What's the difference between the two? The 'chosen' condemn the 'damned' for not believing, and the 'damned' condemn the 'chosen' for being so stupid in the first place.

That's the conflict. Science and spirit. Those of spirit use the immaterial nature of spirit as an excuse to rewrite it however they want, and those of science use the material nature of their art to say, "this is all there is."

We are so desperate for answers, we're willing to extrapolate and then choose the version we're most comfortable with, despite the fact that our understanding is too limited to come anywhere close to being right.

In short, it IS pointless. No side is going to admit defeat. No side is going to give ground. Even if we were to suddenly, miraculously, find the "answer", I still doubt that everyone would accept it.

...Can't we all just get along? No matter where we're from, where we're going, what we're doing, or what we want, we're all in this together. If we can't get along together, we'll die together.

That's the bottom line.

reply to post by Murgatroid

Actually...the Egyptian Army did not all die by drowning in this event. The Egyptian Civilization was most confined to a Narrow strip that bordered the Nile River and it is logical to assume that they were all capable of swimming. The Egyptian Army was just SWAMPED in the rising Tide of this relatively shallow Marsh Land with much Vegetation...ie...REEDS! This is why it was called the Reed Sea...but not in ENGLISH. The Mistranslation occurred when a person who spoke both English and One of the Ancient Languages was assumed to have said the word RED as this person was indeed saying REED as the Ancient Text was translated from one of many texts taken from even OLDER Forms of Stone Carved Text.

In the Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphics the Hebrews were called...THE EVIL ONES...as from the Egyptian Hieroglyphics the Hebrews were said to have been brought into Egypt as Mercenaries. The Hebrews breaded in great numbers and the Egyptians grew afraid that they would take over as they were HIRED as Warrior Conscripts for use in Military Campaigns. The Killing of Hebrew First Born was a Order by Pharaoh RAMESES .

The Bible is a collection of Stories that were Translated from MANY TEXTS in various Languages. The Rosetta Stone is a stone with writing on it in two languages (Egyptian and Greek), using three scripts (hieroglyphic, demotic and Greek). The Rosetta Stone is written in three scripts because when it was written, there were three scripts being used in Egypt. The first was hieroglyphic which was the script used for important or religious documents. The second was demotic which was the common script of Egypt. The third was Greek which was the language of the rulers of Egypt at that time.The Rosetta Stone was written in all three scripts so that the priests, government officials and rulers of Egypt could read what it said

Read more: wiki.answers.com...
www.pbs.org... THIS SITE PUTS IT ALL IN PERSPECTIVE! An English Language Version of the Bible came from MANY TRANSLATIONS over MANY YEARS. This is why the only way to really see what the Multitude of Original as well as Duplications of the Original Texts which were in Various Languages...REAL MEANING as well as the REAL STORIES...is to Re-Translate the Bible AGAIN and this has been done only to find a MULTITUDE OF TRANSLATION ERRORS. Thus it is impossible to state that the Current Bible...and KING JAMES VERSION of...is accurate HISTORICAL DATA...as the various Christian Sect Leaderships have ALL ACKNOWLEDGED there are MANY...MANY INACCURACIES due to MISTRANSLATIONS in the current version of both King James as well as International Bible Changes. Split Infinity

reply to post by Observationalist

When I see a thread heading that says proof UFO exist, I don't go charging in there to call them all nuts and brainwashed into believing in aliens. I could but I honestly don't have anything invested in that argument.

The problem here is when those ufo believers try to assert them as fact. Worse when they try to have laws passed.

You can be sure to get all emotional about it.

As to the Bible being historical, well a lot of it has been proven to be historical. Read it as you would a Korean book or Bhagavad Gita or any those "holy" books. After all they're historical.

Actually UFOs, aliens, ancient astronauts, etc make more sense than those religious nonsense that are spelled out in them.

Do you agree that those India books are history books? Yes or no?

So, we have come to a point where this thread has turned into so many others just like it. But some are calling the atheist "trolls", and another saying "have faith"?! Then the atheist post specific examples with links and cite different authors and scientist. So I please ask, if you want to call the bible a history book, or call people trolls and "have faith" maybe your argument might have some merit if you can start quoting and citing examples, like some of us did. Name calling would be emotional wouldn't it, and a couple of you have already blamed me for that, to turn around and do it yourself. So I ask, If you are a believer, great, but start using some facts to back up claims that the bible is a history book. Name calling and requiring faith just won't do. Hopefully we can step away from the circle and get some discussions going!

reply to post by Murgatroid


So if all history is a lie then why would you believe the people who say it's a lie as well?

If it's all a lie then nobody's to be believed and there's no real history.

So I don't really buy that it's all a lie or a cover. Maybe some of it is, such as when dealing with giants, but not all history.