Can the Bible be proved wrong?

by The Quiet One 158 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Just because the WHOLE of the bible isn't to be take literally and concretely, doesn't mean NONE of it is nor doe sit mean it has NO value.

  Lots of great books are not taken AT ALL literally or concretely and they still have great value. If the Bible has to be separated into true parts and embellished and/or allegorical parts then who is qualified to determine which parts are which? And upon what bases are those determinations made?

  The Bible is still a good book. It just isn't THE "good book" based on the fact that so much of it is demonstrably WRONG.

  That is the type of thinking that drives people to the two extremes of the spectrum - Fundamentalisim and Atheisim.

  I would assert that no thinking at all is what drives people to Fundamentalism, but I get your point. But it returns us to the issue: if much of the Bible is factually incorrect, how do we know whether other parts are or are not correct?
• 

  trevor

  PSacramento

  You guys really need to re-think your "either / or" attitude that you had as Jw's.

  Certainty is not a necessarily a hangover from being a JW but an essential survival tool. You have criticized an all or nothing attitude in non-Christians a number of times over the months but when it come to belief in a living Jesus you yourself have an absolute certainty. There is no grey area in your mind or doubt. No room for the Thomas syndrome.

  That most duplicitous of books the Bible warns its readers not to lean on their own understanding but to obey what is written. Once everything in the Bible become optional, there is nothing left to lean on except guesswork.
• 

  keyser soze

  The real question is, what would qualify as proof to someone intent on believing in its authenticity? Sure, you can 'prove' with science that certain events in the bible are an impossibility. But what does it mean to someone who attributes a supernatural cause to these events?
• 

  The Quiet One

  Keyser: If there are indisputable internal contradictions that can't be excused, I guess. Science becomes irrevelant to someone who believes in a God that can change physical laws. This subject seems to have got some people thinking, at least. Can't believe the number of posts, I thought it was a simple question at first. Keep it up :)
• 

  jaguarbass

  I think there is lots of evidence that the bible can be proved wrong.

  Having said that, the internet is full of evidence arguing there was a world wide flood.

  The first civilization in history, Sumer, speaks of a world wide flood, and that is probably where the bible got its

  flood story from.

  http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYoung/scientific_evidence_for_a_worldwide_flood.htm
• 

  The Quiet One

  Jaguarbass: That's an interesting link, especially as it mentions that Jesus himself referred to a global flood as a REAL event. Isn't it kind of hard to dismiss the global flood as merely a tale when someone you believe in talked about it in that way?
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  To steal Penn and Teller's "The Bible is Bulls%t" (Youtube it),

  Elvis died in 1977. Most people in the U.S.A. in his lifetime were/are literate. There are photos of Elvis in the morgue and in the coffin and his bad habits of eating and drug using were well known, yet many people believe he is (or was for a long time) still alive, that he really did not die. It only took some short number of years for that to happen. There are many first-hand accounts of his life and death. Alas, some of the books by people who knew Elvis wind up as conflicting stories. Now if that can happen in the 20th century....

  ....Jesus was supposed to have lived in a time when people around the area were illiterate, there are no photos and no first-hand accounts. (If you insist John wrote a first hand account, I can allow it, but he waited decades to do it.)

  If people can come up with stories about Elvis despite the evidence, and Christians will defend the Jesus story with their dying breath, well then...
  ...good day to you. No point in trying to shake your faith.
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Isn't it kind of hard to dismiss the global flood as merely a tale when someone you believe in talked about it in that way?

  That's the problem, isn't it? Belief in hearsay after an extremely long game of telephone still leaves the burden of proof on the believer. Questions need to be answered. Why do you believe the current Bible that you read reflects what was originally written about Jesus' beliefs? Why do you believe that what was originally written about Jesus' beliefs accurately portray his beliefs? Why do you believe that Jesus' beliefs, assuming you have solid evidence for belief based on answers to the first two questions, hold any more merit than reason, logic, and modern science?

  Using anything from the Bible as evidence puts an even greater burden of proof on the believer. Personally, I think it would be much better to simply admit the truth: it is a matter of faith - there is no solid evidence without belief.
• 

  trevor

  Using anything from the Bible as evidence puts an even greater burden of proof on the believer.

  In the real world this obvious rule of thumb would apply but in the imaginary world of unseen beings, beliefs can be conjured up as required. As there is no accountability in the invisible world of the imagination, anything is possible. Ask for consistency and you will be accused of having have a JW mentality.
• 

  Heaven

  For me, the Bible proved itself wrong. The idea of a wife having to subjugate herself to her husband never sat well with me and I saw firsthand how it was an EPIC FAIL in my parent's relationship.