No Proof the Bible is untrue.

[JoeyKnothead]

From one of the threads...

Not one human has ever proved anything in the Bible to be untrue. The truth remains in spite of all attacks against it. On the other side of the coin, the words of the Bible apply perfectly to all mankind, while opposing the perversions of unbelieving minds.

I'm gonna pass over the whole 'perversions of unbelieving minds'. I'm just gonna trust this writer had nothing but love in his heart when he said it.

I will though, say the ToE pretty much put the kibosh on the whole creation thing. Eh?

[Goat]

proof the bible is untrue...
2 chronicles 21:5 Jehoram [was] thirty and two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem.
2 chronicles 21:20 Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem eight years, and departed without being desired. Howbeit they buried him in the city of David, but not in the sepulchres of the kings.

So Jehoram was 32 years old when he began to reign in Jerusalem and he ruled eight years and died when he was 40 years old.
But the bible says his son Ahaziah was forty two years old when he began to reign in Jerusalem.
2Chronicles 22:1 And the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah his youngest son king in his stead: for the band of men that came with the Arabians to the camp had slain all the eldest. So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned.
2Ch 22:2 Forty and two years old [was] Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also [was] Athaliah the daughter of Omri.

How can Ahaziah be older than his own father when he began to reign after his father died? This makes no sense! This can't be from God!

Well, that shows that people made mistakes in copying over the centuries.

Now, of course, the same can be said of the Koran.

[Flail]

...and I claim that I am now wearing a purple shirt and standing on a cookie...now......prove that I am not....

this thread is mindless

[Cephus]

Exactly, Flail. The burden of proof rests solely on the person advocating a position. It's not my job to prove the Bible false, it's the adherent's job to prove that it's true. That is something they have utterly failed to do, therefore I have no responsibility to do more than laugh at it.

It's as simple as that.

[Greatest I Am]

The only possible proof of the truth of scripture would be the appearance of the talking snake or some other otherworldly miracle. The talking snake would make all believe.

Regards
DL

[Zzyzx]

.

The only possible proof of the truth of scripture would be the appearance of the talking snake or some other otherworldly miracle. The talking snake would make all believe.

I agree that a talking snake would be impressive -- but being convincing about "scripture" might depend upon what the snake said.

[Greatest I Am]

.

The only possible proof of the truth of scripture would be the appearance of the talking snake or some other otherworldly miracle. The talking snake would make all believe.

I agree that a talking snake would be impressive -- but being convincing about "scripture" might depend upon what the snake said.

Too true.
We would finally have, at the least, a true witness. Might be fun to listen in.

Regards
DL

[Beto]

.

The only possible proof of the truth of scripture would be the appearance of the talking snake or some other otherworldly miracle. The talking snake would make all believe.

I agree that a talking snake would be impressive -- but being convincing about "scripture" might depend upon what the snake said.

Too true.
We would finally have, at the least, a true witness. Might be fun to listen in.

Regards
DL

Is the snake really talking... or is "God" a ventriloquist?...

[Flail]

Common sense dicates that anyone making a claim has the burden of proving it.This burden includes the burden of persuasion and of going forward with evidence that cannot be reasonibly refuted. Absent such proof,all claims remain false and unproven. This burden of proof requirement becomes doubly important if the claims are of matters outside of common experience and logic ie, virgin birth,walking on water,raising of the dead.

Religion depends upon avoiding the burden of proof. Instead all religions substitute various forms of superstition,priest craft,indoctrination,dogma and ritual for reason,loic and common sense. The unreasoned and the indoctrinated convince themselves or allow themselves to be overcome to such an extent that all attempts at reason are thwarted. Whenever someone resorts to rituals,sorcery,repetitions and visions, the mind is not at work. Whenever oratory and massing together as sheep rule the day, the gift of the mind is rejected in favor of conformity,appearance and selfish righteousness.

[McCulloch]

Common sense dictates that anyone making a claim has the burden of proving it. This burden includes the burden of persuasion and of going forward with evidence that cannot be reasonably refuted. Absent such proof, all claims remain false and unproven. This burden of proof requirement becomes doubly important if the claims are of matters outside of common experience and logic ie, virgin birth,walking on water,raising of the dead.

Almost. Absent such proof, all claims remain unproven. Unproven is not the same as false.

However, your point is certainly valid. Claims that seem unreasonable in the face of common sense and common experience, should be held as provisionally false pending some validating evidence. You might accept without evidence my claim to have walked to the subway this morning. You would not be justified to accept my claim to have cured cancer on the weekend.

[Flail]

I agree,McCullogh, that something unproven is not necessarily false and I stand corrected.
Something unproven,could be false and would certainly be so to anyone making a claim knowing it to be false despite causing others to consider it as simply something unproven. In the end,all things are either true or false,despite our inability to discern. I have a right to consider outlandish claims as false while awaiting your proofs.