Seeker of Ka
Asetian
Here I will submit points to try to disprove the infallibility of the Bible primarily used by Christianity and it's contents, and I would like to see if my points can be countered.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Disproving the Bible
- Thread starter Seeker of Ka
- Start date
Seeker of Ka
Asetian
Point 1
If Yahweh demands that the punishment for Sin is Damnation/Eternal Death then why did he have to send himself in the form of a man to die in order to change forgive his believers?
Why could he not have said that all of those who follow the Jewish faith are now forgiven?
If Yahweh demands that the punishment for Sin is Damnation/Eternal Death then why did he have to send himself in the form of a man to die in order to change forgive his believers?
Why could he not have said that all of those who follow the Jewish faith are now forgiven?
Seeker of Ka
Asetian
Point 2
If evil exist so that Yahweh could give humans free-will, and in heaven there is no evil, then that means there is no free-will in heaven.
If the absence of free-will is a good thing as heaven is clearly made out to be, then why would he make free-will in the first place.
If evil exist so that Yahweh could give humans free-will, and in heaven there is no evil, then that means there is no free-will in heaven.
If the absence of free-will is a good thing as heaven is clearly made out to be, then why would he make free-will in the first place.
You are not disproving the Bible here. You are disproving Bible theology.
Thana
Lady
Seeker of Ka
Asetian
Point 3
In the new testament at Mathew 5:17, Jesus declares that he is not going to destroy the laws of the old testament but to fulfill them.
Later in in the bible Jesus is asked if they should stone an adulterating woman, he asks for the first without sin to throw the first stone, clearly implying that no one should do this but Yahweh.
However the old testament law clearly states to stone adulterating woman and he says not to do so, therefore he did destroy the old laws.
Therefore either the Bible has false information in it, Jesus was a liar, or both.
Either way this proves that the bible is fallible.
In the new testament at Mathew 5:17, Jesus declares that he is not going to destroy the laws of the old testament but to fulfill them.
Later in in the bible Jesus is asked if they should stone an adulterating woman, he asks for the first without sin to throw the first stone, clearly implying that no one should do this but Yahweh.
However the old testament law clearly states to stone adulterating woman and he says not to do so, therefore he did destroy the old laws.
Therefore either the Bible has false information in it, Jesus was a liar, or both.
Either way this proves that the bible is fallible.
Seeker of Ka
Asetian
If the theology within the Bible is contradicting itself then that means that the bible contradicts itself.
Seeker of Ka
Asetian
In John 14:6 Jesus states that you can only go to the Father through him, therefore if you do not go to the father you go to Sheol/Sulfur Lake (whichever one you choose to believe from scripture).
Then why did he create evil? If it was not for free-will then he just unleashed evil on this earth becuase he likes to see people suffer. Making him evil.
Congratulations either Yahweh created evil becuase he wanted to and that means that their is an Omnipotent Evil Yahweh. Or that the entire religion is wrong.
Take your pick.
No. Theology is mankind's study of it.
Thana
Lady
Well that was snarky.
Still... you're not trying to disprove the bible you're just taking a shot at Christianity.
Last edited:
Deathbydefault
Apistevist Asexual Atheist
If you want to mess with the Christian community there are much better ways to go about it 
lostwanderingsoul
Well-Known Member
point 1. because the punishment for sin is death, then someone had to die for our sins. by having the only man with out sin be the one to die then that pays the price for every man's sin.
I think you should let other people help you. I suggest beginning with Genesis. For example Genesis 3:1, Genesis 3:7, and Genesis 4:1.
KJV Genesis 3:1 says "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?" -- If the Bible is infallible, then why does it add the redundant phrase "Which the LORD God had made?" Is it not already clear that the LORD made all of the beasts and creatures? The phrase is redundant. Is it suggesting that the serpent was not one of them and was not made by the LORD? It is unclear and requires further clarification.
KJV Genesis 3:7 says "And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons." -- The text clearly suggests that they were blind until that moment, yet previously Eve was able to 'See' that the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was good for food. Only after she and Adam ate the fruit were their eyes opened, so how were they able to see the fruit? Or are you going to insist that they were not literally blind?
KJV Genesis 4:1 says "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD." Here the Bible states that Eve conceived merely because Adam knew her. If the Bible is infallible, then why is this biologically incorrect representation made?
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
To save you time: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
lostwanderingsoul
Well-Known Member
most authorities agree that the use of the verb "knew" means to know her is a sexual way
Let me help you race ahead. Yes, the Bible understood rationally does not fit this mythological view of it. Okay, now what? Now that you've "disproved it", what are you going to do next?
Forever_Catholic
Active Member
Mankind could not have possibly restored the union between God and man that was broken by the disobedience of Adam and Eve. Since we could not atone sufficiently, God the Son atoned in our place. This was a profound act of love. It was not just for the sake of forgiveness, but to make sanctifying grace available to us again.
Evil does not exist so that humans can have free will. It exists as a result of free will. There is free will in heaven, but it is fixed in place by souls themselves, who have no greater or more permanent desire than to be with God. There is a lot more to this essay question, but that’s the bottom line.
And there is free will in the first place because God wants us to love him by choice, and to therefore participate with him by choice in accomplishing his will. One of the properties of having been created in the image and likeness of God is that we have independent minds. If he wanted robots instead, he would have made them instead.
It absolutely does not prove that the bible is fallible. For one thing Jewish laws were far more extensive and complex than the laws given to them by God, and they were not always compatible with God’s will because the Jews incorporated their own spin on everything as they established for themselves the particulars of what was lawful and what was not.
God commands that we not commit adultery, but does not command that we execute people for it. God also specified that in a marriage of a man and woman, the two become one. That didn’t stop the Jews from practicing polygamy, as if five or six or more could also become one. It didn’t stop them from divorcing either, but Jesus clarified that the law given by Moses on divorce was never God’s will. (Matthew 19:8) So the law on stoning a person for adultery was not God's will either, as Jesus demonstrated.
God calls Israel a whore in Jeremiah 3:1, but still offers forgiveness. “Thou hast prostituted thyself to many lovers: nevertheless return to me, saith the Lord, and I will receive thee.” Love, mercy and forgiveness are what God offers us, and what he wants us to give to others. That is all consistently expressed throughout the bible.
Already covered above. You’re still wrong about it and also wrong in stating that God created evil. Evil is a willful choice made by creatures. It does not exist in God’s nature and is always contrary to his will.
And your last point is a very dangerous form of blasphemy, but If you had any knowledge of God at all, I'm sure you wouldn't accuse him of being evil. You should pray for forgiveness and a better understanding of who God is..
Tumah
Veteran Member
Or that means, the theology that was derived from the Bible is wrong...
Christ took on a human nature for our sake so that death could be conquered through his resurrection. Through Christ we now have the means to restore the grace necessary for salvation which hitherto was unavailable.
Because the Jewish law in of itself does not bestow saving grace, only faith in Christ does. The question is whether or not faith in Christ entails following Jewish law, the Council of Jerusalem ruled against this. Only the moral law (that which pertains to our conduct) remains binding for Christian observance.
Evil does not exist for free will, evil is a result of free will. There is no reward without struggle, the angels before they were confirmed in grace were tested and we humans are likewise tested by means of this life. We retain our wills and identities in Heaven, but being confirmed in grace we desire nothing but that of God. Our wills become utterly aligned with his. Sin becomes impossible. Because no one who shares the will of God would act against that will. We sin here on earth because we are still subject our fallen natures, and thus will against what God desires of us.
Or your whole tirade was simply disingenuous. Let's be honest, you're not interested in discussion here.
Forever_Catholic
Active Member
1. A redundant phrase only stresses a point. It in no way indicates fallibility.
2. As we all know, the serpent (Satan) started out as an angel, and is therefore among the creatures God made. But he had been a creature of heaven before he was cast out. Genesis 3:1 is saying that he was more subtle than "any of the beasts of the earth." It doesn't suggest that the serpent is not a creature made by God; it indicates that the serpent has capabilities that surpass those of the earthly creatures.
Unless you're just kidding about this, check the various meanings of "blind" in a dictionary. One of them is lacking understanding, judgment, perception, etc. So yes, since this is the obvious contextual meaning, they were not blind in the physical sense. It's also indisputably obvious in the rest of Genesis that Adam and Eve had perfect physical health, including good eyesight.
I think you're just playing around here too, but if not:
Absolutely right. And it wouldn't be wrong, as far as I know, to have said "all authorities."