Disproving the Entire Christian bible in One Paragraph

[Soapy]

Yeah..... I reckon that is true.
But if I try to suggest that a verse, chapter or book in the bible has limitations, or that it was edited, some Christians insist that the entire bible is the 'Word of God' and perfectly exact.

That can make discussions with some Christians difficult. There is no baseline.

The Bible is a compiled book (‘Bible’!!!) We are to believe in the CONTEXT of its teachings.... not the EXACT WORDS, specifically pertaining to the Old Testament.

The reason is that many concepts were unknown to the ancients. For instance, they did not understand disease nor the purpose of blood. They did not know about COMA and believed someone in such a situation was DEAD. They did not understand ‘AIR’ nor the nature of Spirit and intelligence... TIME was measured in fixed numbers: 40, for instance, represents ‘a long time’ by some measure: days, years, etc. Hence Noah was not in the Arc nor did it rain for exactly, 40 days... nor were the Israelites in the wilderness for EXACTLY forty years. And for sure, the whole of creation was not completed in SIX DAYS (days as in 24 hour periods). It certainly refers to ‘Periods of time - by events’ (I’m not going to argue a case for or against creationism and evolutionism as science actually proves BOTH!!!!)

 

[oldbadger]

The Bible is a compiled book (‘Bible’!!!) We are to believe in the CONTEXT of its teachings.... not the EXACT WORDS, specifically pertaining to the Old Testament.

The reason is that many concepts were unknown to the ancients. For instance, they did not understand disease nor the purpose of blood. They did not know about COMA and believed someone in such a situation was DEAD. They did not understand ‘AIR’ nor the nature of Spirit and intelligence... TIME was measured in fixed numbers: 40, for instance, represents ‘a long time’ by some measure: days, years, etc. Hence Noah was not in the Arc nor did it rain for exactly, 40 days... nor were the Israelites in the wilderness for EXACTLY forty years. And for sure, the whole of creation was not completed in SIX DAYS (days as in 24 hour periods). It certainly refers to ‘Periods of time - by events’ (I’m not going to argue a case for or against creationism and evolutionism as science actually proves BOTH!!!!)

Yes...? OK.
But I was thinking of the additions, editions, etc in the gospels, and how they are so different from each other..... Like different stories .
Look at John's timeline, very strange.

 

[syo]

Paragraph??? Too big.

try one word.

''resurrection''

 

[Muffled]

I believe God is perfect in every way and that includes being jealous. I believe the idea of jealousy being childish is a fantasy on your part.

 

[Muffled]

Curious, when you say "Disproving the Entire Christian bible," exactly what about the Bible are you disproving?

.

.

I believe his point is that the Bible comes from man and not God because he has a dim view of God.

 

[Muffled]

I was going to write something.

Then I decided maybe you wouldn't understand.

I believe as God that I understand anything rational. Did you intend to write something irrational?

 

[Soapy]

Yes...? OK.
But I was thinking of the additions, editions, etc in the gospels, and how they are so different from each other..... Like different stories .
Look at John's timeline, very strange.

Hi, yes... eye witness statements often differ but the ESSENTIAL DETAILS remain the same.

Also, the gospels were written many many years after Christ went up to Heaven. The apostles wrongly believed that Jesus was going to return within a few years and so did not write anything down and so memories became sketchy. However, Jesus told them that the Holy Spirit would bring them remembrance of things. He did not promise EXACT DETAILS.

Showing the apostles were misguided: imagine the things that a first century apostle would find amazing if they could see the world today... did they not believe what Jesus told them that ‘These things you see me do, you too will also do / and GREATER THINGS THAN THESE WILL YOU DO!’

Can you imagine if they saw someone wearing a pair of ‘Google Glasses’ and the person turned to them and said, ‘Hi Thomas, are you still a doubter!???’ He would just die ... ‘How did you....!!??’

 

[oldbadger]

Hi, yes... eye witness statements often differ but the ESSENTIAL DETAILS remain the same.’

Hi again........ Please let me concentrate on the one sentence, above.
No, the ESSENTIAL DETAILS are amazingly different. Take the last week which led up to the execution of Jesus. This week was one of the most essential weeks of the whole story, and each and every disciple would have remembered the first three of these days forever.............. and John's gospel doesn't tell anything about any part of those days that fits with the Synoptic account first written by Mark. Not one part.
Amazing.
Would you like to discuss that?

 

[sojourner]

"THE BIBLE IS INSPIRED BY GOD"


Emphasis: Deuteronomy 32:15-18, Psalms 78:58-59; God gets jealous and angry when his own people start worshipping other gods, just like in the human sense, A person can get jealous and angry when their fiancée kisses her close "guy friend" and pays no attention to her fiancé in the process. "P.S, just a human-like example." Galatians 5:19-21; It is a sin to be Jealous and you will not go to heaven. This shows how God is a divine Hypocrite and that the bible was a construct of the human imagination since the God of the bible gets jealous the same way any other human can get jealous and also shows you that the authors of the bible were just playing God in their novel. Oh, and did you catch the fact that God himself also says that he is salvation in Deuteronomy 32:15? This disproves Jesus' purpose in the NT.


To recap, God is basically the guy who does this;

"Stop! Pay attention to me! I will get Jealous if you don't pay attention to me and instead pay attention to others that I don't want you to pay any attention to!"

This is a great example of a childish tantrum being thrown in such a human-like manner. That's because the authors were not God and only tried to pose as God to the best of their human abilities. Case-closed... again.

I agree that God did not dictate the texts, but this argument is infantile.

 

[sojourner]

The Church interprets the Bible, not we.

Indeed! Well said.

 

[Soapy]

Hi again........ Please let me concentrate on the one sentence, above.
No, the ESSENTIAL DETAILS are amazingly different. Take the last week which led up to the execution of Jesus. This week was one of the most essential weeks of the whole story, and each and every disciple would have remembered the first three of these days forever.............. and John's gospel doesn't tell anything about any part of those days that fits with the Synoptic account first written by Mark. Not one part.
Amazing.
Would you like to discuss that?

Were all the disciples in the same place at the same time...?

Don’t rely on the Gospel of John. Everyone knows this gospel is SIGNIFICANTLY different to the other three ‘synoptic’ gospels.

Also, Ive heard it said that one Apostle borrowed from another in their writing. Don’t ask me which one as it is anecdotal.

But please say which difference explicitly you are referring to. It’s not enough to just say that there are differences.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

(I’m not going to argue a case for or against creationism and evolutionism as science actually proves BOTH!!!!)

Science "proves" neither. It supports evolution. It does not support a creation hypothesis, because there is no such hypothesis to support. There's nothing there. It's just an unfalsifiable claim.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I believe God is perfect in every way and that includes being jealous. I believe the idea of jealousy being childish is a fantasy on your part.

Jealousy would be a foreign concept to someone who's perfect.

Jealousy implies feeling insecure or envy, to want something that someone else has that you don't.

An all powerfull perfect being could easily have everything it wants and therefor does.
An all powerfull perfect being would have no reason to be insecure, as it would be the best at everything and could create whatever it wanted.

I could even argue that a being that is "perfect", wouldn't even have any "wants". But perhaps you should first define what you mean by "perfect" and in contrast to what.

 

[oldbadger]

Were all the disciples in the same place at the same time...?

Yes.
Except for short periods of time when individuals arranged things like a donkey, or the last supper etc.... they were together.

Don’t rely on the Gospel of John. Everyone knows this gospel is SIGNIFICANTLY different to the other three ‘synoptic’ gospels.

I don't.......... !! I do take advantage of the collection of stories, incidents and special mentions on G-John, but he had no idea of the timeline of the story........ the apostle was certainly not the disciple, and he wrote G-John 70-90 years after the events.

Also, Ive heard it said that one Apostle borrowed from another in their writing. Don’t ask me which one as it is anecdotal.

Mark wrote the first gospel.
We know this because Matthew and Luke copied it, in places they copied it word for word.
Matthew and Luke also both copied another gospel which had featured most of Jesus's speeches. And Matthew and Luke each found one other document which they used.

But please say which difference explicitly you are referring to. It’s not enough to just say that there are differences.

John's last week could almost be about another group entirely.
He did not know that Jesus visited the Temple on their first day of arrival, looked about at the whole place and then went out to Bethany for the night. No mention.
He did not know that they returned to the Temple on day 2, Demonstrated against the money changers and sacrificial sellers and Picketed the Temple Courts, then returning to Bethany for the next night.
He did not know that they returned to the Temple on day three and debated/argued with the Temple authorities.
He did not know why the group was accosted by the Temple authorities and Jesus arrested after the others fled.
He pretended that both He and Jesus's Mother were at the execution when in fact only Magdalene, Salome and a few other women followers had the guts to watch 'from afar'.

It goes on and on......Apostle John was not there, was not the disciple.

 

[Soapy]

Science "proves" neither. It supports evolution. It does not support a creation hypothesis, because there is no such hypothesis to support. There's nothing there. It's just an unfalsifiable claim.

I disagree to a degree.

Science is UNCOVERING what YHWH has created and the process that YHWH used to create.

Science always tries to claim that it ‘creates’ or ‘owns’ the discoveries it makes because it cannot admit that there is a greater power and knowledge conscience greater than itself (witness how earthlings are always the top of the chain at the end of every science fiction movie or drama!! Really!!! Yet science admits that the solar system is quite ‘young’ in regard to other ‘solar’ systems)!!!)

However, science proves that it was not six 24 hour periods for creation and here it is creationism that cannot admit that it is the one at fault.

As for the creation of man,.. it need not be a ‘CREATION’ exactly but rather just YHWH putting the IMAGE of himself into an humanoid-type ANIMAL body JUST as science portrays the evolution of caveman into a human as we know it (Jim!)

So, in fact, both creation and evolution agree BUT DISAGREE because of their fetish for false-correctness!

 

[Soapy]

Yes.
Except for short periods of time when individuals arranged things like a donkey, or the last supper etc.... they were together.


I don't.......... !! I do take advantage of the collection of stories, incidents and special mentions on G-John, but he had no idea of the timeline of the story........ the apostle was certainly not the disciple, and he wrote G-John 70-90 years after the events.


Mark wrote the first gospel.
We know this because Matthew and Luke copied it, in places they copied it word for word.
Matthew and Luke also both copied another gospel which had featured most of Jesus's speeches. And Matthew and Luke each found one other document which they used.


John's last week could almost be about another group entirely.
He did not know that Jesus visited the Temple on their first day of arrival, looked about at the whole place and then went out to Bethany for the night. No mention.
He did not know that they returned to the Temple on day 2, Demonstrated against the money changers and sacrificial sellers and Picketed the Temple Courts, then returning to Bethany for the next night.
He did not know that they returned to the Temple on day three and debated/argued with the Temple authorities.
He did not know why the group was accosted by the Temple authorities and Jesus arrested after the others fled.
He pretended that both He and Jesus's Mother were at the execution when in fact only Magdalene, Salome and a few other women followers had the guts to watch 'from afar'.

It goes on and on......Apostle John was not there, was not the disciple.

As I said, the gospel of John is SUSPECT. In fact my own personal opinion (though I love to read the GoJ) is that GoJ is heavily TRINITARIAN BIASED.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I disagree to a degree.

Science is UNCOVERING what YHWH has created and the process that YHWH used to create.

That's just a (religious) claim that you make, which is loaded up with your religious belief that god created the world.

Science always tries to claim that it ‘creates’ or ‘owns’ the discoveries it makes because it cannot admit that there is a greater power and knowledge conscience greater than itself

That makes no sense at all.
First, science as it is discussed here, refers to a method of inquiry. It has no such "preferences" nore does it make the claims you say it does.

Second, it is factually correct that the discoveries made by scientists while studying reality according to the scientific method, are the discoveries of those scientists. They are human accomplishments.

No matter if gods or aliens or nature created the universe. The discoveries of humans are human accomplishments.

(witness how earthlings are always the top of the chain at the end of every science fiction movie or drama!!

I know of several where that isn't the case.
But be that as it may, I don't see what entertainment industry products have to do with the subject of science and the scientific study of reality.

Really!!! Yet science admits that the solar system is quite ‘young’ in regard to other ‘solar’ systems)!!!)

So? Are you complaining that Hollywood creates movies that aren't 100% scientifically accurate?
How is that relevant?

However, science proves that it was not six 24 hour periods for creation and here it is creationism that cannot admit that it is the one at fault.

Science has disproven a lot of wacky ideas over the centuries.
The point I initially responded to however, was not about what science disproves, but about what science proves - as per your claim, where you said that "science proves both creation and evolution", to which I replied that it actually proves neither, and of the two that it only supports evolution.

The incarnations of creationism that it doesn't disprove are either models that current technology either can't test or the creationist claims itself are unfalsifiable.

There are no incarnations of creationism that can be supported through science. Let alone prove them....

In scientific terms, creating gods are about as viable as rainbow eating extra-dimensional unicorns.

As for the creation of man,.. it need not be a ‘CREATION’ exactly but rather just YHWH putting the IMAGE of himself into an humanoid-type ANIMAL body JUST as science portrays the evolution of caveman into a human as we know it (Jim!)

This is post hoc rationalisation with no basis whatsoever.
So, an unfalsifiable claim which presents no evidence (and which by definition can't have any evidence - pro or con). So it's a faith based religious statement which has 0 scientific justifiable reason to even only be considered - let alone accepted.

So, in fact, both creation and evolution agree BUT DISAGREE because of their fetish for false-correctness!

No. In fact, my initial point still stands:
- Science doesn't prove either
- Science overwhelmingly supports the evolution model
- Science does not / can not support the creation model, because there is no creation model

For a model to be scientifically supportable, it needs to make at least a couple testable predictions. The creation model makes no predictions. It's just unfalsifiable religious statements that can only be "believed" and never supported or demonstrated or proven, in any sensible way.

 

[2ndpillar]

"THE BIBLE IS INSPIRED BY GOD"


Emphasis: Deuteronomy 32:15-18, Psalms 78:58-59; God gets jealous and angry when his own people start worshipping other gods, just like in the human sense, A person can get jealous and angry when their fiancée kisses her close "guy friend" and pays no attention to her fiancé in the process. "P.S, just a human-like example." Galatians 5:19-21; It is a sin to be Jealous and you will not go to heaven. This shows how God is a divine Hypocrite and that the bible was a construct of the human imagination since the God of the bible gets jealous the same way any other human can get jealous and also shows you that the authors of the bible were just playing God in their novel. Oh, and did you catch the fact that God himself also says that he is salvation in Deuteronomy 32:15? This disproves Jesus' purpose in the NT.


To recap, God is basically the guy who does this;

"Stop! Pay attention to me! I will get Jealous if you don't pay attention to me and instead pay attention to others that I don't want you to pay any attention to!"

This is a great example of a childish tantrum being thrown in such a human-like manner. That's because the authors were not God and only tried to pose as God to the best of their human abilities. Case-closed... again.

The author of Galatians 5:10-21 is one the main false prophets spoken about in Matthew 7:15. As for the relationship between man and God, man was created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), and in the example of "Israel", was to be the temple/sanctuary of the Spirit of God (Ezekiel 3:28). The prime editor of your "bible" (Galatians 5:19-21) was a daughter of Babylon, the official church of the Roman empire, who was a prominent head of the beast of Revelation 13 & 17, throughout history.

 

[2ndpillar]

As I said, the gospel of John is SUSPECT. In fact my own personal opinion (though I love to read the GoJ) is that GoJ is heavily TRINITARIAN BIASED.

The only entities that are "Trinitarian based" are the church of Rome, based on the Nicene Trinity doctrine, and her harlot daughters. I expect that Babylon is nearing the end of her reign.