• 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!

Two Words That Disprove the Bible

I love the Bible... it is full of allegory. :D

"For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by the handmaid, and one by the freewoman. Howbeit the son by the handmaid is born after the flesh; but the son by the freewoman is born through promise. Which things contain an allegory: for these women are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar.

Now this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia and answereth to the Jerusalem that now is: for she is in bondage with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother. For it is written,

Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not;
Break forth and cry, thou that travailest not:
For more are the children of the desolate
than of her that hath the husband.


Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.
But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, so also it is now. Howbeit what saith the scripture? Cast out the handmaid and her son: for the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman

Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a handmaid, but of the freewoman.

For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage."

-- Galatians 4:22-31, 5
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tathagata

Freethinker
Prove it.

That's not disproof of the Bible at all. That's an asinine statement to think that such a statement disproves anything. If you want to disprove the Bible, you actually have to pick it apart and demonstrate why it is undoubtably false. If you aren't doing that, you can't call it "disproof."

You're so called "two words" are nothing but a statement of skepticism, NOT disproof.

Perhaps you need a dictionary to tell you what "disproof" is because clearly you haven't the slightest clue!

Disprove: 1. to prove (an assertion, claim, etc.) to be false or wrong; refute; invalidate

2. to show (an assertion, claim, etc) to be incorrect

-- Disprove | Define Disprove at Dictionary.com

You have not invalidated, falsified, or demonstrate anything to be incorrect! Those two words are FAR from a disproof.


.
 

horizon_mj1

Well-Known Member
Simple. There is no scientifically possible way for a virgin to give birth. Just because something can't be disproven doesn't make it real. Just because I write it down and make a few people believe will not make it true thousands of years later.
This would fall under one of the unprovable things in the Bible. If this is your only focus and basis on the entire book, IMO that is kind of sad. I do not take any text relating to an other person's beliefs as absolute fact, I take it at face value. There is almost always some kind of manipulation in order to try and convince people it is right. If you read such and keep this in mind, it can still be helpful. Oh and by the way virgin births do happen, it is just we do not documentation of this happening to a person; BBC - Earth News - Snake gives 'virgin birth' to extraordinary babies
 

horizon_mj1

Well-Known Member
Really, that's what your going with? The word of god as handed down to man is metaphorical and hyperbole? How about this then, the creation story. The discovery of fossils and the use of carbon dating have poked so many holes in that, that its near incontrovertible that it didn't happen. Or was that a metaphor too? A metaphor for what, then?
Why? Does it bother you so much that at the time they did not have the scientific knowledge of evolution. Argue this point all you want. Creation is a scientific fact. This fact is called the big bang. The elements of evolution were "created" by something in order for evolution to happen. Metaphorical writings are (IMO) one the most popular types of writing from people who are trying to explain something they do not know. Once again this applies. I actually feel kind of sorry for people who lack imagination. Some people obviously lack the ability to sensibly reason when reading, which I would think makes comprehension quite difficult.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
I'm a little confused as to what you're saying. You said that by believing a man conquered death, we wouldn't let death win. That sounds like heavy personification. And if this man did die, doesn't that mean he DIDN'T conquer death?

So you haven't drawn the line yet....life after death?
Spiritual life preferred?

And here you would be denouncing scripture.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Why? Does it bother you so much that at the time they did not have the scientific knowledge of evolution. Argue this point all you want. Creation is a scientific fact. This fact is called the big bang. The elements of evolution were "created" by something in order for evolution to happen. Metaphorical writings are (IMO) one the most popular types of writing from people who are trying to explain something they do not know. Once again this applies. I actually feel kind of sorry for people who lack imagination. Some people obviously lack the ability to sensibly reason when reading, which I would think makes comprehension quite difficult.

Evolution can't be proved any better than the Bible. It is still an unproven theory. THe big bang is a modern myth used to explain current trends because science doesn't have enough information for a better answer. It is also unprovable.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
So that makes it possible then?

Theres a tonne of evidence against namely it is impossible to ressurect someone. Assuming divine intervention does not count on a scientific level and is outside the capabilities of man to examine.

Science does not determine what is possible only as you say what is possible for those restricted to science. For instance doctors don't heal people most of the time; they prescribe medicines that alleviate the symptoms and cut out parts of the body that don't operate correctly. Christian healers actually restore the body back to its healthy operational status.
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
Evolution can't be proved any better than the Bible. It is still an unproven theory. THe big bang is a modern myth used to explain current trends because science doesn't have enough information for a better answer. It is also unprovable.
Actually evolution has been proven. That is why it is a theory. Now, you must understand what theory means in a scientific context. If you do, then you would know that it isn't just a guess.

And there is quite a bit of evidence supporting the Big Bang (which is completely separate from evolution). Again, theory must be put in it's correct context, a scientific one.
 

blackout

Violet.
I can prove that the bible is real.

It is a real book.
It exists, it is made of pages with ink
that form particular words and sentences
and chapters
that have been titled "the Bible".
Which I can prove by showing you the front cover,
where it says "the Bible".

Beyond that,
there is nothing to prove.
 

horizon_mj1

Well-Known Member
Evolution can't be proved any better than the Bible. It is still an unproven theory. THe big bang is a modern myth used to explain current trends because science doesn't have enough information for a better answer. It is also unprovable.
The theory itself remains to be proved, but facts that there were humanoid/bipeds which are closer relatives to us than any known species (of course this being found through DNA testing and carbon dating). As far as the Big Bang Theory, do you have a better explanation? Do you even know what you are saying by asking for a "better answer"; well they are the ones who looked for the answers and did all the work, yet I do not see anyone else finding any answers aside from ones that come from fairy tales.
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
The theory itself remains to be proved,
Please understand that a Scientific Theory is never "proved".
A Scientific Theory is composed of empirical testable and observable evidence.


But back to the OP...

Muffled's response that "Evolution can't be proved any better than the Bible." is a Red Herring that has successfully distracted from the OP.

"Prove it" is fine for those, like myself, who require evidence for fantastical claims. But, it does not "disprove" the Bible. There are, however, many elements of the Bible that, when taken literally, fly in the face of known science and history. These elements are shown to be false as literal, or merely metaphorical and/or allegorical.
 

roli

Born Again,Spirit Filled
Prove it.

Aside from the archaeological finds, geographical locations which attest to and confirm biblical accounts, dead seas scrolls and countless trasnscripts found that confirm the bible we have today, non christian jewish historians and their writings, the scientific, geological, physiological discoveries mentioned first in scripture......... May I suggest you do some research on the proofs that are out there..before you make such a post

What would you do with the proof if you had it..,,read Josh MacDowell "The Evidence that Demands Verdict" an atheist lawyer who went on search to disprove the bible by using his inexhaustible experience and resources he had at his disposal as a professional and who's life was based on researching facts and proofs and was surprised at his conclusion.......let's just say..he was soundly saved and is a devote born again spirit filled Christian, author, speaker, apologist...

Many people will refute the bible and Jesus Christ all their lives and in my experience of talking with people..they do so more from the point of not wanting to confront their inevitable fate of mortality and the claims of the bible that says there will be judgment...so like many ..we deny, refute,ignore, sweep it under the rug.

The question remains, what will you do if the bible is true...what will you do with Jesus Christ, now in this life and in the one to come.....?
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
..,,read Josh MacDowell "The Evidence that Demands Verdict" an atheist lawyer who went on search to disprove the bible by using his inexhaustible experience and resources he had at his disposal as a professional and who's life was based on researching facts and proofs and was surprised at his conclusion.......let's just say..he was soundly saved and is a devote born again spirit filled Christian, author, speaker, apologist...

Why would you misrepresent Josh McDowell?

In his own words he claims he was agnostic when, as a first year business law student at a two year college, he was preparing a paper on examining the historical evidence of the Christian faith in order to disprove it, when he came to the conclusion that Christianity was supported by evidence.

At that point he dropped out of community college and began attending Wheaton College in Illinois, where he received a Bachelors of Arts degree in Theological Studies.


And yes, I have read Josh McDowell, I find his works misleading and argumentative.
 

wildcatwelder

New Member
As a Christian, this is how I see the bible:

The bible is a book of scriptural guidance. It's not a book of science, or even literal history. That being said, there are many different styles of literature in the bible, including poetry, parable, mystical, simple letters, eyewitness accounts, etc.

When reading the bible, it's really not that difficult to determine which style you're reading. At least, that's not my own personal experience. When I read the bible, I consider the context - who the audience is, the historical setting, the writing style, the original language, etc.

It's challenging at times, but not really all that difficult to grasp.
Very good observation maam, good insight there, IMO.
 
Top