The skeptic's challenge is this. Produce any alleged contradictions, imperfections, historical or scientific inaccuracies you perceive in the Bible and I will successfully refute them. The only rule is that you can give only one at a time per person. When I answer your first then you can provide a second if you wish.
-
Features
Skeptic's Challenge
- Thread starter DLH
- Start date
Example, please? Be specific. Don't just be a smart ass. I don't mind if you be a smart ass, only if you are equal parts of both. Smart, and an ass. Not just a smart ass. I want good discussion, not witty banter.
As you wish.
Ford
Contributor
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 7,222
- Location
- Freedomland
- Basic Beliefs
- Just don't knock on my door on a Saturday Morning
You see, that isn't very specific. Does it have to be true? As a whole? In order to believe it? In order for it to justify it's abuse? Goddammit, none, you're supposed to give me specific problem's with the Bible like the list I gave.
You never want to play right.
The Bible is fallible.
I didn't really anticipate this conversation about Biblical fallibility and was going to discuss Genesis 1:1, and Genesis 1:2-5, but now I am understanding that you believe the Bible is fallible and that changes things a bit.
what is your take on 2 Timothy 3:16-17?:
that all the metaphors and tap dancing about what a verse means doesn't come from God but the reader in order to make it what the reader wants.
maybe if this topic runs it's course we can move onto the Genesis account I was mentioning.
what is your take on 2 Timothy 3:16-17?:
that admission by you about Biblical fallibility seems to contrast starkly if not otherwise make the verse false, a Biblical error.
that all the metaphors and tap dancing about what a verse means doesn't come from God but the reader in order to make it what the reader wants.
maybe if this topic runs it's course we can move onto the Genesis account I was mentioning.
Ford
Contributor
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 7,222
- Location
- Freedomland
- Basic Beliefs
- Just don't knock on my door on a Saturday Morning
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,172
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
I want to know why Pharaoh doesn't have a name.
NobleSavage
Veteran Member
Is seems that Christians have a different meaning for "in order to believe it". Belief for me is based on my life experiences and the things I've learned. I don't chose what I want to believe. For example, do I believe that this chair will not break when I sit on it? Yes, I do, because every chair I've ever taken a seat in has not broken. They odds are highly in my favor that I'm right.
Now when Christians say is, "if you believe in Jesus -- with all your might -- you don't have to be tortured in Hell for eternity and you get a a free pass to eternal happiness." Well, that is a great deal, unless you can't believe that story for 10,000 legitimate reasons.
Really? Seems to contradict your OP:
You've given yourself quite the "out" when it comes to your challenge.
There are problems with the Bible but of the hundreds of skeptics I have presented with this challenge none of them have ever gotten one of them. What they take for errors of the Bible are actually theological rather than scriptural in nature, misinterpretations, that sort of thing. Part of knowing the Bible is having an accurate knowledge of where it's imperfections are. Copyist errors, mostly numerical, spurious scriptures, that sort of thing.
Good question. No. It doesn't. For a thorough explanation read my Skeptic's Study Bible | Genesis Chapter 1 including the Academic's Annotated Bible and Skeptic's FAQ. It isn't as lengthy a read as it sounds.
Ford
Contributor
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 7,222
- Location
- Freedomland
- Basic Beliefs
- Just don't knock on my door on a Saturday Morning
Really? Seems to contradict your OP:
You've given yourself quite the "out" when it comes to your challenge.
There are problems with the Bible but of the hundreds of skeptics I have presented with this challenge none of them have ever gotten one of them.
Well then in the interest of magnanimity, what's one of the problems?
If the Bible is fallible, and has problems, then perhaps you could take the time and refute your own OP by laying out which parts of the Bible are clearly wrong.
I'll wait...
I think that was intentional, to demonstrate his insignificance. Later Pharaoh's were mentioned by name, like Shishak, So, Tirhakah, Nechoh, and Hophra. But many prior to those were not named.
Are you aware of any of the spurious scriptures? Like, bringing the harlot to Jesus and him saying 'He who is without sin cast the first stone.' Never happened. It was added. It suddenly appears in later manuscripts.
Here's a whole shitload of stuff for you: http://bibviz.com/