Can the Bible be proved wrong?

by The Quiet One 158 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • OnTheWayOut
    OnTheWayOut

    "Can you prove the Bible right?" would be more appropriate.

    YES, it can be proved wrong, but many of it's supporters will not accept the proof.
    The flood can be shown to be physically impossible. DNA and archaeology can demonstrate that man is older than the Bible says. Archaeology has shown that Bible history of the Jews is wrong in many areas.

    The Gospels contradict each other. Prophecy from the New Testament has had to morph into symbols of something else because "the end" was supposed to come in the time of one generation that was alive before Jerusalem fell.

  • The Quiet One
    The Quiet One

    Psacramento: Sorry, I should've been more clear, I meant whether God had an influence on what the Bibles authors wrote, or can it be proven from the writings that men made up the concepts/prophecies contained in it? For instance, some claim that the Mosaic law contained principles related to hygiene that were far beyond the scientific knowledge in those days. Was that just chance? Nicolau: In the days when the parting of the Red Sea supposedly occurred, people probably though that that 'miraculous' event was impossible, yet scientists have now discovered the so called 'Moses effect' that shows a powerful enough force could have parted the sea. Quoting our current knowledge of science doesn't really 'disprove' the Bible being inspired.

  • Lore
    Lore

    Of course it can be proven wrong. Unless you are able to take everything it says as symbolic.

    A global flood 4.5k years ago? Definately proven wrong.

    Earth only 6k years old? Definately proven wrong.

    7 year famine in which people from all over the world had to buy their food from Egypt? Definately proven wrong.

    Sun stood still in the sky for a day? Definately proven wrong.

    Earth has corners and is held up by pillars? Definately proven wrong.

    End of the world coming soon as of 2.5k years ago? Definately proven wrong.

    You can move mountains by praying? Definately proven wrong.

    The list goes on and on.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento
    Psacramento: Sorry, I should've been more clear, I meant whether God had an influence on what the Bibles authors wrote, or can it be proven from the writings that men made up the concepts/prophecies contained in it? For instance, some claim that the Mosaic law contained principles related to hygiene that were far beyond the scientific knowledge in those days. Was that just chance? Nicolau: In the days when the parting of the Red Sea supposedly occurred, people probably though that that 'miraculous' event was impossible, yet scientists have now discovered the so called 'Moses effect' that shows a powerful enough force could have parted the sea. Quoting our current knowledge of science doesn't really 'disprove' the Bible being inspired.

    Well, many people are inspired by God and they write and so things that, well...anyways, if inspired means "under the infulence" of God then I would say NO.

    The bible was written by Man, inspired Man, written out of deep devotion for God and written, at times, by man being infulenced directly BY GOD, but the WHOLE of the bible? No.

    Some parts are clearly historical, others stories and parables and so forth, but all were written by falliable men, that is why we must test what is written with the OTHER ways God has revealed himself to US - the universe he created and The WORD of God, Christ.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento
    A global flood 4.5k years ago? Definately proven wrong.

    No dates in the bible, no where will you find a date for the flood.

    Earth only 6k years old? Definately proven wrong.

    No dates in the bible.

    7 year famine in which people from all over the world had to buy their food from Egypt? Definately proven wrong.

    All over the world?

    Sun stood still in the sky for a day? Definately proven wrong.

    Symbolisim.

    Earth has corners and is held up by pillars? Definately proven wrong.

    Symbolisim

    End of the world coming soon as of 2.5k years ago? Definately proven wrong.

    No dates given and actual warnings against trying to guess a date.

    You can move mountains by praying? Definately proven wrong.

    Symbolisim.

  • Mad Sweeney
    Mad Sweeney

    No dates in the bible.

    Geneologies and lifespans and ages when kids are born are given. That's how dates are calculated. Just because they didn't have the same calendar we do doesn't mean they didn't keep track of years. They were quite anal about it. And capitalize "Bible" man. What, have you turned heathen or something?

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento
    Geneologies and lifespans and ages when kids are born are given. That's how dates are calculated. Just because they didn't have the same calendar we do doesn't mean they didn't keep track of years. They were quite anal about it. And capitalize "Bible" man. What, have you turned heathen or something?

    IF you can show that those lifespans are correct then MAYBE you can date events to them, but I wouldn't hold my breath ;)

    And they are based from Adam, not from the beginning to the world or even the beginning of "humonoids".

    And according to the WT, no celebrrate BDAYS so how did they know how old they were?

    LOL !

  • The Quiet One
    The Quiet One

    What evidence is there that the gospels contradict each other? Most Christians will tell you that they are the same story, just told from different viewpoints.. To say they are contradictory is to claim there's no basis for faith in Jesus.

  • sir82
    sir82
    IF you can show that those lifespans are correct then MAYBE you can date events to them

    Erm, hate to state the obvious but....

    If the lifespans are incorrect, then the Bible is (of course) proved wrong.

    If the lifespans are correct, then the Bible is proved wrong because then you can date the events in it, and as noted above, the flood could not have happened according to the Bible's chronology.

    Oh, and how do you tell what in the Bible is "symbolism" and what isn't? Do you have a special decoder ring? If so could you send me one?

    Cuz, like, for example, Bible texts which appear to support the trinity are "literal" for Baptists but "symbolic" for JWs, while Bible texts which appear to contradict the trinity are "symbolic" for Baptists but "literal" for JWs.

  • wobble
    wobble

    The supposed creation of Adam is given to us using Bible generations and ages. The supposed time from Adam until the flood can therefore be calcualted.

    No such flood happened at that time, so the Bible chronology is bunk.

    Nothing in the Bible is other than we would expect from the writers at the time they wrote, do you not think that one thing would be in there that only God would have known so as to put His imprimatur on it ?

    The medical/hygeine advice in the Law is not unusual in view of the time the Pentateuch was probably recorded.

    The biggest problem the Bible has, as has been shown by our truly great poster Terry, it has no provenance.

    All we have is a book that was cobbled together by the Catholic Church in the late 300's A.D , that was derived from copies of copies of copies.

    We have no way of knowing what the original authors wrote, we have no way of knowing what writings, perhaps contradicting the Bible , were rejected and parhaps destroyed by the Church, because they did not suit their very politicised agenda.

    Do you not think that if God had a hand in producing this book, he would not be careful to preserve some resounding proof as to its veracity and its divine approval ?

    No such proofs exist.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit