What makes the bible true

[BlackSnake]

FUCKING SERIOUSLY!? Look, you're about to journey down a huge path of circular reasoning. You're trying to use Jesus as proof the bible is true. When, to the best of my knowledge, there's no proof Jesus existed outside of the bible, let alone performed the "miracles" he did. You'd figure that if he did the things he did, someone, somewhere would write about it. Yet the only place it's found is in the bible.

It was a little over 400 years of history in prophecy that happened before hundreds of whitenesses.

Reread what I posted with a little more comprehension. A study if you will. You are asking for proof, so give it a shot and at least try to understand. You can look at your own mother and question if she is really "your" mother you know. I listed a good study to help you understand.

[racrguy]

It was a little over 400 years of history in prophecy that happened before hundreds of whitenesses.

Reread what I posted with a little more comprehension. A study if you will. You are asking for proof, so give it a shot and at least try to understand. You can look at your own mother and question if she is really "your" mother you know. I listed a good study to help you understand.

So, basically what you're trying to do is use the bible, to prove the bible. Gotcha. That doesn't cut the mustard as far as proof goes. You've just embarked in circular logic.

What you did is akin to telling me to study the fact that Dumbledor exists because the Harry Potter books say that hundreds of students saw him perform magic in the Great Hall.

[BlackSnake]

So, basically what you're trying to do is use the bible, to prove the bible. Gotcha. That doesn't cut the mustard as far as proof goes. You've just embarked in circular logic.

What you did is akin to telling me to study the fact that Dumbledor exists because the Harry Potter books say that hundreds of students saw him perform magic in the Great Hall.

Your question should be re written then. You don't want to know what makes the Bible true. You just want to set up an argument against those that believe.

I might even understand your argument a little better if it were a year or so in the making, but yet it was written some 400 years before it happened. 1500 years total for the completion. 15 hundred years...Thats not like some guy sat down and wrote a great fiction. Thats over 15 times your life time it took to finish the complete Bible. Its called recorded history in the making by some 40 authors.

[racrguy]

No, I don't have to rewrite the question. You have to learn how to answer it. I asked for proof the bible is true. You cannot use something to prove itself. Especially that which is in question. Do you not understand that concept, or would you like me to explain it more?

And in case you didn't catch it earlier, I started this thread with the intention of argument. Not to change peoples minds, but to argue points. Noone has come up with any evidence in this thread that hasn't been disproven, or not easily explained away. Therefore my position stands true, there is insufficient evidence that proves the bible true to me.

[BlackSnake]

No, I don't have to rewrite the question. You have to learn how to answer it. I asked for proof the bible is true. You cannot use something to prove itself. Especially that which is in question. Do you not understand that concept, or would you like me to explain it more?

LOL...No you don't need to explain any further. If you were just a little more open minded, you'd get this pretty easily.

Just forget what was written in the Bible for a second and try to comprehend 39 books in the old testament and 27 in the new. 66 total books by 40 different authors in a 15 hundred year period of recorded history.

Its not 1 book, but 66 books

[racrguy]

LOL...No you don't need to explain any further. If you were just a little more open minded, you'd get this pretty easily.

Just forget what was written in the Bible for a second and try to comprehend 39 books in the old testament and 27 in the new. 66 total books by 40 different authors in a 15 hundred year period of recorded history.

Its not 1 book, but 66 books

When they were written, or how long a period they were written over makes no difference whatsoever. That is not proof that the bible is true. What evidence do you have to support your belief that the bible is true? Keep in mind, evidence has to be measurable, observable, and provable.

[BlackSnake]

When they were written, or how long a period they were written over makes no difference whatsoever. That is not proof that the bible is true. What evidence do you have to support your belief that the bible is true? Keep in mind, evidence has to be measurable, observable, and provable.

Have you read it? You tell me how 40 different authors can write 66 books in a 1500 year spand and be in perfect harmony. Hell, 5 of the smartest DFWMustangers couldnt pull off or agree to what happened today alone. I mean please...Grasp the concept of what this took.

[racrguy]

/facepalm. So noone EVER has taken something, then wrote some more of the story and have it agree with itself. Star Wars (lucas films) has never taken anything written by another person then accepted that as cannon.

Apparently you do need further explanation as to why you can't use the bible to prove itself true.

In order for something to be true, it requires evidence that is not itself to support the original claim. When you have an overabundance of evidence, you have proof, and when you have enough proof, something is proven true. Do you see how that works?

[Maddhattter]

How can 40 different authors can write 66 books in a 1500 year spand and be in perfect harmony? Easily.

1. Every person who wrote a book after the first could have read the books before him.
2. When the books were all put together, they were edited to work seamlessly.
3. Over the 12 or so translations, they have been edited to fit the language being translated into, changing things slightly each time. The change would have been done to fit other events in the same text, as translators do.
4. Finally, and most likely, they aren't "in perfect harmony." You are cherry-picking the great big book of multiple choice, and/or infering things it does not say to reconcile differences pointed out to you.

Not a brag, but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[BlackSnake]

/facepalm. So noone EVER has taken something, then wrote some more of the story and have it agree with itself. Star Wars (lucas films) has never taken anything written by another person then accepted that as cannon.

Apparently you do need further explanation as to why you can't use the bible to prove itself true.

In order for something to be true, it requires evidence that is not itself to support the original claim. When you have an overabundance of evidence, you have proof, and when you have enough proof, something is proven true. Do you see how that works?

Of course I see how what you explain works. But Star Wars? Please lol.
If this offers you no evidence, then Denny was correct when he 1st started that this is a useless argument because there is no proof in the eyes of the unbeliever. Its cool with me though. I just thought I could offer you something a little more tangible. I guess its my ignorance that sometimes thinks that I can make a horse drink the water.

My bed time. Good nite.

[racrguy]

How can 40 different authors can write 66 books in a 1500 year spand and be in perfect harmony? Easily.

1. Every person who wrote a book after the first could have read the books before him.
2. When the books were all put together, they were edited to work seamlessly.
3. Over the 12 or so translations, they have been edited to fit the language being translated into, changing things slightly each time. The change would have been done to fit other events in the same text, as translators do.
4. Finally, and most likely, they aren't "in perfect harmony." You are cherry-picking the great big book of multiple choice, and/or infering things it does not say to reconcile differences pointed out to you.

Not a brag, but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

lol, solid barg.

[racrguy]

Of course I see how what you explain works. But Star Wars? Please lol.
If this offers you no evidence, then Denny was correct when he 1st started that this is a useless argument because there is no proof in the eyes of the unbeliever. Its cool with me though. I just thought I could offer you something a little more tangible. I guess its my ignorance that sometimes thinks that I can make a horse drink the water.

My bed time. Good nite.

You've offered up absolutely no proof whatsoever. When you offer up something "tangible" (assuming you know what that means.) Then I'll take it into account.

If you understand how what I'm saying works, then you understand where your argument fails, miserably.

[BlackSnake]

How can 40 different authors can write 66 books in a 1500 year spand and be in perfect harmony? Easily.

1. Every person who wrote a book after the first could have read the books before him.
2. When the books were all put together, they were edited to work seamlessly.
3. Over the 12 or so translations, they have been edited to fit the language being translated into, changing things slightly each time. The change would have been done to fit other events in the same text, as translators do.
4. Finally, and most likely, they aren't "in perfect harmony." You are cherry-picking the great big book of multiple choice, and/or infering things it does not say to reconcile differences pointed out to you.

Not a brag, but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

I had thought this would be said by Racrguy. At least you offer a great argument. But dont you wonder why it was only done...once? I mean, if it were so easily done, wouldnt we have perhaps hundreds of these "fictional" stories made in this fashion.

Catch up to you guys sometime tomorrow. Good nite.

[racrguy]

I had thought this would be said by Racrguy. At least you offer a great argument. But dont you wonder why it was only done...once? I mean, if it were so easily done, wouldnt we have perhaps hundreds of these "fictional" stories made in this fashion.

Catch up to you guys sometime tomorrow. Good nite.

Apparently you missed my Star Wars reference.....

[Maddhattter]

I had thought this would be said by Racrguy. At least you offer a great argument. But dont you wonder why it was only done...once? I mean, if it were so easily done, wouldnt we have perhaps hundreds of these "fictional" stories made in this fashion.

Catch up to you guys sometime tomorrow. Good nite.

I have wondered why it was only done once. However, high school history courses, supplemented by college level Great Texts, Comparative Religion, and World History indicate, quite strongly, that it hasn't happened only once.

We have archeological evidence of the mythology of the Greek gods existing as early as the 8th century BCE. Giving at least 800 years of texts to be written, edited and reconciled, and personal experiences of interaction and/or communication with the gods to be had.

All that being said, it is still a logical fallacy to claim the bible proves the bible. It's called circular reasoning. Using the Star Wars reference that Racrguy brought up, it's akin to saying that we know Alderaan existed because millions of people cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. Both are equally fallacious.