The Atheist Thread

Of course Sasquamo, the Bible is a very important book to many billions of people in the world and I will not deny the impact it has.  However, my argument is that people take a lot of it far too truthfully and some, such as Creationists, take it even more to the extreme and to me, that's just weird.

So you believe that Jesus was resurrected after he was nailed too and died on the cross?

Nobody has ever had that happen to them since and many thousands of people have been worthy of such an accolade too.

Surely if this happened, it would have happened again?


Edited by Geck0 - December 30 2006 at 13:53

Doesn't match known history? WHAT?
    Prove the Bible to be false? WHAT?

Edited by progismylife - December 30 2006 at 14:06

stonebeard wrote: Well, for instance, Buffy the Vampire Slayer was resurrected after being killed by The One in the first season, and she indeed went on to continue fighting evil for a subsequent 6 seasons.

    

xbillion

Geck0 wrote: Stonie, Buffy isn't real.

progismylife wrote: Doesn't match known history? WHAT?     Prove the Bible to be false? WHAT?

I don't remember specific examples, but I've heard, read, and seen things about how the Bible's account of history conflicts with many other historical documents.  This is no big deal of course, it just means the people who wrote down the stuff in the Bible didn't really know exactly what had happened and when it had happened.  In fact, I've even heard the issue addressed by priests, and they are willing to admit that the Bible isn't 100% accurate in historical matters.  The bottom line is, the Bible is not a history book, and the faster you realize that, the faster you can get to the good parts.

^ The thing is, the Bible reads like a history book for a good portion. Isn't Numbers just a book of census.

That's just silly, though. 

Edited by Geck0 - December 30 2006 at 14:21

stonebeard wrote: ^ The thing is, the Bible reads like a history book for a good portion. Isn't Numbers just a book of census. [IMG]height=17 alt=Wacko src="http://www.progarchives.com/forum/smileys/smiley29.gif" width=17 align=absMiddle>

    
No Numbers isn't just a census it has some things about the israelites in it as well.

Geck0 wrote: That's just silly, though.

progismylife wrote: Sasquamo wrote: progismylife wrote: Doesn't match known history? WHAT?     Prove the Bible to be false? WHAT? I don't remember specific examples, but I've heard, read, and seen things about how the Bible's account of history conflicts with many other historical documents.  This is no big deal of course, it just means the people who wrote down the stuff in the Bible didn't really know exactly what had happened and when it had happened.  In fact, I've even heard the issue addressed by priests, and they are willing to admit that the Bible isn't 100% accurate in historical matters.  The bottom line is, the Bible is not a history book, and the faster you realize that, the faster you can get to the good parts.      The Bible IS a history book. There are some things mentioned in the Bible that are nowhere else and where used to prove the Bible false, until archaelogists discovered these things only mentioned in the Bible. So don't tell me The Bible isn't a history book. Go to the British Museum (if you can).

I don't know, when the Bible says one thing and a hundred other historical documents and artifacts disagree, I'm going to go with the majority.  Ask any historian and I'll bet they'd tell you that it's probably not a good idea to take you're history from the Bible.  There is some historical truth, but many inaccuracies as well.