Debunking the 7 Myths Regarding the Bible

[Questerr]

I can easily "prove" to any rational person that the resurrection did not happen, using all of the evidence ever collected on the topic.

No you can’t. That the “Black Swan Fallacy”.

 

[Galactic Spin]

No you can’t. That the “Black Swan Fallacy”.

Sure I can, if "prove" is taken colloquially. True proofs are for mathematics, I get that.

But yes, I can "prove" the resurrection is a lie, just as easily as I can "prove" the earth is a spheroid.

 

[Questerr]

Sure I can, if "prove" is taken colloquially. True proofs are for mathematics, I get that.

But yes, I can "prove" the resurrection is a lie, just as easily as I can "prove" the earth is a spheroid.

You can’t prove it’s a lie. That’s the core of the Black Swan Fallacy.

Lack of evidence is not evidence something doesn’t exist.

But the core of belief should be positive evidence. We can’t prove the resurrection didn’t happen, but until verifiable positive proof for it is presented, there’s no reason to believe it did happen.

 

[Logicman]

You can't prove a negative.

The accounts of Jesus are not negatives. They're recorded history, and you can't bust them.

 

[Galactic Spin]

You can’t prove it’s a lie.

I sure can. I can, indeed, prove to any rational person the resurrection did not and cannot happen. Whether I can prove someone else was lying or was just delusional is a different idea.

Lack of evidence is not evidence something doesn’t exist.

That's one of the most overused and wrongly used sayings. Yes, for example, the utter lack of evidence of Sasquatch is, itself, evidence sasquach does not exist.

 

[Rumpel]

I am providing an opportunity for everyone to view these videos to get a very honest understanding as to why the Bible is both true and the Word of GOD. If you are not interested please don't watch these ----- just go about your business and let eternity take its course. I don't need to debate what already has been run through the mill. This is just a consolidated grouping for Christians to review and ponder. Atheists need not view. https://genesisapologetics.com/seve..._Cn5nCzBj35EgHSjkpaEpZfd052Fgc9IaApNnEALw_wcB

Could you please list those 7 myths in writing?

 

[Rumpel]

I quote these "myths" now myself!

The Seven Myths addressed in this program include:

• Myth 1: “While the Bible may be ‘inspired,’ by God, it’s not ‘inerrant’ and parts of it are just myth.”
• Myth 2: “The Bible’s account of Creation is only metaphorical, the six creation days were not ordinary days, and creation really unfolded over millions of years.”
• Myth 3: “Genesis 1 and 2 provide two different accounts of creation.”
• Myth 4: “Adam and Eve were not real people, only allegorical figures in the story of human evolution.”
• Myth 5: “The Bible’s account of Noah’s Flood is just myth and was drawn from writings from the Ancient Near East.”
• Myth 6: “Moses did not actually write the first five books of the Bible.”
• Myth 7: “Dinosaurs died out millions of years ago, did not walk with man, and are not mentioned in the Bible.”

Genesis Apologetics

genesisapologetics.com

These "myths" are not myths but facts.

And I doubt that the Bible is inspired by any god.
It was inspired by other earlier human writers.

 

[Logicman]

Since the entire Bible is supposed to be the “inerrant word of god” I think it’s funny you insist on specifying one part, while ignoring the other parts.

Lets start right at the beginning shall we (Genesis)?

It continues to amuse me that with all your supposed smarts, you guys STILL are unable to provide a single 'BEST' ONE EXAMPLE ( 1 - JUST ONE) of a fictitious person, place, or event in the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). PERSON, PLACE OR EVENT. If you feel froggy then cite the pertinent scripture(s) and make your case with some kind of evidence or substantiation why it's fictitious. Still waiting to see that bad boy.

You're not even up-to-date on the 6,000 year old earth debate. How much time passed between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2? Duh.

You theological dilettantes are hilarious, and inept.

 

[Logicman]

I can easily "prove" to any rational person that the resurrection did not happen, using all of the evidence ever collected on the topic.

No, you can't. But if you think you can then cite your 'BEST' ONE EXAMPLE ( 1 - JUST ONE) from the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) why the resurrection if false. Remember to cite the pertinent scripture(s) and make your case with some kind of evidence or substantiation why it's fictitious.

 

[Dragonfly]

You're not even up-to-date on the 6,000 year old earth debate.

Oh yeah? Explain it to me then.

I know we have at least one person here at DP who thinks not only the earth, but the entire Universe is only 6000 years old.

So please, bring me "up-to-date".

 

[ASHES]

Oh yeah? Explain it to me then.

I know we have at least one person here at DP who thinks not only the earth, but the entire Universe is only 6000 years old.

So please, bring me "up-to-date".

Next, bronze smelting 101.

 

[Questerr]

I sure can. I can, indeed, prove to any rational person the resurrection did not and cannot happen. Whether I can prove someone else was lying or was just delusional is a different idea.


That's one of the most overused and wrongly used sayings. Yes, for example, the utter lack of evidence of Sasquatch is, itself, evidence sasquach does not exist.

There was zero evidence of black holes a thousand years ago. Did that prove black holes didn’t exist?

 

[Dragonfly]

It continues to amuse me that with all your supposed smarts, you guys STILL are unable to provide a single 'BEST' ONE EXAMPLE ( 1 - JUST ONE) of a fictitious person, place, or event in the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). PERSON, PLACE OR EVENT. If you feel froggy then cite the pertinent scripture(s) and make your case with some kind of evidence or substantiation why it's fictitious. Still waiting to see that bad boy.

You're not even up-to-date on the 6,000 year old earth debate. How much time passed between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2? Duh.

You theological dilettantes are hilarious, and inept.

Why should I believe New Testament is 100% factually accurate and true, if the Old Testament is littered with fictitious nonsense?

They're both part of the same Bible. More importantly, the OT is the first part of the Bible. The beginning. Sets the tone.

If one part is nothing more than fables, then why should anyone believe the whole thing isn't just fables?

 

[Logicman]

Why should I believe New Testament is 100% factually accurate and true, if the Old Testament is littered with fictitious nonsense?

Quit stalling and squirming around and cite your 'BEST' ONE EXAMPLE ( 1 - JUST ONE) of a fictitious person, place, or event in the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). PERSON, PLACE OR EVENT. Then cite the pertinent scripture(s) and make your case with some kind of evidence or substantiation why it's fictitious. Still waiting to see that bad boy.

 

[soylentgreen]

Silly boy, the only record of the Exodus seems to appear in the Bible. Fiction isn't something that happens.

So, how many orphanages were started by atheists? You will find historically, it were Christians who got the homeless off the streets, and not the pagans, and not the Moslems, and not the Hindi. They learned that lesson from Christian Missionaries. The very same can be said of slavery. Being sold into bondage was once the "practical" way of getting one's money out of the poor. And it wasn't started by Christians.

It is not the only record of the movements of the israelies and you are just pointing to one fictional account, not the only account.

Nor was it ended by christians. Slavery stopped because it was no longer economical. Simple as that.

As usual you demonstrate what thieves christians be for wanting the credit for that which they did not earn. Your charity only created a dysfunctional poverty trap that caused generational poverty. I could easily point out the many evil deeds of abuse, rape and murder of children in christian care. Of the churches implicitness in those deeds.

Doing good towards others is a natural instinct in most. The people who actually care about children do so because it is in their nature not because of a belief in some god.

 

[Questerr]

Quit stalling and squirming around and cite your 'BEST' ONE EXAMPLE ( 1 - JUST ONE) of a fictitious person, place, or event in the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). PERSON, PLACE OR EVENT. Then cite the pertinent scripture(s) and make your case with some kind of evidence or substantiation why it's fictitious. Still waiting to see that bad boy.

THE CENSUS OF QUIRINIUS AT JESUS’S BIRTH

It is a 100% fictitious event. Romans censuses did not require people travel to the place of their father’s birth. There’s no record Caesar Augustus required any empire-wide census at any point during his tenure. And Quirinius didn’t become governor of Syria until 5 years after Herod died, so it’s impossible for Jesus to have been born both when Quirinius conducted his census of Roman Syria/Palestine and when Herod was alive.

 

[LittleNipper]

It is not the only record of the movements of the israelies and you are just pointing to one fictional account, not the only account.

Nor was it ended by christians. Slavery stopped because it was no longer economical. Simple as that.

Read about the ending of Slavery in England.

As usual you demonstrate what thieves christians be for wanting the credit for that which they did not earn. Your charity only created a dysfunctional poverty trap that caused generational poverty. I could easily point out the many evil deeds of abuse, rape and murder of children in christian care. Of the churches implicitness in those deeds.

As usual you demonstrate your own hypocrisy. There are so many more evil deeds of abuse, rape and murder of children in secular care. When a Priest is suspect, it is so easy to assume that he is acting in GOD's behalf. When an atheist commits a crime, I'm very sure his beliefs are not a matter for public record --- only the crime.

Doing good towards others is a natural instinct in most. The people who actually care about children do so because it is in their nature not because of a belief in some god.

I don't believe so --- especially when the kid throws a ball through one's window or damages one's car. Human nature is a funny thing. I believe Christianity is more consistent.

 

[Questerr]

Read about the ending of Slavery in England.

As usual you demonstrate your own hypocrisy. There are so many more evil deeds of abuse, rape and murder of children in secular care. When a Priest is suspect, it is so easy to assume that he is acting in GOD's behalf. When an atheist commits a crime, I'm very sure his beliefs are not a matter for public record --- only the crime.

I don't believe so --- especially when the kid throws a ball through one's window or damages one's car. Human nature is a funny thing. I believe Christianity is more consistent.

Christians opposed slavery in spite of the Bible, not because of it. The Bible explicitly condones slavery.

It was non-Biblical enlightenment philosophies that ended slavery.

 

[Dragonfly]

Quit stalling

Not stalling.

Rather than jumping 3/4's of the way into the bible, I chose to start right at the beginning.

Why is that an issue?

Again - if one part of the supposed "inerrant word of god" is fictitious, then it sure brings into question the rest of it.

 

[Rumpel]

I am providing an opportunity for everyone to view these videos to get a very honest understanding as to why the Bible is both true and the Word of GOD. If you are not interested please don't watch these ----- just go about your business and let eternity take its course. I don't need to debate what already has been run through the mill. This is just a consolidated grouping for Christians to review and ponder. Atheists need not view. https://genesisapologetics.com/seve..._Cn5nCzBj35EgHSjkpaEpZfd052Fgc9IaApNnEALw_wcB

The Bible itself is the myth.
Those "seven myths" are facts.

 

[Mulefoot]

Christians opposed slavery in spite of the Bible, not because of it. The Bible explicitly condones slavery.

It was non-Biblical enlightenment philosophies that ended slavery.

Christian abolitionism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Although many Enlightenment philosophers opposed slavery, it was Christian activists, attracted by strong religious elements, who initiated and organized an abolitionist movement"

 

[Questerr]

Christian abolitionism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Although many Enlightenment philosophers opposed slavery, it was Christian activists, attracted by strong religious elements, who initiated and organized an abolitionist movement"

And they did it in spite of the Bible. The Bible explicitly condones slavery and not once does the Bible call slavery evil or say people shouldn’t own slaves.

 

[Logicman]

THE CENSUS OF QUIRINIUS AT JESUS’S BIRTH

It is a 100% fictitious event. Romans censuses did not require people travel to the place of their father’s birth. There’s no record Caesar Augustus required any empire-wide census at any point during his tenure. And Quirinius didn’t become governor of Syria until 5 years after Herod died, so it’s impossible for Jesus to have been born both when Quirinius conducted his census of Roman Syria/Palestine and when Herod was alive.

You haven't done your homework on that either.

Here's a site with numerous reasons why your claim lacks merit.

Part 1:

https://christianthinktank.com/qr1.html

Part 2:

The Lukan Census: Part two

christianthinktank.com

What's more...

"William Ramsey noted (NBD, s.v. "Quirinius"): Ramsay held that Quirinius was appointed an additional legate of Syria between 10 and 7 bc, for the purpose of conducting the Homanadensian war, while the civil administration of the province was in the hands of other governors, including Sentius Saturninus (8-6 bc), under whom, according to Tertullian (Adv. Marc. 4. 19), the census of Lk. 2:1ff. was held.

Quirinius could EASILY have been responsible for the census.

And curiously enough, even if that were NOT the case somehow, the linguistic data of the last few decades indicates that Luke 2.1 should be translated 'BEFORE the census of Quirinius' instead of the customary 'FIRST census of Quirinius'--see Nigel Turner, Grammatical Insights into the New Testament, T&T Clark: 1966, pp. 23,24 and Syntax, p. 32. This would 'solve the problem' without even requiring two terms of office for Q.

And, while we are talking about Greek here...the term Luke uses for Quirinius' 'governorship' is the VERY general term hegemon, which in extra-biblical Greek was applied to prefects, provincial governors, and even Caesar himself. In the NT it is similarly used as a 'wide' term, applying to procurators--Pilate, Festus, Felix--and to general 'rulers' (Mt 2.6). [The New Intl. Dict. of New Test. Theology (ed. Brown) gives as the range of meaning: "leader, commander, chief" (vol 1.270)...this term would have applied to Quirinius at MANY times in his political career, and as a general term, Syria would have had several individuals that could be properly so addressed at the same time. Remember, Justin Martyr called him 'procurator' in Apology 1:34, which is also covered by this term.] My point is...nothing is really out of order here..."

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/quirinius.html

 

[Logicman]

Christians opposed slavery in spite of the Bible, not because of it.

That's another one of your theological fairy tales.

Jesus: "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free.” – Luke 4:18

“Love your neighbor as you love yourself.” – Matthew 19:19

“Love your enemies.” – Matthew 5:44

What part of “Love your neighbor,” and “Love your enemies” do you think in any way approves of enslaving one's neighbor?

Next - #1: It wasn’t Jesus’ mission to start a war throughout the Roman empire to abolish slavery. Jesus’ mission was the reconciliation of men to God and the salvation of mankind via Jesus’ personal payment for the sins of men.

#2: That being said, Jesus taught that men should be ‘born again’ (in the Holy Spirit). Once the Holy Spirit indwells a believer at the point of salvation, He starts the process of Progressive Sanctification (see article below), and one of the effects of the indwelling Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5-7) is that of causing, or compelling a person, by a change of heart and mind and with the believer’s cooperation, to become more and more like Christ –loving one’s fellow man instead of enslaving him. In short, Jesus came to set the slaves free by changing the hearts of men who would enslave them in the first place.

https://www.gotquestions.org/progressive-sanctification.html


Case closed.

 

[Questerr]

That's another one of your theological abortions.

Jesus: "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free.” – Luke 4:18

“Love your neighbor as you love yourself.” – Matthew 19:19

“Love your enemies.” – Matthew 5:44

What part of “Love your neighbor,” and “Love your enemies” do you think in any way approves of enslaving one's neighbor?

Next - #1: It wasn’t Jesus’ mission to start a war throughout the Roman empire to abolish slavery. Jesus’ mission was the reconciliation of men to God and the salvation of mankind via Jesus’ personal payment for the sins of men.

#2: That being said, Jesus taught that men should be ‘born again’ (in the Holy Spirit). Once the Holy Spirit indwells a believer at the point of salvation, He starts the process of Progressive Sanctification (see article below), and one of the effects of the indwelling Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5-7) is that of causing, or compelling a person, by a change of heart and mind and with the believer’s cooperation, to become more and more like Christ –loving one’s fellow man instead of enslaving him. In short, Jesus came to set the slaves free by changing the hearts of men who would enslave them in the first place.

https://www.gotquestions.org/progressive-sanctification.html


Case closed.

Jesus also told slaves to be good to their masters, even cruel ones. Why didn’t he say “slavery is evil and all slaves should be freed”