Jump to content

Bible Disproved By One Scripture


Recommended Posts

You wa t to talk about scientific evidence as in truths that we can observe? Well how about miracles

Like the Virgin Mary appearing several times, the stigmata of padre pio which only explanation was God. Or how about a host( the Eucharist) turning into flesh and then being tested in New York and coming back as the heart vessel of a man from the Middle East who had been beaten in the chest and tortured, perfectly matching the description of Jesus Christ who the Eucharist is said to be turned to

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 245
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hey guys especially moontanman I just want to apologize for some very rude and disrespectful comments I have made lately I guess I just have been very frustrated because I can't stack to anybody here

So much for keeping an open mind...

I find those who are anti-theist tend to be a bit too hard on those who believe. It takes time to gather all the data, develop critical thinking skills, and debate the topic enough until you get to th

Posted Images

Like the Virgin Mary appearing several times, the stigmata of padre pio which only explanation was God. Or how about a host( the Eucharist) turning into flesh and then being tested in New York and coming back as the heart vessel of a man from the Middle East who had been beaten in the chest and tortured, perfectly matching the description of Jesus Christ who the Eucharist is said to be turned to

 

 

Just out of idle curiosity, how do you know?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or how about a host( the Eucharist) turning into flesh and then being tested in New York and coming back as the heart vessel of a man from the Middle East who had been beaten in the chest and tortured, perfectly matching the description of Jesus Christ who the Eucharist is said to be turned to

 

As they say on Wikipedia: citation needed.

 

And as you mention "being tested" (and this is a science forum) I will expect a reference to a peer reviewed scientific paper in a reliable journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I am starting to understand why the 'anti' and not the silent 'a'. I used to believe these lies.... why should I stand by while some other poor sod listens too and accepts these lies as true? I do not want to see my fellow humans taken in by some con merchant peddling a non existent god to benefit his own gain or to some idiot (like myself some many years ago) who is spouting BS based upon what they believe to be true based on what they have been told and what is in a book. I want the human race to improve and advance in it's learning - not to be held back by some backward rubbish which is clearly bull crap.

 

It might sound harsh, but, I feel the same with religion now as I do with homeopathy. We all know it is BS, so if you are peddling it (whilst knowing it to be untrue or not understanding why it is not true) then you are either a con man or an idiot. What other reason would you have for pushing it?

 

I find those who are anti-theist tend to be a bit too hard on those who believe. It takes time to gather all the data, develop critical thinking skills, and debate the topic enough until you get to the point where you can draw confident conclusions. I find that most people who were brought up religious then became atheist, did so in stages, where they began to doubt, found conflicts and obvious falsehoods, till they got to the place where they simply rejected theism.

 

And not everyone takes all of the steps to become well educated on the topic for whatever reasons.

 

But, I'll agree that those who are knowledgeable and critical thinkers must be missing something or have some ulterior motive to not doubt.

Edited by zapatos
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So the medical examiner who did the testing was also involved in examining the Shroud of Turin, and other religious artifacts, which he found were all just what the Church said they were? It sounds like he's not an independent source for testing, he does exactly this for a living, and writes popular (not scientific) books about it. His methodology is questionable and biased at best, and influenced by sensationalism and profit at worst.

 

His credentials as a county medical examiner don't give anyone the right to take what he says as valid without examining his evidence and methods, which are lacking in your link. Can you link to any peer-reviewed papers the doctor has published on this subject?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That is an extraordinary story.

 

Therefore, I'm afraid I would need a lot more than a magazine article (by someone who is clearly not impartial) before I gave it any credence.

 

I used to believe everything I read when I was young. After all, if it weren't true, they wouldn't publish it, right? Sadly, I have found that is a very poor approach. It is safer to disbelieve everything you read.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Loll I'm done with you no matter if I had Stephen hawking himself verify this incident you still ask for some stupid peer reviewed paper I mean who are you to just completely disregard something a neutral person would at least consider you seemed to have never heard of this incident a moment ago now you are all of a sudden you are an expert just because you think it proves me wrong I can just as well completely disregard what you said but I won't because I don't let my opinion get in the way

Strange thank you for being reasonable about it I would love to research this further also

Link to post
Share on other sites

Loll I'm done with you no matter if I had Stephen hawking himself verify this incident you still ask for some stupid peer reviewed paper I mean who are you to just completely disregard something a neutral person would at least consider you seemed to have never heard of this incident a moment ago now you are all of a sudden you are an expert just because you think it proves me wrong I can just as well completely disregard what you said but I won't because I don't let my opinion get in the way

Strange thank you for being reasonable about it I would love to research this further also

 

 

FFS that's my last meter :doh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being skeptical is about initial disbelief, assuming something is false, and then following up to verify it. I also take with a grain of salt "examination" of evidence for Bigfoot from Bigfoot hunters. They always seem to be the only "experts" who verify evidence in support.

 

Critical thinking helps us see how important the methods we use to study reality are, and that we can't leap to unfounded conclusions and expect to find anything we can trust there.


you still ask for some stupid peer reviewed paper

 

Major stumbling block alert!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would we agree though that if this event did happen it supports Gods existence to the point of near guarantee

 

A single piece of evidence wouldn't be any kind of guarantee. It would be supportive evidence, yes, if you can trust the methods used to examine the sample.

 

But there is an awful lot we don't know about the circumstances. All we have is people's word that there was no contamination or tampering.

 

I remember being told in church that the Bible had changed very little after so many centuries of translations, which was a sign that it was divinely inspired. I just accepted that as fact. Then I began to be skeptical about it, so I studied for myself and found out how MUCH has been changed in the Bible, things that really do change meaning and are designed to make beliefs "fit" in all the 9000+ Christian sects.

 

Thinking critically, you should never just accept that something like this was treated in a rigorous manner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow DrP you are unbearablely naive there are to many ways that we can see God exists

 

Would we agree though that if this event did happen it supports Gods existence to the point of near guarantee

 

 

 

I used to believe the same thing :). There is no evidence for that story. What use is it anyway? A better miracle would be to restore someones bad heart with that bread to flesh trick. It is more likely that the priest was a victim of a prank - that happens all the time. Also, as a thought, that would make an ace murder mystery! The murderer hides the body parts by having them miraculously manifested during the eucharist! :)

 

Even if evidence was provided for some of the wild claims of healing, for example, you would need to show that it is more than just a placebo.

Edited by DrP
Link to post
Share on other sites

A better miracle would be to restore someones bad heart with that bread to flesh trick.

 

The best medical miracle, the one that would be VERY difficult to attribute to natural causes, would be the regeneration of a missing limb. That should be a piece of cake for a god, since we even have an embryonic stage where regeneration is preferred over scar tissue. The mechanisms are there.

 

No amputee has ever had a limb regrown though, never once in recorded history. Either god refuses prayers from ALL amputees but grants miracle prayers for other illnesses, or god isn't miraculously healing anybody.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find those who are anti-theist tend to be a bit too hard on those who believe. It takes time to gather all the data, develop critical thinking skills, and debate the topic enough until you get to the point where you can draw confident conclusions. I find that most people who were brought up religious then became atheist, did so in stages, where they began to doubt, found conflicts and obvious falsehoods, till they got to the place where they simply rejected theism.

And not everyone takes all of the steps to become well educated on the topic for whatever reasons.

I think you hit the nail on the head...well said. I went through a similar process and I often find myself being a bit hard on those who believe. I think one needs to be aware of the enormous influence of genes and environmental programming/strengthening on people's natural underlying susceptibility to superstitions. I find myself in a conservative society where the majority of people are religious and I am often being frustrated by how people just assume that everybody around them are also religious. They also see it as their God-given obligation to ensure that pro-religious ideologies are being promoted in the public sphere like pre-schools and schools while everything that are perceived as anti-religious (like evolution) are being ignored, questioned and even ridiculed. This is the same kind of thing that one sees on many religious websites. They believe they do the right thing and they are entirely ignorant of the fact that their own religious bias is propagating an unfounded ideology while supressing knowledge and inquisitiveness in the process.

Edited by Memammal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Memmamal:

 

In my experience, nonbelievers generally are not as vocal as believers, or, when they are vocal, they have often been on the receiving end of over zealous evangelstis who are quick to condemn those who don't subscribe to their religious morals and beliefs.

 

 

It is often the gentlest of churchgoers who criticize others most openly, because they have come to believe what some might label as fear mongering themselves:

 

If scriptures aren't taken literally, then people will decide for themselves what is right and wrong, and chaos and evil will rein

If we don't help save other people's souls by showing them the one, true way to salvation via our religion, we are in danger of being condemned ourselves.

If someone doesn't believe in (our) scriptures and our God, he/she must be evil or else his/her soul has been taken over by evil.

If one doesn't pray regularly, God will not look after you.

If someone doesn't observe our religious rituals, e.g., baptism, confirmation, marriage, he/she will not be saved.

etc,

Edited by disarray
Link to post
Share on other sites

@ disarray: I agree.

 

Refer to this Q&A re the alleged miracle on a Christian web site. I am unable to find any reference to the purported event in any of the major independent news publications, only on religious (predominantly Roman Catholic) sites, and that seems rather suspicious. It is also not listed on the Wikipedia page Eucharistic miracles...not that I am implying that any of those miracles in fact happened.

 

PS. It reads like something from a Dan Brown novel.

Edited by Memammal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool UI - Of course I wonder at the amazing existence of life and the universe... I still get the numinous feeling of joy and humility when I see a huge yellow full moon or a beautiful scene scape. I still hold to my moral code.... (er, well, sorts, maybe not the ridiculous celibacy, but still), I still try not to lie and put honesty and love high in my list of important things. But nothing I have ever seen is proof of a god - not the kindness of people, the placebo healing of the sick, or the lies of the large church organisation like the RC church with their fake miracles and raping of young boys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool UI - Of course I wonder at the amazing existence of life and the universe... I still get the numinous feeling of joy and humility when I see a huge yellow full moon or a beautiful scene scape. I still hold to my moral code.... (er, well, sorts, maybe not the ridiculous celibacy, but still), I still try not to lie and put honesty and love high in my list of important things. But nothing I have ever seen is proof of a god - not the kindness of people, the placebo healing of the sick, or the lies of the large church organisation like the RC church with their fake miracles and raping of young boys.

I understand that it is tough when you see all the horrible things in the world and I won't argue with you but at least we agree that the nature of the universe is pretty freaking cool
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that it is tough when you see all the horrible things in the world and I won't argue with you but at least we agree that the nature of the universe is pretty freaking cool

 

 

Yes it is, aren't then God/s irrelevant?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.