Does anyone have sources online or books that prove that the bible is simply man made only?
Can you prove the universe wasnāt created 30 seconds ago with false age, by a mutant space chicken named Susan?
Donāt muddy the waters.
We all know it was The Invisible Pink Unicorn.
Susan was busy at the time.
im not a christian, im only looking to see if anyone has sources that prove the bible is man made.
Imagine you had the ability to alter reality, the past, the future, anything you wanted.
Would it be possible then for you to prove the universe wasnāt created by Susan 30 minutes ago? If you canāt prove the universe wasnāt created 30 seconds ago by Susan; then you canāt prove the bible was written by men (because you canāt eliminate the chance it was written by Susan as part of her false age scheme).
Of course, what you could show is that the bible seems to contain many mistakes. Which suggests to me that it was not written by the all-knowing, all-powerful deity the Christians have been telling us about.
Heresy! You will most certainly be shaked & baked at 350 for eternity because of that (but never forget that Susan loves you!).
You canāt do that without basting me periodically!
Iāll dry out.
1 Like
Huh! The Bible itslef claims to be āMan Made.ā WTF are you talking about? The closest you can possibly get to a god from the man made writing in the bible is āGod inspiredā through the hands of men. (Through the interpretation of men.) God wrote NOTHING, not even your 10 commandments.
According to the biblical narrative the first set of tablets, inscribed by the finger of God. These were smashed and no one but Moses ever saw them. (Never mind that Moses is now agreed to have been a fictional character by even the Jews. Itās a myth.) The second set of ten commandments were chissled out by moses. (Written by god but interpreted and actually written by Moses (who never actually existed.) The origin of the 10 comandments can be traced to the Jewish exodus from Babylonia, and Babylonian Law. There is not a single passage in the bible that can be traced to a God.
There is not a single passage that can be traced directly to Jesus. There is not a single passage that can be traced to a disciple. None of the desiciples wrote anything. The only thing you have linking any desciple to any passage in the bible is Church Tradition. No facts, no evidence. The disciples of Jesus were illiterate for the most part. He did not convert the aristocrats of his time. (Assuming there was such a person as Jesus.) There is NOTHING written about him during his life. NOTHING. He was a NOBODY who did nothing greater than any of his fellow prophets who walked the streets of the time. Had he done anything special, someone would have written about him. We have actual records of other, so called prophets, that existed around the time of Jesus. But no mention of Jesus at all.
The Bible is Man Made. Perhaps you need to refine your question. Men wrote the bible. The old testament was written in an ancient form of Hebrew and the New Testament was largely written in Greek. Men wrote it.
4 Likes
Letās hope satan has discovered oven bags. Itās my secret to a moist turkey, no basting necessary.
I canāt really pick out a favorite source that gives compelling reasons for it not being true, but a google search will come up with thousands of sites for and against the bible. The ones for it being true rely on sketchy history, faith, and the bible saying itās true. Not very good ways of discerning the truth. The facts are that the bible contradicts itself, has plagiarized myths from other religions, and that there are many versions of the bible. Itās also so vague as to illicit many interpretations of even the same version. You have to decide for yourself if it seems like something a god would come up with.
āis there proof that the bible isnāt the truth ?ā ā¦
The bible is false on so many levels it is hard to know where to start ā¦ and indeed where to finishā¦
so just to keep it manageable here are two line of research ā¦
Archaeology has repeatedly disproven the biblical narratives ,
Jericho had no walls in Joshuaās time ā¦ Ai was destroyed centuries before Joshuaās time .
There is absolutely no evidence that the Hebrews were ever in Egypt in any numbers let alone as slaves.
DNA research has disproved many of the biblical assertions.
There is no evidence that the Hebrews were outsiders taking āIsraelā by conquest.
in fact far from being incommers they were simply just another indigenous group of Canaanites.
Much of the bible is in fact pure fantasy.
Fantasy ā¦ ?
Giants ā¦ā¦ ?
Goliath ,of course, (1 Samuel 17.) but also Deuteronomy 2.10 ,2-20 and 3.11 āFor only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants;ā
Unicorns ā¦. ?
Numbers 23.22
ā God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.ā
Also Psalm 29.6
āHe maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicornā. ,then also Psalm 92.10 & Deuteronomy 33.17.
Satyrs ā¦ ?
Isiah 13:21 But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls shall dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there.
Cockatice ā¦ā¦?
Jermiah 8:17:āFor, behold, I will send serpents, cockatrices, among you, which will not be charmed, and they shall bite you, saith the LORD.ā
Flying Fiery Serpents ā¦. ?
Isaiah 14:29:āRejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken: for out of the serpentās root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent.ā
And even Dragons ā¦ ?
Isiah 13:22 And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged.
And just to out-Dreamworks Dreamworks ,how about a talking Donkey ā¦?
Numbers
22:28 And the LORD opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?
22:30 And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay. (or should that be Neigh).
Is that enough to be going on with ?
Why would I believe this bookās origins are any different to all the others? Afetr all it is an objective fact that humans create or write books, I am not aware of any objective evidence that a deity is even possible, let alone that an extant deity wrote or inspired a book.
That said it is filled with errant nonsense, and the ignorance and prejudice in it seems to match the bronze age patriarchal societies from which it emerged.
thanks everyone who helped.
what i really want to know is if the bible was written by men without divine guidance.
when i search for evidence or proof i either find christian websites proving Gods existence and the bible being inerrant, and all of the topics of the opposite either look fake or are insubstantial. certain atheists on those websites make claims that are incorrect.
Like I said above. Your question was ill-formed. (I suspected as much.) To get to 'divine guidance." You would first have to get to a 'divine anything. As we have no reasonable evidence for anything divine, there is no good reason to leap to the unsubstantiated assumption that the divine exists. If you have any good evidence for it, let us know. I would love to hear about anything that can stand against critical inquiry.
2 Likes
Loads of atheists make incorrect claims. You are not going to find much of that around here. Most of the contributers to this site hold their fellow atheists to the exact same standards as the theists.
We donāt do theist bashing unlessā¦ (it does happen on occasion) ā¦ the theist proves him or her self to be an absolute troll, incapable on an honest discussion. I think we actually like theists. I know, I do. In some ways they allow me to test my knowledge. A good theist will send me to the books for a bit of clarification. Though, I must admit, I am much more likely to be sent there by a fellow atheist for something I have said.
took the very words from my typing fingers.
My favourite example of why this mythology is fiction, centres upon the assertion contained therein, that genetics is purportedly controlled by coloured sticks. An assertion that was found to be a risible lie by a 19th century monk, whose landmark scientific research not only taught us how genetics actually operates, but laid the foundations of modern genetics as a properly constituted scientific discipline.
Apparently, if the cartoon magic man asserted to exist in this mythology had ever been real, it was not only too stupid to present basic biological facts correctly,but was also insufficiently āomniscientā to foresee the emergence of said 19th century monk and his diligent scientific experiments.
Itās almost as if the Bronze Age nomads who scribbled this mythology, never thought that their imaginary cartoon magic man would ever have to deal with a more educated audience.
Indeed, Iām minded to note that over the past 350 years, scientists have alighted upon vast classes of entities and interactions, that the authors of this mythology were incapable of even fantasising about. Those same scientists have placed said classes of entities and interactions into usefully predictive quantitative frameworks of knowledge, that the authors of this mythology would have regarded as magic.
Those same authors of this mythology were not even capable of counting correctly the number of legs that an insect possesses, an exercise that can be accomplished successfully today by any reasonably astute five year old child, that has enjoyed the benefits of living in a developed and scientifically literate nation. As for the risible apologetics on this matter cooked up by the likes of Ken Ham, I donāt even need to be an invertebrate zoologist to know that said apologetics is horseshit from start to finish, but it helps.
if you look online theres insects with four legs
I hope you arenāt offering an insect with a couple legs pulled off as a counterexample.
Strange that Iāve never encountered any during my years as an invertebrate zoologist ā¦
2 Likes
Very Interesting. I get to blow my studentās little indoctrinated brains out of the water once again. āMost insects have 6 legs.ā This is going to go over great with their middle and high school biology teachers. Yea, they say the one set is modified for this or that; however, in the case of Mantis, those damn claws in the front qualify for legs? Really? You are going to have to do some convincing. The biologists swear they are legs. Hmmm.
I will give them the Nymphalidae with legs too small to be noticed, but I am telling you that those mantis claws are just not my idea of what legs look like or what legs do. Modified? How about; have long ago evolved into arm like structures that are now used to capture prey. That just sounds more honest.
Iāll give the biologists the grasshopper. After all, it does use the back legs for ambulation. Even if that means hopping, it is done so with legs. Not like the frigging mantis. Its front legs are the claws of death. Get near that beast and āSNAPā you are lunch. I think the best case can me made for calling the Mantis an insect with 4 legs. Itās ancient ancestor, just like our ancient ancestor, might have been a knuckle dragger, but today, that beast is walking on 4 legs just as we are walking on 2.
Nice Post!