Difference between revisions of "Debate:Why the Bible"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Nothing)
m (Undo revision 560335 by Amantine2 (Talk))
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==Nothing==
 
==Nothing==
The bible is the best selling science fiction book ever made. It was written by a large cult of mentally retarded ancients, who had no idea how anything in the world functioned, from thousands of years ago. Sadly, however, idiocy has survived throughout time and many people still believe in the illogical sh1t spewed from page to page. As such, it may be the single greatest example of trolling, unintentional or not, and perhaps the longest edit war that the world has ever seen.
+
There is no evidence that the Bible is more trustworthy than any other piece of literature. The Bible is merely a fictional novel which has traditionally been believed and baselessly seen as the infallible word of God for hundreds of generations.  
 +
-Helios
  
Probably the oldest of old media, the Bible is a sprawling epic that spans thousands of years. It is part creation myth and part war story, as well as romance, adventure, drama, comedy, amateur pornography and completely irrelevant history. Although everyone knows corrupt Iranian Jews made most of the sh1t up to troll the Egyptian and Israeli Jews.
+
What idiot puts page-long geniologies in a novel??!! Whether the bible is true or not (as I know it is) the ''authors'' seemed to think it's true. --[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 07:58, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
  
The main character of the book is God, who is actually a race of super-intelligent extra-terrestrials who make up ridiculous rules just for the lulz.
+
Agreed. I think it was made by some men wanting to show people morals and values, like Aesop fables.
  
The book is divided into two parts, the Old Testament, and the New Testament. Most scholars agree that the Old Testament is the real deal, while the New Testament is fan fiction, written because there was no proper sequel in sight.
+
While some Biblical events may be confirmable by more scientific-based types of knowledge, belief in most of the Bible is contingent on faith. Nothing more, nothing less. Take that for what it's worth. [[User:Jacobin|Jacobin]] 19:44, 8 April 2007 (EDT)
  
George Bush uses a mixture of The Bible and Mein Kampf for the basis of his politics. See also Hitler, fascism, Nazis, and stupidity.
+
"Take that for what it's worth."-Ooooo... I get a free Bible. -Helios
Contents
+
 
(EDT)
+
I will watch this discussion and see when it gets deleted.  There seems to be a concerted effort at policing even these debate areas.  [[User:Seekcommon|Seekcommon]] 19:34 8 April 2007 (CDT)
 +
 
 +
Hmmm... if we consider the New Testament as Bible 2.0, then would the Koran be Bible 3.0 or Bible 2.1? And where does this leave the Book of Mormon? 4.0? 3.1? 2.2? 3.1.1? --[[User:AppalledBystander|AppalledBystander]] 07:32, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
Well since Christianity actually branched off of Judaism the '''Old''' Testament would be v2.0  -Helios
 +
 
 +
The bible has been put together by hundreds of authors, over the course of around 900 years, and has subsequently been translated (several times), re-written and "improved" by many other hundreds of contributers and writers since. To put any kind of significance upon it at all is at best misguided and at worst plain idiotic. That is not to say that there are some good messages in there, however the majority is just plain weird. [[User:Bolly Ottihw|Bolly Ottihw]] 21:02, 19 April 2007
 +
 
 +
If a book was made today and was said to be the work of god, would you believe it? The world isn't as small as it used to be. Chris
 +
 
 +
You guys are right, the bible is total garbage.[[User:Rebiu|Rebiu]] 23:01, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
  
 
==2Nihilism==
 
==2Nihilism==

Revision as of 23:36, 16 November 2008

Nothing

There is no evidence that the Bible is more trustworthy than any other piece of literature. The Bible is merely a fictional novel which has traditionally been believed and baselessly seen as the infallible word of God for hundreds of generations. -Helios

What idiot puts page-long geniologies in a novel??!! Whether the bible is true or not (as I know it is) the authors seemed to think it's true. --BenjaminS 07:58, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

Agreed. I think it was made by some men wanting to show people morals and values, like Aesop fables.

While some Biblical events may be confirmable by more scientific-based types of knowledge, belief in most of the Bible is contingent on faith. Nothing more, nothing less. Take that for what it's worth. Jacobin 19:44, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

"Take that for what it's worth."-Ooooo... I get a free Bible. -Helios

I will watch this discussion and see when it gets deleted. There seems to be a concerted effort at policing even these debate areas. Seekcommon 19:34 8 April 2007 (CDT)

Hmmm... if we consider the New Testament as Bible 2.0, then would the Koran be Bible 3.0 or Bible 2.1? And where does this leave the Book of Mormon? 4.0? 3.1? 2.2? 3.1.1? --AppalledBystander 07:32, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

Well since Christianity actually branched off of Judaism the Old Testament would be v2.0 -Helios

The bible has been put together by hundreds of authors, over the course of around 900 years, and has subsequently been translated (several times), re-written and "improved" by many other hundreds of contributers and writers since. To put any kind of significance upon it at all is at best misguided and at worst plain idiotic. That is not to say that there are some good messages in there, however the majority is just plain weird. Bolly Ottihw 21:02, 19 April 2007

If a book was made today and was said to be the work of god, would you believe it? The world isn't as small as it used to be. Chris

You guys are right, the bible is total garbage.Rebiu 23:01, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

2Nihilism

I know the Bible to be the true Word of God because I have studied it for decades. They are the reasons why I am, as well as others, are driven to study it. There are no grave errors or inconsistencies within the Bible. This is only professed by those who hate Christians and Jews that keep repeating it in the vain hope someone will believe them. Just because you don't get it doesn't make it errant. It just betrays their ignorance and illiteracy. It is readily apparent that some of the ridiculous statements being made here are thinly disguised examples of religious bigotry. Every one of the statements denouncing the Bible as being the Word of God are false, out of context, and total garbage. I see no serious discussion here but only an adolescently motivated hatefest against Judeo-Christianity.--Roopilots6 14:31, 25 May 2007 (EDT)

Roopilots6, you mind as well just give this up. The people you are debating with are nothing more than hard-core Christ haters.Sysop-Богдан Talk 15:01, 25 May 2007 (EDT)
I'm not writing it for them. It's for everyone else that reads it. Just so people can see the difference between nihilists and everyone else.--Roopilots6 22:12, 27 May 2007 (EDT)

This is a typical comment by a brainwashed Christian zealot. They always say how accepting they are of other people. Until any discussion comes into play questioning the bible or their faith. Its a silly book written by some desert nomads and has no basis guiding todays societies and norms. If Jesus could cure blind people...why are people blind? And to say the earth life was created 5K years ago has not facts to support it. Face it we all are a byproduct of algae

I would agree that this arguement is somewhat one sided. I personaly believe that the bible was written by the gretest scolars ever or by beggers, if it provides some sense moral and comfort for people then its worth a read. Even if your not a christian it still has some good morals and is probably worth a read. .Concretemuncher

I personally hold to the idea of limited Biblical Inerrancy, however most of the stories in it are based on History (although frequently changed by author bias, or changes during the oral tradition). The Authors did not intend on writing a simple novel. The wrote what they believed as Truth. Even though modern science calls the historic, geographic, and scientific statements into question, it still provides what should be common sense morals and ideas. It shows a loving God who cares for us, desires us to be good, not a people hating "Volcano" god. I have gotten something out of it, ideas about life, and thanks to my Jewish friends, humor (Apparently the OT is riddled with Yiddish humor). That's my rant. I dare you to counter it. --User:Capercorn Talk contribs 21:37, 7 February 2008 (EST)


The danger of the direction this discussion is going is for simple minded people to read this, in passing, and believe that the bible is just a collection of cute myths that were gathered together. It is far more than that based on MANY evidences. The most obvious one I would like to site is the thousands, thats right, thousands of documents we have discovered over the years from ancient history. The oldest of which, the book of Mark, was found to be dated within like a few decades of the ACTUAL events taking place. I have learned that the bible has somewhere in the neighborhood of 5,000 different manuscripts that are survived from that time period. These NUMEROUS attestations provide overwhelming evidence that the bible can be trusted as a whole as the inspired word of God, and our savior Jesus Christ. -matt