It must be true, ‘cos it’s in the bible!

Posted on by Ark

         Atheist

” ….mockery of the Gospel and a refusal to listen to the warnings of God.”

The gospel should be mocked – from the first to the last. Aside from the fact that it is riddled with every form of inaccuracy/falsehood you care to name, it can be indirectly and directly linked to some of the worst actions and periods in human history. You name it, you’ll find it in this revolting ”book”.

Theist

 Love that atheist logic – ‘every form of inaccuracy’…..two plus two =5. Is that one of them?! Can you actually name ANY inaccuracy? And one of the worst actions that the Gospel is DIRECTLY linked to….will I hold my breath? Sometimes fundie atheists can be somewhat amusing in their rants and illogicality!

I’ll link to the post if anyone really wants.

In the meantime, can you possibly name any inaccuracy, or just one ”worst” action one can point the finger at the gospel?

Feel free to add your two cents!

Ark

94 thoughts on “It must be true, ‘cos it’s in the bible!”

  2. ” ….mockery of the Gospel and a refusal to listen to the warnings of God.”

    Before I could listen to the “warnings of god” I’d need to be persuaded that there was a god. And that the gospel contained a communication from this god. And that the person doing the “warning” actually understood that communication correctly. They aren’t even close to doing any of that.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. Yep, whenever someone tries to get Christianity in your face, just ask them how do they know the Bible (or their God) is true. Because if they can’t answer that properly, then everything else they say from the Bible doesn’t mean shit.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

    2. I’d like to know why the God who is omniscient and knew billions of aeons before the Creation what you would have to have no option but to do — feels the need to write a book about it; or why offer totally redundant ‘warnings’—

      “Hey, you!”

      “Yes, your Godship?”

      “Stay in bed all day tomorrow, ‘cos yer gonna get up in defiance of my Warnings to go for a tinkle, slip on a dead rat the cat dragged in, fall and smash yer silly skull!”

      “Silly?”

      Yo … you don’t believe in Me so you’ll ignore my warning. Sorry Dude, nothin’ I can do about it. It’s in the future, you see, and fixed.”

      “Fixed? Oh … otherwise it wouldn’t be THE future, no?”

      “Ya got it Dude. But there may be hope for you if you’ll read My infallible book ….”

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  3. Ark-

    Surely you know the necessary distinction between things written AS IF they are true, versus the account of things WHICH ARE true.

    Example: when the group of men banded together by oath swearing they would not eat til they killed Paul, this was TRUE as their plot, but false in that they failed.

    They aborted their mission and enjoyed their sandwich. Scripture presents things as they are, bones, warts, and all.

    This fact of brutal honesty alone should serve as a wake up call to the books innate integrity.

    The accounts are all true.

    Like

    Reply

        1. Sorry not done-

          ……with of course Adam being first as a mature adult.

          Zombies? Nope, it was not a television show.

          Flood? Hello? Do u have any idea of the waters above the earth- the incomprehensible volume of water?

          Then there are the oceans, so, so so, deep…..

          So yeah, can’t u think of something a bit harder to believe.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Okay, I offered you the opportunity to provide evidence, and like the Christian who is the author of the ridiculous comment in the post, you are either lying or simply being an idiot.

            I only offer people like one opportunity and you decided to waste it.
            Bye, bye John-boy.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. @ Prof.
            When I am feeling magnanimous I allow certain inmates, such as CS, to run amok for a bit.
            But when they show signs of dribbling I prefer to put them back in their pens.

            Liked by 1 person

    2. Surely you know the necessary distinction between things written AS IF they are true, versus the account of things WHICH ARE true.

      Just the account of an event is not sufficient enough to make this distinction
      It is external evidence that determines which group a story/account belongs to

      Liked by 5 people

      Reply

      1. Agree completely. Yay, common ground.

        And it is precisely this principle Jonathan that proves God’s word accurate, reliable, and truthful.

        Fast forward thousands where the same principles still hold true. Paul speaks of seeds that do not resemble the body to come AT ALL, yet, affirming the truth of nature’s consistency.

        God watered the young plants, like a careful Gardener, from the ground up, as mist. Love that.

        Hard to escape notice that Genesis proves more true science than Universities.

        Like

        Reply

      1. Really covert? You going with that?

        Read the books of Kings and honestly say your comparison is even in the same universe. Like Harold the Pied Potter can compete with the likes of King Herod, Pontious Pilate, of the life and times of Daniel in Babylon.

        You have showed your hand of intellectual inferiority and mental myopia, but tks for reading my response.

        Like

        Reply

        1. My point is, if something makes a good story, it says nothing about it’s truthfulness.

          Right, so I asked you how you know the Bible is true, yet all you can do is hurl insults back at me. Looks like you have nothing to offer Mr Lion.

          Liked by 3 people

          Reply

          4. Insults? Did u actually read my comment to you?

            I reminded you of the verifiable HISTORY of scripture.

            It is reliable from the beginning. I challenge you to read the 3rd of Luke, written by a historian, and I challenge you to find fault with one account, one verse, one word.

            If you take this as insulting, it’s your problem, but know this, scripture has never a single argument.

            Like

          6. All modern shipbuilding Doug is structured from the perfect dimensions as given by God for the purpose of durability, volume, weight, and float ability.

            Many engineers have admitted to the genius of the dimensions. Of course, as God’s ways are perfect.

            How’s that for starters.

            Like

          7. Yes! And Ken Ham copied Yahweh’s instructions to the letter and it only took an army of craftsmen,modern technology, years of construction time, and millions of dollars conned from innumerable credulous half-wits like you, and it would never float either.
            Perhaps you could now direct your response to the evidence of the global flood as recorded on Genesis.
            I’m having a bit of fun at the moment and enjoying allowing you to make a Giant Nob of yourself, but my patience is not endless.

            Liked by 1 person

          8. Luke 3? Ah the genealogy of Jesus. OK, I have a big problem with that. Both Matthew and Luke describe this genealogy but the contradict each other. Matthew says there was 27 generations from David to Joseph, while Luke says there were 42.; plus many of the names are different on the two lists, and they disagree with who Joseph”s father was. Do you not have a problem with that? Most modern scholars don’t treat it as history anymore.

            In Genesis, how did the plants survive without sunlight and warmth, since they were created first?

            There ya go Mr Lion.

            Liked by 2 people

          9. All of ColoringSprinkles arguments (if they can be labelled that) or defense of his ideology are weakly based in a “legend” he really knows nothing about; only what he has been fed. His replies are always the same… circular with no precise answers or proof. 😴

            Liked by 2 people

          10. Challenge accepted. The words quoted in Luke 3:4-6 do not match what’s written in Isaiah 40:3-5, no matter which translation is used. Next challenge.

            Liked by 1 person

          11. I don’t read.
            I judge by the weight of the evidence.

            If I put a Bible on one side of the weighing-balance (scales) (not for putting over eyes) and the Mahabharata on the other, there’s a sort of balance. So they’re equally true.

            Liked by 1 person

      1. You should see the miles of apologetic excuses for just that one verse. Of course, others have the same misstep. Religion tends to make people batty and edgy. The end is near as usual.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        1. A recent post on Wally’s site had a group of commenters actually wishing for the end of the world and pleading that Jesus would come soon.
          These people are completely demented.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

          1. Yesterday I was reading about prophecy. The psychology behind it leads one to hope for the worst, then when it fails to happen disappointment sets it, then they spend their days sifting through all the news and reports to find proof of there bias. It’s an illness, really

            Liked by 2 people

          4. There is a pretty large segment of Christianity called Preterist. They believe everything has already happened, now it just needs to get fn miserable out there so jesus can take the wheel. But, through this conditioning they will learn to accept anything that provides a smidgen of likeness to the whole scam

            Liked by 2 people

  5. and again: (spoiler alert) if there really truly WERE a god, there would be no need for a bible. we’d already have him in our heads, and not even know he was there.

    No need for rules, or books, or arguments about who did what to whom 4 K years ago. It wouldn’t matter.

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply

  6. I’ll go with an inaccuracy. At the very start–page one–in the first account of the creation, God creates on the third day, grass, herbs, and trees. This is all well and good until he waited until the fourth day to create the sun. Not only did the poor plants, herbs and trees have no sunlight, which of course means, among other things, e.g., no photosynthesis, they had no warmth. In short, they would have been created in an icy environment that would make Antartica look like a summer beach in Florida. This bit of biological inaccuracy becomes even more confusing when we see (no pun intended) that he created “light” before he created the sun and the moon and the stars. Eh? What light exactly would this be? I did ask a man of faith this question and he replied, “God’s light.”

    So, God needed some light…to create light? What? He couldn’t “see” in the dark…?

    And that’s just the beginning!

    Liked by 9 people

    Reply

    2. And the lord said “Let there be light” and there was light and you could see for fu*king miles!
      And the lord said “let there be rain” and there was rain, it pis*ed it down, well it was a bank holiday.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  7. If the person agrees with a old earth and agrees with evolution and that the exodus did not occur

    You can point out that Jesus believed that Adam existed and Moses and the exodus did not occur

    You can point out the contradiction in the nativity story

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    2. JZ:

      Can’t argue with my own eyes—I look out the window, and other than the odd hill here and there it is flat. Yup!

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

          2. Paul Landowski’s little carving down the road from you tends to throw things a bit of a wobbly curve, I’d say, wouldn’t you?
            🙂

            Like

        2. Not all of us, per se. Just around my neighbour down the road a mile or so, the one with all the chooks. (Her henhouse is the centre of the universe—she told me so, and I couldn’t fault her logic.) (A nice old duck, but a bit quackers …)

          She had a pet Bible too, and used to sit it in the sun on her window sill on fine days.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

        1. To some it’s damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

          To me it’s a truism that regardless of who gets in I can always say “Well—YOU voted for them!”

          (Without picking nits here, ANY use of that system (regardless of who for) is an endorsement of it. Civic responsibility lies in not endorsing a bad product, a severely flawed product: at least warlords and brigands are honest about it.)

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

          1. Sitting back not endorsing is not enough, though. SOMEBODY has to motivate the introduction of a product worth endorsing. As many somebodies as possible.

            Like

          2. Weeeellllll … the Yanks done it, a couple of hundred years ago. Their idea was essentially sound but it’s turned to cactus since then.

            Meaning no offence: do you honestly think folks would vote for an honest politician?

            To me, the mere fact that someone is running for office suggests a dishonest person. And yes, it really is that simple—

            “Vote for ME! I have only YOUR interests at heart!”

            Sure … and while we’re voting, I still have that lovely bridge for sale in Sydney Harbour—special bargain price for any bona-fide voters …

            Like

  10. The big problem with all you “atheists” is you aren’t reading the bible in its original language. Or so says someone who commented on The Closest Atheist’s blog. If you would just spent a bit of time learning Hebrew (the very oldest version) and Greek, you would KNOW that everything believers say about “God” and his progeny is the truth, whole truth … and well, you know the rest.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

      1. ARK:

        mine too. Some wonderful resonance in some of those wordings … just ask ol’ Bacon, he’ll be rapt.

        Like

        Reply

    2. I agree with your follow up comment.
      Regardless of the language used it doesn’t matter. If the bible was the word of god I wouldn’t need to study hebrew, greek, latin etc to understand the bible after all understanding comes from god. Certainly many christians haven’t even read the entire bible in english or the translation in their native tongue.

      An all powerful and unknowing god could make me hear and understand his or her or it words in the language god knows I know best

      It should be christians who belief that the bible is the word of god that should read the bible in its original languages and not trust mere mortal with the translation.
      We know that many translators have accidentally and intentionally made erroneous translations to support their doctrine have added and remove passages, verses and books (catholic and protestant bible) to support their doctrine

      A lot more muslims learn a bit of arabic to read the Quran than christians learn hebrew or greek to read the bible

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. JON:

        Islam intends (is set up to) conquer the world, and the Koran being in Arabic gives ’em a common language. The holy pilgrimage to the holy city helps ’em establish bro’hood and networks … ol’ Mo was most certainly no fool.
        His works unite,

        Christianity divides—I challenge anyone to walk the streets of parts of Belfast at night and not have a quiet poop then and there if cold metal is suddenly pressed against the back of the neck and a voice rasps—

        “Catick, or Protestant?”

        Like

        Reply

  11. “Can you actually name . . . one of the worst actions that the Gospel is DIRECTLY linked to?”

    Absolutely! Here’s an excerpt from “Twelve Years a Slave” (the narrative of Solomon Northup, a Citizen of New-York, Kidnapped in Washington City in 1841, and Rescued in 1853, from a Cotton Plantation near the Red River in Louisiana) pp. 127-130:

    Like William Ford, his brother-in-law, Tanner was in the habit of reading the Bible to his slaves on the Sabbath, but in a somewhat different spirit. He was an impressive commentator on the New Testament. The first Sunday after my coming to the plantation, he called them together, and began to read the twelfth chapter of Luke. When he came to the 47th verse, he looked deliberately around him, and continued—”And that servant which knew his lord’s will,”—here he paused, looking around more deliberately than before, and again proceeded—”which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself”—here was another pause—”prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.”

    “D’ye hear that?” demanded Peter, emphatically. “Stripes,” he repeated, slowly and distinctly, taking off his spectacles, preparatory to making a few remarks.

    “That nigger that don’t take care—that don’t obey his lord—that’s his master—d’ye see?—that ‘ere nigger shall be beaten with many stripes. Now, ‘many’ signifies a great many—forty, a hundred, a hundred and fifty lashes. That’s Scripter!” and so Peter continued to elucidate the subject for a great length of time, much to the edification of his sable audience.

    At the conclusion of the exercises, calling up three of his slaves, Warner, Will and Major, he cried out to me—

    “Here, Platt, you held Tibeats by the legs; now I’ll see if you can hold these rascals in the same way, till I get back from meetin’.”

    […]

    Peter Tanner prided himself upon his strict religious observances: he was a deacon in the church.

    http://www.gutenberg.org/files/45631/45631-h/45631-h.htm#Page_127

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  12. Inaccuracies in the Bible? where do we start? Pretty much anything in Genesis can be picked apart. There’s no evidence for a global flood in the geological record. If Mount Everest had been submerged, it would’ve been REALLY CLEAR. There is no way that several billions of species could fit onto an ark with the dimensions specified in the Bible.

    As for a ‘worst action’ that can be blamed on the Gospel. Well, the native Americans almost got completely wiped out by the Spanish when they tried to bring Jebus over. Basically any civilisation that has been ruined by people trying to spread the Gospel to them and change their way of life…

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  13. It was Mark Twain who said if you believe in miracles,

    “The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and a seal

    and I am not sure to such a person there can be an inaccuracy, in the bible more so

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  16. Do the Chinese still put copies of Mao’s famous all-purpose Little Red Book in the fields to ensure a good and bountiful harvest?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  17. The one HUGE inaccuracy that I’ve often debated/used with zealous Christologians is the unshakable Roman census of 4 BCE in contrast to Luke’s Gospel, 2:4. It is a glaring contradiction. And the Roman authorities and historical authors were sticklers for details and accuracy. That is just one out of at least 24 MAJOR contradictions of the entire canonical New Testament!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Oh gods, how often do I have to tell you blasted atheists—

      (a) the Bible (all versions and variants of it) is the unarguable sacred entirely accurate incontrovertible blessed WOG (Word Of God).

      (b) there are (and can be) no errors or contradictions in the WOG. It’s impossible. God is utterly infallible, which covers every conceivable angle and the rest.

      (c) Any apparent errors are due to perception and your limited capabilities.

      But do not fret, little person/s … God will forgive you. (He’s nice like that.)

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Hahahaha! 😆 You are right again Argus. That same God made SO MANY THINGS extremely IMPERFECT, DEFECTED, WHACKY, and IMMORTAL it makes most intelligent humans wonder what sort of slapstick workshop He’s running up there in the first place! Geeezzzz. 😛

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. The Christians say that He’s testing us. I like that, it’s my sort of cop out … but why would an omniscient test anybody, hey?

          Knowing in advance that (say) flies with no wings cannot get airborne, why does He test flies by pulling their wings off?

          Is He genuinely needing answers — or is He in fact an immeasurably colossal sadist?

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

Leave a comment