As far as what evidence is, I go by the legal definition for relevant evidence (www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_401):
Evidence is relevant if:
(a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and
(b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.
That's a broad definition. Evidence can be strong or weak, and just because there is evidence for something doesn't mean that it is proved. The Bible is certainly evidence under this standard, although how strong of evidence it is is another matter completely.
There. I do have a good grasp of what evidence is, and I've provided a neutral definition of the term. Now it's your turn -- what definition of evidence are you working with that causes you to shriek things such as, "Paul is NOT evidence! Not even close!"?
And you have been thoroughly brainwashed if you think there is a difference between one scripture and another!
You are mistaking PROMOTION & PROPAGANDA for evidence! I've even spoken to clergy and history professors about this. You realize 90% of scripture out there is from religions outside Christianity? Ive asked Christians about those other scriptures and they simply say "pfff..those are fake". Then I remind them the same way you dismiss those other scriptures the bible can be dismissed as well!
Let's put your statements to the test using the Book of Mormon, which I mentioned in my last reply. I view the Book of Mormon as a forgery, made up by Joseph Smith out of whole cloth, at least because the Book of Mormon describes an ancient American culture of Israelite people, the Nephites, who built great cities and were eventually wiped out in the fourth century A.D. If there had been such a civilization there would almost certainly be archeological evidence for it, but no evidence accepted by non-LDS archeologists has been found.
Okay, now explain to me how the Bible can be dismissed on the same grounds that I dismissed the Book of Mormon. There is archeological evidence, accepted by non-Christian and non-Jewish archeologists, supporting such things as the city of Jerusalem and particular structures such as the temples that were there.
NONE of the major characters and events in the bible have proven to be true.
I mentioned King Hezekiah my last reply. There is archeological evidence that King David existed, of the exile of Jews to Babylon, and of the policy that led to their return under Cyrus, to give just a few more examples.
The bible doesn't come with a footnote and bibliography page to corroborate the claims they make!
Considering that footnotes and bibliography pages had not been invented yet, that's hardly a surprise.
You also realize that there is an entire school of thought that the bible is simply a book of parables and allegories that were NEVER meant to be taken literally?
I am well aware that there is a school of thought that maintains that such things as the story of Adam and Eve, and even many other parts of Genesis, are simply parables and allegories. That's not remarkable. (What is remarkable is that there are people who think that such stories should be taken literally.) Is there a school of thought that maintains that such things in the Bible as the existence of the city of Jerusalem and of an ancient Israelite kingdom are not to be taken literally? If so that is a very misguided school of thought.
You have clearly spent too much time getting brainwashed in church. You need to stay away and study some other scriptures and religions to get an objective perspective again.
The idea that I have been brainwashed by spending too much time in church would be laughable to anyone who knows me. But go ahead hot shot, feel free to suggest some religious scripture that you have read and you think I have not, that you think I would benefit from studying. Got anything?
reply
share
megafauna005
10 years ago
Frog, you keep making the same mistake of thinking your "evidence" is exclusive to Christianity when it's NOT! There is ZERO archaeological evidence to support any character or event in the bible! Read below to get educated from archaeologists themselves who show there is NO proof to support ANY of the 4 major bible stories thereby destroying the very foundation of Christianity itself! The religion is nothing but a FRAUD and deep down you KNOW it!
Archaeology disproves the Bible: The Bible Unearthed
If all this blather by religious fanatics like Bill O'Reilly regarding the supposed war Atheists are waging on Christmas got me thinking: Would these fundamentalist folks be so right-wing if they were aware of the relatively recent conclusions regarding the book they take so literally?
A book offering a comprehensive overview of this subject and a mother lode of peer-reviewed research is still*The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts*by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman.
New findings point to completely different histories of Israel and Egypt than those in the Bible and thought to be true, including by Finkelstein himself:
• Archaeological evidence contradicts all four stories that make up the foundations of the Bible; and
• the Bible was written, re-written, edited and redacted for the purposes of propaganda.
Early archaeologists in that part of the world were typically trained as clerics or theologians, the authors note, and so forced artifacts they found to match with Bible stories. That all changed once new excavations, chemical analysis of soil samples and refinements in the carbon-dating technique to determine age, revolutionized the study of these two of the most heavily excavated areas of the planet.
Because many references to places and events in this period show contemporary details were integrated into stories biblical authors maintained happened hundreds or thousands of years before, the modern assessment that the foundations were laid during the late 8th and early 7th centuries BCE appears to be an open-and-shut-case.
Why Was the Bible Created?
To provide motivation and moral justification for the territorial aspirations of a little kingdom called Judah.
Contrary to biblical history, Judah was a backward little region while its envied and despised neighbor to the north, Israel, was far more advantaged economically. Both, however, were usually under domination by one foreign power or another. *
Finally, in the 8th century BCE, came Israel’s destruction and later the Assyrian retreat. That’s when King Josiah went to work.
An ambitious plan to take advantage of the political vacuum required powerful propaganda, the authors note, and so one of the religions practiced in the area was chosen. That of the Israeli cult fit the bill.
Archaeologists say at the same time the literacy rate rose, prompting “an unlikely coalition of Judahite court officials, scribes, priests, peasants and prophets” to create a new movement. By weaving in ancient heroic tales, legends and folklore, along with further reworking, elaboration and censoring, stories of the Old Testament were to “become a coherent and persuasive prophecy for the people of Israel.”
*
The Patriarchs
The first story molded with these goals in minds is that of the patriarchs in Genesis – starting with God’s favored family, that of Abraham, whose descendants would include Israel and Judah.
Besides the fact the genealogies of the patriarchs, some of whom were said to have lived hundreds of years, are contradicted in various passages, the “combination of camels, Arabian goods and Philistines and place names, which were prevalent at the time of writing but nonexistent during the time period depicted in the Bible,” showed the story to be written centuries later.
This story was crafted to provide Josiah’s subjects with a common ethnic and religious history, and ultimately fulfill the promises given to the patriarchs by God of a unified people living securely in their land.
The belief that God had their backs would bring on Judah’s success.
The Exodus
The second foundational tale is that of the Exodus, where God chose Moses to liberate 600,000 men from enslavement in Egypt, and they proceeded to wander around the desert for 40 years.
However, there was no record of any Israelites being in Egypt at that time, and hundreds of thousands of people trekking the desert would likely not have been allowed by Egypt, which tightly controlled the area. There are records of small bands passing through, yet none indicating a mass movement of people. There is also no evidence such a group camped for extended periods – including in the places mentioned in the Bible.
http://m.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/24/1265119/-How-Archaeology-Disproves-Biblical-History
Jesus NEVER existed! He is Judeo Christian MYTH!
reply
share
TopFrog
10 years ago
Is this really the best you can do? I'm sure many would be aghast that little ol' Froggy has been somehow been cast as the fidei defensor in this exchange, but they needn't worry as long as I have you as an opponent.
Frog, you keep making the same mistake of thinking your "evidence" is exclusive to Christianity when it's NOT!
I'm not even sure what you're trying to say, but if you think that I've taken the position that archaeology only supports the Bible and Christianity, then you're mistaken. Note a couple of messages ago, when I explicitly stated that "the Bible gets many things wrong."
There is ZERO archaeological evidence to support any character or event in the bible!
See previously when I directed you to fact that there is archeological evidence for King Hezekiah and King David, as well as for the exile of Jews to Babylon, and their return under Cyrus. All of these things are in the Bible, and you've not disputed that there is extra-Biblical evidence for them. I could look up many, many more examples. But wait, I don't have to look them up...
Read below to get educated from archaeologists themselves who show there is NO proof to support ANY of the 4 major bible stories thereby destroying the very foundation of Christianity itself!
Why look them up when you've provided me with views from archaeologists that you vouch for? From your own link:
Finally, in the 8th century BCE, came Israel’s destruction and later the Assyrian retreat. That’s when King Josiah went to work.
Do you want to know where else you can read about Israel's destruction at the hands of the Assyrians and the later retreat of the Assyrians, and about King Josiah of Judah? Yup, that's right, it's in the Bible. What was that again about there being "ZERO archaeological evidence to support any character or event in the bible"?
And none of the "major bible stories" cited in the article (the patriarchs, the exodus, the conquest of Canaan, and the united kingdom of Judah and Israel) provide the "very foundation of Christianity itself," as you so boldly assert. Christianity does not rest on the historical accuracy of any of those parts of the Bible.
With a nod to Sun Tzu, let me offer you a way out. Go ahead and admit that some parts of the Bible are supported by archeological evidence, and that there is indeed some evidence for the existence of New Testament figures like Jesus and Paul (although you find the evidence weak and unconvincing), and I'll just agree to disagree. Otherwise, if you actually want to continue this one-sided exchange, please up your game a notch or two, just to make it interesting.
reply
share
megafauna005
10 years ago
Frog, you LOSE again! Those Kings and Jews you mentioned are NOT major characters in the bible. You also fail because if you bothered to read non-Christian scriptures you would see they mention historical characters and events too! Even the Illiad and Odessy do!
I am 100% right in that there is ZERO corroborating evidence that major bible characters Jesus, Moses, Noah, Paul, Mark, etc. even existed! You show more ignorance because if you bothered to read other scriptures you'll see other gods had disciples too. So I guess you believe them just because THEY SAY SO?
Your entire PATHETIC argument is "the bible says so". LMAO! You are nothing but a naive FOOL to fall for it hook, line, and sinker! You realize ANYONE can write a FICTIONAL story and name the characters in it Jesus, Mark, Paul, Moses, Mary, etc.? I guess you believe the HUNDREDS of characters in other scriptures because they simply say so?
You FAIL big time! Did you know Christian influence is dying off in the west and becomes smaller every year? Did you know THOUSANDS of churches close every year in America alone? Deep down more people every day know it's nothing but a fairy tale and if you actually looked it at it with an unbiased and objective mind you would see that too!
Jesus NEVER existed! He is Judeo Christian MYTH!
reply
share
TopFrog
10 years ago
Megafauna, before moving goalposts:
There is ZERO archaeological evidence to support any character or event in the bible!
Megafauna, after movement of goalposts:
there is ZERO corroborating evidence that major bible characters Jesus, Moses, Noah, Paul, Mark, etc. even existed
In addition, you are way off base in saying that the Jews aren't major characters of the Bible. They are what the Old Testament is all about.
Your entire PATHETIC argument is "the bible says so".
Nope. I've repeatedly referred to the existence of archaeological evidence, which you have not disputed.
You realize ANYONE can write a FICTIONAL story and name the characters in it Jesus, Mark, Paul, Moses, Mary, etc.?
Absolutely, but that does nothing to advance your case.
I guess you believe the HUNDREDS of characters in other scriptures because they simply say so?
Strawman, and contradicted by my earlier posts, where I stated that I view the
Book of Mormon as fictional.
You FAIL big time! Did you know Christian influence is dying off in the west and becomes smaller every year? Did you know THOUSANDS of churches close every year in America alone? Deep down more people every day know it's nothing but a fairy tale and if you actually looked it at it with an unbiased and objective mind you would see that too!
Even if what you say is true, it does not mean that people who stop going to church do so because they think that Jesus didn't exist -- it's entirely possible to believe that Jesus existed without believing that he was a prophet or deity (or even that there is any deity at all). And even if most people did think that Jesus didn't exist, it would be an
argumentum ad populum to contend that it proves your case.
reply
share