bransrath:

no-more-kids:

bransrath:

againstjesus:

The Bible

1. Is inconsistent with itself
2. Is not supported by archeology, and in fact is frequently refuted by archeology
3. Contains fairy tales and magic
4. And failed prophecies
5. And many forgeries

1. False. Its internal consistency is well known

2. False. Archaeology in fact dupports the bible at every turn. From the existenxe of the Hittitites, to the destruction cities to the locations of wells in Herusalem, the bible wins out each time

3. It contains a supernatural worldview

4. It does not contain failed prophecies. Prophecies that have yet to happen =/= failed

5. Zero forgeries. Not a single one.

What forgeries are they talking about?

Could be a couple of things. Some books are named for people who didn’t write them. However it fails because naming a book for a figure isn’t meant to ne a claim that said person wrote it. The book might just be about them.

It could be the editing process some books underwent, but editing =/= forgery. For instance, Ezekiel may have had “grad students” that did the compiling. Later editors may have added explanatory notes. None of that is forgery and editing can be done under inspiration.

It could be an appeal to the debunked and anti-semitic “pan-babylonianism.” Scholars have refuted pan-babylonialism in two ways.

1. Just because the flood story matches the babylonian and sumerain material doesn’t mean the Jews just stole the story.

2. Jewish accounts of the events leading up to the flood are theological polemics against babylonian theoligical claims.