Whats wrong with using the text to prove the bible? Like i said before..thats like proving the president is in the whitehouse by looking into the whitehouse.
35 comments
Translation: "It's true because it says it's true, and it's the Bible, so it wouldn't lie."
Looking into the White House and seeing the President gives you good evidence that the President is in the White House. It says nothing about the President's veracity.
No, that's incorrect. Using bible text to prove the infallibility of the bible is not like that at all. One can interpret biblical text in any fashion to "prove" anything. The failure is in the orginal assumption that the bible is anything more than a 3rd century BCE compilation of Hebrew folk-tales and prevarications, foisted upon gullible people for the purpose of controlling them.
No, Ezekiel (I think I recall an insane character named Ezekiel on one of the Johnny Quest shows...), using the Bible to prove the Bible is like using LotR to prove that Frodo existed. Both are dry, very long stories with text that confuses many people.
Whether or not the president is in the White House answers the question "Is the president in the White House?" The fact that something's written in the Bible answers the question "Is there something written in the Bible."
"Whats wrong with using the text to prove the bible?"
What about using text to prove The Hobbit, Haryy Potter, or Cinderella?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
