untitled
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 19:34:31 -0400
From: Mike Ryder
Subject: Challenge part one
To: [Family member A]
[Family member A],
Okay, the time has come to address your challenge. You had
challenged me to disprove the Bible. Before I start down that road it's
important to talk a little about some basic understandings concerning
this topic.
Firstly, I am concerned with the onus of proof. As you are aware
Christians assert that the Bible is the perfect and truthful word of
God. It is upon those that make the assertion the burden of proof
lies. They have made the assertion and are required to back it up
with evidence. My inclination is to require from you the evidence
you accepted that convinced you of the truthfulness of the Bible.
However, with some trepidation, I would like to take up your challenge
as laid down and attempt to provide you with some evidence that refutes
the Bible's claim to perfection.
You state that you think I will find it hard task. I know you are
correct in this, but perhaps not for the reasons you expect. It
will be a hard task for me because I will know the information I'm
providing you will trouble your faith and world view. This is
hard for me, because I can see that it's a very important part of your
life. It's not something that I do without considerable thought
and conviction. My hope is that you will think and question
things that you have not thought about or questioned before.
My first task is to look at your proposition and define it in a manner
that is acceptable to both of us. "I challenge you to disprove the
Bible". This is as far as I hope to get in this e-mail. There are
two keywords in the challenge: disprove; and Bible.
Looking first at the word Bible, I take this to mean an English
translation of the 66 books contained within the old and New
Testaments. The particular version shouldn't really matter, but
for the sake of argument let's stipulate that it's a widely published
and used vision eg King James. Of course all English versions are
translations from other languages and it is valid to resort to these
translations in explaining anomalies to some degree. However the
Bible, if it is the inspired Word of God, written or dictated by the
hand of God himself, should convey the same perfect inerrant message no
matter what language, translation, or version is being used.
Secondly I'd like to consider the use of proof or disproof. I
would like to know from you, what to your thinking would constitute
disproof. I mean by this would it be adequate to share something
mentioned in the Bible was not in fact evident in reality? Or
would it require a contradiction within the Bible itself? Or in
fact an error within the Bible? In other words is it permissible
to use extra biblical references or am I restricted to the Bible
itself? I suspect I am restricted to the Bible and this is fine.
Lastly I like to consider what has to be disproved. Undoubtedly
much written in the Bible is either truthful or based on truth,
therefore to attempt to disprove the whole thing would be an exercise
in futility. Not least because that's not the
position that I take. Every book of fiction is based to some degree on
fact. So I propose that disproof is constituted by showing one or more
passage or story contained within the Bible to be illogical,
self-contradictory, physically impossible, or plain erroneous.
This is what I intend to provide you with.
Is this acceptable?
yours
bravenet.com