Is it reasonable to accept a 2,000 year old book at face value while simultaneously arguing against.....?

...mountains of scientific evidence?

Is it reasonable to accept a 2,000 year old book at face value while simultaneously arguing against.....?
Unfortunately, for many that seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Though it's never made a great deal of sense to me. I wish I could just laugh it off, but people with that mentality are actually in charge of stuff in this country.... which is anything but funny!
Reply:I have to except JEHOVAH'S WISDOM Over Man's.


(Jeremiah 10:23) . . .I well know, O Jehovah, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.





(Ecclesiastes 12:12-14) . . .As regards anything besides these, my son, take a warning: To the making of many books there is no end, and much devotion [to them] is wearisome to the flesh. 13 The conclusion of the matter, everything having been heard, is: Fear the [true] God and keep his commandments. For this is the whole [obligation] of man. 14 For the [true] God himself will bring every sort of work into the judgment in relation to every hidden thing, as to whether it is good or bad.
Reply:Blind faith that those with closed minds seem to keep taking on as "The Official Guidebook to the Path of Least Resistance". I can't stand when people say "Lay down all your scientific evidence and I'll prove you wrong" when A) that person was NOT alive 2000 years (and more) ago to prove ANYthing; B) the scientific evidence keeps proving more theories year after year; and, C) it has been proven that different leaders have twisted the words (or omitted them altogether) of the Christian Bible around to suit their needs or to control the masses, so the words that we read today aren't very reliable in places. The teachings of Jesus of Nazareth were so twisted that many people took them to read that women are "treacherous and unclean" and it's okay for them to be treated like third-class citizens, worse than pets or farm animals. I can't see any self-respecting woman go in for a religion that has once and often still tolerates behaviour like that!





Those who have been virtually brainwashed into believing certain things about ANY religion always think they're right, no matter if they're proven wrong, time and again. ALL people hate to be proven wrong and will go to their graves believing what they were taught is right, even with vast amounts of proof. The best thing to do is keep educating yourself, and politely refuse to listen when someone tries to preach at you about something you can not, in good conscience and education, believe in. Keep an open mind and heart, even in the face of those who say you're wrong - those people are doing the same, right! :)
Reply:There is an insiduous nature to religion - which should be openly discussed - this is about "programming" - ie. brainwashing which is evident in the constant preaching that is found in the Bible and other so-called religious text.


Any text which has this present - should automatically be discounted as having 'information' because it is already forcing the reader to believe in nonsense.


It is clearly designed to instil the fear of God into any unbeliever and to give them no choice but to believe .. by offering them heaven or hell.


Whatever goodness it once contained - has been corrupted by the fanatical need to convert unbelievers such that it (that religion) becomes all powerful and all controlling...





This is what the agument against religion is about basically - it is not really about information versus information...
Reply:No, it's not in the slightest bit reasonable. The Bible is one long unsupported assertion. Science supports its assertions with arguments and evidence.
Reply:No just do what all the other resonable christians do, pray like hell on yeur death bed in case the bible is right
Reply:Scientific evidence changes by the day. The Bible doesn't. Can you argue against it? Sure. God didn't prohibit arguments. But try to argue religion with theology not science. the Bible doesn't try to argue religion with science. Only the atheists and agnostics do that.
Reply:Well, i don't believe in the Bible and I believe in all the scientific stuff, so...yay me.


Peace and lurve.
Reply:Well I know there's like a lot of evidence that shows bibles credibility is questionable but I don't know, it's hard to know them all.
Reply:how old are you have you been around that long if so which I clearly don't believe you have write a book yourself and try turning it into one of the worlds best sellers do you except that challenge
Reply:Not everybody can face the thought of ploughing through "mountains of scientific evidence"





It's much easier to just have faith in God and then (without any effort at all) one has a complete knowledge of the universe --- God did it! Isn't God amazing?
Reply:Mountains of scientific evidence proving what? That there are still more questions then answers.





So, do you think that the Bible was written as a vast conspiracy to promote a hoax? Do you have any idea what it would have taken to do that?
Reply:Please list your evidence. I can rebut it.
Reply:It is very reasonable!





You should question everything as through this means Knowedge is gained.





This includes the Bible or any other text no matter how old it is.
Reply:We use Gilgamesh and the Iliad and Odyssey as history books, as likewise we use the Old and New Testament and other religious books from various time periods to help format views on how history occurred. Obviously, there is some credence to a book that old.





But what does it matter?





You know what I don't get? I believe in G-d, or at least something like it, but I also believe in evolution and the big bang theory. You know why?





Because the Bible, as much credence I am willing to give to it as a formation for religion, is really a bunch of Aesop's tales. It is not meant to be factual, and there is no reason why G-d couldn't have harnessed the tools of evolution to create man.





There's also no reason why G-d couldn't have ignited the Big Bang, especially considering that scientists don't have an explanation as to why the Big Bang happened, or what came before it.





And personally, faith is called faith because you do not need evidence. It's great if science contributes to your religion, but it shouldn't take away from it when it goes against something you believe.





I think these arguments really factor between two groups:





those literalists who take the Bible fro every word it says to be true, and those who so vehemently deny the Bible and all its worth, who are trying to force themselves on others that don't agree like they do.





And seriously, why attack the Bible only, as I am assuming that is what you are doing. Why not the Qu'ran, or all the other books written at that time which make religious claims?
Reply:no. which is why i believe that religion is the result of a psychological problem and should be treated as such.





atheist.