4 ms·

I tend to think you're right that "God" (in the general sense) is not falsifiable. But, as a Christian, and someone who studies the Bible daily, I can say that

I tend to think you're right that "God" (in the general sense) is not falsifiable. But, as a Christian, and someone who studies the Bible daily, I can say that at the very least, the God of the Bible is falsifiable. For instance, if you could prove any one of the following statements to be true, the Christian message would fall apart (and indeed, some of these are even called out in the Bible as essential to its message). If you want a roadmap to debate Christians, here you go: - Jesus Christ never existed as a real human being. - Jesus wasn't "sinless" (according to the Biblical definitions of sin). - There exists at least one other person than Jesus who has never sinned. - Jesus wasn't crucified by Roman soldiers at the behest of Jewish religious leaders. - The resurrection of Jesus didn't happen. - Jesus' mother wasn't a virgin. - Jesus never actually claimed to be God. Many falsifiable propositions are made in the Old Testament, too. These may apply to Judaism as well, though I claim no particular expertise in that religion other than where it overlaps Christianity. Proving these propositions false would go a long way to discrediting the God of both the Old and the New Testaments: - The Genesis account of creation. - The Genesis account of a great flood. - The Genesis account of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. - That Joseph interpreted a Pharoah's dream and became second-in-command of Egypt. - That Egypt never had a 7-year famine which they survived because of storehouses of grain. - That Egypt never enslaved Israel. - That the plagues mentioned in Exodus never befell the Egyptians (notably the plague of the firstborn). - That Israel didn't walk across the Red Sea. - That the Egyptian army wasn't drowned in the Red Sea in pursuit of Israel. - That Samson never existed. - That Esther never existed. - That Esther wasn't a queen who saved Israel from genocidal annihilation. - That Ruth never existed. - That Jonah never existed. - That Jonah never preached in Nineveh. - That Jonah was never swallowed by a whale/fish. - That Daniel didn't serve in the court of the Babylonian/Medo-Persian empires. - That Daniel didn't accurately predict hundreds of years of political wars and intrigue in the Ancient Near East before it happened [0]. There's lots more than that, of course, but it's a start. In short, Christians believe in taking the Bible at face value. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of claims which the Bible makes which are definitely falsifiable. Claims of particular events happening to particular people living in particular places at particular times. There's nothing stopping you or anyone from falsifying those claims. Not to do your job for you, but consider that there are several ways to do this: - Discredit the Biblical story's internal consistency. - Find contradictory archaeological evidence. - Find contradictory, reputable historical accounts. - Come up with valid textual criticisms. ... and I don't believe that's even an exhaustive list. Good luck and Godspeed! ;-) [0]: https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/869-amazing-prophecy-in-the-book-of-daniel-an https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/869-amazing-prophe...

bsder 9y ago
1) None of these directly disprove God, only the founding documents of Christianity. And, it is awfully arrogant to assume that the Christian God is the one that needs to be disproven. You need to do a lot more to substantiate that position as the Christian religion is neither the oldest nor the most numerous. 2) You might want to go look up biblical archaeology. Quite a lot of the history in the Bible has been disproven. 3) Simply being factually correct is necessary but insufficient. Falsifiability is about disproving a prediction called a hypothesis. Very few religions have tenets that allow you to put the pieces together and make a novel prediction that can then be tested. And, if I were being particularly uncharitable, I would argue that the fact that the Second Coming has been predicted over and over and yet still has not occurred is actually significant disproof of the existence of the Christian God.
- Veelox 9y ago
  >2) You might want to go look up biblical archaeology. Quite a lot of the history in the Bible has been disproven. I often hear something to this affect, would you be willing to provide 3 specific claims/events documented in the Bible that have been disproven?
  - jcranmer 9y ago
    1. Noah's Flood 2. The entire book of Joshua. If that's not specific enough for you, the conquest of Jericho. Jericho was not inhabited at the time. 3. The existence of the unified monarchy of Israel under King David and Solomon.
    - oldandtired 9y ago
      I have read various bits and pieces of the evidence that is supposed to validate the claims that these didn't occur. What I found interesting was that the archaeological presentations either were very wishy-washy or the conclusion so presented were in direct disputation of the evidence presented. Some years ago, I read a paper by two Israeli archaeologists disputing the idea that the northern Kingdom of Israel arose out of a split of the unified King David/King Solomon kingdom. What bemused me was that the evidence directly confirmed what the biblical record says and yet the conclusion was that the evidence had to mean that the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah had been independent from the very beginning. I find it interesting that the Hittites were, for a long time, only known by the biblical records. Yet, it found in recent times, (the last two or so centuries) that it was a large thriving kingdom that disappeared from history. As far as Jericho is concerned, what evidence have you seen that is was uninhabited at the time. I have seen various archaeological papers that directly support the biblical story. One of the major problems that is faced today is that we have no sure way of measuring the time periods of the artefacts found with any real precision. The +/- errors are just too large to be sure of precise timing. Unless we actually develop the technology to view the past, we will always be unsure of what and when events occurred. It becomes a matter of "faith" as to what you end up as believing as "truth". What god, if any, you believe in is a personal decision. I believe that Jesus Christ is God (one with the Father and Holy Spirit) and that He is the creator of the universe and that He takes a personal interest in every single person who has lived, is living or will live. But whether or not you so believe is entirely up to you. He has given you the free choice to do so. For those who think science "proves" that there is no God, my to you is why are there so many scientists who believe in a god and in particular believe in Jesus Christ as God, especially when they come from a background of no belief in any god or gods? What made it compelling to them to change their minds and believe in Jesus Christ? Of course, on the other side, there are those who believed and no hold the view that there is no god. One must also ask them why did they change their minds about the matter.

bsder 9y ago

1) None of these directly disprove God, only the founding documents of Christianity. And, it is awfully arrogant to assume that the Christian God is the one that needs to be disproven. You need to do a lot more to substantiate that position as the Christian religion is neither the oldest nor the most numerous. 2) You might want to go look up biblical archaeology. Quite a lot of the history in the Bible has been disproven. 3) Simply being factually correct is necessary but insufficient. Falsifiability is about disproving a prediction called a hypothesis. Very few religions have tenets that allow you to put the pieces together and make a novel prediction that can then be tested. And, if I were being particularly uncharitable, I would argue that the fact that the Second Coming has been predicted over and over and yet still has not occurred is actually significant disproof of the existence of the Christian God.

Veelox 9y ago
>2) You might want to go look up biblical archaeology. Quite a lot of the history in the Bible has been disproven. I often hear something to this affect, would you be willing to provide 3 specific claims/events documented in the Bible that have been disproven?
- jcranmer 9y ago
  1. Noah's Flood 2. The entire book of Joshua. If that's not specific enough for you, the conquest of Jericho. Jericho was not inhabited at the time. 3. The existence of the unified monarchy of Israel under King David and Solomon.
  - oldandtired 9y ago
    I have read various bits and pieces of the evidence that is supposed to validate the claims that these didn't occur. What I found interesting was that the archaeological presentations either were very wishy-washy or the conclusion so presented were in direct disputation of the evidence presented. Some years ago, I read a paper by two Israeli archaeologists disputing the idea that the northern Kingdom of Israel arose out of a split of the unified King David/King Solomon kingdom. What bemused me was that the evidence directly confirmed what the biblical record says and yet the conclusion was that the evidence had to mean that the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah had been independent from the very beginning. I find it interesting that the Hittites were, for a long time, only known by the biblical records. Yet, it found in recent times, (the last two or so centuries) that it was a large thriving kingdom that disappeared from history. As far as Jericho is concerned, what evidence have you seen that is was uninhabited at the time. I have seen various archaeological papers that directly support the biblical story. One of the major problems that is faced today is that we have no sure way of measuring the time periods of the artefacts found with any real precision. The +/- errors are just too large to be sure of precise timing. Unless we actually develop the technology to view the past, we will always be unsure of what and when events occurred. It becomes a matter of "faith" as to what you end up as believing as "truth". What god, if any, you believe in is a personal decision. I believe that Jesus Christ is God (one with the Father and Holy Spirit) and that He is the creator of the universe and that He takes a personal interest in every single person who has lived, is living or will live. But whether or not you so believe is entirely up to you. He has given you the free choice to do so. For those who think science "proves" that there is no God, my to you is why are there so many scientists who believe in a god and in particular believe in Jesus Christ as God, especially when they come from a background of no belief in any god or gods? What made it compelling to them to change their minds and believe in Jesus Christ? Of course, on the other side, there are those who believed and no hold the view that there is no god. One must also ask them why did they change their minds about the matter.