# Evidence for the Bible **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 5, 2007, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587 "2007-10-05T02:46:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2007, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/61 "2007-10-06T18:48:49Z")
post rescinded. seemed too snarky upon review. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2007, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/62 "2007-10-06T20:57:26Z")
[QUOTE=C K Dexter Haven] I’m not familiar enough to offer chapter and verse, but Paul’s comments about the Jews would pretty much be classified as racist by any reasonable standard… not to mention, the cause of 2000 years (and ongoing) persecution and intolerance in the name of “Christianity.” [/QUOTE] I suspect that you may be confusing several statements in the gospels of Matthew and John with the epistles of Paul. I do not recall any comment by Paul that could be considered racist and only two (both requiring some squinting) that might be considered uncomplimentary. Matthew, trying to proselytize a Jewish audience, has several passages in which the Jews call down punishment on themselves for not embracing Christianity and John, writing after the Jewish-Christian disagreement had broken into open hostility, several times used the word “Jews” to indicate the leaders of either the Jewish faith or the Jewish nation. I recall no similar statements in Paul. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2007, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/63 "2007-10-06T23:44:24Z")
> [@](#): > > **Diogenes the Cynic** : Diogenes the Cynic: John and Mark didn’t think he was born in Bethlehem. Cite? Leaving it out of their accounts should not be construed as taking a position against his being born there. If they specified somewhere else, that would be an acceptable cite. Also, please provide a cite where Matthew and Luke explain their motives in setting the birth in Bethlehem. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/64 "2007-10-07T13:23:05Z")
[QUOTE=KGS] **Matthew 24:23-31** is all about false prophets & such plus some trippy apocalyptic nonsense about the end of the world. If I were to take Jesus’ word on faith, that would mean I should not believe ANYBODY who claims to be Jesus or claims to know who Jesus is. It’s sort of like he’s denying his own divinity and his own existence. (Kinda freaky how that passage is underlined in my Bible…they must teach that ch/verse in Sunday School class!) **Matthew 8:38-39** …does not exist. Neither does Mark. :dubious: [/QUOTE] IMatthew chapter 24-verses 29 -31" but immediatly after the tribulation of those days,the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give her light, and the stars will fall from heaven,and the powers of heaven will be shaken,and then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven: then will all tribes of earth mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of heaven with great power and majesty, And he will send forth his angels with a trumpet and a great sound,and they will gather his elect from the four winds,from one end of the heavens to the other". Hard to do if the stars have fallen and the sun has fallen (which is our closest star). Mark 8- verses 38-39 For whoever is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes with the holy angels in the Glory of his father" and he said to them,“Amen I say to you,there are some sanding herewho will not taste death ,till they have seen the kingdom of God coming in power.” I notice that you do not believe the bible neither do I, It was reading the Bible that made me not believe in it,and what Jesus is quoted as saying doesn’t make sense, if he were anything other than a normal human he would know if the stars fell, earth would nor could it survive. I apologize for giving the wrong quotes. Monavis ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/65 "2007-10-07T13:39:37Z")
[QUOTE=KGS] **Matthew 24:23-31** is all about false prophets & such plus some trippy apocalyptic nonsense about the end of the world. If I were to take Jesus’ word on faith, that would mean I should not believe ANYBODY who claims to be Jesus or claims to know who Jesus is. It’s sort of like he’s denying his own divinity and his own existence. (Kinda freaky how that passage is underlined in my Bible…they must teach that ch/verse in Sunday School class!) **Matthew 8:38-39** …does not exist. Neither does Mark. :dubious: [/QUOTE] Jesus when accused of blasphmey calling God his father He replied; "why do you say I blaspheme because I call God my father:when your fathers did?. Refering to Psalm either 81 or 82 depending on what Bible you use. The Psalmist say’s in verse 6, “Don’t you know you are gods, sons of the most high”? Monavis ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/66 "2007-10-07T14:33:57Z")
[QUOTE=monavis] Mark 8- verses 38-39 For whoever is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes with the holy angels in the Glory of his father" and he said to them,“Amen I say to you,there are some sanding herewho will not taste death ,till they have seen the kingdom of God coming in power.” [/QUOTE] Just to clear up some confusion, Mark 8:38 is the first quoted statement and the second quoted statement is Mark 9:1. ---
**Author:** ![DirkGntly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d9b06d/32.png) [@DirkGntly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DirkGntly)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/67 "2007-10-07T14:55:21Z")
And to address Paul’s supposed “mysogyny,” most of the commentary attributed to him that even comes close was in 1 Corinthians. Those statements were directed at the Corinthians, who had well-known issues with adultery, bigamy, and fornication (as understood at the time). Paul’s commentary to the Corinthians was intended to be a set of recommendations the Corinthians (and ONLY the Corinthians) might try, in an effort to curb the sexual issues within the church at Corinth. He later went back, in 2 Corinthians, to correct the Corinthian church’s over-zealous application of the suggestions he made in 1 Corinthians. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/68 "2007-10-07T15:07:48Z")
[QUOTE=Zoe] Also, please provide a cite where Matthew and Luke explain their motives in setting the birth in Bethlehem. [/QUOTE] Well, Matthew’s motive is in Matt 2:3-6 (NIV) > [@](#): > > When King Herod heard this he was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him. When he had called together all the people’s chief priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Christ was to be born. “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, "for this is what the prophet has written: > > ‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, > are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; > for out of you will come a ruler > who will be the shepherd of my people Israel.’ ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/69 "2007-10-07T15:18:35Z")
[QUOTE=DirkGntly] And to address Paul’s supposed “mysogyny,” most of the commentary attributed to him that even comes close was in 1 Corinthians. Those statements were directed at the Corinthians, who had well-known issues with adultery, bigamy, and fornication (as understood at the time). Paul’s commentary to the Corinthians was intended to be a set of recommendations the Corinthians (and ONLY the Corinthians) might try, in an effort to curb the sexual issues within the church at Corinth. He later went back, in 2 Corinthians, to correct the Corinthian church’s over-zealous application of the suggestions he made in 1 Corinthians. [/QUOTE] Whatever local practices Paul may have been reacting to, here’s what is recorded in [1 Corinthians 11:3-15](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2011:3-15;&version=31;): > [@](#): > > Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head. > > In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. (There’s also a variant text shown from verse seven, but it’s not exactly feminist either.) Another famous (or infamous) passage is [1 Timothy 2:11-15](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%202:11-15;&version=31;): > [@](#): > > A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. What exactly does 2 Corinthians say that modifies or contradicts any of this? ---
**Author:** ![DirkGntly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d9b06d/32.png) [@DirkGntly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DirkGntly)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/70 "2007-10-07T15:34:24Z")
Not so much contradicts, as much as, “Hey, tone it down a little.” The Corinthians started to make matters of dress and head-covering requirements for admission into the church and punishments could be rendered for such offenses. Paul basically came back in 2 Corinthians and said, “hey, we’re under grace, not law, and I didn’t intend you to take my suggestions and make them church law.” Now, Paul’s commentary that you quoted, **MEBuckner** could possibly be taken as mysogynistic, but is probably more accurately described as patriarchal in nature. I can’t find evidence that Paul found women INFERIOR, merely that to him, it was more appropriate for men to take a leadership position (which, given the times when this was written, and the intended audience, is not unusual). ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/71 "2007-10-07T15:35:40Z")
[QUOTE=Zoe] > [@](#): > > **Diogenes the Cynic** : Diogenes the Cynic: John and Mark didn’t think he was born in Bethlehem. Cite? Leaving it out of their accounts should not be construed as taking a position against his being born there. If they specified somewhere else, that would be an acceptable cite. [/QUOTE] [John 1:46](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:46&version=31): > [@](#): > > Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” > > “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” Nathanael asked. > “Come and see,” said Philip. [John 7:41-52](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%207:41-52;&version=31;): > [@](#): > > Others said, “He is the Christ.” > > Still others asked, “How can the Christ come from Galilee? Does not the Scripture say that the Christ will come from David’s family and from Bethlehem, the town where David lived?” Thus the people were divided because of Jesus. Some wanted to seize him, but no one laid a hand on him. > > Finally the temple guards went back to the chief priests and Pharisees, who asked them, “Why didn’t you bring him in?” > > “No one ever spoke the way this man does,” the guards declared. > > “You mean he has deceived you also?” the Pharisees retorted. “Has any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed in him? No! But this mob that knows nothing of the law—there is a curse on them.” > > Nicodemus, who had gone to Jesus earlier and who was one of their own number, asked, “Does our law condemn anyone without first hearing him to find out what he is doing?” > > They replied, “Are you from Galilee, too? Look into it, and you will find that a prophet does not come out of Galilee.” You could say that John doesn’t flat out say “Jesus was born in Nazareth”–John doesn’t mention the birth of Jesus at all. Still, either John 1:46 or the last part of chapter 7 would have been an excellent place for John to have thrown in a quick parenthetical statement “(Of course Jesus was actually born in Bethlehem, just as the prophets foretold; he only grew up in Galilee”)–if in fact John had any such belief. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/72 "2007-10-07T15:48:32Z")
[QUOTE=DirkGntly] Not so much contradicts, as much as, “Hey, tone it down a little.” The Corinthians started to make matters of dress and head-covering requirements for admission into the church and punishments could be rendered for such offenses. Paul basically came back in 2 Corinthians and said, “hey, we’re under grace, not law, and I didn’t intend you to take my suggestions and make them church law.” Now, Paul’s commentary that you quoted, **MEBuckner** could possibly be taken as mysogynistic, but is probably more accurately described as patriarchal in nature. I can’t find evidence that Paul found women INFERIOR, merely that to him, it was more appropriate for men to take a leadership position (which, given the times when this was written, and the intended audience, is not unusual). [/QUOTE] To me at least, saying “For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner” implies inferiority. Also, for one group to be placed in authority over another group puts the second group in a, well, inferior position. It is true that Christian sexist attittudes have historically often been couched in terms not of hatred for women but “merely” subjection of them; patriarchal rather than misogynistic, as you say. For that matter, at times, some Christians have sought to relegate women to an inferior position (socially or politically speaking) by claiming women are _better_–the whole “Oh, women are purer and better than men, and so should stay ought of grubby old politics and business and devote themselves to the _important_ stuff, like raising children and cooking and cleaning” line. I’m curious though: You indicate a certain cultural relativism (“given the times when this was written, and the intended audience”). Do you also apply that to strictures against homosexuality or homosexual acts? Is the notion that gay sex is inherently wrong as opposed to straight sex merely a cultural artifact, or is it a permanent and timeless ethical principle? ---
**Author:** ![DirkGntly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d9b06d/32.png) [@DirkGntly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DirkGntly)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/73 "2007-10-07T15:57:00Z")
In my mind, the strictures against homosexual acts fall in line with the same strictures against fornication or adultery, which were based in the idea that sex should be reserved for those persons who are married. Since it was assumed that homosexual people could not be married, then that fell under the same set of “rules” as fornication or adultery. I realize Paul had some pretty incendiary (by today’s standards) things to say about homosexuality itself, but I’m not scholarly enough to debate those issues effectively. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/74 "2007-10-07T15:58:08Z")
Well, what about gay marriage then? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/75 "2007-10-07T16:10:46Z")
[QUOTE=Zoe] Cite? Leaving it out of their accounts should not be construed as taking a position against his being born there. If they specified somewhere else, that would be an acceptable cite. Also, please provide a cite where Matthew and Luke explain their motives in setting the birth in Bethlehem. [/QUOTE] In addition to what **MEB** quoted from John (which includes the passage where Jesus’ detractors say he can’t be the Messiah because he wasn’t born in Bethlehem…a point which is significantly left uncorrected and unrebutted by John), [Mark 6:1-4](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%206&version=31) also says the following: > [@](#): > > 1Jesus left there and went to his hometown, accompanied by his disciples. 2When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed. > > “Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What’s this wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles! 3Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him. > > 4Jesus said to them, “Only in his hometown, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor.” An extended passage where Mark describes Jesus’ small town Galilean roots in some detail without ever mentioning that he wasn’t born there. Mark was the first Gospel written. The Pauline Corpus was written even before that. Q was written before either Matthew or Luke and it’s not there either. The birth in Bethlehem is not found in the earliest strata of Christian literature, even in spots where one should expect to find it emphasized. The first extant claim that Jesus as born in Bethlehem does not occur until Matthew’s Gospel (c. 80 CE), 50 years after the crucifixion, written by a non-contemporary and a non-witness in a patently, demonstrably, fictional narrative in the which the author makes a habit throughout his Gospel of trying to force or invent events in the life of Jesus to fit what he believes are OT prophecies about the Messiah (many of which are not). The motive is pretty clear in Luke as well, even if he doesn’t say it explicitly. He has to jump through a number of hoops to get the Nativity to Bethlehem and his own account is, like Matthew’s, a clear and demonstrable fiction, containing events which did not or could not have occurred (and I’m not just talking about miracles) and which are set 10-12 years later than Matthew’s Nativity. It is the uncontroversial consensus of mainstream historical and NT scholarship that Jesus was born in Galilee and that Matthew and Luke’s Bethlehem narratives are both pious fictions engineered to address one of the critiques of Jesus’ alleged Messiahship (a critique which the author of GJohn had no answer for). ---
**Author:** ![KGS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/90ced4/32.png) [@KGS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KGS)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/76 "2007-10-07T16:51:43Z")
[QUOTE=monavis] Hard to do if the stars have fallen and the sun has fallen (which is our closest star) [/quote] Since we live in an [expanding universe](http://skyserver.sdss.org/dr1/en/astro/universe/universe.asp), the stars aren’t going to being falling on us for at least several billion years. Sinners, rejoice! > [@](#): > > I notice that you do not believe the bible neither do I, It was reading the Bible that made me not believe in it,and what Jesus is quoted as saying doesn’t make sense, if he were anything other than a normal human he would know if the stars fell, earth would nor could it survive. Thanks for clarifying that. What’s the name for that type of false logic where something is used to prove itself? For instance, how many Christians say, “The Bible says that it’s written by God, therefore it’s written by God. Q.E.D.” ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/77 "2007-10-07T18:11:38Z")
[QUOTE=DirkGntly] And to address Paul’s supposed “mysogyny,” most of the commentary attributed to him that even comes close was in 1 Corinthians. Those statements were directed at the Corinthians, who had well-known issues with adultery, bigamy, and fornication (as understood at the time). Paul’s commentary to the Corinthians was intended to be a set of recommendations the Corinthians (and ONLY the Corinthians) might try, in an effort to curb the sexual issues within the church at Corinth. He later went back, in 2 Corinthians, to correct the Corinthian church’s over-zealous application of the suggestions he made in 1 Corinthians. [/QUOTE] It’s profoundly unsatisfying to arbitrarily attribute certain statements as applying to a specific people, culture and time while applying others broadly across all time and all circumstances. This sort of wiggleroom leaves the whole thing suspect. At a bare minimum, a book directed by the Almighty would have a chapter specifically devoted to clarifying which Truths extend across all time and all civilizations. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2007, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/78 "2007-10-07T22:01:30Z")
The accuracy of the prophecies of Nostradamus is amazing. Take a look for yourself at all the prophecies that were fulfilled. How could it be by chance? [http://www.dreamscape.com/morgana/nospast.htm](http://www.dreamscape.com/morgana/nospast.htm) The accuracy of the prophecies of the Delphic Oracle is amazing . . . ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2007, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/79 "2007-10-08T10:47:40Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] Just to clear up some confusion, Mark 8:38 is the first quoted statement and the second quoted statement is Mark 9:1. [/QUOTE] In My Bible which is quite old I wrote directly from it, I have an old version, I have I read it to pieces years ago so perhaps there are many new translations since that, I haven’t read it in many years. I suppose that is why there is confusion as there are so many different translations. Thanks for pointing it out to me though. Monavis ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2007, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587/80 "2007-10-08T10:55:40Z")
[QUOTE=KGS] Since we live in an [expanding universe](http://skyserver.sdss.org/dr1/en/astro/universe/universe.asp), the stars aren’t going to being falling on us for at least several billion years. Sinners, rejoice! Thanks for clarifying that. What’s the name for that type of false logic where something is used to prove itself? For instance, how many Christians say, “The Bible says that it’s written by God, therefore it’s written by God. Q.E.D.” [/QUOTE] As I understand it the stars etc. are in a constant state of what would be considered falling, as I read it, thinking that in those days people believed the stars could fall on the earth.as they believed the earth was the center of the universe. I think stars burn out not fall, of course I admit I am no scientist. Monavis [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-for-the-bible/421587.md?page=5)