|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 05/12/2005 : 19:46:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Except when the inerrancy of the bible is needed to maintain that faith, as it is with the person who started this thread. Perhaps your point might have more merit if this thread was actually begun by a skeptic. But you see, Hippy's a literalist.
Be fair, H. The OP reads, in part:quote:
My current belief is that the Bible which we have is not inerrant...
Bolding mine. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2005 : 19:57:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Be fair, H. The OP reads, in part:quote:
My current belief is that the Bible which we have is not inerrant...
Bolding mine.
Ah, ok, well "inerrancy" is not the proper word. What would we call that then? "Nigh inerrancy?" I mean, he does claim the only discrepancy he's aware of is the timing of a curse.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 05/12/2005 19:58:06 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2005 : 20:43:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I mean, he does claim the only discrepancy he's aware of is the timing of a curse.
But he did, as Dave_W pointed out, also say that he was not a believer in the innerancy of the bible. He did ask for contradictions, so maybe he falls into the category of people who haven't actually read the bible beyond certain selected passages.
Or hasn't read it with the intent of examining it critically.
Because seriously, if you have ever read genesis, you have to either be not paying attention or deliberately ignoring the contradicions to not have noticed them.
And that's just the first book...
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2005 : 21:09:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
But he did, as Dave_W pointed out, also say that he was not a believer in the innerancy of the bible. He did ask for contradictions, so maybe he falls into the category of people who haven't actually read the bible beyond certain selected passages. Or hasn't read it with the intent of examining it critically.
Yes, of course you and Dave are right. I suppose I just can't wrap my head around the idea that the bible can be admittedly errant yet still be taken literally. As far as I know, Hippy is a young earther, or he was investigating the bible's claims of a young earth maybe is a better way of putting it.
My question would be on the bible's largest contradiction: the immutable nature of god. In the Old Testament god is a authoritative tyrant who curses the earth, orders the murder of infants, and kills off the entire population of the planet save Noah and his family. Yet in the New Testament we are presented with a god of limitless love, mercy, and forgiveness. That seems like a pretty friggin big change of heart from a god for whom change is impossible.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 05/12/2005 22:44:28 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2005 : 22:09:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
and kills off the entire population of the planet save Moses and his family.
Noah....
Moses was the guy in Egypt for whom god killed every first born child of Egyptian heritage.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2005 : 22:44:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Noah....
Moses was the guy in Egypt for whom god killed every first born child of Egyptian heritage.
Wow. I knew that. Just tired I guessed. Thanks for catching that.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 05/12/2005 22:45:13 |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2005 : 06:18:24 [Permalink]
|
Hi, h4c. In regards to your latest challenge, I'm fairly certain that you're right when you say that "the Bible which we have is not inerrant, but the errors present in it are not sufficient to make the rest of the Bible unauthoratative." By which I mean that while there may be slight contradictions or internal inconsistancies in the Bible, none are so great as to creat glaring problems. You'll never find, for instance, a story wherein the Hebrew slaves escape Egypt followed by one where they're captured and slaughtered by Pharaoh's elite guard.
The reason for this is simple: the Bible isn't a random collection of books. Instead, it was codified by people with certain theological and political agendas. Books that jibed with and furthered those agendas were kept, while others were not.
But these people didn't actually write the books; they could only select from what was in front of them. Thus, there will naturally be small errors-- one book says 10,000 men while another says 100,000.
Indeed, if there were a glaring contradition, if would have been spotted centuries ago!
Of course, when the Bible is compared to extra-Biblical evidence we find a different story. Modern science, for instance, has shown that the Biblical accounts of life's origins on earth are simply not correct. And modern scholarship in the history of the ancient southwest Asia (the Middle East) has shown other problems. (While, of course, confirming large parts of early Israel's and Judah's history as presented in the Bible!) As I noted in another thread, the Tower of Babel story simply cannot be true in any literal since.
But while you've (rightly) suggested that small contradictions shouldn't ruin one's faith in the Judeo-Christian religions, I don't know what you think about problems that arise when the Bible is compared to extra-Biblical sources and found wanting...
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2005 : 10:30:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Noah....
Moses was the guy in Egypt...
As an amusing aside, ask people "how many of each animal did Moses take on the Ark?" Most people will answer "two" without thinking about the name at all. (Nevermind also that Noah was told to take seven pairs of all "clean" animals.)
The above is, of course, akin to asking, "if a plane crashed exactly on the border between two countries, where do they bury the survivors?" |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 05/15/2005 : 14:51:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by the_ignored
Just a word of caution: make sure that if you use the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, that you have checked the sources and arguments somewhat. Even some of the people over at Internet Infidels don't care for it too much, and some really obnoxious apologists skewer it.
But you can read the quotes directly. I pay much more attention to the actual quotes than to the analyses. |
|
|
|
hippy4christ
Skeptic Friend
193 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2005 : 08:53:50 [Permalink]
|
Hello all,
Question: Is there anyone out there with medical experience? I'd like to relate an experience.
In response to some of your comments, I have until recently thought that my faith was based on the Bible. Then my teacher told me that his faith was based on meeting Jesus face to face and speaking with him since then. So I've decided that, in a while, I'm going to take a walkabout to see if I can get some experiences. Before I do so, I'd like to get some more info.
So, to the list:
How many apostles did Jesus appear to after His ressurection?
Ten
Jn.20:19-24
Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.... But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
Eleven
Mt.28:16 "Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshipped him."
Mk.16:14
"Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen."
Lk.24:33, 36
And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together.... And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
Twelve
1 Cor.15:5
"And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve."
The first time that Jesus appeared it was to the ten, without Judas or Thomas. Mk.16:14 and Lk.24:33, 36 refers to the next time that Jesus appeared to them, when Thomas was present. Mt.28:16 is refering to another time period after both events. As for 1 Cor.15:5 the phrase "the twelve" was used simply to refer to the apostles as a group, as can be seen from the above passage from John where he calls Thomas "one of the twelve."
Next,
2 Sam.23:6 The ... chief among the captains ... he lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time. 1 Chr.11:11
the chief of the captains: he lifted up his spear against three hundred slain by him at one time.
What they neglect to tell you is that these two passages are talking about two completely different people at completely different times.
This next one is a good question.
Rom.4:2
"For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory." Jas.2:21
"Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?"
Paul and James are discussing two sides of the same coin. Faith is the actual thing which justifies. But if you have faith, you will have works. So, in a sense, works justify. James puts it well in the following verse:
2:22
Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
And Paul, in the same book, also denies simply claiming belief as a way to salvation:
6:1
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
|
Faith is believing what you are told, whether it's by a priest or a scientist. A person's scientific beliefs are ones based on personal observation and experimentation.
Lists of Logical Fallacies |
| Edited by - hippy4christ on 05/17/2005 09:26:24 |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2005 : 08:57:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by hippy4christ
In response to some of your comments, I have until recently thought that my faith was based on the Bible. Then my teacher told me that his faith was based on meeting Jesus face to face and speaking with him since then.
Cuckoo! Cuckoo! |
|
|
|
hippy4christ
Skeptic Friend
193 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2005 : 10:04:40 [Permalink]
|
Cuneiformist:
I've known my teacher for years. He certainly seems capable of logical reasoning to me, and I don't know anyone who claims otherwise.
To continue, how many sons did Abraham have?
Heb.11:17
"By faith Abraham when he was tried, offered up Isaac, ... his only begotten son."
Gen.22:2
"Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, ... and offer him there for a burnt offering."
At the time of Gen. 22:2 Abraham had sent away Ishmael, so in that sense, he only had one son at that time.
21:14
And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba.
Next,
1 Samuel 22:20 And one of the sons of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped, and fled after David.
2 Samuel 8:17 And Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, were the priests; and Seraiah was the scribe;
It's entirely possible that Abiathar had a son who he named after his dad.
For now, I'm going to concentrate on contradictions dealing with doctrines.
Adultery:
Ex.20:14, Dt.5:18
"Thou shalt not commit adultery."
Heb.13:4
"Whoremongers and adulterers God will judge."
Num.31:18
"But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
Hos.1:2
"And the Lord said to Hosea, Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms...."
Hos.3:1
"Then said the Lord unto me, God yet, love a woman beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress."
As for the Numbers case: adultery is wrong, polygamy is not. (And to forestall certain comments, the slaughter of the Canaanites bothers me too, but that's a different subject.
As for Hosea: This is a special case where Yahweh tells an individual to do something against the Law. He does this at times. Sometimes the individuals ask not to break the Law, and He grants their request(as far as I know).
Is alcohol OK?
Num.6:3
"He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried."
Pr.20:1
"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise."
Pr.23:20-21
"Be not among winebibbers.... For the drunkard and the glutton shall come to poverty."
Dan.1:8
"But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king's meat, nor with the wine which he drank."
Rom.14:21
It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
Jn.2:3-10
"And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. ... etc.
In short, alcohol is OK to drink in moderation. For the Numbers case, the passage is refering specifically to those who take the vow of the Nazarene. The Proverbs cases are speaking against immoderate use. Daniel was refusing to drink the king of Babylon's wine. In Romans, Paul is saying that if drinking alcohol will offend your brother then it's good to not drink and not offend him.
Later,
Hippy |
Faith is believing what you are told, whether it's by a priest or a scientist. A person's scientific beliefs are ones based on personal observation and experimentation.
Lists of Logical Fallacies |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2005 : 10:11:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by hippy4christ
Cuneiformist:
I've known my teacher for years. He certainly seems capable of logical reasoning to me, and I don't know anyone who claims otherwise.
But h4c, were I to say that my faith in, say, Communism stems from my having met Lenin face to face, and my continued talks with him, how would you react?
I'm not saying that your teacher is not logical or stupid. I just have trouble grasping the concept of "meeting Jesus face to face" and having continued converstions with him, given that Jesus has been dead for ca. 2000 years. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2005 : 10:23:58 [Permalink]
|
| Just what is the medical question, h4c? |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2005 : 10:42:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by hippy4christ
Question: Is there anyone out there with medical experience?
Some here do have such experience, but the necessary disclaimers apply: nobody can ethically diagnose or treat any problem you may or may not have over an Internet forum.quote:
I'd like to relate an experience.
In response to some of your comments, I have until recently thought that my faith was based on the Bible. Then my teacher told me that his faith was based on meeting Jesus face to face and speaking with him since then.
I would suggest that there are problems with both. If your faith is based solely upon a book, then if you find problems with the book, your faith collapses. Not much of a faith, is it? Secondly, the Bible suggests that very few people have seen Jesus face-to-face since His death, making the most-reasonable explanations of your teacher's experience either hallucination or derangement, neither of which is a good thing to base a faith upon, either.quote:
So I've decided that, in a while, I'm going to take a walkabout to see if I can get some experiences.
Faith in Christ comes from the heart, Hippy. If you don't have it there - so I'm told - you won't get it from a book or from visions.
quote:
2 Sam.23:6 The ... chief among the captains ... he lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time. 1 Chr.11:11
the chief of the captains: he lifted up his spear against three hundred slain by him at one time.
What they neglect to tell you is that these two passages are talking about two completely different people at completely different times.
I can't find a version of the Bible which mentions 800 being killed in 2 Samuel 23:6 (which doesn't mention killing at all).
Ah, okay. The SAB list has a typo, and should read "2 Sam 36:8." However, it and 1 Chr 11:11 still present a problem, as the verses are simply listing who's who among David's powerful men, and they give different names and tribes for David's "chief of the captians." Note that both 2 Sam 36:9 and 1 Chr 11:12 mention "Eleazar the son of Dodo, the Ahohite."
The tribes, at least, may be another one of SAB's typos, however. The NIV 2 Sam 23:8 is heavily footnoted. It reads:These are the names of David's mighty men: Josheb-Basshebeth, a Tahkemonite, was chief of the Three; he raised his spear against eight hundred men, whom he killed in one encounter. And the NIV 1 Chr 11:11 reads:this is the list of David's mighty men: Jashobeam, a Hacmonite, was chief of the officers; he raised his spear against three hundred men, whom he killed in one encounter. The footnotes suggest that "Jashobeam" may be a variant of "Jashob-Baal," while "Josheb-Basshebeth" may be a variant of "Ish-Baal" (and that "Tahkemonite" is probably a variant of "Hacmonite").
Either way, either there were two chiefs who both directly preceeded (or commanded) Eleazar, or one chief who slew 800 in one telling of the tale, and 300 in another. If you've got further evidence, Hippy "that these two passages are talking about two completely different people at completely different times," please present it.quote:
At the time of Gen. 22:2 Abraham had sent away Ishmael, so in that sense, he only had one son at that time.
If you've got a Biblical source which suggests that sending away one of two sons means you're down to an "only begotten son," I'd be interested in reading it. After all, God - who either wrote or inspired the Bible - would know that sending a kid away doesn't mean the child was never born.quote:
It's entirely possible that Abiathar had a son who he named after his dad.
Such apologies do not have Biblical support. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
