Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Squaring circles: direct biblical contradictions
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5240 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 16 of 161 (531748)
10-19-2009 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by purpledawn
10-19-2009 2:51 PM


Re: Perfect God
According to you they must be flawless (without fault or blemish) and unquestionable if God is flawless. The adjective "perfect" describes God, not necessarily what he says or does or inspires.
If you look back to the quote I posted to kick off this thread:
The rationale for justifying any of my beliefs stems from an overarching belief that the Bible is the word of God. Once I've accepted that, there isn't much need to justify any specific belief arising from that overarching acceptance: God says it's so - who am I to argue with God?
This says unequivocally that "god says it's so" via god's word in the bible. It was written in another thread by another christian. I took him at his word (i.e. I believe that what he wrote was true and sincere, in case you are wondering what I mean by that). It appears that your understanding of "the word of god" is at variance with mine and his.
Why should the writings in the Bible be unquestionable because God is supposedly flawless? How does one relate to the other?
If they were questionable, then their originator couldn't ever be considered "perfect".
God is always changing as the Bible shows us.
Well, this is a new theology. No other christian I have had any dealings with has thought that god is "always changing". Are you certain about this? Which christian sect believes that god is changing? Your god is, however, always changing - his story.
So, do you still consider the verses you provided to be inconsistent? You didn't really respond to my explanations.
Yes, they are obviously inconsistent if you read the plain text, and I thought your explanations were extremely convoluted, and unconvincing because of that.
Edited by Blzebub, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by purpledawn, posted 10-19-2009 2:51 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Perdition, posted 10-19-2009 4:35 PM Blzebub has seen this message but not replied
 Message 18 by purpledawn, posted 10-19-2009 4:54 PM Blzebub has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


(1)
Message 17 of 161 (531755)
10-19-2009 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Blzebub
10-19-2009 4:06 PM


Re: Perfect God
Yes, they are obviously inconsistent if you read the plain text, and I thought your explanations were extremely convoluted, and unconvincing because of that.
I think she's trying to say that, beside God changing, humanity is also changing and growing. In the same sense that you tell your two year old not to go into the street unless you yourself have a hold of his hand, you can tell your ten year old to look both ways before crossing the street alone. Are you being inconsistent? Not really, you're just allowing for the maturation of your child.
Edited by Perdition, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Blzebub, posted 10-19-2009 4:06 PM Blzebub has seen this message but not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


(1)
Message 18 of 161 (531757)
10-19-2009 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Blzebub
10-19-2009 4:06 PM


Re: Perfect God
quote:
This says unequivocally that "god says it's so" via god's word in the bible. It was written in another thread by another christian. I took him at his word (i.e. I believe that what he wrote was true and sincere, in case you are wondering what I mean by that). It appears that your understanding of "the word of god" is at variance with mine and his.
That person said it is so for him. That's his rationale for justifying his beliefs. I know who it was written by. He said nothing about God being perfect or that God's word can't be questioned. You seem to be conflating perfect God with word of God.
quote:
If they were questionable, then their originator couldn't ever be considered "perfect".
Here we go with meaning again. I take indisputable to mean that what is written is certain and no one is allowed to argue or test what is written.
How does God being flawless relate to what is written? Flawless means without fault or blemish. How does that relate to what is spoken?
quote:
Well, this is a new theology. No other christian I have had any dealings with has thought that god is "always changing". Are you certain about this? Which christian sect believes that god is changing? Your god is, however, always changing - his story.
We aren't talking about sects. We talking about the Bible. You can see the change in the writings of the Bible.
quote:
Yes, they are obviously inconsistent if you read the plain text, and I thought your explanations were extremely convoluted, and unconvincing because of that.
Please show me how they are inconsistent given the responses I gave you.
Show me what I missed in the plain text.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Blzebub, posted 10-19-2009 4:06 PM Blzebub has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 10:16 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5240 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 19 of 161 (531763)
10-19-2009 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by purpledawn
10-18-2009 11:27 AM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
The point of the A&E story in Genesis 2:15-17 has nothing to do with whether it is wrong to be able to tell good from evil. It is a foundational myth written as a just-so story to explain why mankind is the way it is. This story does not contradict what the author of Hebrews said in 5:13-14.
So, this one is dismissed as a "myth".
The author of 2 Peter is referring to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, not what happened afterwards. In Genesis 19, Lot was saved because he was considered righteous before the destruction.
Whoever thought he was "righteous" before, was proved wrong soon after.
Do you really think Genesis 22 and James 1 are talking about the same thing?
God gave Abraham a command. The test of Abraham was if he followed God's command. A direct test of obedience. The author of James is talking about temptation (enticement) to do things that are wrong, not that God gave them a direct order.
I think killing children is wrong. Don't you? God asked Abraham to kill his son. God comes across as a particularly nasty and sadistic psychopath in this jolly little tale.
Again, this is not a contradiction of the law, but a sign of the times.
Come off it. Honestly, this is ridiculous.
Judges is considered an historical book. Judges 4:21 is telling what happened. Judges 5:25-27 is a song about the incident. Songs tend to take poetic license
Poetic license? You'll be saying it's all made up by primitive Bronze-Age people, next.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by purpledawn, posted 10-18-2009 11:27 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by purpledawn, posted 10-19-2009 6:17 PM Blzebub has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


(1)
Message 20 of 161 (531772)
10-19-2009 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Blzebub
10-19-2009 5:23 PM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
quote:
So, this one is dismissed as a "myth".
No, the point of the story is not about whether it is wrong to be able to tell good from evil. If you disagree, show me in the plain text.
quote:
Whoever thought he was "righteous" before, was proved wrong soon after.
But the author of 2 Peter is making a point concerning Lot's righteousness at the time of the Sodom and Gomorrah event. If you disagree, then show me in the plain text.
quote:
I think killing children is wrong. Don't you? God asked Abraham to kill his son. God comes across as a particularly nasty and sadistic psychopath in this jolly little tale.
It is irrelevant what you think about killing children. The verses are talking about different types of testing. If you disagree, then show your evidence in the plain text.
quote:
Come off it. Honestly, this is ridiculous.
If you disagree that the NT authors were referring to Micah 7:6 as a sign of Messianic times, then provide evidence that they meant otherwise.
quote:
Poetic license? You'll be saying it's all made up by primitive Bronze-Age people, next.
One is narrative and one is a song. Show evidence that a song always matches reality 100%.
Now I gave you very polite and detailed explanations in my first response to the inconsistencies, but your responses provided no evidence to support your disagreement. You wanted the science thread, which means you also have to provide evidence for your disagreement. You've shown nothing so far.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Blzebub, posted 10-19-2009 5:23 PM Blzebub has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 3:22 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5240 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 21 of 161 (531807)
10-20-2009 3:22 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by purpledawn
10-19-2009 6:17 PM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
You show me evidence that one is a "myth", and another is a "song". Where's the music?
The later example (sabbath commandment) makes it quite clear that the order is permanent, but it is subsequently countermanded by Jesus and Paul.
If you truly, honestly don't agree that my examples were inconsistencies, why did you refer to them as such in your first reply?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by purpledawn, posted 10-19-2009 6:17 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by purpledawn, posted 10-20-2009 5:22 AM Blzebub has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 22 of 161 (531819)
10-20-2009 5:22 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Blzebub
10-20-2009 3:22 AM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
quote:
You show me evidence that one is a "myth", and another is a "song". Where's the music?
The later example (sabbath commandment) makes it quite clear that the order is permanent, but it is subsequently countermanded by Jesus and Paul.
If you truly, honestly don't agree that my examples were inconsistencies, why did you refer to them as such in your first reply?
That's what I thought. You found a list of Bible contradictions, but you really don't have any reasoning of your own to sustain your position. You're demanding more evidence, when you haven't even provided counter evidence.
So far you haven't shown evidence that the Christian Bible must be free of contradictions and errors to be considered the word of God.
You're also unable to seriously address the explanations I gave concerning the supposed inconsistencies you provided. Message 8 & Message 11
You're not even reading the text. Judges 5:
On that day Deborah and Barak son of Abinoam sang this song:...
And did you miss the talking snake and magic trees in the A&E story?
If you're not going to read, why do I need to jump through hoops?
I know, you were hoping for apologetics and not real answers that would make you think.
When you're ready to discuss these seriously, I'll be available.
Edited by purpledawn, : Added A&E thought.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 3:22 AM Blzebub has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 10:26 AM purpledawn has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 23 of 161 (531824)
10-20-2009 5:32 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Blzebub
10-17-2009 4:57 PM


A personal favorite..
Bzlbub writes:
5. God prohibits killing:
God prohibits man killing. Thou = man
God orders killing
God doesn't prohibit God killing. Thou not= God.
In this case God is the killer and man the weapon of Gods choice. Man isn't subject to the law which prohibits him deciding to kill off his own bat in this case (think of our own laws prohibiting killing yet that same authority can instruct us to kill (executioner/soldier))
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Blzebub, posted 10-17-2009 4:57 PM Blzebub has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 10:42 AM iano has seen this message but not replied
 Message 31 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 1:50 PM iano has replied

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5240 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 24 of 161 (531873)
10-20-2009 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by purpledawn
10-19-2009 4:54 PM


Re: Perfect God
He said nothing about God being perfect or that God's word can't be questioned. You seem to be conflating perfect God with word of God.
He said "who am I to argue with god?" The clear implication is that god's word can't be questioned. Anyway, he has arrived in the thread now, so perhaps he can explain for himself what he means.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by purpledawn, posted 10-19-2009 4:54 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5240 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 25 of 161 (531874)
10-20-2009 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by purpledawn
10-20-2009 5:22 AM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
That's what I thought. You found a list of Bible contradictions, but you really don't have any reasoning of your own to sustain your position. You're demanding more evidence, when you haven't even provided counter evidence.
So far you haven't shown evidence that the Christian Bible must be free of contradictions and errors to be considered the word of God.
I think you are playing fast and loose with words.
Philosophical theism commonly ascribes to god the attribute of immutable - the idea that god cannot and does not change. Whatever god is like now is the way that god was for all of the past and the way god will be for all of the future. It doesn’t matter what happens elsewhere, god always and inevitably remains the same. But you claim that god changes with time. The only reason why you claim this, is to try to paper over the cracks in the bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by purpledawn, posted 10-20-2009 5:22 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by purpledawn, posted 10-20-2009 11:04 AM Blzebub has replied

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5240 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 26 of 161 (531876)
10-20-2009 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by iano
10-20-2009 5:32 AM


Re: A personal favorite..
In this case God is the killer and man the weapon of Gods choice.
This would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad. Your god uses men to do its dirty work on its behalf? Are you serious? What about the physical and psychological damage to all the people concerned, including their families and loved ones? Does your god not care too much about that?
I thought the christian god was supposed to be "a god of love and peace".....
2 Corinthians 13:11 (King James Version)
Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you.
Quite how you can "worship" such an uncaring and inconsistent entity is way beyond me.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by iano, posted 10-20-2009 5:32 AM iano has seen this message but not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 27 of 161 (531885)
10-20-2009 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Blzebub
10-20-2009 10:26 AM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
quote:
Philosophical theism commonly ascribes to god the attribute of immutable - the idea that god cannot and does not change. Whatever god is like now is the way that god was for all of the past and the way god will be for all of the future. It doesn’t matter what happens elsewhere, god always and inevitably remains the same. But you claim that god changes with time. The only reason why you claim this, is to try to paper over the cracks in the bible.
Show evidence that God/Religion does not, cannot, and has not changed. Remember, you're in the science thread; not faith and belief.
Show evidence that the simple reading of the verses you supplied actually contradict each other within the context they were written. You haven't even addressed your own examples seriously.
I'm not trying to paper over cracks. Actually, I like looking through the cracks to see the reality, but you haven't shown true cracks. You're comparing apples and oranges.
Show me that Jesus or Paul said people could/should do their normal daily work on the Sabbath. The fence around the Torah had become burdensome if not ridiculous.
A gezeirah is a law instituted by the rabbis to prevent people from accidentally violating a Torah mitzvah. We commonly speak of a gezeirah as a "fence" around the Torah. For example, the Torah commands us not to work on Shabbat, but a gezeirah commands us not to even handle an implement that you would use to perform prohibited work (such as a pencil, money, a hammer), because someone holding the implement might forget that it was Shabbat and perform prohibited work. The word is derived from the root Gimel-Zayin-Reish, meaning to cut off or to separate.
Show evidence that Jesus countered the command not to work on the Sabbath, as opposed to teaching people to address the spirit of the law with common sense. Israel was no longer a nation governing itself. They were under Roman rule. Look at the argument Jesus made. Look at what was happening around them.
Crosswalk.com and biblos.com are good sources for reading the chapters that surround the verses you provided.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 10:26 AM Blzebub has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 11:28 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5240 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 28 of 161 (531893)
10-20-2009 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by purpledawn
10-20-2009 11:04 AM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
Show evidence that God/Religion does not, cannot, and has not changed. Remember, you're in the science thread; not faith and belief.
There's no evidence god even exists, so how can anyone "show evidence" about whether god has changed? I've already shown that "immutability" is a common theme in christianity, and it's what I was taught as a young child, before I grew old enough to see through it all.
Show evidence that Jesus countered the command not to work on the Sabbath, as opposed to teaching people to address the spirit of the law with common sense.
The command was unequivocal, punishable by death, and states explicitly that it is "a perpetual covenant", "for ever". I don't think it could be any clearer than it is. Here's the relevent part again:
Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.
It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
But if you think Jesus and Paul were right to abandon a key tenet of god's word, just because the Romans were hanging around, then that's obviously all OK then.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by purpledawn, posted 10-20-2009 11:04 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by purpledawn, posted 10-20-2009 12:26 PM Blzebub has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 29 of 161 (531904)
10-20-2009 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Blzebub
10-20-2009 11:28 AM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
quote:
There's no evidence god even exists, so how can anyone "show evidence" about whether god has changed? I've already shown that "immutability" is a common theme in christianity, and it's what I was taught as a young child, before I grew old enough to see through it all.
So you have no evidence that god/religion does not, cannot, and has not changed. All you have is what you were taught as a child. If your contention is that my responses to the verses provided are incorrect due to God's immutability (not capable of or susceptible to change), then you need to provide the evidence that God is not capable of or susceptible to change.
quote:
The command was unequivocal, punishable by death, and states explicitly that it is "a perpetual covenant", "for ever". I don't think it could be any clearer than it is. Here's the relevent part again:...
But if you think Jesus and Paul were right to abandon a key tenet of god's word, just because the Romans were hanging around, then that's obviously all OK then.
I didn't say the original law wasn't clear. I said: Show evidence that Jesus countered the command not to work on the Sabbath, as opposed to teaching people to address the spirit of the law with common sense. IOW, did Jesus actually rescind the command or just knock down the fence?

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 11:28 AM Blzebub has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Blzebub, posted 10-20-2009 12:54 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5240 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009


Message 30 of 161 (531909)
10-20-2009 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by purpledawn
10-20-2009 12:26 PM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
So you have no evidence that god/religion does not, cannot, and has not changed. All you have is what you were taught as a child. If your contention is that my responses to the verses provided are incorrect due to God's immutability (not capable of or susceptible to change), then you need to provide the evidence that God is not capable of or susceptible to change.
I agree that religion has certainly changed its tune: for example, the Inquisition would be rather tricky to re-enact these days!
Asking for evidence that god has (or hasn't) changed is patently absurd. You might as well ask whether I think Father Christmas has changed. But christianity teaches that god hasn't changed. I won't bother to provide any supporting links, because you have disallowed them.
Show evidence that Jesus countered the command not to work on the Sabbath, as opposed to teaching people to address the spirit of the law with common sense.
You are playing with words again. Of course he was countering it, by placing the interests of "man" above any petty rules about "the sabbath". The original command is, however, very explicit and it even stipulates that there are to be no exceptions in the future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by purpledawn, posted 10-20-2009 12:26 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by purpledawn, posted 10-20-2009 3:10 PM Blzebub has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024