Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


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 66 of 161 (532299)
10-22-2009 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by purpledawn
10-22-2009 2:19 PM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
What were the rules in that day?
Since his daughters didn't leave the house, why does this negate his righteous standing?
Was it considered "righteous" to offer your virgin daughters to a mob of strangers, in that day, in your increasingly peculiar view?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by purpledawn, posted 10-22-2009 2:19 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by purpledawn, posted 10-22-2009 3:08 PM Blzebub has replied

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


Message 69 of 161 (532313)
10-22-2009 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by purpledawn
10-22-2009 3:08 PM


Re: Supposed Inconsistencies
Was it considered "righteous" to offer your virgin daughters to a mob of strangers, in that day, in your increasingly peculiar view?
That's what I asked you.
Stop wasting posts that don't further the discussion.
Of course it wasn't! Have you taken leave of your senses?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by purpledawn, posted 10-22-2009 3:08 PM purpledawn has not replied

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


Message 70 of 161 (532314)
10-22-2009 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by iano
10-22-2009 4:14 PM


Re: A personal favorite..
It doesn't much matter what you think. What matters is an authorities ability to both forbid killing and instruct killing without there being a contradiction involved.
What seems to matter to you is to defend this point, even at the cost of admitting that "god" uses men as some kind of proxy weapon against other men. Can't you see how ridiculous this appears?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by iano, posted 10-22-2009 4:14 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by iano, posted 10-22-2009 6:16 PM Blzebub has replied

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


Message 78 of 161 (532368)
10-23-2009 3:10 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by iano
10-22-2009 6:16 PM


Re: A personal favorite..
I don't have to admit God uses men as a weapon against other men. You've already accepted the Bible states as much yourself..remember?
If I didn't make it clear before that I think that line of reasoning is preposterous and obviously incorrect, may I do so now?
However, if we accept that it is the case for the sake of your argument for one moment, then it immediately sets up a conflict with assertions elsewhere in the bible, which say that "god is a god of love".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by iano, posted 10-22-2009 6:16 PM iano has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 79 of 161 (532369)
10-23-2009 3:20 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by purpledawn
10-22-2009 8:27 PM


Re: Errors
An error is unintentional. We have no way of knowing, concerning some of the verses we've addressed, if the difference was unintentional or not. If it was intentional, then it isn't an error.
Er, you've made an error! See 2:
error
n.
1. An act, assertion, or belief that unintentionally deviates from what is correct, right, or true.
2. The condition of having incorrect or false knowledge.
3. The act or an instance of deviating from an accepted code of behavior.
4. A mistake.
5. Mathematics The difference between a computed or measured value and a true or theoretically correct value.
6. Abbr. E Baseball A defensive fielding or throwing misplay by a player when a play normally should have resulted in an out or prevented an advance by a base runner.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by purpledawn, posted 10-22-2009 8:27 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by purpledawn, posted 10-23-2009 7:38 AM Blzebub has replied

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


Message 80 of 161 (532372)
10-23-2009 3:39 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by purpledawn
10-22-2009 8:27 PM


Re: Errors
Nope. Blzebub didn't wish to answer my questions in Message 50. He chose instead to define the word inerrant.
I chose not to bother with them, because they are valueless, empty questions. Here they are again:
How does the error by the song writer make God not perfect?
How does the error in prices make God not perfect?
How does Ezra's bad editing make God not perfect?
How does Jesus showing that it is lawful to do good and to save life even on the Sabbath make God not perfect?
If god is perfect, and the bible is god's word, then the bible must be inerrant (without error). If the bible is god's word, yet contains errors, then god is not perfect.
You still haven't answered my implicit question in Message 69. Do you really, seriously, believe that in Lot's time (or any other time), a righteous man would offer his two daughters to a mob for the explicit purpose of gang-rape? If this is your belief, please provide evidence to support it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by purpledawn, posted 10-22-2009 8:27 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by purpledawn, posted 10-23-2009 6:51 AM Blzebub has replied
 Message 85 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-23-2009 10:31 AM Blzebub has replied

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


Message 86 of 161 (532426)
10-23-2009 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by purpledawn
10-23-2009 6:51 AM


Re: Errors
Before you can claim that an error in the Bible means God is not flawless, you need to connect God to the production of the Bible.
No I don't. The entire premise of this thread was set out quite clearly in my first post, containing this statement from a christian:
quote:
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 is what the thread is supposed to be about. A clear "mission statement" which sets out the rationale for belief: the bible is the word of god, and cannot be questioned. You appear to agree with my own opinion, which is that the bible was written by men, and contains numerous errors. So I don't understand why you are arguing with me.
But your position is obscured slightly by your simultaneous insistence that the errors I have pointed out aren't errors at all!
The most recent defence of Lot's "righteousness" is certainly one of the most outlandish opinions I have ever seen from a religious apologist:
What we think of it today is irrelevant. In the story, Lot was not chastised for offering his daughters to the mob. The angels of God were right there with him.
I think that if your argument reaches the point where it relies on an extremely unlikely (and frankly rather silly) premise, such as this suggestion of yours that in Lot's time, offering ones daughters to a rapacious mob was viewed as a righteous act, then the onus is on you to provide some evidence to support this premise, and not on me to refute it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by purpledawn, posted 10-23-2009 6:51 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by purpledawn, posted 10-23-2009 12:43 PM Blzebub has not replied
 Message 92 by Granny Magda, posted 10-23-2009 3:05 PM Blzebub has not replied

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


Message 87 of 161 (532429)
10-23-2009 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by New Cat's Eye
10-23-2009 10:31 AM


Re: Errors
Another possible conclusion is that the Bible is God's word but is not perfect.
In that case, why do christians never describe the bible as "an imperfect transcription of god's word, containing numerous errors"? Instead, they bang on about it being "the word of god", and refer to its unquestionable authority.
Anyway, at least two of you now seem to acknowledge that the writings in the bible are questionable. Which is a start, I suppose.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-23-2009 10:31 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-23-2009 12:38 PM Blzebub has not replied

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


Message 88 of 161 (532431)
10-23-2009 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by purpledawn
10-23-2009 7:38 AM


Re: Incorrect Information
quote:The condition of having incorrect or false knowledge.
So which verse had incorrect information?
Please show evidence that the information was incorrect at the time of writing.
At least one of the two different threshing-floor prices must have been incorrect at the time of writing, and indeed at any other time. The price was already paid, and is an immutable fact (whatever the price actually was).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by purpledawn, posted 10-23-2009 7:38 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by purpledawn, posted 10-23-2009 1:32 PM Blzebub has not replied

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


Message 99 of 161 (532578)
10-24-2009 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by purpledawn
10-24-2009 8:20 AM


Re: Lot and Levite
I haven't found a real theological contradiction yet, as opposed to a theological progression, from a contradiction list.
My point wasn't necessarily to show so-called "theological" anomalies.
But the kill/no-kill one still stands, IMO. If you accept the absurd defence that god was using men as a weapon against one another, then this clashes with statements that "god is a god of love".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by purpledawn, posted 10-24-2009 8:20 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by purpledawn, posted 10-24-2009 11:57 AM Blzebub has replied

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


Message 102 of 161 (532591)
10-24-2009 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by purpledawn
10-24-2009 11:57 AM


Re: Kill or No Kill
Now when you say this clashes with statements like "God is a god of love" then you are looking at current theology, beliefs, views, etc. We aren't going to get anywhere if you can't admit what you're actually trying to debate.
So, religions these days pick and choose amongst conflicting biblical verses, in order to suit their current agendas. Agendas which are actually set by the secular moral zeitgeist! It's totally lame behaviour.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by purpledawn, posted 10-24-2009 11:57 AM purpledawn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Adminnemooseus, posted 10-24-2009 3:14 PM Blzebub has not replied
 Message 106 by Blzebub, posted 10-24-2009 4:37 PM Blzebub has not replied

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


Message 105 of 161 (532605)
10-24-2009 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by DevilsAdvocate
10-24-2009 3:16 PM


Re: NT vs OT
Bravo!
I was brought up as a catholic, and was instructed that god doesn't change. Catholicism represents an enormous slice of "christendom".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 10-24-2009 3:16 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

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


Message 106 of 161 (532606)
10-24-2009 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Blzebub
10-24-2009 1:18 PM


Re: Kill or No Kill
I'll reply to my own message, then, after such stern admonishment from On High ;-)
Support for my view that:
"religions these days pick and choose amongst conflicting biblical verses, in order to suit their current agendas. Agendas which are actually set by the secular moral zeitgeist! It's totally lame behaviour."
...would include the christian crusades against the east, in the Middle Ages, Medieval "witch-hunts" carried out by the godly, and the catholic "Inquisition".
None of these could be justified nowadays, purely because the secular moral zeitgeist would not allow them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Blzebub, posted 10-24-2009 1:18 PM Blzebub has not replied

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


Message 108 of 161 (532628)
10-25-2009 6:26 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by purpledawn
10-24-2009 9:29 PM


Re: Is God Unchanging?
The character and nature of God changes with man. They can always point to the Bible and say see it doesn't change. Well, duh. But when we look at what the various religions present, God's character has changed.
This is the expected outcome, given that god is a man-made construct.
More "songs"? ;-)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by purpledawn, posted 10-24-2009 9:29 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024