|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Squaring circles: direct biblical contradictions | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blzebub  Suspended Member (Idle past 5494 days) Posts: 129 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3710 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:It's a historical account from the religious viewpoint. Some religious views of 9/11 were different than the news version. I realize it isn't a fundamentalist view. Fortunately I've never been a fundamentalist. Is God unchanging? That is the question.
quote: 1 Samuel 15:29 says that God does not change his mind, but we already know that he does. Genesis 2:17 and the story of Sodom of Gomorrah. So what does Samuel mean by his statement? Is he really saying that God never ever changes his mind? Saul screwed up and wants to be forgiven, but Samuel tells him that God has rejected him as king over Israel. IMO, what Samuel is telling Saul is that God is not going to change his mind about Saul's kingship. God made Saul king of Israel and he has now changed his mind and taken that kingdom away because Saul rejected the word of the Lord. In verse 35 is says: ...And the Lord was grieved that he had made Saul king over Israel. I really don't think Samuel was saying that God never changes his mind about anything. That would negate the potential for a merciful God. IMO, God has to be willing and able to change his mind to grant mercy.
quote:Again we have to look at what is being discussed. The Lord does not change what or how. The issue at had is the faithfulness of Israel. Israel has been unfaithful. IMO, God is saying he hasn't been unfaithful (changed his faithfulness) and won't destroy Israel. By not destroying Israel, God is again changing his mind. He said in Exodus that they would be his people as long as they obeyed his commandments. According to Malachi they haven't been obeying his commandments and God still isn't going to destroy them. quote:(70-100CE) This is a sermon, dealing with trials and temptations. The author is telling his audience that God will not switch and give them bad gifts. Does that mean God doesn't change in any way, shape, or form? quote:These are from songs and are the feelings of the people of the time. IMO, when people use the word forever, the usually mean beyond their own lifetime. They really don't know if something is going to last forever. Looking at reality, the Nation of Israel didn't last forever, how can the statutes?
quote:And yet in reality Christianity dumped the majority of the Law. quote:We don't know what was preached to them specifically. Of course the other question in all of this is, what is the word of God according to the Bible? It was mentioned in Samuel, which is before any of the prophets. We know what "word of God" refers to today (most of the time), but what exactly were they referring to back then? Were they referring to the scrolls? Have we change what the "word of God" refers to? Some use it to refer to Jesus Christ.
quote:They say it when defending beliefs or scripture, but do their actions reflect this belief? I agree the Bible is stagnant. Once something is in writing it doesn't usually change and if protected will last a very long time, but we do know that the Bible has been changed through the ages. 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. As for the nature of God, what is the nature of God?
quote:There is a difference between literal and literalism. Most Christians don't view the Bible consistently one way. Most Christians don't really read the Bible. I have a less dogmatic view. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blzebub  Suspended Member (Idle past 5494 days) Posts: 129 Joined: |
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"? ;-)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DevilsAdvocate Member (Idle past 3354 days) Posts: 1548 Joined: |
PD writes: There is a difference between literal and literalism. Most Christians don't view the Bible consistently one way. Most Christians don't really read the Bible. I have a less dogmatic view.
I have even a less dogmatic view and that is that the Bible is a 100% human contrived work. Of course this is my belief, but it is a belief based on my life experience and the collection of historical and scientific evidence to date. Whether a supernatural deity called God exists or not, I feel, will never be answered 100% by science or any other human endeavor if he is truly outside the realm of our natural world. However, we can look at history so far and see a strong case that whatever people have called evidence for God, really is a sham, whether they realize it or not. Christians tend to rationalize any type of contradictions and inaccuracies in the Bible in order to keep their worldview. Nothing wrong with this except that some Christians, like some other religious believers, overstep their bounderies and try to impose their worldview and moral authority onto other unwilling people. I say each to his/her own as long as you are not interfering with the freedoms and rights of other individuals. The only reason I challenge Christians on this board is because they voluntarily come onto this board wanting to debate/discuss religious and scientific issues. If they don't like that, they don't have to be here. No one is forcing them to be on this board. Just my thoughts, from an atheist/agnostic/deist (I am not sure so I guess really the middle one applies the most). Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given. Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given. One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan "It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 2194 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Purpledawn writes:
Matthew 5:18 "I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." And yet in reality Christianity dumped the majority of the Law. Rather than dumping the Law I think you'll find a change injuristictions has come about in the life of a Christian. They are no longer subject to the 'law of sin and death' but have been transferred to a realm in which they are beholden to the 'law of the spirit of life that is in Christ Jesus'. Whereas the penalty involved in breaking the law of sin and death .. is death, the penalty for breaking the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus is (largely speaking) knowing you've spat in the face of He who loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3710 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:I agree. I saw it just by observing Christians. They don't necessarily practice in their day to day living what they preach or supposedly believe. (General observation of those who claim the loudest.) I found it fascinating while looking at the Jewish religion, that when Rabbi's explain something they have no problem using legends. Abraham is the father of Judaism. We could drop the creation stories and the flood stories and it wouldn't alter Judaism supposedly. I've run into this story several times being used by Rabbis to explain how Abraham came to believe in one God. Using his own observation he decided the idols had no power.
Abraham, the son of the idol-maker Terah (Gen. R. xxxviii. 13), was, like his father, a thorough-going idolater, being chiefly devoted to the worship of the stone idol called Merumat ("Eben Marumah," stone of deceit and corruption). But on a journey to a place near Fandana (Padanaram), some of his idols were smashed, and having long felt misgivings as to their power, he became convinced of the unreality of such deities. The legend continues with Abraham smashing or chopping up some wooden idols in his father's shop and when confronted by his father, Abraham said the one idol left standing was the one who smashed it. (There are variations on this theme.) His father didn't believe him, which shows even his father didn't really believe the idol had power. That's what I see in many Christians. If I tell a preacher that God told me not to give money this week, he would scoff. If I would say that God gave me any instructions contrary to what they want or their traditions, they would scoff. God only speaks if it is in agreement with the established mind set, which is strange considering Jesus went against the established mind set in many instances. The legends of the Jews seem to have the "rest of the story". I like some of the explanations given in Judaism. They refer to legends and the sages. Christians attribute everything in the Bible to God. So we have "the Bible says" or "God says". We lose the understanding of Paul talking or Isaiah talking, myths, poetry, etc.
quote:As a creative person, imagination is important. Now with a grandchild that imagination will be utilized even more. I've watched people make up explanations to fit what they saw or experienced or thought they saw or experienced, whether there is evidence for the explanation or not. My grandfather had a habit of doing that. I'm not even referring to fanciful stuff. The ancients did the same thing. Gods were personifications of nature. The more man learns the more gods disappeared. Gods need to be moved beyond the realm of human knowledge. That's why God is out there where science can't see him. Science has already proved the existence of the ancient gods: planets and nature. Our planet and the nature on it is what sustains us. The sun never changes, east to west. Natural disasters don't care what god is worshiped.
quote:I agree. Unfortunately Christianity was based on Paul and Paul was a salesman, so they are in perpetual sales mode. If you've ever been part of Amway, it seems like the same theme. IMO, preachers should be teaching practical behavior application and not continually selling the product to people who have already bought into it. The people shouldn't be selling the product, they should be examples of it. quote:I challenge them to see the literary diversity in the Bible and what the authors were probably telling their audiences. Then they can see what lessons can be learned. I find lessons in all types of writings, religions, and experiences. I agree, no one forces them to participate and several times I've suggested that if the Christian is uncomfortable with addressing the plain text and looking at the reality behind the Bible, they should abstain from the discussion. Usually they prefer to link me with Satan. Take Care "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3710 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Now there's the iano I know and love. Remember we're in the science forum and I'm dealing with reality and the simple reading of the text. I agree about jurisdiction, mainly because Paul dealt with the Greeks who weren't under Jewish law anyway. As far as "law of sin or death", those are personifications. As you well know, Paul was very fond of personifications. Sin and Death do not have laws, unless you can list them for me. Sin doesn't pay wages either. The question is, what did Paul really mean? To discuss the reality of this further, I would need to know which verses of Paul's you are actually looking at. I don't want to guess. I think this type of difference would still be on topic, since the originator doesn't really want to discuss what he provided. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DevilsAdvocate Member (Idle past 3354 days) Posts: 1548 Joined: |
PurpleDawn,
It seems we don't have much to disagree on. Are you sure you are not a deist? Your views are not much different than mine and I float somewhere between being a deist and an agnostic atheist. I also agree with your interpretation of the Jewish religion. My brother-in-law is Jewish and I have been to synogogue once and have read a lot of Jewish literature. Jews, even some of the more orthodox ones are a lot more liberal in there thinking and interpretation of the Bible than the hard core fundamentalist Christians. Anywho, Take care as well. One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan "It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 2194 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
purpledawn writes: Remember we're in the science forum and I'm dealing with reality and the simple reading of the text. Fair enough, I was pointing out what the reality is for a Christian (whether physical Jew or Gentile). They wouldn't consider themselves subject to the Law so it's not surprising they've 'dumped it'. Dumped all of it in fact. My purpose was to counter what I detected to be a slightly disparaging tone behind your stating them to have done this.
quote: -
To discuss the reality of this further, I would need to know which verses of Paul's you are actually looking at. I don't want to guess. I think this type of difference would still be on topic, since the originator doesn't really want to discuss what he provided. I think our positions are too far apart and we share too little common ground to permit fruitful discussion. Alas.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Calypsis4 Member (Idle past 5467 days) Posts: 428 Joined: |
1 Samuel 15:29 says that God does not change his mind, but we already know that he does. Genesis 2:17 and the story of Sodom of Gomorrah. So what does Samuel mean by his statement? Is he really saying that God never ever changes his mind? This is an error. One might consider that God promised to bless Israel IF they would obey him and that they would see His continual care and concern IF they continued in what He commanded them. He did not change his mind: they did. So it was with Saul. Saul was anointed by God to be king but his administration was rejected when Saul did not live up to the terms of his appointment. Continued blessing and favor always hinged upon obedience. God never changed his mind about that. The Lord made it clear to the Jews from the time of Moses that... "IF ye walk in my statutes, and keep my commandments, and do them...And I will give peace in the land...and make you fruitful, and multiply you, and establish my covenant with you." Leviticus 24:3,6,9. But he told them in the same chapter... "And IF ye shall despise my statutes, or if your soul abhor my judgments, so that ye will not do all my commandments, but that ye break my covenant...And I will set my face against you, and ye shall be slain before your enemies: they that hate you shall reign over you..." Levitucs 24: 14, 17 He also told them, " And IF ye will not be reformed by me by these things, but will walk contrary unto me; Then will I also walk contrary unto you, and will punish you yet seven times for your sins."vss 23-24. Not only so but the Lord had already told the people before Saul was anointed king that he would be a dictator and would oppress them. But they didn't believe Him and rejected Samuels counsel from God. It isn't God that 'changes his mind', at least not from heaven's vantage point. It only appears that way to men...forgetful men who are near-sighted about the will of Almighty God. Malachi 3:6 "I the LORD do not change. So you, O descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed."-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Again we have to look at what is being discussed. The Lord does not change what or how. The issue at had is the faithfulness of Israel. Israel has been unfaithful. IMO, God is saying he hasn't been unfaithful (changed his faithfulness) and won't destroy Israel. By not destroying Israel, God is again changing his mind. He said in Exodus that they would be his people as long as they obeyed his commandments. According to Malachi they haven't been obeying his commandments and God still isn't going to destroy them. God never changes His mind about right vs wrong or good vs evil, but men do. God never changes His mind about His eternal promises but men do. However, when men rebel against God and do evil He will punish them in due time and that means that He can/does postpone the promises. So it was for Israel when John the Baptist came and prepared the way of the Lord (Jesus). Christ told the people, "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And IF ye will receive it, this is Elias(Elijah), which was for to come." Matthew 11:13-14. They didn't receive John's testimony about Christ, killed him, and the Anointed one John spoke of and so God postponed the kingdom. That kingdom is still to come and all the promises will be fulfilled. God does not lie. Men and women simply fail to (1) believe Him and/or (2) err in their conclusions about those promises.
And yet in reality Christianity dumped the majority of the Law. The Christians didn't 'dump' anything. What a wicked thing to say! They simply shifted gears from the law of Moses to the higher law of the Spirit. "the Law came by Moses by grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." Also, "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." Romans 8:2 Far from 'dumping' the law or even most of it, the believer in Christ is brought to understand that righteousness goes beyond the mere outward performance of the law (i.e. no adultery, no theft, no lying, no false witnessing, etc.) to learn that even our thoughts are to be in truth, (lustful thoughts, even thinking about theft, even thinking about lies, etc.) so the truth was for New Testament believers to be carried to a higher level. It was the ceremonial aspect of Moses law that was done away with because Christ had performed the task of the atonement for sin. So no physical temple was needed any longer; a priesthood was no longer needed; and the killing of animals was no longer necessary for Christ has fulfilled it all in dying on the cross.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3710 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:That's what I said. Saul screwed up and wants to be forgiven, but Samuel tells him that God has rejected him as king over Israel. IMO, what Samuel is telling Saul is that God is not going to change his mind about Saul's kingship. IOW, God is not going to give Saul back the kingdom. Samuel isn't saying that God never changes his mind on anything. He's saying that God isn't going to change his mind concerning his decision to remove Saul as king. quote:I'm not clear on what you're saying in relation to what I said. I am looking at the plain text. The NT has nothing to do with the plain text of the OT. quote:Until you clean out the personification Paul uses, the verse by itself doesn't mean anything. You need to provide what you think Paul is saying. Paul does clear that up later starting with verse 5. Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but hose who live in accordance with the spirit have their minds set on what the spirit desires. The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the spirit is life and peace; the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. Death refers to immoral behavior or desires and life refers to moral behavior and desires. Paul isn't really dealing with what specific parts of the Mosaic law is or isn't to be followed. I look at what the plain text is saying. Other than you didn't like the word "dumped" what is your point concerning what I had said or the topic? Remember this is the science forum and evidence is needed to support your position. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Calypsis4 Member (Idle past 5467 days) Posts: 428 Joined: |
The NT has nothing to do with the plain text of the OT. It has everything to do with it because it is all God's Word. Jesus said so, Paul said so. "For all scriptures is given by inspiration of God and is profitable..." II Timothy 3:16. Jesus and the N.T. writers consistently quoted the O.T. and they regarded Christs teachings and that of Moses and the prophets on the same level. "...no prophecy is of any private interpretation...but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost..." II Peter 1:20.
Until you clean out the personification Paul uses, the verse by itself doesn't mean anything. There was no personification in the scriptures I quoted nor is there any in the entire chapter of Romans 8. It was direct doctrinal teaching. Being 'made free from the law' is not personification. It can be liked unto an astronaut who is made free from the restraints of earths gravity by going into space. At a certain point he becomes weightless and further out earths gravity doesn't even hold him in orbit. If you wish to see personification then look at chap. 7 for there is plenty of it there.
Remember this is the science forum and evidence is needed to support your position. And like you responded to the evidence I gave you that the Old Testament teaches spiritual death (othewise God is a liar about Adam & Eve) you won't take the scripture I give you as evidence. I gave you John 1:17 & Romans 8:2. Shall I quote the entire chapter or will that make any difference?
I look at what the plain text is saying. Other than you didn't like the word "dumped" what is your point concerning what I had said or the topic? No, you are not 'looking at the plain text', you are inserting your personal views of spiritual matters in an attempt to force the writers of scripture to say what you want them to say. But if you have any respect for the honesty and integrity of the writers of scripture, many of whom were eyewitnesses to Christ and his glory, then don't ever use the word 'dumped' as it relates to their attitude towards the Word of God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4443 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
And like you responded to the evidence I gave you that the Old Testament teaches spiritual death (othewise God is a liar about Adam & Eve) you won't take the scripture I give you as evidence. I gave you John 1:17 & Romans 8:2. Shall I quote the entire chapter or will that make any difference? This is a science forum topic, the evidence must be actual evidence not hearsay. For scripture to be evidence, you would have to show some other source that the scripture is the word of God other than the scripture itself. There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3710 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
Unfortunately you didn't respond to anything that deals with the topic or clarify your responses that I was unclear about. I don't see anything I can respond to that won't lead us off topic.
Please address the point of what I said and not just phrasing you dislike. If you have an issue in another thread, address it in that thread please. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Calypsis4 Member (Idle past 5467 days) Posts: 428 Joined: |
"This is a science forum topic, the evidence must be actual evidence not hearsay. For scripture to be evidence, you would have to show some other source that the scripture is the word of God other than the scripture itself."
The Word of God is not 'heresay'. It is of divine inspiration and it is truth whether human beings believe in it or not. "some other source." And whenever I do so my opponents arbitrarily declare that evidence as illegitimate or untrustworthy, no matter how solid it is. Like I did for the timing of Christ's death in my thread on the moons, eclipses, and timing. I gave four solid lines of evidence and every single skeptic that read those sources just lightly brushed it off as if Jesus Christ did NOT die on April 3, A.D. 33 as the prophet Daniel indicated that he would, of that the historians living at the time confirmed it, or that the eyewitnesses wrote about the event, and/or that computer analysis determined of the lunar eclipse on that date. Besides that, this is not my thread. Be consistent. If you expect this of me you should expect the same thing of those who also use scripture but no other source. Is that clear to you?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein. AdminPD Edited by AdminPD, : Off Topic
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024