Summations Only

So you claim Faith but that is not what the Bible Actually says is it? Do I have to post the passages here yet again?You know that I can and I will Faith.

Except Faith, according to the Bible he cannot tell the story the same way twice in a row. As I pointed out back in Message 1841 the stories are filled with contradictions. Two were likely written down within a year of each other but still for being the most dramatic event of his life seem like not one event but two totally different ones.The accounts found in Acts are not first person accounts told by Paul but rather the author of Acts writing dialog for the Paul character in the narrative. Those two accounts also vary with the later definitely being written to play to a Jewish audience.Shall I post all of them here again or can you just use the link to see what the Bible actually says Faith as opposed to what you claim it says?If the Bible really were the inerrant word of God wouldn't you think God could get the story straight?

That's exactly my point: to anybody but the husband, they pretty much are.

Henny Youngman anybody?Like Jesus, another nice Jewish boy.Edited by jar, : hit wrong key

The very evidence that the account is true, that Paul tells the story slightly differently each time, is treated as evidence that it's false. Have you ever told a story about yourself in exactly the same way twice? No, but Paul has to or he's lying. And as usual you are inventing contradictions where they should be read as building on one another.

The Bible IS evidence, too bad your bias eliminates it a priori so that you will never be able to recognize it.

Thanks for providing yet more evidence that the Bible is not the inerrant word of God Faith. Knew I could count on you.Let's look yet again at what the Bible actually says Faith.The earliest account is from First Corinthians. It is very simple and straight forward and just says Paul claims to have seen Jesus after his death.

quote:

---

1 Corinthians 15:3-8King James Version (KJV):

​

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

​

4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

​

5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

​

6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

​

7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

​

8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

---

Just a simple story, no one else with him, no voices, no light, no struck blind; just a claim to have seen Jesus and note that he is only repeating what is said in scripture of the day; no revelation.About a year later there is the account found in Galatians.

quote:

---

Galatians 1:11-16King James Version (KJV)

​

11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

​

12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

​

13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:

​

14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

​

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

​

16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

---

Now the story has been elaborated a little, Instead of preaching what he learned from Scripture he claims a revelation of Jesus Christ and that he was called by God, not Jesus to preach about Jesus. But still no voices, no lights, no companions, no struck blind, no vision regained ...While elaboration and adding elements to a story is perfectly normal for humans, it does destroy any claim of inerrancy.But wait, there's more. Then we come to the hearsay reports found in Acts. In Acts we see the author writing dialog for the Paul Character that again expands on the earlier simple tale and adds all kinds of woo factors that just were not in the original ones, the light and voices and blindness and witnesses that see different things in the two tales and do different things in the two tales plus the later account is definitely tailored to play well to a Jewish audience.

quote:

---

Acts 9:3-9King James Version (KJV)

​

3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:

​

4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

​

5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

​

6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.

​

7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

​

8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

​

9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.

---

quote:

---

Acts 22 King James Version (KJV)

​

22 Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you.

​

2 (And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,)

​

3 I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day.

​

4 And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women.

​

5 As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished.

​

6 And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.

​

7 And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

​

8 And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest.

​

9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

​

10 And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.

​

11 And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus.

​

12 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,

​

13 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.

​

14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.

​

15 For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.

​

16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

---

So yes, humans do vary stories when they retell them and elaborate and exaggerate and make stuff up and embellish but those are all human characteristics not of inerrancy.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin: form ---> from

If Paul changed the story in each telling, then by virtue of the definition of inerrant, then it would not be inerrant.

Of course the Bible is evidence. Everything is evidence.We're seeking evidence for whether the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. So far there is both internal evidence from within the Bible and external evidence from the real world that the Bible is the very much errant words of men.If you were aware of actual evidence that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God then you would be showing it to us instead of evading discussion and resorting to ad hominem. We are not biased or prejudiced, not do we lack discernment, nor are we idiots, imbeciles, blockheads, dolts, stupid, insane, or any of the other names you've called us. If you only had answers for even just a few of our questions and inquiries then you would indeed have a mountain of evidence, but alas you appear to have nothing.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.

No, Percy, you aren't "seeking evidence for whether the Bible is the inerrant word of God," you made up your mind long ago and nothing anyone could say could change it. The evidence that has been given you continue to dismiss on the basis of your prejudice against the supernatural. There is no evidence that could be given that would persuade you. Even a genuine miracle you'd just write off as some sort of psychological trick or other sort of illusion.

I understand it feels that way to you because you believe we're just dismissing your evidence, but we're also explaining why what you think is evidence isn't really evidence. Bald assertions ("Christianity is the one true religion") aren't evidence. Insisting that people just be taken at their word (as long as they're arguing for Christianity) isn't evidence. Using the Bible to prove the Bible isn't evidence. Insisting on unproven relationships (absence of error means it's the Word of God; accurate prophecy means its the Word of God) isn't evidence.And you have significant problems with consistency. You can't insist that arguments that prove your point when they're about Christianity can be ignored when they're about other religions (Biblical miracles are genuine proof that Christianity is the one true religion, miracles of other religions are "puny imitations" and mean nothing). You can't simply dismiss obvious differences with nonsensical declarations (two is the same as seven). You can't argue that qualities that are evidence of religious truth when they're for Christianity are not evidence for religious truth when they're for other religions (losing ten tribes makes the Bible unique and is evidence that it is the Word of God; recounting the Kurukshetra War makes the Hindu scriptures unique but is not evidence that it is the Word of God). True evidence can be observed repeatedly by anyone. If there really is such a thing as supernatural phenomena then it should be possible to gather actual, genuine evidence for them.--Percy

The whole joke called Biblical Inerrancy is a fairly modern concept (mostly 70s) that was the creation of a very small, very human conclave of Evangelical Marketeers. It was not anything well thought out and was infact produced at a three day Fly in to O'Hare (good Catholic boy) Regency. It was not subject to testing or debate or examination by any who had not already made up their minds. All the attendees had decided before the conference had even started that the goal and conclusion would be a "Statement" affirming inerrancy.Like most of Faith's posts the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy offers no support for its position and simply says "here is the final word". It just claims that the original autographs are inerrant and even if there are no original autographs it don't matter.It's an interesting look into the mind and so called thought patterns of the "Biblical Christian" Hucksters.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin, dropped a "t"

Sigh.

That's not a response. It's been explained how the types of "evidence" you're offering have two very serious problems:

• They aren't evidence. For example, it's irrational to say, "You should just accept what people say at face value," and call what they say evidence. It's irrational to say two is the same as seven.
  ​
• And if they were evidence, then all other religions have just as good a claim to being the one true religion as Christianity.

If you have responses to the reasons why your evidence isn't really evidence then you must provide them. You can't keep quitting in the middle.--Percy

Oh yes I can keep "quitting in the middle." It's only the "middle" according to you anyway. To me it's the point where the discussion became too futile to continue.But one no doubt futile remark about the miracles comparison. Sigh. The miracles in the Bible are genuine God-wrought miracles, on a scale and with a power only God could accomplish including bringing people back to life who have died. The so-called "miracles" of other religions ARE puny little demonic tricks by comparison.Take it or leave it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.