|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,838 Year: 4,095/9,624 Month: 966/974 Week: 293/286 Day: 14/40 Hour: 3/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: More Lies for God | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4987 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Why are people intent on lying for God?
I was browsing the web one day when I happened upon a site called ‘answers.org’ which looked like it deserved a quick once over. One item caught my eye, something about archaeology confirming the Bible yet again. Now as archaeology is germane to my area of study and I know that archaeology proves very little of the bible, I thought it deserved a look. Imagine my surprise when I read the following passage: "Ignorance of the facts concerning the trustworthiness of the Bible can be embarrassing for critics. For example, for many years doubters disputed the New Testament accounts concerning Pontius Pilate. No historical sources outside the New Testament mentioned him, so they considered him a fictional character. Then, in 1961, archaeologists unearthed an early first century theater inscription at Caesarea Maritima in Israel, dedicated from "Pontius Pilate, Prefect of Judea," to "Tiberius Caesar." What the Christians had preserved in scripture and the historic creeds ("suffered under Pontius Pilate), the liberal critics admitted in 1961." After reading this passage a few times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I was totally lost for words!! (for once) The author was seriously saying that there were no non-biblical mentions of Pilate in any other historical sources until the inscription at Caesarea was found, and that this was another embarrassing example for bible critics. At the time I came up with three sources off the top of my head, Philo, Josephus and Tacitus who ALL mention Pilate, so what could this person be on about. Then I got it; maybe the author meant that there was no direct non-biblical evidence for Pilate, like a letter from Pilate or some archaeological evidence like the aforementioned inscription. There was a contact addy on the home page, so I sent off an e-mail asking for clarification of the passage cited whilst pointing out the references in Philo, Josephus and Tacitus. After over 7 weeks of waiting, I got a reply saying that they had noticed the error and I was quite correct in my assumption that it should have read that there were no archaeological sources until the find in 1961, and that they will edit the page as soon as possible. I thought, fine, these things happen, we all make mistakes, so I thought no more about it. Then guess what happened 3 months later, sorry no prizes on offer. I got an email informing me that my opinion that the bible is not an historically accurate book is wrong because. ROFLMAO Yes you guessed it, the Pilate inscription quoted verbatim from the very site I contacted!! Now in my original mail to them I said that a totally innocent reader of the site may actually quote this ‘evidence’ of Bible perfection to a sceptic and be shown how erroneous this claim is. So I fired off another email asking them if or when they are going to remove the misleading passage, so far I haven’t had a reply. It has now been over 6 months since I first informed this site, and today it remains unaltered. Why are people determined to lie for God? Notice the first line ‘Ignorance of the facts concerning the trustworthiness of the Bible can be embarrassing for critics’ It appears that the facts aren’t sensational enough for the owners of this site, they have to make ‘facts’ up to make the bible look good. One thing for sure, ignorance of the facts can be particularly embarrassing for the layperson that quotes moronic sites like this one when debating educated non-believers. Then they claim: ‘For example, for many years doubters disputed the New Testament accounts concerning Pontius Pilate’ No references to who these ‘doubters’ are, probably because there weren’t any. Does anyone else have a similar story, that they informed some site of an error, had that error recognised by the site and then nothing was done about it? If members do have some examples, maybe a good idea would be for a group of us to target each site and keep emailing them about their error(s) until something is done? Anyway, I look forward to reading some similar stories, if any. Best Wishes Brian P.S. I have just sent another email to remind the site owner about the lack of action regarding the erroneous claim. ------------------Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4987 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Sorry, meant to post this in Bible accuracy and inerrancy.
{I'll get it moved - Adminnemooseus} [This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 10-31-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nos482 Inactive Member |
Originally posted by Brian Johnston:
Why are people intent on lying for God? Did you know? It's not lying when you do it for god. The same as it isn't murder when you kill for god as well, it is called justice.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4987 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
quote: LOL Oh yup forgot about that one. If I remember correctly, the Yorkshire Ripper tried to use the excuse that it was God that told him to murder 13 women, why is he in jail if god told him to do it? Is there some kind of test that can be done by the courts to determine if Sutcliffe was telling the truth or not? Surely courts believe in God, last time i was there I had to swear on the bible that I was telling the truth!! Bria ------------------Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nos482 Inactive Member |
Originally posted by Brian Johnston:
LOL Oh yup forgot about that one. If I remember correctly, the Yorkshire Ripper tried to use the excuse that it was God that told him to murder 13 women, why is he in jail if god told him to do it? Is there some kind of test that can be done by the courts to determine if Sutcliffe was telling the truth or not? You're talking about Man's Law and that doesn't count. Surely courts believe in God, last time i was there I had to swear on the bible that I was telling the truth!! Bria What happens if you're an atheist and don't believe in the bible? You can't tell the truth? Where I live you don't have to swear on the bible if you don't want to. You can give an affirmation that you will tell the truth instead. Though, I don't believe in compelled oaths, pledges or the like. They still won't stop a liar from lying. They're like most locks, they are only for honest people. [This message has been edited by nos482, 10-31-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
gene90 Member (Idle past 3850 days) Posts: 1610 Joined: |
[QUOTE][B]The same as it isn't murder when you kill for god as well, it is called justice.[/QUOTE]
[/B] So what do you call it when the state kills a serial killer? Muder?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4987 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
quote: It is called 'Capital Punishment.' Normally capital punishment is a punishment voted in as a law of the state by the members of that state by way of a democratic process. Also, the murderer is aware that the punishment for taking a life MAY mean that he/she will have their life taken away from them. Best Wishes Brian ------------------Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nos482 Inactive Member |
Originally posted by Brian Johnston:
It is called 'Capital Punishment.' Normally capital punishment is a punishment voted in as a law of the state by the members of that state by way of a democratic process. Also, the murderer is aware that the punishment for taking a life MAY mean that he/she will have their life taken away from them. Best Wishes Brian I think that capital punishment is murder as well. No nation can truly call itself civilized which kills its own citizens. And the death penality has never been an effective deterent against murder. The difference between the Laws of the State and those of god is that we choose our own and their enforcement is real, not some threat of being punished after one dies.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4987 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
quote: **I agree that capital punishment is murder too, thats why, if there was ever a referendum in the UK for the reintroduction of the death penalty, I would vote against it. However, if I chose to remain in the UK I would have to accept the laws of the land and realise that if someone takes a life then they run the risk of losing theirs. I dont agree with a few of the laws in the UK but I have to accept them or move out. Also, regarding killing for God, it isn't just the threat of punishment after death, it is the promise of a reward for killing in certain faiths that also has to be considered as an incentive to murder for God. Brian ------------------Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NimLore Inactive Member |
For one thing.. God does not need man in order to prove his existance... and the lies of man do not disprove God, even if someone is trying to lie for God..
One thing I will say to the extent of people lieing for God.. how about the evolutionists tampering with evidence? Even the greatest scientists use the writings of others as factual and if the writing that they used as factual proves to be erronous then so to will there theory unless of course it is designed to go against the argument.. yeah it happens. I sure hope that those Christians fix the erronous passage too. And as to the comment on it bein ok to lie for God.. Outrageous!.. again God does not need man to prove him, there is proof enough.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nos482 Inactive Member |
Originally posted by NimLore:
For one thing.. God does not need man in order to prove his existance... and the lies of man do not disprove God, even if someone is trying to lie for God.. Without believers there is no god since they all create god in their own image. One thing I will say to the extent of people lieing for God.. how about the evolutionists tampering with evidence? Even the greatest scientists use the writings of others as factual and if the writing that they used as factual proves to be erronous then so to will there theory unless of course it is designed to go against the argument.. yeah it happens. That is why they have peer review in science. With religion they just break off and makeup yet another sect. I sure hope that those Christians fix the erronous passage too. And as to the comment on it bein ok to lie for God.. Outrageous!.. again God does not need man to prove him, there is proof enough. You don't understand (Big surprise) they don't think that it is lying at all when they do it for their god. Without believers there is no god since god only exist in the beliefs of those who want to believe because this is the biggest lie of all to themselves. You are no different in this.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NimLore Inactive Member |
I will defintly differ with you there.. because I come by my facts by prayer.. and I am willing to accept correction WHERE IT IS DO!
I thought this to be a Creationist vs Evolutionist discussion board.. not a Creationist vs Evolutionist slander board.. Lets get real and instead of all this biting of each other get down to what is observable. If there is a fact presented and you disagree with it than give an actual argument rather than just a snide comment!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: hmmm.... God may not need man, but God has certainly left it up to man.
quote: The question, of course, is if there is so much good evidence for God, why would anyone lie in an effort to prove god's existence? Answer: Because there isn't any good evidence.
quote: What about it? People tamper with evidence for a hundred different reasons. Science is set up so that these deceptions eventually get worked out. It is called 'peer review' and 'reproducibility of results'
quote: I almost agree. Scientist use the works of their predecessors as the basis for their own work. Otherwise we'd be starting from scratch each generation. But is naive to think that that early work is never rethought and reworked. As for your final statement, a theory based upon an erroneous theory is not automatically falsified, but it does become unsupported. It is still possible that the second theory was right for the wrong reasons.
quote: Sorry, but.... what?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NimLore Inactive Member |
the sorry but... what?
The conclusion you drew is what I meant.. you just explained it better than me. And I disagree with you that God has left it up to man.. because it in my experience God has very much been part of it.. I very much believe and know God to be alive and well and willing to partake with his creation..It only took him six days to create all we see, he took a day of rest and the rest of the time has been him being active in what he has made.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nos482 Inactive Member |
Originally posted by NimLore:
I will defintly differ with you there.. because I come by my facts by prayer.. and I am willing to accept correction WHERE IT IS DO! In other words you make them up? I thought this to be a Creationist vs Evolutionist discussion board.. not a Creationist vs Evolutionist slander board.. It's only slander if it isn't true.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024