Bible Contradictions

[mwtech]

I used to be a Christian and only recently become an atheist after studying the Bible enough to notice the flaws. I believe the Bible in itself to be contradictory enough to prove itself wrong, and I enjoy discussing it with other people, especially Christians who disagree. I would really like to have a one on one debate with any Christian who thinks that they have a logical answer for the contradictions in the Bible. The one rule I have is that you can't make a claim without evidence, whether from the Bible or any other source. I am interested in logical conversation, and I don't believe that any Christian can refute the contradictions I have found without making up some rationalization that has no evidence or logical base.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 148 by edform]
Ed F:

1. God ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son.
2. Abraham and Isaac agreed to do it.

That says it all. There is no need for painful mental gymnastics and explanations that stretch rationality beyond its limits.

This "God" told Abraham to murder his beloved son as a demonstration of Abraham's faith in God. This is an unspeakable evil, whether or not this "God" intended all along to merely test Abraham, and was always going to allow Isaac to live. The horror of putting such a choice to a father, condemns this "God" to the lowest regions reserved for the purveyors of evil. No amount of ratiocination, equivocation, explanation, or doublespeak can hide the fact.

On the other hand, the probability that none of this ever happened makes at least as much sense.

[Idealist]

[Replying to post 150 by Danmark]

You wrote that "Human beings do not 'have' a spirit or soul in any sense indicating a separate element of their constitution. There is no such thing as 'spirit' or 'soul'. Consciousness arises from matter . . ."

While I certainly agree that our mechanical "computing" processes do arise from matter, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea that we all possess and radiate a certain electromagnetic reality through which we may all become part of some larger 'spiritual' whole. Humans seem to possess an overall quality which surpasses the sum of their individual physically-working parts. As Robert Lanza says in Psychology Today, "Indeed, the mysteries of birth and death, the play of consciousness during dreams (or after a few martinis), and even the commonest mental operations – such as imagination and memory – suggest the existence of a vital life force – an élan vital – that exists independent of the body."

[Zzyzx]

.

I am struggling to come to terms with the fact that you are actually capable of thinking like that.

If that is the way you propose to deal with the discussion, then I’m wasting my time.

You give the impression that you are a non-believer with an axe to grind: a mission to prove to yourself that you have no reason to believe.

Moderator Warning


Kindly debate the ISSUES and NOT personal characteristics of other debaters. With 25 posts you are no longer "new" and are expected to be aware of (and abide by) Forum Rules.
______________

Moderator warnings serve as a strike towards users that can lead to a probation vote. Any challenges or replies to moderator warnings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 150 by Danmark]

You wrote that "Human beings do not 'have' a spirit or soul in any sense indicating a separate element of their constitution. There is no such thing as 'spirit' or 'soul'. Consciousness arises from matter . . ."

While I certainly agree that our mechanical "computing" processes do arise from matter, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea that we all possess and radiate a certain electromagnetic reality through which we may all become part of some larger 'spiritual' whole. Humans seem to possess an overall quality which surpasses the sum of their individual physically-working parts. As Robert Lanza says in Psychology Today, "Indeed, the mysteries of birth and death, the play of consciousness during dreams (or after a few martinis), and even the commonest mental operations – such as imagination and memory – suggest the existence of a vital life force – an élan vital – that exists independent of the body."

Lanza says in that article:

We think life is just the activity of atoms and particles, which spin around for a while and then dissipate into nothingness. But if we add life to the equation, we can explain some of the major puzzles of modern science, including the uncertainty principle, entanglement, and the fine-tuning of the laws that shape the universe.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/bio ... e-says-yes
This is still no more than wishful thinking. I hope he is right, but he has, as yet, no foundation for this hope. Where Lanza and others go wrong is in their their dismissal of matter as 'mere matter,' or in Lanza's case "just the activity of atoms and particles, which spin around for a while and then dissipate into nothingness."

There is nothing 'mere' about matter. The 1000 X 100 billion connections in the human brain has resulted in both consciousness and unconsciousness - a 'mind' so profound and unfathomable that it has been mistaken for 'God' and 'eternity' for millennia. To this we can add the inner sense we all [or at least many of us] have that we will never die. I take this as wishful thinking and the unjustified sense that we cannot simply go out of existence. I share this irrational belief. I believe I am wrong to think so, but still hope that this rational conclusion of mine is wrong.

[Idealist]

[Replying to post 154 by Danmark]

So, just to be clear in my understanding, you believe that the same elementary particles which make-up rocks and countless minerals are also capable of spontaneously erupting into consciousness if they are arranged and/or mixed the right way, and that the arrangement itself is completely the result of mindless chance? Carrying this further, do you also believe that a computer containing sufficient capability will spontaneously develop a conscious intelligence and a unique personality? I'm not mocking the idea, mind you - I respect the fact that all our beliefs concerning the origins of life are fantastic to contemplate, no matter what we personally believe. I just feel that there is a quality to life which cannot simply be extrapolated from reaching some "magic" level of complexity - a level at which chemistry becomes biology or machinery becomes self-aware.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 154 by Danmark]

So, just to be clear in my understanding, you believe that the same elementary particles which make-up rocks and countless minerals are also capable of spontaneously erupting into consciousness if they are arranged and/or mixed the right way, and that the arrangement itself is completely the result of mindless chance? Carrying this further, do you also believe that a computer containing sufficient capability will spontaneously develop a conscious intelligence and a unique personality? I'm not mocking the idea, mind you - I respect the fact that all our beliefs concerning the origins of life are fantastic to contemplate, no matter what we personally believe. I just feel that there is a quality to life which cannot simply be extrapolated from reaching some "magic" level of complexity - a level at which chemistry becomes biology or machinery becomes self-aware.

I would never use some of the phrases and concepts you suggest; e.g., "mindless chance," or "spontaneously erupting" to describe these phenomena. There are immutable laws of nature that restrict what happens from being "mindless chance." These laws also make impossible the idea that some mythic "god" can break these laws to "create" in an instant. All that has to be done to start to understand the natural world is to reject ancient, prescientific myths and simply observe.

As for "spontaneously erupting," this suggestion implies that things happen instantaneously rather than over billions of years.

Yes indeed, a 'computer' composed of 100 billion neurons with 1000 connections each would also achieve consciousness. It does not matter if you call it a 'computer' or a 'brain.' If it is made of the same matter and organized the same way, it will have consciousness. We can even deduce consciousness, on a more limited scale, in animals; in our cats and dogs and certainly in higher primates. We even see morality in these animals.

[Joab]

‘In Isaac shall thy seed be called’ was said to Abraham by God during a family celebration of the fact that Isaac was weaned – in other words, more than 30 years before the events on Mount Moriah.

Can you provide any evidence that supports this claim? A god spoke to an Abraham? Whenever?

[mwtech]

It seems as though edform no is no longer going to debate, so I will post a new "contradiction" for discussion. Hopefully someone will be interested.

Here we have a verse that says God does not grow faint or weary.
Isaiah 40:28
Have you not known? Have you not heard? The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He does not faint or grow weary; his understanding is unsearchable.

And here we have two verses where God grows weary of his people
Jeremiah 15:6
You have rejected me, declares the LORD; you keep going backward, so I have stretched out my hand against you and destroyed you— I am weary of relenting

Isaiah 43:24
You have not bought me sweet cane with money, or satisfied me with the fat of your sacrifices. But you have burdened me with your sins; you have wearied me with your iniquities.

[Danmark]

It seems as though edform no is no longer going to debate, so I will post a new "contradiction" for discussion. Hopefully someone will be interested.

Here we have a verse that says God does not grow faint or weary.
Isaiah 40:28
Have you not known? Have you not heard? The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He does not faint or grow weary; his understanding is unsearchable.

And here we have two verses where God grows weary of his people
Jeremiah 15:6
You have rejected me, declares the LORD; you keep going backward, so I have stretched out my hand against you and destroyed you— I am weary of relenting

Isaiah 43:24
You have not bought me sweet cane with money, or satisfied me with the fat of your sacrifices. But you have burdened me with your sins; you have wearied me with your iniquities.

You can add Genesis 1 to those. God breezed through 14 billion years or so of work in just six days, but then he needed the next entire day to 'rest.' I'm not minimizing the literally fantastic amount of work God did in just six days , but after all, he is GOD. In addition to the contradiction with the verses that say God does not grow faint or worry, why did he need to rest after just six days?

It almost sounds like it's obviously just a myth, a myth designed to tell people they need to take a day off once a week.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 158 by mwtech]

Edform provided overly generous answers. I trust you appreicated them.

I wonder if any non Christian wants to argue against that one you presented? Are you really stumped for an answer to it?