Biblical Contradictions

[achilles12604]

Ok. I looked over the last few pages of topics and I couldn't find one dedicated to this discussion (much to my surprise). Therefore I am starting it.


What are the biblical contradictions which the atheists keep refering to and what are the answers by apologists.

Ready, set . . . GO!

[Metacrock]

There are countless translation error all the way through on purpose to disguise the guilty parties...
This is still clearly visable and needs fixing globally, why i am here in the first place to help fix it...

real scholars rarely mess with message boards. where did you study blibcal languages? the Secular ;Web?

I am really curious as well. Who did you study under? Can you understand when I write something like . . .


makavrio aujtov

Didn't take Hebrew. my undergrad language was Greek. University of Texas system. My Masters degree is from Perkins school of theology, SMU.

I don't claim to be a professional sholar.


Sorry to be insulting. I just think its' absurd to come on like "I am the one sent by .God to correct Paul who is mistaken in everything he said." Wizanda does come on like that both here and in another hread I'm on.

Paul did what theological do. He was in a sense the first real theologian in history. He was one of the most brilliant minds of his day. He was clearly called by God, if we accept Markan and lukan authorship the Pauline circle even shares half the Gospels.

No. You misunderstand. I was actually talking to wiz, not you. I was agreeing and further emphasizing your previous post.

Sorry for the confusion.

i am sorry, but thanks!

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Achilles,

If God inspired the Bible, and truely wants us to obey his will, do you really think he would subjugate Christians to an apparently never-ending scavenger hunt for Biblical truth?

You mean something along the lines of "Love the Lord your God and love your neighbor as yourself. . . " Something like this perhaps. . .

I don't know, you tell me.

Is this all that Christianity is about? Do the various other supposed tenants not matter?

God, it seems, was not even clear on this simple point. Lot's of people have interpreted the text as promoting hatred and violence.

The LRA, a theocratic Christian rebel faction in Uganda, has been terrorizing citizens for years, and often subjects child captives to sex slavery.

Evangelical groups in India have been known to burn the homes of those who refuse to convert to Christianity.

On a slightly less extreme note, I know a number of professed Christians who sincerely believe that "God hates fags". Liberals and athiests are also popular targets of Christian hatred.

You may argue that such people are simply wacko's whose feelings and actions serve their own personal agendas rather than that of Christ. However, there are Biblical arguments that can (and are) used in justification of such actions. A couple examples:

Luk 19:27
Bring my enemies, who didn't want me to be their king. Kill them in front of me.

Mat 10:34,35
Don't think that I came to bring peace to earth. I didn't come to bring peace but conflict. I came to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.

Many (the LRA in particular) also point to the various wars and genocides against unbelievers that God endorsed (and occasionally conducted himself).


You may interpret these verses differently. However, many see them as jusification for violence and hate, and abide by them accordingly. Surely God would have known that some people would be mislead by such verses. Why include them?

Why is it that followers of Buddha or Confucious rarely ever exhibit violent attributes (much less kill unbelievers)? Is the Bible's stance on hatred really as clear as it could be?

Jesus attoning death and resurrection from the Grave. Beyond this, who cares if you don't eat pork or you wash your feet or you do the Hokie Pokie.

Indeed, I don't know of many Christians who would disagree on this point.

But once again, is this all that I need to know in order to be a Christian?

What about the requirements for salvation? The Christian stance on the various moral issues? Under what pretenses is violence okay? How should I conduct myself around unbelievers? Must I be baptised to be saved?

Do none of these "minute details" matter at all? Somehow, I don't think the Bible is justified simply because it managed to get one thing across clearly.

Hmm . . . How about the assumption that if you disagree in Islam, you are murdered. I don't recall Paul ordering the murder of Peter. He disagreed with Peter, talked to Peter and tried to get him to see his point of view. Perhaps this is why there are so many different nuances in the Christian faith, because we are free to disagree much moreso (with small exceptions), than in Islam. Notice that right now Iraq is falling into Civil war which has been brewing for many years because of the persecution of one Islam against another Islam. I don't see Baptists murdering and bombing my street ministry. I must be missing all the Non-denominational churches launching poison gas against the lutherans. Sure there have been a few problems between our denominations. But we have never resorted to Genocide against other Christians. If you are muslim and you disagree with another muslim, you are taking your life into your hands it seems. Of course since violence and control are the founding force behind Islam, I guess this makes sense.

This violence was an obvious deterant to free thought.

http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm

Christian authorities have been murdering dissenters for centuries. And yet, thousands of different Christian schools of thought have risen regardless. Obviously violence is not so much of a deterrant to free thought. The Bible is simply too vague and inconsistent to garner any possible unilateral doctrine, such as that found in other religions.



Also, I would still like to hear your views on these subjects:

Then you don't think there was any simpler way for God to covey his wishes to us? Why not just list the requirements of Christians, as was done with the 10 commandments? Not many people misunderstand the principles set forth in the 10 commandments.

Wouldn't this be more logical? Why shouldn't God strive to make it easy to understand his will?

And if the Bible is not perfect, then niether, may we assume, is the being who supposedly authored it.

If the Bible was divinely inspired by a perfect diety, how can the text within be any less than perfect (much less downright contradictory)?

[Easyrider]

Next time you're down and out try finding a BITTER ATHEIST'S HOMELESS SHELTER!

[McCulloch]

Next time you're down and out try finding a BITTER ATHEIST'S HOMELESS SHELTER!

Let's try to get back on topic.

Easyrider, are you trying to argue that the Bible does not have contradictions because Christians sponsor charitable works? Mormons are quite good at charitable works, yet other Christians do not even want to acknowledge them as legitimate believers. Jews sponsor many really effective charitable works, yet Christians claim that they deny their own God's sacrifice. Atheists do support charitable works, but they generally do so not in the name of atheism but simply as a good work. In my country there are many charities which run without regard to religion. They are supported by the religious and the non religious.
Was it Jesus who said something about the right hand and the left hand regarding charitable works?

[Easyrider]

Next time you're down and out try finding a BITTER ATHEIST'S HOMELESS SHELTER!

Let's try to get back on topic.

Easyrider, are you trying to argue that the Bible does not have contradictions because Christians sponsor charitable works?

Nope, that wasn't what I was saying. My point was that some people in this forum are so darned intent on making Christianity out to be a murderous religion that someone needed to remind them that there aren't a lot of homeless shelters built by bitter atheists.

Mormons are quite good at charitable works, yet other Christians do not even want to acknowledge them as legitimate believers. Jews sponsor many really effective charitable works, yet Christians claim that they deny their own God's sacrifice. Atheists do support charitable works, but they generally do so not in the name of atheism but simply as a good work. In my country there are many charities which run without regard to religion. They are supported by the religious and the non religious.
Was it Jesus who said something about the right hand and the left hand regarding charitable works?

And all that will be judged for what it's worth come judgment day (1 Corinthians 3).

[achilles12604]

http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm

Christian authorities have been murdering dissenters for centuries. And yet, thousands of different Christian schools of thought have risen regardless. Obviously violence is not so much of a deterrant to free thought. The Bible is simply too vague and inconsistent to garner any possible unilateral doctrine, such as that found in other religions.



Also, I would still like to hear your views on these subjects:

I would be very careful trusting anything written by someone who signes off with :

This page 1996 by kelsos. So there.

While this page may contain many facts, it also contains flatly false information. Examples:

Volk speaks of "a thick wall" and "a secret stemming from the highest command." All information connections with the Jews were cut after their deportation to the East. Throughout the article Volk insists, however, that the Catholic leaders were as equally zealous in countering the murder of the Jews as they had been in halting the euthanasia -- based on what they knew. The list of churchmen who spoke out on this matter is impressive. It includes two German cardinals, M.F. Faulhaber (Munich), A. Bertram (Breslau), and four German bishops, K. von Preysing (Berlin), J.G. Machens (Hildesheim), W. Berning (Breslau) and H. Wienken, secretary of the Conference of Bishops.

On the work of alleviating the plight of the Jews, Volk mentions the founding, by Bishop Preysing, of the Bishop's Welfare Agency in Berlin, with Frau Margarete Sommer as its hardworking leader. This agency, founded in September 1938, carried out charity work among the Jews, assisting them especially in their emigration from Germany. Besides this Catholic organ there existed official Jewish organizations of similar function while non-Aryan Protestants (that is, ethnic Jews) had the Paulusbund, named after the Apostle Paul. The latter organization functioned until 1944.

Father Volk points out that helping the Jews was difficult. For although churchmen were successful in halting the deportation of the Mischlinge, by doing so, without demanding more, the churchmen gave latent approval for the deportation of the "racially pure" Jews. Why, then, did church officials remain vague and general? According to Father Volk it was because general accusations were more promising than specific accusations, which required providing specific proof.

Such proof would have meant delays caused by time-consuming investigations during a situation of total war. Here lay the dilemma. The Jesuit, in this connection, speaks also of "a psychic law." That is, the greater the monstrosity of a crime, the greater the demand for specific and actual proof. In short, the task of the Catholic leaders was not an easy one. Had charges been leveled and then disproved, the churchmen's position would have been greatly weakened.

Apparently, your source decided to ignore that most of the church was helping the Jews dispite being threatened if they did so. Could this be because your source is insainly biased? Hmm . . .

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p101_Lang.html

Your source also uses a lot of heresay as solid proof, example would be in Rwanda.

All in all, you have mangaed to find a site which exaggurates and focuses on every little incident they could find. They cite heresay and rumor as fact and introduce information which was more than a little inaccurate.

And even with all of this, you still can not add all of these up to match the death caused by atheist rulers of just the 20th century.

Good job.

[Cathar1950]

Next time you're down and out try finding a BITTER ATHEIST'S HOMELESS SHELTER!

Let's try to get back on topic.

Easyrider, are you trying to argue that the Bible does not have contradictions because Christians sponsor charitable works?

Nope, that wasn't what I was saying. My point was that some people in this forum are so darned intent on making Christianity out to be a murderous religion that someone needed to remind them that there aren't a lot of homeless shelters built by bitter atheists.

Mormons are quite good at charitable works, yet other Christians do not even want to acknowledge them as legitimate believers. Jews sponsor many really effective charitable works, yet Christians claim that they deny their own God's sacrifice. Atheists do support charitable works, but they generally do so not in the name of atheism but simply as a good work. In my country there are many charities which run without regard to religion. They are supported by the religious and the non religious.
Was it Jesus who said something about the right hand and the left hand regarding charitable works?

And all that will be judged for what it's worth come judgment day (1 Corinthians 3).

We have been waiting for almost 2000 years so I am saying lets not wait for judgment day. I agree that just because some Christians hate gays and bomb clinics or toss their kids out all do that any more then all atheist are evil and immoral. I also dont find Paul compelling or useful as a reference. Christians also have a poor track record yet I find the Mennonites and Quakers wonderful people. If I were going to have to go to church as a Christian it would either be United Methodist, Mennonite and Quaker. I am a liberal.
I tend to agree with the Ebonites and understand the Jewish view better they I can make sense out of the usual Christian doctrine and dogma. I find bible-believers to be rather tedious and misinformed no mater how much they study. It is a human book or books and they seem almost idolatrous and the worship of Jesus and the idea of human sacrifice repugnant and I doubt the historical Jesus would appreciate their adoration.
Mack makes some good observations and I agree with much of what he says even if he is a Canadian. Blame Canada, Blame Canada! (from Southpark movie).

[wizanda]

Ok after trying to read everyones post yet all comming from difrent angles can we fix it for them and just keep it simple....

The main contradiction is the Fact the pharisee remain in the Bible:

John Nicodemus aka Nicolaitans and a form of Nicholas...ie the Bible condems this doctrine as would any true Jews as it contradicts Jewish believe very cleverly yet on pupose..written by a member of the Pharisee high Coucil...


Saul aka Paul worked for John this to is strange considering the tesmonies make christianity....yet in fact are Anti-Christ to begin....


Simon is named stone and was releated to Judas it informs you this in Greek when Christ says they will betray me and uses plural...

Now Considering they taught you get an inheritance and it is good another mans righteousness cover your own mistakes or as Balaam taught these books should be closed as in any court case....

They contradict them self they cotradict Christ they contradict every commandment this is a joke we waste time talking about it again and again...

Only reason some people get to sell more books, why all of mine are free online
Bringing down said Babylon empire they built using a good mans words to make a fake Cult!
As they now force feed our children and our selfs, with very limited understanding to begin with...by the way I have a large Christian family with its own Christian book shop..
Who now call me heritic for having studied the Bible for its self and not some fantasy they are told to read in a certain order as it makes for better reading, yet no clear logical sense.....!

[Cmass]

I just donated 5 tokens to the Platypus for writing a very detailed, coherent post - one of the better I have read recently.
I also donated 5 tokens to McCulloch because he is Canadian. I have a thing for Canada and if I ever leave the Seattle area I will almost certainly move to Calgary AB!
-------------------------
Easyrider and Achilles, I keep getting you guys mixed up! I suppose either of you would have said this so it doesn't matter:

Nope, that wasn't what I was saying. My point was that some people in this forum are so darned intent on making Christianity out to be a murderous religion that someone needed to remind them that there aren't a lot of homeless shelters built by bitter atheists.

This is truly pathetic. Normally I enjoy your venom(s) but Platypus put forth a VERY strong and well thought out response that I think deserves some thought.
Now, go pray on it for a while, and then come back and give him some hellfire and brimstone worthy of his efforts!

[achilles12604]

I just donated 5 tokens to the Platypus for writing a very detailed, coherent post - one of the better I have read recently.
I also donated 5 tokens to McCulloch because he is Canadian. I have a thing for Canada and if I ever leave the Seattle area I will almost certainly move to Calgary AB!
-------------------------
Easyrider and Achilles, I keep getting you guys mixed up! I suppose either of you would have said this so it doesn't matter:

Nope, that wasn't what I was saying. My point was that some people in this forum are so darned intent on making Christianity out to be a murderous religion that someone needed to remind them that there aren't a lot of homeless shelters built by bitter atheists.

This is truly pathetic. Normally I enjoy your venom(s) but Platypus put forth a VERY strong and well thought out response that I think deserves some thought.
Now, go pray on it for a while, and then come back and give him some hellfire and brimstone worthy of his efforts!

Not to mince specifics or avoid an issue, but his entire post is a fabulous example of a red herring. We were discussing

Quote:
If God inspired the Bible, and truely wants us to obey his will, do you really think he would subjugate Christians to an apparently never-ending scavenger hunt for Biblical truth?

You mean something along the lines of "Love the Lord your God and love your neighbor as yourself. . . " Something like this perhaps. .

All of a sudden he goes off on the evil Christianity side topic with out ever addressing the fact the I pointed out exactly what he was asking for.

As textbook red herring, very well executed as well.


As for the evils of Christianity, as I said in my reply which hasn't been addressed yet, and as I said in a PM to Cmass, the evils of Christianity (even if his whole source was 100% accurate which it obviously isn't) don't come close to the attrocities committed by the atheist rulers of the 20th century alone. Also as Easyrider pointed out, Christianity has done a lot of good as well.

Therefore, Plat's entire post is a huge and totally unwarrented generalization, (another logical fallacy by the way).

If plat wishes to address what I actually put forth rather than running to the atheist default of "Christianity is evil. . . look what they did" and avoiding the good example I presented, then he should feel free.

Was his reply good? Perhaps it was descriptive and very provocative. It could have even had some information in it which was accurate. But it also had bad info, it avoided the entire discussion, and it committed a huge generalization which focused on a few incidents in history which also had many other factors involved (like political power, money, and other things of the like which were left ENTIRELY unmentioned conveniently).

You are entitled to your opinion of his reply. I for one found it to be a fantastic example of running away from the topic and shielding himself with the tired "evil Christianity" attack.





Hey I just notice that this is post 666 for me. Does that help or hinder my arguement on this post do you think?