2nd coming of christ. are you ready?

[JonaDiaper]

=O there is no scientist anywhere that doubts Jesus existed.

 

[Reaver197]

I think what RDK was trying to say, though I could be wrong about this, was that someone came along and said they saved him when he never was in a position that he felt he needed to be saved. If you're doing perfectly fine and happy, and someone comes up to and starts pressing you how you've been "saved" by someone over two millenia ago, it implies that somehow they were in a bad position way before they were even born. In a way, it's condescending and manipulative. However, if RDK did mean it in the way you interpreted it, I would have to agree that RDK's statement is not right.

Also, as for the Egyptians "hiding" the fact they had slaves so it wouldn't make them look bad is just ridiculous. They had slaves anyway, just never Jewish ones. It was pretty common in those days, and I doubt anyone really thought twice about it. It's just they have no records of a particular Jewish group of slaves that after a series of really horrible events, ran away, and crossed an uncrossable sea by foot. I'm pretty sure if any of the extraordinary claims that the Bible made about how they escaped actually happened, the Egyptians themselves would've made note of it. Instead, there's nothing at all, and they certainly be far seem the better and more reliable historical writers than the Jews were at that point.

Besides, from the Old Testament, it seemed the Jewish people themselves had no scruples over taking and essentially enslaving other people, particularly their virgin women, and often completely killing a who race of people, women and children, and sometimes even their animals too. Doesn't sound at all anything someone should be proud of, yet they make no secret about it, often exalting over it, and even once being punished for not completely killing every single person and animal of a particular group of people. Not a very nice bunch of people, and certainly not a very nice god.

 

[cman]

maybe egyptians didnt have records of slavery cuz it would make them look bad.

didnt Germany hide their Jewish Slaves and keep NO records of them? yea

No, iirc, Germany kept fantastic records, but i know what you are saying. Answer this; why does the Bible retain credibility when so many other sources disagree with it on so many accounts, and when it even disagrees with itself?

 

[Aesir]

=O there is no scientist anywhere that doubts Jesus existed.

That's nice to know, but in case you didn't know scientists don't exactly have authority on matters of history.

 

[JonaDiaper]

the Bible does not disagree with itself. people take things and twist them in order to make it seem that way. either that or they just dont understand it and think its wrong and contradictory to something else they didnt understand.

plus thee Bible is the Bible.

40 different authors from many different countries who all share the same story.
fufilled prophecies and stuff come on man.



“I cannot have confidence in the Bible, for it is a book filled with contradictions.”

I could not estimate how many times I have heard this charge against the Holy Scriptures over the past several decades. One thing, however, has been consistent about the allegation—the critic rarely can name even one alleged contradiction that the Bible is supposed to contain. He just “knows” that they are “in there” somewhere.

Those who allege that the Bible contains contradictions basically fall into two classes. First, there is the person who honestly believes this to be the case because he has heard the hackneyed charge repeated frequently; thus, he sincerely is misinformed about the facts. Second, there is that type of person who, from base motives, hates the Bible and so does not scruple to pervert its testimony in order to discredit the Sacred Volume. In either case, the Word of God is not at fault!"

ill give you the rest of the link if you wanna readThis

 

[JonaDiaper]

That's nice to know, but in case you didn't know scientists don't exactly have authority on matters of history.

so you refuse to believe the same people you believe diescovered Evolution? nice

oops double. o well here comes another one

 

[Aesir]

so you refuse to believe the same people you believe diescovered Evolution? nice

oops double. o well here comes another one

Well you could cite these scientists so I could see what they're actually saying. But as far as their authority on the matter they have none.

Were you trying to show I'm contradicting myself?

Scientists deal with science.

Historians deal with History.

Why would I take a scientists word on subject matter that isn't his area of expertise? it's like believing the world if flat because an English professor thinks so.

 

[RDK]

so you refuse to believe the same people you believe diescovered Evolution? nice

oops double. o well here comes another one

WTF? Historians and evolutionary biologists are two completely different things. Honestly, think things through before posting.

the Bible does not disagree with itself. people take things and twist them in order to make it seem that way. either that or they just dont understand it and think its wrong and contradictory to something else they didnt understand.

I can pull several examples off the top of my head where the Bible contradicts itself.

MAT 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

MAR 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

JOH 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.

JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

There are plenty more, like the account of King Saul's death, Jesus's own geneology, completely contradictory records of certain kings' rule lengths. And then there's the off-the-wall absurdities, like where it says the Earth is flat and supported by pillars, and it talks about the winged fowl that crawl on four legs.

Honestly, it's odd that you can somehow explain away these contradictions as interpretation errors when any other day you'll espouse the doctrine that the Bible is the literal, inerrant word of God.

40 different authors from many different countries who all share the same story.
fufilled prophecies and stuff come on man.

Where is your source for this?

 

[Steel]

You guys are arguing with someone who isn't that informed about about his own religion. He hasn't learned that the Bible was only taken literally hundreds of years ago. We have learned that this should not be the case. It's not all accurate stuff.

 

[JonaDiaper]

lol the Bible is my source. and i know my faith very well thank you.

its not about religion.

heres a source on the 40 authors and contradictions thing
http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-errors.html

 

[Reaver197]

There are some other contradictions in the Bible, such as the story of Jesus's birth. Apparently, according to Micah, they expect him to be born in Bethlehem, but in John, they're surprised that Jesus is not born in Bethlehem, but rather in Galilee. However, Matthew states that John and Mary lived in Bethlehem all along, yet Luke acknowledges that they did not originally live in Bethlehem, but then has the excuse that they go to Bethlehem to fulfill the orders of the Roman Emperor for a census. Unfortunately for Luke, he got the timing of things wrong. The census issued under Quirinius was only a local census, not one mandated by the Emperor, and it happened far too late for Jesus' supposed birth, as it took place AD 6, after King Herod had already died. Also, not to mention, it makes no sense for John and Mary to go to Bethlehem anyway, since David lived thousands of years before, so why would they go to a town that a remote ancestor of theirs had lived, if they even knew they were descendants of David?

As for more contradictions in the Bible, you can refer to a large list of them here.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html

 

[Steel]

Who was doubting your faith?

I'm saying you're behind in the times.

EVERYTHING IN THE BIBLE IS NOT TO BE TAKEN 100% LITERAL.

 

[AgentJGV]

But why? So many things in the Bible are either so ridiculously outlandish that no one would ever believe them, or have been proven to be false that there's no reason to believe in any of it, even though some of it might be historically accurate. Emphasis on some.

Why do people have faith? Because it gives them hope. Other than that, we don't know why one person believes this and one person beilves that. In regards to the Bible, it contradicts itself more than enough times for us to see that you can't take the bible word for word. You have to believe the message, not the stories. And like you said, SOME of it might be historically acurate. But also, some of it is false.

My advice is to always take what the Bible says with a grain of salt.

 

[Reaver197]

Who was doubting your faith?

I'm saying you're behind in the times.

EVERYTHING IN THE BIBLE IS NOT TO BE TAKEN 100% LITERAL.

Then how do you decide what to take seriously and what not to? If you can simply pick and choose as you please what you should listen to and should not listen to in the Bible, it clearly is not a good moral guide.

 

[JonaDiaper]

10 comandments are a pretty good moral guide

 

[RDK]

10 comandments are a pretty good moral guide

That website you gave me was vague and ridiculous. You didn't actually reply the individual points in my post.

I assume you're going to reply with "The differences can be explained by the different authors." Normally I would reply by saying most of those contradictions are within the same book, but that's beside the point--if the Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant, should there be any differences at all, no matter how small?

 

[Aesir]

10 comandments are a pretty good moral guide

Not really.

It's riddled with with authoritarian thought which is unhealthy for democratic/republic societies.

 

[JonaDiaper]

good point, but no one is perfect.

humans wrote the book and we make mistakes,

when im preeching and i miss prounounce a word, does that mean everything i say goes down the tube cuz i messed up? hopefuly not.

 

[RDK]

good point, but no one is perfect.

humans wrote the book and we make mistakes,

when im preeching and i miss prounounce a word, does that mean everything i say goes down the tube cuz i messed up? hopefuly not.

Then it's not literal and inerrant, so don't go around acting like it is.

 

[JonaDiaper]

Not really.

It's riddled with with authoritarian thought which is unhealthy for democratic/republic societies.

so dont cheat, dont steal, dont lie, dont kill, dont lust after women, honor your parents is not so good?

and God is a jealous God, he doesnt want you to make your own ideas and serve things that he created. only serve him.

oh and the 10 commandments can be summed up in two.

The first four tell you how to love God and the last six how to love your neighbor. Does this summary of the commandments of God make of less imortance any one of the specific laws? Of course not. Can we say that we love our neighbor if we don't kill him, but we steal from him? And likewise we can we say that we love God if we don't take his name in vain but choose to disregard his sabbath?

@RDK

becuase the Bible is written by humans its gonna seem like its messed up in some places

becuase thats the way we see it

but God left it be like that for a reason


Isaiah 55:8-9 (English Standard Version)
8For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD
9For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.

 

[Reaver197]

Not really, especially when there are different versions of them saying different things. Especially the punishments god puts forth with them as well.

http://www.positiveatheism.org/crt/whichcom.htm

I do not doubt that the most commonly extolled version of the Ten Commandments sounds very nice to us with our much more advanced and humanistic sense of morals nowadays, but you have to keep in mind, when they were originally written, it does not apply so openly and broadly as we now interpret it. "Love thy Neighbor" sounds great until you realize it applied only to Jews. "Thou shall not kill" sounds great as well, until once again, you realize its originally meant to apply only to Jews. If it did at all apply to people at large, Jews violated it constantly and in the grossest ways they could.

Oh yeah, not to mention, in all the versions they say to keep the Sabbath day, and the punishment for violating the Sabbath day is death, as in Numbers when they stone to death a man for picking up sticks, just because it happened to be the Sabbath.

Either way, when you have to pick and choose the good bits from the Bible from the bad, it becomes pretty evident that the Bible as a whole is not a good moral guide or even what gives us our morality.

 

[JonaDiaper]

does it matter what it originally was meant for?

the words are clear. easy to follow, well not so easy but theyre easy to have on your mind.

what does it matter who voilated it? or what punishments were?

your just trying to make God and the Bible seem bad using examples like that.

 

[Aesir]

so dont cheat, dont steal, dont lie, dont kill, dont lust after women, honor your parents is not so good?

I'm not doubting some of those are good, but to call the whole thing a good moral guide is misleading.

Honor your parents? that's control right there. Some parents deserve to be honored some don't. To tell a child he must love and honor a parent regardless of character is incredibly immoral.

and God is a jealous God, he doesnt want you to make your own ideas and serve things that he created. only serve him.

And you don't see the problem with that? A person who is so insecure he doesn't even want you to make your own ideas? That's tyrannical.

oh and the 10 commandments can be summed up in two.

The first four tell you how to love God and the last six how to love your neighbor. Does this summary of the commandments of God make of less imortance any one of the specific laws? Of course not. Can we say that we love our neighbor if we don't kill him, but we steal from him? And likewise we can we say that we love God if we don't take his name in vain but choose to disregard his sabbath?

Golden rule kind of makes it a lot easier.

 

[Reaver197]

Yeah, it does matter what it originally was meant for, because that's what the authors of the Bible had in mind when they wrote it. They did not mean for us to take it the way we do now. It was us adjusting our interpretation of the Bible as the times past, not the Bible itself extolling those beliefs.

Also, what's the point of having rules if you don't have punishments for it? It matters greatly what the punishments are, as that's what gave the Ten Commandments any sort of reason to be followed, especially back then.

I'm not doing anything except taking exactly what was in the Bible and showing them to you. If you think there's something wrong with it, it's not me that's doing it, it's the Bible itself.

I could also mention the story of Sodom and Gomorrah to further prove my point, if you would like.

 

[JonaDiaper]

God is not a person. hes not so tyrannical if he gave you free will didnt he?

lol God insecure? jealousy does not make you insecue.

why would God be insecure. if he was he wouldnt allow you to even think

becuase he knows someone would go against his words and stuff. and they have

bu he allows it

 

[RDK]

God is not a person. hes not so tyrannical if he gave you free will didnt he?

Well then it's doubly cruel in this case--he gives us free will to do whatever we choose, but tells us we're going to burn in hell for eternity if we choose to excercise our free will. You don't see something wrong with that?

And the concept of free will is a vague one at best.

 

[JonaDiaper]

Yeah, it does matter what it originally was meant for, because that's what the authors of the Bible had in mind when they wrote it. They did not mean for us to take it the way we do now. It was us adjusting our interpretation of the Bible as the times past, not the Bible itself extolling those beliefs.

Also, what's the point of having rules if you don't have punishments for it? It matters greatly what the punishments are, as that's what gave the Ten Commandments any sort of reason to be followed, especially back then.

I'm not doing anything except taking exactly what was in the Bible and showing them to you. If you think there's something wrong with it, it's not me that's doing it, it's the Bible itself.

I could also mention the story of Sodom and Gomorrah to further prove my point, if you would like.

thats like saying that Jesus died only for the people who were alove at the time.

the rules do have punishment for them. you break them and dont as for forgiveness, and you die without forgiveness, youll have plenty of punishment.

Sodom and Gomorrah? the 2 cities filled with so much sin that God had to destroy them?

just like now, sin is taking over everywhere, and God is going to step up to the plate again. (aka 2 coming of christ aka end of the world)

he gives us the choice wether or not to sin. and if we do, like i said punishment will come

 

[Crimson King]

This ****ty topic is done as is the ****ty topic starter.

When someone is so stubborn that they ignore presented evidence with retorts like "I don't believe that but you can lol" then the argument is dead in the water.