| Author |
Topic:
Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
IellaWessiriNRI
Registered:
Jan '01
|
Date Posted:
2/3/02 2:18pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
There is not the smallest fragment of trustworthy evidence to show that any of the Gospels were in existence, in their present form, earlier than a hundred years after the time at which Christ is supposed to have died.
The following is an excerpt from Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ
"Acts ends apparently unfinished - Paul is a central figure of the book, and he's under house arrest in Rome. With that, the book abruptly halts. What happens to Paul? We don't find out from Acts, probably because the book was written before Paul was put to death. That means Acts cannot be dated any later than A.D. 62. Having established that, we can then move backward from there. Since Acts is the second of a two-part work, we know the first part - the gospel of Luke - must have been written earlier than that. And since Luke incorporates parts of the gospel of Mark, that means Mark is even earlier."
The first historical mention of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, was made by the Christian Father, St. Irenaeus, about the year 190 A.D.
Actually, it comes from the testimony of a Christian writer named Papais, who wrote about Mark's gospel in A.D. 125. He also mentions that Matthew accurately preserved the teachings of Jesus.
This proves that they were not written by Christ's disciples, or by any of the early Christians. Foreign Gospels, written by unknown men, in a foreign tongue, several generations after the death of those who are supposed to have known the facts...
Oh please. And since Jesus and His gospels were Jews, the could ONLY have known Aramaic? There's no way they could have known Greek, which happened to be the English of that day? By this, I mean that while every region had its own dialects, most people knew Greek. I know Chinese, but I also speak English fluently. I speak Chinese at home, but my friends don't speak Chinese, so I speak to them in English. Same idea. I wouldn't write to my friends in Chinese - that would be stupid.
Obscure men wrote Gospels and attached the names of prominent Christian characters to them, to give them the appearance of importance. Works were forged in the names of the apostles, and even in the name of Christ.
You've touched on something very important here. Once again, I quote The Case for Christ
"Mark and Luke weren't even among the twelve disciples. Matthew was, but as a former hated tax collector, he would have been the most infamous character next to Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus!"
From this mass of literature, our Gospels were selected by priests and called the inspired word of God.
And not because they had well-known names attached, but because they were carefully evaluated and put to rigorous testing, and they passed. Doesn't it say something that out of all these writings, only four were chosen?
-----signature-----
I miss the good old days.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darkside_Spirit
Registered:
Sep '01
|
Date Posted:
2/4/02 10:20am
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
- Date Edited:
2/4/02 10:26am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Darkside_Spirit
|
We don't find out from Acts, probably because the book was written before Paul was put to death. That means Acts cannot be dated any later than A.D. 62.
Whoa...big leap of logic here! Just because Acts ends before Paul is put to death, no way means it must have been written in a similar timescale (assuming that the death of Paul in AD 62 did actually take place).
Actually, it comes from the testimony of a Christian writer named Papais, who wrote about Mark's gospel in A.D. 125. He also mentions that Matthew accurately preserved the teachings of Jesus.
That website doesn't argue that Mark was written before AD 125. However, it doesn't need to. A dating of one hundred and twenty-five years after the events are supposed to have taken place is ample refutation of Mark as reliable evidence.
Oh please. And since Jesus and His gospels were Jews, the could ONLY have known Aramaic? There's no way they could have known Greek, which happened to be the English of that day? By this, I mean that while every region had its own dialects, most people knew Greek. I know Chinese, but I also speak English fluently. I speak Chinese at home, but my friends don't speak Chinese, so I speak to them in English. Same idea. I wouldn't write to my friends in Chinese - that would be stupid.
Of course. You live in a modern country with a modern education system, where multiple languages are the norm. I personally find it hard to believe that Jesus' followers, apparently humble, working men, would have been educated in another dialect.
And not because they had well-known names attached, but because they were carefully evaluated and put to rigorous testing, and they passed. Doesn't it say something that out of all these writings, only four were chosen?
Put to rigorous testing were they? Oh, the early Church fathers had a time machine!  Seriously, I'll be surprised if you can substantiate this claim of "rigorous testing." We have only copies of copies of copies of a selection of works that were chosen by early Church fathers for incorporation into canon. We have no way of knowing what criteria they used, or where they got the original texts from.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
IellaWessiriNRI
Registered:
Jan '01
|
Date Posted:
2/10/02 6:57pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
|
woah... I forgot about this one. Anyway, I'll respond to you probably sometime next weekend, D_S (assuming someone else doesn't first), but right now I have a history test coming up. [shwarzenegger]I'll be bach[/shwarzenegger]
-----signature-----
I miss the good old days.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
cydonia
Registered:
Jun '01
|
Date Posted:
2/10/02 7:16pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
|
apologetics time!
-----signature-----
when you're born a lover, you're born to suffer-
Like all soul sisters and soul brothers
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth Geist
Registered:
Oct '99
|
Date Posted:
2/11/02 1:08pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
- Date Edited:
2/11/02 1:10pm (2 edits total)
Edited By:
Darth Geist
|
Over Palpazzar's objections,  I'd like to continue the discussion on the burden of proof:
Many of the Bible's claims would seem to conflict with what we know of the world today. The Bible alleges, for example, that a race of giants once roamed the earth (Genesis 6:4). Now, of course we've never found any extra-Biblical records of these giants--no bones, no tools, no ruins, nothing; and no, they aren't dinosaurs, unless dinosaurs could breed with man--but there are those who argue that, because we can't disprove it, the story stands.
Imagine that one day you get arrested. For witchcraft. They drag you into court and accuse you of using your magical powers to bring misfortune on your village--and what's more, the concept of "innocent till proven guilty" hasn't been invented yet; to get off, you have to prove that you're not a witch. How do you do that--how do you prove an abstract negative? Does the burden of proof rightly rest on you, or those who argue in the affirmative?
Belief that you're right isn't enough; kids have believed that putting on a Superman costume enables them to fly, but gravity still takes precedence when they jump off their tables or out their windows.
Now if I claim to have seen Bigfoot, but offer no evidence, would you take my story at face value? If you knew me and trusted me, maybe; I wouldn't be the first to make that claim, and there's (questionable) evidence in Bigfoot's favor. What if I claim to have seen Bigfoot wearing a cowboy hat and a police uniform dancing around and singing "YMCA?" I'd better damn well be able to back that up, lack of disproof or no.
-----signature-----
"The key to enlightenment, then, is recognizing the basic goodness of all things.
Youth and old age, life and death, happiness and sorrow, all have their place
and we must learn to let them come and go in their time, without attachment or aversion."
- Diz
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Palpazzar
Registered:
Aug '00
|
Date Posted:
2/11/02 1:36pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
- Date Edited:
2/11/02 1:38pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Palpazzar
|
Geist, the word you use as giant is in Hebrew "Nephilim". It means fallen ones. Apparently, they were of great size and strength. Nothing is said of them actually be what we think of as giants. They may have simply been a rather robust people. Certainly bones have been found that are large compared to some of their contemporaries. But to use 'giants' as you do distorts the word used. It only means big guys who are sinners.
Want to tell me there is no proof of what I just described?
-----signature-----
September 11, 2001 - Black Tuesday
I was never married to Oprah
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth Geist
Registered:
Oct '99
|
Date Posted:
2/11/02 1:41pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
- Date Edited:
2/11/02 2:54pm (2 edits total)
Edited By:
Darth Geist
|
"But to use 'giants' as you do distorts the word used."
Genesis 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
Numbers 13:33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.
Granted, the word "giant" may well be a mistranslation (although if it is, the "grasshoppers" quote is still problematic--a huge exaggeration, perhaps?), but there are many other large-scale supernatural events in the Bible which have no extra-Biblical parallel.
Individuals live for hundreds of years, animals speak, food for millions falls from the sky on a regular basis (we could really use that one today), angels appear to the masses or swoop through cities taking lives, heroes such as Samson topple armies and buildings single-handedly, people rise from the dead, seas part on command, the sun stands still, floods cover the entire planet, and God Himself appears in flame and whirlwinds to deliver His messages personally.
Either these events (and many others like them) are historically accurate or they aren't. There's no proof that they did or didn't happen, but given what you know of the world around you, which is the more likely answer?
-----signature-----
"The key to enlightenment, then, is recognizing the basic goodness of all things.
Youth and old age, life and death, happiness and sorrow, all have their place
and we must learn to let them come and go in their time, without attachment or aversion."
- Diz
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Palpazzar
Registered:
Aug '00
|
Date Posted:
2/11/02 4:08pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
Giant isn't so much a mistranslation as it is simply ambiguious.
It has long been held by some that David was never real. He was thought by some to be perhaps a metaphor or even an outright myth. Recently, an inscription was found on an monument (Assyrian I think) with bore David's name. The link to this article is no longer around, and I haven't looked for it elsewhere. However, at least in this case the events of the Bible are supported by evidence.
As to the events in your example, I can neither confirm or deny by empirical evidence. However, I have no difficulty believing in God, and so it is not hard for me to believe those things. What I will NOT do is believe only in those things I can see.
-----signature-----
September 11, 2001 - Black Tuesday
I was never married to Oprah
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Wylding
Registered:
Aug '00
|
Date Posted:
2/11/02 4:24pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
Either these events (and many others like them) are historically accurate or they aren't. There's no proof that they did or didn't happen, but given what you know of the world around you, which is the more likely answer?
Hebrews 11:1
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
-----signature-----
Jedi Master
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth Geist
Registered:
Oct '99
|
Date Posted:
2/12/02 8:12am
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
- Date Edited:
2/12/02 8:38am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Darth Geist
|
There may have been a King David. There may also have been a King Arthur; that doesn't mean Merlin ever did any magic.
I think there's more going on than we can perceive--but since it is, by nature, imperceptible, I don't think that anyone can say with any authority who's right and wrong about it.
-----signature-----
"The key to enlightenment, then, is recognizing the basic goodness of all things.
Youth and old age, life and death, happiness and sorrow, all have their place
and we must learn to let them come and go in their time, without attachment or aversion."
- Diz
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darkside_Spirit
Registered:
Sep '01
|
Date Posted:
2/12/02 3:28pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
|
The I will not believe in only that which I can see argument simply doesn't wash. There's a difference between only believing what you can see with your own eyes, and refusing to believe anything for which a single piece of reliable evidence cannot be dragged up by any human living today.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Palpazzar
Registered:
Aug '00
|
Date Posted:
2/12/02 4:51pm
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
"refusing to believe anything for which a single piece of reliable evidence cannot be dragged up by any human living today."
Oh, but I have seen evidence that supports my beliefs and have yet to find something to cast doubt on them. I don't expect anyone else to believe, although there are those that do.
-----signature-----
September 11, 2001 - Black Tuesday
I was never married to Oprah
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darkside_Spirit
Registered:
Sep '01
|
Date Posted:
3/8/02 9:08am
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
Contradictions...hmmm...let's take a couple of important ones.
1. The whereabouts and length of Jesus' public life. If it lasted three years and was spent in Judea (John), it did not last one year, located in Galilee (synoptics).
2. Christ as a historical person or as a purely spiritual figure. According to the gospels, Jesus actually lived on earth and was reported by eyewitnesses. However, according to the Pauline Epistles he was kept hidden for centuries, exposed through divine revelation, and was crucified in a realm of demon spirits. (The fact that the Pauline Epistles make no reference to an earthly Jesus is good evidence for those who, like me, deny that Christ ever existed. However, it can also be cited as a contradiction).
Also, I see you've gone to great lengths to explain away minor "on the face of it" contradictions. If the Bible was really a divinely inspired book showing humanity a much-needed path to salvation, such malarky to make it fit would be unnecessary.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth_SnowDog
Registered:
Sep '01
|
Date Posted:
3/8/02 9:28am
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
- Date Edited:
3/8/02 9:31am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Darth_SnowDog
|
The biggest contradiction I find are the passages that lead followers to believe that the Bible has exclusivity with the construct of God.
The problem is that a variety of other religious text make claims of being "the one true way to god" as well... each of which has about as much objective evidence of its validity as the Bible.
My conclusion is that either they are all exaggerations of the truth, arrived at separately... or they are all merely periodical interpretations of the unknown, by cultures who, historians and anthropologists can confirm, believed each that they were either the "chosen" or "true" or only people.
It's like ten different people brought in separately to write a description of a bottle of water. The bottle of water is simple... but undoubtedly each description will vary... and the more complex the object (or person, let's say) being described, the greater the variances in description...
To further complicate matters... as soon as those descriptions are passed on through generations.. when they are later compared, they're even more different... sort of like ten different chains of people all passing down a message... Haven't you ever done that experiment in school? It's bad enough when a message gets passed through several people for ten minutes... but 2000 years? How do we even know that the Dead Sea Scrolls weren't preceded by several stages of oral folklore passage?
Reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons:
Bart: You know, I heard Skinner say the teachers will crack any minute.
:the message is passed by about 10 people:
Guy: Skinner said the teachers will crack any minute purple monkey dishwasher!
-----signature-----
I am boycotting theforce.net
because of their homophobic, bigoted
policy concerning fanfic romance.
Others who believe this is bigotry should
boycott all TFN, Lucasfilm and IGN products.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darkside_Spirit
Registered:
Sep '01
|
Date Posted:
3/8/02 9:30am
Subject:
RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
|
|
Palpazzar, perhaps you'd care to elaborate on your evidence for Christianity, and then send a copy to the nearest church. Theists are in dire need of evidence for the existence of god when they engage in debate with atheists.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
