Author Topic: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
cydonia 
Registered: Jun '01
6295_Cloud Car
Date Posted: 3/9/02 10:36am Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
A god may exist. But if she really saw a vision of you on stage, does it necessarily follow that the Bible is God's word? Maybe she really did see something, but does that mean it's Jesus by default? That's the only explanation?

 

-----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
Darkside_Spirit 
Registered: Sep '01
Date Posted: 3/9/02 10:44am Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
You are in all right to doubt, like i said before, but the fact that God is exists is unrefutable, you might not want to believe, but that doesn't change the fact. Remember i said in order to see you must believe, not the other way around.


Immune to refutation? On the contrary, it's impossible to substantiate the existence of a God because no theist has ever given the concept of "God" a coherent meaning. Perhaps you'd like to support your wild, unjustified assertion.

Also why are you trying to make human reason of one situtation that has happened to me? what about the others i have stated? Try to explain why people show demonic possesion (like in the exorcist, but sometimes worse)? or How do you explain miraculous healing, like quadraplegics and paraplegics no longer needing their wheelchairs? of blind people finally seeing? is that also a placebo effect?


As I have stated, attributing something to God explains nothing scientifically. The choice between a scientific theory and supernatural interference is the choice between a possible explanation and no explanation whatsoever.

How do you define a miracle? The refutation is different depending on which definition you ascribe to the word:

1. Supernatural interference in the world. This is useless for establishing the existence of a God since it presupposes that God exists.

2. An event that is so unusual that it can only be explained with reference to supernatural power. I reiterate: putting something down to the supernatural is no sort of explanation. The primitive nomads of millennia ago thought they had "explained" the creation and the nature of the universe by putting it down to God. They achieved nothing with this false "explanation".

3. An event that cannot be contained within the realms of natural law. This presupposes knowledge of all the principles of nature. Until we have knowledge of all natural principles, we are unable to make this declaration.

Take this quote from Thomas Paine:

If...we seen an account given of such miracle by the person who said he saw it, it raises a question in the mind very easily decided, which is, is it more probable that nature should go out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie? We have never seen, in our time, nature go out of her course; but we have good reason to believe that millions of lies have been told in the same time; it is, therefore, at least millions to one, that the reporter of a miracle tells a lie.


Now, I don't entirely agree with this statement. For a start, nature goes out of her course all the time, and that's how new scientific principles are discovered. The basic point, however, is that the vast majority of human experience indicates that people do not rise from the dead, show demonic powers, etc. There are also millions of examples of untruths being told. Therefore, it is far more likely that someone has lied, than such a wildly out-of-course event has actually occurred.

 

Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Palpazzar 
Registered: Aug '00
6026_Palpatine
Date Posted: 3/9/02 1:09pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
"However, you cannot expect another person... such as myself... to accept that it would work for me. Knowing what I know, I realize that it is, in fact, a placebo because the path only works for those who believe it does."

Actually, no one starts out believing. Yet something always happens which convinces the person to believe. Do you expect the placebo effect to work when there is on placebo? And just to add a personal thought, the Bible is clear God gives blessings to the just and unjust. No matter who we are, God does still provide so on one is free from God.

"Religion basically fails the litmus test of clinical consistency because there are good people in every faith whose prayers aren't answered 100 percent of the time."

How do you clinically define God? God wants faith not puppets. If God could be proved in a clinical sense, then there would be no faith or freewill.

"But that explanation is really a red herring that was originally concocted by institutions that could not explain why their subjects would experience the same kinds of tragedies under the new regime that they had with the old"

Well, that is nice. But to turn around the common reaction to Christianity, why don't you prove what you say?

"You are truly the master of your own fate"

Tell that to the 3,000 people in the WTC.

"Mysterious indeed... If you remove God from the equation... almost consistently you will find that the outcome of a person's situation is directly correlated with either their actions or their perceptions, or their presence in a situation that is outside their control because of the overwhelming influence of someone else's actions or perception"

How exactly do you want God to work? By miracles? Miracles are by definition rare. If not, they would be 'commons'. God more often than not uses the very things around us. That is just how he does it. This is not a 'failing'. Nor does it mean there is no God. Remember, if he didn't let us have free will, then such factors would not matter anyway.

The rest of your post is interesting, but again, God doesn't fit in a test tube. In fact, he even says that blessed are those who believe without seeing. Prayer studies in any regard are not measuring the 'God' varible anyway. Not one of those studies ever mentions a single implication on God.

 

-----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: 3/9/02 1:17pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
How exactly do you want God to work? By miracles? Miracles are by definition rare. If not, they would be 'commons'. God more often than not uses the very things around us. That is just how he does it. This is not a 'failing'. Nor does it mean there is no God. Remember, if he didn't let us have free will, then such factors would not matter anyway.


God's omnipotence means that he shouldn't need methods at all. As for "you must agree with me to see why I'm right", that is too stupid to comment on. I don't often insult people, but that's a really, really mindless argument.

 

Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Palpazzar 
Registered: Aug '00
6026_Palpatine
Date Posted: 3/9/02 1:33pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
Where did I say anyone must agree with me? If I did, then it was not intended and I shall amend the statement.

I just said miracles aren't everyday things. We should not expect them to be. Thus since those statements are true, then that means that is how God works. Hence it is not a failing. It is a logical progression. If one doesn't agree with the logic then fine by me. That is their choice.

 

-----signature-----
September 11, 2001 - Black Tuesday
I was never married to Oprah
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
cydonia 
Registered: Jun '01
6295_Cloud Car
Date Posted: 3/9/02 1:47pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible - Date Edited: 3/9/02 1:52pm (1 edits total) Edited By: cydonia
Even more Thomas Paine (hope no one's getting sick of me posting this guy): (i guess this is the main text darkside spirit got his thomas paine quote from happy )

"In the same sense that every thing may be said to be a mystery, so also may it be said that every thing is a miracle, and that no one thing is a greater miracle than another. The elephant, though larger, is not a greater miracle than a mite: nor a mountain a greater miracle than an atom. To an almighty power it is no more difficult to make the one than the other, and no more difficult tomake a million of worlds than to make one. Every thing, therefore, is a miracle, in one sense; whilst, in the other sense, there is no such thing as a miracle. It is a miracle when compared to our power, and to our comprehension. It is not a miracle compared to the power that performs it. But as nothing in this description conveys the idea that is affixed to the word miracle, it is necessary to carry the inquiry further.

Mankind have conceived to themselves certain laws, by which what they call nature is supposed to act; and that a miracle is something contrary to the operation and effect of those laws. But unless we know the whole extent of those laws, and of what are commonly called the powers of nature, we are not able to judge whether any thing that may appear to us wonderful or miraculous, be within, or be beyond, or be contrary to, her natural power of acting.

The ascension of a man several miles high into the air, would have everything in it that constitutes the idea of a miracle, if it were not known that a species of air can be generated several times lighter than the common atmospheric air, and yet possess elasticity enough to prevent the balloon, in which that light air is inclosed, from being compressed into as many times less bulk, by the common air that surrounds it. In like manner, extracting flashes or sparks of fire from the human body, as visibly as from a steel struck with a flint, and causing iron or steel to move without any visible agent, would also give the idea of a miracle, if we were not acquainted with electricity and magnetism; so also would many other experiments in natural philosophy, to those who are not acquainted with the subject. The restoring persons to life who are to appearance dead as is practised upon drowned persons, would also be a miracle, if it were not known that animation is capable of being suspended without being extinct.

Besides these, there are performances by slight of hand, and by persons acting in concert, that have a miraculous appearance, which, when known, are thought nothing of. And, besides these, there are mechanical and optical deceptions. There is now an exhibition in Paris of ghosts or spectres, which, though it is not imposed upon the spectators as a fact, has an astonishing appearance. As, therefore, we know not the extent to which either nature or art can go, there is no criterion to determine what a miracle is; and mankind, in giving credit to appearances, under the idea of their being miracles, are subject to be continually imposed upon.

Since then appearances are so capable of deceiving, and things not real have a strong resemblance to things that are, nothing can be more inconsistent than to suppose that the Almighty would make use of means, such as are called miracles, that would subject the person who performed them to the suspicion of being an impostor, and the person who related them to be suspected of lying, and the doctrine intended to be supported thereby to be suspected as a fabulous invention.

Of all the modes of evidence that ever were invented to obtain belief to any system or opinion to which the name of religion has been given, that of miracle, however successful the imposition may have been, is the most inconsistent. For, in the first place, whenever recourse is had to show, for the purpose of procuring that belief (for a miracle, under any idea of the word, is a show) it implies a lameness or weakness in the doctrine that is preached. And, in the second place, it is degrading the Almighty into the character of a show-man, playing tricks to amuse and make the people stare and wonder. It is also the most equivocal sort of evidence that can be set up; for the belief is not to depend upon the thing called a miracle, but upon the credit of the reporter, who says that he saw it; and, therefore, the thing, were it true, would have no better chance of being believed than if it were a lie.

Suppose I were to say, that when I sat down to write this book, a hand presented itself in the air, took up the pen and wrote every word that is herein written; would any body believe me? Certainly they would not. Would they believe me a whit the more if the thing had been a fact? Certainly they would not. Since then a real miracle, were it to happen, would be subject to the same fate as the falsehood, the inconsistency becomes the greater of supposing the Almighty would make use of means that would not answer the purpose for which they were intended, even if they were real.

If we are to suppose a miracle to be something so entirely out of the course of what is called nature, that she must go out of that course to accomplish it, and we see an account given of such a miracle by the person who said he saw it, it raises a question in the mind very easily decided, which is, -- Is it more probable that nature should go out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie? We have never seen, in our time, nature go out of her course; but we have good reason to believe that millions of lies have been told in the same time; it is, therefore, at least millions to one, that the reporter of a miracle tells a lie.

The story of the whale swallowing Jonah, though a whale is large enough to do it, borders greatly on the marvellous.; but it would have approached nearer to the idea of a miracle, if Jonah had swallowed the whale. In this, which may serve for all cases of miracles, the matter would decide itself as before stated, namely, Is it more probable that a man should have, swallowed a whale, or told a lie?

But suppose that Jonah had really swallowed the whale, and gone with it in his belly to Nineveh, and to convince the people that it was true have cast it up in their sight, of the full length and size of a whale, would they not have believed him to have been the devil instead of a prophet? or if the whale had carried Jonah to Nineveh, and cast him up in the same public manner, would they not have believed the whale to have been the devil, and Jonah one of his imps?

The most extraordinary of all the things called miracles, related in the New Testament, is that of the devil flying away with Jesus Christ, and carrying him to the top of a high mountain; and to the top of the highest pinnacle of the temple, and showing him and promising to him all the kingdoms of the world. How happened it that he did not discover America? or is it only with kingdoms that his sooty highness has any interest.

I have too much respect for the moral character of Christ to believe that he told this whale of a miracle himself: neither is it easy to account for what purpose it could have been fabricated, unless it were to impose upon the connoisseurs of miracles, as is sometimes practised upon the connoisseurs of Queen Anne's farthings, and collectors of relics and antiquities; or to render the belief of miracles ridiculous, by outdoing miracle, as Don Quixote outdid chivalry; or to embarrass the belief of miracles, by making it doubtful by what power, whether of God or of the devil, any thing called a miracle was performed. It requires, however, a great deal of faith in the devil to believe this miracle.

In every point of view in which those things called miracles can be placed and considered, the reality of them is improbable, and their existence unnecessary. They would not, as before observed, answer any useful purpose, even if they were true; for it is more difficult to obtain belief to a miracle, than to a principle evidently moral, without any miracle. Moral principle speaks universally for itself. Miracle could be but a thing of the moment, and seen but by a few; after this it requires a transfer of faith from God to man to believe a miracle upon man's report. Instead, therefore, of admitting the recitals of miracles as evidence of any system of religion being true, they ought to be considered as symptoms of its being fabulous. It is necessary to the full and upright character of truth that it rejects the crutch; and it is consistent with the character of fable to seek the aid that truth rejects. Thus much for Mystery and Miracle."

 

-----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
R2D2-PENA 
Registered: Aug '01
6636_Alf Tyranus
Date Posted: 3/9/02 2:14pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
Who the heck is this Thomas Payne? And why would i care who he is? Forgive my ignorance.

 

-----signature-----
Oh Yeah! from this book Evolution 1:1 "In the Beginning there was nothing, and then it exploded."
Homer Simpson: "You got any of those potato chips that give you diahrrea?
I need to do a little spring cleaning"
no matter what you say, Episode 2 ROCKS!!
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Darkside_Spirit 
Registered: Sep '01
Date Posted: 3/9/02 3:38pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible - Date Edited: 3/9/02 3:46pm (2 edits total) Edited By: Darkside_Spirit
He was, once his name is free from spelling mistakes, one of the great American patriots, quite possibly responsible for the outcome of the War of Independence. (Ooops! Did I attack the myth that the founding fathers were pious Christians? wink )

Anyway, Paine wrote The Age of Reason. Unlike the Bible, it was vastly ahead of its time. It tore the doctrine of Biblical errancy to shreds, along with making great inroads into Christianity on a broader scale. Paine raised points that, as you can see, are still being quoted by freethinkers today.

You should not judge an intellect by reputation, however, but by the virtue of each individual argument. It is up to you to determine how great a man he truly was when you attempt to answer quotations that we may take from his works.

cydonia, the part I quoted is in the middle of that big mass of text. grin Glancing over it, it looks like my above criticism of his words may have been redundant. I will look into this further, but I must go to bed now... happy

 

Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Palpazzar 
Registered: Aug '00
6026_Palpatine
Date Posted: 3/9/02 4:19pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
I am the border of the Founding Fathers not being Christian at all.

But I'm interested to know why do you think Paine was responsible for the success of the Revolution? He wrote which is a noble job, but compared to Daniel Morgan, George Washington, James Madison, Greene, Marion, Adams, and Knox, what did he contribute? Did he even once pick up a rifle or aid in the government (I'm asking because I don't know but I don't think he did).

Christianity has been attacked by a lot of people smarter than Paine. happy Christianity hasn't died out yet.

 

-----signature-----
September 11, 2001 - Black Tuesday
I was never married to Oprah
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
cydonia 
Registered: Jun '01
6295_Cloud Car
Date Posted: 3/9/02 4:22pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible - Date Edited: 3/9/02 4:28pm (3 edits total) Edited By: cydonia
It's not an attack on christianity. From Paine's view, christianity is an attack on reason and logic.

Lots of things that could be perceived as bad haven't "died out" yet. Fill in the blanks.

Anyway Paine being smart or not smart has nothing to do with the points he was making that darkside and myself posted, namely the nature and possiblity of miracles (the issue being discussed when i posted that particular excerpt). Thanks for adding to the discussion.

 

-----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
6270_Darth Vader
Date Posted: 3/9/02 4:32pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible - Date Edited: 3/9/02 4:33pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Darth Geist
His writing (particularly his pamphlet Common Sense) inspired many, many others to take up arms in defense of the cause. Washington's army would have been considerably smaller without his influence on the public opinion.

 

-----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
6026_Palpatine
Date Posted: 3/9/02 6:30pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
For that matter, without Washington, the army would have faded away. Off topic, I don't consider Washington that brilliant of a tactician. Except for Trenton, he was average at best.

Paine is (by his opinion) ruling out God so why should he believe in the miraculous being done? Paine is relying on his reason and intelligence to systemically disprove Christianity. That is fine for him. But humans are limited in wisdom. He can be no more certain of the spirit world than anyone else on either side of the debate. Relying upon the reasoning of a man is an invitation to flaws.

We are all colored by our opinions and views. It is not given that Paine is right simply because of his 'reason'. For every Paine, there is a C.S. Lewis.

Bottom line: You make your choice and I'll make mine. If you want to rely upon a man's philosophical musings, then I wish you well. For me, that is not proof, but that is my opinion. Eventually we will know who is right and who is wrong.

 

-----signature-----
September 11, 2001 - Black Tuesday
I was never married to Oprah
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
cydonia 
Registered: Jun '01
6295_Cloud Car
Date Posted: 3/9/02 7:04pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
You can say he was ruling out God in the miracles, but in general he didn't rule out God. Paine was a deist. All throughout the age of reason he refers to the moral rightness of deism, and not "blasphemising" the "true word of God (creation as a whole, it seems)" by ascribing the accounts of barbarity and superstition (he perceived) in the bible to the true God.

Side note on desim, in the age of reason paine says that all science and all progress has come from our attempts to understand the night sky and planets, the discoveries made in astronomy way back when applied themselves to all the scientific discovery of today. He is of the opinion that the true word of God is creation, that those stars are there in order to educate us and to educate whoever else might be out there. I don't know if i agree with that, but it's still a nice thought.

 

-----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
Palpazzar 
Registered: Aug '00
6026_Palpatine
Date Posted: 3/9/02 7:10pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
I agree with him, but find it too limited.

The deism of the Age of Reason seems so conflicted to me. Ben Franklin's "Beer is proof God loves us and wants us to be happy" and of course Paine seem to believe in more of a universal trend in nature rather than a god. That is how it seems to me at least. Unfortunately the backgrounds of the Founding Fathers is not my main area of interest in the Revolution so I could be missing something important.

 

-----signature-----
September 11, 2001 - Black Tuesday
I was never married to Oprah
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
R2D2-PENA 
Registered: Aug '01
6636_Alf Tyranus
Date Posted: 3/9/02 8:23pm Subject: RE: Alleged Contradictions in the Bible
I was just kicked out of this debate, i have NO idea what you are talking about.

 

-----signature-----
Oh Yeah! from this book Evolution 1:1 "In the Beginning there was nothing, and then it exploded."
Homer Simpson: "You got any of those potato chips that give you diahrrea?
I need to do a little spring cleaning"
no matter what you say, Episode 2 ROCKS!!
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History