Omega says: Actually, no, it doesn't. The Bible says that SAMUEL said that God does not "nacham". It's entirely possible that Samuel was wrong. The Bible just says that he said it, not that he was right. 2 Timothy 3:16 - ALL scripture is inspired by god
You can't use this arguement. Your arguement is that the bible is the inspired word of god. Mine is that it is a collection of writings. If Samuel erred, but was inspired when he erred, there creates a problem. Clearly, biblical inspiration is not perfect. Moreover, if Samuel, a Bible writer (supposedly) can be wrong when describing god, who else is? Perhaps god is not love?
Moreover, if god can repent, then he is not perfect.
"Who said the original judgement was wrong? God simply changed it. Probably, he wanted Moses to learn something."
Learn what?
"To teach the Israelites that there were severe consequences to their actions."
So to do that, he does actions which later he changes his mind on? By this justification, incidentally, any evil is fine. Hitler is justified for he taught the Jews that they needed a homeland. If god is so great as to permit evil simply to teach lessons, your god is sick in the head. But to get back to the point about this, what is the purpose of punishing the bastard son? What sin did he commit that was worthy of punishing? This was not some law given to scare people, this was THE LAW! It's a penal code, like any other, and here it clearly shows that god is commanding his people to PUNISH children for the sins of their father whereas he also says that the sons CANNOT be punished for the sins of their father.
"Because then the people would never have learned what they needed to learn. David also learned many things from Saul's being king. Nor could David have been made king immediately, as he was probably not yet born at the time."
David did not need to be made king. Theoretically, god could've found someone to be king who he would not letter regret having made king. As it stands, you cannot simply wipe away all this on the issue of 'nacham' because I am not a Hebrew scholar. The Bible was translated by Hebrew scholars, the English translation clearly must be good enough. Or perhaps I should give it to you in German?
"We're not being punished. Death is not punishment. God simply can't be in the presence of sin, and there can be no life without God. If you go back to a previous thread, I go into more detail, but the idea is that God isn't damning us. We're already damned. "Come with me, if you want to live.""
I don't want to come with him, frankly. And why are we damned? Because of Adam. Was man originally created to die? No. Death came through sin. Read Romans 5:12.
"My very own? You mean in the general sense that he was a protestant Christian?"
Yes. Martin Luther is your own in no other way for he was an intellectual and not a bottom feeding drone like yourself. You really should read some Luther, it'd do you good.
"The Bible doesn't say that Jacob saw God's face. It says that JACOB said that he saw God's face. He could have been mistaken."
Again, go back to my earlier point. Jacob can't be wrong if this is inspired by god.
"Well, that's funny. In my Bible, II Samuel 21:8 says, "...together with the five sons of Saul's daughter Merab..." You must try the NIV some time. KJV is so out of date."
I'm not using the KJV to back up this point. The name Merab does NOT appear in the Masoretic texts. Now, will you tell the Jews they are wrong about their own Bible? Samuel, afterall, was a Jew writing in Hebrew in the Jewish half of the Bible. I am far more inclined to trust a Rabbi on what Samuel said than I will trust a Christian.
As it is, I find the phrase that the KJV to be out of date quite arrogant. Are you telling me that the millions of Christians who based their lives around the Bible, as interpreted by James Stuart, were basing their lives on a book that was wrong? According to you, the KJV is not accurate, so thus, they were wrong. What if, hundreds of years from now, someone tells you that about the NIV?
"Again, you must try NIV. II Chronicles 22:2, "Ahaziah was 22 years old when he became king...""
You should try the American Standard Version. Or the King James Version. Or the Third Millenium Bible. Or the New Revised Standard. Or the Revised Standard. Or the Douay. Or the Latin Vulgate. All of these translations contradict the NIV. This brings up another problem. If the translations are themselves contradictory, how can we know which one is true? We don't have the originals, thus we are dealing with copies of copies many times removed, including translations. Errors clearly can, and do, crop up. Thus, if we cannot even trust the Bible to be what was originally written....
"Again, my Bible says in Chronicles that he was eighteen when he assumed the throne."
Again... you can give me one translation, I give you seven others. As it is, this errs twice because it also differs on how long he ruled.
re: fire of hell
"IN DANGER OF". Not "Guarenteed".
Nevertheless, my main point is not that Jesus went to hell but that he contradicted himself. Again, this is easily explained. One of the writers had more of a dramatic flare than the other and did not check what the other was writing.
Why does god reward those with riches if they must give it all away for the Christ?
The Joab Census
You make no sense here. In Chronicles it says that Benjamin and Levi did not register. Chronicles has the HIGHER number. Now, since this is the same story, one of two things happened. In one of the books, the author guessed how many those two tribes would have (not a very accurate way to write the inspired word of god). Or, of course, someone was estimating, which again, this is the inspired word of god, is it not? Your refutation of this contradiction is lacking, and as you have to refute every single contradiction otherwise the Bible is wrong, I demand you try to refute it again but more logically (at the same time, tackle the other two censuses I mentioned). How can the exact same census show two completely different numbers? There is a LARGE difference between 800,000 and 1 million. 20 percent, to be exact. If our government was off that much, you'd be trying to string up the stupid liberals who conducted the census. Moreover, you've read the scripture wrong. Chronicles specifically gives TWO numbers, one for Israel, one for Judah. Samuel does the same. Both time they give numbers, they are off. What gives? Don't tell me that in one book they say they're giving numbers for Israel, include Judah, and then give the numers for Judah while the other they just give numbers for Israel and then numbers for Judah. Because, frankly, they don't add up. If Samuel says Israel has 800,000 men that drew the sword, and Chronicles says Israel has 100,000 men that drew the sword, there must be 700,000 unaccounted for me. Judah? Well, Judah has 10,000 men that drew the sword. Still too low. Omega, you have some fuzzy math.
Let's stick with numbers to get into the census of Ezra and Nehemiah. Let's just hit one particular section:
"and there were among them two hundred singing men and singing women."
- Ezra 2:65
"and they had two hundred forty and five singing men and singing women. " - Nehemiah 7:67
Apparently, god forgot fortyfive singers!!!
On the issue of blasphemy I encourage you to read verse 38. "Let it therefore be known to YOU, brothers, that through this One a forgiveness of sins is being published to YOU." If blasphemy is unforgivable, what of those who then repent and find the Lord? Are they, like Paul, welcomed to the fold or are they refused admittance?
"Then there passed by Midianites merchantmen; and they drew and lifted up Joseph out of the pit, and sold Joseph to the Ishmeelites for twenty pieces of silver: and they brought Joseph into Egypt." - Genesis 37:28
"And the Midianites sold him into Egypt unto Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh's, and captain of the guard." - Genesis 37:36
These verses are so close, but why does one say he was sold from the Midianities to the Ishmeelites and then brought into Egypt and the other says he was just sold right into Egypt? Different authors. The first verse was written by a Yahwist source and the second by an Elohist source.
The last words of Jesus are reported different in three different gospels. Inspired word of god or a story? Of course, it is also interesting that in one of those versions he asks himself why he forsook himself and in another he commends his spirit to himself.
In Matthew, Judas gives the ransom price back to the chief priests and hangs himself.
In Acts, Judas buys a field with it and then "falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out."
Matthew 16 says that, after his saying that "there be some standing here which shall not taste death" it was six days until the transfiguration. Luke 9 takes the exact same saying and makes it eight days.
In Mark, Simon bears the cross for Jesus. In John, it clearly states Jesus bore the cross.
Luke includes a second Judas as an apostle, Matthew gives a Lebbaeus Thaddaeus.
In John, following his baptism, Jesus goes to Galilee with Philip and two days later is at the wedding feast in Cana. In Mark, following his baptism, Jesus is in the wilderness forty days and tempted by Satan (which is remarkably similiar to a story written about the Buddha a few centuries before Jesus was born).
"While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live."
- Matthew 9:18
"And besought him greatly, saying, My little daughter lieth at the point of death: I pray thee, come and lay thy hands on her, that she may be healed; and she shall live."
- Mark 5:23
"Jesus answered him, Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice."
- John 13:38
"And Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice."
- Mark 14:30
The inscription on the top of the cross is different in FOUR DIFFERENT GOSPELS. And don't blame that on translations, I have the original Greek on my lap right now and it's different. Only slightly, yes, but still different and it should not be if this is the inspired account of god.
Acts 9 says the men with Paul heard a voice but saw no man and Acts 22 says the men with Paul (in the same story) saw a light but heard no voice.
"He reigned three years in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Michaiah the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah. And there was war between Abijah and Jeroboam."
- II Chronicles 13:2
"And after her he took Maachah the daughter of Absalom; which bare him Abijah, and Attai, and Ziza, and Shelomith."
- II Chronicles 11:20
Matthew 1 attempts to give a geneology of of Jesus. In so doing, he lists 16 generations from the time they were brought into Babylon. Then, in verse 17 he says that from the carrying away into Babylon until Christ there were 14 generations. More fuzzy math.
Unfortunately, I must now go as some friends of mine and I shall be carousing and trying to break as much of god's law as possible. I will return tommorow with more.
------------------
"A mass of tears have been transformed to stones now, sharpened on suffering and woven into slings"
Zack de la Rocha
Rage Against the Machine
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic