Fo2:Interestingly enough, those of us who believe it's all a load of horse manure haven't been proven wrong, either.
Ah, but I never said that that was my intention, did I? 
Tim:
A rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet. Insert corny "Rose of Sharon" reference here.
Eclipse:
Don't suppose you could post us the first few verses of Genesis in your version of the Bible, could you?
Which ones do you want?
DT:
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.
No, no, he was inspired while WRITING, not for every second of his life. If he was writing about his own actions in the past, he would HAVE to write down his mistake. Otherwise, it'd be a false writing.
if god can repent, then he is not perfect
Only by certain definitions of "repent".
"Who said the original judgement was wrong? God simply changed it. Probably, he wanted Moses to learn something."
Learn what?
That, "Hey! I really do care about these annoying people." Nothing like forcing someone to say something out loud to cement the idea in their mind.
Theoretically, god could've found someone to be king who he would not letter regret having made king.
But then the Israelites wouldn't have learned what they did about the folly of kings from Saul. David had to be king. It was part of the overall plan (Jesus, and such). The only way to get the people to accept David as a king might have been to give them a really crappy king in the interrim, so they'd appreciate him more. David also learned much about kingship from Saul, and from his son Jonathan. Effectively, David was to become king, and all other things worked toward that end.
The Bible was translated by Hebrew scholars, the English translation clearly must be good enough.
Yes, and it says "regret", which can have several different meanings in this context.
And why are we damned? Because of Adam. Was man originally created to die? No. Death came through sin.
As I said. We sinned, and were thus seperated from God. Thus we die.
Jacob can't be wrong if this is inspired by god.
But Jacob wrote no part of the Bible, to the best of my considerable knowledge, and it is therefore not required that he have been inspired.
The name Merab does NOT appear in the Masoretic texts.
But it DOES appear in some Hebrew manuscripts, Septuagint and Syriac. Some may say otherwise, but if you have two distinct sources for a piece of information, and one of those sources gives two possibilities, then you accept the one that doesn't lead to a contradiction. Unless, of course, you're TRYING to create contradictions where they aren't necessary, which wouldn't be very scientific of you. The same applies to Ahaziah.
re: "you're a fool"
my main point is not that Jesus went to hell but that he contradicted himself
No, he didn't. He said that someone who called his brother a fool was in danger of the fires of Hell. That passage was talking about how you treat your brother. First, that would hardly apply to Jesus relationship to the hypocrites to whom he was later speaking. Second, some manuscripts qualify the entire passage by saying "without cause". Jesus was well justified in being angry. Again, don't try to create contradictions where they aren't necessary.
Why does god reward those with riches if they must give it all away for the Christ?
A) Heavenly riches don't have to be given away.
B) Even the earthly ones, when given away, can do good. You're the communist. Would you rather see $1,000,000,000 in the hands of a Christian philanthropist, or in the hands of an athiest who doesn't give a darn?
re: census
Let me quote the appropriate scriptures, so those not following along will know what I'm talking about.
II Samuel 24:9
"Joab reported the number of the fighting men to the king. In Israel there were eight hundred thousand able-bodied men who could handle a sword, and in Judah five hundred thousand."
I Chronicles 21:5-6
"Joab reported the number of the fighting men to David: in all Israel there were one million one hundred thousand men who could handle a sword, including four hundred and seventy thousand in Judah. But Joab did not include Levi and Benjamin in the numbering, because the king's command was repulsive to him."
Now Samuel says that Joab reported that there were 1.3 million fighting people in Israel. Chronicles says that Joab reported that there were 1.1 million. However, Joab didn't include Levi and Benjamin in that 1.1 million. Is it not possible that a slightly later census obtained numbers for those two tribes, and those were the numbers used by Samuel, because they were complete? It would also explain the difference in Judah's numbers. Alternatively, perhaps Chronicles lists a sort of preliminary report, or even an attempt by Joab to come quit before his job was finished. If the attempt was disallowed, Joab would have finished the census by going to Levi and Benjamin, and later reported the greater number including Benjamin and Levi, which were then used in Samuel.
There are possibilities. Thus, there is no explicit contradiction.
re: Ezra and Nehemiah singers
Ezra was a list of all the people that came the first trip back to Israel from captivity. Nehemiah said that he was reading from the geneological records that he'd found quite some time later. It's possible that the geneological records were wrong without leading to a contradiction, because an inspired writer didn't write them, to the best of our knowledge. All Nehemiah said was that that was what was written, not that it was what was true.
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?
Blasphemy and the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit are apparently two seperate things. The only explaination I've found is that once you've commited the unforgivable sin, you won't ASK for forgiveness, and thus of course won't receive it.
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?
Thing is, verse 28 doesn't make all that much sense, even on its own, at first glance.
"So when the Midianite convoy came by, his brothers pulled Joseph up out of the cistern and sold him for twenty shekels of silver to the Ishmaelites, who took him to Egypt."
Now if it was a Midianite convoy that came by, then why did Joseph's brothers sell him to the ISHMAELITES? One possibility: A number of manuscripts say "Medanites". Are these an identified group? If not, it's quite possible that the Medanites are simply a sub-group of the Ishmaelites, and thus we have consistancy, both within verse 28, and between it and v.36. Another possibility is that the [Midianite/Medanite] convoy for some reason included Ishmaelites, and they, after originally buying Joseph, sold him to the [Midianites/Medanites] of the convoy, who then sold him in Egypt.
The last words of Jesus are reported different in three different gospels. Inspired word of god or a story?
Matthew 27:46-50
"About the ninth hour, Jesus cried out in a loud voice, 'Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani'-- which means, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' When some of those standing there heard this, they said, 'He's calling Elijah.' Immediately, one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink. The rest said, 'Now leave him alone. Let's see if Elijah comes to save him.' And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit."
Mark 15:34-37
"And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, 'Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani'-- which means, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' When some of those standing near heard this, they said, 'Listen, he's calling Elijah.' One man ran, filled a sponge with wine vinegar, and offered it to Jesus to drink. 'Now leave him alone. Let's see if Elijah comes to take him down,' they said. With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last."
Luke 23:46
"Jesus called out with a loud voice, 'Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.' When he had said this, he breathed his last."
John 19:28
"Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, "I am thirsty." A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, but the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips. When He had received the dring, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit."
Don't feel bad that you're going to get beaten on this one, Dan. I've argued this here before, during your self-imposed and all to brief sabbatical.
I fail to see the contradiction. Jesus cries out in a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit," then very quietly, where none but those standing nearby (like John) can hear him, says "It is finished." It's actually a nice little bit of continuity, that John would be the only one to hear it. He was the only writer near by. Unless, of course, you count the Gospel of Mary as "canon".
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 27:3
"When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse, and returned the thirty silver coins to the shief priests and the elders. "I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood." "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility." So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It's against the law to put this into the treasury, since it's blood money." So they decided to use it to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners."
Acts 1:18
"With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out."
Well, two apparent contradictions. First is, who bought the field with the money? Second is, how did Judas die?
The death can be reconciled. I'd guess (as only one possibility) that after he hanged himself, they started to bury him in the field. It was intended as a burial ground for foreigners. Perhaps Judas would qualify. We don't know that much about him. It's also possible that, since it was his money that bought it, they decided to bury him there. Not knowing Jewish funeral traditions of the day I can't give details, but either way, it's possible that when the body was being transported or buried, it was dropped, and THEN his intestines spilled out. Notice that Acts doesn't say that he died when his body burst open. He could easily have already been dead.
As for who bought the field, I know something about Greek, and "With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field;" smacks of being an ambiguous sentence. I'll have to look it up at that site Tim refered me to later.
Darn, this is taking a long time...
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.
Ah, Luke says "ABOUT eight days after Jesus had said this..." Not exactly eight days. Six is close enough for me.
In Mark, Simon bears the cross for Jesus. In John, it clearly states Jesus bore the cross.
Matthew 27:32
"As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross."
Mark 15:21
"A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his was in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross."
Luke 23:36
"As they led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus."
John 19:17
"Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha)."
Crosses came in two parts, you know. Then there's the whole Catholic myth about Jesus falling beneath the load, and THEN Simon carrying the cross. It's not supported by scripture, and was probably created to cover just this problem, but it's at least feasable. Then there's the possibility that they were BOTH carrying the cross. It was a rather long device, after all.
Luke includes a second Judas as an apostle, Matthew gives a Lebbaeus Thaddaeus.
Matthew 10:2-4
"These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Him."
Luke 6:14-16
"Simon (whom He named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thoman, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a trator."
I won't quote the rest of the scriptures that give the entire list. Mark 3:16-19 lists Thaddeus, whereas Acts 1:13 lists Judas son of James. You know as well as I do that people could have multiple names back then. Simon/Peter, for an example. This is reaching, even for you.
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
No, no, NO! Would you actually READ the scripure before you start talking about it? It'd sure save me the time wasted responding to useless things like this.
The story of Christ's baptism in John is only told because John tells about John the Baptist telling others about it LONG AFTER IT HAS HAPPENED. It was two days after JohnB TOLD about His baptism that Jesus left for Galilee, not two days after the baptism itself.
re: the ruler's daughter
Don't forget Luke 8:41-56. I'll have to look up the Greek on this one, too. It's quite possible that the present and past tenses of "dying" could be confused, or even are the same.
I'll get to the last in a bit. I need a break.
------------------
"How do you define fool?"
"I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination."
- CJ Cherryh, Invader
[This message has been edited by Omega (edited May 01, 2001).]
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic