FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-17-2001, 07:50 AM   #41
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I believe Paul contradicts himself in his testimony regarding his early career as a Christian. In Galations ch 1, Paul has a vision, goes to Arabia/Damascus for 3 years, goes to Jerusalem and sees only Peter and James the Lord's brother (NO other apostles) then heads off to Syria and Cicilia and is UNKNOWN to the Churches of Judea at that time. In Acts, chapter 9, there is his vision, 3 years in Damascus, then to Jerusalem (where ALL the apostles were afraid of him), stays with them, and preaches in and out of Jerusalem with them. So how come he is UNKNOWN? Then in Acts chapter 26, Paul says: "shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance." So he preached all over Jerusalem and Judea in Acts but Galations contradicts that.
 
Old 01-17-2001, 09:58 AM   #42
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by QuadWhore:
How did you manage to learn to write without learning how to read? We weren't debating the literal existance of adam and eve you flaming idiot. </font>
You know, for a whore you're awfully touchy.

You're right, I misread (or just missed) your first post. It looked as if you were debating Adam & Eve's literal existence and I have no tolerance for that. See if you can dig down into your filthy little touch-hole and forgive me.

 
Old 01-17-2001, 08:59 PM   #43
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You know, for a whore you're awfully touchy.

You're right, I misread (or just missed) your first post. It looked as if you were debating Adam & Eve's literal existence and I have no tolerance for that. See if you can dig down into your filthy little touch-hole and forgive me.</font>
Misreading a post is one thing, but if you intend to insult someone (which you so masterfully did..) you better get your facts strait first.
 
Old 01-17-2001, 10:53 PM   #44
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Smile

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dmvprof:
[B]Im looking for everyones top 5 biblical contradictions/impossibilities/bullshit, etc. to use as ammunition. Please avoid the obvious, and it would be useful to describe the typical response from xians.

My personal favorite has always been an offshoot of the concept (doctrine?) of "incarnation." In other words, Jesus was fully man AND fully God. How can that be explained in practical terms? Now THAT'S a contradiction!

If he was a man, he got nailed to the cross, suffered and died. If he was God, then no big deal. He was resurrected to God's glorious right hand. Christianity has always danced on the God/Man stage, not really facing up to its obvious difficulties.

An ancient heresy in this regard was "Docetism," the belief that Jesus was not truly human, but only seemed to be so (from dokeo--"seem"). In other words, he only "seemed" to suffer on the cross. He was really God and felt nothing but--what--joy?

In this regard, most fundamentalists I have talked with are true heretics. But to try to convince them of it... Hmmmm.

Perhaps they may answer that it's "all a mystery" and then you could accuse them of New Age mysticism. But to really ask them HOW someone could be BOTH God AND man at the same time is to watch someone dissemble before your very eyes. That can be amusing, but what isn't so amusing is to realize that they will rarely let themselves be aware of it!

Donald Morgan has some less philosophical contradictions on his site in the infidel's library files, too!

 
Old 01-18-2001, 01:10 AM   #45
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by SingleDad:
The verse says "for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." [emphasis added]

Adam did not die the day he ate it.

If a day means something other than a day, perhaps eat means something other than eat, or God means something other than God.
</font>
The word 'day' is English and doesn't exist in the Hebrew OT. Instead, we must translate it, and it clearly refers to a 'period of time' in other vereses. Remember, we are living in the "day" of free speech.

Another wiggle that I'm leaning towards, is that God CHANGED his mind, as He did in many other places in the Bible. Calvinists don't like it, but it IS Biblical! (See Moral Government Theology, a theological Christian system that boasts of its logic AND its faithfullness to the text.)
 
Old 01-18-2001, 06:22 AM   #46
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Gee, I didn't expect such a turnout. Thanks everyone. But I must say that lucifer wins the prize for the most entertaining. However, everyone has helped me in an exchange Im having with some xian now. I am kindof suprised that noone brought up anything about the Noah, I though that story was filled with problems. 7 animals or 2? which is it.
 
Old 01-18-2001, 10:08 AM   #47
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

opps

[This message has been edited by jess (edited January 18, 2001).]
 
Old 01-18-2001, 10:10 AM   #48
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I got my mom on the following---

ask how Judas died (any good bible movie watcher will tell you he hanged himself, dropping his illgotten gains at his feet) If they don't volunteer the bit about the money, ask them what happened to it.

Then tell them to read Acts 1 15-20.

Walk away with a knowing smile...

(Acts says that he bought a field with the cash and tripped and fell, bursting open and dying.)

Whore: I admire your balls. I would never have had the testosterone to be a visitor on the board and insult and ridicule a regular like that for something so minor.
Wow.
 
Old 01-18-2001, 10:18 AM   #49
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Fred:
The word 'day' is English and doesn't exist in the Hebrew OT. Instead, we must translate it, and it clearly refers to a 'period of time' in other vereses. Remember, we are living in the "day" of free speech.

Another wiggle that I'm leaning towards, is that God CHANGED his mind, as He did in many other places in the Bible. Calvinists don't like it, but it IS Biblical! (See Moral Government Theology, a theological Christian system that boasts of its logic AND its faithfullness to the text.)
</font>
"And the evening and the morning were the first day"

seems pretty clear there was a word for "day" in hebrew



[This message has been edited by karlydee (edited January 18, 2001).]
 
Old 01-18-2001, 10:51 AM   #50
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Fred,

The word 'day' is English and doesn't exist in the Hebrew OT. Instead, we must translate it, and it clearly refers to a 'period of time' in other vereses.

Naturally the English word “day” doesn’t appear in Hebrew. But the Hebrew word I got from Strong’s concordance list the Hebrew equivalent for the word “day” as “yowm”, and I think it is used in the older Hebrew texts. You are saying no? You say it really is referring to a “period of time" greater than a day, correct? I again looked at my concordance, and this is the same Hebrew word that is used during the creation when it states “...and the evening and the morning were the first day...and the evening and the morning were the second day...etc. The context and very precise wording doesn’t leave much room for any conjecture other than a 24 hour time period, I would think.

John
 
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:49 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.