FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-16-2002, 05:51 PM   #21
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Alaska, USA
Posts: 1,535
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by FunkyRes:
<strong>Skipping generations was not an uncommon practice when giving a genealogy.</strong>
So maybe Heli wasn't Joseph's father at all, but his grandfather, or his great-grandfather. Or maybe Jacob was. Maybe Matthew lists every other name, so that you could interlace Luke & Matthew together to get the complete picture!

But whose list comes first?

The point is, why would God inspire the gospel writers to produce inaccurate genealogies, knowing full well that future skeptics would rip them to shreds?
Grumpy is offline  
Old 07-16-2002, 06:29 PM   #22
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Antioch, CA
Posts: 173
Post

Because God knew that future skeptics would rip at it regardless.

If they did complete genealogies then the skeptics would say they didn't fit the culture where it was common to skip genealogies, and therefore was written at a later date (Kind of like they do now with Daniel just cuz his writings have a few things in common with the 2nd century acopalyptic writers)

Besides- is the fact that the genealogies are OK proof that God had anything to do with them?

No.

So unless you believe in God, then using what God "could have done" is fruitless to what the authors actually wrote and why.
FunkyRes is offline  
Old 07-16-2002, 07:10 PM   #23
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,562
Post

Quote:
I have a friend who says the Bible does not contradict itself. I need some good examples of how it does. Thanks.

Marguerite
One of my favourites for fundies is the Sunday morning stories. Compare Matthew 28 and John 20.

I have challenged many people to attempt to combine the two stories into one.

These are the rules.
1. Must use all the material in both stories.
2. Can add anything he or she wants.
3. Story must be plausible and not contradict.

I have never seen it done.
Considering that these are inspired authors writing about such an important subject as the resurrection one has to wonder.

The conclusion is that one or the other or both of these two stories has been fabricated. It is a lie.
NOGO is offline  
Old 07-17-2002, 01:10 PM   #24
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Alaska, USA
Posts: 1,535
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by FunkyRes:
<strong>Besides- is the fact that the genealogies are OK proof that God had anything to do with them?

No.
</strong>
Without conceding that the genealogies are "OK," I'll admit you have a point. If the genealogy in Luke was unimpeachably accurate, it would not necessarily indicate divine inspiration, when scrupulous reportage is enough. Likewise, if Luke agreed with Matthew, skeptics would simply say one copied the other, with no divine intervention necessary.

But be careful not to fall into the converse trap: You're almost saying that, because the genealogies appear faulty (though you believe they are not faulty), it is a sign that God inspired them. Because any dumb bastard can write an accurate genealogy, but it takes a deity to write a screwed-up one.

[ July 17, 2002: Message edited by: Grumpy ]</p>
Grumpy is offline  
Old 07-17-2002, 02:35 PM   #25
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Orions Belt
Posts: 3,911
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by FunkyRes:
<strong>
In fact, I believe it can be demonstrated through other genealogies in the OT that one (or both) skipped some generations. I'm not positive (haven't looked myself) but I believe that has been demonstrated.</strong>
Sort of. This same sort of twisted reasoning is used by some fundies to get past the rather explicit dating of the earth, using the OT geneologies, which is coimpleted dessimated by modern science.

"The bible says the earth is ~6000 years old"

"Science has proven that wrong many times"

"Oh, well maybe they skipped generations in there, it must be older".

Kosh is offline  
Old 07-18-2002, 06:16 AM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,751
Post

Marguerite, there is a pretty compelling discussion of a contradiction in the first two verses of the OT, <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=51&t=000412" target="_blank">here</a>.

Basically, there are two creation stories. In one humans are created before animals, in the other animals before humans.
Clutch is offline  
Old 07-18-2002, 06:34 AM   #27
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,751
Post

Quote:
GRUMPY: The point is, why would God inspire the gospel writers to produce inaccurate genealogies, knowing full well that future skeptics would rip them to shreds?

FUNKY: Because God knew that future skeptics would rip at it regardless.
<a href="http://atheist.8k.com/theology.html" target="_blank">I thought that looked familiar...</a>

214. ARGUMENT FROM COUNTERFACTUAL EVIDENCE

1) You claim that there is no proof of God's existence.
2) But if there were tons of evidence, you still wouldn't be convinced.
3) Therefore, God exists.
Clutch is offline  
Old 07-19-2002, 11:43 AM   #28
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Burlington, Vermont, USA
Posts: 177
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by FunkyRes:
<strong>Because God knew that future skeptics would rip at it regardless.

If they did complete genealogies then the skeptics would say they didn't fit the culture where it was common to skip genealogies, and therefore was written at a later date (Kind of like they do now with Daniel just cuz his writings have a few things in common with the 2nd century acopalyptic writers)

Besides- is the fact that the genealogies are OK proof that God had anything to do with them?

No.

So unless you believe in God, then using what God "could have done" is fruitless to what the authors actually wrote and why.</strong>
This is a remarkable argument, if it comes from a person who believes in Biblical inerrancy. I know many liberal Christians accept that the Bible isn't perfect and has to be read in the context of the times in which it was written. But that surely will not do for people who claim that the ordinary word "kind" in Genesis was intended by God to have a precise biological meaning. If God was so precise about the esoteric subject of biology, why was he so careless about the genealogy of his own incarnation? It's nothing but a list of meaningless names anyway, so why bother putting it in at all?
RogerLeeCooke is offline  
Old 07-19-2002, 01:02 PM   #29
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Alaska, USA
Posts: 1,535
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by RogerLeeCooke:
<strong>It's nothing but a list of meaningless names anyway, so why bother putting it in at all?</strong>
It's almost as though the point of the genealogies is to show Jesus' right to royalty through association with the Davidic line. Which is completely irrelevant to modern-day Christians, who have zero interest in re-establishing a monarchy in Israel, and every interest in grovelling at the feet of a living-dead Superman. (In Dracula's name, we pray.)

But if genealogies matter, there's still the question of which one builds the stronger case for Jesus' claim to the throne. Or did one of them (Luke, I suppose) find it satisfying that Jesus could claim any Davidic descent at all?
Grumpy is offline  
Old 07-19-2002, 01:49 PM   #30
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Antioch, CA
Posts: 173
Post

I don't know why they need to include the genealogy but the prophecies did say that the Messiah would be of the house of David.

From a Legal point of view, that is covered through Joseph, since he was supposed to be Jesus Father (by Adoption) wether or not it was biological.

But through Mary, it also is a very literal fulfillment that goes through genetics opposed to just legal.
FunkyRes is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:43 PM.

Top

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