Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ex-xian · 08-04-2003, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by winstonjen
[edited by mod to remove flame]

But seriously...how do you really feel?

winstonjen · 08-04-2003, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ex-xian

But seriously...how do you really feel?

I feel dirty after debating with someone like Magus. Time for my purification ritual.

Magus55 · 08-04-2003, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by winstonjen
I feel dirty after debating with someone like Magus. Time for my purification ritual.

Why are you so rude Winst? Do I make ridiculing, sarcastic remarks at you constantly? You add absolutely nothing to a discussion but insults and ridicule - so why don't you just be quiet.

Asha'man · 08-04-2003, 06:21 PM

As for contradictions, I've always felt the two genealogies of Joseph was the best possible example. You can't claim an out-of-context reading, you can't claim a metaphorical meaning. Your only possible excuse is that the text is simply wrong, and one of them is about Mary, not Joseph.

The genealogies provide an excellent arguing point, since one of them must be a fabrication. The motivation for fabrication is clear: fulfilling a prophecy. And if the authors are willing to lie for their theology, then nothing else can be trusted.

As for historical inaccuracies, I think all of Genesis and Exodus is about more than you can ask for.

Magus55 · 08-04-2003, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Asha'man
As for contradictions, I've always felt the two genealogies of Joseph was the best possible example. You can't claim an out-of-context reading, you can't claim a metaphorical meaning. Your only possible excuse is that the text is simply wrong, and one of them is about Mary, not Joseph.

The genealogies provide an excellent arguing point, since one of them must be a fabrication. The motivation for fabrication is clear: fulfilling a prophecy. And if the authors are willing to lie for their theology, then nothing else can be trusted.

As for historical inaccuracies, I think all of Genesis and Exodus is about more than you can ask for.

No contradiction in genealogies. They are split, one starting from Nathan ( david's) son, going through Mary's side, and one from Solomon to Joseph, through his side. There is no discrepency.

http://www.carm.org/diff/2geneologies.htm

Godless Wonder · 08-04-2003, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Magus55
Oops, sorry - misread the verse - was thinking of Mat 24, not Mark. Mark 9:1 though isn't a contradiction, but that is referring to those who stand there. Mark 9:1 was at Jesus' transfiguration. It wasn't referring to the end days and judgement.

As an aside note, since Matt 24 about "this generation shall not pass", was bound to come up since it does in every other contradiction post - I'm just one step ahead

There are a variety of other competing theories that attempt to avoid the paradox. Anyone may surf over to Google and type in

"Mark 9:1" "kingdom" "with power"

and view a whole pile of theories for just about every permutation of alternate definitions of words imaginable that will permit avoidance of the paradox.

I prefer Yosemite Sam's definition of "kingdom come"... it is, as every child knows, the place to which rabbits are blown by kegs of dynamite.

Secular Pinoy · 08-04-2003, 07:13 PM

Maggie,

Quote:

Matt 1:16 - and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called the Messiah.

Luke 3:23 - Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli

Both genealogies refer to Joseph's ancestors, and no apologetic acrobatics will change what the verse says. So stop perpetuating this lie.

Also, note that Joseph has two different fathers.

WinAce · 08-04-2003, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WinAce
Magus, let's imagine a hypothetical parallel universe where Jesus *did* say he'd come back within the Apostles' lifetimes. How would he go about saying so, and what are the differences between this hypothetical and his actual words?

In other words (pardon the pun), how could Jesus make it any clearer he would be coming back "while some STANDING HERE" and "THIS GENERATION" were still around?

My post must be invisible.

wordsmyth · 08-04-2003, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WinAce
My post must be invisible.

You should know by now that Magus55 sees only what he wants to see and responds only to arguments that he thinks won't show his ignorance.

Secular Pinoy · 08-04-2003, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wordsmyth
You should know by now that Magus55 [...] responds only to arguments that he thinks won't show his ignorance.

That doesn't seem true, cause if it is, he wouldn't have the number of posts as he does now. Almost every argument and debate he has engaged in pretty much demonstrates his ignorance.

08-04-2003, 06:21 PM	#24
Asha'man Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: southeast Posts: 2,526	Best Examples As for contradictions, I've always felt the two genealogies of Joseph was the best possible example. You can't claim an out-of-context reading, you can't claim a metaphorical meaning. Your only possible excuse is that the text is simply wrong, and one of them is about Mary, not Joseph. The genealogies provide an excellent arguing point, since one of them must be a fabrication. The motivation for fabrication is clear: fulfilling a prophecy. And if the authors are willing to lie for their theology, then nothing else can be trusted. As for historical inaccuracies, I think all of Genesis and Exodus is about more than you can ask for.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.