Baidarka

Magus55

Why do you refuse Rabbi Jesus bar Joseph?

SkyDancer_0202

the bible is as historical as the Iliad... maybe less

Ion

Simple:

the Bible defies understanding because it's made of inconsistencies.

Internal inconsistencies -like the one that Ipetrich brings up, and many others-.

External inconsistencies too, when tested by fields based on science, like archaeology and physics.

Queen of Swords

It refers to two separate creation stories. I know, that's not so much a clue as it is giving the entire game away, but hey, I try to make it easy.

How do you "understand" something which is both "yes" and "no" simultaneously? Some kind of Schroedinger's Cat principle?

lpetrich

Me: humanity created God-like?
G1: Yes
G2: No
How have I not understood those two stories? Please explain.

And since you are so interested in this subject, I have started a whole thread on G1 vs. G2. Magus55, you may enjoy reading that thread; given your great interest in the Bible, you may find it very enlightening. You may even want to print it out and take it to Bible class some time; I'm sure that they'll enjoy reading this discussion.

Magus55

Ipretrich didn't bring up an inconsistency because there is no contradiction between Gen 1 and Gen 2. They are just written in 2 different contexts and for a different purpose - its still the same story.

What does physics have to do with the Bible? And Archaeology actually supports the Bible. Just recently, in the past week or so, Archaeologists uncovered the Pool of Siloam that Jesus is said to have healed at. It has been buried for 2000 years, and now proven to have actually existed.

Queen of Swords

Of course there is. In the first creation story, the animals are created first. Then humans are created. In the second one, it's the other way around. In the first one, god gives humans all the fruits, herbs, etc. to eat; in the second one, there's a prohibition. In the first, people were made in god's image and likeness - in the second, they lack the knowledge of good and evil.

Actually, you're right about something, Magus. There is no one contradiction. There are many contradictions.

Mageth

In addition to the differences already noted, one was written with "El" or "Elohim" as the creator and the other with "YHWH" as the creator.

I find it less than incredible that the authors of the NT actually used real places in their stories. Mt. Olympus is a real place as well.

Magdlyn

Hey, Harry Potter's books have got London in them! I guess Harry Potter is real too! Yay!

Magus55

And this was explained in another thread by another theist. El/Elohim refers to the general category of God. Yahweh is the specific Hebrew name for the Jewish God. Since Gen 1 was written as a general overview of creation, the general word for God was used, where as when Gen 2, the more specific recap of Gen 1, the Hebrew Yahweh was used.



Yes, but we've known Mt. Olympus was real for a very long time. Up until last week, the Pool of Siloam was a myth. And of course I never presented this point to show that the Bible is obviously correct because we can prove real places mentioned in the Bible exist. I was just stating that Archaeology does not always disagree with the Bible.