diana

But...you have read it.

Yes? Or no?

d

mdd344

Diana,
I have not read all of the Quran, or the Book of Mormon, or the Apocrypha. I have read and studied them all however to a lesser degree.

Might I ask if you have read the Bible from cover to cover? Now consider the question, was that true 'study' or was that surface reading? There is a big difference. You don't have to answer that, btw. One can have reasons gleaned through proper study without having read every word.

Kosh

Even if Moses only saw his "back side", that still contradicts "No man hath seen God at any time."

You seem to be conflating "seeing God" with "seeing God's face".

And now I'm going to get in the hot tub, because following these mental gymnastics of yours has made my back hurt.

mdd344

Kosh,
Studying the Bible is hard work. There is a lot of information there.

It was God who said no man could see His face and live. It was God who said Moses could see whatever 'back' is on a Spirit being. It didn't have to be literally God. It could have easily been one of the many forms God used to appear to individuals, records of which are found in the OT.

It could also be the case that 'seeing God' has reference to His face. But, it may not. Consider that Moses saw God's glory, but did he really see, actually see, God Himself?

Those things are parts of the evidence that must be considered before one determines anything. And those are some of the more hard elements to study btw. The Godhead is amazing, and for the most part beyond our comprehension.

Kosh

Only the Godhead?

diana

From cover to cover...I don't think so. The vast majority of it, yes. I've read a great deal of it in true study. Surface reading is pretty good to get a feel for what's going on the first time through. I tend to read passages several times, look them up in other versions, research my questions, etc.

Since you brought it up, I trust you've done this with the Quran...? (If you mean "true study" by "assume it is inspired first," you're in trouble here...aren't you?)

d

diana

Considering the fact that I know you to be a preacher in a belief system which constantly claims you can understand what the Bible says because it is says what it means and means what it says, and that anyone can understand it and it is very clear, I find your "well, it doesn't have to literally mean X" sidestepping somewhat amusing.

OK. Highly amusing. The bible is literal except when it is not. Right? How...convenient. With the "poetic language" thrown in, I could probably find a verse to support or condemn anything you pulled from your nether regions.

Before we continue, would you mind defining "evidence" as you understand it?

d

Smullyan-esque

Let me get this straight. You are saying that things in the Bible can be wrong? That they may just be quotes from people who were mistaken?

What happened to your earlier contention that the whole of the Bible was inspired by Jesus, and therefore could be considered the inerrant word of God?

Maybe you are used to talking to people who don't notice inconsistencies like this. Be well advised that, here at IIDB, we will make sure you get your story straight! Either that, or you will slink away to a more gullible audience, like many other apologists before you.

RexT

Yes, and with good reason. But you have here faced several whose acumen and bible knowledge matches your own, and yet, you always seem to find a way to suggest that they lack some element of understanding that you claim to possess.

Surely you are not suggesting that you have confronted only such uninformed individuals here.

Well, no one can know everything or be an expert in every field.If the uneducated are not led, what possible chance have they at understanding the word of god as you do. How can they be saved? Surely you, a minister, being such a one whose vocation is exactly to lead his flock, to instruct others in the correct way to salvation, must have meant something other than you said. For you said, "I do not believe one has to be 'led' as it were".

If one does not have to be led, then what is the point of your vocation. Is it just a hobbie? Are you really sugessting that everyone is able to acquire the same level of knowledge as you? Surely not, for if that were possible, again, who would need ministers. I think you believe exactly the opposite of what you said, I think you believe that the weak minded and lost do indeed need to be led. I hope you can clear this up.

And really, what does it matter if millions or even billions of people come to the wrong conclusion about god and religion. As far as I can tell, that would already describe every religion that has ever reached a conclusion on such matters. You speak as if there is actually some absolute truth out there. As if that truth is hidden from all but yourself, of course and perhaps others who agree with you. Here is the truth about god, NO ONE KNOWS. But that has not prevented billions of people throughout history from believing that they know. So what is the problem.

Apparently, the human specie survives just fine with all manner of misconceptions and wrong conclusions about god and every other subject. This has nothing to do with contradictions in the bible. Either show me how you are more able to mend the contradictions than others have been at pointing them out, or have the decency to admit that logic and reason is not what your religion is about. It is about faith, about believing something that is completely irrational. But of course, if you admit the truth about your religion, you will leave this place having presented no sound arguments.

Rex

Sven

Please read your bible:

Acts 1:18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

Please explain how someone who hanged himself can fell headlong.

Thanks for admitting that the bible may contain errors, because people only thought something, which in reality was wrong.
In case you did not notice: You dismantled the claim of inerrancy perfectly yourself. Congrats.