Mageth

Once again, I must point out that the legends of the Apostles' martyrdom are largely unsubstantiated Church tradition. Most of the accounts are considered apocryphal.

aikido7

You misunderstand first-century religious writing. Don't look at it from a secular, 21st century point of view. The gospel writers were not lying--they were writing gospels.

A gospel is a "faith document." It is not biography. It is not history. It is not literal. It may contain elements of what we would call biography or history but it is framed by what I would term a "holy, inspirational intent."

aikido7

You misunderstand first-century religious writing. Don't look at it from a secular, 21st century point of view. The gospel writers were not lying--they were writing gospels.

A gospel is a "faith document." It is not biography. It is not history. It is not literal. It may contain elements of what we would call biography or history but it is framed by what I would term a "holy, inspirational intent."

Tod

[QUOTE]Originally posted by hope's daughter
David takes the census out of pride and engrossment in his own achievements. David was depending on the strenth in numbers rather than depedance on GOD. GOD's involvement was to allow David to take the census. Satan tempted David.

You're not reading carefully then, because II Sam 24 clearly states that YHWH "moved" David to take the census. It doesn't say YHWH "allowed Satan to move David to take a census." It doesn't even remotely imply it. It explicitely states that YHWH himself did it. This is special pleading and nothing more.
I personally see no contradiction in the I kings 15:5 with regard to the census.

Then you haven't read it carefully.

I Kings 15:5 says that David did "all that was right in the eyes of the LORD...save only the matter of uriah the Hittite," While II Sam. 24 clearly has YHWH punishing David for taking the census, and thus "the matter of uriah the Hittite" isn't the only thing David did that wasn't "right in the eyes of the LORD." It's pretty clear stuff.

David commited murder and is not even comporable to to the passage on the census. It stresses the serious nature of what he did and the primary focus of how his life was altered by this one sin.

And this addresses the problem, how? What you just wrote doesn't make the contradiction go away. One verse says sending Uriah to the front lines to get his wife was the only thing David did that was wrong, but II Sam 24 tells us otherwise.

p.s. and just incase you wish to mention the injustice of God taking human life...I suggest you take it up with Him personally.

I'm taking it up with you, as you are the one that stands behind the text. So you think it is just to kill 70,000 people to punish one man, and do nothing to the man?

A related question: Had you been alive during the time of the Amalekite slaughter spoken of in I Sam 15 for the sins of their ancestors, would you have obeyed God's command and slaughtered the Amalekite infants?

DrJim

Just what exactly are the generic characteristics of 'faith documents' so we can recognize 'em when we see 'em? Can anyone write them?

winstonjen

Well, faith documents need to be taken on faith, naturally. They are also impossible to verify.

Sci_Fidelity

Magus, are you going to address jer. 19:9 and Duet. 28:53?

Doctor X

Engage Kyle Voice:

Woa, Dude!

Disengage Kyle Voice:

Anyways, I will add the passages requiring then explaining child sacrifice which I have mentioned a few times before.

--J.D.

Weltall

Been playing too much Final Fantasy? The Hindu Shiva they based the summon off of was male. If there's more to the story than that however, please correct me. Hindu mythology isn't exactly my area of expertise.

On the off chance that hd reads this: If God exists and I do wind up having a chat with him you can bet I'd have a long discussion about justice and morality and how he doesn't deserve praise, much less worship.

Javaman

Yeah! Now I feel stupid... although, there are quite a few paintings where 'he' looks kinda girly.