Sauron

Still not an answer.

1. You said that Hitler deserved to go to hell for his crimes.
2. What crimes, specifically?
3. What about the Jews, then?

Sauron

But the laws and processes that govern the earth were not different. No traction for your argument here, Magus55.

Care to try again?

jbernier

Oh, so instead of a lot of eternal fire and torture one gets just a little eternal fire and torture? That's great.

Problem: This notion is not really consistent with the standard Protestant notion of salvation by grace through works as one is now saved from less torture through one's own efforts. In other words, one's moral behaviour determines the quality of the afterlife, an idea which stands in direct contradiction to Protestant sola gratia and sola fide.

ichabod crane

Sorry, myndreach, but while I'm loathe to agree with Magus55, you are wrong here. Proverbs, like most Hebrew poetic literature, makes extensive use of the technique of parallelism. This was a poetic technique found not just in Hebrew, but also in the language from which it derives (the Canaanite of the Ugaritic texts). Parallelism consists in making two statements which essentially say the same or similar things, with the second expanding on or relating to the first. Sometimes the second statement will be a contrasting statement to the first. Consider for example:

Prov 2:3 if you indeed cry out for insight (statement), and raise your voice for understanding (parallel);
Prov 2:4 if you seek it like silver (statement), and search for it as for hidden treasures (parallel)--
Prov 2:6 For the LORD gives wisdom (statement); from his mouth come knowledge and understanding (parallel);
Prov. 2:22 but the wicked will be cut off from the land (statement), and the treacherous will be rooted out of it (parallel).

An example of a contrasting parallel:

Ps. 1:6 for the LORD watches over the way of the righteous (statement), but the way of the wicked will perish (contrasting parallel).

Now let's return to your example whilst keeping this in mind:

I love those who love me (statement), and those who seek me diligently find me (parallel).

So the second statement is clearly related to the first and is an expansion or elaboration of it. It is only speaking of people who love the Lord and seek him. Therefore there is no contradiction with Prov. 1:28, since the context is clear that it is people who do not fear or love the Lord. Incidentally, neither verse says anything about "Jesus".

The second example you gave is also not convincing, because the word in Gen. 22:1 is the Hebrew verb nasah (not nacah as Magus55 stated), and the word in James 1:13 is the Greek verb peirazo, and each word has a range of meanings, as Magus55 pointed out, and don't necessarily mean tempt; like most words in different languages, their range of meaning is not exactly the same anyway.

There are plenty of contradictions in the Bible, but these are not good examples.

Jack the Bodiless

Magus:
Soap was invented by the Celts. Yes, it existed then.
How fast could grass run in those days, in order to outrun the dinosaurs and appear above them in the fossil record? Why do all the hollow-boned, flying pterosaurs appear below all the elephants?

If the world was so very different, then how can we make sense of the Bible? Maybe there was nothing miraculous about the parting of the Red Sea, because seas were as prone to scuttling about as grass was?

For that matter: maybe the original Biblical texts were just beetle droppings on scraps of parchment floor matting, and the laws of insect behavior have since changed so that bugs no longer crap in Hebrew?

Apologists only cite this "the world was different" stuff in order to explain the evidence that clearly contradicts Genesis: evidence that shouldn't exist if Genesis were true.

myndreach

well thank you, that is a much more convincing, instructive example of why those are not contradictions.

i appreciate it and stand corrected

funinspace

I would doubt it will happen in any serious way. Since there is no good literalist answer, it is much safer to stick to quick standard apologetic quips than actually address the detailed post here:
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=90188

Looks like the issue will be dodged again...

DK

Sauron

Oh, didn't you know? That's precisely Magus55's modus operandi.

1. Make a claim.
2. Get challenged on it.
3. Fail to provide any proof.
4. Duck out of sight for a few days while he licks his wounds.
5. Re-surface in another thread, and pretend the first claim never happened.
6. Make the same claim again, ignoring the fact that it has already been rebutted.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Magus55

And you know the Earth operated according to the same principles how?

Magus55

All humans deserve hell, because all have sinned. You should know this by now.