Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Magus55 · 06-30-2004, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gullwind

Here is one of my favorites.

2 Kings 8:25-26 "25 In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign. 26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel."

2 Chronicles 22:1-2 ". . . So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned. 2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri."

2 Kings says he was 22, 2 Chronicles says 42. The kicker is that both accounts say Jehoram his father was 40 when he died. How exactly a 40 year old man can have a 42 year old son is beyond me.

To be fair, there is another Ahaziah, earlier in the line of kings, but the other one is mentioned in the same place in both accounts and is clearly not this particular king.

Copyist error - yes they do exist in Translations. Ahaziah was 22.

http://www.carm.org/diff/2Kings8_26.htm

judge · 06-30-2004, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ichabod crane

Let me tell you why this is extremely improbable, judge. The verb apagchomai occurs only once in the New Testament, Mt. 27:5, but it occurs twice in the Septuagint, and on both occasions it clearly means to hang oneself. .

This does not make it "extremely improbable" It is still possible it was used figuratively.

Quote:

The meaning of a word in the New Testament is likely to be much closer to the Septuagint meaning than to that found in classical literature; in fact the New Testament writers quoted from the Septuagint all the time. Here is the evidence from the Septuagint:

The NT authors did not quote from the septuagint, and you can't prove they did. Many many times they disagree with the septuagint.
They either paraphrased or quoted a version that no longer exists that was similar to the LXX at times.

(snip)
.

Quote:

In summary, the evidence is very strong for the meaning "to hang oneself"..

Problem all the other verses touching on this infer Judas was still alive after this event (and there are quite a few).
Far easier to accept that the word can be used figuratively as as well as literally. IMHumble O...

.

Quote:

Regarding the issue of the Bible teaching that Jesus would return within the lifetime of the apostles, which it clearly does in some passages, can I bring to your attention an important passage in which it does so, because we see how fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals try to evade the plain sense of the text in its historical context, and read it in a way that the author could not have intended. The verse in question is I Corinthians 15:51. It says "Behold, I tell you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed". Now the question is, when Paul says "we", to whom is he referring? The natural sense in historical context is that we means himself and the Corinthian Christians to whom he is writing and to whom the letter is addressed. But if that is true, then Paul clearly indicates his belief that not all of these people alive at that time would die before Jesus returns..

To sleep does not mean to die. "Sleeping" is what the dead did after their earthly lives whilst awaiting resurrection.
Those who died prior to the resurrection (prior to 70 ad) were to "sleep" until the resurrection. Those who lived through would be resurrected on death...they would not "sleep".

All the best.

Magus55 · 06-30-2004, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faith

It's no coincidence that most of those claims attributed to Jesus are found in John, which was the last of the Gospels to be written (around CE 95 or so). The concept of Jesus as God evolved over time and wasn't present in the earliest texts. The epistles of Paul and the Gospel of Thomas, for example, never show that Jesus claimed to be God. And the books of Matthew, Mark and Luke are full of Jesus' reference to Himself as the Son of God.

Jesus being God is pretty well supported in the Bible. Its a main doctrine of Christianity.

http://www.carm.org/doctrine/Jesusisgod.htm

http://www.carm.org/doctrine/Jesusquestions.htm

http://www.carm.org/doctrine/Jehovah_is_Jesus.htm

http://www.carm.org/doctrine/100truths.htm

judge · 06-30-2004, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Hold on, are any NT texts in aramaic - I thought they were all in Greek. Have I misunderstood something?

Yes there is and always has been an Aramaic NT. It is called the Peshitta

judge · 06-30-2004, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amlodhi

Hello judge,

Hi Amlodhi, hope you are well

Quote:

While an understanding of the original languages is useful for proper translation, a concentration on perceived subtle inferences at the expense of the plain sense of the text is seldom instructive.

As always, namaste'

Amlodhi

I aggree with you and Jbernier (I think?) that it is curious that both fields have the same name. This does seem to indicate that they were the same field.
Why would both fields be known by the same name? I don't know. We do know that this name was a local dialect or a "nickname". It was a way of referring to a filed that would only have been understood bya local.
We know this because even the peshitta clears up the meaning for "non o locals".
However for myself I still think the most parsimonious solution is that Judas was alive after this "hanging" and there is no compelling reason to read this possibly figurative phrase through 21st century western eyes.
But who knows...maybe Matti just got it wrong.

Faith · 06-30-2004, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magus55

Jesus being God is pretty well supported in the Bible. Its a main doctrine of Christianity.

Yes, Magus, I know that.

My point was that in the earliest Gospel, that of Mark, Jesus doesn't claim to be God. The text focuses on His humanity, to the point that it doesn't even mention an Immaculate Conception. And the earliest manuscripts end with Mark 16:8, without the disciples ever encountering the Risen Christ.

It is much later accounts which focus increasing attention on Jesus as God incarnate.

diana · 06-30-2004, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faith

My point was that in the earliest Gospel, that of Mark, Jesus doesn't claim to be God. The text focuses on His humanity, to the point that it doesn't even mention an Immaculate Conception. And the earliest manuscripts end with Mark 16:8, without the disciples ever encountering the Risen Christ.

It is much later accounts which focus increasing attention on Jesus as God incarnate.

Oddly enough, it doesn't matter what history reports to us in this instance. When it comes down to pointing out biblical contradictions, continuity errors, scientifically refuted goofs and impossibilities, all that matters in the argument is what Christians believe, because their assumptions that none of the flaws are there rest squarely on their belief in Jesus really being God and the bible can't be errant.

If you're going to dispute contradictions, this is always the wall you bang your head on.

d

judge · 06-30-2004, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magus55

Not according to the Greek. The Greek is apagchomai which means to hang one's self to death.

The word translated "hanged himself" in the KJV is apanchomai from
the Greek word apancho. It is used only once in the NT. However in
classical literature it means "to strangle" or "to choke" and is used
figuratively to mean to choke with anger or grief.
Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, rev. by
Henry S Johnes (1843; 9th ed., Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940), p.174.

Gullwind · 06-30-2004, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Copyist error - yes they do exist in Translations. Ahaziah was 22.

So it's only inerrant within limits.

Now if the originals don't exist, and all we have are copies, how can we be sure that there aren't more "copyist errors" that haven't been detected as such and that have greater effects? I am reminded of the joke about the head monk who checks the accuracy of the copying, and learns that the word was supposed to be celebrate!

Another question would be why didn't the poor fellow who made the error (or anyone else) realize that Ahaziah couldn't be 42 when his father died at 40? How could this error be perpetuated for so long?

Harry Bosch · 06-30-2004, 06:27 PM

My favorite contradiction is when Joshua asks God to continue the day so that he could continue slaughtering the pagan that he was battling. And then God simply stops the sun from revolving around the earth for a day. The story is great because it demonstrates God's mercy and the ancient Jewish knowledge of the solar system.

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

06-30-2004, 06:27 PM	#140
Harry Bosch Contributor Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Northwest America. Posts: 11,408	My favorite contradiction is when Joshua asks God to continue the day so that he could continue slaughtering the pagan that he was battling. And then God simply stops the sun from revolving around the earth for a day. The story is great because it demonstrates God's mercy and the ancient Jewish knowledge of the solar system.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.