Koyaanisqatsi

You might want to just ask your parents to write down a complete, comprehensive account of every detail of the passion narrative, leaving nothing out from any of the accounts.

Peter Kirby

If you are going to criticize the Bible, you might as well do so on a doctrinally significant point. In "Humani Generis, Encyclical of Pop Pius XII concerning some false opinions threatening to undermine the foundations of Catholic doctrine," the one-time pope declared the polygenesis theorized by scientists to be contrary to the faith, favoring instead the idea of the descendance of all human beings from two and only two people, Adam and Eve who fell with Original Sin. Reasonably, without Original Sin, there is no need for redemption.

However, genetics makes it practically impossible for all of today's variegated DNA in the human gene pool to have come from the inbreeding of a couple individuals a few thousand years ago. Everyone knows what happens when you inbreed; there are medical problems because there isn't enough genetic diversity. A locus is the genetic place that codes for a specific trait, such as eye color. Alleles are the specific genetic code that says, for example, whether one's eyes are brown, blue, green, or whatever. There are two alleles for every locus (one on each of a pair of chromosomes), so two people can carry four alleles (at most) between them for any given locus. But there are some loci, such as HLA-DRB1, that have at least fifty nine alleles known to be in the human population today ("MHC Polymorphism and Human Origins," by Jay Klein, Naoyuki Takahata and Francisco J. Ayala, in the December 1993 issue of Scientific American, pp. 78-83). Not only that, but the alleles are different from each other by over one hundred substitutions. Thus, the gene pool of the human population today is far too diverse to be the result of the inbreeding of a single pair of people a few thousand years ago. Ironically, the creationist believes in blindingly fast evolution that would put any 'evolutionist' to shame!

This is a simple scientific disproof of the Bible and Christian faith. Use it with my permission.

best,
Peter Kirby

Secular Pinoy

The problem with that approach is that it is an argument from science, which most fundamentalists are wary of. Which is why showing biblical errancy can lead to demonstrating the falsity of Christianity, especially those of the fundamentalist bent. I agree, though, that concentrating on doctrinally important points is a good idea. That is why I prefer to show contradictions in the passion narrative, especially on Easter sunday.

Peter Kirby

The approach that should be taken would depend on the background of the listener. I know that, as a young Catholic, a list of contradictions in the Bible would mean little to me, but showing the falsity of monogenism was part of what ultimately persuaded me to abandon Christianity. (To Secular Pinoy.)

In any case, if you want to show that there are sections in the Bible that have contradictions, the only way to go about it is to explain in detail what the contradictions are. Nobody is going to do the work of finding the contradictions for themselves in the process of producing a harmony. (This was in response to Koyaanisqatsi.)

best,
Peter Kirby

CX

Hmmm...in general any discussion on the discrepancies in the Xian bible with an inerrantist which is predicated on logic and reason is doomed to fail. Any and I mean any conflict you can find has an apologetic response as people have been raising such questions for millenia. Secondly since it's your parents you're talking about it probably serves no purpose to engage in such a debate, doubly so if you still live at home. My father is an Episcopal Deacon and both my parents are devout evangelical Xians. As such and in the interests of our relationship we just don't discuss such matters.

Wayne Delia

Speculation on the possible reactions to your explanation is no excuse for failing to provide your explanation.

WMD

abospaum

Have any of you ever visited faithforum. It is a challege forum where they seek tough and challenging questions about Christianity. They even seek questions from atheists.

This link has good contradictions listed:
http://www.faithforum.org/challenge/...?TOPIC_ID=2644

This next one is focused on how the prophecies concerning Jesus were not fulfilled:
http://www.faithforum.org/challenge/...?TOPIC_ID=2964

A recent hot topic for me is whether or not Paul was a Pharisee and if so how could he have written the book of Hebrews. Read the book of Leviticus and compare it to the book of Hebrews. It is clear that the author of Hebrews was ignorant not only of what the OT says but what the Jews of his time commonly believed.

I challenge anyone to find where the OT has requirements for perfection. Only the NT requires believers to be perfect (through Christ). It also nowhere is required to perform sacrifices for the forgiveness of intentional sins. Read the numerous examples of God's forgiveness simply because of repentance and prayer. Only when someone sinned in ignorance to the law or unconsciously was a sin sacrifice required and only after knowledge of the sin was learned. There are no sacrifices for intentional sins. Once a year, one the day of Atonement, the sins of the Israelites were put onto the scapegoat who was released in the desert. The scapegoat was not sacrificed. Hebrews 10:3 says that not only coud the goats not take sin (a contradiction) but it also speaks of daily sacrifices. This ignores that this atonment was once a year. A Pharisee could not have misunderstood this.

Wayne Delia

Riiiiiight. Really good contradictions. The first post on the referenced site consisted of the following:

I'm sure that's really, really good, but we were looking for something just a little bit better.

WMD

Doctor X

SecularPinoy:

Now THAT is funny . . . the first fallacious fallacy!

abospaum:

Welcome to the forums.

I am not certain anyone has made that claim.

Depends on which text. In Jn you have no choice--your are either "born from above" or you are not. In Mk you do, but, you may be prevented from learning the truth.

Such as his command to slaughter every woman, child, baby in a city?

Regarding Paul and Hebrews, I will have to check, but I believe it is not considered a Pauline document--"psuedopauline."

Regarding contradictions, many of the ones on this thread should suffice.

--J.D.

abospaum

Wayne- I didn't say that everyone had something insiteful to say. Most of the contradictions are posted by Will or Holy Brother with decent responses by Old Student, Evangelian, Th1bill. Most of the other stuff is garbage. This is typical of any bulletin board. Just like you wasted yours and other peoples time with your comment, the same happens on the other site. Sometimes you have to read more than the first few posts. Most of the meat on this particular topic is towards the end.