|
Post by davidvalley on Oct 17, 2008 12:51:48 GMT -5
Here is just a little food for thought. Lets see if any street preacher on here can explain these without some cop-out excuse such as God works in mysterious ways or some other common excuse.
Now before I go on I would like to say again that I am not an atheist. The only reason I challenge Christianity is because there are just too many problems with it to take it seriously. Do I believe in God? Yes. But I don't think we know as much about God as we like to falsely believe. I think our first mistake was looking at God as if he were a man like us. The very idea of God is so complicated that it is impossible for anyone to have that high of spirituality. Why are we here? Where do we come from? I don't know and no one else can honestly say they know either.
I believe Christianity has become so huge because people are afraid to die. They are afraid because they don't know what happens after death. Lets face it. As a society we have become zombies completely ignoring our own thoughts and just decide to follow others. Doing that makes us repeat world wide mistakes over and over such as war and other forms of greed and violence.
I seek nothing but better understanding about who I am and a good life. Anyone condemning others because they don't believe in the same thing is ridiculous and irresponsible. No one knows what the meaning of life is. I think the most important thing is that you believe that there is a meaning of life. I believe there is and that is what keeps me going every day to be the best person I possibly can be. I refuse to let false teachers blind me from my inner soul and growth in spirituality.
Is Jesus equal to or lesser than?
JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.
JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
Which first--beasts or man?
GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
Is it folly to be wise or not?
PRO 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.
ECC 1:18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.
1CO 1:19: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."
Righteous live?
PSA 92:12: "The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree."
ISA 57:1: "The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart."
Moved David to anger?
II SAMUEL 24: And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.
I CHRONICLES 21: And SATAN stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
Tempts?
"And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." (GEN 22:1)
"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." (JAS 1:13)
Judging
1 Cor 2:15 "The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:" (NIV)
1 Cor 4:5 "Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God."
Just a little last note here. I don't want you to think that I think Christianity is bad. I think it is a very positive idea that teaches very good things. I think anyone who has turned to Christianity has a very good soul because at least they are seeking for a better way to be a good and pure person.
Also I don't hold anything against atheist either. I understand why they don't believe in anything. Pretty much all of science(even though stubborn christians will fight you over this all day even if they know they are wrong) points to their being no higher power.
Higher power. What a pitiful idea. In my opinion we should stop seeking higher power and start seeking within ourselves.
|
|
|
Post by davidvalley on Oct 17, 2008 16:50:20 GMT -5
awwww come on. Aren't any of you even going to try?
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 17, 2008 17:09:13 GMT -5
I don’t have much time right now, but here what can already be said about these some of your “contradictions”. Is Jesus equal to or lesser than? JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.
JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. [/quote][/i] This is no contradiction. It is written in the gospels. Jesus is the Son of God and also the Son of Man. This is one of the basic beliefs of the Christians that Jesus is God (thus equal to the Father) , yet born from a woman and grown like a man. If you had studied a bit deeper the Scriptures, you will come to passages that speak the of the 2 and explain why the Son of God had to became a man In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. (John 1:1-3) In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. (Heb 1) … Christ Jesus, Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2) Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. (Heb 2:14-17) The One who has said in the Old testament ‘humility precedes glory’ humiliates himself to become a servant, when in fact He was the master , and not only the master but the creator of all. Isn’t He great ? Is it folly to be wise or not?PRO 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.
ECC 1:18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.
1CO 1:19: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."Firstly there are many Scriptures that speak of 2 kinds of wisdom. For example you may want to compare Proverbs 9:1-6 with Proverbs 9:13-18 or James 3:13-18 As for the particular text of 1 Co 1:19, it says that those who thought to be wise had completely missed the mark. Is it so hard to understand that God resist to the proud ? Many, including religious people, were waiting for a Messiah who perform miracles , others were waiting for a Messiah who speak words of Wisdom. Jesus did all that ! However they did not believed that He was the One of whom it was spoken in the prophesies of the Old testament, and the fact that He had to be crucified for the sins of the multitude was a stumbling block for many , especially for those who thought to be wise enough and holy enough. In fact people who think they are intelligent and don’t need to be saved from sin have a hard time to believe that the Messiah had to be overcome by the hand of the sinners , for He came to pay the price for their sins. And so it is today , many people speak of wisdom, but they don’t want to hear about God’s wisdom manifested by Jesus at the Cross. Those who were seeking wisdom killed the prince of Glory who could have made of them real wise men ! How foolish is the wisdom of man, without Jesus, without the fear of God. Take the greatest wiseman of the earth , if he has no fear of God, he knows nothing. Righteous live? PSA 92:12: "The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree."
ISA 57:1: "The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart."There is nothing complicated here. There are scriptures that speak of the righteous who by faith bears fruit (virtues), and yet they are not exempt of suffering or persecution. Even if no man layeth it at heart , they are not forgotten of God. Moved David to anger? II SAMUEL 24: And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.
I CHRONICLES 21: And SATAN stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.These two scriptures are two aspects of the same event. Ain’t that a good thing to have insights like this one ? Yeah, when God wants to deal with sin (God is angry with sin) , He can uses Satan for that purpose. When Jesus went to the Cross to deal with the sins of His creatures, He said that the Prince of this world [Satan] comes … Satan is a vile instrument , not knowing that his free-will is used against what he is fighting for or Who he is fighting against. Tempts? "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." (GEN 22:1)
"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." (JAS 1:13)The word Tempting has two meanings, depending on the context. (If you study the context and know God, it is easy). 1/ Tempting [to sin]. 2/ Testing [to see if there is real faith love and obedience]. The strength or weakness of the heart must be tested. So yes in the text of Genesis 22:1 , Abraham was tempted (understand tested) by God to see if what Abraham had received from God so far was solid. Judging 1 Cor 2:15 "The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:" (NIV)
1 Cor 4:5 "Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God."Even more simple. Same thing here. The word Judgement has two meanings dependaing of the kind of judge you are. 1/ To literally judge (unrighteously) 2/ To discern , (rightly) After healing a blind man who was mocked by the Pharisees, Jesus said : “For judgment I have come into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may be made blind.” [John 9:39]
|
|
|
Post by davidvalley on Oct 17, 2008 17:29:57 GMT -5
Those my friend are advanced cop-outs. Saying that a word has two meanings? That is ridiculous. Using that logic I could say that when God loved the people it could also mean that love has two meanings and is another meaning for hate meaning God doesn't love people. Yes some words do have two meanings but like in the one where you said tempt can also mean to test why wouldn't it just say test? If you have to think that hard to come up with a small excuse like a word has two meanings you probably shouldn't have even tried here. I have actually heard your "words meaning two different things" before on both the atheist and the Christian sides alike.
I know i'm not going to change anyone's mind here. I just thought I would offer some things that I have yet to see anyone who defends Christianity explain without overdone comebacks such as the one here.
I love that you have a lot of faith Debonaire but please I beg you do not let it take over your mind and make you ignorant(because I can tell you are smart and aren't ignorant just from your posts). Seeing how you explained some of the stuff here I do agree with a few but for most you pretty much just used the same cop-out things I've heard before.
|
|
|
Post by kureji on Oct 17, 2008 19:22:39 GMT -5
Christians don't want to admit their bible has contradictions in it because then there is a possibility that other things might be wrong and all of a sudden their bible is no longer the infallible word of God.
How many stalls and horsemen?
1KI 4:26 And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.
2CH 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; whom he bestowed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.
Here's one of my favorites, is that a typo or is God not so good with numbers? You'd think that God being infallible could at least stay consistent. My other favorite is the beast or men first that you already listed.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 18, 2008 4:05:30 GMT -5
Those my friend are advanced cop-outs. Saying that a word has two meanings? That is ridiculous. Using that logic I could say that when God loved the people it could also mean that love has two meanings and is another meaning for hate meaning God doesn't love people. Yes some words do have two meanings but like in the one where you said tempt can also mean to test why wouldn't it just say test? If you have to think that hard to come up with a small excuse like a word has two meanings you probably shouldn't have even tried here. I have actually heard your "words meaning two different things" before on both the atheist and the Christian sides alike. . Coming back to you, David. I did not try hard to find an explanarion to your "contradictions" , and do not try to find excuses. Excuses for what ? People who stumble upon a mere written word that seems unclear (only for them), just prove they know not about the matters of faith and the ways of God. You could have chosen a better example than the word “Love” Love of course can only have one meaning. At the difference of the word “Tempt’ I guess that when the KJV has been written , the translator chose the English word "Tempt" , which is not false, but it would may have been better to chose the word "Test", to not be a "stumbling block" for people, several centuries afterTest is a better word than the word tempt in contemporary English i reckon, but we can't blame it on the KJV version which is not contemporary English but an old one. At that time, the word Tempt could stand for Test, and perfectly understood without confusion. Gen 22:1 Some time later God tested Abraham. (NIV) My versions in French also say Gen:22:1 After these events , God put Abraham to the testOr Gen 22:1 After this, God tested Abraham The meaning of this passage is clear. God put His faithful to the test and bring trials upon them, to prove that what they have received from Him is sufficient to make them over comers. It is after this great test of Genesis 22 that God confirms His promise to Abraham. The outcome of these trials is to bear more fruit. James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations; Knowing this, that the trying of your faith works patience. But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing. [James 1:1-4] When trial , test , tribulations comes in the way of the Christian , there is always the possibility of being "tempted" to give up The Putting to the test is from God, the lust to fall away is from the Devil. That is what James was saying when he said "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God" for God cannot be tempted with evil". Whatever it is tempted to fall in particular sins by literal lusts, or tempted to fall away from faith when confronted to a situation coming from God(or allowed by God), this is not the will of God that christians fall or turn back. In the hope it is a bit clearer now.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 18, 2008 4:18:52 GMT -5
Christians don't want to admit their bible has contradictions in it because then there is a possibility that other things might be wrong and all of a sudden their bible is no longer the infallible word of God. How many stalls and horsemen? 1KI 4:26 And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen. 2CH 9:25 And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; whom he bestowed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem. Here's one of my favorites, is that a typo or is God not so good with numbers? You'd think that God being infallible could at least stay consistent. My other favorite is the beast or men first that you already listed. The Septuagint reads 4,000 instead of 40,000. So in the Septuagint version there is no difference between the 2 scriptures This difference between the 2 scriptures in other versions come probably from an old copyist error in the Massoretic text. It should be read 4,000 in both scriptures. It would be "nitpicking" to consider a Typo error like this in a text that isn't essential to Faith and salvation a stumbling block.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 18, 2008 4:42:59 GMT -5
Which first--beasts or man?
GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
There is no contradiction here for me.
Genesis 1 is straightforward in its chronology
In Genesis 2 , verses 18 and 19 are obviously not completely straightforward. For it is does not say esplicitely when "God formed" (the animals).
That is the "problem" with words put in past tense, you can't deduce a straightforward chronology , except if it is written explicitly, like in Genesis 1 where God refers to different days. In the context of Genesis 1, God refers to days and nights (periods of time) which induce a straightforward chronology. In Genesis 2 there is no such chronology, thus we can't conclude that the order of the phrases match a straightforward chronology. God does not say in Genesis 2 the exact time when the animals were formed.
|
|
|
Post by kureji on Oct 18, 2008 9:15:00 GMT -5
Oh I see so putting errors in the bible is just a test for your faith, how convenient. Blindly accepting your deluded "truth." Also about it being right in one of your versions of the bible and it being a copyist error, I was quoting from the King James Version of the bible, which Jesse holds to be number one held righteous in their eyes as the one true bible. Not to mention, quoting I believe Brother Jed, "The Bible isn't just a book writen by man, it's written by God where he uses man as his pen just as a painter uses a brush." If you don't accept that, then you're admitting that the bible is just another book written by man, if you are admitting that, then you're telling me that God has a really bad memory sometimes and makes copying errors which isn't very God like, you'd think God could keep his facts straight supposedly being omnipotent. If you're saying, well then that version of the bible isn't divinely written or copied! Then what version is? What version is the perfect word of God? Guess what? They all have "copyist errors" and your other silly arguments. Also, about nitpicking unimportant things, lets use some logic here. If there are errors in the unimportant stuff, that obviously leads that there might be errors in the important things, and then *gasp* it might mean that it wasn't divinely written as God doesn't make errors, but wait... Maybe that's because God doesn't exist! Oh now I see the reason why contradictions in holy scriptures are important again. Not to mention your response to the men vs beast arguement. Which first--beasts or man?
GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.There is no contradiction here for me. Genesis 1 is straightforward in its chronology In Genesis 2 , verses 18 and 19 are obviously not completely straightforward. For it is does not say esplicitely when "God formed" (the animals). That is the "problem" with words put in past tense, you can't deduce a straightforward chronology , except if it is written explicitly, like in Genesis 1 where God refers to different days. In the context of Genesis 1, God refers to days and nights (periods of time) which induce a straightforward chronology. In Genesis 2 there is no such chronology, thus we can't conclude that the order of the phrases match a straightforward chronology. God does not say in Genesis 2 the exact time when the animals were formed. Maybe it's because English isn't your first language (as far as I'm understanding anyway, sorry if it is.) Though because of how the sentence begins with AND this means that this event happened right after the last event. Someone doesn't say I watched the soccer game and I bought tickets for the soccer game. That just doesn't make any bloody sense. You're saying they aren't straight forward because you don't want to admit that it's most definitely not right. In this version, he most definitely formed the beast in front of Adam one at a time and had Adam name it, almost makes me wonder if you actually read it or just skimmed it to come up with some quick defense for your oh so holy book. It's not taken out of context, it's not a jumble you read in the magazine, it's straight forward and simple. So which is it, God has a bad memory or God talks funny? Or wait a second, oh right God doesn't exist.
|
|
|
Post by davidvalley on Oct 18, 2008 9:43:31 GMT -5
I find it sort of crazy that no one else has come in here to debate. I mean this is the ultimate book of life we are suppose to be talking about here. I expected a lot more of you to defend it.
I'm not saying everything in the Bible is false. I'm saying maybe we aren't meant to take everything in it literally. The Bible has been written and interpreted many many times. The oldest writings of the Bible come from the Dead Sea Scrolls. If you have studied the Dead Sea Scrolls and what people have researched about it you will find out that there are a lot of differences in it compared to the Bible. I'm not saying that this scroll is what it is suppose to say though. It could have just as easily been misinterpreted. Most scholars believe the New Testament was written around 100 AD which would point to the Dead Sea Scrolls being a very early copy or the first(although I doubt it because the books were not written together.)
Yet here is the kicker. The Dead Sea Scrolls have still yet to be published or added to the Bible. There is still controversy around it going on now.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 18, 2008 9:54:04 GMT -5
Kureji ,
I don't know why it would make no sense that the first part of verse 19 is a reminder of what God had already formed. It is not more silly than believing that God formed some new animals, after the creation of the first species and of Adam (I reckon that this latter version would be possible though but i don't think that's what did happen).
In Genesis 2 , the fact that there is the word AND does not prove anything as the word AND does not implies necessarily a series of following events in time. Otherwise it would be written THEN , THUS , AFTER THAT, CONSEQUENTLY.
No , English is not my first language, but I am not sure that if I need to take lessons in grammar, (i certainly need) I would call for your services :] Thanks for trying to help though.
As for the 4000 versus the 40000 , if you want to follow the logic that -if there is one small error there is necessarily big ones too-, go for it, if that suits you fine.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 18, 2008 9:59:11 GMT -5
David,
In fact the Dead Sea Scrolls are a confirmation for the older manuscripts that were to our disposition before the discovery of the DDS. For both are identical.
|
|
|
Post by davidvalley on Oct 18, 2008 10:53:10 GMT -5
David, In fact the Dead Sea Scrolls are a confirmation for the older manuscripts that were to our disposition before the discovery of the DDS. For both are identical. I know what your saying but honestly it does not really confirm much. Yeah some of it is the same as some of the books in the New Testament. Think about it. Dead Sea Scrolls were written sometime in 100s AD which is when scholars believe they were written. They however don't believe they were written by the actual apostles. They say they were written by people with the same name(or names they chose to give the apostles since they wrote it). They were all different people living different lives according to scholars. All of them wrote different accounts of the same time period. This would actually make sense because if you look at the New Testament observantly you can see that there are different agendas coming through such as one book making Jesus look more Jewish or one making him more supernatural. What do you think about the Bible not being updated with the oldest writings of the Bible Debonaire?
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 18, 2008 13:38:40 GMT -5
i am not sure to understand what you are saying by the oldest writings of the Bible ... You mean the oldest versions of some manuscripts ? Normally that is from there , that the bible is translated into English and other current languages
|
|
|
Post by kureji on Oct 18, 2008 17:03:14 GMT -5
Why in the world would people speak sentences out of order? What kind of story telling is that? How does that make any sense? Even so lets look at the sentence again.
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
So he forms the animals out of the ground and air, and brings them to Adam. If he brings them to Adam, Adam has to exist first. Now you might have an argument here if it was this:
And the LORD brought unto Adam the beasts of the field which were formed out of the ground, and every fowl of the air, to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
but that isn't what the quote is. Because of how the statement is, it's implied that Adam came first.
|
|
|
Post by davidvalley on Oct 18, 2008 17:24:07 GMT -5
i am not sure to understand what you are saying by the oldest writings of the Bible ... You mean the oldest versions of some manuscripts ? Normally that is from there , that the bible is translated into English and other current languages The Dead Sea Scrolls are the oldest known writings that have passages from the Bible on it. A lot of it contradicts what the Bible says today. Wouldn't it be more accurate to use the oldest writings than one that has been interpreted over and over and over?
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 19, 2008 3:37:21 GMT -5
No, the scrolls that are part of the Bible (scroll of Isaiah, scroll od Daniel) , etc... found confirm the oldest manuscripts that were to disposition before the findings of the DDS.
Ellis Skolfied who has spent a lot of time in studying this says :
We have similar textual support for the authenticity of the Old Testament. Until a few years ago, the earliest documents we had for the Old Testament were later copies of a 70 B.C. Septuigent in Greek and a Massoretic Text in Hebrew that could be positively dated to the ninth century A.D.. However, with manuscript discoveries at Qumran made in the late 1940s (the Isaiah scroll, the book of Daniel, the book of Jubilees, the Temple scrolls, etc. etc.), some of which could be dated to the third century B.C.. Internal evidence within one Daniel scroll dates it at 350 B.C. As a result, we can now state with some certainty that there has been no tampering with the canonical Old Testament manuscripts between 300 B.C. and 900 A.D..
Despite the span of over a thousand years, the canonical manuscripts are virtually identical !!!!
If there are other scrolls that are not part of the Bible which contradict what the Bible says, i don't know why the Bible should be edited with scrolls that were never part of what the Jews and later the Church considered inspired.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 19, 2008 3:48:52 GMT -5
Kureji
I don't say that what you say can not be right, and in the version you are using to prove your point it seems that at first sight, it is the more logical conclusion
But other versions say :
Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. [NIV]
The form of the word "formed" in my versions in French let also think that these animals were already formed before Genesis 2:18-19
This make lots of more sense.
That is what i say that the KJV is very unclear in the translation/use of some words (like the word Tempting we have talked about earlier)
|
|
|
Post by evilart on Oct 19, 2008 8:44:14 GMT -5
Bible contradicts itself because it is garbage.
|
|
|
Post by davidvalley on Oct 19, 2008 11:02:18 GMT -5
No, the scrolls that are part of the Bible (scroll of Isaiah, scroll od Daniel) , etc... found confirm the oldest manuscripts that were to disposition before the findings of the DDS. Ellis Skolfied who has spent a lot of time in studying this says : We have similar textual support for the authenticity of the Old Testament. Until a few years ago, the earliest documents we had for the Old Testament were later copies of a 70 B.C. Septuigent in Greek and a Massoretic Text in Hebrew that could be positively dated to the ninth century A.D.. However, with manuscript discoveries at Qumran made in the late 1940s (the Isaiah scroll, the book of Daniel, the book of Jubilees, the Temple scrolls, etc. etc.), some of which could be dated to the third century B.C.. Internal evidence within one Daniel scroll dates it at 350 B.C. As a result, we can now state with some certainty that there has been no tampering with the canonical Old Testament manuscripts between 300 B.C. and 900 A.D..
Despite the span of over a thousand years, the canonical manuscripts are virtually identical !!!! If there are other scrolls that are not part of the Bible which contradict what the Bible says, i don't know why the Bible should be edited with scrolls that were never part of what the Jews and later the Church considered inspired. There are only similarities. Those are the books I was talking about as being the same. You are completely ignoring the scrolls that say differently than the current version of the Bible meaning there is no way the current version of the Bible can be the true word of God. I'm not trying to hurt your faith Debonaire. I just want you to try and look at it from every side. I can see you are trying really hard to ignore certain things because your faith is very strong but you have to open up your eyes fully. Not just to the parts you like.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Oct 19, 2008 11:37:41 GMT -5
What is your problem exactly , that the original manuscripts have been translated into English , and the other languages ? Languages evolve , i don't see how people today could learn old Greek and Hebrew , just to have access to the original manuscripts There is no part in the Bible i do not like But that is not the most important. The most important is what Jesus said to the pharisees and other students of the Scriptures. They thought they had eternal life by serious study the manuscripts , byt they refused to come to Him.
|
|
|
Post by davidvalley on Oct 19, 2008 23:46:26 GMT -5
Okay seeing how only one person in Debonaire(thanks) came in here to debate these I'm guessing no one else on here really has anything to say about which I'm guessing is because they are in denial on the fact that maybe I hit a nerve in the Christian structure.
|
|
|
Post by fs on Nov 15, 2008 22:55:11 GMT -5
The Bible is not full fo contradictions when read and understood properly. Those claiming it is full of contradictions simply do not understand it..
Our associate pastor, Julius Drummond, once gave a great stand-in sermon on this that I wish you could have heard.
The Bible does not contain the word of God. It IS the word of God.
|
|