Biblical Flaws and Your Thoughts

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by ScrollMaker, Sep 10, 2003.

  1. ScrollMaker I Make Scrolls Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    177
    For a project I got assigned religion (how lucky

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ) out of all the subjects such as government, language, population, etc. So I was wondering if readers of this forums could post some biblical flaws (of the first and second testament) and their thoughts about these flaws. (biblical flaws as in the bible contradicting itself, etc.) Anybody who has counter-thoughts to some of these flaws are welcome to post as well. PLEASE POST
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. GodLied Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    436
    For one, get a Bible. Read it. Genesis is self-contradicting. Read different testimonies of the same subject. Those different testimonies might result in contradictions. Read the Ten Commandments and compare them against what one should do for God according to the Bible. Any contradictions with respect to those commandments are contradictions. Any comments that God saved Israelis from slavery and then lets Israelis have slaves is up to you for your interpretation of a golden rule.

    Have fun reading and finding out that the Holy Bible contains a lot of perjury in the sense that it is supposed to be God's Word.

    Your final conclusion to your class might be that all religions based on the Holy Bible are based on perjurous testimony. Therefore, such beliefs are based on lies. To do so is to say that God lied.

    Have a great Day!

    Godlied
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. ScrollMaker I Make Scrolls Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    177
    I don't have a lot of time. Only about a week. I will get a copy of the bible and read through as much as I can. Thanks for that little information on contradictions

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Frzn_Pükcicle Registered Member

    Messages:
    19
    Throughout the internet thare are sites dedicated to pointing out falicies and parodoxies in the bible, a simple google will get you to them.
     
  8. ScrollMaker I Make Scrolls Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    177
    Will check. But I really wanted people's thoughts and counter-thoughts. More of a discussion about it. Thanks for the info.

    Edit: http://www.geocities.com/pleiades61/IsThatintheBible.html

    Really great site! I can't believe a religious person could read all those things and still believe the bible is the strict true word.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2003
  9. heart Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    480
    ScrollMaker,

    Matthew 22:39
    ....Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

    VS

    Luke 14:26
    If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

    Some christians try to say the word "hate" translated means "love less" which is bologna. In the Strong's Concordance the Greek word for hate is "miseo" which is defined as:
    1. to hate, pursue with hatred, detest
    2. to be hated, detested

    Hardly close to the phrase "love less"
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2003
  10. atheroy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    383
    be careful scrollmaker, religion is a touchy topic at best. some of the views you get here would often not be voiced as this site is very impersonal. if you will be getting up infront of your peers in class, try to give no bias personally. i found most of my christian mates became more distant friends when i pointed out little flaws in their belief, i was only asking them questions about their belief but the resulting hostility was some what unexpected and rather disappointing.

    i'm not sure what contadictions you are looking for specifically, ones contained only in the pages of the bible itself or is it inclusive of contradictions relating to this world? in the sum of its parts, some of the main events depicted in the bible are not viable biologically. noahs ark could not have happened as the resulting inbreeding would have left not one animal alive on this planet. god cannot have created all organisms, banana's and bulldogs (the ones with the massively large jaws) are completely dependant on humans for their continued existance- banana's don't have seeds anymore and bulldogs can't naturally birth because their jaws are too big.

    this would mean evolution has and is occuring (by our unwitting hand and naturally as well- speciation is evident all around us). this would give rise to the question of whether adam and eve are an actual event or a made up story. it is the highest form of arrogance i can think of to assume we are separated from the natural processes of this universe- from all other life on this planet.

    indeed if you want examples of where the bible contradicts itself a good one is "thou shalt not kill" then what do you know david is slinging rocks between the eyes of overly large people (this is just one example of killing occuring in the bible). or how incest is condemned yet that guy copulates with his daughters (i can't remember the name of him, someone in here will know what i'm talking about). how god is supposed to know everything but is decieved by one of his followers (yeah, you can tell my knowledge of the bible is so good).

    in the end i rely on what lies around us to draw my conclusions about religion. the bible completely contradicts the world we live in and its process'. in its own pages it falls short of itself. if it indeed it is the word of god then it should be definitive, not a book of riddles and contradictions. people can glaze these over by interpreting the bible to allow for such discrepancies, but include our natural world into the picture and the bible has no basis in reality, nor any actual relevance to us as humans (though it has practically formed society into what it is today, it does not convey anything of worth to us as humans).
     
  11. okinrus Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,669
    Numbers has a few flaws, there are seemly two different accounts of Judas' death and the the accounts of who witnessed the removal of Jesus' burrial tomb differ. On closer look though, the Numbers mismatch is probably do to errors by scribes and the two different accounts of Judas death are probably the result of Peter hearing second hand information and then announcing it. Later when all of the facts of Judah's death became known to the apostles, they were recorded accurately in the synoptic gospels, yet the speech given by Peter in acts was still kept.

    Luke was written in Greek or at least translated into Greek, but the words Jesus used no doubt were aramaic. This illustrates one of the major problems people have because culture differences can make something appear more or less than what it is. The site posted http://www.geocities.com/pleiades61/bibleabsurdities.html is of low value because the plethora of non-contradictions. http://www.aramaicnt.org/Site-Index/Luke/Hate.php
     
  12. Medicine*Woman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,346
    (Scroll, the biggest flaw I can see is the contrived absence of the Gnostic Gospels in the Bible. Men chose the books that were to be in the Bible and in what order. What about the Gospels of Thomas, Philip, and Mary Magdalene, among others? These people walked with Jesus. Paul and the Gospel writers didn't. What does that tell you?)
     
  13. okinrus Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,669
    What makes you so certain that the gnostic books were written by Thomas, Philip and Mary Magdalene. My impression is that they are about secret knowledge and an outreach of the already present gnostic greek tradition. An examples in Thomas is "These are the secret words which the living Jesus spoke, and which Didymus Judas Thomas wrote down." Of course you still might be able to gleam value from the gnostic works just as you might be able to find value in say Plato but that does not mean that they should be in the bible. Books that were not in use or held in authority by the bishops were not simply not chosen to be in the canon.

    Your distortion of Paul is nerve racking

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Get over the fact that he women to dress appropriate(defined by the times) in church or in prayer.
     
  14. Jenyar Solar flair Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,833
    This is what happens if you read the Bible with tunnel-vision. You cannot read a single teaching out of the context of a general teaching. Apart from that - in order to validate this contradiction, you must be the literal fundamentalist in this case, not the Christian. Just keep that in mind.

    Matthew 10
    37"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;

    Jesus is saying commitment to him is primary and always comes first. Thus, if you are willing to put others before Christ and unwilling to follow through with your commitment, you may as well never commit in the first place.

    Or do you take this passage literally as well? Luke 16:13:
    No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.

    What about this one?:
    Genesis 29
    30 Jacob lay with Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah. And he worked for Laban another seven years.
    31 When the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren.

    Here's a secular Greek example:
    Poimandes 4:6
    If you do not hate your body first, O child, you will not be able to love yourself.

    and from the Greek war song in Poetae Lyrici Graeci: it is said that in battle, men "must count his own life his enemy for the honor of Sparta".

    Why do people suddenly plead the case for stupidity when they read the Bible. Everybody else was using hyperbolical language, why not Luke, Paul and Matthew? After all, they believed in the Ten Commandments much more than you do. They wouldn't exactly strengthen their case by contradicting it.


    Scrollmaker, you are evidently going out from an anti-biblical bias. That's all fine, as long as you are not lying to yourself about being objective. Otherwise, do some research befor you just quote a sceptic website verbatim.
     
  15. biblthmp Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    274
    Re: Re: Biblical Flaws and Your Thoughts

    That they were written pseudonymously decades or even centuries after their death.
     
  16. Medicine*Woman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,346
    Re: Re: Re: Biblical Flaws and Your Thoughts

    Originally posted by biblthmp
    ----------
    That they were written pseudonymously decades or even centuries after their death.
    ----------
    (As were MML&J!)
     
  17. heart Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    480
    Jenyar,

    Okay, sure you have made a good point. It's just that I find it funny that "god" would choose to lead the very men who were to write his words, to be used for all time, by using hyperbolic language.

    Isn't "god" suppose to be all-knowing? Wouldn't it stand to reason he would think some of the exaggerated language wouldn't make sense to others reading this say 2000 years later- especially without clarification?

    Matthew 10:16 "Behold, I send you (the disciples) out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. 17But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and scourge you in their synagogues. 18You will be brought before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles. 19But when they deliver you up, do not worry about how or what you should speak. For it will be given to you in that hour what you should speak; 20for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you."

    It clearly states that the Spirit is the one who speaks- so why would the Spirit of God have them use hyperbolic language when it could cause confusion?

    But, hey if you want to believe hyperbolic language was used in Luke 14:26 that's certainly your prerogative.. I guess others used them too when writing about the miracles Jesus "performed". "That Jesus is a slick one- you know he can walk on water" and Jesus speaking to others metaphorically, "My beloved, I have so many things on my plate to deal with you should see the cross I have to bear"
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2003
  18. ScrollMaker I Make Scrolls Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    177
    Don't worry Jenyar I will make sure that I will not be bias. The whole point is that I would like to hear what you guys think about these. The more I hear of the religious point of view the better I can balance these out. Thanks for all the information everyone!
     
  19. Jenyar Solar flair Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,833
    It only becomes confusing when you expect to be confused. And you can expect to be confused if you read the Bible as something superhuman, not as something written by normal people in a certain cultural environment. You don't need to know all these historical/contextual details unless you find something that requires them. The Greeks liked using dramatic or poetic language. The Romans liked formal or legalistic language. The Hebrews were more philosophical.

    As you've seen, the hyperbolical language used in Luke is different from the language in Matthew. If you read the rest of Luke, you'll see that he used this different style of writing. But just because Luke liked to use one style, doesn't mean you now have to interpret the rest of the Bible - especially the chapters by different authors - in the same mode. You don't read Shakespeare the same way you read Tolstoy.

    The Spirit does not override a person's personality. It doesn't take hold of him and he suddenly becomes "god-like". A Spirit-filled life is one that is led by the Spirit, but walked by you. You don't lose your will or character or personality. But God used each of those authors' unique personalities to deliver His message to different audiences. Some people like John's philophical approach, others like Matthew's Jewish approach, or Mark's straightforwardness. But they all deliver the same message.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2003
  20. ConsequentAtheist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,579
    According to what scholarship were the Hebrews deemed "more philosophical" that the Greeks?
     
  21. biblthmp Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    274
    Re: Re: Re: Re: Biblical Flaws and Your Thoughts

    But there are a multitude of extra-biblical sources that quote from these books, just decades after they were supposedly written, giving credit back to the creditted writers. Example Polycarp quote from his mentor the apostle John. Crystosom quotes frequently from Paul's letters, attributing the quotes back to Paul, early in the second century.
     
  22. Jenyar Solar flair Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,833
    I'm just referring to the literature of the time. I know the Greeks were the de facto philosophers, but they still had a practical approach. There is no Greek kabbala or notable mysticism beyonf their gods, who also arguably only existed for practical purposes.

    But your point is taken. It might only be my subjective opinion - I've done reading, but not research. But the style of reasoning was definitely different between cultures.
     
  23. ConsequentAtheist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,579
    You are such a fraud ...

    You do a disservice to your faith.
     

Share This Page