Tony1 loves to thump the Bible, well here thump through this:

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Godless, Sep 5, 2001.

  1. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Issue No. 1
    January 1983

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    COMMENTARY
    (A) One of the most important concepts in Christianity is original sin, or the belief that all mankind has inherited a sinful nature brought about by the acts of Adam and Eve.
    Rom. 5:12 "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

    Rom. 5:19 "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,..."

    1Cor. 15:22 "For as in Adam all die, ..."

    Yet, no amount of theological reasoning can make an inherently unjust idea seem right. Punishing billions of people for the acts of one is not only inherently unfair and unwarranted but also in opposition to other Biblical verses such as:

    Deut. 24:16 "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers (2Chron.25:54) :every man shall be put to death for his own sin." (2 Kings 14:6)

    Ezek. 18:20 "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

    Ezek.33:20 "O ye house of Israel, I will judge you every one after his ways."

    Jer. 31:29-30 "In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge."

    Rom. 2:6 "Who will render to every man according to his deeds."

    Ezek. 18:4 "... the soul that sinneth, it shall die."

    Each of these verses shows that every person should only be punished for those sins which he commits, not those of others.

    Original sin makes about as much sense as if I were sitting at home one evening and the following occurred: The police came to my door and stated I was under arrest because my father in Europe just shot and killed someone. I responded by asking what that had to do with me and they said, "He's your father, isn't he?"

    (B) Another false conception held by many Christians is that the Bible is without contradictions. Few beliefs are more erroneous. For this reason, contradictory statements will be highlighted not only in this issue of Biblical Errancy but all thoses that follow. The following examples are only a fraction of those that could be mentioned:

    Rom.3:23 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."

    1Kgs. 8:46 "...for there is no man that sinneth not,...." (2Chr. 6:36)

    Prov.20:9 "Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?"

    Eccl. 7:23 "For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."

    Mark 10:18 "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God."

    Rom. 3:10 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one." (Also 1 John 1:8 & 10, Rom. 3:12, 5:12, Gal. 3:22)


    Versus
    Gen. 6:9 "Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."

    Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

    Job 1:8 "...my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?" (Job 2:3)

    Gen. 7:1 "And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation."

    Luke 1:5-6 "In the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, there was a priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abia: and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.(RSV)

    (C) Another clear contradiction concerns whether or not God repents.

    Num. 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent."

    1Sam. 15:29 "And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent."


    Versus
    Jonah 3:10 "And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."

    1Sam.15:11 "It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king...."

    Exod. 32:14 And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

    Jeremiah 26:3 "... for I repent me of the evil that I have done unto you."

    Gen. 6:6 "And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."

    1Sam. 15:35 "...and the LORD repented that he had made Saul king over Israel."

    (D) One final contradiction is worthy of note. It concerns the question of whether or not God's face has been seen.

    John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time;..."

    John 6:46 "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father."

    1John 4:12 "No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us."


    Versus
    Gen. 32:30 "And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
    Exod. 33:11 "And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend."

    Num. 14:14 "...that thou LORD art seen face to face,..."

    Job 42:5 "I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee."

    Deut. 34:10 "And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,..."

    Deut. 5:4 "The LORD talked with you face to face...." (also Psalm 63:2 Isa.6:1 & 6:5, Amos 7:7-8, Ezek. 20:35, Ex. 24:9-10


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    REVIEWS
    In April 1982 Zondervan Publishing House issued one of the most comprehensive writings in recent memory to justify Biblical fallacies. Entitled An Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficulties, the promotional campaign by "Christian Readers News" describes it as a work which "exhaustively studies every difficult passage in the Bible--Genesis to Revelation." This is erroneous, as this issue of Biblical Errancy, and those that follow, will show. For example, the author, Gleason Archer, a professor at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, neither explained how we could all be victims of original sin because of the deeds of one nor how Noah could be perfect if all have sinned.
    Incidentally, it is always interesting to note the terminology employed by Biblical apologists with respect to contradictions. They are rarely referred to as contradictions, per se. Such words as "difficulties," "discrepancies," "detractions," and "problems," are far more evident than contradictions, fallacies, and falsehoods. Using the former denotes an obvious attempt to minimize inconsistencies. A minor discrepancy sounds far less serious than a contradiction.

    (E) What, then, are Gleason Archer's explanations for the above mentioned contradictions? In regard to the problems of God's repentance, he offers the following:
    "...it is a mistake to infer from this (God's omniscience-ed) that he is incapable of emotions or reactions to willful depravity of his creatures."(p. 80)

    (1) If the word repent means anything, it says, I somehow made a mistake, not that I merely regret the results of my acts. I went down the wrong road. If you regret the outcome you are also saying, I wish I had done something else. (2) But even if repent is restricted to the very narrow sense of emotion and remorse, the fact remains that God does not repent in any sense. 1 Sam. 15:29 and Num. 23:19 makes this quite clear. Whether he is sorrowful or not is irrelevant. God does not repent, period. Apologists use the phrases universally when it suits their purpose, but in a restricted sense when it is obviouly wrong to employ the broad sense.

    After saying God could repent in a sorrowful or remorseful sense, Archer states:
    "Yet when it comes to His announced covenant purposes toward His covenant people, God is indeed incapable of repentance."

    (1) But there is no evidence of such a distinction in scripture. Num. 23:19 and 1 Sam 15:29 says that God does not repent. They do not say this applies only to those situations which involved "His annouced covenant purposes toward His covenant people." Acher has inserted a provision which is clearly nowhere in evidence.

    In groping for a way out of this quagmire, Archer has grasped at two straws. Readers are free to choose either. "Repent" is only meant in an anthropomorphic sense or God does not repent "when it comes to His announced covenant purposes toward His people." There is not the slightest evidence for either assumption.

    (F) With respect to seeing God's face Archer says: "The Bible draws a clear distinction between gazing on God in his unveiled glory and beholding a representative or reflection of God..."

    (1) The issue concerns whether or not God's face is seen, not whether his glory or a mere relection is viewed. Acher has reframed and rewritten the problem. Ex. 33:11 and Gen. 32:30 clearly say God's face was seen, not a representation.

    (2) The Bible draws no distinction in these verses between his glory and a mere reflection. Archer has artificially created a difference which does not exist. He is trying to escape from the problem by admitting a reflection of God was seen but not his essence, his glory.

    Archer continues:
    "John 1:18 declares, no man has seen God at any time (that is, his full glory as Creator and Sovereign of all the universe."


    (1) John 1:18 says nothing about "his full glory as Creator and Sovereign of all the universe." There is no such proviso, not even implicitly.

    Archer then says: "We behold the face of God by faith as we look to Christ, 'He who has seen Me has seen the Father.' (John 14:9) God therefore showed His face and declared His glory through His Son, who was God Incarnate."

    (1) Yes, the Bible does say men see God through Jesus, but it also says God is seen face to face. The latter is prominent also. The Bible nowhere states that one excludes the other.

    Archer proceeds: "God showed His face through an angel (as at the interview with Moses at the burning bush ( Ex. 3:2-6), or else through his glory cloud,..."

    (1) The Bible clearly states that Moses (Ex. 33:11) and Jacob (Gen.32:30) saw God face to face, not "through an angel" or "through His glory cloud." Archer is guilty of insertionism--the unwarranted and unsubstantiated insertion of words into Biblical verses to escape contradictions or a mistake.

    (2) Archer chose a bad example, from his perspective, when he used Ex. 3:2-6. It says "And Moses hid his face: for he was afraid to look upon God." How then, could he have seen God's face, through an angel or otherwise?

    He adds:
    "We are therefore to understand that Yahweh met with Moses and talked to him in some glorious representation that fell short of a full unveiling of His face. In that sense He talked to Moses face to face..."(1) Again Ex. 33:11 and Gen. 32:30 say "face to face" not "in some glorious representation that fell short of a full unveiling of His face."

    And finally, Archer falsely alleges that in Ex. 33:18: "Moses asked to see the very face of God."

    (1) This verse actually states that Moses asked to see God's glory, not his face. They are not identical. God did not deny this request, as verse 19 shows, but stated in verse 20 (RSV) that it would not extend to revealing His face.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue No. 2,
    February 1983

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    RESURRECTION--Among those beliefs crucial to Christianity, few are of greater importance than that of the Resurrection. Paul went so far as to allege the very foundation of Christianity rests upon its occurrence.
    1Cor. 15:14 "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." ( also: 1 Cor. 15:17)

    Yet, why should the Resurrection be of such significance? Elijah raised a child from the dead (1Kings 17:17, 21-22); Samuel said to Saul, "Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me" (1Sam. 28.7, 11, 15); Elisha raised the dead son of a Shunammite (2 Kings 4:32, 34-35); a dead man being lowered into a grave revived when he touched the bones of Elisha (2 Kings 13:21); Moses and Elijah revived at the time of the Transfiguration (Luke 9:28, 3 );the saints arose at the time of Jesus' death (Matt. 27:52-53); Jairus' daughter rose from the dead (Matt. 9:18, 23-25 ); the widow at Nain's son rose from the dead (Luke 7:11-15); and Lazarus rose from the dead (John 11:43-44). All of these people ascended from death, and all did so before Jesus. So why attribute so much importance to the event? By the time Christ rose from the dead, this was a rather common occurrance. Moreover, people arose not only before Jesus, but after as well. Peter raised Tabitha and Paul raised Eutychus.

    While participating in a radio call-in program several years ago, the author was told by a caller that, except for Jesus, all of the above-mentioned people eventually died again. But Paul clearly asserted it's the Resurrection, per se, that matters, not the fact Jesus never died again. The caller was asked to cite a passage that justified his contention. There was no reply.

    A second major difficulty associated with the Resurrection lies in the contradictory accounts in the four gospels of what occurred. The following represent some of the major disagreements surrounding the events connected with the Resurrection:

    A. At what time in the morning did the women visit the tomb? At the rising of the sun (Mark 16:2) vs. when it was yet dark (John 20:1).

    B. Who came? Mary Magdalene alone (John 20:1) vs. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt. 28:1) vs. Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome (Mark 16:1) vs. Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary, the mother of James, and other women (Luke 24:10)

    C. Was the tomb opened or closed when they arrived? Open (Luke 24:2) vs. closed (Matt 8:1-2)

    D. Whom did they see at the tomb? The angel (Matt. 28:2) vs. a young man (Mark 16:5) vs. two men (Luke 24:4) vs. two angels (John 20:11-12)

    E. Were these men or angels inside or outside the tomb? Outside (Matt. 28.2) vs. inside (Mark 16:5, Luke 24:3-4, John 20:11-12).

    F. Were they standing or sitting? Standing (Luke 24:4) vs. sitting (Matt. 28:2, Mark 16:5, John 20:12).

    G. Did Mary Magdalene know Jesus when he first appeared to her? Yes, she did (Matt. 28:9) vs. no she did not (John 20:14).

    If the stories were consistent, one could write one long, continuous narrative, incorporating all four versions without fear of divergencies. Yet, this has never been done without adding, altering or omitting key verses. Apologists often submit the witness-at-an-auto-accident argument, which is quite irrelevant, since two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive versions of the same event cannot be simultaneously accurate. One or the other is false. Moreover, witnesses at an accident, unlike gospel writers, are not claiming inerrancy.

    Thomas Paine summarized the relationship between the gospels quite well.

    "...it is, I believe, impossible to find in any story upon record so many and such glaring absurdities, contradictions, and falsehoods, as are in the books (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John). They are more numerous and striking than I had any expectation of finding, when I began this examination,..." (Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, page 167)

    A third major problem connected with the Resurrection lies in the fact that even if Jesus had risen, nobody is going to follow his example:
    Eccle. 3:19-21 (RSV) "For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same: as one dies, so dies the other. ...man has no advantage (pre-eminence-KJV) over beasts;... All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down to the earth."

    Job 7:9-10, 1 Tim. 6:15-16, Isaiah 26:14 say as much. Robert Ingersoll, one of the greatest Biblical commentators in American history, spoke wisely when he said: "The Old Testament tells us how we lost immortality and it does not say a word about another world, from the first mistake in Genesis to the last curse in Malachi. No man in the Old Testament stands by the dead and says, "We shall meet again." From the top of Sinai came no hope of another world." (Orthodoxy, Ingersoll's Works, Vol. 2, page 424.

    And lastly, others participated in even more momentous events. Adam was never born to begin with (Gen. 1:27); he came into the world as a full-grown adult. Enoch (Gen. 5:22-24) and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11) never died. The latter went straight to heaven, which, incidentally, contradicts Hebrews 9:27 which says, "And it is appointed unto men once to die..."

    In fact, what did Jesus ever do that had not already been accomplished? He rose from the dead, but only after others. He performed miracles, but so had others. He raised people from the dead, but so had Old Testament prophets. He healed, but so had others. What, then, did Jesus do that was different, that had not already been done? Plainly stated, "What makes him stand out from the crowd?" Thousands have claimed to be the savior; so what are the acts that substantiate his credentials? Assertions alone prove nothing. Anyone can claim to be the Messiah, and thousands have.

    Jesus, The Imperfect Beacon--For two thousand years Christians have alleged that Jesus of Nazareth is God incarnate, the sinless being, the embodiment of perfection.

    1Pet. 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth.

    Isa. 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

    Yet, the New Testament has many statements and acts by Jesus which prove the contrary. He, like Paul, repeatedly made false statements and inaccurate prophecies. Here are a few examples:

    John 7:8-10[KJV] Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

    John 7:8-10 RSV Go to the festival yourselves. I am not going to this festival, for my time has not yet fully come. After saying this, he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone to the festival, then he also went, not publicly but as it were in private.

    Jesus broke his promise [word] by going up secretly after saying he wouldn't.

    (B) In John 13:38 Jesus said: "...Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou (Peter-ed) hast denied me thrice."

    And yet, what actually occurred is shown in Mark 14:66-68: "And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew."

    According to Jesus' prophecy the cock was not to speak until after the third denial, not after the first.

    (C) Jesus told the thief on the cross: Luke 23:43 "... Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise." This prophecy could not have been kept unless Jesus went to heaven that day, in which case he would not have been buried for three days.

    (D) Jesus told a man: Mark 8:34 "... Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me."

    This statement was made early in his ministry. Yet, the cross could not have become a Christian symbol until after the Crucifixion. There would be nothing to pick up. This utterance would have made no sense whatever to the man being addressed.

    (E) In Matthew 5:22 he said:

    Matt. 5:22 "...but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."

    Yet, Jesus repeated called people fools: Matt. 23:17,19 "Ye fools and blind..." Luke 11:40 "Ye fools,..."

    (F) In Matthew Jesus said: Matt. 12:40 " For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."

    Mark 15:37 and 15:42 show Jesus died on the day before the sabbath which would be Friday. Mark 16:9 and Matthew 28:1 show he allegedly rose sometime during Saturday night or Sunday morning. Friday afternoon to Sunday morning does not encompass three days and three nights. His prophecy failed.

    (G) John 3:13 Jesus falsely stated: "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."

    This verse is not only inaccurate historically as 2 Kings 2:11 shows: 2 Kings 2:11"...behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." but also absurd on its face. If the son of man (Jesus-ed) is down here on earth speaking, then how could he be in heaven?

    (H) And in Matthew 27:46 Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying: " Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

    How could Jesus be Savior of all mankind when he couldn't even save himself? These aren't the words of a man who went to the cross willingly to die for our sins. These are the words of a man who could think of a hundred places he would rather be. They certainly aren't the words of someone who has the situation under control.

    These examples of Jesus' duplicity represent only a fraction of the 193 that could have been presented. The New Testament provides more than enough evidence to demonstrate Jesus' inability to provide a reliable beacon to lighten the way to truth and honesty, to claim the Messiahship. As Thomas Paine said: "The priests of the present day profess to believe it (the story of Christ-ed). They gain their living by it, and they exclaim against something they call infidelity. I will define what it (infidelity-ed) is. HE THAT BELIEVES IN THE STORY OF CHRIST IS AN INFIDEL TO GOD." (The Life and Works of Thomas Paine, Vol 9, page 292)

    Jesus is not perfection incarnate. As Robert Ingersoll once said: "The theological Christ is the impossible union of the human and divine--man with the attributes of God, and God with the weakness of man."

    In closing this month's commentary, several contradictions are worthy of note. Joseph's father is Jacob in Matthew 1:16 but is Heli in Luke 3:23. David slew the men of 700 chariots of the Syrians and 40,000 horsemen according to 2 Samuel 10:18, while 1 Chron. 19:18 says it was the men of 7,000 chariots and 40,000 footmen. Solomon had 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots in 1 Kings 4:26, while 2 Chron. 9:25 says it was 4,000 stalls.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    REVIEWS
    Although such previously mentioned contradictions as "take up the cross," "go to the feast," and the warning not to call others fools were avoided by Gleason Archer in his apologetic work, The Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficulties, (discussed in January's issue of Biblical Errancy, p. 3), he did direct his attention toward several others.

    His explanation for the "Today thou shalt be with me in paradise" problem is especially revealing. It abounds in suppositions, conjectures and hypotheses, virtually none of which is supported by Scripture. On page 367 Archer says: "The answer lies in the location of paradise on Good Friday. Apparently paradise was not exalted to heaven until Easter Day. Jesus apparently refers to it in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus as "Abraham's Bosom," to which the godly beggar Lazarus was carried by the angels after his decease (Luke 16:19-31).

    Apparently, apparently! "Apparently paradise was not exalted!" "Jesus refers to it in the parable of the rich man!" Thereis no solid evidence either assumption is true. However, from Archer's point-of-view it would be nice if there were, so the problem would vanish.

    He continues:
    "Thus Abraham's Bosom referred to the place where the souls of the redeemed waited till the day of Christ's resurrection. Presumably this was the same place as paradise... Doubtless it was to the infernal paradise that the souls of Jesus and the repentant thief repaired after they each died on Friday afternoon."

    Presumably! Presumed by whom? Archer's entire explanation is based on conjecture and unwarranted assumptions. Where is the evidence that paradise did not become heaven until Easter Day, that paradise was identical with Abraham's Bosom, or that souls went to paradise before later entering heaven? Moreover, even if both did enter "paradise" rather than heaven after death, Jesus would still not have been in the earth three days as he had prophesied in Matt. 12:40.

    Like many apologists, Archer assumes that if he can devise reasonably viable explanations for Biblical difficulties then substantive evidence is not required. Plausible theories enwrapped in carefully devised speculation are sufficient unto themselves. Most apologetics is more concerned with rationalization and justification than truth and objectivity.

    In regard to the number of Solomon's stalls and the proper-name disagreements between 1 Kings 4:26 and Chron. 9:25, Archer frankly admits the contradictory aspects. On page 222 he says:
    "In explanation of these transmissional errors (As we believe them to be), let it be understood that numerals and proper names are always more liable to copyist errors than almost any other type of subject matter..." "As we believe them to be" is a frank admission that speculation is involved. It would be just as rational to assume there were no copyist errors, just independent writers following independent traditions while reporting on the same events. "Copyist error" is employed in far too many instances by biblicists to escape what are otherwise impossible dilemmas.(See: Alleged Bible Discrepancies by Haley). It provides a quick means of escape.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DIALOGUE & POLEMICS
    Letter # 1 from Michael Hauerstir of Dayton, Ohio

    I've read your "Bible Errancy" Newsletter. The Bible says in 1 Corinthians 2: 14, " But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." You are dealing with a spiritual book when you deal with the Bible. The Holy Spirit moved men to write the Scriptures, and to understand the Scripture, you must be Spiritual. To you, as 1Corinthians 2: 14 states, you find the Bible foolish, full of contradictions and errors (seemingly).
    Actually, you need to be born again. Jesus, God manifested in the flesh, said "Ye must be born again."The enclosed tract will tell you how to be saved, be born again. You need to be saved, please read it.

    Editor's Response to Letter #1
    You asked me to read your small tract entitled, "In Devil's Hell." Well, I did and found it to be typical of the pamphlets that we often find in bus terminals, on library tables and on door knobs. It is permeated with the urgent need to accept Jesus, confess sins, be saved and fear hell. Much was asserted; nothing proved.

    Now I ask you to respond in kind. Read Biblical Errancy, but not through a filter composed of Christian fundamentals. Among other things, the January issue proved the Bible is not to be trusted as a reliable source. Yet, your tract avoided the evidence entirely and blindly plodded forward with such quotes as: "The wicked shall be turned into hell;" "Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead;" and "that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus...thou shalt be saved." You were`shown clearly contradictory utterances which you completely ignored.

    You assumed the very point in dispute, that the Bible is truth, per se. If asked how you know your statements are true, you would probably say, because they are in the Bible. But, instead of asking yourself if the Bible is true, you just assumed as much. But I have proven the contrary; it is not the truth. It says for instance, that "all have sinned," which is completely false. How do I know? because your own book says so. Don't you believe it? "Noah was a just and perfect in his generation,..." (Gen. 6:9); "... that man (Job-ed) was perfect and upright,..." (Job 1:1). These men were perfect, so obviously they could not have been sinners. How can you be a sinner and be perfect? The Bible has hundreds of problems of this nature, and if you bear with me, I will prove as much in the issues to come. But please be reasonable; I can't cover the entire Book in two issues.

    Quoting from a work is fruitless unless you first prove the book is valid, truthful and reliable. I provided evidence the Bible fails this test. Instead of proving my evidence to be false or invalid, instead of proving the Book to be true, valid and inerrant, you merely assume as much and proceeded to quote at will. Don't you believe the Bible when it says, "Prove all things..." (1 Thess. 5:12) or "But the wisdom from above is first pure, then...open to reason,..." (James 3:17). What have you proved? Where is your reasoning? The Bible says, "Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you;..." (1 Peter 3:15). Where is your defense? Mere assertions prove nothing.

    You sent me a tract that implies people are wicked and sinful, while confident you abide in Jesus. Yet, the Bible says, "No man who abides in him sins;..." (1 John 3:6). If you abide in him, as you believe, why are you still sinning? Surely you are not saying you no longer sin. My friend, with all due respect, if there is any verse in the Bible you and those of like mind should commit to memory it is Proverb 14:15, which says, "The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going."

    Letter # 2 from an Anonymous Reader in Cleveland, Ohio.
    Your Biblical Errancy discusses contradictions but how important are they? The Bible was not meant to be scientifically precise. It isn't a history book. It was written to provide a path to salvation through Jesus Christ Our Lord. You are concentrating too much on details and not seeing those things that really count. Accept Jesus and you will have the answer to your questions.

    Editor's Response to Letter # 2
    My friend, all you know about Jesus comes from Scripture. The validity of Jesus depends upon the validity, reliability and accuracy of Scripture. Rarely do I agree with Evangelicals, but I couldn't agree more when a fundamentalist group, The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) of Oakland, California, said the following when told, "Inerrancy is not important. It is the quibbling about insignificant details. What really matters is a person's relationship with Jesus Christ":
    "... But how do you know Jesus except as he is presented to you in the Bible? If the Bible is not God's Word and does not present a picture of Jesus Christ that can be trusted, how do you know it is the true Christ you are following? You may be worshipping a Christ of your own imagination." (Does Errancy Matter by James Boice, page 24)

    Once conceding there are errors in the Bible, you have opened a Pandora's Box. How do you know which parts are true, if you admit some parts are false? As ICBI said: "... But this position (claiming truthfulness for those parts of the Bible where God, as opposed to men has spoken-ed). is unsound. People who think like this speak of Biblical authority, but at best they have partial Biblical authority, since the parts containing errors obviously cannot be authoritative. What is worse, they cannot even tell us precisely what parts are from God and are therefore truthful and what parts are not from God and are in error. Usually they say that the "salvation parts" are from God, but they do not tell us how to separate these from the non-salvation parts." (Does Errancy Matter by James Boice, page 8)

    The ICBI was also correct when it said the following statement of belief is an attack on the Bible:
    "... Sure I believe in the Bible, as do you, but what difference does it make if there are a few mistakes in it? After all, the Bible isn't a history book. It's not a science book. It only tells us about God and salvation." This belief is more than an attack; it's a refutation. As the religious reformer, John Wesley, said:
    "If there be any mistakes in the Bible, there may as well be a thousand. If there be one falsehood in that book, it did not come from the God of truth."
    Well spoken! And Biblical Errancy will expose the falsehoods.



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue No. 3
    March 1983

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    COMMENTARY
    SALVATION--Next to Jesus, probably no topic occupies the Christian mind more than salvation. We must do everything to be saved, assuming, of course, salvation exists. We must obtain eternal life. That's the Christian attitude. The fundamental problem in this regard, however, is that even if one were to say to a believer, "OK, I believe you; so what must I do to be saved," he still couldn't obtain a rational response. Why? Because the answer would depend upon what the Biblical verses were selected. Some scriptural passages say you are saved by works; others say you are saved by faith; others say your destiny has already been predetermined; and still others say it is decided by God's whim. He simply looks down and arbitrarily selects those He wants.
    (1) Salvation by works, for example, is clearly shown in Matthew 19:16-19 [actually it should be to verse 21] where a man asked Jesus what he must do to have eternal life:

    Matt. 19:16-18 "And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me."

    Clearly, according to Jesus salvation is obtained by works. Good works, good deeds, following the commandments are all that is necessary. Jesus said nothing about believing in anything. Faith or belief isn't even mentioned. Robert Ingersoll correctly stated:"(In the 19th Chapter of Matthew we find-ed.) a child of God is asking God what is necessary for him to do in order to inherit eternal life... Now, if there ever has been an opportunity given to the Almighty to furnish a man of an inquiring mind with the necessary information upon that subject, here was the opportunity... (And yet Jesus-ed) did not say to him: You must believe in me- that I am the only begotten son of the living God. He did not say: You must be born again. He did not say: You must believe in the Bible. He did not say: You must remember the Sabbath, to keep it holy... What right has the church to add conditions of salvation?" What Must We Do To Be Saved?, Ingersoll's Works Vol. 1 p 465.

    Incidentally, only five of the Ten Commandments were listed and "Love thy neighbor" is not even a commandment. It's actually found in Leviticus 19:18.

    Mark 10:17-19 repeats the essential message of Matthew 19:16-18, and also lists a commandment--defraud not--that doesn't exist. Again, five of the Ten Commandments were omitted. (See also: Luke 18:18-22, 10:25-28, Acts 10:35 Ezek.18:4-9, James 1:25, 27, 2:21, 25, Romans 2:13, 1 Cor. 7:19, Luke 19:8-9, John 5:28-29, Deut. 10:12, Ecclesiastes 12:13). All the above verses resemble Micah 6:8, which says:
    Micah 6:8 "...what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?"

    All of them state one is saved by good works; none mentions anything associated with belief or faith. Good deeds alone are sufficient.

    (2) Some verses contend your destiny has already been predetermined. It's fixed. Acts 13: 48

    Acts 13:48 "And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed."

    and Ephesians 1:4-5:

    Eph. 1:4 "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his 13:8, 2 Thess. 2:13, Eph. 1:11, Matthew 24:24, 31, Proverbs 16:9, 20:24, 2 Tim. 2:10, 1 Peter 1:2, 2:8.

    (3) Some passages allege God merely selects people as He sees fit. Psalm 65:4 is a good example.
    Ps. 65:4 "Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts." (See also: John 6:44, 65, 17:9, Acts 22:14, Romans 9:16, 18, Psalm 86:13)

    (4) And of course, there are those verses which Christians quote to prove one is saved by faith. Acts 16: 30-31 is as representative as any.
    Acts 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou halt be saved, and thy house. (See also: John 14:6, 3:15-16, 18, 36, 6:28-29, 47, 11:25-26, Acts 4:12, 13:39, Romans 1:16-17, Hebrews 11:6, Ephesians 2:8-9)

    All the above clearly shows that even if one were to surrender himself completely to Christian teachings, he still wouldn't know what to do. If he is saved by works, then he had better commit good deeds; if he is saved by a Godly act of merciful selection, then he can only hope to be chosen; if he is saved by faith, then he must choose the correct beliefs; and if his destiny is predetermined, he should ignore the entire matter. Why become concerned about something that is unalterable? It is interesting to note that although Paul often says saved by faith, Jesus clearly states you are saved by works. And unless "Christianity" is actually "Paulianity," Jesus' assertions take precedence.

    Thomas Paine once made an astute observation with respect to Paul's salvation by faith:
    "One set of preachers make salvation to consist in believing. They tell their congregations that if they believe in Christ their sins shall be forgiven. This, in the first place, is an encouragement to sin, in a similar manner as when the prodigal young fellow is told his father will pay all his debts, he runs into debt faster, and becomes the more extravagant. Daddy says he pays all, and on he goes: just so in the other case, Christ pays all, and on goes the sinner." The Life and Works of Thomas Paine Vol 9, p. 27

    Paine made an equally apt comment with respect to predestination:
    "Another set of preachers tell their congregations that God predestinated and selected, from all eternity, a certain number to be saved, and a certain number to be damned eternally. If this were true, the day of judgement is past: their preaching is in vain, and they had better work at some useful calling for their livelihood. This doctrine has a direct tendency to demoralize mankind." The Life and Works of Thomas Paine, Vol 9, p. 208

    Is it any wonder that Jesus' prophecy: John 10:16 "... and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd." has never materialized? One can easily understand how a book as inconsistent as the Bible has given rise to more that fifteen hundred separate Christian denominations. The deficiency lies not so much with the preachers as the book from which they preach.

    Prophecy--Christians often assert alleged inspiration of the Bible is proven by accurate prophecies contained therein. Yet, any reasonably objective analysis of the Book will expose many inaccurate predictions. Generally speaking, prophetic failures can be grouped into three separate categories: Those which were fulfilled in a manner different from that promised, those which have never occurred, and New Testament references to Old Testament prophecies that don't exist. Besides Jesus' inaccurate predictions with respect to the cock crowing, the attainment of paradise by the thief on the cross, and the similarity in time between His internment and Jonah's period in the whale (See 2nd issue, Feb.1983, p.3), the following falsehoods could be mentioned. In Genesis 2:17 God told Adam: Gen. 2:17 "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Yet, Adam ate the fruit and did not die that day. In fact, he lived to be 930 years old (Gen. 5:5). If a spiritual, as opposed to a physical, death was intended, as apologists allege, then why wouldn't this be true of what Nathan told David in 2 Samual 12:14? David had sinned against God and Nathan said: 2 Samual 12:14 "Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die." Verse 18 clearly shows that the child died physically, not spiritually, shortly thereafter. [Which also goes against Deut. 24:16.]

    Unless the context shows a verse should be given a spiritual interpretation, we should adhere to a literal approach. The well-known apologist W. Arndt aptly stated: "It must be remembered that a deviation from the literal sense is not justified unless the Scriptures themselves prescribe such a course." Bible Difficulties, W. Arndt, p. 133.

    Another inaccurate prophecy is found in Genesis 28:13: "...I am the LORD God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed." Jacob never received the promise land, and it is questionable whether the spot on which he lay ever came into the possession of his descendants.

    In Genesis 35:10 God said to Jacob: "And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel"

    Yet, just 11 chapters later the text says: Gen. 46:2 "And God spake unto Israel in the visions of the night, and said, Jacob, Jacob. And he said, Here am I."

    A concluding false prophecy among the scores of available is found in Deuteronomy 23:3: "An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever."

    Ruth, a Moabitess, not only entered the congregation of the Lord as Ruth 1:4, 1:22, 4:13, 4:17 show, but gave birth to the ancestors of David and Jesus.

    Even more noteworthy are prophecies that don't exist such as found in Matthew 2:23. "And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene." He shall be called a Nazarene does not exist in the Old Testament. There is no such prophecy.

    Jesus, The Imperfect Beacon--I thought it might be appropriate to conclude this month's commentary with some additional statements and acts by Jesus which disprove his perfection. In Matt. 5:44 Jesus told people to: Matt. 5:44 "...Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, ..." Yet repeatedly called his opponents names and hurled epithets. (See Matt. 23:15, 23:17, 19, 27, 33, John 10:8, Luke 11:40, Matthew 12:34)

    In John 23:32 Jesus said: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." Jesus allegedly lifted up, but he is far from having drawn all men to him. The majority of mankind have never heard his name.

    In Matthew 8:20 Jesus said: "And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head." while in Mark 2:15 says: Mark 2:15 '...Jesus sat at meat in his house." Jesus had no place to lay his head, yet he owned a house. According to psalm 24:1 he owned everything.

    And lastly, in Matthew 19:19 Jesus said: "Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." while he said to his own mother: John 2:4 "...Woman, what have I to do with thee?" Apparently Jesus' love escaped him. This is the same Jesus who told everyone else to "Honor thy father and mother."


    REVIEWS
    In regard to eating the forbidden fruit, a related problem is especially troublesome to Biblicists. How could evil arise in the beginning if God created everything was good, yea perfect? Certainly Adam and Eve couldn't have created evil, since they were part and parcel of the perfect creation. As perfect beings they couldn't have created imperfection, i.e. sin. If they did, or could, create sin, then by definition they weren't perfect. The apologist W. Arndt said it well:
    "Here we face a mystery, baffling to all thinkers, for which we, standing on the Bible, can offer no explanation than the one given in divine revelation, to wit; that Satan brought sin into the world. If the inquiry is pushed beyond this point (which I wouldn't hesitate to do-ed) and it is asked, How could Satan, who evidently was created as a good being, become perverted and an enemy of God? We are not able to give a solution. It is a question on which God has not thought it necessary to inform us in His holy Word." Bible Difficulties, W. Arndt, p.132

    Why no answer is given is quite easy to understand. There isn't any.

    This directly parallels the problem presented by Isaiah 44:24, Eccle. 11:5, John 1:3, Eph. 3:9, Rev. 4:11 and other verses saying God must have created everyting. If God didn't create everything, including evil, then either evil doesn't exist, or God did not create some things, namely evil. It's that simple. In attempting to remedy the problem W. Arndt alleged, "... there are angels who did not remain in the state of rightousness and holiness in which they had been created, but who sinned, leaving their own habitation, the mansions of Heaven, and by God were cast down to hell... It is here where we have the origin of evil in the universe. One of these fallen angels is Satan, and it was he who employed the serpent in his successful endeavor to lead mankind into sin." Ibid. p136

    This explanation has an obvious fatal flaw. If God's original creation was perfect, then no aspect of it could have created evil. If the fallen angel was originally perfect, then he could no more have committed an evil act than could the allegedly perfect Jesus.


    DIALOG & DEBATE
    Letter #3 from Ray Wigdal of Cedarville, Ohio
    (After quoting 2 Tim. 3:16 which contends all scripture is inspired, Ray continues-ed)
    The first question I would like to ask is why are you going to such lenghts to disprove the authority of the Word of God? Secondly, do you believe that a Christian who loves the Lord Jesus has the authority to refute the Word of God? Thirdly, do you believe this verse (2 Tim. 3:16-ed) to be the Word of God or the word of men? I believe it to be the verbal plenary inerrant word of God!... Fourthly, do you believe our God is a God of truth? We know from Titus 1:2 "God who cannot lie" that God cannot lie. Lastly, Mr. McKinsey, if you do not know Jesus Christ personally as a Savior, then your heart and mind is darkened by the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. See Eph. 2:1-10... (After asking me some common questions generated by preachers on the stump, Ray continues-ed) Are you saved by faith? I would like sometime to personally meet with you and discuss this matter more personally. Please respond to my questions. The only reason I can ask you these questions is because it is so vital to know Christ in order to rightly divide and understand the truth. I definitely would enjoy responding to some of your arguments on errancy and the various verses you have quoted! But I trust that you are looking to the word of God for salvation in Christ and not to prove your own convictions."
    Editor's response to Letter #3
    Ray, I appreciate receiving your letter, not only because several major fallacies within Christian beliefs are exposed, but also because dialogue can occur. Unlike Christian preachers on radio and television, I believe both sides with respect to the Bible's validity deserve a hearing. The emergence of truth is impossible when millions listen to or read only one side. In large measure that is the problem with denominations today. Each group lives in an ideological cocoon, with all the accompanying feelings of superiority.

    Let me respond to your statements one at a time. You begin by making the most serious mistake of all Christians asserting the Bible is the Word of God. I'd like to give you a list, a litany, of the deeds that God committed somewhere in the Old Testament. Now remember, God, the Perfect Being, did all of folowing in what is supposedly His book. He created evil (Lam. 3:38, Jer. 26:3, 36:3, Ezek. 20.:25-26, Judges 9:3, 1 Sam. 16:23, 18:10); He decieved (Jer. 4:10, 15:18, 20:7, 2 Chron. 18:22, Ezek. 14:9, 2 Thess. 2:9-12); He told people to lie(Ex. 3:18, 1 Sam. 16:2); He lied (Gen 2:17, 2 Sam. 7:13); He rewarded liars (Ex. 1:15-20); He ordered men to become drunken (Jer. 25:27); He rewarded the fool and the transgressor (Prov.26:10); He delivered a man, Job, into Satan's hands (Job 2:6); He mingled a perverse spirit (Isa. 19:14); He spread dung on people's faces (Mal. 2:3)); He ordered stealing (Ezek. 39:10, Ex. 3:22); He made false prophecies (Jonah 3:4. Gen. 5:10); He changed his mind (Jonah 3:10); He caused adultery (2 Sam. 12:11-12); He ordered the taking of a harlot (Hosea 1:2, 3:1-2); He killed (Num. 16:35, 21:6, Deut. 32:39, 1 Sam. 2:26, Psalm 135:10); He ordered killing (Lev. 26:7-8, Num. 25:4-5); He had a temper (Deut. 13:17, Judges 3:8); He was often jealous (Deut. 5:9, 6:15); He wasn't omnipresent (Gen4:16, 11:5, 1 Kings 19:11-12); He wasn't omniscient (Deut. 8:2, 13:3, 2 Chron. 32:31); He often repented (Ex. 32:14, 1 Sam. 15:35); He practiced injustice (Ex. 4:22-23, Joshua 22:20, Rom. 5:12); He played favorites (Deut. 7:6, 14:2, 1 Sam. 12:22); He sanctioned slavery (Ex. 21:20-21, Deut. 15:17); He degraded deformed people (Lev. 21:16-23); He punished a bastard for being illegitimate (Deut. 23:2); He punished many for the acts of one (Gen. 3:16, 20:18); He punished children for the sins of their fathers (Ex. 12:29, 20:5, Deut. 5:9); He prevented people from hearing his word (Isa. 6:10, John 12:39-40); He supported human sacrifice (Ex. 22:29-30, Ezek. 20:26); He ordered cannibalism (Lev. 26: 29, Jer. 19:9); He demanded virgins as a part of war plunder (Num. 31:31-36); He ordered gambling (Joshua 14. 2, Num. 26:52, 55-56); He ordered horses to be hamstrung (Joshua 11:6); He sanctioned violation of the enemy's women (Deut. 21:10-14); He excused the beating of slaves to death (Ex. 21:20-21); He required a woman to marry her rapist (Deut. 22:28:29); He taught war (Psalm 144:1); He ordered the burning of human feces to cook food (Ezek. 21:3-5); He intentionally issued bad laws (Ezek. 20:25); He excused the sins of prostitutes and adulterers (Hosea 4:14); He excused a murderer and promised his protection (Gen. 4:8-15); He killed a man who refused to impregnate his widowed sister-in-law (Gen. 38:9-10); and He is indecisive (Gen. 18:17).

    Now, can you imagine anyone saying, "Yes, that's my book, that represents me; that's the way I am." --especially a supposedly perfect being. What villian, what criminal, in all history had a record to match?

    Second, you ask if I believe a Christian who loves the Lord Jesus has the authority to refute the Word of God. To begin with, it is not a question of "authority," it's a question of "right." Everyone, Christian or otherwise, has a right, indeed, an obligation, to question the truth of what he is told and to demand evidence. Blind obedience leads to disaster. And every part of BIBLICAL ERRANCY proves the Bible is something other than God's word.

    Third, you ask if I know and love our Lord and Savior. My answer should already be obvious. He isn't the Lord and he isn't our Savior. But mere assertions by you or me prove little; evidence, such as that provided by BIBLICAL ERRANCY is what counts.

    Fourth, you ask if I believe the Bible to be the Word of God. You say you believe it is plenary and inerrant. But what you or I believe is irrelevant and immaterial. As is true in court, the evidence, must speak for itself.

    Fifth, you ask if I believe our God is a God of truth. BIBLICAL ERRANCY is not concerned with the nature of God; it is concerned with the Bible. By definition God cannot lie, but the Bible does.

    Six, constantly saying Jesus is our Savior proves nothing. Why do you keep repeating this, while providing little or no proof? Believers seem to think that if they repeat a statement long and hard enough, people will eventually succumb.

    Seven, am I saved by faith? No, neither are you, according to Jesus. How one is saved, assuming salvation exists, was discussed earlier. The Bible can't give anyone a definitive answer to this question.

    And, in answer to your last question, Ray I am sorry to say you are wrong on both counts. I am not looking to the Bible for salvation in Christ, because it isn't God's word, and Jesus isn't my Savior; and I am not proving my own convictions. I provide facts, evidence, documentation and information. Others formulate the convictions; they are the jury.

    Editors Note: BIBLICAL ERRANCY will always provide a hearing for apologists. Indeed, creating a forum for debate between proponents and opponents of the Bible's validity is one of the primary reasons for its existence. However, increasing numbers of apologists want more than a hearing; they seek to turn the publication into little more than a spokesman for fundamentalism by putting unacceptable controls on their letters. For example, one writer sent a 13 page handwritten analysis of BIBLICAL ERRANCY and stated his writing could only be published if done so verbatim and in total. Another writer sent me a lengthy tract and said, it too, must be published verbatim. If this continues, they will be wanting me to publish entire books. BIBLICAL ERRANCY is composed of 6 pages, not 60. I would be glad to address the points made in both writings, but the conditions imposed are unreasonable. Any submitted manuscript having less than 200 words will probably be published verbatim, but those exceeding 200 words must, of necessity, be edited, with only the stronger aspects being published. I suggest those having many points to make either write several letters over a period of months, or submit one comphrensive summary. They could even write a lengthy letter divided in such a matter that one section could be discussed each month. Secondly, any literature sent to BIBLICAL ERRANCY could very well be published unless the submitter indicates otherwise.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue No. 4,
    April 1983

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    COMMENTARY
    MORALITY--Defenders of the Bible, such as fundamentalists, never cease criticizing the evils and immoralities of modern society and environment. A "return to the Bible" movement is hardly the answer. The Bible is definitely not the fountain from which truth, goodness and purity spring, as its proponents would have us believe. Many Biblical verses are permeated with corruption, degeneracy and immorality. Awakening our children on Sunday morning to participate in Biblical readings could easily lead to that which is being opposed. Much of the Bible dwells on immorality, fosters profanity and honors corruption. If children were not diverted from various parts of scripture, they could easily be influenced by such negative language as the following:
    Gen. 38:9 "...and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground."
    Lev. 21:20 "... a man that is brokenfooted or...hath his stones broken."
    2Sam. 16:21 "... and Absalom went in unto his father's concubines in the sight of all Israel."
    Ezek. 23:20 "..Yet she increased her harlotry, and doted upon her (RSV) paramours there, whose members were like those of asses, and whose issue was like that of horses. Thus you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when the Egyptians handled your bosom and pressed your young breasts."
    Song 5:4 "My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him."
    I don't think many people need to be told what "it," "stones," "went unto," "members," and "issue," and "by the hole of the door," are referring to.
    One school of apologists alleges that some of these verses are to be understood figuratively, not literally. But what does it matter? The words are equally disgusting and should be kept away from impressionable people. Children, for example, are not going to make subtle distinctions as to intent and meaning. Other apologist contend:
    "When it (the Bible-ed.) speaks of sin, it describes it in its ugliness, so that disgust and horror enter the heart of the reader. Not once, for a moment, does it leave the high moral level of stern opposition to unrighteousness in all its forms." Bible Difficulties, W. Arndt, p. 63.
    "Disgust and horror" are clearly produced, but where is the "high moral level;", where is the opposition to profanity? The context of each verse shows they have nothing to do with moral teachings.

    The following verses aren't going to elevate the morality of society either. If anything they are worse:
    Deut. 23:1-2 "He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD. A bastard shall not enter ..."
    2Kgs. 18:27 "... that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you."
    Prov. 5:19 "... let her breasts satisfy thee at all times;..."

    Biblicists allege that the Song of Solomon's infatuation with breasts comprises part of a love poem between either a man and his wife or Christ and His Church:
    Song 1:13 "A bundle of myrrh is my well beloved unto me; he shall lie all night betwixt my breasts."
    Song 4:5 "Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies."
    Song 8:10 "I am a wall, and my breasts like towers:..."
    But regardless of motive, such language is still offense.

    Many other verses could be quoted, but the point is made. Enough is enough. I don't like writing verses of this nature any more than decent people like reading them. How could the Bible be a book of goodness, moral teachings and purity, when it actually indicts itself:
    Prov. 15:26 "... the words of the pure are pleasant words."

    Later issues of Biblical Errancy will discuss morality in regard to patriarchs and numerous events, but what better way to close this month's commentary than quoting Robert Ingersoll and Ashley Montagu, who said:
    "The believers in the Bible are loud in their denunciation of what they are pleased to call the immoral literature of the world; yet few books have been published containing more moral filth than this inspired word of God... Until these passages are expunged from the Old Testasment, it is not a fit book to be read by either old or young... There are chapters that no gentleman would read in front of a lady... and the time will come when mankind will wonder that such a book was ever called inspired." "Some Mistakes of Moses," Ingersoll Works, Vol.2, p. 177.
    "If the Bible is not obscene, what book is?... The Christian world should never say another word against immoral books until it makes the inspired volume clean. These vile and filthy things were not written for the purpose of conveying and enforcing moral truth, but seem to have been written because the author loved an unclean thing. "Some Mistakes of Moses," Ingersoll Works, Vol.2, p. 178.
    "THE GOOD BOOK - one of the most remarkable euphemisms ever coined." Ashley Montagu


    DIALOG & DEBATE
    Letter #4 from Michael Hauenstein of Dayton Ohio (Part 1)
    Dear Mr. Mckinsey, Thank you for reading the tract ("In Devil's Hell"-ed) that I sent you. I hope that you'll also read the tract ("Today's Keys to Everlasting Life"-ed), that I've enclosed this time. You have asked me "to respond in kind: Read Biblical Errancy". I have read Issue Number two.
    You said that my tract avoided the issue ("your tract avoided the evidence entirely..."), however that is not true. The issue I pointed out (See: Letter #1, Feb. 1983 Issue-ed.), is that you, Mr.McKinsey, "must be born again." The tract dealt with that subject alone. You need to be saved more than anyone I know. The reason why I say that is because you are so bent on trying to prove the Bible false. The Holy Spirit must really be reproving you of sin, so to avoid the point, you are trying to air condition Hell. There are no air conditioners in hell, it's just hot all the time...

    The issue therefore is, are you, Mr. McKinsey, born again? Please answer that question, openly. Be open with your readers. The front page of your "periodical"states that you provide a hearing for apologists... Why didn't you print the tract (the first tract he sent-ed.) in toto? Why refer to it out of context? You are not providing much of a hearing when you won't present all of the evidence which the other side has to offer!... Having made my point, I will proceed by the grace of God, to correct your periodical....(To BE Continued-ed.)

    Editor's response to Letter#4 (part I)
    Since your letter is long, Mike, I will respond to one section at a time in this and subsequent issues. First, I read your small tract, "Todays's Key to Everlasting Life," and found it to be erroneous in several major respects. First, it claims to know the specific procedures one must follow in order to be saved. As I showed in the March, 1983 Commentary of Biblical Errancy this can't be done, since the Bible is hopelessly inconsistant in this regard. Second, it claims "all have sinned" which clearly contradicts such verses as Gen. 6:9 and Job 1:1 (See Jan.1983 Issue, p.3). Third, the folowing verses in your tract:
    Hebr. 9:27 "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment."
    contradicts:
    1Ths. 4:17 "Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
    2Kgs. 2:11 "... there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven."
    Hebr. 11:5 "By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God." (See: Gen. 5:24)

    Each of the latter verses clearly shows an instance in which people have gone to God without dying. Fourth, the tract says, "You must admit that you are a sinner who deserves to die and go to hell." According to Christian beliefs, this is true of anyone the moment he becomes a human being. But Biblical Errancy demonstrated in the January, 1983, issue that "Original Sin" is patently unjust on its face, and could not possibly be santioned by a just God. There is not now, never has been, and never will be an adequate answer as to why humanity is being punished (allegedly) for what one man, Adam, did. "The absurdity of the doctrine known as 'The Fall of Man,' gave birth to that other absurdity known as 'The Atonement'. So that now it is insisted that, as we are rightfully charged with the sin of someone else, we can rightfully be credited with the virtues of another." "Orthodoxy," Ingersoll Works, Vol. 2, p. 370.

    And fifth, the pamphlet states, "God is Holy and Righteous. There is no sin in Him." Although this may be true of God, it is in direct opposition to "His" Book's description of him. According to "His" Book he not only violated his own Ten Commandments by killing individuals, telling people to lie, causing adultery, and ordering stealing, but committed a wide assortment of other despicable acts. (See: Biblical Errancy, March, 1983, p. 5.) As Thomas Paine and Robert Ingersoll said:
    "A false friend, an unjust judge, a braggart, a hypocrite, and tyrant, sincere in hatred, jealous, vain and revengeful, false in promise, honest in curse, suspicious, ignorant, infamous and hideous--such is the God of the Pentateuch." "Some Mistakes of Moses", Ingersoll Works
    "All our ideas of the justice and goodness of God revolt at the impious cruelty of the Bible. It is not God, just and good, but a devil, under the name of God, that the Bible describes." The Age of Reason", Thomas Paine, p.198.
    "... A book so full of contradictions and wickedness could not be the Word of God, and...we dishonor God by ascribing it to him." The Life and Works of Thomas Paine, Vol. 9, p. 177.
    "...for in my opinion the Bible is a gross libel against the justice and goodness of God, in almost every part of it." The Age of Reason, Thomas Paine, p.199.
    "... as I never will believe any book that ascribes cruelty and injustice to God. I therefore reject the Bible as unworthy of credit." The Age of Reason, Thomas Paine, p.199.
    "I seek to rescue the reputation of the Diety." "What We Must Do To Be Saved," Ingersoll's Work, Vol. 1, p.470.

    You stated in your letter, Mike, that the issue is, "You must be born again." But that is by no means the issue. The issue is, "Is the book from which that statement comes, valid? Is it the word of God?" That's the real issue. If it isn't God's Word, who cares what it says? It's no more inspired and deserves no more credence than any other book. Thomas Paine could not have said it better: "... but before anything can be admitted as proved by the Bible, the Bible itself must be proved to be true; for if the Bible be not true, or the truth of it be doubtful, it ceases to have authority, and can not be admitted as proof of anything." The Age of Reason, Thomas Paine, p.89.

    You say I need to be saved. But the truth is, you need to be aware of the fact that you have accepted a book, adopted its precepts and expounded its teachings without investigating its validity or performing a reasonable, intelligent critique of its contents. Apparently you are so desperate for something to believe in that you are willing to minimize or ignore all contrary information. As I told some college students recently after a protracted discussion, "As long as it looks good, sounds good, feels good, and seems to make sense, you really don't care whether it is true or false. Having something to believe in is more important to you than the accuracy of that which you believe." Francis Bacon, the philosopher, said it well: "Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true."

    You say I am "bent on trying to prove the Bible false." In truth, Mike, I am trying to awaken people to the tremendous number of problems contained within Scripture. For several years I have been sending a letter of introduction to call-in radio stations, which says, in part, "Since the 1960's most of my time has been devoted to a searching analysis of the Bible. Like Thomas Paine and Robert Ingersoll, I was disturbed by the large number of difficulties contained therein and decided to initiate a calm, dispassionate presentation of that which was not being exposed to the laity. My intent was not to injure people's feelings but to inform. Once individuals have the data, only they can decide how it should be employed." I also stated a fundamental judicial tenet that, "People can only formulate an informed, reasoned analysis of any subject when given both pro and con information." On the other hand, Mike, those representing your position, especially the evangelicals, are bent on making sure people are allowed to hear only one point of view. When did you ever hear a preacher on radio or television state the Bible was mistaken in some respect? I'm not "bent" in any direction, Mike. I'm trying to straighten matters out. The world's conditions are bent enough already; they don't need any assistance.

    You say the "Holy Spirit must really be reproving me of sin." I think you had better consult the Holy Spirit again, Mike. Since when has he been driving people away from "God's Word"? When and where does the Bible relate an instance in which the Holy Spirit punished someone by urging him to go elsewhere? Incidentally, in regard to one of your comments, I hope you didn't mean to question my integrity. Neither of us has any reason to doubt the decency of the other. Ad hominen arguments prove nothing, are irrelevant, and only generate ill will. So let's stay with the Book and not shift the discussion to personal comments.

    You accuse me of wanting to "air-condition" hell, while all I'm trying to do is let some fresh air into the minds of many. You ask me to open up to my readers and imply I failed in this respect by not publishing your tract in toto. As I stated in the March, 1983 Issue, copying extended tracts such as yours is not practical (See: Editor's Note in Issue #3). Moreover, so many of your tracts' fallacies have already been exposed that little can be accomplished by printing the rest. Why discuss the remaining secondary information? I have been providing you with a hearing, Mike, and will continue to do so. So will you please relate one instance in which your tract was quoted out-of-context or you were denied an adequate hearing.

    Letter #4 Continues:
    You say that "Elijah revived at the time of the Transfiguration." I'd say that in the context of your sentence that the word "revived" meant "came back to life." Yet you say on page two, line 32, that Elijah never died! If he didn't die, how did he revive?

    Editor's Response to Letter #4
    Good Question, Mike! That's the most intelligent comment you have made. But don't ask me; ask the Bible. I've wondered how apologists resolve this contradiction. I didn't say Elijah never died; the Bible says as much (2 Kings 2:11). I never said Elijah rose from the dead; the Bible shows as much (Matt. 17:3). I am merely repeating the Biblical account. If you insist that Elijah never died and, thus, never came back to life at the time of the Transfiguration, then why was he mentioned, along with Moses, who did return to life? The problem is, "does Matt. 17:3 mean Elijah rose from the dead?" The context seems to say yes.

    Letter #4 Continues:
    You say, "How could Jesus be the savior of all mankind when he couldn't even save himself?" That's how He was the Savior of Mankind, He gave himself for us to pay for our sins. In a sense, Jesus couldn't save Himself from dying on the cross, if any person was to ever be born again, because Jesus had to make the sacrifice which would pay for the sins we've committed against God.

    Editor's Response to Letter #4
    Mike, you just ignored what I wrote in Feb. 1983 issue on page 3. How could Jesus have been giving himself for mankind when he said on the cross, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Clearly he was not dying willingly for anyone, and was not "giving himself for mankind". You keep saying he is dying for you when he says he isn't. Why don't you believe him?

    What do you mean by, "In a sense, Jesus couldn't save himself"? Either he could or he couldn't. There is no in between. And his words clearly show he couldn't, although he wanted to.

    (Part II of Letter #4 will be in next month's issue.

    Letter #5 from Abigail Brown of Fort Worth, Texas
    Dear Mr. McKinsey, Even if every copy of the Bible were destroyed and there was no way to reproduce the Bible again, the story and message of Jesus Christ would live. It will continue to live and to grow, as long as the world needs love. Every aspect of creation needs care and concern (love). Survival of life itself is in jeopardy. I send this sermon (a copy is attached-ed) in hope it can get through to you.

    Editor's Response to Letter #5
    Dear Abigail, I'm sorry to tell you that of all the apologetic letters I have received, your approach is among the weakest. What have you proved? Nothing! What evidence have you provided? None! Where is your data? All you have done is utter some assertions that make you feel good. You haven't even bothered to support your position with some Biblical verses. I might just as well say I am positive I will be elected president of the United States in 40 years. Now prove this false. How do you know what is going to occur until it's happened? How do you know the message of Jesus would live on if the Bible were destroyed and couldn't be reproduced? But even more importantly, who cares? The question is not whether the Bible's message will endure, but whether it is accurate. Continued support by the majority doesn't prove it is truth. To quote a wit: "Majorities mean nothing: during the Flood only one man knew enough to get out of the rain." The majority wants to hang a man at a lynching but that doesn't make it right.

    I agree with you that "living" aspects of creation need love and survival itself is in jeopardy, but what has that to do with the Bible's truthfulness? The need for love doesn't prove Jesus is the answer; it only causes some people to look to him for love.

    As far as the sermon you sent me is concerned, it is difficult to see how it could get through to anybody in light of its glaring inaccuracies. Proof for this is shown by looking at a statement on page 2. It says, "He (Jesus-ed) did not believe there was a devil, but he believed that power was demoniac." Yet, Jesus not only believed the devil existed but had conversations with him (Matt. 4:3-10, Luke 4:3-8).

    Letter #6 from Paul Hutchinson of Cincinnati, Ohio
    The fact that present-day individuals still base their political, social and even economic philosophies and outlooks on overt and demonstrable false pronouncements of ancient figmental deities is alarming, to say the least. And although I would never deny anyone the right of free expression and belief, your efforts, Dennis, are precious in that they point out blatant falsehoods in what far too many people have for far too long held absolute, uncontestable truths. The overall importance of our philosophies, religious or otherwise, are far greater than one would automatically assume. Our outlooks often determine how we observe, interpret and react to our environments and ourselves, and it is mostly for this reason that it is important our philosophies stand in accord with the available facts--an uncommon occurrence. I heartily salute your efforts to separate fact from fiction. If all had your desires to better know and understand our complex world, there's little doubt it would be a much more enjoyable place to live. Keep up the good work (and God be with you).

    Editor's Response to Letter #6
    What can I say, Paul! Your kindness is exceeded only by your wisdom.

    Letter # 7 from BR of St. Cloud, Minnesota
    I received your issue #2 (Feb.) and found it to be extraordinary. It has long been my belief that the Christians have to be defeated on their own turf (that is, Christians who seek to convert) which is the Bible itself. So sign me up for six months (and may I have a copy of No.1 as well?) My check is enclosed.

    Editor's Response to Letter #7
    Dear BR: I think we both agree with Paine who said, "I will not go out of the Bible for proof against the supposed authenticity of the Bible. False testimony is always good against itself." The Age of Reason, Thomas Paine, p. 105.

    Letter #8 from M. Potts of New York, New York
    Sorry to keep you waiting on this subscription, it was one of the many waiters on the pile. Anyway, here we go for six months. Love your article, keep up the good work, mate. This is great stuff! By the way, I've only gone as far as No.2, so could you follow on from there please? Thanks again for the wonderful information. (A subscription was enclosed-ed.)

    Letter # 9 from Rev. Heins of Wisconsin
    Dennis: I like the material you're putting in the newsletter. I'd like to try and give it a shot to publish some working manuals for Bible study. There must be some way to get the message out that Biblical interpretation must be based on other than literal interpretation. Keep up the good work


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Contents
     
  2. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Some more bible thumping for U!.

    From Losing Faith In Faith: From Preacher To Atheist, by Dan Barker -- Chapter 23

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Bible Contradictions
    PAUL SAID, "God is not the author of confusion," (I Corinthians 14:33), yet never has a book produced more confusion than the bible! There are hundreds of denominations and sects, all using the "inspired Scriptures" to prove their conflicting doctrines.
    Why do trained theologians differ? Why do educated translators disagree over Greek and Hebrew meanings? Why all the confusion? Shouldn't a document that was "divinely inspired" by an omniscient and omnipotent deity be as clear as possible?

    "If the trumpet give an uncertain sound," Paul wrote in I Corinthians 14:8, "who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air." Exactly! Paul should have practiced what he preached. For almost two millennia, the bible has been producing a most "uncertain sound."

    The problem is not with human limitations, as some claim. The problem is the bible itself. People who are free of theological bias notice that the bible contains hundreds of discrepancies. Should it surprise us when such a literary and moral mish-mash, taken seriously, causes so much discord? Here is a brief sampling of biblical contradictions.


    Should we kill?
    Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."
    Leviticus 24:17 "And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death."
    vs.


    Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, . . . and slay every man his brother, . . . companion, . . . neighbor."
    I Samuel 6:19 " . . . and the people lamented because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter."
    I Samuel 15:2,3,7,8 "Thus saith the Lord . . . Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. . . . And Saul smote the Amalekites . . . and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword."
    Numbers 15:36 "And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."
    Hosea 13:16 "they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with children shall be ripped up."
    For a discussion of the defense that the Commandments prohibit only murder, see "Murder, He Wrote", chapter 27 (Losing Faith In Faith: From Preacher To Atheist).

    Should we tell lies?
    Exodus 20:16 "Thou shalt not bear false witness."
    Proverbs 12:22 "Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord."
    vs.


    I Kings 22:23 "The Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee."
    II Thessalonians 2:11 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."
    Also, compare Joshua 2:4-6 with James 2:25.

    Should we steal?
    Exodus 20:15 "Thou shalt not steal."
    Leviticus 19:13 "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbor, neither rob him."
    vs.


    Exodus 3:22 "And ye shall spoil the Egyptians."
    Exodus 12:35-36 "And they spoiled [plundered, NRSV] the Egyptians."
    Luke 19:29-34 "[Jesus] sent two of his disciples, Saying, Go ye into the village . . . ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither. And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him. . . . And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt? And they said, The Lord hath need of him."
    I was taught as a child that when you take something without asking for it, that is stealing.

    Shall we keep the sabbath?
    Exodus 20:8 "Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy."
    Exodus 31:15 "Whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."
    Numbers 15:32,36 "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. . . . And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."
    vs.


    Isaiah 1:13 "The new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity."
    John 5:16 "And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day."
    Colossians 2:16 "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days."
    Shall we make graven images?
    Exodus 20:4 "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven . . . earth . . . water."
    Leviticus 26:1 "Ye shall make ye no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone."
    Deuteronomy 27:15 "Cursed be the man that maketh any graven or molten image."
    vs.


    Exodus 25:18 "And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them."
    I Kings 7:15,16,23,25 "For he [Solomon] cast two pillars of brass . . . and two chapiters of molten brass . . . And he made a molten sea . . . it stood upon twelve oxen . . . [and so on]"
    Are we saved through works?
    Ephesians 2:8,9 "For by grace are ye saved through faith . . . not of works."
    Romans 3:20,28 "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight."
    Galatians 2:16 "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ."
    vs.


    James 2:24 "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."
    Matthew 19:16-21 "And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he [Jesus] said unto him . . . keep the commandments. . . . The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven."
    The common defense here is that "we are saved by faith and works." But Paul said "not of works."

    Should good works be seen?
    Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works."
    I Peter 2:12 "Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that . . . they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation."
    vs.


    Matthew 6:1-4 "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them . . . that thine alms may be in secret."
    Matthew 23:3,5 "Do not ye after their [Pharisees'] works. . . . all their works they do for to be seen of men."
    Should we own slaves?
    Leviticus 25:45-46 "Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, . . . and they shall be your possession . . . they shall be your bondmen forever."
    Genesis 9:25 "And he [Noah] said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren."
    Exodus 21:2,7 "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. . . . And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the manservants do."
    Joel 3:8 "And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hand of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people far off: for the Lord hath spoken it."
    Luke 12:47,48 [Jesus speaking] "And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes."
    Colossians 3:22 "Servants, obey in all things your masters."
    vs.


    Isaiah 58:6 "Undo the heavy burdens . . . let the oppressed go free, . . . break every yoke."
    Matthew 23:10 "Neither be ye called Masters: for one is your Master, even Christ."
    Pro-slavery bible verses were cited by many churches in the South during the Civil War, and were used by some theologians in the Dutch Reformed Church to justify apartheid in South Africa. There are more pro-slavery verses than cited here.

    Does God change his mind?
    Malachi 3:6 "For I am the Lord; I change not."
    Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent."
    Ezekiel 24:14 "I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent."
    James 1:17 " . . . the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."
    vs.


    Exodus 32:14 "And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people."
    Genesis 6:6,7 "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth . . . And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth . . . for it repenteth me that I have made him."
    Jonah 3:10 ". . . and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
    See also II Kings 20:1-7, Numbers 16:20-35, Numbers 16:44-50.

    See Genesis 18:23-33, where Abraham gets God to change his mind about the minimum number of righteous people in Sodom required to avoid destruction, bargaining down from fifty to ten. (An omniscient God must have known that he was playing with Abraham's hopes for mercy--he destroyed the city anyway.)

    Are we punished for our parents' sins?
    Exodus 20:5 "For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation." (Repeated in Deuteronomy 5:9)
    Exodus 34:6-7 " . . . The Lord God, merciful and gracious, . . . that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation."
    I Corinthians 15:22 "For as in Adam all die, . . ."
    vs.


    Ezekiel 18:20 "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father."
    Deuteronomy 24:16 "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin."
    Is God good or evil?
    Psalm 145:9 "The Lord is good to all."
    Deuteronomy 32:4 "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he."
    vs.


    Isaiah 45:7 "I make peace and create evil. I the Lord do all these things." See "Out of Context" for more on Isaiah 45:7.
    Lamentations 3:38 "Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good?"
    Jeremiah 18:11 "Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you."
    Ezekiel 20:25,26 "I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live. And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the Lord."
    Does God tempt people?
    James 1:13 "Let no man say . . . I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."
    vs.


    Genesis 22:1 "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham."
    Is God peaceable?
    Romans 15:33 "The God of peace."
    Isaiah 2:4 ". . . and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."
    vs.


    Exodus 15:3 "The Lord is a man of war."
    Joel 3:9-10 "Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up: Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong."
    Was Jesus peaceable?
    John 14:27 "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you."
    Acts 10:36 "The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ."
    Luke 2:14 " . . . on earth peace, good will toward men."
    vs.


    Matthew 10:34 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household."
    Luke 22:36 "Then said he unto them, . . . he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
    Was Jesus trustworthy?
    John 8:14 "Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true."
    vs.


    John 5:31 "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true."
    "Record" and "witness" in the above verses are the same Greek word (martyria).

    Shall we call people names?
    Matthew 5:22 "Whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger of hellfire." [Jesus speaking]
    vs.


    Matthew 23:17 "Ye fools and blind." [Jesus speaking]
    Psalm 14:1 "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God."
    Has anyone seen God?
    John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time."
    Exodus 33:20 "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live."
    John 6:46 "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God [Jesus], he hath seen the Father."
    I John 4:12 "No man hath seen God at any time."
    vs.


    Genesis 32:30 "For I have seen God face to face."
    Exodus 33:11 "And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend."
    Isaiah 6:1 "In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple."
    Job 42:5 "I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee."
    How many Gods are there?
    Deuteronomy 6:4 "The Lord our God is one Lord."
    vs.


    Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image."
    Genesis 3:22 "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man has become as one of us, to know good and evil."
    I John 5:7 "And there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
    It does no good to claim that "Let us" is the magisterial "we." Such usage implies inclusivity of all authorities under a king's leadership. Invoking the Trinity solves nothing because such an idea is more contradictory than the problem it attempts to solve.

    Are we all sinners?
    Romans 3:23 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."
    Romans 3:10 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one."
    Psalm 14:3 "There is none that doeth good, no, not one."
    vs.


    Job 1:1 "There was a man . . . who name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright."
    Genesis 7:1 "And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation."
    Luke 1:6 "And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless."
    How old was Ahaziah?
    II Kings 8:26 "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign."
    vs.


    II Chronicles 22:2 "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign."
    Should we swear an oath?
    Numbers 30:2 "If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath . . . he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth."
    Genesis 21:22-24,31 " . . . swear unto me here by God that thou wilt not deal falsely with me . . . And Abraham said, I will swear. . . . Wherefore he called that place Beersheba ["well of the oath"]; because there they sware both of them."
    Hebrews 6:13-17 "For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself . . . for men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath."
    See also Genesis 22:15-19, Genesis 31:53, and Judges 11:30-39.

    vs.


    Matthew 5:34-37 "But I say unto you, swear not at all; neither by heaven . . . nor by the earth . . . . Neither shalt thou swear by thy head . . . . But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil."
    James 5:12 ". . . swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation."
    When was Jesus crucified?
    Mark 15:25 "And it was the third hour, and they crucified him."
    vs.


    John 19:14-15 "And about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! But they cried out . . . crucify him."
    It is an ad hoc defense to claim that there are two methods of reckoning time here. It has never been shown that this is the case.

    Shall we obey the law?
    I Peter 2:13 "Submit yourself to every ordinance of man . . . to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors."
    Matthew 22:21 "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's." See also Romans 13:1,7 and Titus 3:1.
    vs.


    Acts 5:29 "We ought to obey God rather then men."
    How many animals on the ark?
    Genesis 6:19 "And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark."
    Genesis 7:8-9 "Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah."
    Genesis 7:15 "And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life."
    vs.


    Genesis 7:2 "Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female."
    Were women and men created equal?
    Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."
    vs.


    Genesis 2:18,23 "And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. . . . And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."
    Were trees created before humans?
    Genesis 1:12-31 "And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: . . . And the evening and the morning were the third day. . . . And God said, Let us make man in our image . . . And the evening and the morning were the sixth day."
    vs.


    Genesis 2:5-9 "And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. .Ê.ÊAnd the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground . . . And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food."
    Did Michal have children?
    II Samuel 6:23 "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death."
    vs.


    II Samuel 21:8 "But the king took the two sons of Rizpah . . . and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul."
    How many stalls did Solomon have?
    I Kings 4:26 "And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen."
    vs.


    II Chronicles 9:25 "And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen."
    Did Paul's men hear a voice?
    Acts 9:7 "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man."
    vs.


    Acts 22:9 "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me."
    (For more detail on this contradiction, with a linguistic analysis of the Greek words, see "Did Paul's Men Hear A Voice?" by Dan Barker, published in the The Skeptical Review, 1994 #1)

    Is God omnipotent?
    Jeremiah 32:27 "Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh: is there anything too hard for me?
    Matthew 19:26 "But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."
    vs.


    Judges 1:19 "And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron."
    Does God live in light?
    I Timothy 6:15-16 " . . . the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach . . ."
    James 1:17 " . . . the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."
    John 12:35 "Then Jesus saith unto them, . . . he that walketh in darkness knoweth not wither he goeth."
    Job 18:18 "He [the wicked] shall be driven from light into darkness, and chased out of the world."
    Daniel 2:22 "He [God] knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him." See also Psalm 143:3, II Corinthians 6:14, and Hebrews 12:18-22.
    vs.


    I Kings 8:12 "Then spake Solomon, The Lord said that he would dwell in the thick darkness." (Repeated in II Chronicles 6:1)
    II Samuel 22:12 "And he made darkness pavilions round about him, dark waters, and thick clouds of the skies."
    Psalm 18:11 "He made darkness his secret place; his pavilion round about him were dark waters and thick clouds of the skies."
    Psalm 97:1-2 "The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice . . . clouds and darkness are round about him."
    Does God accept human sacrifice?
    Deuteronomy 12:31 "Thou shalt not do so unto the Lord thy God: for every abomination to the Lord, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods."
    vs.


    Genesis 22:2 "And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of."
    Exodus 22:29 "For thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors; the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me."
    Judges 11:30-39 "And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hand, Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon . . . and the Lord delivered them into his hands. . . . And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances: . . . And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed."
    II Samuel 21:8-14 "But the king [David] took the two sons of Rizpah . . . and the five sons of Michal . . . and he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the Lord: and they fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest . . . And after that God was intreated for the land."
    Hebrews 10:10-12 " . . . we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ . . . But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God."
    I Corinthians 5:7 " . . . For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us."
    Who was Joseph's father?
    Matthew 1:16 "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus."
    vs.


    Luke 3:23 "And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli."

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This chapter was first printed as a "nontract," a freethinkers' version of a (non-proselytizing) tract. Since it was first published, I have received numerous replies from Christians who think that these contradictions are either trivial or easily explained. Yet not a single "explanation" has been convincing. Most of them do little homework, inventing off-the-cuff defenses of what the bible "could have meant," or devising creative explanations that actually make the problem worse. For example, one Christian, agreeing with Eusebius, explained that "Thou shalt not bear false witness" does not prohibit lies, and that God actually wants us to tell falsehoods if it will further the kingdom of heaven.

    Many of the defensive attempts are arguments from silence. Some apologists assert that since the writer of John does not say that there were not more women who visited the tomb with Mary, then it is wrong to accuse him of contradicting the other evangelists who say it was a group of women. But this is a non-argument. With this kind of thinking, I could claim that the people who accompanied Mary to the tomb included Mother Teresa, Elvis Presley, and Paul Bunyan. Since the writer of John does not specifically exclude these people, then there is no way to prove that this is not true--if such fragile logic is valid.

    All of the above contradictions have been carefully studied, and when necessary the original languages have been consulted. Although it is always scholarly to consider the original languages, why should that be necessary with the "word of God?" An omnipotent, omniscient deity should have made his all-important message unmistakably clear to everyone, everywhere, at all times. No one should have to learn an extinct language to get God's message, especially an ancient language about which there is much scholarly disagreement. If the English translation is flawed or imprecise, then God failed to get his point across to English speakers. A true fundamentalist should consider the English version of the bible to be just as inerrant as the original because if we admit that human error was possible in the translation, then it was equally possible in the original writing. (Some fundamentalists do assert that the King James Version is perfect. One preacher reportedly said, "If the King James Version was good enough for the Apostle Paul, then it's good enough for me.") If a contradiction exists in English, then the bible is contradictory.

    The above list of thirty-three contradictions is a very small portion of the thousands of biblical discrepancies that have been catalogued by scholars. See "Leave No Stone Unturned" for seventeen additional contradictions specific to the resurrection of Jesus. One monthly publication, "Biblical Errancy," is devoted entirely to this topic (published by Dennis McKinsey, 3158 Sherwood Park Drive, Springfield OH, 45505.) Even if a defender of the bible were to eliminate all of the above (and no one has come close), we are still only scratching the surface. The bible is a flawed book.

    © Copyright 1992 by Dan Barker. All Rights Reserved.

    Please do not distribute copies of this chapter in this form.

    Losing Faith In Faith: From Preacher To Atheist by Dan Barker can be purchased from the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc., PO Box 750, Madison WI 53701

    A version of this chapter is available as a nontract (in much briefer form) suitable for handing to religionists.
     
  3. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    Way to go. Post a thousand objections in hope you hit the target.

    I'm shaken! Look at all those verses!

    You are an idiot. Focus on one and you will be taken seriously. Cut and past many and forget it. How are we supposed to respond in an orderly fasion to that?

    You just vomit the crap you've been fed and expect us to clean up the mess?

    Ben
     
  4. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Calling people names will get you nowere!!.

    The message was not ment for you anyhow, someone here likes thumping the bible, Tony1 puts in a thousand verses, and yet you say nothing to him! I on the other hand post many objections and you complain!! get over it!! you don't have to read it!!.

    But if you do! you may be enlighten! or twice as confused, take it as you will! OH!! and can you tell I call you no names! that's cause I've grown!. (so grow up)
     
  5. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    The difference between you and Tony is that the "thousands" of his verses form a single point whereas you're just shooting randomly hoping to hit something.

    I just call it as I see it. It's a typical response when someone can't prove a point to try to overwhelm their opponent. That's why I called you an idiot. Whining because I called you a name (And with a frowny face even.) is hardly disproving my point.

    If you want to be taken seriously in your attempt to show a doctrinal contradiction you need to focus and have a clear plan of attack.

    Any so called "Minister" who doesn't understand why Christ's resurrection was unique is hardly credible as an authority on the Bible.

    Ben
     
  6. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Oh!! hell my bad!!.

    When I started it was just on the **Original Sin** bit, however I made the mistake of copying too much!!. OOOOOps!

    Ps. I just noticed it Kalvin, thanks for bringing it up!.

    The other page is from an author who was a priest, and now is an athiest, I threw that one in too keep Tony1 busy thumping through his bible!!!.
     
  7. daktaklakpak God is irrelevant! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    710
    Interesting post. Anyone has objections to any or all the points no need to reply all. Just pick one and list the counter statements. I would like to read from the opposite side. ;)
     
  8. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Thanks daktaklakpak

    As you can tell I've only been attacked for it!! too long, pick a point sort of thing. Yes I do realize I made a mistake, sue me!. lol

    I copied a little too much on the Original Sin bit, which is what originally wanted to do.
    Oh! and since others such as Kalvin will read this, the point is:
    To demonstrate all the discrepancies one can find in the bible.

    If the *Book* is the word of god, why does it have so many contradictions?. (hint) is not the word of god!!. But of man, to control and manipulate the ignorance of the masses, and it has worked quiet well for thousands of years. Why does it work. That's easy, people are too lazy to contradict what is suppose to be devine, the squashy feeling of doing wrong if one contradicts it, the fear built into the work, "end up in hell" type of warning.

    Why is it been debated so much lately? We've been growing, the Church predicted the end of Earth by the new mellenia, IT HAS NOT HAPPENED!!! Crooked priests, Televangelist in it for the money, David Coresh, Rev. Jim Jones., no need 2 go on.
     
  9. Deadwood Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    386
     
  10. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    It's nice you want to put on a show and I hope you have fun. But I refuse to be a part of it.

    I've debated religion long enough to know when a debate with someone who doesn't believe in the Bible is worth having.

    I have no objections to you not believeing or accepting anything I have to say. I think I've demonstrated on numerous occasions that I'm willing to debate complex issues which is why I continue to debate on these boards.

    Ben
     
  11. tony1 Jesus is Lord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,279
    Some more bible thumping for U!.

    What I get from this is that you found the first few Issues of Biblical Errancy and a link from The Skeptical Review website.

    I gather you were trying to make some point; so, what is it?

    *I copied a little too much on the Original Sin bit, which is what originally wanted to do.
    Oh! and since others such as Kalvin will read this, the point is:
    To demonstrate all the discrepancies one can find in the bible.

    If the *Book* is the word of god, why does it have so many contradictions?
    *

    So who said Dennis McKinsey, Dan Barker, Farrell Till, et al, are right?

    What are the contradictions in the Bible?
     
  12. Godless Objectivist Mind Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Here are the contradictions Tony1

    you asked: What are the contradictions, well looks here!!. This is one is on original sin!.

    One of the most important concepts in Christianity is original sin, or the belief that all mankind has inherited a sinful nature brought about by the acts of Adam and Eve.
    Rom. 5:12 "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

    Rom. 5:19 "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,..."

    1Cor. 15:22 "For as in Adam all die, ..."

    Yet, no amount of theological reasoning can make an inherently unjust idea seem right. Punishing billions of people for the acts of one is not only inherently unfair and unwarranted but also in opposition to other Biblical verses such as:

    Deut. 24:16 "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers (2Chron.25:54) :every man shall be put to death for his own sin." (2 Kings 14:6)

    Ezek. 18:20 "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

    Ezek.33:20 "O ye house of Israel, I will judge you every one after his ways."

    Jer. 31:29-30 "In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge."

    Rom. 2:6 "Who will render to every man according to his deeds."

    Ezek. 18:4 "... the soul that sinneth, it shall die."

    Each of these verses shows that every person should only be punished for those sins which he commits, not those of others.

    Original sin makes about as much sense as if I were sitting at home one evening and the following occurred: The police came to my door and stated I was under arrest because my father in Europe just shot and killed someone. I responded by asking what that had to do with me and they said, "He's your father, isn't he?"

    (B) Another false conception held by many Christians is that the Bible is without contradictions. Few beliefs are more erroneous. For this reason, contradictory statements will be highlighted not only in this issue of Biblical Errancy but all thoses that follow. The following examples are only a fraction of those that could be mentioned:

    Rom.3:23 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."

    1Kgs. 8:46 "...for there is no man that sinneth not,...." (2Chr. 6:36)

    Prov.20:9 "Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?"

    Eccl. 7:23 "For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."

    Mark 10:18 "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God."

    Rom. 3:10 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one." (Also 1 John 1:8 & 10, Rom. 3:12, 5:12, Gal. 3:22)


    Versus
    Gen. 6:9 "Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."

    Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

    Job 1:8 "...my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?" (Job 2:3)

    Gen. 7:1 "And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation."

    Luke 1:5-6 "In the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, there was a priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abia: and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.(RSV)

    (C) Another clear contradiction concerns whether or not God repents.

    Num. 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent."

    1Sam. 15:29 "And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent."


    Versus
    Jonah 3:10 "And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."

    1Sam.15:11 "It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king...."

    Exod. 32:14 And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

    Jeremiah 26:3 "... for I repent me of the evil that I have done unto you."

    Gen. 6:6 "And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."

    1Sam. 15:35 "...and the LORD repented that he had made Saul king over Israel."

    (D) One final contradiction is worthy of note. It concerns the question of whether or not God's face has been seen.

    John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time;..."

    John 6:46 "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father."

    1John 4:12 "No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us."


    Versus
    Gen. 32:30 "And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
    Exod. 33:11 "And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend."

    Num. 14:14 "...that thou LORD art seen face to face,..."

    Job 42:5 "I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee."

    Deut. 34:10 "And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,..."

    Deut. 5:4 "The LORD talked with you face to face...." (also Psalm 63:2 Isa.6:1 & 6:5, Amos 7:7-8, Ezek. 20:35, Ex. 24:9-10


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I doubt that you will read it!.
     
  13. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    Godless, you're a whiny little bitch. Seriously, get over the fact that no one wants to play your stupid little game.

    If you can't focus on one just shut your trap. No one cares to talk to you. I suggest editing your posts and clearing them out. Until you have one and only one contradiction listed in this thread will I not even consider explaining it to you. Tony is obviously blowing you off as well.

    No one who would explain them to you cares to get into an argument when you're obviously such a pompus ass who really doesn't care what we'd have to say anyway.

    Read my sig...no, at this point I doubt you even look smart.

    Ben
     
  14. Hermann Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    124
    small box

    Toni1,

    What do you mean by a "small box" and why is your "box" so large?
    Please explain.
     
  15. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,813
    KalvinB

    You're a testament to the compassion and understanding of the Christian endeavor, and equally an asset to humankind.

    :rolleyes:,
    Tiassa :cool:
     
  16. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    Yes I know, I'm a horrible person.

    Maybe I just don't care to limit my vocabulary or my thoughts to account for the feelings of others.

    If Godless wants to cluster bomb the forum with "contradictions" for some illogical reason then why should I feel obligated to be nice in return?

    Just letting him know what I honestly think about HIM personally. I'm more than willing to be nice to be people.

    Godless is just being a pompous ass as is obvious by the things he's said ("I accidently pasted too much"? What the hell is that?) and the actions he taken to try to "disprove" Christianity.

    If he wants to have an intelligent debate (one contradiction at a time) I'm all for it. If he wants to be an ass then I have no problem calling him on it. If I'm an ass for doing so then well I'm an ass.

    Ben
     
  17. Teg Unknown Citizen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    672
    Notice how quick they are to avoid the subject! Why can't you tell us how you resolve the obvious contradictions listed by Godless. Tony1, I can see that you have simply given up on your lists. The lack of counter arguments can be taken to mean that no one objects the original post. So I take it that we all agree that what was said is true?
     
  18. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    You're an idiot.

    There I go being an asshole.

    When Godless can pull his head out of his ass and post a single contradiction and delete everything else in this thread, I'm more than willing to talk to him and explain the contradiction to him.

    I have no reason or obligation to explain anything to anyone and neither does Tony. I'm here of my own will to explain my take on things where I feel I should. I participate in threads I feel are worthwhile regardless of the topic.

    I don't feel I give a shit what you or Godless think at this point so I don't feel I'm obligated to explain anything to him/her or you.

    Take as you will I don't care. I expect such a small minded assumption about me and Tony's response to Godless because it is what I've come to expect from those who don't accept our beliefs and are incapable of intelligent debate.

    Why don't you generalize my position and call all Christians assholes in the process because ya know aithiests would never act this way. They're always pleasant and open to Christians and their views. There's not a thread in the "Free" Thought forum advocating the religion is the cause of this travesty in America because aithiests don't think that way. They're open to the fact that whoever did this is taking their religion way too far on their own outside any written scripture they may have. They know it has absolutly nothing to do with the Christian or any other God and everything to do with personal agendas and anger falsly justified by religion. There's also not a thread mocking religious TV programming in foreign countries posted by an aithiest.

    So shut the hell up. If you want to have an intelligent debate, let's have one. Delete this thread and let's start from the beginning with a single contradiction like was asked for to start with and we'll have an intelligent discussion on it.

    I have no problem with that. I enjoy debate. I've been doing this for years. I've managed to debate many people without pissing them off. We have our differences but at the end of the debate we can shake hands. But I'm not afraid to speak my mind if I feel I need to no matter how that makes you view me.

    Ben
     
  19. Hypnogog Registered Member

    Messages:
    29
    Hmm

    Actually, I thought Godless started a very decent debate. Within the bounds of his text he posted several contradictions, specifically defined to several basic areas of the Bible and stated the he would like refutation. After the it all diffused into name calling and ramblings.
    Let's take it down a notch. How does one validate the obvious self-contradictions within the Bible without calling the entire works under suspicion? (For examples please see previous posts)
     
  20. KalvinB Publicity Whore Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,063
    You take it one contradiction at a time.

    From experience in studying the Bible (studies available at my site under "The Book of Studies") solving one will solve many as the Bible intertwines quite a bit. There are "thousands" of contradictions but they all fall under only a dozen or so categories if that.

    Godless would have made a good opening if he had not overdone it. The number of contradictions he listed could not be reasonably discussed in one thread. Keeping on topic would be impossible and we'd accomplish nothing. It would just turn into an endless discussion. How many threads now are still related to the original comments or questions? To start a thread with numerous unrelated issues is absurd.

    People like Teg would then say (and he did) "you're lack of response proves there's no answer to these objections" or something very similar.

    When in reality it's just too much to bite. It's like me posting every objection to evolution and expecting an evolutionist to respond effectivly.

    I don't and don't encourage using information overload to win debates. It's obnoxious. You take it one step at a time and make sure every point is examined before moving to the next step.

    Ben
     

Share This Page