But the way you worded your post, it sounds like you want me to say ''God said YOU SHALL NOT KILL'' then youre going to tell me that every time God killed or had Israel kill, that its a contradicdtion.Sandwich said:?? Sorry--I am not sure exactly what you mean by this?? No, no games. Just that the only reconciliation requires theological maneuvers that are demonstrably immense.
michabo said:Okay, so criterium 1:
- contradiction must not be a translation artifact, but present in the original manuscript
For one thing, this example is pretty silly.I don't understand your point here. Can you clarify? Are you saying that, for example, if one person says that he had a happy day on Oct 17, 1999 in LA and bought some milk and watched some tv, and another mentioned that there was a catastrophic earthquake, that this isn't a contradiction because maybe the first person watched tv during the earthquake and chose not to mention it?
see above.Isn't this a fancy way of brushing over a contradiction? Shouldn't you admit that, yes it is in fact a contradiction but not a significant one?
That's not the point or the question. I want to know what techniques are legitimate to brush away potential contradictions
You haven't asked me what my criteria are for establishing a contradiction
What about (for analogy) if one person said that President Bush detonated a bomb killing thousands and another said Osama bin Laden detonated a bomb killing thousands? Would that be a contradiction? (and would it be extreme?)JesusBeliever said:There are no contrdictions Ive seen presented of THIS sort of extreme.
Serapha,Serapha said:Would you provide a listing of which manuscripts you find acceptable?
Interesting that you should both accept this as a contradiction and describe it as extreme, as this is a direct analogy of the resurrection stories. One describes an earthquake and resurrected saints, and others do not.JesusBeliever said:For one thing, this example is pretty silly.
There are no contrdictions Ive seen presented of THIS sort of extreme.
Heh, funny. Are you saying that contradictions can only be removed through faith?What you call ''brushing away'' we Christians call ''fervent prayer and study''
Soon. First I would really like to pin down the "rules". Many times I've seen contradictions presented and then a bunch of ad hoc hand-wavings are used to blow them away. Personally, I'd like to agree on a set of principles or criteria in advance so that we both know what is legit. I don't think this is unreasonable.You can just assume Ive already heard it all before in 20 years guy.
Instead of beating around the bush here, will you get to the point and present your contrdiction ?
Hello et. al.michabo said:Soon. First I would really like to pin down the "rules". Many times I've seen contradictions presented and then a bunch of ad hoc hand-wavings are used to blow them away. Personally, I'd like to agree on a set of principles or criteria in advance so that we both know what is legit. I don't think this is unreasonable.
That's a textbook example of "poisoning the well" - that anyone who fails to reach your conclusion must have had a particular deficiency, drawback, or shortcoming. It's a logical fallacy because it's something you really can't demonstrate.JesusBeliever said:There are no contradictions.
Only people who have refused to study them out and keep in prayer until they see the truth.
Phred said:There are no contradictions in the Bible if you believe there aren't any. It's that simple. However, the Bible as a story has many contradictions, from the geneology of Christ to the number of angels/men at the tomb to...
Matthew 1
16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
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,
Who was the paternal grandfather of Jesus?
The only reason anyone cares about this is that some Christians insist the Bible is perfect. A book that may or may not have been inspired by God and has been translated, transcripted and politically decided upon has enough difficulties for us to be amazed it's here at all. But then some insist we believe it literally... So the contradiction party begins.
Many are truly just viewpoints. Being on the far side of a river is subjective to which side of the river the narrator is. But then we get mathematical. Who's at the tomb? One man, two men, one angel, two angels? 4 gospels... 4 different answers.
It's an imperfect book written by imperfect men across unimaginable time. Get over it... contradictions in a book don't make your God any less.
.
I would expect to find contradictions, sense the Bible was written over a 1500 year peroid by at least 40 authors. If you look at science, they can not agree from one year to the next and they do not fully agree with each other.JesusBeliever said:There are no contradictions.
To be sure, the theological content ought to be the important issue, but the establishment and acknowledgement of errors, however small, is enough to refute the claim that the Bible is inerrant or free from contradictions. In fact, it is quite common for the argument to equivocate and morph into several different forms, such as "There are no contradictions in the Bible" to "That Bible contradiction does not affect the theological message" to "My faith is still strong in the face of this Bible contradiction" or "I do not consider this contradiction to be a contradiction."The Midge said:Personally I'm not very concerened about exactly how many charriots Solomen had or the eaxct number who were fed with five loaves and two fish- theologically speaking it makes no odds. The theological content or what the passage means is what is important.
The Truth is The Truth !JohnR7 said:I would expect to find contradictions, sense the Bible was written over a 1500 year peroid by at least 40 authors. If you look at science, they can not agree from one year to the next and they do not fully agree with each other.
The thing about the Bible though, is that it is the truth, and the truth never contradicts itself.
There are no contradictions in the geneology of Jesus. One traces the geneology though Mary, the other through Joseph. The devil would like people to think there are contradictions. Paul talked about how they were a endless source of conflict and there were many disputes.Phred said:There are no contradictions in the Bible if you believe there aren't any. It's that simple. However, the Bible as a story has many contradictions, from the geneology of Christ to the number of angels/men at the tomb to...
So if there is a typo, a misprint, a mis-quote or any kind of factual error in your newspaper it can not be believed? Oh dear, I think you have just ruled out the entire body of human literature.OccamsLaser said:To be sure, the theological content ought to be the important issue, but the establishment and acknowledgement of errors, however small, is enough to refute the claim that the Bible is inerrant or free from contradictions. In fact, it is quite common for the argument to equivocate and morph into several different forms, such as "There are no contradictions in the Bible" to "That Bible contradiction does not affect the theological message" to "My faith is still strong in the face of this Bible contradiction" or "I do not consider this contradiction to be a contradiction."
But occasionally the apparently mundane, small contradictory details do involve a theological message. In one of the examples you presented, it is a very plausible possibility that a large group of people showed up while Jesus and His disciples were eating a picnic lunch of two fish and five loaves of bread. The crowd asked for some food, and there clearly wasn't enough, so Jesus began preaching, repeating His clever slogan that "man does not live by bread (and fish) alone, but by the Word of God." That story could have gone from a metaphorical, allegorical equivocation on the word "feed" into a tale of how Jesus literally fed a "large multitude" with just five loaves and two fish. So, the question of the exact number and how they were fed would have a direct impact on the theological message.
"Once upon a time" is an appropriate beginning to that story, because McDowell weaves an interesting combination of historical fact and creative literary license in His apologetic books. Making the problem more difficult is McDowell's complete hesitation to respond to any criticism. Jeff Lowder over at Internet Infidels (http://www.infidels.org) has provided a comprehensive, point-by-point refutation of McDowell's "Evidence That Demands a Verdict."5solas said:Once upon a time there was a guy called Josh McDowell who wanted to prove that the Bible is wrong and full of contradictions. Now he is a believer!
This is an appeal which is less than persuasive, in the form of "I used to be like you, now I'm like me. You can be like me if you believe the same things I believe," common to just about any cult or religion. I have read criticism of McDowell's apologetics, and it does appear that he's playing fast and loose with the facts.Are you a skeptic?
by Josh McDowell
I was a skeptic too until I took a good hard look at the claims of Jesus Christ. In college I met several students who challenged me to take a closer look, to study and examine the Christian faith.
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I took the challenge, feeling certain I could prove Christianity to be false, a religion built on nice stories that couldn't stand up to the test of truth. [/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]But as I dug deeper and deeper into the claims of Christianity, I was shocked. I found facts, not fiction. I found so much evidence that I could only come to one conclusion Jesus Christ is the Son of God. He was crucified, He died, and He was resurrected on the third day. [/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Soon after this discovery, I accepted Jesus as my Savior and Lord. That was 39 years ago. My life has been completely changed because I have a personal relationship with Christ. [/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]As a skeptic, you've probably heard this before, but don't just shrug it off I challenge you, as those students challenged me examine the claims of Jesus Christ for yourself. If there's even the slightest chance that He truly is the Son of God, shouldn't you be willing to find out?
Why not order a copy of MTAC? Because I already have one, obtained from the "deep discount" table at a bookstore clearance sale (less than a dollar). The impression I got from reading the book cover to cover is that McDowell is selling his viewpoint to those who already believe, and who are less likely to criticize or question his sources and reasoning. But for anyone with even just a little critical thinking skill, it misses the mark.[/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]To get started, why not order a copy of More Than a Carpenter. Or check out the [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Apologetics Resource Center.[/font]
Silly in what way? It's just an example of an extreme contradiciton.JesusBeliever said:For one thing, this example is pretty silly.
One contradiction of this type which will probably be discussed is what happened immediately after the crucifixion. Apparently there was an eclipse of some sort, and a veil in the temple was torn, but the author of Matthew seems to think there was an earthquake which opened graves of dead people in Jerusalem, who were raised to life, and walked and talked with the people of the city. Curiously, the authors of Mark, Luke, and John completely omitted the incident of the zombie parade from their narratives, despite being in or near Jerusalem at the time. Claiming the authors were writing "just another viewpoint" of the same thing makes no sense. In this case, it can be argued that absence of evidence IS evidence of absense. It would serve as prima facie evidence directly supporting the claim, so for the other three authors to omit it from their narrative is a dubious strategy, and casts considerable doubt on their effectiveness - and competence - as investigative journalists. It would be as if one of the Gospels argued that Jesus was the Messiah, while completely omitting any details about the crucifixion and resurrection.There are no contrdictions Ive seen presented of THIS sort of extreme.
Call it whatever you want, it's still avoiding the issue. The "fervent prayer and study" rarely seem to provide any effective explanations.What you call ''brushing away'' we Christians call ''fervent prayer and study''
Note To Self: Read ahead in the thread to see if the same answers have already been given.michabo said:Interesting that you should both accept this as a contradiction and describe it as extreme, as this is a direct analogy of the resurrection stories. One describes an earthquake and resurrected saints, and others do not.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?