Creation: Genesis contradictions? - by Don Batten

[OzSpen]

That it's an interpretive opinion, not "evidence".

Not true!

 

[OzSpen]

The discussion isn't about Jesus' death, but the year of his birth.

I've already provided a link to evidence about the year of Jesus' birth, approx 4 BC.

 

[OzSpen]

Can you give me an example of testimony by an eyewitness given in the Bible?

You must be joking. There are droves of them in the Gospels and the Book of Acts. Here is but one of them:

Luke 24:1-12English Standard Version Anglicised (ESVUK)
The Resurrection
24 But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared. 2 And they found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3 but when they went in they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4 While they were perplexed about this, behold, two men stood by them in dazzling apparel. 5 And as they were frightened and bowed their faces to the ground, the men said to them, “Why do you seek the living among the dead? 6 He is not here, but has risen. Remember how he told you, while he was still in Galilee, 7 that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men and be crucified and on the third day rise.” 8 And they remembered his words, 9 and returning from the tomb they told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest. 10 Now it was Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women with them who told these things to the apostles, 11 but these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them. 12 But Peter rose and ran to the tomb; stooping and looking in, he saw the linen cloths by themselves; and he went home marvelling at what had happened.

However, your atheism prevents you from wanting to acknowledge this truth. God's estimate of what you do is: 'For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth' (Rom 1:16 ESV).

I don't expect you to be open to the eyewitness testimony, because of this suppression of the truth.

Oz

 

[SkyWriting]

Knock yourself out
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html
Personally I'm interested to see an explanation of the "chariots of iron" bit.

Wow...how obtuse. Truth's in scripture are written from multiple
points of view. Some references are from man's more historical
point of view, and others are more spiritually referenced.

If it is being translated correctly, it is simply the historians opinion
what happened was because of chariots. Perhaps history played out
differently because the valley residents were not vanquished in this
one battle. God is not known as the crusher of iron chariots everywhere.

I'll pick another randomly. This is post 124 so I'll examine that one.

Who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah?
19:13
19:24


Really? You discovered "a problem" with one verse 11 sentences after the first?

Lets just put them together and see what explodes:

For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it. Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven.

It looks fine now. That didn't take any research.

 

[46AND2]

You must be joking. There are droves of them in the Gospels and the Book of Acts. Here is but one of them:


However, your atheism prevents you from wanting to acknowledge this truth. God's estimate of what you do is: 'For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth' (Rom 1:16 ESV).

I don't expect you to be open to the eyewitness testimony, because of this suppression of the truth.

Oz

Luke specifically states he is not an eyewitness. Care to try again?

My atheism has nothing to do with it. Modern (and old) new testament Christian scholarship agrees that Luke was not an eyewitness.

 

[Armoured]

Wow...how obtuse. Truth's in scripture are written from multiple
points of view. Some references are from man's more historical
point of view, and others are more spiritually referenced.

So, contradictory versions, IOW.

If it is being translated correctly, it is simply the historians opinion
what happened was because of chariots. Perhaps history played out
differently because the valley residents were not vanquished in this
one battle. God is not known as the crusher of iron chariots everywhere.

I'll pick another randomly. This is post 124 so I'll examine that one.

Who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah?
19:13
19:24


Really? You discovered "a problem" with one verse 11 sentences after the first?

Lets just put them together and see what explodes:

For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it. Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven.

It looks fine now. That didn't take any research.

If that were the only exmple, you may have a point. Get back to me when you'v managed the next hundred or so.

 

[Armoured]

Not true!

Um, yes, it is. Evidence is, you know, "evidence". Not some guy's opinion about what stuff means.

 

[SkyWriting]

So, contradictory versions, IOW.
If that were the only exmple, you may have a point. Get back to me when you'v managed the next hundred or so.

I've done all 100.
Which ones will change your mind?

 

[Armoured]

I've done all 100.
Which ones will change your mind?

Well, how about you start with the iron chariots one, like I asked?

 

[SkyWriting]

So, contradictory versions, IOW.
If that were the only exmple, you may have a point. Get back to me when you'v managed the next hundred or so.

You will change your mind after YOU tackle a few hundred.

This is post 128 so I'll check on that one:

Out of the country
And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many. And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country. Mark 5:9-10
Into the deep
And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him. And they besought him that he would not command them to go out into the deep. Luke 8:30-31

This shows there were two witnesses to the event.

As one person remembers it, the speaker said something about "This region" "This country" or "This" something.
What they heard was not clear. Likely it was "This realm" but the witness were not highly educated. If you check to see how it was translated, even teams of scholars are not clear how to translate it http://biblehub.com/mark/5-10.htm

The second witness in Luke remembers the intent of the possessed. As this witness remembers it, it was " Don't send me into that other place".........which is where Jesus sends them.

The two accounts improve on the idea that the story is being repeated in scripture, because there was more than one witness and more than one account of the historical events.

If scripture was fictional, there would be no reason to repeat the same story with two versions.

 

[SkyWriting]

Well, how about you start with the iron chariots one, like I asked?

3 posts back

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...ns-by-don-batten.7935415/page-7#post-69357517


If it is being translated correctly, it is simply the historians opinion
what happened was because of chariots.

What scripture is showing you is that men are men and will say
that "God is behind the Green Bay Packers big win" ....even though
that is not the case.

The Bible is just telling true stories about man.

 

[Armoured]

This shows there were two witnesses to the event.
Children belong with their bio parents

You will change your mind after YOU tackle a few hundred.

This is post 128 so I'll check on that one:

Out of the country
And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many. And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country. Mark 5:9-10
Into the deep
And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him. And they besought him that he would not command them to go out into the deep. Luke 8:30-31

This shows there were two witnesses to the event.

As one person remembers it, the speaker said something about "This region" "This country" or "This" something.
What they heard was not clear. Likely it was "This realm" but the witness were not highly educated. If you check to see how it was translated, even teams of scholars are not clear how to translate it http://biblehub.com/mark/5-10.htm

The second witness in Luke remembers the intent of the possessed. As this witness remembers it, it was " Don't send me into that other place".........which is where Jesus sends them.

The two accounts improve on the idea that the story is being repeated in scripture, because there was more than one witness and more than one account of the historical events.

If scripture was fictional, there would be no reason to repeat the same story with two versions.

So, you've goal post shifted from "there are contradictions, but they show different accounts, rather than scripture being fictional"?

I see.

 

[Armoured]

3 posts back

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...ns-by-don-batten.7935415/page-7#post-69357517


If it is being translated correctly, it is simply the historians opinion
what happened was because of chariots.

It's still part of scripture, isn't it? It's still contradictory to other parts of scripture, isn't it?

Or when you say "there are no contradictions" is "except the bits quoting historians" implied?

 

[SkyWriting]

3 posts back

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...ns-by-don-batten.7935415/page-7#post-69357517


If it is being translated correctly, it is simply the historians opinion
what happened was because of chariots.

It's still part of scripture, isn't it? It's still contradictory to other parts of scripture, isn't it?

Or when you say "there are no contradictions" is "except the bits quoting historians" implied?

I've covered that. There are different accounts of the exact same events.
Two versions of the same evens support the reality of the events taking place.

There are no contradictions that support the idea that any of the writings are fictional.
The differences add credibility.

Genesis 1 and 2, the same thing. Gen 2 is a different perspective on day 6 in gen 1.
Gen 2 is not a creation account, but the same story told with a different perspective.

 

[SkyWriting]

So, you've goal post shifted from "there are contradictions, but they show different accounts, rather than scripture being fictional"?

I see.

Two accounts of the same story are not contradictions. There are no contradictions. They are compliments.

Look:

"the proposed new system suffers from a set of internal contradictions"

• a person, thing, or situation in which inconsistent elements are present.
  "the paradox of using force to overcome force is a real contradiction"
• the statement of a position opposite to one already made.
  "the second sentence appears to be in flat contradiction of the first"
  synonyms: denial, refutation, rebuttal, countering
  "a contradiction of his statement"

The list is not covering even one "position opposite to one already made" or paradox.
I'm moving the goal post to the known definition of "contradiction. "

 

[Armoured]

I've covered that. There are different accounts of the exact same events.
Two versions of the same evens support the reality of the events taking place.

Yes, that's what "contradictory" means.

There are no contradictions that support the idea that any of the writings are fictional.
The differences add credibility.

Goal post shift, as discussed.

 

[DerelictJunction]

3 posts back

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...ns-by-don-batten.7935415/page-7#post-69357517


If it is being translated correctly, it is simply the historians opinion
what happened was because of chariots.

What scripture is showing you is that men are men and will say
that "God is behind the Green Bay Packers big win" ....even though
that is not the case.

The Bible is just telling true stories about man.

Your claim that if it is "being translated correctly it is simply the historian[']s opinion" is not backed up by your providing this supposed "correct" translation. So, this is merely a claim by you.
Please provide the "correct" translation, the Bible scholars who agree that it is the "correct" translation, and the reasoning (or link to that reasoning) for their determination that it is, indeed, the "correct" translation.
If all scripture is "God breathed", then why does this historian's opinion fail to read as an opinion? BTW, I am assuming that the historian in question is the person who wrote Judges 1:19. If you mean a different historian, please make that more clearly defined.

 

[SkyWriting]

Your claim that if it is "being translated correctly it is simply the historian[']s opinion" is not backed up by your providing this supposed "correct" translation. So, this is merely a claim by you.
Please provide the "correct" translation, the Bible scholars who agree that it is the "correct" translation, and the reasoning (or link to that reasoning) for their determination that it is, indeed, the "correct" translation.
If all scripture is "God breathed", then why does this historian's opinion fail to read as an opinion? BTW, I am assuming that the historian in question is the person who wrote Judges 1:19. If you mean a different historian, please make that more clearly defined.

"God breathed" means men under guidance from God, not channeling God's words into English. Even if officially we all do a bit.

 

[DerelictJunction]

"God breathed" means men under guidance from God, not channeling God's words into English. Even if officially we all do a bit.

Did ya plan on providing that "correct" translation and your evidence that it is the "correct" translation, or have you decided to ignore my request and leave your claim unsupported?

 

[ewq1938]

Both are the same, out of the country into the deep is not where the evil spirits wanted to go.

They wanted to stay in the country, out of the deep.

You will change your mind after YOU tackle a few hundred.

This is post 128 so I'll check on that one:

Out of the country
And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many. And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country. Mark 5:9-10
Into the deep
And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him. And they besought him that he would not command them to go out into the deep. Luke 8:30-31

This shows there were two witnesses to the event.

As one person remembers it, the speaker said something about "This region" "This country" or "This" something.
What they heard was not clear. Likely it was "This realm" but the witness were not highly educated. If you check to see how it was translated, even teams of scholars are not clear how to translate it http://biblehub.com/mark/5-10.htm

The second witness in Luke remembers the intent of the possessed. As this witness remembers it, it was " Don't send me into that other place".........which is where Jesus sends them.

The two accounts improve on the idea that the story is being repeated in scripture, because there was more than one witness and more than one account of the historical events.

If scripture was fictional, there would be no reason to repeat the same story with two versions.