28 Nov 06
Originally posted by whodeyI agree with you that there are some truth in the Bible. I never said it is all false. But the problem how to recognize the true from the false.
No, but it does represent that fact that there is truth in the Bible and it is of historical significance even though it was not designed to be a historical text. Thus truth is present in the Bible, therefore it is up to as to how much of it you accept.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
29 Nov 06
Originally posted by SquelchbelchIf most Christian don't believe that the bible is a Divine work, then what is the issue?
They are in the same book & if you believe The Bible a Divine work (most Christians don't these days) then these contradictions shouldn't occur.
You have also confused what "oral tradition" means. It is not "a language problem" as you put it. Basically, the tradition of the creation story were orally transmitted through separated communities. It is plausible that over time small discrepancies developed. During the writing of genesis, probably during the Jewish Exile to Mesopotamia, these traditions were integrated into a written tradition. There are some who claim that the beginning of chapter five is even a different creation story, but was eventually incorporated.
With the death of Judas there are some attempts at a reconciliation. After a while the inside of a hanged person would gush out, as Luke describes. However, it is most likely that Luke was relying on different information (an oral tradition) than Matthew. Luke could also have made the description up; being a master of Hellenistic prose, the dramatic death of Judas, seems to almost be a retribution from God, and a warning to all who disobey Him. Another explanation of the difference between Acts and Matthew, could be that Luke wants to show this as prophesy fulfilment. If you read either of Luke's works, you will notice that Luke often presents stories as fulfilments of Hebrew Scripture. It is possible that Luke modified Matthew's account (of which, it is not impossible that he had access to) in order to demonstrate Judas' death as the fulfilment of the psalm, of which he then quotes in the next verse.
29 Nov 06
2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyI think you know that I belive in all prophets, I also belive they all came with the same message from GOD. And it is the same as the message that the prophet Muhammed came with.
I thought I just explained that. It matters little who the author is, rather, it only matters if the author was inspired by God himself. If God did not inspire the author then the book is of no real religious significance in ragards to the actual truth about who the real God is. For example, we know that Mohammad wrote the entire Quran. So what? The ques ...[text shortened]... wever, someone is lying. Is it Mohammad or is it the entire New and Old Testament in the Bible?
The problem is as follow:
1- Every one told the quran from the prophet until today is known, so we know that the Quran revealed to the prophet is the same one we have today. Not only Quran, but every word the prophet said and everything he did during his life. There is a complete scientific decipline in Islam dedicated to ensure that no lie could be added on the mouth of the prophet, and no corruption could be made. So I find it save to build my faith over it.
If I want to do the same with the Bible, unfortunatly I can't do the same. How can I tell that this Bible is the one inspired by GOD. Specially if I find many contradictions and things that can't be inspired by GOD. So how can I use it to build any faith.
I don't refuse the Bible because I doen't have any truth. I refuse it because it is unreliable source to build my faith.
29 Nov 06
Originally posted by ahosyneyYou may find contradictions but I do not as I have addressed the supposide contradictions that has been claimed in the Bible. I think you will agree that it is far easier to find contradictions in writings that you are either unfamiliar with or fundamentally disagree with in general. In fact, contradictions are often manufactured in such instances.
I think you know that I belive in all prophets, I also belive they all came with the same message from GOD. And it is the same as the message that the prophet Muhammed came with.
The problem is as follow:
1- Every one tell the quran from the prophet until today is known, so we know that the Quran revealed to the prophet is the same one we have today. ...[text shortened]... ause I doen't have any truth. I refuse it because it is unreliable source to build my faith.
As far as the difference in the Quran to that of the Bible, what do you see are the major theological differences? A different name for God perhaps? I understand your objection that Chrsit died for our sins because you only accept him as a mere prophet, but what are the other major differences? Is it your view that God has merely given up on the Jews and is now focused on the descendants of Ishmael instead of the descendants of Isaac?
My other question is what evidence do you have that Mohammad accuratly represented the men of God in the Bible other than the arguement that Mohammad says so? What ancient manuscript, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, indicate that the Bible has been "corrupted". I would assume you have an older manuscript in which to refer to in order to prove that the Bible of today has been tampered with.
29 Nov 06
Originally posted by whodeyWe have discussed many points. They are all still open. I don't think we will reach a conclusion this way.
You may find contradictions but I do not as I have addressed the supposide contradictions that has been claimed in the Bible. I think you will agree that it is far easier to find contradictions in writings that you are either unfamiliar with or fundamentally disagree with in general. In fact, contradictions are often manufactured in such instances.
As fa ...[text shortened]... uscript in which to refer to in order to prove that the Bible of today has been tampered with.
Any way..
You may find contradictions but I do not as I have addressed the supposide contradictions that has been claimed in the Bible. I think you will agree that it is far easier to find contradictions in writings that you are either unfamiliar with or fundamentally disagree with in general. In fact, contradictions are often manufactured in such instances.
I told you before contradictions is not the only problem. The real problem is that you don't know the narration chain of the Bible. There are more than 4000 years between you and the Torah first releaved. Do you exactly how each chapter reached you through this 4000 years or more? Can you grant me that this is the same one inspired by GOD? How can you be sure?
The other problems are:
1- There are many contradictions. You may argue with me in some of them. But the list is very long. But I will asume that I'm not familier of the Bible,
2- The Bible assume things for GOD that are logicaly not accepted. The GOD in the Bible sleep , lack power, lack knowlage, beaten in a fight, his creature force him to do what they want, and can do things aganist his power. Do you think these things are accepted to GOD? Do you think that GOD will say that about himself?
3- The Bible accuse almost every Prophet of adultry, and immorality. Which can't be accepted for prophets. I can argue with you in this point if you don't agree.
4- Some parts of the Bible has no use, and can't be a source of any value or morality. Example I remember now the "The Songs of Solmon".
5- There are some parts of the Bible clearly delare that they are written by humans like the four Gospels.
And many more.......
Do you think I'm wrong?
As far as the difference in the Quran to that of the Bible, what do you see are the major theological differences? A different name for God perhaps? I understand your objection that Chrsit died for our sins because you only accept him as a mere prophet, but what are the other major differences?
There are many major differences:
1- The most important one for you is the trinity and Jesus. And you mentioned that already.
a- In the Bible Jesus is GOD (althougth you didn't prove it yet), in Quran he is a man and prophet.
b- In the Bible Jesus crossified, died and raised after 3 days. In Quran he is not crossified. He was raised to GOD.
c- In the Bible there is Christianity. In Quran there is no Christianity.
d- Related to this point: In the Bible, GOD didn't know that Adam will sin, he did punish him and send him to earth. The story appears in the Bible that if Adam didn't sin, he would have stayed in heaven for ever. We carry the sin of Adam (I don't know if you managed to prove this)
In Quran GOD created Adam to live on earth. He was created in heaven. God knew he was going to sin, it was a test for Adam. Adam ask forgiveness and he is forgiven.
2- The GOD in Quran is not like anything else, but in the Bible he is viewed as a person.
3- The GOD in Quran is powerful, has every attribute of perfection. But in the Bible he is week, sleep, regret his action, and his knowlage is limited.
4- Quran focuse on the purpose of human life to be worship. In Bible the purpose is unclear. Christians belive it is love, Jewish belive they are the choosen nation and GOD is only for them.
5- Quran introduce a complete and valid life system for human. Every muslim follow this system now with no problem, while there is no specific one in the Bible. And the one exists no one follow it, because it is not practical.
There are other differences. But I think this is enough.
Is it your view that God has merely given up on the Jews and is now focused on the descendants of Ishmael instead of the descendants of Isaac?
Islam is not limited to a specific nation or race. It is a universal Message. You will not find your claim in the Quran. For me Both are prophets. The only difference is the Prophet Muhammed is from Ishmael branch. but that has nothing to do with the message.
My other question is what evidence do you have that Mohammad accuratly represented the men of God in the Bible other than the arguement that Mohammad says so? What ancient manuscript, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, indicate that the Bible has been "corrupted". I would assume you have an older manuscript in which to refer to in order to prove that the Bible of today has been tampered with.
I didn't understand this question, but we talked about the Dead see scrolls before , and I told that not all the Bible found in the Scrolls, and there some errors found in them. Besides how can you say that the Dead See Scrolls are the original? They are a copy written by hand, you cann't verify it itself.
I don't have an older one neither do you. Although you belive in untrusted souce but I don't.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
29 Nov 06
Originally posted by twhiteheadWell yes and no. You have to accept that they are open to error, but not necessarily that "a large proportion of the contents of the gospels could not possibly have been based on fact". And whether "oral tradition" conflicts with "inspired writing" depends very much on what one defines as "inspired writing".
But once you accept that they are oral traditions and not 'inspired writing' then you must accept that a large proportion of the contents of the gospels could not possibly have been based on fact.
29 Nov 06
3 edits
Originally posted by Conrau KWell many Christians would surely say:
Well yes and no. You have to accept that they are open to error, but not necessarily that "a large proportion of the contents of the gospels could not possibly have been based on fact". And whether "oral tradition" conflicts with "inspired writing" depends very much on what one defines as "inspired writing".
1) Creation was God's greatest feat
2) The Bible is the Holy word of God
Therefore, at least concede that the Biblical account of Creation should not contain a huge contradiction as I outlined in page 1 above.
God commands atrocities...
Or perhaps another language issue???
Samuel 15: 1-3
1 Samuel also said unto Saul, The LORD sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the LORD.
2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.
3 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.
Charming😕
29 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Conrau KYes. A great deal of classical Greek and Roman poetry, for example, has a claim to divine inspiration (the Muse)...And "vates" (poet) means "prophet"...The way I see it, God prefers a library to a single book.
And whether "oral tradition" conflicts with "inspired writing" depends very much on what one defines as "inspired writing".
29 Nov 06
Originally posted by SquelchbelchHave you seen this? Should keep you amused for hours.
Well many Christians would surely say:
1) Creation was God's greatest feat
2) The Bible is the Holy word of God
Therefore, at least concede that the Biblical account of Creation should not contain a huge contradiction as I outlined in page 1 above.
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
29 Nov 06
Originally posted by SquelchbelchYour confusion lies in your inability to think laterally 🙂
I mean, base your life on a political tool that can't even decide on how its principal baddie dies...
"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (Matt. 27:5)
Or...
"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18)
Hmmmmm
😉