Biblical Contradictions

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Locked

Where do you draw the line on Biblical inerrancy?

There are minor errors of fact and detail which do not alter the material truth or meaning of the text in any way - IE 200 and 2000 is not important as it could easily be a copy error
9
13%
There are significant variations in the stories and records, none of which are fully accurate, but all of which contain historical truth along with the errors.
8
11%
There is a vast mix of styles and sources, layered and re-layered over time reflecting traditions and stories relating to the Hebrew people and their God. But, based on independent archeological evidence and literary records, some of it could be possible
15
21%
It's all a fairy tale, but in its message--sometimes scary, sometimes inspiring. Sometimes looney, sometimes profound. Sometimes outrageously wrong. Sometimes stunningly correct.
14
20%
It's all a fairy tale, but in its message--sometimes scary, sometimes inspiring. Sometimes looney, sometimes profound. Sometimes outrageously wrong. Sometimes stunningly correct.
14
20%
The bible is so full of bogus errors that we can nt be sure that there even was any of the people, places or events that it records
11
15%
 
Total votes: 71

User avatar
achilles12604
Site Supporter
Posts: 3697
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 3:37 am
Location: Colorado

Biblical Contradictions

Post #1

Post by achilles12604 »

Ok. I looked over the last few pages of topics and I couldn't find one dedicated to this discussion (much to my surprise). Therefore I am starting it.


What are the biblical contradictions which the atheists keep refering to and what are the answers by apologists.

Ready, set . . . GO!
Last edited by achilles12604 on Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 3 times

Post #1171

Post by McCulloch »

Biker wrote:You and the "science" crowd have nothing but voodoo interpretation of some data. The science crowd is the posterchild for conjecture/speculation, and you have to have faith in greater degree to believe the voodoo of the "scientific" origin of life "poof, bang" there it is?
Interesting choice of words. Voodoo, Informal: Usually Disparaging. characterized by deceptively simple, almost magical, solutions or ideas: voodoo politics. Which interpretation of data is closer to being deceptively simple or magical? The Earth came into existence by a long natural process that is not yet fully understood or the Earth was spoken into existence in a single day by the Father God?
Biker wrote:Rather than the Biblical account of creation, especially since Jesus Himself affirmed it! Jesus affirmed the Genesis account of creation, whats your problem? I'm supposed to believe some 20th century "scientist" over Jesus Christ?
Yes. Why not?
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

User avatar
Cathar1950
Site Supporter
Posts: 10503
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 12:12 pm
Location: Michigan(616)
Been thanked: 2 times

Post #1172

Post by Cathar1950 »

Biker wrote:
Rather than the Biblical account of creation, especially since Jesus Himself affirmed it! Jesus affirmed the Genesis account of creation, whats your problem? I'm supposed to believe some 20th century "scientist" over Jesus Christ?
No you have taken the word of what unknown authors have said about Jesus over science reason and history.

LightGrenade04 in another thread wrote:
Fundamentalism is actually an ultra-conservative theological movement/orientation that began in the 19th and early 20th centuries with the thought of people like Dwight Moody and John Darby within the collective umbrella of Evangelical Protestantism. There is no explicitly established "fundamentalist" denomination nor does any singular institution or individual speak for "fundamentalism"; however, various doctrines or beliefs unite them. Such as:

*Biblical inerrancy along with a dispensationalist-literalist hermeneutic - hence, their adherence to creationism (especially young earth creationism) and universal flood geology

*Penal substitutionary atonement - hence, their highly wrathful conception of God

*Some version of Millenialism - hence, the plethora of End Times prognosticators and awful novels like the Left Behind series
"But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no man."
"Let no man deceive himself.
If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become foolish that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness before God."
Logic? What logic? Mans logic will get you nowhere fast, in the things that matter.
I suggest if you want real truth, logic, go to the source! The Bible, the 66 volume Bible.

Biker
Maybe you just a cultish unnatural irrational man in denial when you say your not a fundamentalist?

User avatar
bernee51
Site Supporter
Posts: 7813
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:52 am
Location: Australia

Re: John 10:35

Post #1173

Post by bernee51 »

Biker wrote:
Biker wrote: How is it "fallacious argument'?
If you have to ask why a circularity is a fallacious argument there is no point in answering.
Just as I thought, nonsense. Tell me how do you know
I'm sure you have been told before, and the information is widely available. But to make it easier for you..you view that the bible is the word of god because it says so in the bible and the bible is the word of god is clearly a case where the premise presupposes the conclusion...

it is a fallacy whether you like it or not.
Biker wrote:
Bernee wrote: he/she/it doesn't exist?
Are you sure?
Without a doubt.
"Whatever you are totally ignorant of, assert to be the explanation of everything else"

William James quoting Dr. Hodgson

"When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. My life is a movement between these two."

Nisargadatta Maharaj

Biker

Re: John 10:35

Post #1174

Post by Biker »

bernee51 wrote:
Biker wrote:
Biker wrote: How is it "fallacious argument'?
If you have to ask why a circularity is a fallacious argument there is no point in answering.
Just as I thought, nonsense. Tell me how do you know
I'm sure you have been told before, and the information is widely available. But to make it easier for you..you view that the bible is the word of god because it says so in the bible and the bible is the word of god is clearly a case where the premise presupposes the conclusion...

it is a fallacy whether you like it or not.
Biker wrote:
Bernee wrote: he/she/it doesn't exist?
Are you sure?
Without a doubt.
I suppose that in most instances of common knowledge, the premise presupposes the conclusion argument may apply, but in the case of the Word of God, it does not. For, if you have the authoritative document, given by the authoritative being, who created everything seen and unseen, who existed before everything, where everything was created by and for Him, and we have His Word to mankind.
Where would one appeal?
The words of Scripture are self attesting. They cannot be "proved" to be Gods words by appeal to any higher authority. There is no higher authority. When one has the highest or absolute authority such as the Word of God, it would be subordinating the authority of Scripture to the thing to which we appeal to prove it to be Gods Word. If we ultimately appeal to human reason, or to logic, or to historical accuracy, or to scientific truth, as the authority by which Scripture is shown to be Gods Words, then we have assumed the thing to which we appealed to be a higher authority than Gods words and one that is more true or more reliable. And Bernee you have made that assumption, and I can't, because the Bible has demonstrated that authority, which I cannot deny.

Biker

Biker

Post #1175

Post by Biker »

Cathar1950 wrote:
Biker wrote:
Rather than the Biblical account of creation, especially since Jesus Himself affirmed it! Jesus affirmed the Genesis account of creation, whats your problem? I'm supposed to believe some 20th century "scientist" over Jesus Christ?
No you have taken the word of what unknown authors have said about Jesus over science reason and history.

LightGrenade04 in another thread wrote:
Fundamentalism is actually an ultra-conservative theological movement/orientation that began in the 19th and early 20th centuries with the thought of people like Dwight Moody and John Darby within the collective umbrella of Evangelical Protestantism. There is no explicitly established "fundamentalist" denomination nor does any singular institution or individual speak for "fundamentalism"; however, various doctrines or beliefs unite them. Such as:

*Biblical inerrancy along with a dispensationalist-literalist hermeneutic - hence, their adherence to creationism (especially young earth creationism) and universal flood geology

*Penal substitutionary atonement - hence, their highly wrathful conception of God

*Some version of Millenialism - hence, the plethora of End Times prognosticators and awful novels like the Left Behind series
"But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no man."
"Let no man deceive himself.
If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become foolish that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness before God."
Logic? What logic? Mans logic will get you nowhere fast, in the things that matter.
I suggest if you want real truth, logic, go to the source! The Bible, the 66 volume Bible.

Biker
Maybe you just a cultish unnatural irrational man in denial when you say your not a fundamentalist?
Cathar,
I quoted Scripture straight out of the Bible, it is not my idea but in fact is Gods. You can heed the advice, and wisdom in it or not. That is your choice, I would hope you would take it.
I have not read anything from Dwight Moody or John Darby? All of the descriptions listed of a certain type of belief system, don't describe my thoughts, especially the "wrathful conception of God", which I do not adhere to.

Biker
Biker

User avatar
bernee51
Site Supporter
Posts: 7813
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:52 am
Location: Australia

Re: John 10:35

Post #1176

Post by bernee51 »

Biker wrote:
bernee51 wrote:
Biker wrote:
Biker wrote: How is it "fallacious argument'?
If you have to ask why a circularity is a fallacious argument there is no point in answering.
Just as I thought, nonsense. Tell me how do you know
I'm sure you have been told before, and the information is widely available. But to make it easier for you..you view that the bible is the word of god because it says so in the bible and the bible is the word of god is clearly a case where the premise presupposes the conclusion...

it is a fallacy whether you like it or not.
Biker wrote:
Bernee wrote: he/she/it doesn't exist?
Are you sure?
Without a doubt.
I suppose that in most instances of common knowledge, the premise presupposes the conclusion argument may apply, but in the case of the Word of God, it does not. For, if you have the authoritative document, given by the authoritative being, who created everything seen and unseen, who existed before everything, where everything was created by and for Him, and we have His Word to mankind.
Where would one appeal?
Your appeal is what is known as special pleading. Yet another fallacious argument. You are doing well. Wanna go for a triple?
Biker wrote: The words of Scripture are self attesting. They cannot be "proved" to be Gods words by appeal to any higher authority. There is no higher authority. When one has the highest or absolute authority such as the Word of God, it would be subordinating the authority of Scripture to the thing to which we appeal to prove it to be Gods Word. If we ultimately appeal to human reason, or to logic, or to historical accuracy, or to scientific truth, as the authority by which Scripture is shown to be Gods Words, then we have assumed the thing to which we appealed to be a higher authority than Gods words and one that is more true or more reliable. And Bernee you have made that assumption, and I can't, because the Bible has demonstrated that authority, which I cannot deny.

Biker
It is you who is making an assumption. i.e god exists. For you to claim the bible to be the word of god she/he/it MUST exist. You can assume it exists based on your beliefs.

I too am use logic and reason, and observation, (jnana...knowledge) and meditation and self-enquiry.

I do not start from a position..gods exists, from whence you start.
"Whatever you are totally ignorant of, assert to be the explanation of everything else"

William James quoting Dr. Hodgson

"When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. My life is a movement between these two."

Nisargadatta Maharaj

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 3 times

Post #1177

Post by McCulloch »

I think that we are getting off topic. This is not a bad thing. This is a very important topic. Let's continue in a new thread: Why believe the Bible is from God?
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

Biker

Re: John 10:35

Post #1178

Post by Biker »

bernee51 wrote:
Biker wrote:
bernee51 wrote:
Biker wrote:
Biker wrote: How is it "fallacious argument'?
If you have to ask why a circularity is a fallacious argument there is no point in answering.
Just as I thought, nonsense. Tell me how do you know
I'm sure you have been told before, and the information is widely available. But to make it easier for you..you view that the bible is the word of god because it says so in the bible and the bible is the word of god is clearly a case where the premise presupposes the conclusion...

it is a fallacy whether you like it or not.
Biker wrote:
Bernee wrote: he/she/it doesn't exist?
Are you sure?
Without a doubt.
I suppose that in most instances of common knowledge, the premise presupposes the conclusion argument may apply, but in the case of the Word of God, it does not. For, if you have the authoritative document, given by the authoritative being, who created everything seen and unseen, who existed before everything, where everything was created by and for Him, and we have His Word to mankind.
Where would one appeal?
Your appeal is what is known as special pleading. Yet another fallacious argument. You are doing well. Wanna go for a triple?
Biker wrote: The words of Scripture are self attesting. They cannot be "proved" to be Gods words by appeal to any higher authority. There is no higher authority. When one has the highest or absolute authority such as the Word of God, it would be subordinating the authority of Scripture to the thing to which we appeal to prove it to be Gods Word. If we ultimately appeal to human reason, or to logic, or to historical accuracy, or to scientific truth, as the authority by which Scripture is shown to be Gods Words, then we have assumed the thing to which we appealed to be a higher authority than Gods words and one that is more true or more reliable. And Bernee you have made that assumption, and I can't, because the Bible has demonstrated that authority, which I cannot deny.

Biker
It is you who is making an assumption. i.e god exists. For you to claim the bible to be the word of god she/he/it MUST exist. You can assume it exists based on your beliefs.

I too am use logic and reason, and observation, (jnana...knowledge) and meditation and self-enquiry.

I do not start from a position..gods exists, from whence you start.
Bernee,
From whence I started was a heathen. Which has nothing to do with with the authority of the Bible. It (the Bible) was the authority before I ever whenced! Or before you whenced. Your laundry list of things to appeal to cannot authenticate in this instance. How would a whencer authenticate the authentic with a non authentic. Or if a whencer has the authoritative document, with what would one authorize the authority with, other than the most authoritative. A whencer wouldn't whence with a lesser authority, to authorize the more authoritative! Hence a whencer whences with the most whenceable. In this whenceality, the Bible.
And oh by the way, your belief, "God doesn't exist", is self defeating!

Biker

User avatar
bernee51
Site Supporter
Posts: 7813
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:52 am
Location: Australia

Re: John 10:35

Post #1179

Post by bernee51 »

Biker wrote:
bernee51 wrote:
Biker wrote:
bernee51 wrote:
Biker wrote:
Biker wrote: How is it "fallacious argument'?
If you have to ask why a circularity is a fallacious argument there is no point in answering.
Just as I thought, nonsense. Tell me how do you know
I'm sure you have been told before, and the information is widely available. But to make it easier for you..you view that the bible is the word of god because it says so in the bible and the bible is the word of god is clearly a case where the premise presupposes the conclusion...

it is a fallacy whether you like it or not.
Biker wrote:
Bernee wrote: he/she/it doesn't exist?
Are you sure?
Without a doubt.
I suppose that in most instances of common knowledge, the premise presupposes the conclusion argument may apply, but in the case of the Word of God, it does not. For, if you have the authoritative document, given by the authoritative being, who created everything seen and unseen, who existed before everything, where everything was created by and for Him, and we have His Word to mankind.
Where would one appeal?
Your appeal is what is known as special pleading. Yet another fallacious argument. You are doing well. Wanna go for a triple?
Biker wrote: The words of Scripture are self attesting. They cannot be "proved" to be Gods words by appeal to any higher authority. There is no higher authority. When one has the highest or absolute authority such as the Word of God, it would be subordinating the authority of Scripture to the thing to which we appeal to prove it to be Gods Word. If we ultimately appeal to human reason, or to logic, or to historical accuracy, or to scientific truth, as the authority by which Scripture is shown to be Gods Words, then we have assumed the thing to which we appealed to be a higher authority than Gods words and one that is more true or more reliable. And Bernee you have made that assumption, and I can't, because the Bible has demonstrated that authority, which I cannot deny.

Biker
It is you who is making an assumption. i.e god exists. For you to claim the bible to be the word of god she/he/it MUST exist. You can assume it exists based on your beliefs.

I too am use logic and reason, and observation, (jnana...knowledge) and meditation and self-enquiry.

I do not start from a position..gods exists, from whence you start.
Bernee,
From whence I started was a heathen. Which has nothing to do with with the authority of the Bible. It (the Bible) was the authority before I ever whenced! Or before you whenced. Your laundry list of things to appeal to cannot authenticate in this instance. How would a whencer authenticate the authentic with a non authentic. Or if a whencer has the authoritative document, with what would one authorize the authority with, other than the most authoritative. A whencer wouldn't whence with a lesser authority, to authorize the more authoritative! Hence a whencer whences with the most whenceable. In this whenceality, the Bible.
It is still a fallacy.

Biker wrote:[
And oh by the way, your belief, "God doesn't exist", is self defeating!

Biker
How so?

(I was tempted to say - read my sig...thre is no self to defeat.)
"Whatever you are totally ignorant of, assert to be the explanation of everything else"

William James quoting Dr. Hodgson

"When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. My life is a movement between these two."

Nisargadatta Maharaj

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 3 times

Post #1180

Post by McCulloch »

Reminder from a Moderator

The topic of this debate thread is Biblical Contradictions.
achilles12604 wrote:What are the biblical contradictions which the atheists keep referring to and what are the answers by apologists.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

Locked