Bible Fails

[PruePhillip]

Who says their laws cease to exist? Leviticus and Deuteronomy were written during and after the Babylonia exile to give the Hebrews an identity and rituals that set them apart from "the other".

Quote - " Leviticus and Deuteronomy were written during and after the Babylonia exile..."

At Shiloh in Israel we see people observing the law of Moses.
Here was the altar and the sacrifices. We know it was a Hebrew
sacrifice because Moses told the priests they must only cut on
the right side of the slain beast - and there we have the evidence.
And the Philistines destroyed Shiloh and took the ark of the
covenant.

Shiloh was destroyed about 100 years before Solomon. It lay
in ruins for centuries.

Here's the problem YOU have to explain:
how did people of Babylonian and Greek eras know there was
a cultic center at Shiloh a THOUSAND YEARS EARLIER?
Why did the people of Shiloh carry out sacrifices as is written
in Leviticus and Deuteronomy if these books were written a
THOUSAND YEARS LATER?

Occam's Razor. Shiloh was exactly as described in Samuel.
The priests here had been observing the law of Moses for
centuries. It wasn't all made up.

 

[PruePhillip]

Yes, Omri was quite real.

• Timna is an Egyptian controlled mining area that produced copper and turquoise . The Egyptians mined copper & turquoise at both Timna and Serabit el-Khadim. Jezirat Faraun was the Egyptian mining sea port that served Timna.

Copper Snake of Timna - Bible
www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-timna.htm

As real as the House of David?
There's, what, a hundred thousand separate mines at Timna,
attesting to a vast enterprise after the Egyptians left - yet there's
no evidence for such an organized society of Edomites with
such a huge population. Yet there was - the bible says that
Edom was a great monarchical power like Israel with a large
population - something not evident in archaeology.

 

[sooda]

Quote - " Leviticus and Deuteronomy were written during and after the Babylonia exile..."

At Shiloh in Israel we see people observing the law of Moses.
Here was the altar and the sacrifices. We know it was a Hebrew
sacrifice because Moses told the priests they must only cut on
the right side of the slain beast - and there we have the evidence.
And the Philistines destroyed Shiloh and took the ark of the
covenant.

Shiloh was destroyed about 100 years before Solomon. It lay
in ruins for centuries.

Here's the problem YOU have to explain:
how did people of Babylonian and Greek eras know there was
a cultic center at Shiloh a THOUSAND YEARS EARLIER?
Why did the people of Shiloh carry out sacrifices as is written
in Leviticus and Deuteronomy if these books were written a
THOUSAND YEARS LATER?

Occam's Razor. Shiloh was exactly as described in Samuel.
The priests here had been observing the law of Moses for
centuries. It wasn't all made up.

There was NO Leviticus and Deuteronomy at the time of Shiloh.

Why on earth would the Greeks or Babylonians know about Shiloh?

 

[McBell]

It's completely 100% true, complete, infallible, and inerrant . I can't help it if all of the atheists here are wrong; they're 100% ignorant.

This thread like a rally for the atheist religion. They believe what they want as long as it fits their criticisms.

 

[sojourner]

How do you come up with 100 AD? Sounds suspiciously round number

It is a round number. I’ve done the church thing to day, and I’m tired. But John is dated from the high 80s to high 90s. The higher the more likely to be accurate.

If you read the latter chapters of Luke you see a man (or woman) who
was with Paul on his last journey. And shortly thereafter the book of
Acts ends.

So? Being late (and later than Luke-Acts), the writer may have known about this person.

No mention of Paul's death, or Peter's. No mention of General Gallus
or Vespasian, or the temple destroyed, or the Kitos War or anything
from that era. They simply didn't know (with the exception of John's
latter work.)

Because it doesn’t fit John’s agenda. Remember: these aren’t histories. They’re stories, and the stories have unique theological agendas. There was no reason fo John to mention the things you pointed out. Why would he, for example, talk about the destruction of the temple, when that didn’t happen in Jesus’ lifetime, and added nothing of significance to the revelation of Jesus as Divine?

 

[sooda]

As real as the House of David?
There's, what, a hundred thousand separate mines at Timna,
attesting to a vast enterprise after the Egyptians left - yet there's
no evidence for such an organized society of Edomites with
such a huge population. Yet there was - the bible says that
Edom was a great monarchical power like Israel with a large
population - something not evident in archaeology.

The anachronisms make it tough.. You do know that Timna was 300 kilometers south of Jerusalem???

"Copper was the oil of the time and to control this region would have been a major asset."

The sheer scale of copper production at Timna and Faynan would have required the support of a major polity, scholars studying the Aravah agree.

For one thing, the mines needed external assistance. Separating copper from ore required maintaining charcoal fires at about 1,200°C for eight to 10 hours (using blowpipes and foot bellows). No food was available in the barren reaches of the desert where the mines were: there had to be a procurement and import system, also for wood to make the charcoal. Supplies would have traveled as much as hundreds of kilometers.

Seeds found at Timna: Crops couldn't have been grown in the barren desert, food had to be imported. Erez Ben-Yosef / TV Project
Water was a bit closer, but: "There is no water near the mines. It had to been brought in from the Yotvata oasis 15 kilometers away," Ben-Yosef says.

continued

Did David and Solomon's United Monarchy exist? Vast ancient mining operation may hold answers

 

[PruePhillip]

There was NO Leviticus and Deuteronomy at the time of Shiloh.

Why on earth would the Greeks or Babylonians know about Shiloh?

I meant Babylonian and Greek ERAS. Sorry.
If there was no Leviticus and Deuteronomy in Shiloh's day
then WHY WERE THE PRIESTS OBSERVING ITS LAWS?

 

[sojourner]

It's completely 100% true, complete, infallible, and inerrant . I can't help it if all of the atheists here are wrong; they're 100% ignorant.

This thread like a rally for the atheist religion. They believe what they want as long as it fits their criticisms.

You’re mistaken. It’s not; even the early Xtians didn’t believe it was; it wasn’t intended to be so; the Hebraic writers of the OT books were editing earlier material in some cases, and much of it material from earlier, Babylonian and Sumerian (and Egyptian) mythic tales. The idea that the Bible is some “super book” is a fairy tale that arose over the centuries. And I say that as a member of the clergy. ”Many of the atheists aren’t 100% ignorant.” They’re quite astute. And quite right on this issue.

 

[PruePhillip]

It is a round number. I’ve done the church thing to day, and I’m tired. But John is dated from the high 80s to high 90s. The higher the more likely to be accurate.


So? Being late (and later than Luke-Acts), the writer may have known about this person.


Because it doesn’t fit John’s agenda. Remember: these aren’t histories. They’re stories, and the stories have unique theological agendas. There was no reason fo John to mention the things you pointed out. Why would he, for example, talk about the destruction of the temple, when that didn’t happen in Jesus’ lifetime, and added nothing of significance to the revelation of Jesus as Divine?

Yeah, we sort of agree. I am not sure how you can go to church yet see a lot of this as fiction.
We accept that John wrote his epistles and Revelation at the end of the Century.
I hold that the author of Luke/Acts died in Rome about the same time as Paul. This author
does not record Paul's death, nor the death of Israel. I hold these events had no happened
when Acts closed. The author was clearly a preacher himself, and like Peter, that attracted
the death sentence - so this author wasn't going to Rome as a tourist.
And his Gospel was clearly written before he even began Acts - so I posit the '50's when
the Gospel of Luke was finished.

Why do people give a much later date for these things? To EXPLAIN AWAY WHAT JESUS
SAID ABOUT JERUSALEM.

 

[sooda]

I meant Babylonian and Greek ERAS. Sorry.
If there was no Leviticus and Deuteronomy in Shiloh's day
then WHY WERE THE PRIESTS OBSERVING ITS LAWS?

Because the story of Shiloh was written AFTER Babylonian exile. These are stories not history..

 

[sooda]

Yeah, we sort of agree. I am not sure how you can go to church yet see a lot of this as fiction.
We accept that John wrote his epistles and Revelation at the end of the Century.
I hold that the author of Luke/Acts died in Rome about the same time as Paul. This author
does not record Paul's death, nor the death of Israel. I hold these events had no happened
when Acts closed. The author was clearly a preacher himself, and like Peter, that attracted
the death sentence - so this author wasn't going to Rome as a tourist.
And his Gospel was clearly written before he even began Acts - so I posit the '50's when
the Gospel of Luke was finished.

Why do people give a much later date for these things? To EXPLAIN AWAY WHAT JESUS
SAID ABOUT JERUSALEM.

Maybe..

In the Catholic tradition, despite the claims of early Christian writers that Saint Luke was martyred, the earliest documents available to the church attest that the apostle settled in Greece, wrote his gospel and died peacefully at the age of 84 in Boeotia.

 

[sojourner]

And his Gospel was clearly written before he even began Acts - so I posit the '50's when
the Gospel of Luke was finished

That’s not how I see it. Luke made use of Mark (which was written post-70). Luke-Acts was originally a single story. Luke also post-dates Matthew, so around 80 is a good date.

 

[sojourner]

I am not sure how you can go to church yet see a lot of this as fiction

I not only go to church; I’m a member of the clergy — been to seminary, done a lot of advance biblical study. The Bible (as I see it) is a collection of documents that deal with theological issues and religious history of Judaism and Xy. While not much may be historic fact, there is a lot of truth in them. They are part of the whole Tradition of those who worship God. For me, Xy is a living religion, that is, it changes to meet the needs of different cultures and times. It grows with our growth. It’s truth lies not so much in its factual veracity, but in how it helps us make meaning of our world and our spiritual experiences through the use of metaphor and allegory.

 

[Galateasdream]

May I ask you for example in relation to the scriptures if you believe homosexuality is a sin? If so why? If not why not?

I believe the biblical authors consistently held that same genital sex acts were a sin. I think they were wrong.

CONCLUSION: We are saved or have salvation through faith, it is not of ourselves it is a gift of God.

To be clear you're leaping here. More properly the conclusion is: the author of Ephesians believed we are saved by a gift of faith.

So faith comes by hearing and heaing come by the Word of God so it is fath in God’s Word that brings us salvation.

But what 'Word of God' actually refers to in this passage is not made clear by the provided proof texts, plus you should be careful not to assume that terms used in one text mean the same when used elsewhere.

CONCLUSION: We get faith by believing and following Gods' Word.

You have smuggled in 'following' here. It is nowhere in the texts you cited and you are adding to the scriptures.

If according to the scriptures shown above, we are only saved through believing and following God's Word (the scriptures)

This assumes: a) there are no other biblical passages which speak of or imply other routes to salvation (like feeding the hungry, or childbirth, or baptism), yet I know these exist, and b) you've added in 'follow' again, and c) you seem to conflating rather dramatically Jesus and the bible as being 'the word'.

people not to believe the scriptures

I don't believe I'm doing that. More precisely I'm asking for strong evidences of errors so as to confound a particular modern idea of inerrency. Note, I don't think you could accuse Augustine or Barclay of not believing the scriptures, yet both held that there were errors in the texts.

 

[sojourner]

I believe the biblical authors consistently held that same genital sex acts were a sin. I think they were wrong.



To be clear you're leaping here. More properly the conclusion is: the author of Ephesians believed we are saved by a gift of faith.



But what 'Word of God' actually refers to in this passage is not made clear by the provided proof texts, plus you should be careful not to assume that terms used in one text mean the same when used elsewhere.



You have smuggled in 'following' here. It is nowhere in the texts you cited and you are adding to the scriptures.



This assumes: a) there are no other biblical passages which speak of or imply other routes to salvation (like feeding the hungry, or childbirth, or baptism), yet I know these exist, and b) you've added in 'follow' again, and c) you seem to conflating rather dramatically Jesus and the bible as being 'the word'.



I don't believe I'm doing that. More precisely I'm asking for strong evidences of errors so as to confound a particular modern idea of inerrency. Note, I don't think you could accuse Augustine or Barclay of not believing the scriptures, yet both held that there were errors in the texts.

Terse, concise reply. This is one of the best posts I’ve seen. Congrats!

 

[halbhh]

I believe the biblical authors consistently held that same genital sex acts were a sin.

Having looked into that, that's a popular misconception. Instead only what we'd call sodomy intercourse, alone, is actually proscribed, leaving all else, the other 200 things people could do between those in a committed relationship unaddressed.

 

[halbhh]

What bible fail is the most 'oof!' in your opinion?

Imagine you could only point to one issue with the bible to convince someone that it was flawed and not inerrent. What is the most damning biblical mistake that really can't be harmonised, contextualised, or explained away?

It can be a contradiction, moral failing, unhistorical event, scientific error, misquote, or whatever.

What about you though? What do you think is a 'fail', as best you currently understand it?

 

[Galateasdream]

Having looked into that, that's a popular misconception. Instead only what we'd call sodomy intercourse, alone, is actually proscribed, leaving all else, the other 200 things people could do between those in a committed relationship unaddressed.

I've read those arguments and remain unconvinced by them, finding the work by Gagnon to be more convincing (and in line with majority interpretation for most of Christian history).

I think it would be somewhat mitigating to hold that homosexual sex acts can be permissible so long as they are not anal sex, but I don't think the exegetical case is as strong as you do.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this, at least for this thread.

Regarding what I think is a good candidate for the strongest biblical fail, I posted some pages ago about Matthews misquotation of Jeremiah, which I think a very good example of a clear internal error.

Besides that, I also think it quite telling that many things in the bible don't cohere at all well with what we know of the world, maths, science, or history. I also find many of the moral teachings quite immoral and barbaric. The issue of the canon, and the loss of original manuscripts, and later interpolations, are all also problematic.

 

[3rdAngel]

Well to be honest you simply ignored most of my post to you in post # 316 was there a reason for it?

I believe the biblical authors consistently held that same genital sex acts were a sin. I think they were wrong.

So you believe that Homosexuality in the bible according to the scriptures is sin. So what your saying is that you do not believe the scriptures. Why do you not believe the scriptures in regards to the practice of Homosexuality? Let's be honest here as we are talking about integrity in regard to the truth of the scriptures and your claims to a "better" understanding of the scriptures. May I ask are you a Homosexual or somthing similar?

3rdAngel wrote: HOW ARE WE SAVED ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES?

EPHESIANS 2:8-9 [8], FOR BY GRACE ARE YOU SAVED THROUGH FAITH; and that not of yourselves: IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD: [9], Not of works, lest any man should boast.

CONCLUSION: We are saved or have salvation through faith, it is not of ourselves it is a gift of God.

To be clear you're leaping here. More properly the conclusion is: the author of Ephesians believed we are saved by a gift of faith.

Your response....

But what 'Word of God' actually refers to in this passage is not made clear by the provided proof texts, plus you should be careful not to assume that terms used in one text mean the same when used elsewhere.

So your saying EPHESIANS 2:8-9 does not say "FOR BY GRACE ARE YOU SAVED THROUGH FAITH ? If the scripture is not saying what it is saying what is it saying in your view? Are you being honest here? You were also preovided the Greek word definitions that you did not post from post # 316 linked, the prove what you are saying and suggesting is not correct. You know that right so I am not assuming anything here? The Word of God is made clear by the collective proof texts in the entire post you did not respond to or quote from. We are saved through faith *EPHESIANS 2:8-9. Faith being defined as belief that we get from the Word of God *ROMANS 10:17 and JESUS in his very own words defining "GREAT FAITH" as "believing the Word of God only" *MATTHEW 8:5-10. I am sorry as you can see from the evidence provided above I am not assuming anything and have provided scripture evidence to prove as much.

3rdAngel wrote: WHAT IS FAITH AND HOW DO WE GET IT?
The Greek word meaning of faith G4102 Πίστις; pistis meaning; OF; TO; THE; ASSURANCE; BELIEF; From G3982; persuasion, that is, credence ; moral conviction of religious truth, or the truthfulness of God or a religious teacher, especially reliance upon Christ for salvation; truth itself: - assurance, BELIEF, BELIEVE, FAITH, fidelity; Greek word meaning πιστεύω pisteuō From G4102; to HAVE FAITH (in, upon, or with respect to, a person or thing) BELIEVE; TRUST, that is, credit ; by implication to entrust (especially one's spiritual well being to Christ): - believe (-r), commit (to trust), put in trust with.

HEBREWS 11:1 Now FAITH is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

ROMANS 10:17 [17], SO THEN FAITH (Πίστις; pistis BELIEF, BELIEVE, BELIEVING, faith) COMES BY HEARING, AND HEARING BY THE WORD OF GOD.

So faith comes by hearing and heaing come by the Word of God so it is fath in God’s Word that brings us salvation.

JOHN 3:14-21 [14], And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: [15], THAT WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM SHOULD NOT PERISH, BUT HAVE ETERNAL LIFE. [16], FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD, THAT HE GAVE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, THAT WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM SHOULD NOT PERISH, BUT HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE. [17], For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world THROUGH HIM MIGHT BE SAVED. [18], HE THAT BELIEVES ON HIM IS NOT CONDEMNED: but HE THAT BELIEVES NOT IS CONDEMNED ALREADY, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. [19], And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and MEN LOVED DARKNESS RATHER THAN LIGHT, BECAUSE THEIR DEEDS WERE EVIL. [20], For every one that does evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. [21], But he that does truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are worked in God.

What does it mean to believe on/in him?

JOHN 1:1-3; 10; 14
[1], In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and THE WORD WAS GOD.
[2], The same was in the beginning with God.
[3], ALL THINGS WERE MADE BY HIM; AND WITHOUT HIM WAS NOT ANY THING MADE THAT WAS MADE.
[10], HE WAS IN THE WORLD, AND THE WORLD WAS MADE BY HIM, AND THE WORLD KNEW HIM NOT.
[11], HE CAME TO HIS OWN, AND HIS OWN RECEIVED HIM NOT.
[12], BUT AS MANY AS RECEIVED HIM (the Word), to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
[13], Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
[14], AND THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH, AND DWELLED AMONG US, AND WE BEHELD HIS GLORY, THE GLORY AS OF THE ONLY BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER, FULL OF GRACE AND TRUTH.

CONCLUSION: We get faith by believing and following Gods' Word. To believe in JESUS is to believe the Word of God revealed through the scriptures which are the written words of God given by inspiration of God through holy men. JESUS is the Word of God and the creator of heaven and earth according to the scriptures. The one who spoke the Word let there be light and there was light GENESIS 1.

Your response...

You have smuggled in 'following' here. It is nowhere in the texts you cited and you are adding to the scriptures.

There is no smuggling in following to the application of faith, belief pistis which is the moral conviction to believe and follow. Are you trying to say we can believe and not follow what God's Word says?

The scripture also say in JAMES 2:18 that FAITH WITHOUT FOLLOWING what the Word says IS NOT FAITH. Faith (belief) that does not do what the scriptures say according to JAMES therefore is not FAITH if it does not have actions (follows what the scripture teaches)....

JAMES 2:18-20 Yes, a man may say, you have faith, and I have works: SHOW ME YOUR FAITH WITHOUT YOUR WORKS, AND I WILL SHOW YOU MY FAITH BY MY WORKS. You believe that there is one God; you do well: the devils also believe, and tremble. BUT WILL YOU KNOW, O VAIN MAN, THAT FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS DEAD?

The point here is that the devils believe the scriptures but will not be saved because they do not do what they believe. There is no faith in God's Word if we do not do what God's Word says. This is also made clear in MATTHEW and JOHN

MATTHEW 7:21-26
[21], Not every one that said to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; BUT HE THAT DOES THE WILL OF MY FATHER WHICH IS IN HEAVEN.
[22], Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name? and in your name have cast out devils? and in your name done many wonderful works?
[23], And then will I profess to them, I never knew you: depart from me, YOU THAT WORK SIN.
[24], THEREFORE WHOEVER HEARS THESE SAYINGS OF MINE, AND DOES THEM, I will liken him to a wise man, which built his house on a rock:
[25], And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat on that house; and it fell not: for it was founded on a rock.
[26], And EVERY ONE THAT HEARS THESE SAYINGS OF MINE, AND DOES THEM NOT, SHALL BE LIKENED TO A FOOLISH MAN, WHICH BUILT HIS HOUSE ON THE SAND
[27], AND THE RAIN DESCENDED, AND THE FLOODS CAME, AND THE WINDS BLEW, AND BEAT ON THAT HOUSE; AND IT FELL: AND GREAT WAS THE FALL OF IT.

And again here JESUS defines who his people are…

JOHN 10:26-27
[26], But you believe not, because you are not of my sheep, as I said to you.
[27], MY SHEEP HEAR MY VOICE (the Word of God), AND I KNOW THEM, AND THEY FOLLOW ME

According to the scripture definition of FAITH and BELIEF there is no faith without following or doing what the scriptures say. Can you see this better now?

3rdAngel wrote: CAN WE HAVE SALVATION WITHOUT FAITH AND BELIEVING AND FOLLOWING GOD’S WORD?

HEBREWS 11:6 But WITHOUT FAITH IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PLEASE HIM: for he that comes to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

ROMANS 14:23 … WHATSOEVER IT NOT OF FAITH (believing Gods Word) IS SIN

CONCLUSION: How do we get faith? Faith comes by the Word of God *ROMANS 10:17. If you have no Word then we have no faith therefore it is impossible to please God because whatsoever is not of faith (believing Gods’ Word) is sin *ROMANS 14:23.

Your response...

This assumes: a) there are no other biblical passages which speak of or imply other routes to salvation (like feeding the hungry, or childbirth, or baptism), yet I know these exist, and b) you've added in 'follow' again, and c) you seem to conflating rather dramatically Jesus and the bible as being 'the word'.

What other routes to God's salvation are available apart from faith as shown in the scriptures already? EPHESIANS 2:8-9 makes it very clear that no one can earn their salvation it is a "GIFT" of God and "NOT OF "WORKS" lest any man should boast. It is by God's "GRACE" (unmerited favour) that we are "SAVED" how? "THROUGH FAITH" which is defined through the scriptures are shown above by "BELIEVING" and "FOLLOWING" what God's Word says. Let's speak what we are claiming here which are claims to intellectual integrity and honestly in regard to the truth of the scriptures. I have simply posted the scriptures here and there is no conflating anything I have shared with you. Do you believe the scriptures? If you do not how can you have God's salvation if we only have salvation through faith which the scriptures define as "BELIEVING AND FOLLOWING God's Word"? *ROMANS 10:17; JAMES 2:18-20; 26; JOHN 10:26-27?

I hope you can consider all my post content instead of part quoting me in your replies for your next reply. I believe that you will remember me as one of the only persons that loved you enough to be honest with you and to tell you the truth.

 

[james bond]

You’re mistaken. It’s not; even the early Xtians didn’t believe it was; it wasn’t intended to be so; the Hebraic writers of the OT books were editing earlier material in some cases, and much of it material from earlier, Babylonian and Sumerian (and Egyptian) mythic tales. The idea that the Bible is some “super book” is a fairy tale that arose over the centuries. And I say that as a member of the clergy. ”Many of the atheists aren’t 100% ignorant.” They’re quite astute. And quite right on this issue.

Not I who is mistaken, but you, you, you.

The mythic tales were taken from the true accounts in the Bible. This is the way fiction works even today.