Do the numerous mistakes in the Bible play a part in driving people away from religion?

[thomas t]

Great! What dies the Koine Greek text say were Jesus's last words that he said as he died?

I reject your bonus points. I'm sure my fellow posters are eager to get them!
The last recorded words may be the one in John 19:30. Note that John does not explicitely say: "and these were his last words!".
So I might be wrong here.
But I think it isn't important.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I am no scholar, but it seems that the intent here in this instance is to demonstrate that humanity was not doing as well as it could and G-d had given them a timeframe in which to repent. I read also that this is linked to the verse in Ezekiel where G-d does not take joy in the death of the wicked and that it is 'regrettable' that they won't repent.

And, apparently ...

... when it describes G-d as having feelings/emotions this is referring to the human experience of this cause, it's not that G-d actually has emotions

Still, if God wished to convey something other than regret one would think that God would be able to do so.

 

[BilliardsBall]

What kind of sin were you thinking of?
Drinking alcohol?
A young girl going to a nightclub, dancing with boys?
Two gays entering in to a civil partnership?

??

People who want to sin, any kind of sin, without feeling a guilty conscience.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Yes, yes and yes.

I recommend this resource: Bible Questions Answered | GotQuestions.org

 

[Muffled]

Do ex-Christians or "Christians by name" tend to think that since the Bible is flawed, religion is false?

I believe if that happens it is a very small minority. Mostly what we see in RF are non-believers who wish to justify their non-belief.

BTW, I believe, true believers do not believe the Bible is flawed only non-believers believe that.

 

[Muffled]

There are no mistakes in the Bible, as I see it.
Yet people think there are.

I believe God doesn't make mistakes but people do.

 

[Muffled]

Some do. Some are driven towards other religions. I've heard of many Christians who have left Christianity for Judaism because the NT didn't make sense in light of the Tanach. Flaws in this case are solely in the NT portion of the Bible. There are also those that go the completely different religions, like eastern ones.

I believe that reveals that people are flawed.

 

[oldbadger]

this is not hogwash.

Hello.....
I was interested to see that you personally use a Greek Bible, and that your church uses German bibles.

And so your church does not use the King James Version of the bible?

In any case, I now know that either KJV bible or yours is a deception. Which is it?

You have tried to pretend that the Jews started their passover early, then you have tried to tell me that your Greek Concordance shows that all the gospels claim that Jesus was executed on the same Jewish day........ so now I'm telling you that either your bible or the KJV bible was fiddled with in this report.

How dreadful!
SOURCES!!!.....
Mark {14:12} And the first day of unleavened bread, when they
killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt
thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the
passover?

Mark {14:14} And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the
goodman of the house, The Master saith, Where is the
guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my
disciples?

Mark {14:16} And his disciples went forth, and came into the
city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made
ready the passover

John{13:1} Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus
knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of
this world unto the Father, having loved his own which
were in the world, he loved them unto the end. {13:2} And
supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart
of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s [son,] to betray him;
John {18:28} Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall
of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not
into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that
they might eat the passover
John {19:14} And it was the preparation of the
passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the
Jews, Behold your King! {19:15} But they cried out, Away
with [him,] away with [him,] crucify him.

Luke {22:7} Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the
passover must be killed. {22:8} And he sent Peter and John,
saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.

Luke {22:11} And ye shall say unto the goodman of
the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the
guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my
disciples? {22:12} And he shall shew you a large upper
room furnished: there make ready.
Matthew {26:17} Now the first [day] of the [feast of] unleavened
bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where
wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?

Matthew {26:18} And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and
say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will
keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. {26:19}
And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they
made ready the passover

 

[Rival]

And so your church does not use the King James Version of the bible?

As he apparently lives in Germany, I'd doubt that it does.

 

[oldbadger]

People who want to sin, any kind of sin, without feeling a guilty conscience.

You replied yes, yes and yes to those three questions. Most sad.
Progressive and Revisionist Christianity does seem to be growing, although the JWs (Watchtower) is growing fast as well, but the subjective, judgemental extremes of Christianity seem to be dying, certainly are around here (UK).

Are you in one of the churches that would execute gays, or hold public executions and/or floggings for a selection of cherry-picked offences out of the OT and Paul's letters?

If so....... most sad.

 

[oldbadger]

As he apparently lives in Germany, I'd doubt that it does.

For sure. Did you notice that the member does use the Greek Concordance ...? That's different, for sure.

 

[Harel13]

I believe that reveals that people are flawed.

I believe I am not at all surprised at your comment.

 

[thomas t]

In Germany, most Christians use several Bibles. If you want to have a good read you take the one version, if you want it to be precise you take the other. I read 3 Bibles. One for the good read and the other two to get an idea what the original text really meant. This is how churches proceed, too. At least the ones I've attended so far.

You have tried to pretend that the Jews started their passover early, then you have tried to tell me that your Greek Concordance shows that all the gospels claim that Jesus was executed on the same Jewish day........ so now I'm telling you that either your bible or the KJV bible was fiddled with in this report.

Mark 15:42 Interlinear: And now evening having come, seeing it was the preparation, that is, the fore-sabbath, indicates the day of the crucifiction.
This day is called "Paraskeue" Greek Concordance: παρασκευή (paraskeuē) -- 3 Occurrences
John 19:31 Interlinear: The Jews, therefore, that the bodies might not remain on the cross on the sabbath, since it was the preparation, (for that sabbath day was a great one,) asked of Pilate that their legs may be broken, and they taken away. uses the same exact word to describe which day it was when the crucifiction took place: see John 19:31 Greek Text Analysis

So, I conclude, it's the same exact day in all the gospels.
No contradiction that I could see.

Even if beforehand, the passover meal had been made ready for Jesus, as your verses indicate.

Thomas

 

[oldbadger]

In Germany, most Christians use several Bibles. If you want to have a good read you take the one version, if you want it to be precise you take the other. I read 3 Bibles. One for the good read and the other two to get an idea what the original text really meant. This is how churches proceed, too. At least the ones I've attended so far.

Mark 15:42 Interlinear: And now evening having come, seeing it was the preparation, that is, the fore-sabbath, indicates the day of the crucifiction.
This day is called "Paraskeue" Greek Concordance: παρασκευή (paraskeuē) -- 3 Occurrences
John 19:31 Interlinear: The Jews, therefore, that the bodies might not remain on the cross on the sabbath, since it was the preparation, (for that sabbath day was a great one,) asked of Pilate that their legs may be broken, and they taken away. uses the same exact word to describe which day it was when the crucifiction took place: see John 19:31 Greek Text Analysis

So, I conclude, it's the same exact day in all the gospels.
No contradiction that I could see.

Even if beforehand, the passover meal had been made ready for Jesus, as your verses indicate.

Thomas

Question:-
Did Jesus eat the passover meal with his disciples?
Yes? No?

 

[oldbadger]

In Germany, most Christians use several Bibles. If you want to have a good read you take the one version, if you want it to be precise you take the other. I read 3 Bibles. One for the good read and the other two to get an idea what the original text really meant. This is how churches proceed, too. At least the ones I've attended so far.

That seems most strange.
For truth read this bible. For fiction read that one?

Mark 15:42 Interlinear: And now evening having come, seeing it was the preparation, that is, the fore-sabbath, indicates the day of the crucifiction.
This day is called "Paraskeue" Greek Concordance: παρασκευή (paraskeuē) -- 3 Occurrences
John 19:31 Interlinear: The Jews, therefore, that the bodies might not remain on the cross on the sabbath, since it was the preparation, (for that sabbath day was a great one,) asked of Pilate that their legs may be broken, and they taken away. uses the same exact word to describe which day it was when the crucifiction took place: see John 19:31 Greek Text Analysis

So, I conclude, it's the same exact day in all the gospels.
No contradiction that I could see.

Many scholars place John's timeline date as Nisan 4
The Synoptics place the date as Nisan 5.

I'm going to take their opinion in to hand on this.
But you've clicked on something quite different with the above.!!!

Even if beforehand, the passover meal had been made ready for Jesus, as your verses indicate.

Thomas

No Thomas! A lamb had to be sacrificed in the Great Temple by the priesthood, Thomas. And after preparation the meal was eaten immediately in the Temple refectories.

You're showing beyond doubt that Jesus never did eat a passover meal........... he just had a supper, his last supper with his friends.

I have long suspected that Jesus never did get to celebrate passover. It hadn't even commenced.

And that is what debating on RF is all about........ it connects the dots in the story.

 

[thomas t]

Jesus and the disciples had a meal. It's called "last supper". I'm not sure about what that was.

That seems most strange.
For truth read this bible. For fiction read that one?

yeah, I agree. The two versions that are most accurate... they use a language that only aims to depict an accurate picture to let the reader know what the Greek text really meant. The versions are called Schlachter and Elberfelder - they are both excellent but use a different original text, so slight differences may occur. They are the equivalent of KJV in English.
Other Bibles such as Gute Nachricht Bibel aim to have a beautiful language. They are redacted by some who see the Bible as a flawed number of myths that may or may not contain the truth. They add words, add meanings, omit others just as they see fit. The language is great. But you never know if it's true.

There is also the following problem. A friend of mine is a craftsman: when he speaks, he uses short sentences of maybe 10 words or less. If there is a complicated thing, he takes time to convey the message dedicating much attention to it. He splits the phrases and after some time and effort he said what he was going to say. He's a great craftsman, btw.
However, this guy simply does not understand Elberfelder and Schlachter. They have sentences like 100 words long using words that noone else uses in today's Germany. Words totally unknown by people who don't scholarly approach the Bible. That's why pastors also use Gute Nachricht Bibel knowing that it's erroneous.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

married a Christian girl, remained active in churches for years after that. But I eventually realized I no longer believed the fundamentals of Christianity and after many years, owned to very much being an atheist. And I've been that way for >40 yrs.

That sure sounds familiar. In my case, the Christian girl I married introduced me to the religion as well. She was Christian when we met. I wasn't. About a decade later, I was out of the marriage and out of the religion. I chose her to be my wife based on a feeling that the Holy Spirit was exhorting me to do so. That feeling cost me a lot of unhappiness when, two children later, the marriage failed. I realized the folly of believing by faith rather that by reason applied to evidence.

What was I thinking? Nothing, apparently.

Have you any proof besides you saying the bible being flawed ?

It's a fact. I can see the errors. They appear as internal contadictions, failed prophecies, unkept promises, oral and intellectual errors attributed to a perfect god, and errors in science and history.

And I know why the faithful don't / can't. I have no burden of proof to anybody here. I just disregard their claims that their are no errors in the Bible, and have little incentive to try to show them why. Why argue logically with a person who decides what is true about the world by faith? We don't have enough in common to have a discussion about reality. I have nothing to say to such a person, since all I have is reasoned, evidenced argument.

These are my conclusions about biblical error, and I am not trying to make them yours. I don't mind if you don't agree with me. And I can't prove to a person that which he has a major stake in not believing.

And I posted here in the thread as one of those who hold that the Bible is inerrant. So I take it as personal.

That's your choice. And it is a common one among the faithful - persecution complexes, martyr fantasies, if you challenge my beliefs you are the enemy of god and a bad person (that kind of thinking makes it personal right there).

You obviously disagree with people like me about biblical inerrancy. Why are you miffed, but not me? It's that religious chip on the shoulder. "Don't you dare question my cherished, faith-based beliefs."

I don't see mistakes in the Bible.

But I do. What should I make of that difference? I know a mistake when I see one. And I know what kind of cognitivebias might be preventing you from seeing what is so apparent to others. It's called a confirmation bias. You see what you want to see. From the pen of the poet: "All lies and jests. Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest"

the subject of how to interpret Genesis. He and his contemporaries realised perfectly well that this story was a myth, an allegory.

I've expressed this point to you before, but don't recall your response if any. Why are these biblical stories called allegories rather than just guesses that turned out to be wrong. What promotes the latter to the former?

The problem for me is that the author of an allegory (or metaphor) knows what his fictional creations stand for in history or the news. Swift's Gulliver's Travel describes people and actions that stand for specific characters in British government. Swift knows that this guy jumping on the high wire stands for Pitt or whomever.

The authors of the Genesis creation myths weren't doing that. They weren't creating stories where elements of the story were intended to stand for known historical creation processes. Nothing in that story stands for the big bang, inflation, symmetry breaking, etc.. That story is not an allegory for the scientific explanation. It is a (good faith) error that finds itself in a modern milieu where that word is not permitted.

In my experience, believers simply will not say, "Yeah, that part of the Bible is wrong" under any circumstances. Instead, they say, "That wasn't wrong. It was an allegory. One of thousands of metaphors."

I suspect most non-Christians you know have never learnt much about Christianity and may have swallowed the falsehoods about it, regarding science, put forward by people like Dawkins.

I got my understanding of such matters from within the church.

A Muslim should by definition not be talking about the mistakes of the Bible.

That's not a part of my definition of a Muslim. Why shouldn't they discuss errors of the Christian Bible? I'd rather hear any unbeliever's read on that over a believer's which will not be objective. You'll learn more about the shortcomings of Coke from Pepsi than from Coke. And vice-versa.

Go to the adherent not to learn what is true, but what they have been taught. Decide for yourself what is true. I go to the Christian to see what they are being taught about the errors in the Bible. I go to the Bible to evaluate those errors, not adherents.

The Quran was tried to be written as a perfect book, yet its mistakes are not simple flaws but glaring eyesores.

So I guess that the Christian who admonishes Muslim critics of the Bible feels comfortable doing the same in return. I guess, "a Christian by definition shouldn't be talking about the mistakes of the Quran" is incorrect, then. That kind of thinking only applies to them, not you. Right?

I went to Fredericksburg. All the stores told me with their official signs that if I was hungry or thirsty or naked, that I would not be helped without a mask. That if was a stranger, I would not be welcomed. That if I was imprisoned, I should continue to stay inside. That if I was declared "sick" no one will help me.

Really? You put yourself, a person refused service for refusing to wear a mask during a pandemic, in the place of a hungry person? You're a social menace who does not care about the lives of others. But you're hungry for a microwave burrito at a convenience store, and they won't serve you without a mask, so you drag out your Bible. Poor oppressed you! They won't let you harm others.

Sorry, no sympathy here. In fact, if only they could spray for disease carrying humans the way they do for disease carrying mosquitoes.

 

[exchemist]

That sure sounds familiar. In my case, the Christian girl I married introduced me to the religion as well. She was Christian when we met. I wasn't. About a decade later, I was out of the marriage and out of the religion. I chose her to be my wife based on a feeling that the Holy Spirit was exhorting me to do so. That feeling cost me a lot of unhappiness when, two children later, the marriage failed. I realized the folly of believing by faith rather that by reason applied to evidence.

What was I thinking? Nothing, apparently.



It's a fact. I can see the errors. They appear as internal contadictions, failed prophecies, unkept promises, oral and intellectual errors attributed to a perfect god, and errors in science and history.

And I know why the faithful don't / can't. I have no burden of proof to anybody here. I just disregard their claims that their are no errors in the Bible, and have little incentive to try to show them why. Why argue logically with a person who decides what is true about the world by faith? We don't have enough in common to have a discussion about reality. I have nothing to say to such a person, since all I have is reasoned, evidenced argument.

These are my conclusions about biblical error, and I am not trying to make them yours. I don't mind if you don't agree with me. And I can't prove to a person that which he has a major stake in not believing.



That's your choice. And it is a common one among the faithful - persecution complexes, martyr fantasies, if you challenge my beliefs you are the enemy of god and a bad person (that kind of thinking makes it personal right there).

You obviously disagree with people like me about biblical inerrancy. Why are you miffed, but not me? It's that religious chip on the shoulder. "Don't you dare question my cherished, faith-based beliefs."



But I do. What should I make of that difference? I know a mistake when I see one. And I know what kind of cognitivebias might be preventing you from seeing what is so apparent to others. It's called a confirmation bias. You see what you want to see. From the pen of the poet: "All lies and jests. Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest"



I've expressed this point to you before, but don't recall your response if any. Why are these biblical stories called allegories rather than just guesses that turned out to be wrong. What promotes the latter to the former?

The problem for me is that the author of an allegory (or metaphor) knows what his fictional creations stand for in history or the news. Swift's Gulliver's Travel describes people and actions that stand for specific characters in British government. Swift knows that this guy jumping on the high wire stands for Pitt or whomever.

The authors of the Genesis creation myths weren't doing that. They weren't creating stories where elements of the story were intended to stand for known historical creation processes. Nothing in that story stands for the big bang, inflation, symmetry breaking, etc.. That story is not an allegory for the scientific explanation. It is a (good faith) error that finds itself in a modern milieu where that word is not permitted.

In my experience, believers simply will not say, "Yeah, that part of the Bible is wrong" under any circumstances. Instead, they say, "That wasn't wrong. It was an allegory. One of thousands of metaphors."



I got my understanding of such matters from within the church.



That's not a part of my definition of a Muslim. Why shouldn't they discuss errors of the Christian Bible? I'd rather hear any unbeliever's read on that over a believer's which will not be objective. You'll learn more about the shortcomings of Coke from Pepsi than from Coke. And vice-versa.

Go to the adherent not to learn what is true, but what they have been taught. Decide for yourself what is true. I go to the Christian to see what they are being taught about the errors in the Bible. I go to the Bible to evaluate those errors, not adherents.



So I guess that the Christian who admonishes Muslim critics of the Bible feels comfortable doing the same in return. I guess, "a Christian by definition shouldn't be talking about the mistakes of the Quran" is incorrect, then. That kind of thinking only applies to them, not you. Right?



Really? You put yourself, a person refused service for refusing to wear a mask during a pandemic, in the place of a hungry person? You're a social menace who does not care about the lives of others. But you're hungry for a microwave burrito at a convenience store, and they won't serve you without a mask, so you drag out your Bible. Poor oppressed you! They won't let you harm others.

Sorry, no sympathy here. In fact, if only they could spray for disease carrying humans the way they do for disease carrying mosquitoes.

Not clear who you are talking to, as you quote from several contributors, in my case responding to posts that were not addressed to you. I don't recall us having a discussion about allegories, though we may have. Origen, and contemporary scholars who had read the Greek myths, read Genesis in a similar spirit (according to Diarmaid MacCulloch's "History of Christianity").

 

[thomas t]

persecution complexes, martyr fantasies, if you challenge my beliefs you are the enemy of god and a bad person (that kind of thinking makes it personal right there).

Actually, I don't have any persecution complexes or martyr fantasies.
I'm not saying that if someone challenges my belief that he or she is an enemy of God and a bad person.

I don't think I have confirmation bias when I say the Bible is not faulty.

 

[BilliardsBall]

You replied yes, yes and yes to those three questions. Most sad.
Progressive and Revisionist Christianity does seem to be growing, although the JWs (Watchtower) is growing fast as well, but the subjective, judgemental extremes of Christianity seem to be dying, certainly are around here (UK).

Are you in one of the churches that would execute gays, or hold public executions and/or floggings for a selection of cherry-picked offences out of the OT and Paul's letters?

If so....... most sad.

My yes answers neither implied nor inferred what you've written above.

The UK is dying. It's Empire has gone--likely because of Britain's dealings with the Chosen People and the death of saving Christianity there.