Does the Bible Contradict Itself ?

[nPeace]

I've found multiple Tyre prophecies in the Bible. Sounds like some kind of vague hand-waving you're doing here.

SZ already got an answer, but some people when they feel they hold a trump, they are never satisfied unless you agree with them. So I would not bother... at all.

 

[Subduction Zone]

SZ already got an answer, but some people when they feel they hold a trump, they are never satisfied unless you agree with them. So I would not bother... at all.

Yes, it was an amazingly ignorant one that demonstrated you did not understand the prophesy. You failed the honesty test. My question is how weak is your faith that you think it helps to be dishonest for your belief? That appears to be self contradictory to me.

 

[Skwim]

A reasonable person knows that if a copyist error occurs, it is minor. It does not entirely change the document.
There is an entire account of how Goliath met his fate. A copying error does not get an entire account wrong.

Knowing that copyist errors do occur in the Bible presents the problem that; no one knows what else may be and what may not be a copyist's error. Maybe “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me," is a copyist error, and the true version of John 14:6 is supposed to read “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except me." One just can't be certain, unless one makes the effort to lie to oneself, and believes it. ---a not uncommon practice in religion.

Why do you doubt the Bible? Let's be honest.
Is it because of copyist errors, and presumed contradictions - for which a good example was used to show that those conclusion usually wrong, come from a critic and skeptic that is against God, the Bible, or Christianity, or all three, or is there another reason?

Aside from this being a rather ludicrous reason, there are a lot of good reasons, but In main it's because of all the absurdities of the Christian religion itself. The Bible is but one of many problems that, taken with the rest, taint each other with such absurdity that the integrity of Christianity simply crumbles. The lack of the Bible's veracity is but one chink in the probity of Christianity.

.

 

[PruePhillip]

And the life from the sea example is a case of reinterpretation after the fact.

"And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven."
Genesis 1:20

 

[PruePhillip]

Nope,that is pure reinterpretation on your accont.

And of course we can say there was no Noah's Ark. That is the application of science.

You have proven something doesn't exist. That reminds me of people proving there was no such thing as a black swan.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven."
Genesis 1:20

Thank you, reinterpretation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You have proven something doesn't exist. That reminds me of people proving there was no such thing as a black swan.

I see that you do not know how to use logic properly. This is not an example of a black swan fallacy.

 

[PruePhillip]

Nope. Check your history. Others knew the Earth to be much larger. Columbus's error was why the Italians rejected his funding and he had to shop the idea elsewhere. He also thought that he had reached his destination. He had nowhere near the supplies to make the actual trip.

Notwithstanding the Greek Erastothenes and his measurement of the world, generally speaking, the further back you go, the smaller the world was. And also, the term 'world' had different meanings as well. In Roman times it meant the Roman empire, even though the Romans knew of other places.

 

[PruePhillip]

I see that you do not know how to use logic properly. This is not an example of a black swan fallacy.

True. In Europe swans are white. Some posited there are no black swans. But how can you prove a negative? Remember the aphorism "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,"
It turned out there were black swans, and millions of them.
Saying "There was no ark" or "There was no Trojan horse" is of a similar vein.

 

[PruePhillip]

Thank you, reinterpretation.

I didn't reinterpret that. I copied it from my King James bible.
AND, may I say, back in "those days" of King James, the notion that seas could bring forth life, was considered as we consider the six days of creation, absurd. But then came Darwin's little warm pond.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Notwithstanding the Greek Erastothenes and his measurement of the world, generally speaking, the further back you go, the smaller the world was. And also, the term 'world' had different meanings as well. In Roman times it meant the Roman empire, even though the Romans knew of other places.

At the time of Columbus there was not much trouble with the size of the world. He grossly underestimated his journey and it took him several years and monarchs to find one that was willing to ignore the experts of his time:

Christopher Columbus - Wikipedia

 

[Subduction Zone]

I didn't reinterpret that. I copied it from my King James bible.
AND, may I say, back in "those days" of King James, the notion that seas could bring forth life, was considered as we consider the six days of creation, absurd. But then came Darwin's little warm pond.

Of course you did. Not only that Genesis 1 contradicts Genesis 2. But they are both wrong so what difference does it make?

 

[Subduction Zone]

True. In Europe swans are white. Some posited there are no black swans. But how can you prove a negative? Remember the aphorism "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,"
It turned out there were black swans, and millions of them.
Saying "There was no ark" or "There was no Trojan horse" is of a similar vein.

The Noah's Ark myth has consequences , no matter which version you believe in. If we can't observe the consequences of any particular version that version is refuted.

 

[PruePhillip]

Of course you did. Not only that Genesis 1 contradicts Genesis 2. But they are both wrong so what difference does it make?

So please tell me, do YOU believe life came out of the sea?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So please tell me, do YOU believe life came out of the sea?

Immaterial. You reinterpreted the Bible after the fact to try to get it to agree with reality. Muslims do the same trick with the Koran. Are you impressed when they do that?

 

[PruePhillip]

Immaterial. You reinterpreted the Bible after the fact to try to get it to agree with reality. Muslims do the same trick with the Koran. Are you impressed when they do that?

You aren't going to answer this honestly, are you?
Here's another. A whole volume of prophecy concerns the exile and ultimate return of the Jews to their nation. As Isaiah put, "twice."
The first was exile to Babylon, the second was exile and slavery into the whole world. But when the Gentiles time is "fulfilled" they will come again and take back their nation "with the sword." That's today, and it began in the late 1800's. The idea of "Zionism" was greeted with hilarity by the cognoscenti at the time. They were wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You aren't going to answer this honestly, are you?
Here's another. A whole volume of prophecy concerns the exile and ultimate return of the Jews to their nation. As Isaiah put, "twice."
The first was exile to Babylon, the second was exile and slavery into the whole world. But when the Gentiles time is "fulfilled" they will come again and take back their nation "with the sword." That's today, and it began in the late 1800's. The idea of "Zionism" was greeted with hilarity by the cognoscenti at the time. They were wrong.

What are you talking about? That was your failing. Reinterpretation is always dishonest. And the Isaiah prophecy has several flaws. It is rather vague. It has more than one interpretation. And it is largely self fulfilling. A segregated group will often wish to return to their homeland. The prophecies that have clear end dates have failed. The Tyre prophecy in the Old Testament, Jesus's return in the New.

Here is a good article on biblical prophecies:

Biblical prophecies - RationalWiki

 

[PruePhillip]

What are you talking about? That was your failing. Reinterpretation is always dishonest. And the Isaiah prophecy has several flaws. It is rather vague. It has more than one interpretation. And it is largely self fulfilling. A segregated group will often wish to return to their homeland. The prophecies that have clear end dates have failed. The Tyre prophecy in the Old Testament, Jesus's return in the New.

Here is a good article on biblical prophecies:

Biblical prophecies - RationalWiki

I like this, re piercing of the Messiah "the context of Zechariah 12 is of an invading army, not a Messianic prophecy of Jesus."
The context of prophecy is USUALLY NOT about the Messiah. The prophecy occurs in all sorts of situational texts. That proves nothing. And David also spoke of the piercing of the Messiah. And to those Jews who don't believe in the Messiah as the suffering Redeemer and Lamb of God, there's the Messianic king ruling the nations - "and they shall see Him whom they pierced."
As such I find this site slightly trashy, and guilty of the very things it accuses others of doing.

Some who claim the New Testament authors crafted a story to soak up all the Messianic prophecies about Christ (and that's a real Get Out of Jail card, isn't it?) cannot explain how these prophecies state that the Jews will not receive their Messiah, and they will go into exile and slavery. That's powerful and consistent prophecy throughout the bible. And it's usually ignored those who testify these prophecies are false.

 

[nPeace]

Knowing that copyist errors do occur in the Bible presents the problem that; no one knows what else may be and what may not be a copyist's error. Maybe “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me," is a copyist error, and the true version of John 14:6 is supposed to read “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except me." One just can't be certain, unless one makes the effort to lie to oneself, and believes it. ---a not uncommon practice in religion.

That's not a copyist error as I already mentioned.
Did you read the information I posted? There are hundreds of manuscripts that can be compared, to detect such errors.
If all the manuscripts said the same exact thing, then it would be difficult to determine possible errors, but that's not the case.

Aside from this being a rather ludicrous reason, there are a lot of good reasons, but In main it's because of all the absurdities of the Christian religion itself. The Bible is but one of many problems that, taken with the rest, taint each other with such absurdity that the integrity of Christianity simply crumbles. The lack of the Bible's veracity is but one chink in the probity of Christianity.
.

Again. It is a matter of who is reading the text, and that one's motives and views also are to be considered.
Different people read the Bible, and come to different conclusions.
Some view it as ridiculous. Some view it as the most reliable and beneficial book there is.

People look at the same house - Some say it's ugly. Some say it's beautiful. At the end of the day, the occupants are living comfortably in it.
The important thing is, can it withstand the earthquake to come?
If it does, and the other houses crumble, the "ugly" house has proved to be solid - despite ridicule.

How will the ridiculer fare? Will their "pretty" houses stand?
Time will tell.

 

[nPeace]

I like this, re piercing of the Messiah "the context of Zechariah 12 is of an invading army, not a Messianic prophecy of Jesus."
The context of prophecy is USUALLY NOT about the Messiah. The prophecy occurs in all sorts of situational texts. That proves nothing. And David also spoke of the piercing of the Messiah. And to those Jews who don't believe in the Messiah as the suffering Redeemer and Lamb of God, there's the Messianic king ruling the nations - "and they shall see Him whom they pierced."
As such I find this site slightly trashy, and guilty of the very things it accuses others of doing.

Some who claim the New Testament authors crafted a story to soak up all the Messianic prophecies about Christ (and that's a real Get Out of Jail card, isn't it?) cannot explain how these prophecies state that the Jews will not receive their Messiah, and they will go into exile and slavery. That's powerful and consistent prophecy throughout the bible. And it's usually ignored those who testify these prophecies are false.

RationalWiki is indeed trashy. It's a site where desperate people go.