(February 21, 2015 at 10:11 am)taylor93112 Wrote: First off, I'm not a believer. But I constantly hear from fellow non believers that the gospels aren't reliable because they contain contradictions. Honestly, I don't understand why this argument is used. From my understanding, the gospels spread by word of mouth for at least 20+ years before being written down. And then mark was written down, which the others are based off of. So isn't the real reason they are unreliable due to them being circulated by conversation for over 20 years?

Please, correct me if I'm wrong. I'm happy to be educated.
(Any helpful links would be appreciated!)

Well for me a couple things raise their ugly head. Here we have a faith, the world dominating one for the moment, which professes that an invisible super diety created 400+ billion planets (that is how many the hubble telescope can see) and then after getting at least one juuuuuust right, grabbed a handful of dirt and blew into it, creating man. No no, wait there's more, after knowingly planting the tree of knowledge and forbidding his creations from eating of the fruit (wait, he is 'all knowing', so he must have known before he created the first planet that this was the future, so why do it?) but anyway, then as you know how the story goes, Eve ate the apple and *gasp* god was displeased. Now eternal sin was created and the foundation of the xtian incarnation and atonement began....god demands appeasement, but man of course is unable to properly pay for such a violation, it requires this god thing to slice off some holy ghost and implant it into a "virgin" so that he could could grow up, become a martyr and die for man's sins..thus paying for the past sins, and providing them a key to heaven through belief in jesus...sorry I have to pause to roll my eyes...okay, better now..

Sooooo the religion is based on belief that jesus christ died for our sins, our eternal debt placed upon us at birth, and this god demands eternal groveling and begging to be lifted of this sin that he knew when he created us would occur, yet did it anyway, sounds like someone needs to feel important, demanding worship and all this dramatic bowing and scraping...but anyway when a thinking person says, okay well who was jesus.....they point to the bible....the problem now comes that not only is there ZERO physical evidence of jesus the christ, no writings, works of carpentry, dwelling, bloody nail...nothing...but further investigation shows that no one who ever wrote of jesus knew him...no one, not christian, not contemporary, not historian...no one...we have the synoptic gospels....the anonymous authors who wrote under the name mark were the first, followed by the anonymous authors who wrote matthew and luke based on the work under the name mark.....john was a whole nother bit of musings that dont even match the others...

Mark (60 to 75 CE), Matthew (80 to 90 CE), Luke (80 to 90 CE based on the Gospels of Mark), and John (80 to 110 CE) (Albl 283).

Outside of a plethora of pseudepigrapha, copious usage of interpolations, parables and allegorical writings...there is very little left of the bible in which to consider, and no one who wrote of jesus, actually knew him....and yet people believe anyway....which is why it is called blind faith.

Contradictions, lack of coercive story, lack of evidence, lack of anyone AT THE TIME writing down about the earth going dark and the zombie invasion that occurred at his death...would make one take pause...and consider their faith...you would think anyway.

Once you have established no real evidence exists to prove he ever existed, without jesus, there is no basis of Christianity...which explains the tap dancing, the waving of the hands, the fixation on "its the message that matters" while missing the fact that the message isnt the message if you dont know who said it....or "it requires faith, the belief in the unseen...a transcendental world outside of man's comprehension"...sound like BS to you? because it is.

Reference:
Albl, Martin C. Reason, Faith, and Tradition: Explorations in Catholic Theology. Winona: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2009. Print.

Quote:Honestly, I don't understand why this argument is used.

It depends on who you are talking to. Modern, cherry-picking, cafeteria xtians are not swayed by it as they already know the gospels are a pile of shit.

But, fundies who swear that this bullshit is the word of god will twist their scrotums into pretzels trying to refute the obvious contradictions in their alleged "perfect word of god" and that is fucking amusing as all hell.

You need to make your own fun in life and it helps to know your opponent's weaknesses.

(February 21, 2015 at 12:38 pm)goodwithoutgod Wrote: ...which professes that an invisible super diety created 400+ billion planets

Boy, sometimes typos would make Freud proud. Love that one, since it evokes so many nasty potty jokes about god. Bold by me.

(February 21, 2015 at 10:11 am)taylor93112 Wrote: First off, I'm not a believer. But I constantly hear from fellow non believers that the gospels aren't reliable because they contain contradictions. Honestly, I don't understand why this argument is used. From my understanding, the gospels spread by word of mouth for at least 20+ years before being written down.

It matters most because the authors of the gospel versions we have claim that they are divinely inspired and proofread by the holy spirit.

If they contain errors they could not be divinely inspired by a perfect god and thus could not be god's word, but instead would be man's word, and men lie like shit!

(February 21, 2015 at 1:09 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 21, 2015 at 12:38 pm)goodwithoutgod Wrote: ...which professes that an invisible super diety created 400+ billion planets

Boy, sometimes typos would make Freud proud. Love that one, since it evokes so many nasty potty jokes about god. Bold by me.

Ack! lol, I always do that. That's what I get for running back and forth from the kitchen making everyone breakfast and trying to type up a post at the same time

Probably a majority of Christians still believe in biblical inerrancy. The Catholics have a nice legalistic definition:

Quote:The "doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture" held by the Catholic Church, as expressed by the Second Vatican Council, is that "the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_inerrancy

So the gospel contradictions would need to lead to contradictory teachings about salvation.

BTW: That is probably why the Catholics believe in a literal Adam who committed a literal original sin - it is a necessary part of their salvation theology. They are willing to throw-out Noah's Ark, but they aren't willing to throw-out the Garden of Eden.

For the gospels, I assume the key points for Catholics are: immaculate conception and perpetual virginity of Mary, the crucifixion, the resurrection, etc. They wouldn't care if the stories about feeding multitudes are mythical IMO. (I'm just guessing, because I'm not a Catholic.) It's probably similar for other types of Christians.

As an example, we have absolutely convincing proof the Mormon church has REVISED all of Joseph Smith's revelations he received directly from God, and God approved the writing as perfectly received claimed Joseph Smith, BTW, and most of the revelations were revised MORE THAN once.


In less than 200 years, the LDS church has CORRUPTED everything they claim to believe was the actual Word of God.


Imagine what Mormonism will look like after 2000 years !!!!

Tens of thousands of sects, and wars over which interpretation is correct?

They're sects mad.

Tonus the Bible is a book of wonder. Why is it the greatest selling book of all time and no book even comes close. The bible is the living word and can cut into the soul. You can read it a thousand times and you will always learn something new from it. Also if gospels dont supposedly contradict then sceptics would say it was made up and copied. They are eye witness accounts who died for their eye witnes testimony. Also pen and paper was not so common 2000 years ago. People relied more on memory. Rabbis could recite old testament. In any case gospels are eyewitness accounts and you can be sentenced to death based on eye witness testimony. The bible is a reliable source it shows how holy god is and gives us an escape plan. Jesus words will never die. A fulfilled prophecy