RE: Does the Bible Contradict Itself?
July 16, 2012 at 1:03 pm
(This post was last modified: July 16, 2012 at 1:30 pm by spockrates.)
(July 16, 2012 at 12:33 pm)ElDinero Wrote:(July 16, 2012 at 12:19 pm)spockrates Wrote: It would take much time to have everyone in ancient Palestine (men and women) journey to the village or city in which their ancestors were born. The ancient world moved by a slower clock than our world does. We would need some documentation indicating when the census began and when it ended, or some indication of how long each person had to comply. It might have taken place in stages--one tribe of Israel every few years, or one area every few years. Making everyone move at the same time would stop the economy (and taxes paid to Rome). It would defeat the purpose of doing a census--which was to increase the money coming from the Roman occupied territory.
Look, just because it took the Jews forty years to complete a journey that should have taken six weeks, just how much slower was this fucking ancient clock? Like I said, unsupported assertions. You can't back up any of the above, it's pure conjecture.
With regards Salah, I don't see what's causing you the problem. There is a character named Salah. I want to know who his father was.
True. I cannot back up my premise that it took several years to complete the census, or that it was done in stages. Likewise, you cannot back up your premise that the census of everyone in all of ancient Palestine and Judea was carried out all at once in one year. We do know, however that Roman emperors carried out censuses of Egypt and Sicily in stages:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius
So it is not illogical to propose that the same method was used in to take a census of the vast number of ancient Jewish people in the Roman occupied territory. That being said, I have to agree with you. All that we can say for sure is that neither your premise nor mine can be demonstrated with any degree of certainty. Would you agree it's a stalemate for this line of inquiry?
(July 16, 2012 at 12:43 pm)Annik Wrote: I think I'd actually agree with you there on the contradictions you sent to me, as the list that's titled "faith alone" never said that was was the only thing, but more like a starting point. However, there are plenty more. Furthermore, it makes you think that if there are so many mistranslations, can the document be trusted?
How about if women who give childbirth are sinful? This is was brought up recently in a conversation with my fiance: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra...aring.html
Thank you for your honesty. I used to be Evangelical and was so sure I thought I knew what the Bible taught until I discovered this. It was an eye-opener to me how the biblical text is so ambiguous that it leads to contrary interpretations. I would not go so far as to say the translations are inaccurate, or contradictory, as to say that people's interpretations are contradictory. The ambiguities encompass not just trivial matters, but central doctrines of Christianity--such as the method by which one gains access to heaven. This is only one cause of the great number of denominations with conflicting beliefs.
An example of contrary interpretations:
8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith —and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
(Ephesians 2)
A Baptist, or Evangelical, or Calvinist, or Lutheran might say that it is grace, through faith alone that saves one from Hell. Good works (good behavior) has nothing to do with it (verse 9). A Catholic would say it is by grace, through faith and works that one is saved, explaining that works we do in our own power (verse 9) do not save us from Hell, but works done in God's power (verse 10) do contribute to our gaining access to heaven. The contradiction arises from a difference of opinion over what the word grace actually means. To the Baptist, it is God's undeserved favor. To the Catholic, it is God's undeserved power. Exact same text--contrary understandings. My thought is that the contradiction of interpretations is due to ambiguity of the biblical text.
"If you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains (no matter how improbable) must be the truth."
--Spock
--Spock