RE: Why are other civilizations ignored in the Bible?
February 25, 2014 at 11:08 am
(This post was last modified: February 25, 2014 at 11:56 am by Tonus.)
(February 24, 2014 at 4:19 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Which is one of those convenient ways to dodge the problem. Claim that god "inspired" the Bible in order to give it the weight of authority. Then claim that he did so via "fallible men" to paper over the confusing and/or contradictory passages. Presto! The Bible is a perfect document for leading men to god, except when it isn't, but that's okay!Quote: But why is it reported that way?Apparently, 'god' is a little shaky on details!
(February 24, 2014 at 7:36 pm)discipulus Wrote: If that is how you see it. In my sight their divergence in details lends credibility to their accounts. It would be mighty suspicious if all four men recorded every single event exactly the same. I am sure some here would charge them with conspiring together if this had been the case!!!!
"It is a conspiracy, they copied one another!!!!" would be the charge then.....
Some people cannot be satisfied it seems....hock:
That works both ways, though. If the accounts vary, you can say that it makes them seem more credible since they are the accounts of various eyewitnesses who may have seen different things from their perspective. If they had been much more consistent, you could say it makes them more credible because the accounts were inspired by god and therefore, would be guided by one perspective.
Some people are perhaps too easily convinced it seems...
(February 24, 2014 at 8:00 pm)discipulus Wrote: Most N.T. scholars posit that since Matthew labels these resurrected people as "saints", that these were more than likely godly men and women that lived during the O.T.Then how did Matthew figure out that this happened, when no one else --absolutely no one else!-- seems to have? We are left with a bit of a conundrum: a bunch of the saints of old were resurrected and wandered into town. Did no one recognize them? If so, what happened next? Did they just assimilate into the local town or province as if nothing happened? Did they try to convince people they were the saints of old and perhaps suffer mockery and execution as a result? Did they ever dispense any words of wisdom? I guess not.
If this indeed were the case, no one alive at the time would have recognized them because no one alive would have been alive when these "saints" had been alive.
They came to life, "appeared to many people" and then disappeared in puffs of dust or something. Nothing notable comes of this "sign" from god. That is very, very weird, isn't it?
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould