Assuming God Exists, Could an Omnipotent God,

[bikerdruid]

They tie themselves into knots here trying to explain them. I wouldn't call them knowledgeable.
http://www.talkjesus.com/bible-contradictions-explained/

the catholic church is quite willing to admit that the bible is to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[dafydd]

oops Jelsoft enterprises for a reference? Can't ya just read yourself?

Jelsoft? Yes I can read, and spell too.

 

[tsig]

no, they were punished for disobeying God's order to not eat from the tree.

You worship something like that?

 

[chuck4842]

Jelsoft? Yes I can read, and spell too.

So, last question I swear,should I trust everything Jelsoft publishes as fact, or just what you want me to?

 

[dafydd]

So, last question I swear,should I trust everything Jelsoft publishes as fact, or just what you want me to?

Jelsoft? Publish? I have no what you're on about. I provided a link to a religious forum, not to a publishing company.

 

[Ladewig]

I'm scratching my head wondering how I got in the position of defending the Bible when I don't believe it myself. I guess because I'm a fan of the Bible and in hard times, did find it comforting. Children do know right from wrong, but are continually testing their parents metal to see how far they can go. How's that? Somewhat in between the scientific, it is, or it isn't?

I like your answer: Two year olds inherently know right from wrong but understand neither how to resist temptation nor the importance of choosing right over wrong. I like it because it is more logically consistent than I thought your position was. You are, of course, grossly mistaken in your belief that two year olds inherently know right from wrong before being taught, but I like your answer nonetheless.

 

[dafydd]

Jelsoft? Some sort of lube?

 

[chuck4842]

Jelsoft? Some sort of lube?

I was just running off at the keyboard. When I don't see any credentials on a site, but alot of reading, I scroll down to the bottom and skip it. I officially acknowledge there are contradictions in the Bible. But Daffydd's were weak. I'm glad you pointed to a site full of 'em, rather than easily point one out yourself.

 

[dafydd]

I was just running off at the keyboard. When I don't see any credentials on a site, but alot of reading, I scroll down to the bottom and skip it. I officially acknowledge there are contradictions in the Bible. But Daffydd's were weak. I'm glad you pointed to a site full of 'em, rather than easily point one out yourself.

Jelsoft?

 

[chuck4842]

Jelsoft?

Yeah, that's what I saw at the bottom before I closed the page. It's still there, last I checked. I'm so excited we at least have this together.

 

[slingblade]

Yeah, that's what I saw at the bottom before I closed the page. It's still there, last I checked. I'm so excited we at least have this together.

What are you yammering on about, do you even know?


How is Jelsoft a "reference?"

You did look at the bottom of this page, as well, right?

 

[dafydd]

Yeah, that's what I saw at the bottom before I closed the page. It's still there, last I checked. I'm so excited we at least have this together.

Why would you quote it in a post? How old are you?

 

[chuck4842]

Why would you quote it in a post? How old are you?

Do I really have to spell it out for you? I found nothing credible to your link other than a library of what the author considers contradictions, which I've admitted over and over this isn't necessary , I know there are contradictions. It's also true that I pointed out contradictions are in the eyes of the beholder.I'm old enough, are you? Can we please move along?

 

[dafydd]

Do I really have to spell it out for you? I found nothing credible to your link other than a library of what the author considers contradictions, which I've admitted over and over this isn't necessary , I know there are contradictions. It's also true that I pointed out contradictions are in the eyes of the beholder.I'm old enough, are you? Can we please move along?

Certainly.

 

[chuck4842]

Certainly.

and please not to the Luke and Matthew again , I agree that don't make sense either. Maybe Christ had a split personality or a stunt double.

 

[bikerdruid]

and please not to the Luke and Matthew again , I agree that don't make sense either. Maybe Christ had a split personality or a stunt double.

i see how you 'slipped that on by'.
it is a huge stretch past the concept of a historical jesus to call him 'christ'.

let's get past," jesus was just this guy," before we discuss his divinity.
heck, even constantine never got to that til the 4th century.

 

[ddt]

and please not to the Luke and Matthew again , I agree that don't make sense either. Maybe Christ had a split personality or a stunt double.

Why not? You haven't really answered the question about the contradictions in the nativity story. So yes, I'd still like your honest opinion. Oh, and the "stunt double" angle has already been tried by Rudolf Steiner, see this thread.

So, chuck, Jude, how is it with the contradictions I mentioned earlier:

How can that get more difficult? Well, never mind, let's list them explicitly. Mind, this is just about the nativity story.

1. Jesus' date of birth
According to Luke, during Quirinius' census, i.e., 6 CE.
According to Matthew, during Herod/s reign, i.e., 4 BCE or earlier.

2. Residence of Joseph and Mary (before Jesus' birth)
According to Luke, Nazareth in the Galilee
According to Matthew, Bethlehem in Judea

3. Whereabouts of the Holy Family after Jesus' birth
According to Luke, they present Jesus in the Jerusalem temple and return to Nazareth.
According to Matthew, they flee to Egypt, then return to Israel and settle in Nazareth for fear of the Judean ethnarch, Archelaus.

4. Star & Magi
Matthew mentions the star and the magi.
Luke, the eminent historian of natural phenomena according to Sir Willam Ramsay, doesn't mention them.

5. Massacre of the Innocents
Matthew mentions this.
Luke, the eminent historian (etc.), doesn't mention it.

And let's throw in a bonus for good measure:
6. Genealogy of Jesus
Matthew 1:1-17 has a different genealogy than Luke 3:23-37. Hell, they even differ in who is Joseph's father.

 

[chuck4842]

By the time the canon of the NT was established, there were too many copies of the various gospels around to redact them to have them agree. And well, those synoptic gospels do have a lot of material in common.

But I'd be interested in what the RCC's position is on these contradictions. Anyone knowledgeable want to chime in?

I can present it to someone or you can. The catholics have never been shy boasting their knowledge of the Bible in my parts, and I'm in the south. Have you tried taking your findings to your local catholic church?

 

[bikerdruid]

I can present it to someone or you can. The catholics have never been shy boasting their knowledge of the Bible in my parts, and I'm in the south. Have you tried taking your findings to your local catholic church?

when i was a kid, it was not common for catholics to read the bible.
and since catholics do not view the bible as the inerrant word of god, contradictions meant little.
(i was a cradle catholic)

 

[chuck4842]

Oh, and the "stunt double" angle has already been tried by Rudolf Steiner

If I was a believer, we can make believe right? God gave Jesus a time machine, or Matthew was a liar. Fountain of youth maybe? If he could walk on water, it wouldn't surprise me if he showed up two different places at the SAME time.