26 Aug 2009, 2:07 pm
26 Aug 2009, 3:49 pm
26 Aug 2009, 4:43 pm
26 Aug 2009, 5:00 pm
Soon can be seen as a subjective and relative term. I guess I have never seen this used in any type of arguement against scripture. 
26 Aug 2009, 5:19 pm
claire333 wrote:
Soon can be seen as a subjective and relative term. I guess I have never seen this used in any type of arguement against scripture.
One that literally used "soon"? I haven't seen that. Arguments that consider Christ's coming to be falsified by the fact that it hasn't occurred yet? I've heard of those, I even know that Christian scholars who believe in a translation that Christ coming should have already happened do exist.
26 Aug 2009, 6:43 pm
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,239
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
26 Aug 2009, 9:13 pm
26 Aug 2009, 9:27 pm
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
When he does come back, I hope he has a healthy sense of entropy. All too many people who don't believe in him or can't embrace organized religion - doesn't have as much to do with wanting to be in grand orgies or lie cheat and steal whenever they want. He gave us intellect, gave us little else, and the farther we go from the source book along the course of time and the sad reality of not having the advent of film back then - we're kind of stuck working it out on our own. Believe it or not, he doesn't interject himself and lead the way every time people ask the bigger questions, more often its a deafening silence. While I consider myself somewhat abstractly Christian - I still have no idea who God really is, who Jesus really is, we may not be able to know that accurately until (if) we see both again (ie. if both even exist) - mainly because even if most of the history actually happened, it only reaches so deep into context, which, when your problems in life are of an areligious origin - its tough to sort that one out, or genetic health issues, world economies, from that stance.
To cross-reference another thread:
pakled wrote:
...against stupidity, the Gods themselves struggle in vain...
26 Aug 2009, 9:34 pm
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,239
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
26 Aug 2009, 9:37 pm
skafather84 wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
When he does come back, I hope he has a healthy sense of entropy. All too many people who don't believe in him or can't embrace organized religion - doesn't have as much to do with wanting to be in grand orgies or lie cheat and steal whenever they want. He gave us intellect, gave us little else, and the farther we go from the source book along the course of time and the sad reality of not having the advent of film back then - we're kind of stuck working it out on our own. Believe it or not, he doesn't interject himself and lead the way every time people ask the bigger questions, more often its a deafening silence. While I consider myself somewhat abstractly Christian - I still have no idea who God really is, who Jesus really is, we may not be able to know that accurately until (if) we see both again (ie. if both even exist) - mainly because even if most of the history actually happened, it only reaches so deep into context, which, when your problems in life are of an areligious origin - its tough to sort that one out, or genetic health issues, world economies, from that stance.
To cross-reference another thread:
pakled wrote:
...against stupidity, the Gods themselves struggle in vain...
That's my cognitive dissonance with it all. If there is a God, you can find him just as easily by looking at the mechanics of reality - when that thesis goes against the grain, it seems like there's a problem.
26 Aug 2009, 9:52 pm
27 Aug 2009, 2:44 am
27 Aug 2009, 2:45 am
27 Aug 2009, 4:23 am
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,239
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
27 Aug 2009, 5:49 am
27 Aug 2009, 8:17 am
The thing with Biblical contradictions or inconsistencies, is that people do everything to explain them somehow. The Bible, after all, says it is flawless and perfect, never mind that being a circular argument. So if they encounter some really obvious contradiction, they figure that explaining how two seemingly contradictory things fit together.
Here's an attempt of clearing up some loose threads surrounding Judas' death by Answers in Genesis:
Quote:
The relevant passages are:
Matthew 27:5
Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself.
Acts 1:18
(Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out.
Some people have wrongly assumed that Matthew and Luke (the author of Acts) are contradictory in their account of Judas’ death. Since the Bible is inerrant Judas cannot have died by hanging and died by falling and bursting open. Rather they are two different viewpoints of the same event. For example, if I saw a car hit a pedestrian, I might simply say that the pedestrian died because they were hit by the car. The coroner who came on the scene later but did not actually see the accident might give a graphic description of the injuries to the pedestrian. Both the coroner and I are describing the same event just different aspects of it.
Matthew tells us that Judas died by hanging (death is inferred from the passage). Luke, being a doctor, gives us a graphic description of what occurred following the hanging. The reason for ordering the events as such is twofold. First, if someone has fallen and their internal organs spilled out they would die and so could not subsequently die from hanging. Secondly, even when people suffer bad falls they do not usually burst open and have their internal organs spill out. The skin is very tough and even when cut in the abdominal area their internals do not usually spill out. Thus, it is unlikely that Judas could die in this manner merely from falling.
Gruesome as it is, Judas’ dead body hung in the hot sun of Jerusalem, and the bacteria inside his body would have been actively breaking down tissues and cells. A byproduct of bacterial metabolism is often gas. The pressure created by the gas forces fluid out of the cells and tissues and into the body cavities. The body becomes bloated as a result. In addition, tissue decomposition occurs compromising the integrity of the skin. Judas’ body was similar to an overinflated balloon, and as he hit the ground (due to the branch he hung on or the rope itself breaking) the skin easily broke and he burst open with his internal organs spilling out.
There is no contradiction surrounding Judas’ death; rather, merely two descriptions given by two different authors of the same event.
Matthew 27:5
Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself.
Acts 1:18
(Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out.
Some people have wrongly assumed that Matthew and Luke (the author of Acts) are contradictory in their account of Judas’ death. Since the Bible is inerrant Judas cannot have died by hanging and died by falling and bursting open. Rather they are two different viewpoints of the same event. For example, if I saw a car hit a pedestrian, I might simply say that the pedestrian died because they were hit by the car. The coroner who came on the scene later but did not actually see the accident might give a graphic description of the injuries to the pedestrian. Both the coroner and I are describing the same event just different aspects of it.
Matthew tells us that Judas died by hanging (death is inferred from the passage). Luke, being a doctor, gives us a graphic description of what occurred following the hanging. The reason for ordering the events as such is twofold. First, if someone has fallen and their internal organs spilled out they would die and so could not subsequently die from hanging. Secondly, even when people suffer bad falls they do not usually burst open and have their internal organs spill out. The skin is very tough and even when cut in the abdominal area their internals do not usually spill out. Thus, it is unlikely that Judas could die in this manner merely from falling.
Gruesome as it is, Judas’ dead body hung in the hot sun of Jerusalem, and the bacteria inside his body would have been actively breaking down tissues and cells. A byproduct of bacterial metabolism is often gas. The pressure created by the gas forces fluid out of the cells and tissues and into the body cavities. The body becomes bloated as a result. In addition, tissue decomposition occurs compromising the integrity of the skin. Judas’ body was similar to an overinflated balloon, and as he hit the ground (due to the branch he hung on or the rope itself breaking) the skin easily broke and he burst open with his internal organs spilling out.
There is no contradiction surrounding Judas’ death; rather, merely two descriptions given by two different authors of the same event.
Makes sense, doesn't it? The bible is inerrant after all, so nothing in it is wrong.
Going by this reasoning: A man dies, but the events surrounding his death are unclear. Three witnesses claim they know what caused his death. One witness says the man died by a hitman shooting him. Another says a car ran into him. A third claims a flash of lighting claimed his life. The curious thing is, all of them agree with each other.
1) The witness statement is untrue in one way or another.
2) The witness statement is actually consistent. The man actually died by being shot, being run over by a car and being struck by a flash of lightning at the same time.
Going by Biblical reasoning, we should go with 2), since any ridiculous explanation is more likely than it being not inerrant.
