Almost full-size replica of Noah's ark

[dvldog]

My response was as irrelevant as yours was, but then you know that.

If want to have a serious discussion you can answer the questions I've posed continually throughout this tread. If fundamentalists really have the depth of knowledge they claim, then they shouldn't be afraid to answer some straight forward questions. So far the only feedback I've received is in the form of circular logic, non sequiturs and spin. I'm not surprised, of course.

Well, we're not all as blessed as you. Must be a drag being that smart and confident. Have a nice day.

 

[Bodhisattva]

Well, we're not all as blessed as you. Must be a drag being that smart and confident. Have a nice day.

More dodging. Nice. I don't see why it's so hard to answer a couple of questions. These threads occur every few months, and as they relate to me it's always the same thing. I ask some questions and the fundies pretzel themselves not to answer.

I'm left with the conclusion that fundies tend to go through life never having examined their beliefs. Or they have and they've decided to lie to themselves. Either way, that hardly seems to be a quality belief system.

 

[Islander]

In the final analysis, I don't think it will make any difference whether or not you or I believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Your salvation is predicated on accepting Christ. If you feel the Bible is in error, what part do you choose to accept as truth and what part do you choose not to accept as truth. I choose to accept it as presented. That way even if it is imperfect I will be on firm foundation. Yes bamajeff, that is an amazing picture that you presented to us!!!

 

[BamaInBham]

BIB, I will give you credit for a few things. Your ability to ask for Biblical contradictions and then completely ignore the dozens presented to you while asking for contradictions again is truly outstanding. I think that may only be trumped by your ability to master the use of circular logic. Or perhaps your most accomplished ability is to ignore very simple progressions in logic.

I know you'll ignore this again, but let me try another way.

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C. Simple transitive property.

If Man is imperfect and Man wrote the Bible, then the Bible is imperfect. Get it?

Or perhaps answer me this simple question: if the Bible says that 2+2=5, would it be wrong?

I asked you several times to present 1, yes one, contradiction, and I will try (I may by the grace of God be able, maybe He won't give me the answer.) to answer it. No one has done that. I'm not going to address a list or a link. And don't bother with obscure historical references that erroneously contradict the Bible - the Bible has corrected erroneous history numerous times - we will simply disagree on that. Try some factual, not theoretical, scientific error, or an internal inconsistency or obvious historical error. You have yet to do that. And only do it if you sincerely want to know the truth, not just looking to "trip someone up" or looking for a gotcha. I do not want to waste my time with it if that is the case.

You are so confused or obdurate that you cannot understand that God can use imperfect man to communicate His perfect thoughts. That is how He used man to write the Scriptures - He is omipotent and omniscient. That is obvious to those who know He created the heavens and the earth.

You are talking of things about which you know nothing. You have said that man cannot understand God, where God says just the opposite, "'...let the man who boasts, boast in this that he knows and understand Me, that I am the Lord who exercises lovingkindness, justice, and righteousness on earth; for I delight in these things', says the Lord.". And I know by experience that this is true - I know Him and understand Him in some measure, as do multitudes of others. More importantly, I believe His Word.

Btw, you say you believe in God. What is this God you believe in, like ? Please tell a little about him.

 

[Bodhisattva]

In the final analysis, I don't think it will make any difference whether or not you or I believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Your salvation is predicated on accepting Christ.

As I've said, every religion - large and small, new and ancient, contemporary or defunct - has offered the "golden ticket" to eternal rewards. That a Jewish sect claims their guy is the key to salvation is underwhelming in its marketing. You believe it because you grew up in a Christian society. Had you been born in ancient Perisa, you'd have been a devote Zorastrian.

If you feel the Bible is in error, what part do you choose to accept as truth and what part do you choose not to accept as truth.

I choose to be skeptical about the parts that are in effect saying 2+2=5. Ignoring the correct answer and having faith that the answer is 5 still makes you wrong. I believe that God knows the answer is 4. Somewhere along the line man screwed up and came up with 5. I choose to believe God and not man.

I choose to accept it as presented.

It is presented by men, who make mistakes. Admit there are mistakes and do God the honor of getting it right.

That way even if it is imperfect I will be on firm foundation.

Continuing to believe that 2+2=5 is not a firm foundation.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I asked you several times to present 1, yes one, contradiction, and I will try (I may by the grace of God be able, maybe He won't give me the answer.) to answer it. No one has done that. I'm not going to address a list or a link.

LOL! OMG you're too funny. You ask for errors; I give you scores. You ask for errors; I give you scores. So, you ask for one. Hey, why don't you pick one from the scores I've given you?

And don't bother with obscure historical references that erroneously contradict the Bible

LOL! To you anything historical is obscure. I bet you've never had to confront the history of the early centuries of Christianity and all the schisms and competing ideas of the concept of Christ. Donatists. Meletians. Arians. Gnostics. Manichaeism. Etc. Etc.

And which Bible? The one used in the West? The one used in Orthodox Chrisianity? Which version of the Christian god is the real version of the Christian god? (It's probably the one as imagined by contemporary redneck society.)

You are so confused or obdurate that you cannot understand that God can use imperfect man to communicate His perfect thoughts. That is how He used man to write the Scriptures - He is omipotent and omniscient. That is obvious to those who know He created the heavens and the earth.

The confusion is all yours. Perfection filtered through imperfect Man is imperfection. Hate to break it to you.

Recreational reading is a constant for me, and one of the amusing things is how often I find typos. I find one in just about every other book I read. Imagine that! An error. Despite the modern equipment that modern publishing houses have at their disposal - an error. I'm sure that shocks a guy like you - that man can make mistakes. But, not me.

You are talking of things about which you know nothing. You have said that man cannot understand God, where God says just the opposite, "'...let the man who boasts, boast in this that he knows and understand Me, that I am the Lord who exercises lovingkindness, justice, and righteousness on earth; for I delight in these things', says the Lord.". And I know by experience that this is true - I know Him and understand Him in some measure, as do multitudes of others. More importantly, I believe His Word.

If you cared to study history at all you would know that the early church leaders were also the political leaders of the day. Constantine used the power of the church to solidify his rule. The Council of Nicea was called to decide (300 years after Christ's death) who Christ was, what he was, and what the Church was going to be about.

So, you can quote the bible all you want, but the what became the Christian Bible was a political decision as much as it was a religious one. 300 years of drift among independent Christian churchs in Europe, North Africa, Anatolia, Persia, the Levant, etc. Do you think people can come up with their own interpretations and their own holy texts in 300 years? And Nicea kept some things and discarded others for political reasons.

Know your history. Be less ignorant.

In any other field if someone says, "I want to do no critical evaluation and just swallow what I'm fed" that person would be considered a fool at best. Except when it comes to religion, where one is considered devout and faithful. Be ignorant and accept the authority of the religious (a.k.a. political) leaders. Be sheep. When it comes to religion, a legitimate ignorance or an ignorance out of fear is not something I have. Sorry that threatens you.

Btw, you say you believe in God. What is this God you believe in, like ? Please tell a little about him.

Well, I can chose from many versions and still historically be a Christian. He can be angry and vengeful and into mass punishment. He can be gentle and forgiving. Christ can be completely man. He can be completely diety. He can be both at the same time. He can be represented through icons. Or he can never be represented through icons.

Contradicting, huh? Well, that's Christianity historically - a series of contradictions. But, of course you knew that right? Because you know what you're talking about right?

 

[BamaInBham]

The Bible was completed approx 70 A.D., not compiled centuries later. It was not dependent upon Councils are any other human arrangement to complete. The omnipotent God inspired its writing and superintended its compilation and its maintenance. He used imperfect (we agree that man is deeply flawed, the Bible makes that quite clear) men to do this work.

You are right that unprincipled men have used religion and the Bible or what they called the "Word of God" in a deceitful manner, just like they've misused many other good things; just like there are many 'Christian' frauds today. But that does not change the fact that God maintained the true Scripture's integrity, and has seen to it that it has passed through the centuries intact. You are unwilling to see that God is able to preserve His Word. But just like He created the heavens and the earth and has maintained them to this day, He has watched over His Word to this day.

You can't be a Christian in the Biblical sense unless you are born again as Jesus Christ said, "Unless a man is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

What is the source of your info about your God ? Why do you trust it ?

 

[Ark-Tider]

I choose to be skeptical about the parts that are in effect saying 2+2=5. QUOTE]

Is it possible that 2+2 really equals 5?

 

[dvldog]

More dodging. Nice. I don't see why it's so hard to answer a couple of questions. These threads occur every few months, and as they relate to me it's always the same thing. I ask some questions and the fundies pretzel themselves not to answer.

I'm left with the conclusion that fundies tend to go through life never having examined their beliefs. Or they have and they've decided to lie to themselves. Either way, that hardly seems to be a quality belief system.

I was not debating the larger issue just responding to your comparison of your wife making out a grocery list or some such analysis. Then you got defensive. Your trying to convince us or yourself? Not being as intelligent as yourself, I boil it down to what for me is the basics; I believe in God, I believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, I believe He died on the cross for my sins and was reserected. Anything else largely above my own personnel experience or ability to fully comprehend, I don't get bogged down in. Its the nature of man to question and doubt. No getting around that except by faith. Im sure you have an argument for that which we will all get to read. But just as we won't change your mind, you won't change ours. I hope all your beliefs help you get though life and wish you the best.

 

[Bodhisattva]

The Bible was completed approx 70 A.D., not compiled centuries later. It was not dependent upon Councils are any other human arrangement to complete. The omnipotent God inspired its writing and superintended its compilation and its maintenance. He used imperfect (we agree that man is deeply flawed, the Bible makes that quite clear) men to do this work.

You are right that unprincipled men have used religion and the Bible or what they called the "Word of God" in a deceitful manner, just like they've misused many other good things; just like there are many 'Christian' frauds today. But that does not change the fact that God maintained the true Scripture's integrity, and has seen to it that it has passed through the centuries intact. You are unwilling to see that God is able to preserve His Word. But just like He created the heavens and the earth and has maintained them to this day, He has watched over His Word to this day.

You can't be a Christian in the Biblical sense unless you are born again as Jesus Christ said, "Unless a man is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

What is the source of your info about your God ? Why do you trust it ?

Who completed the Christian Bible? Why do different Christian Churches have different versions of the Bible? I've only asked you this question about a dozen times.

You admit man is flawed. Yet man somehow records, translates, compiles and maintins the Bible perfectly. Illogical.

 

[Bodhisattva]

Is it possible that 2+2 really equals 5?

I'm pretty sure that God made 2 + 2 equal to 4, and that man somewhere along the line made a mistake.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I was not debating the larger issue just responding to your comparison of your wife making out a grocery list or some such analysis.

I know what you were trying to do, and it was a nonsequitur because in my example a human wrote something down and made it happen. If man records a document, proclaims it holy, and then fulfills the claim in the document, how is God involved? He's not. It would be the same as if my wife made out a "God-inspired" menu and then accomplished it. It's not a prophecy; it's just dinner.

I believe in God, I believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, I believe He died on the cross for my sins and was reserected. Anything else largely above my own personnel experience or ability to fully comprehend, I don't get bogged down in.

That's fine, but it has nothing to do with the fact that flawed, imperfect man has made errors in the Bible over the centuries. A literal interpretation of the Bible is incorrect since it contains allegories and some errors in translation or other mistakes. You can look at two Bibles and see that the wording is not the same.

 

[BamaInBham]

Who completed the Christian Bible?

I've answered this several times. Evidently we disagree.

Why do different Christian Churches have different versions of the Bible? I've only asked you this question about a dozen times.

Christian churches are not infallible. Some are faithful, some less faithful, many are completely unfaithful. As far as the 'church' at large, Jesus Christ said of the church of the last days that He would 'vomit it out of His mouth".

You admit man is flawed. Yet man somehow records, translates, compiles and maintins the Bible perfectly. Illogical.

When God supervises the project, He effortlessly guides man to produce perfection. He has done so with His Word.



You did not answer my question: What is the source of your info about your God ? Why do you trust it ?

 

[derek4tide]

It's amazing that so many know what Jesus would "vomit" and what he wouldn't "vomit." I wish I knew everything God did, that'd be way cool.

 

[BamaInBham]

It's amazing that so many know what Jesus would "vomit" and what he wouldn't "vomit." I wish I knew everything God did, that'd be way cool.

He said it in His Word. Rev 3, if you want to check it out.

 

[derek4tide]

He said it in His Word. Rev 3, if you want to check it out.

Nah, I will stick with this one.

"Stop judging, so that you shall not be judged, for with what judgment you judge, you will be judged, and with what measure you measure, it will be measured to you. But why do you look at the speck, the [one] in your brother's eye, but you do not notice the log, the [one] in your own eye? Or, how will you say to your brother, ‘Allow [me], I shall take the speck from your eye,' and look!, the log [is] in your own eye? Hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye". (Matthew 7:1-5)

 

[Bodhisattva]

Christian churches are not infallible.

Ah, so now you admit that churches are imperfect along with mankind. Yet things interpreted, translated and compiled by the aforementioned imperfect actors are perfect? Illogical.

Some are faithful, some less faithful, many are completely unfaithful.

Which Christian churches would these be? And while you're at it, which churches are correct?

As far as the 'church' at large, Jesus Christ said of the church of the last days that He would 'vomit it out of His mouth".

Interestingly though, the early church leaders, who were also political leaders, set up church doctrine so that the only way to be right with God was through the Church. Thus, Christian gnostic sects were snuffed out. I guess Christianity doesn't square with Christ.

When God supervises the project, He effortlessly guides man to produce perfection. He has done so with His Word.

The only thing you know about God's word is what was approved by political leaders of early Christianity. Most of what was not approved was destroyed. You are willfully blind if you cannot see that.

 

[BamaInBham]

Ah, so now you admit that churches are imperfect along with mankind. Yet things interpreted, translated and compiled by the aforementioned imperfect actors are perfect? Illogical.

No admission. Just a statement of fact. I've never said or inferred anything different.

Which Christian churches would these be? And while you're at it, which churches are correct?

The faithful ones are the ones who teach the Word of God in truth, the unfaithful do not. You find true believers, those who have been born again through faith in Jesus Christ, in many groups.

Interestingly though, the early church leaders, who were also political leaders, set up church doctrine so that the only way to be right with God was through the Church. Thus, Christian gnostic sects were snuffed out. I guess Christianity doesn't square with Christ.

There were true believers like Paul and Peter and John and Timothy, etc. who were not political leaders. Multitudes of others have followed through the centuries - to this present day. You are confusing true believers with professing Christendom. They are not the same - does not mean there are not true believers mixed in with it. Constantine and others who followed, as well as lesser lights who preceded, were in many cases not even believers. Whether they were are not, they certainly did not follow the Lord's instruction regarding becoming a political force. The Lord said regarding the marriage of the church with the world's political system, "I know where you dwell, where Satan's throne (the world political system) is".

True faith has nothing to do with what some 'church leaders' or 'church councils' or any other such group has to say. This is a source of great confusion for you: you equate organized religion, both true and false, with true faith and the Word of God.

The only thing you know about God's word is what was approved by political leaders of early Christianity. Most of what was not approved was destroyed. You are willfully blind if you cannot see that.

See above. Politics has nothing to do with it. There are many Greek NT manuscripts and other evidences before the Council of Nicea.




Again, you did not answer my questions: What is the source of your info about your God ? Why do you trust it ?

 

[Bodhisattva]

No admission. Just a statement of fact. I've never said or inferred anything different.

So, you are agreeing with me? That is illogical to claim that imperfect men and imperfect churches can maintain God's word perfectly? That's quite a sea-change for you, isn't it?

The faithful ones are the ones who teach the Word of God in truth, the unfaithful do not. You find true believers, those who have been born again through faith in Jesus Christ, in many groups.

Now you are spinning. You just wrote, "Christian churches are not infallible. Some are faithful, some less faithful, many are completely unfaithful." Which churches have it wrong? Armenian Orthodox? Ethiopian Orthodox? Roman Catholic? Any one or all of the myriad of Protestant denmenations? Finish your thought.

There were true believers like Paul and Peter and John and Timothy, etc. who were not political leaders. Multitudes of others have followed through the centuries - to this present day. You are confusing true believers with professing Christendom. They are not the same - does not mean there are not true believers mixed in with it. Constantine and others who followed, as well as lesser lights who preceded, were in many cases not even believers. Whether they were are not, they certainly did not follow the Lord's instruction regarding becoming a political force. The Lord said regarding the marriage of the church with the world's political system, "I know where you dwell, where Satan's throne (the world political system) is".

Constantine hosted the Council of Nicea to decide, among other things, the nature of Christ. Man, diety or both? The way Christians today view Christ is through a political lense. You cannot deny that. It's right there in your history books. For the 300 previous years there were scores of independent Christian sects with their own interpretations. It's true that Constantine didn't care what was decided, so long as some sort of consensus could be reached. I didn't think the nature of Christ was determinative on the give and take of political man.

True faith has nothing to do with what some 'church leaders' or 'church councils' or any other such group has to say. This is a source of great confusion for you: you equate organized religion, both true and false, with true faith and the Word of God.

What confuses you is that you seem to think people are immune from the influences of 2000 years of church interpretations. That makes no sense whatsoever.

See above. Politics has nothing to do with it. There are many Greek NT manuscripts and other evidences before the Council of Nicea.

Completely wrong. You did not grow up in a religious vacuum. You, and everyone else exposed to religion, learned through your parents and/or a church. The Bible you love to quote was approved by churches.

 

[jthomas666]

The point is that the Bible cannot be perfect if it was written, translated and compiled by men.

I don't care if you believe in evolution or gravity or anything scientific. I don't care if you believe you talk to God every day and that he talks back.

My only point in this whole thread is the first sentence. And I'm pounding home that point because it is so hard for fundamentalists to admit the obvious. They believe that the Bible is the word of God and that it is a perfect document. It is not. It is the word of God as (imperfectly) understood by men.

How many times do I have to demonstrate that it is not? And again, I belive in God. I'm not attacking Christianity or anything else. I just want people to admit that man is flawed .... in everything he does ..... including recordation of the Bible.

Bodhi, here's the short answer:

Yes, there are questions of translation, canonicity, etc. However, God inspired St. Jerome as he translated the Vulgate in the 5th century; because of that inspiration, whatever errors had crept in were corrected.

Protestants further contend that the King James translation was similarly inspired. Again, whatever errors had developed since the Vulgate were at that point corrected. I cannot vouch as to how closely the Vulgate compares with the KJV.

Divine inspiration is also cited when justifying the specific books admitted into the Bible--however, given that the Divinely inspired Roman Catholic bible contains books not contained in the divinely-inspired Protestant Bible, and that Martin Luther himself had reservations about the canonicity of certain books of the New Testament, you pretty much pays your money and takes your chances.