Biblical Contradictions/Inconsistencies - Page 3 - OG Myth-Weavers

Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


Biblical Contradictions/Inconsistencies

 
Quote:
It is not arbitrary to call 'wicked' all those who do not love God. If God is holy, then he is the standard of what is right and good. So if someone does not follow him, they do not meet the standard of what is right and good and are, therefore, wicked.
I do believe it was stated 'the bible can not be supported by the bible', or something like. That is, god is not good 'cause he says so' - to be good, one must be good. To destroy nations merely because they are of a different nations is not a good act.

Or, if you agree murder and the destruction of civilizations is justified by god's will, let us move on to another point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amadan
I do believe it was stated 'the bible can not be supported by the bible', or something like.
Stated where and by whom? That seems like a particularly unhelpful requirement for a thread about biblical inconsistencies. Does it follow then that 'the bible can't be contradicted by the bible'? Doesn't the major part of the task of correcting inconsistencies within the bible itself involve demonstrating the internal consistency of the bible itself? Sure, you can deny that God is holy all you want, but that doesn't solve the problem. The problem, so I thought, was with apparent inconsistencies such as that the bible says God is good and it also says that he seems to do things that aren't. But if you can take the bible's word for it when it says that God is good to show the bible is wrong, why can't I take the bible's word for it that God is good to show it isn't? If we aren't taking the bible's word for it even if only for the sake of argument, then what is there to discuss? Just deny he's good and be done with it. If you can use the bible to show the bible's inconsistency and I can't use the bible to show the bible's consistency, then this is a very different thread than I thought it was. Are you asking for someone to prove God's existence and goodness apart from the bible?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amadan
To destroy nations merely because they are of a different nations is not a good act.
I agree. But the bible does not say that mere difference alone is the sole reason for God destroying nations. It seems to me (as I pointed out about the Jeremiah verses, for example) that God actually has had much more substantive reasons than mere difference.

I'm saying god is not good because god says god is good. I may as well argue I'm right because I say I'm right. Show me these 'substantive reasons' for destroying nations, besides that they were not god's 'chosen people'. Or the reason for killing all of Egypt's first-born instead of those that held the Jews as slaves. Or the reason for destroying a nation (of god), along with all its property put to the torch, its children and wowanfolk put to the sword (Judges I mentioned earlier), and the later giving of women as gifts.

Amadan, the rule is that you can't use personal experiences and you can't use "because i believe in god". The bible is the source for all arguments in this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnistar
Amadan, the rule is that you can't use personal experiences and you can't use "because i believe in god". The bible is the source for all arguments in this thread.
I stand by my derision of the argument "god is good because god says god is good". Anyhow, as I said, if you feel evil acts are redeemed as pure through the fact that god is the perpetrator, then move onto another point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amadan
if you feel evil acts are redeemed as pure through the fact that god is the perpetrator, then move onto another point.
Well, then I guess we can't yet move on to another point.

The quote above "begs the question" by assuming the very answer that is in dispute. To say that destroying nations is evil but "redeemed as pure" because God does it is to begin from the premise that God destroying nations is evil. The point I was trying to make is that God destroying nations is not evil, and I tried to show you at least some reasons for thinking that.

As for 'substantive reasons' for God destroying nations, I would say that the specific reasons may vary from one case to the next. Provide a specific case and then we can talk about reasons.

To be generous, I'll provide one for you, and start with the first recorded example (I think . . .): Noah and the flood. This seems to me to be a template for subsequent divine judgments on nations, as far as reasons go:

GEN 6:5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Now, at least as far as the internal consistency of the bible is concerned, we have a substantive reason (other than 'mere difference') for the destruction not just of a nation but of the whole world (assuming the flood was, as they say, universal and not localized, which is another question altogether). Consider that part of your challenge met.

If, however, you disagree with the bible's characterization of mankind at the time of the flood, or its definitions of evil and good, then those are other issues. But as far as consistency is concerned, the previous points still stand. It is not evil for a sufficiently good and legitimate authority to punish evildoers commensurate to the crime in question.

Why put women and children to death? Theyw ere a sinful people; they followed false god's teachings. (Judges;joshua;deuteronomy,no specific chapters it's throughout all those books.)They had no reverencer for God and made no atonement for their sins. That explains the death of those in Egypt and in in other nations.( I hope.)

Mathew 19:17 And [Jesus] said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Now, one might think that this enlightened fellow would know right from wrong. So, if keeping the commandments are 'good' one might also suppose go against them would be 'evil'. Then, if god murders and steals away all a fellow has... Actually there are three points here - god breaking the commandments, Jesus saying he is not god as many christians claim, and Jesus saying no one is good (so why spare some yet destroy others?).


Quote:
A quick question. What do you do to dogs with Rabies?
Find an exorcist? Burn it at the stake? Try to discover why this disease occurs and create a vaccine?

Quote:
Why put women and children to death? Theyw ere a sinful people; they followed false god's teachings. (Judges;joshua;deuteronomy,no specific chapters it's throughout all those books.)They had no reverencer for God and made no atonement for their sins. That explains the death of those in Egypt and in in other nations.( I hope.)
That must be one of the racist remarks I've ever heard. People - any person, regardless of their deeds and life and goals - should be murdered for not being a Jew?




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Last Database Backup 2024-03-19 06:45:13am local time
Myth-Weavers Status