"40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-06-2016, 04:03 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
(01-06-2016 03:44 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(01-06-2016 03:34 PM)SkepticalDaniel Wrote:  You wouldn't believe how the try to resolve the contradictions. I once mentioned the contradiction in Genesis 22:1 and James 1:13 to one of my co-workers, who is a Christian, and she said "Words have different meanings". Or sometimes the my pull out the Law of Non-Contradiction.

Which Law of Non-Contradiction? The one in logic that says you can't have both "A" and "not A"? What does that have to do with the Bible? The Bible isn't logic -- it's literature. A storyteller (and even more so multiple storytellers) can contradict himself to his heart's content. There is no "law" against it.

I meant the one that states "you can't have A and not A" apologists seem to like that one.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2016, 04:04 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
(01-06-2016 03:44 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(01-06-2016 03:34 PM)SkepticalDaniel Wrote:  You wouldn't believe how the try to resolve the contradictions. I once mentioned the contradiction in Genesis 22:1 and James 1:13 to one of my co-workers, who is a Christian, and she said "Words have different meanings". Or sometimes the my pull out the Law of Non-Contradiction.

Which Law of Non-Contradiction? The one in logic that says you can't have both "A" and "not A"? What does that have to do with the Bible? The Bible isn't logic -- it's literature. A storyteller (and even more so multiple storytellers) can contradict himself to his heart's content. There is no "law" against it.

I meant the one that states "you can't have A and not A" apologists seem to like that one.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2016, 04:08 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
(01-06-2016 04:04 PM)SkepticalDaniel Wrote:  
(01-06-2016 03:44 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Which Law of Non-Contradiction? The one in logic that says you can't have both "A" and "not A"? What does that have to do with the Bible? The Bible isn't logic -- it's literature. A storyteller (and even more so multiple storytellers) can contradict himself to his heart's content. There is no "law" against it.

I meant the one that states "you can't have A and not A" apologists seem to like that one.

OK, but what makes them think that it applies to the Bible? The law says that A and not A cannot both be true. It says nothing about what someone can write in a book. If you put together the Law of Non-Contradiction and the fact that the Bible contains numerous obvious contradictions, that's an argument against the "truth" of the Bible, not for it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2016, 04:14 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
(01-06-2016 04:08 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(01-06-2016 04:04 PM)SkepticalDaniel Wrote:  I meant the one that states "you can't have A and not A" apologists seem to like that one.

OK, but what makes them think that it applies to the Bible? The law says that A and not A cannot both be true. It says nothing about what someone can write in a book. If you put together the Law of Non-Contradiction and the fact that the Bible contains numerous obvious contradictions, that's an argument against the "truth" of the Bible, not for it.

I think an example would be like this:

Quote:"1) Judas hanged himself. 2) Judas fell down, and his bowels spilled out. Neither statement about Judas contradicts the other. That is, neither statement makes the other impossible because neither excludes the possibility of the other. The statements can be harmonized by stating: Judas hanged himself, and then his body fell down, and his bowels spilled out.

In order to make the set of statements contradictory, we would have something like: 1) Judas hanged himself. 2) Judas did not hang himself. Since either statement excludes the possibility of the other, we would then have a contradiction since both could not be true. However, to say that Judas hanged himself and Judas fell are not contradictory since both could occur." SOURCE: https://carm.org/dictionary-law-of-non-contradiction
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2016, 04:20 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
(01-06-2016 04:14 PM)SkepticalDaniel Wrote:  
(01-06-2016 04:08 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  OK, but what makes them think that it applies to the Bible? The law says that A and not A cannot both be true. It says nothing about what someone can write in a book. If you put together the Law of Non-Contradiction and the fact that the Bible contains numerous obvious contradictions, that's an argument against the "truth" of the Bible, not for it.

I think an example would be like this:

Quote:"1) Judas hanged himself. 2) Judas fell down, and his bowels spilled out. Neither statement about Judas contradicts the other. That is, neither statement makes the other impossible because neither excludes the possibility of the other. The statements can be harmonized by stating: Judas hanged himself, and then his body fell down, and his bowels spilled out.

In order to make the set of statements contradictory, we would have something like: 1) Judas hanged himself. 2) Judas did not hang himself. Since either statement excludes the possibility of the other, we would then have a contradiction since both could not be true. However, to say that Judas hanged himself and Judas fell are not contradictory since both could occur." SOURCE: https://carm.org/dictionary-law-of-non-contradiction

Yes, I've seen that argument, and I can't deny that it's possible that both things happened, but this has nothing to do with the law of non-contradiction. It just says that this particular example is not exactly a contradiction. I've also seen where they deny that Joseph (Mary's husband and Jesus's stepfather) had two different fathers (according to the Bible), but there they claim that "it doesn't really mean what it says" -- which also has nothing to do with the law of non-contradiction. They are just trying to weasel out of obvious problems with the Bible by using fancy phrases from philosophy that don't apply to these situations.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
01-06-2016, 04:23 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
Apologist logic goes something like this: (1) The Bible is true, because it's "the Word of God". (2) A and not A cannot both be true. (3) Therefore, there can be no contradictions in the Bible, and anything that looks like one really isn't.

But that's not how it works. They are running the argument backwards. And we have no good reason to assume #1.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
01-06-2016, 04:32 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
(01-06-2016 04:20 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(01-06-2016 04:14 PM)SkepticalDaniel Wrote:  I think an example would be like this:


Yes, I've seen that argument, and I can't deny that it's possible that both things happened, but this has nothing to do with the law of non-contradiction. It just says that this particular example is not exactly a contradiction. I've also seen where they deny that Joseph (Mary's husband and Jesus's stepfather) had two different fathers (according to the Bible), but there they claim that "it doesn't really mean what it says" -- which also has nothing to do with the law of non-contradiction. They are just trying to weasel out of obvious problems with the Bible by using fancy phrases from philosophy that don't apply to these situations.

I figured so.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2016, 04:44 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
(01-06-2016 03:00 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  It's very simple to refute, the book contradicts itself constantly, the stories don't flow together at all and any real connection is easy to make. The later writers just had to read the earlier chapters, that's it. It's like fan fictions, that's what the OT is, it's just a continuation of the Yahweh story for a new audience and they change hugely important aspects of his personality and character to fit this new theme.

If all those authors in all those different languages in different countries contributed to one book and it was the actual truth it would make perfect sense and actually be astonishingly harmonious and conform to one basic God myth, it's far from meeting this standard, it's a total mess of symbology trying to mix with world history, some dashes of terrible science and moral ambiguity.

You can check out a list of contradictions here that are easy to remember so you can use them to refute the bible later on, you really only need a few:

Bible Contradictions

The thing that still gets me in a twist is when they talk about the 40 different authors in 3 different continents.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2016, 05:18 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
(01-06-2016 04:44 PM)SkepticalDaniel Wrote:  
(01-06-2016 03:00 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  It's very simple to refute, the book contradicts itself constantly, the stories don't flow together at all and any real connection is easy to make. The later writers just had to read the earlier chapters, that's it. It's like fan fictions, that's what the OT is, it's just a continuation of the Yahweh story for a new audience and they change hugely important aspects of his personality and character to fit this new theme.

If all those authors in all those different languages in different countries contributed to one book and it was the actual truth it would make perfect sense and actually be astonishingly harmonious and conform to one basic God myth, it's far from meeting this standard, it's a total mess of symbology trying to mix with world history, some dashes of terrible science and moral ambiguity.

You can check out a list of contradictions here that are easy to remember so you can use them to refute the bible later on, you really only need a few:

Bible Contradictions

The thing that still gets me in a twist is when they talk about the 40 different authors in 3 different continents.

I'm not sure what they mean by different continents, I guess technically you could say Europe and Northern Africa but that's only two, what's the third? Asia...America? If you consider Joseph Smith a prophet than I guess yeah he was American but he was still heavily influenced by the original Bible and if we are to consider him then why not Muhammad and every Christian can go ahead and convert to Islam?

[Image: sagansig_zps6vhbql6m.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2016, 05:22 PM
RE: "40 Different Authors, 66 Books, Different Languages and Continents" Argument
(01-06-2016 05:18 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  
(01-06-2016 04:44 PM)SkepticalDaniel Wrote:  The thing that still gets me in a twist is when they talk about the 40 different authors in 3 different continents.

I'm not sure what they mean by different continents, I guess technically you could say Europe and Northern Africa but that's only two, what's the third? Asia...America? If you consider Joseph Smith a prophet than I guess yeah he was American but he was still heavily influenced by the original Bible and if we are to consider him then why not Muhammad and every Christian can go ahead and convert to Islam?

It's a little bit more complex than that. I mean more of the idea that these 40 writers were supposedly "inspired by God". Some apologists will like to say that the phrase "thus saith the Lord" appears in the Old Testament over and over again, thus proving it to be true
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: