Biblical contradictions
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-01-2015, 09:51 AM
RE: Biblical contradictions
(11-01-2015 03:30 PM)LM2340 Wrote:  "Jesus sacrificing himself for mankind is BULLSHIT! He knew ahead of time that in 3 days he would be resurrected as he is all knowing. He basically took a 3 day nap for mankind. Had he not resurrected then that would be an actual sacrifice. Now what if Jesus was asked to sacrifice himself to his own personal eternal hell for ETERNITY for mankind.... No chance in HELL he would make that sacrifice!!"

(source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WC8JQxrKAZY posted by Yon Choi)

Another point about this is that J. went through no more suffering than the thieves that were supposedly crucified alongside him, nor anyone else who were subjected to that form of execution--or, for that matter, the billions of human beings who have endured great suffering since humanity began.

If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities.--Voltaire.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." --Thomas Paine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes 666wannabe's post
12-01-2015, 10:17 AM (This post was last modified: 12-01-2015 10:21 AM by Leo.)
RE: Biblical contradictions
(12-01-2015 09:51 AM)666wannabe Wrote:  
(11-01-2015 03:30 PM)LM2340 Wrote:  "Jesus sacrificing himself for mankind is BULLSHIT! He knew ahead of time that in 3 days he would be resurrected as he is all knowing. He basically took a 3 day nap for mankind. Had he not resurrected then that would be an actual sacrifice. Now what if Jesus was asked to sacrifice himself to his own personal eternal hell for ETERNITY for mankind.... No chance in HELL he would make that sacrifice!!"

(source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WC8JQxrKAZY posted by Yon Choi)

Another point about this is that J. went through no more suffering than the thieves that were supposedly crucified alongside him, nor anyone else who were subjected to that form of execution--or, for that matter, the billions of human beings who have endured great suffering since humanity began.
Another point is that the Jesus cruxifiction was faked. According to the gospel of mark Jesus was crucified at the third hour (9:00)am . According to the Roman catholic church and orthodox church the third hour could mean the period of time between 9:00 and 12:00pm. Any how Jesus dies after only 3-6 hours in the cross at 3:00 pm. The gospel of John says that Jesus was condenmed to death at the sixth hour or noon. The others gospels talk about a darkness of 3 hours between noon and 3:00 pm but the actual cruxifiction hour is not mentioned. So Jesus was hung at the cross for a few hours and the cruxifiction was a very long execution lasting many hours and sometimes several days. Even Pilate was surprised at the Jesus super fast "death" . He don't expect Jesus to "die " that fast.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 11:02 AM
RE: Biblical contradictions
(09-01-2015 03:18 PM)docskeptic Wrote:  
(08-01-2015 10:42 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I'm not familiar with the phrase Y-man, but both Joseph and Mary in their lineages are direct descendants of King David, Joseph via David's son Solomon, and Mary via another son of David, Nathan.

The Y-chromosome donor. Joseph, in this case.

Incidentally, Q, how do you know it's not the other way round? Mary from Solomon and Joseph from Nathan?

Doc

The Solomonic line could not sit on the throne. Joseph had the pedigree, Mary had the right. The way that both lines of prophecies dovetail "David's son will be a forever-King" and "Solomon's sons (after the diaspora) will not sit on the throne..." is if Joseph, direct descendant of Solomon, adopted as his firstborn son and heir a son of David not from Solomon.

Back then, not only were adoptees and step-children fully children, but in-laws were mom and dad. You get two lines in two gospels through two sons of David. Mary and Joseph share their parentage and heritage.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 11:06 AM
RE: Biblical contradictions
(12-01-2015 10:17 AM)Leo Wrote:  
(12-01-2015 09:51 AM)666wannabe Wrote:  Another point about this is that J. went through no more suffering than the thieves that were supposedly crucified alongside him, nor anyone else who were subjected to that form of execution--or, for that matter, the billions of human beings who have endured great suffering since humanity began.
Another point is that the Jesus cruxifiction was faked. According to the gospel of mark Jesus was crucified at the third hour (9:00)am . According to the Roman catholic church and orthodox church the third hour could mean the period of time between 9:00 and 12:00pm. Any how Jesus dies after only 3-6 hours in the cross at 3:00 pm. The gospel of John says that Jesus was condenmed to death at the sixth hour or noon. The others gospels talk about a darkness of 3 hours between noon and 3:00 pm but the actual cruxifiction hour is not mentioned. So Jesus was hung at the cross for a few hours and the cruxifiction was a very long execution lasting many hours and sometimes several days. Even Pilate was surprised at the Jesus super fast "death" . He don't expect Jesus to "die " that fast.

This kind of thing--and I do appreciate the logic you employed here--underscores my request that the Bible be treated just like other books written for another culture and time and not in English, in context and from the languages then in use. You needed to tell us what "sixth hour" and etc. meant to begin to study the passages/issues.

They were surprised at the speed of the death--the crucifixion was meant to keep the poor person awake day and night as they lingered. Jesus said "Father, I commend my spirit to you" and then died. There was an earthquake and etc. and a soldier is heard to remark (a Gentile, not a proselyte) truly this was God's Son (as had been reported/rumored).

The fact of the speedy death is mentioned in an appeal to the unusual nature of the death of Jesus. Prophecies were fulfilled including "not a bone of Him shall be broken" and then there was no need to break his thigh bone and prevent Jesus from pulling Himself up and down on the cross to breathe--He was dead. The thieves lingered until their thigh bones were shattered...

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 11:50 AM (This post was last modified: 13-01-2015 01:53 PM by docskeptic.)
RE: Biblical contradictions
(13-01-2015 11:02 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(09-01-2015 03:18 PM)docskeptic Wrote:  The Y-chromosome donor. Joseph, in this case.

Incidentally, Q, how do you know it's not the other way round? Mary from Solomon and Joseph from Nathan?

Doc

The Solomonic line could not sit on the throne. Joseph had the pedigree, Mary had the right. The way that both lines of prophecies dovetail "David's son will be a forever-King" and "Solomon's sons (after the diaspora) will not sit on the throne..." is if Joseph, direct descendant of Solomon, adopted as his firstborn son and heir a son of David not from Solomon.

Back then, not only were adoptees and step-children fully children, but in-laws were mom and dad. You get two lines in two gospels through two sons of David. Mary and Joseph share their parentage and heritage.

What difference does it make? Both lines converged at Zerubbabel and Shealtiel wiping out any difference that may have existed. Or to put it another way, Zerubbabel was the common ancestor of Joseph and Mary. How can you say then that Mary is descended from Nathan and Joseph from Solomon? You are repeating apologists' pap without critically evaluating the evidence for yourself.

I posted this elsewhere, but it may be worth repeating. I prepared a list of Jesus's ancestors from the four different accounts that we have in the Bible. A glance at it is sufficient to see that Joseph and Mary having separate lineages is not possible.


.doc  Gen1.doc (Size: 56.5 KB / Downloads: 70)


Doc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like docskeptic's post
13-01-2015, 01:01 PM
RE: Biblical contradictions
(13-01-2015 11:02 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(09-01-2015 03:18 PM)docskeptic Wrote:  The Y-chromosome donor. Joseph, in this case.

Incidentally, Q, how do you know it's not the other way round? Mary from Solomon and Joseph from Nathan?

Doc

The Solomonic line could not sit on the throne. Joseph had the pedigree, Mary had the right. The way that both lines of prophecies dovetail "David's son will be a forever-King" and "Solomon's sons (after the diaspora) will not sit on the throne..." is if Joseph, direct descendant of Solomon, adopted as his firstborn son and heir a son of David not from Solomon.

Back then, not only were adoptees and step-children fully children, but in-laws were mom and dad. You get two lines in two gospels through two sons of David. Mary and Joseph share their parentage and heritage.

I ask again: Where are you finding anything about Mary in the genealogies? They both end at Joseph, except that they go in different directions. One says "X was the father of Joseph" and the other says "Joseph was the son of Y" (and X and Y are different people). There is not a word about Mary in either of them. You can use this adoptee/step-children/in-laws thing to claim that one of them refers to Mary, but then you're playing word games (not to mention guessing at which one it is). What it actually says is a contradiction.

Not to mention Doc's point about convergence in the middle of the genealogies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
13-01-2015, 01:04 PM
RE: Biblical contradictions
(13-01-2015 11:06 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(12-01-2015 10:17 AM)Leo Wrote:  Another point is that the Jesus cruxifiction was faked. According to the gospel of mark Jesus was crucified at the third hour (9:00)am . According to the Roman catholic church and orthodox church the third hour could mean the period of time between 9:00 and 12:00pm. Any how Jesus dies after only 3-6 hours in the cross at 3:00 pm. The gospel of John says that Jesus was condenmed to death at the sixth hour or noon. The others gospels talk about a darkness of 3 hours between noon and 3:00 pm but the actual cruxifiction hour is not mentioned. So Jesus was hung at the cross for a few hours and the cruxifiction was a very long execution lasting many hours and sometimes several days. Even Pilate was surprised at the Jesus super fast "death" . He don't expect Jesus to "die " that fast.

This kind of thing--and I do appreciate the logic you employed here--underscores my request that the Bible be treated just like other books written for another culture and time and not in English, in context and from the languages then in use. You needed to tell us what "sixth hour" and etc. meant to begin to study the passages/issues.

They were surprised at the speed of the death--the crucifixion was meant to keep the poor person awake day and night as they lingered. Jesus said "Father, I commend my spirit to you" and then died. There was an earthquake and etc. and a soldier is heard to remark (a Gentile, not a proselyte) truly this was God's Son (as had been reported/rumored).

The fact of the speedy death is mentioned in an appeal to the unusual nature of the death of Jesus. Prophecies were fulfilled including "not a bone of Him shall be broken" and then there was no need to break his thigh bone and prevent Jesus from pulling Himself up and down on the cross to breathe--He was dead. The thieves lingered until their thigh bones were shattered...

I already explained what the new testament hours means. Third hour 9:00 am , sixth hour 12:00 pm etc. The gospels accounts of Jesus last friday have several contradictions. They don't agree at the hour of Jesus cruxifiction etc. At any event Jesus was hung at the cross not more than 6 hours. One of the shortest cruxifictions in history. The Jesus scourging was harsh but Pilate don't expect Jesus to die so fast.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 03:22 PM
RE: Biblical contradictions
I am familiar with those contradictions also--my own journey was to read the text, see the contradiction, then research it also. Here is a piece I adapted from my readings--I know there is somewhere online a place to see these lines...

Solomon’s son Joram married Athaliah, daughter of Ahab and Jezebel. Seed is cursed for four generations in accordance with Ex. 20:5 and next three names in genealogy are omitted, leaving Ozias as son of Joram in Matthew 1:8. Variants of Ozias are Azariah (1 Chron 3:12) and Uzziah (Isa. 6:1).

Look at Jehoiakim, name no. 14. His name ends with an M, not an N, so he is not to be confused with his son, Jehoiakin (also called Jechonias, Coniah, Conias). With Jehoiakim we begin to see separate threads of continuity of bloodline and titular right to the throne in David’s line. Jehoiakim provoked Nebuchadnezzar to attack Jerusalem and Jeremiah 36:30 was to foretell that none of his seed would ever sit on David’s throne. Son Jehoiakin (Jechonias in Matthew) succeeded his father and was taken to Babylon after only three years on the throne, as you know.

Jechonias was in Babylon thirty-seven years and was treated kindly by his rulers. He apparently married a daughter of Neri in Nathan’s branch of the house of David (Neri is no. 54 of that line). An assumption is that Neri was not only a woman of appropriate status but possibly a widow whose husband was killed in one of the many Jerusalem sieges. Zechariah may have had this circumstance in mind (cf. With Zechariah 12:12). If her son by her deceased husband was Pedaiah of I Chron 3:18 when Jechonias took her as a spouse…

But Jechonias had a son by Neri, Salathiel (2nd and 56th names in the pedigree lines). Salathiel appears to have died childless, ending Jehoiakim’s blood line. In the principle of the Levirate (Deut. 25:5, 6) Pedaiah, deceased Salathiel’s stepbrother, would take his widow raise up seed, passing Salathiel’s royal title right but not Jehoiakim’s blood line. Note that son, Zerubbabel, is listed in Matthew 1:12 and Luke 3:27 legally as Salathiel’s son…but in I Chron 3:19 as son of Pedaiah by actual blood relationship. We might use extended terms as son-in-law and stepson, etc. but these happenings would be consistent with Biblical law and practice.

Or:
Jehoakim has a son, Jechonias, who has a son, Salathiel, who by Levirate custom has a son, Zerubbabel, who has title right but no bloodline taint. Neri begets a grandson through his daughter and Salathiel begets an unusual “son”, Zerubbabel, through Pedaiah.

Jeremiah 22:30 also predicted Jechonias’ “childless” death, and we see two acts of clemency bestowed by God, kind treatment from Evil-Merodach and an heir…Zerubbabel under Cyrus was prominent in Scripture and had several sons and one daughter (1 Chron 3:19). We do not know his sons’ disqualification but daughter Shelomith, inherited the title and bloodline and passed them to son, Abiud…and down to Joseph. Again, with Joseph, there was no bloodline…but Mary drew her line through Heli from Joanna, second son of Shelomith.

Jesus’ blood line was through His mother directly and His title through adopting father, Joseph. His death and resurrection lock these rights into Him and no new “Messiah” can appear, I should add!

Arthur C. Custance, Ph.D.
Adapted by me from Appendix VI from The Seed of the Woman, 1980

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 03:24 PM
RE: Biblical contradictions
(13-01-2015 01:01 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(13-01-2015 11:02 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  The Solomonic line could not sit on the throne. Joseph had the pedigree, Mary had the right. The way that both lines of prophecies dovetail "David's son will be a forever-King" and "Solomon's sons (after the diaspora) will not sit on the throne..." is if Joseph, direct descendant of Solomon, adopted as his firstborn son and heir a son of David not from Solomon.

Back then, not only were adoptees and step-children fully children, but in-laws were mom and dad. You get two lines in two gospels through two sons of David. Mary and Joseph share their parentage and heritage.

I ask again: Where are you finding anything about Mary in the genealogies? They both end at Joseph, except that they go in different directions. One says "X was the father of Joseph" and the other says "Joseph was the son of Y" (and X and Y are different people). There is not a word about Mary in either of them. You can use this adoptee/step-children/in-laws thing to claim that one of them refers to Mary, but then you're playing word games (not to mention guessing at which one it is). What it actually says is a contradiction.

Not to mention Doc's point about convergence in the middle of the genealogies.

Yes, but it is also with the post above the sole way to reconcile what seem to be contradictory prophecies. This is old ground for Bible study--just as Jesus's death, resurrection and second advent reconcile Messiah both suffering for sin and liberating Israel.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 05:14 PM
RE: Biblical contradictions
(13-01-2015 03:24 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(13-01-2015 01:01 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  I ask again: Where are you finding anything about Mary in the genealogies? They both end at Joseph, except that they go in different directions. One says "X was the father of Joseph" and the other says "Joseph was the son of Y" (and X and Y are different people). There is not a word about Mary in either of them. You can use this adoptee/step-children/in-laws thing to claim that one of them refers to Mary, but then you're playing word games (not to mention guessing at which one it is). What it actually says is a contradiction.

Not to mention Doc's point about convergence in the middle of the genealogies.

Yes, but it is also with the post above the sole way to reconcile what seem to be contradictory prophecies. This is old ground for Bible study--just as Jesus's death, resurrection and second advent reconcile Messiah both suffering for sin and liberating Israel.

Right, the Bible doesn't say what it clearly says, it says what you want it to say.

Got it. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: