The only problem is tec...most of the bible writers were not ACTUALLY witnessess...it was all hear say...passed on from other people. Chinese whispers.
Is Biblical Morality Situational, Based Upon the Arbitrary Whims of Yahweh?
by leavingwt 268 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
cofty
So if a few different witnesses gave a few different details about a car accident, would that mean that the car accident didn't happen?
The gospels are so unreliable you cannot confidently assert a single incident as historical or a single word as authentic.
-
tec
The gospels are so unreliable you cannot confidently assert a single incident as historical or a single word as authentic.
Cofty, you have to back that up with something. Name some big contradiction that changes anything meaninful to Christ and his life/teachings please.
Peace,
Tammy
-
cofty
Jesus' genealogy
The entire birth narrative
The sermon on the mount
The resurrection stories
His ascension
Why don't you tell me a single event involving Jesus that you are certain actually happened or a single word he spoke that you are certain he said and tell me why you have this confidence?
-
still thinking
Anonymous and Pseudonymous Authors
Based on the dating difficulties and other problems, many scholars and researchers over the centuries have become convinced that the gospels were not written by the people to whom they are ascribed. As can be concluded from the remarks of fundamentalist Christian and biblical scholar Dr. Craig L. Blomberg, the gospels are in fact anonymous.[3] Indeed, the belief in the authorship of the gospels by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John is a matter of faith, as such an opinion is not merited in light of detailed textual and historical analysis. In reality, it was a fairly common practice in ancient times to attribute falsely to one person a book or letter written by another or others, and this pseudepigraphical attribution of authorship was especially rampant with religious texts, occurring with several Old Testament figures and early Church fathers, for example, as well as with known forgeries in the name of characters from the New Testament such as the Gospel of Peter, et al.
-
SweetBabyCheezits
Name some big contradiction that changes anything meaninful to Christ and his life/teachings please.
#1. Human conception is the result of sex between a female and a male, not a female and a stiff breeze. pun
-
sabastious
Good idea. That means that God didn't choose a singular Noah to be a genetically modified fruit puppy. Unless you've got that scripture, of course, that says he did.
Humans are like a fine wine, they refine with age through genetic breeding. Fertile ground is always required and that ground, no matter what you believe or not believe, was created by bad things (death and destruction); at least in our story. The very idea of natural selection is that the best traits are passed on through the will to survive at any cost. It's that "any cost" that creates a natural wall and when that wall is threatened life will never openly choose death. Eventually, however, we see that people chose death no matter how illogical it is. Dawkins call them delusional, but he is only half right. Now I don't mean going out with a blaze of glory. I mean when we stand up and yell, "Liberty or death!" and then we are killed. That liberty includes the right to be wrong. Science has it's answers to how morality (righteousness) came about, but I find them truly lackluster.
-Sab
-
tec
I'll get bacl tp you, Cofty, but none of what you consider significant contradictions has any bearing on the message and teaching of Christ. I have to go to work now though, and probably won't be able to be back until the morning. Have a good evening.
pun
Naughty;)
Peace to you both,
Tammy
-
EntirelyPossible
Humans are like a fine wine, they refine with age through genetic breeding.
That's not how wine is refined. You clearly don't know how wine is refined. . Do you have a scripture that says Jehovah chose Abraham because of his righteous genetics?
The very idea of natural selection is that the best traits are passed on through the will to survive at any cost.
Also not how natural selection works.
life will never openly choose death
Wrong. Many examples of people willingly dying.
Eventually, however, we see that people chose death however illogical it is
Wait, you just said life would never openly choose death. Which is it? Will it NEVER choose death or will it? And how do you know it's always illogical?
Science has it's answers to how moralty (righteounsess) came about, but I find them truly lackluster.
It seems more like you just don't understand much of anything.
-
cofty
See you tomorrow Tammy.
The very idea of natural selection is that the best traits are passed on through the will to survive at any cost.
Is this according to the Sab version of evolutionary biology?