the bible says that a prophet who predicts something that does not occur is speaking words that the lord did not speak, but that is exactly what jesus did, if you can believe the author of mark.
here are the relevant verses:.
"when a prophet speaks in the name of the lord, if the word does not come about or come true, that is a word which the lord did not speak;" (deuteronomy 18:22).
Who is both "faithful and foolish"? Anyone who believes every word in the Bible is "God-breathed" and misinterprets poorly-written scripture to mean that they can drink cyanide and not be harmed. That person is both faithful and foolish, wouldn't you say?
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
RR writes, "the scriptures tell us that Christians, those who would follow in the footsteps of Christ do so to reign with him IN heaven,"
Reign with Jesus in heaven? Are these words intended to be taken literally? If so, can anyone explain what the Bible says heaven is, and where it says it? If it's a place, exactly where is it, and how do you know?
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
the myth of the dangerous child was virtually universal in pre-biblical times: a child is born about whom certain prophecies have been made, and who represents a threat to a king or tyrant.
the child is removed from danger and later returns in triumph.
the story of one of the better-known dangerous children was told in the epic poem "mahabarata," written two centuries before jesus' birth.
The myth of the dangerous child was virtually universal in pre-biblical times: A child is born about whom certain prophecies have been made, and who represents a threat to a king or tyrant. The child is removed from danger and later returns in triumph.
The story of one of the better-known dangerous children was told in the epic poem "Mahabarata," written two centuries before Jesus' birth. In it, we are told of the Hindu faith's virgin-born Crishna who was prophesied to be the destroyer of the tyrant Kansa, who heard of it and ordered all the male children born at that time to be killed. Crishna survived because a heavenly voice warned his foster father to flee with the child.
Dangerous-child stories were told of Buddha, Zoroaster, Hercules, Oedipus, Romulus and Remus, and many others too numerous to mention; all of these legends pre-date that of Jesus by several centuries. The most recent dangerous-child story--that of Jesus, as told in the Bible by Matthew, deserves special attention.
"When Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of Herod the king, there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem, saying: Where is he that is born king of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the East and have come to worship him. Then Herod, when he had privately called the wise men, enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared. And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said: Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word." (Matthew 2:1-8)
The wise men found Jesus but didn't return to tell Herod: "When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under. (Matthew 2:16)
This was just one more story so much like so many others, cast this time in the specific mold of Crishna: birth of a god-child, a threatened monarch, heavenly warning to the parent, and the escape.
The simple folk of that time were used to stories about these dangerous-heroic child-saviors and were awaiting their own; Matthew made sure his messiah candidate was qualified, so he invented the story above.
If all of these babies in Bethlehem and the surrounding area had been murdered by the Romans, there would have been unleashed a flood of contemporaneous lamenting poems, art, and journalistic accounts. But, extremely improbably, the story of the murderous Herod is found only in the gospel according to Matthew; nowhere else in the Bible is it mentioned, and no Jewish or Roman historians of that time says a word about this sensational event.
The Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus (110 AD), who went out of his way to record every misdeed of despots and tyrants, was completely silent. Silent also was Josephus (40 AD), the Jewish historian who provided a detailed account of all the lesser evil-doings of Herod up to the end of his life; not a word did he write about Herod's massacre of the innocent children.
The reason why such a manifestly ridiculous story for two millennia has been promulgated as truth by church fathers is partly given by an anonymous historian quoted by T.W. Doane ("Bible Myths and Their Parallels in Other Religions," T. W. Doane, p. 173.):
"The brow of many a theologian has been bent over this (Matthew) narrative! For, as long as people believed in the miraculous inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, of course they accepted every page as literally true, and thought that there could not be any contradiction between the different accounts or representations of Scripture. The worst of all such pre-conceived ideas is, that they compel those who hold them to do violence to their own sense of truth. For when these so-called religious prejudices come into play, people are afraid to call things by their right names, and without knowing it themselves, become guilty of all kinds of evasive and arbitrary practices; for what would be thought quite unjustifiable in any other case is here considered a duty, inasmuch as it is supposed to tend toward the maintenance of faith and the glory of God!"
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
josiah, king of judah (640-609 b.c.
), was installed as king at the age of eight.
josiah attempted to restore the kingdom of david and was opposed by pharaoh necho of egypt in a battle at megiddo.
Yeru asks, " Sooo, you don't think the writer of 1 Samuel was trying to give credit for the death of Goliath to King David ?"
No, that's not what I think; you must have misread my post.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
josiah, king of judah (640-609 b.c.
), was installed as king at the age of eight.
josiah attempted to restore the kingdom of david and was opposed by pharaoh necho of egypt in a battle at megiddo.
Yeru,
You are right; there is a contradiction, but I'm inclined to believe that it's not about whether the young David--or someone else--killed the giant Goliath; it's about who a warrior named "Elhanan" killed.
1 Samuel 17 tells us that a young David is sent against the nine-foot Goliath by King Saul; this is the story we're all familiar with.
1 Chronicles 20:5 tells about battle that occurred after David had become king, and therefore after the young David slew Goliath in 1 Samuel. In this later battle we're told that a warrior named Elhanan killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath. So far, so good. The problem comes when one reads that "Elhanan…killed Goliath…" in 2 Samuel 21:1-19. Thus, the contradiction need not be over the name of the person who killed Goliath, as Yeru suggested, but over who Elhanan killed.
We can either believe that the Bible is wrong because it tells us the young David killed Goliath in 1 Samuel, while in 2 Samuel we're told the Elhanan killed Goliath, or else we can believe simply that the transcriber of the verse in 2 Samuel inadvertently left out the words "Lahmi the brother of ." I think the latter is far more likely. But, either way, there's clearly a contradiction, as Yeru said.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
the bible says that a prophet who predicts something that does not occur is speaking words that the lord did not speak, but that is exactly what jesus did, if you can believe the author of mark.
here are the relevant verses:.
"when a prophet speaks in the name of the lord, if the word does not come about or come true, that is a word which the lord did not speak;" (deuteronomy 18:22).
Mark 16:18 "they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."
It's clear from the passage above that Mark is having Jesus speak of the physical harm that comes from being bitten by snakes, or contracting leprosy after touching the sick, not the "spiritual" harm that might come from someone who might "drink in" a false doctrine.
Thus, everybody would know that Mark is speaking of an actual, physical poison. God would have known that's what his readers would think, and that's why God didn't guide Mark in his writing of this passage.
Bang replies,
you imply that you don't even believe the passage….As I was asking, what did Jesus mean when He said, "..whoever drinks the water I give him”
Alward responds:
You’re right, Bang, I don’t believe this passage, because I don’t think a son of a God would claim that anyone who believed in this god could drink deadly poison and not be harmed. A real, all-knowing god would have guided his son to be more careful with his words, and not cause foolish but faithful readers to kill themselves by drinking poison.
Now, as for what Jesus meant when he said, “whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." (John 4:14): It’s obvious that the author means for the reader to believe that Jesus is speaking of the eternal salvation that comes to those who “drink” in the word of the Lord, i.e., accepts the teachings of Jesus. However, as I noted above, Mark has Jesus speaking of physical harm, not spiritual harm; thus, the “deadly poison” Mark mentions is actual, physical, poison, like the venom of the snake, or the virus of the leper, NOT the spiritual “poison” you have in mind.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
the bible says that a prophet who predicts something that does not occur is speaking words that the lord did not speak, but that is exactly what jesus did, if you can believe the author of mark.
here are the relevant verses:.
"when a prophet speaks in the name of the lord, if the word does not come about or come true, that is a word which the lord did not speak;" (deuteronomy 18:22).
TR,
Yes, I've heard about it. The body develops antibodies to strychnine and snake venom if these poisons are taken in small quantities over a long period of time.
Of course, this does not validate the claims Mark had Jesus make; he was referring to ANYONE who had faith; and it's certainly not true that such people can drink deadly poison will go unharmed. Thus, if Mark was correct and Jesus said this, then Jesus was a false prophet; alternatively, if Mark was wrong, and Jesus didn't say this, then the Bible is in error.
The relevant verse is repeated before for reference.
16 WHOEVER believes and is baptized will be saved...And these signs will accompany those who believe...when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
the bible contradicts itself in the matter of punishing children for the sins of their fathers.
in one place is says that it is strictly forbidden, but in another the lord speaks of slaughtering sons for the sins of their forefathers, and in yet another place the lord orders the murder of suckling babes.
here is the evidence:.
Ex 34:7b (NIV) Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.
Moxy, I agree that the quote above is in powerful contrast to
Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.(Deuteronomy 24:16)
but it leaves some wiggle-room for desperate inerrantists who will try to argue that Deuteronomy speaks of "death," while Exodus mentions only "punishes." I think the passage in 1 Samuel 15:2-3, in which suckling babes are to be killed, is more directly on point.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
the bible says that a prophet who predicts something that does not occur is speaking words that the lord did not speak, but that is exactly what jesus did, if you can believe the author of mark.
here are the relevant verses:.
"when a prophet speaks in the name of the lord, if the word does not come about or come true, that is a word which the lord did not speak;" (deuteronomy 18:22).
Bang,
Mark 16:18 "they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."
It's clear from the passage above that Mark is having Jesus speak of the physical harm that comes from being bitten by snakes, or contracting leprosy after touching the sick, not the "spiritual" harm that might come from someone who might "drink in" a false doctrine.
Thus, everybody would know that Mark is speaking of an actual, physical poison. God would have known that's what his readers would think, and that's why God didn't guide Mark in his writing of this passage.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
the bible says that a prophet who predicts something that does not occur is speaking words that the lord did not speak, but that is exactly what jesus did, if you can believe the author of mark.
here are the relevant verses:.
"when a prophet speaks in the name of the lord, if the word does not come about or come true, that is a word which the lord did not speak;" (deuteronomy 18:22).
Moxy,
De Chardin's faith in the physical world is stronger than whatever faith he might have God; he would sooner sacrifice his belief in what might be rather than his belief in what is, and so would I.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
