Posts by Larsguy

39

Bible Error: How Did Judas Die?

by JosephAlward in

matthew says that judas hanged himself, while the writer in acts says that he fell and his guts spilled out.

both of these accounts cannot be true.

either one is, or neither is, and this means that the bible is not error-free.

Larsguy

Hi Joseph,
First of all, on the matter of proving whether or not there is a special "gospel style" in presenting certain details or not and having to prove that based upon other writings, I don't have to do any such thing. I'm TELLING YOU DIRECTLY this is the gospel style, which could be unique, and since you can't disprove that matter, it's just an issue of my view versus your view. The fact that you're incapable of accepting this view is moot. The only issue of note, therefore, is that you recognize that that view allows me to dismiss hundreds of your so-called "errors". So my word to you is that "it works for me and my acceptance of the gospel" so that's the end of it. You can find as many errors as you want.

But, in fact, I can prove that the Jews in particular did this sort of thing in their writings, one of them being Josephus. But I'm not even going to bother giving you the examples since I'm sure you will then say: "Well show us someone besides Josephus and any others who did this, then I'll believe." In other words, I don't need to meet your CRITERIA to prove what is evident. I only need one example of this parallel detail in Jewish writings which is the gospels, so that's that. You can either accept it or not. It matters not to me. But just because you find in one gospel where Jesus said one thing to a "Mary Magdalene" and you find in another place he said something else, it's your own folly to presume a scribal error without considering these might be two different women and two different incidences. So you can't prove the error.

Now on the point of why God wouldn't want the outsiders to understand the nature of Judas' death or the significance of that point, I don't need to comment on it beyond the fact that tripping up people like you who want to find error with God's works is very much his nature. He likes to trip up the "wise in their own cunning" and to show the foolishness of worldly wisdom.

So he trips you up with these parallel accounts and having the gospels speak of similar accounts but separately so that you think there is an error. A lot of things can be true or false based upon perception.

For instance, if you're walking in a straight line around the earth that intersects with a certain city, say Jerusalem, do you realize that someone might say you're walking AWAY from Jerusalem and someone might say you're walking TOWARD Jerusalem, depending upon their disposition. You can always fly to New York via Hawaii, Hong Kong and Spain, you know. You'll eventually get there, right?

Or if you asked me my age and I told you: "I'm going on 90" that would be true whether I'm 89 or 3. Because everybody under 90 is "going on 90", technically. So while it may be DECEPTIVE and purposely so, it's still not a LIE. Only if I were 90 or over would it be an UN-TRUE statement.

So you have to realize that the Jews, for most of their late history, were under the control of pagan powers and even though they had their own writing and language, they had to find ways to communicate secrets and information without it being privy to their captors. People event these kinds of "tongue-in-cheek" ways of conveying information all the time, like masters of a house talking in a way so that the servants don't understand what is going on, etc.

So a literary style that provides some private information in plain sight of others is not uncommon. Why you have a problem of giving the gospels this benefit of the doubt, therefore, is simply bias on your part. You're trying to apply simplistic concepts to an extremely complex work and so your are finding problems with it. But the problem is you simply don't understand what you're doing.

But please don't STOP! This is amusing and fun to the anointed Biblicalists.

But I tell you one thing; you make me glad I'm an informed "insider". Knowing scripture is truly a wonderful joy.

Have a nice day.

L.G.

28

Bible Error: Jesus Cures the Leper

by JosephAlward in

the author of mark thinks that jesus cured the leper after he cured simon peters mother-in-law, but the author of matthew says just the opposite: he thinks that jesus cured the leper before he cured the mother-in-law.

they both cannot be right, so the bible is in error.

here is the evidence:.

Larsguy

Hi Joseph,
How many times have I told you that the GOSPEL STYLE was designed to hide details like this?

It purposely uses parallel events that vary just a little bit which makes you think they are the same event but in fact, they are specifically two different but similar events.

Case in point is where it says that Simon will deny Jesus three times before a cock crows, and in another place it says he will deny him three times before a cock crows twice.

Well if you follow the details closely enough, you'll see that BOTH statements are true. That is, Peter denied Jesus at least three times before a cock crowed once and then another three times before a cock had a chance to crow twice!

Just for your background, after Peter denied Jesus a third time while in the courtyard, he heard the cock crow and looked at Jesus and remembered what he said and distressed, he head for the door to weep. But this was a large house and to get from the courtyard to outside he had to go through various passages ways including a gate house to get outside where various groups were congregated. So it happened, from the time the cock crowed once until it crowed again, which might have been just a few minutes, Peter ended up denying Jesus to each of the groups he had to pass through to get outside so that by the time he finally did get outside a cock had crowed a second time and he had denied Jesus another three times.

But the way the information is presented, it is clear it was purposely set up to be similar to force you to understand the details.

The same thing with the three Mary Magdalenes who were around Jesus who came to the grave at three different times. The Bible could have simply told us there were three of them right up front, then when we read the accounts we would have figured out when each of them went to the grave and with whom. But the way the gospel is written it almost seems like a variation of the same event. But it's not.

Therefore, by doing this, and keeping us in tune to the SPECIFIC DETAILS, we learn more information that is hidden.

So in your example, based upon the above, the first presumption would be that Jesus cured one leper before he healed Peter's mother-in-law and another one afterward, under similar circumstances.

So you see, the casual reader would not have noticed anything. The negative reader, like yourself, might presume there is an error. But the trained Biblicalist knows that this was just a way the gospel had of showing that Jesus healed two lepers, one before and one after this event.

But there are lots of fun examples of this in scripture where some people get confused over things because they miss critical details that prove that Jesus is talking about two different things but with very similar details.

At any rate, just knowing the gospels do this on purpose, we would not be able to qualify this as an ERROR and there is probably some other place in scripture that will prove these were two different lepers he healed.

It's no different than if you knew two women named "Mary" who you saw at the mall, one at 1:00 p.m. at Macy's and one at 2:00 p.m. at Starbucks. But two sets of different friends who knew only one the Mary's asked you: "Did you see Mary?" and you said: "Yes, at 1:00....". But you would know which Mary that person was talking about. But later if you told someone else you saw Mary at a different time and place and they made a comparison of your statements, they'd think you were confused or lying, when in fact, you were talking about two different Marys. The only thing missing is a statement that spelled it out to you that: There were two Marys that I saw, one at 1:00 and one a 2:00. Then there would be no conflict. But the absence of that statment is the point of Jewish style becuase you should be able to tell by the different times and circumstances these were two different Marys, IF, in fact, you consider the person to be truthful and not confused.

So the fact that you think the gospel writers are incompetent and oncfused most of the time is why you are seeing ERRORS when, in fact, there is no credible error, just your lack of understanding gospel style. And as I said, Jesus himself pointedly noted that he spoke in a way to hide things from the outsiders and to show secrets to his followers.

So again, you're saying NOTHING about an "error" because you are presuming this is the same leper; when it isn't.

So you're just all excited about all these "errors" and everything and we "insiders" are just laughing at you because we know you don't know what you're doing nor understand the complexity of the gospels.

So we don't mind you are finding these errors since it trips you up and we were not going to share any sacred secrets with you anyway. But just know that for us, your argument has nil effect and we're just ignoring you, mildly amused that you are learning some detail of scripture; which is more than many witnesses, by the way.

So if you're REALLY HONEST, I'll show you some DOOZIES that even JWs can't accept because they don't believe scripture. In fact, I'd like to get your opinion about them if you like.

Anyway, for the record, this is just the gospel's way of letting us know Jesus cured two lepers that day. That's all. No error.
But I do sympathize with you; the gospels are not that friendly to outsiders, so it's okay. We understand your disposition.

L.G.

39

Bible Error: How Did Judas Die?

by JosephAlward in

matthew says that judas hanged himself, while the writer in acts says that he fell and his guts spilled out.

both of these accounts cannot be true.

either one is, or neither is, and this means that the bible is not error-free.

Larsguy

Hi Joseph,

>>>>Larsguy speaks of being anointed and of communicating with other "anointed" ones. What do JW's think "anointed" means, and how does one determine if one is anointed, or not?

Jehovah's witnesses have within their organization basically those who place themselves into two categories; one called the "anointed" or "heavenly class" and the other called the "other sheep" or the "earthly class." Now this needs correcting but this simply deals with JWs and your question.

The nature of the two groups are obvious, one is supposed to have a heavenly hope and the other an earthly hope in paradise. The "anointed" group are the ones they associate with the 144,000 referenced in revelation. So "anointed" is the loose organizational term they apply to those who feel they are part of the heavenly group. But it is sort of official since I think on their Publisher's Record Card (cards which keep track of their baptism, membership, etc.) one is supposed to check which group they are in and it is referred to as "anointed" or "other sheep".

Now as far as knowing if one is of the anointed or not, the simply say that a degree of "holy spirit" communicates to them in a subtle way that they are of the "anointed" and that's it. They know who they are. The other sheep group don't get a feeling they are of the other sheep, they just have the absence of a heavenly calling.

But in the witness subculture some of the comparisons talked about that seems to be generally true is that for one, the Bible reads differently for the anointed once he becomes anointed. It seems to light up and verses seem to be more directly pointed to them. So that is a specific difference. So the Bible becomes more of a communication device for the anointed if I'm not overstating. Other than that things are about the same.

When one of the anointed dies, though, usually they indicate at the funeral this person died faithfully and is now "in heaven" (which ain't true, but...), whereas if an other sheep dies, they say they will be resurrected later in the new order during the millennium (which also isn't precisely true, but..).

The critical significance in this group and this setting, though, is that the anointed are supposed to have more advanced understanding of scripture and be involved with their eventual positions as king-priests who rule during the millennium. So a lot of things pertain to them.

Furthermore, the "evil slave" comes out of the "anointed" group, those who make up God's temple, so there is a spiritual battle more focussed among the faithful and unfaithful anointed ones in the organization.

It's hard to perhaps explain, but for instance if I went to the Governing Body and gave them some Biblical correction, it would make a difference if I told them if I were of the anointed or not. I won't take that any further, but they would understand the difference. An "anointed" one can be more of a "prophet" or representative of the heavenly organization than someone who did not feel they were "anointed".

Now this might be something to amuse and entertain outsiders, but it is a reality to this organization, and in this JW-based discussion group that's what most will understand when you say "I'm anointed", whether they believe or not.

One more thing, is that if you're "anointed" the stakes are higher for you to be honest and truthful as far as the Bible is concerned and it is assumed the Bible and spiritual advancement is your primary goal so it's more critical if an anointed one is ignoring counsel than perhaps one of the "other sheep" class since they should know better and their position in heaven as a king-priest hangs in the balance.

Finally, ultimately, those of the "anointed" are as staetd expected to be kings and priests and be part of the Bride Class of 144,000 and so it is a higher spiritual rank than non 144K members; but at the same time, there is more spiritual responsibility as well. God expects more of the anointed than of others.

That's the basics. I wouldn't feel a need to elaborate beyond this, especially since it's such a subjective issue for the individual.

Of course, Joseph, if you had to ask that, you must have never been a witness. In which case I should warn you that witnesses have a built-in insulation to most of your arguments. The WTS has been very good at counteracting most of these challenges, many of which are baseless or exaggerations based upon bent interpretations.

L.G.

39

Bible Error: How Did Judas Die?

by JosephAlward in

matthew says that judas hanged himself, while the writer in acts says that he fell and his guts spilled out.

both of these accounts cannot be true.

either one is, or neither is, and this means that the bible is not error-free.

Larsguy

>>>If Larsguy knows why this information should be kept from us, or why he thinks God wanted us to guess what happened to Judas, I hope he will enlighten the rest of us.

Hi Joseph, how are you?

Just to keep you on track and in context here. My original argument was regarding the gospel STYLE of writing and Jewish sacred writings in general. These writings, probably to be self-protective, often make indirect statements that sometimes seem to contradict themselves, but in reality in the background of context knowledge reveals additional information not that noticeable to the casual reader. Then you seemed to make the point about the gospels being rather straightforward and there being no evidence that such complexity was employed, at which time I pointed out to you that Jesus directly stated to his followers the reason he spoke in parables, in incidentally, was to keep knowledge from the non-believers and have understanding for his followers.

So now you want to bring it back SPECIFICALLY to why Jesus would want to keep Judas' manner of death a secret just for his followers and that's not my point was. The way Judas' death is related in scriptures has to do with the separate point of how the Jewish writing style in general seemed to use separate, specific pieces of information which when combined revealed additional information. They didn't tend to spell out the whole story to you in detail repeatede over five times like we're used to.

In this case, one scripture could have simply said: "Judas went out and hanged himself by tying a rope on a tree branch overhanging a cliff where lots of people hang themselves and upon throwing himself headlong over the cliff, the rope snapped him back against some jagged rocks in such a violent manner as to burst his guts open."

And that would have been the end of that.

Then...when we'd read in one place about a "hanging" we'd say, oh; and then in another place about his throwing himself over a cliff and his guts bursting out, we'd say, oh yeah.

So the point is, when you often find statements that seem to contradict each other or not quite harmonize in a simple way, you have to use your mind to extrapolate the added detail when both staements, both true, are combined.

So in this case, it would just be the common style of Jewish writing and the gospels in particular that might have confused persons regarding the Judas hanging. But in other cases, a more direct effort to exclude ousiders from sacred truth was employed which simply contradicts the notion that the gospels are not complex but simply erroneous.

L.G.

39

Bible Error: How Did Judas Die?

by JosephAlward in

matthew says that judas hanged himself, while the writer in acts says that he fell and his guts spilled out.

both of these accounts cannot be true.

either one is, or neither is, and this means that the bible is not error-free.

Larsguy

Hi Mox,
It's not that simple, but what makes you think I'm giving away any sacred secrets to unbelievers. I'm preaching to Christ's anointed ones who have access to this board.

On the other hand, there are things in the Bible that condemn false apostates and part of the message Christian anointed ones give is sentencing and condemnation notice to the wicked.

So posting the information has many purposes though critical advanced truth will be accepted by the true followers and rejected by those who can't understand it.

So I'm really not trying to convert anyone. I'm not really evangelizing in the driver's lane really. Most of my posts here simply expose false teachings and put people on notice that God is about to bring about drastic changes in the world. But advanced understanding is put out for the other anointed ones, not to those who can't relate to it.

Good point though..

Have a nice day.

LG

17

Did the Son of Man Come?

by JosephAlward in

if the author of the book of matthew can be believed, jesus left no doubt about when the apocalypse would occur.

it would be before all of jesus' disciples died, even before his disciples would be able to spread the good word to all of the cities of israel.

since all of the disciples are dead and the apocalypse hasn't occurred, we must conclude that matthew was wrong and that the bible is in error.

Larsguy

>>>When Matthew had Jesus say to the men with him that not all of them would die before the apocalypse came, how were they supposed to know that Jesus *really* meant that the apocalypse wouldn't come for about two thousand years or more? What clue was there to be found in the words Matthew gave Jesus which would alert the listeners to this fact? None.

This is the thing that always amazes me about your "errancy" folks; you misread the scriptures and miss the subtle details and then run off claiming there is an error. This is the perfect example.

You claim there is "none" context in Jesus' words that would make these listeners not know that the kingdom was 1900 years down the road or at least beyond the lifetime of those living in his day. But that's not true. Because Paul includes himself into the group that would "survive down to the Lord's day", but contrasts his group with those who would die first.

1 Thess 4:15 shows Paul reassuring those persons who would die first that those who would "survive until the Lord's day" would not supercede them into the kingdom, but all would get their heavenly reward at the same time.

Also Jesus in the last words of John is making a reference where Jesus told Peter how he would die but there was doubt as to whether John would be among those chosen not to die until Jesus returned.

But within that reference, of course, is the profound understanding that those who would, in fact, not die or "survive until the Lord's day" would clearly outlive those who would die. So the Bible indeed shows that they understood that generation would die out before the second coming, necessitating a resurrection for them.

So out the two groups concerned, those who would die and need a resurrection, and those who would never die, it seems clear that the second coming must have been beyond the normal lifespan of that generation. After all, would we presume Jesus' statement that "some would not die before they see me coming into the kingdom" was just a reference that perhaps a few of them would live into the nineties, perhaps, while the rest of them would die? Of course not.

He was noting what they all knew and understood and that was that he would not arrive again for centuries into the future and thus it was an amazement that he was telling them that some would be selected for special purposes to live down through the centuries until he came and that some of them were right there in that group. For sure, we know that John was one of them, though Peter was not.

So you see, you just don't read the scriptures closely enough or understand them fully enough to be finding "errors" in specialized texts you don't understand.

On the other hand, you are also presuming that the chronology prophecies, specifically the "7 times" prophecy was not understood by the Jews. But in fact, Jesus in Luke refers to the time when Jerusalem would be destroyed and the Jews would go into "exile until the appointed times of the nations were fulfilled." So the disciples knew that Jerusalem was set to be trampled upon for many many years after its destruction and they would have understood as well that this period of time would likely reach well into the future if they understood the "7 times" to be a period of 2520 years from the fall of Jerusalem.

That's why they asked what would be the "signs" that would accompany his second coming because the Bible specifically dates the second coming to 2520 years past the fall of Jerusalem. So they knew it was going to be far, far into the future before he returned and that the majority of them would die off first before it occurred, though some, a select few, likely representatives of the 12 tribes, would live on and "survive until the Lord's day."

Another hint that they fully understood this would be far into the future are the words in Hebrew where Paul clearly understands about the millennium being a thousand years of a special "sabbath". If the seventh day is 1000 years near the end of a 7,000-year creative day, then obviously they would understand that nearly 6000 years would have to elapse prior to that and they knew by Jewish chronology that they had just less than 2000 years to go before reaching that typology.

Just how understanding the Christians were about this subtextual chronology can even be demonstrated by Venerable Bede who around 700 understood that the Passover week which was from the 15th through the 21st representing the third week of the month was understood to extrapolate over a month of 8,000 years and that the Messiah's two advents by this pattern would occupy the last 2,000 years prior to the last week of 2000 years.

So with that understanding, extrapolating implied chronology from Jewish ritual would have told them the general pattern of chronology which extended over a period of 7,000 years and that they were just 4000 years into that 7,000-year week.

So there are lots of things in scripture which would have been known to them that the Messiah was not to return for his kingdom until well into the future, in fact, specifically 2520 years from the fall of Jerusalem. After all, are we to assume they didn't understand the symbolism of the "7 times" that would pass over the chopped down tree not being 2520 years?

Of course they understood it. And they understood that the double bands on the tree, the first being iron and the second copper represented the first and second coming.

Further, why wouldn't Jesus have told them he wasn't expected to arrive until 2520 years after the fall of Jerusalem if, in fact, that was the case?

So you see, Joseph, AGAIN, it's your own misreading and poor reading of scripture, based upon biased presumptions that you add all up togehter to create an anxious "error" in scripture, when really there is none. The only obvious error is your anxiety over finding error without doing your adequate homework.

The disciples knew precisely when Jesus would arrive which was 2520 years from the fall of Jerusalem, the year of the second coming is specifically dated. So they knew the year Jesus would return in the flesh, what they didn't know was what else would be happening just before that and that's why they asked him "what are the signs of your parousia"? It didn't mean they didn't know when he would arrive.

Now, even though they knew the YEAR he would come, they were still told to stay awake, because they still didn't know the specific DAY or HOUR. That means that by the time it got close to the time of the second coming, they would have figured out the probable month he would arrive, but not the day nor hour. Anyway, The Bible gives the chronology for the specific year of the second coming, but not the day nor hour, and the disciples certainly should have understood this.

So it is only YOU who is confused over thinking that the kingdom would come before his first-century followers would die off, not them.

Sorry.

L.G.

39

Bible Error: How Did Judas Die?

by JosephAlward in

matthew says that judas hanged himself, while the writer in acts says that he fell and his guts spilled out.

both of these accounts cannot be true.

either one is, or neither is, and this means that the bible is not error-free.

Larsguy

Hi Joseph,
again, on the topic of Judas. This is what happened.

After Judas felt guilt for what he did, he went back to the temple and tried to return the money and the priests refused to take it because it was blood money to kill Jesus. Judas freaked out, not wanting it and so threw it into the temple and then went out and hanged himself. The way he did that was he tied a rope around a tree near the edge of a high cliff and then then around his neck and jumped over the cliff hopine he'd die. But apparently the jerk-back was so violent when the rope snapped that he was catapulted against the edges of the cliff and som jagged rocks apparently cause his guts to burst out.

Now is that so hard to understand?

Now please realize you are reading things to scripture that is not there, one of which is that Judas was buried in his own field. The Bible does not say that. Nor does it say that he hanged himself in his own field. These are spurious concepts you have that you are having problems with that the Bible doesn't say occurred. The field wasn't even purchased until after his death, so how could he hang himself in that field? Purchasing the field and donating it to the city was the idea of the priests after Judas killed himself.

Can't you read the scriptures? He threw himself over a cliff in the act of hanging himself. Something went wrong and he ended up spilling is guts out against some rocks. What's the big deal?

There is no conflict here, just details you refuse to acknowledge.

All that is here are the details of both accounts.

One account says he threw himself over a cliff and busted his guts out. Another scripture says he hung himself.

The combined understanding is that when he threw himself over the cliff he apparently had a rope around his neck with the intent of hanging himself.

It's not that complex, really.

Anyway, you score ZERO on this one. Please find another "errancy" in the gospels to harp on because this one is another dud.

Why don't you talk about how Jesus claimed he was in the gave for "three nights" which is impossible if he died on a Friday? That seems to me to be a direct contradiction.

Or why don't you talk about how Jesus could be imapled at the third hour, which is 9:00 a.m. (Mark 15:25) and yet just be on trial at the sixth hour (John 19:14)which means he was impaled three hours before his trial? Not to mention it got dark at the sixth hour three hours before his death.

Now that seems to me to be some pretty direct contradictions if Jesus died on the same day he was arrested. Why don't you talk about something like that, instead of these word games with the details of how Judas hanged himself, with the interjection of false details such as Judas actually being buried in his own field or hanging himself in his own field? It was called the "field of blood" because it was purchased with blood money, not because Judas died in that field.

Find errors in scripture if you can, but at least get the details right. That's all I'm asking here.

Anyway, you're a delight, and I love your posts!

Have a nice day.

L.G.

39

Bible Error: How Did Judas Die?

by JosephAlward in

matthew says that judas hanged himself, while the writer in acts says that he fell and his guts spilled out.

both of these accounts cannot be true.

either one is, or neither is, and this means that the bible is not error-free.

Larsguy

Hi Joseph,
Where have you been? You have decided that your view of the gospels is superior to mine. I will allow you your opinion not to agree with me that the Bible hides things, but it certainly can't preempt my view.

However, on that point, that is again, where you error. You see, you imagine the Bible is supposed to be a nice easy book without complexities to confound people, when in fact, if you actually read the Bible you'd know that is PRECISELY the case.

The Bible is meant for Christ and his followers SPECIFICALLY and not for outsiders!

Didn't you read in scripture when the disciples asked Jesus why he spoke in parables that he told them that these secrets were for THEM and so that the outsiders, looking in vain, would not understand?

So how is it that you think that the Bible is supposed to be understood by nonbelievers at the level of Jesus' followers when he directly says that he deliberately spoke in riddles so that they WOULD NOT understand?

So your view that the Bible is an open book for the public to read in all simplicity isn't even according to the Bible itself. Instead, it is a book which purposely hides things.

Haven't you heard about Paul referring to "sacred secrets"? Or Daniel saying to "seal up the secrets" until the last day? So how is it that you think that everything is supposed to be so simple and easy? It is not. In fact, it's just the opposite. The gems of truth in scripture comes from intense focus and study. Those without such intensity remain confused and bewildered and "late".

This is critically illustrated in the parable about the wise and foolish virgins. Generally speaking, the foolish virgins felt self confident with just oil in their lamps, meaning, a casual superficial interest in Biblical things. But the "wise virgins" were much more attentive and they carried extra oil in their lamps. Thus when the critical time came, those with the extra oil were able to go on to the next step while those with only a casual interest lamp's died out and gave no more light.

So you see, intense study and Biblical research and knowledge is where the sacred secrets are in scripture.

So I find it quite profound that you as an outsider and doubter of scripture would challenge me when I'm revealing to you the hidden secrets of scripture.

So what we have here is me getting a lot more out of scripture as a believer than you as an unbeliever, but the scriptures are totally in my favor on that point since Jesus himself said he spoke in a way so that outsiders would not understand these sacred things.

So your belief that everything is right out in the open and easy and not complex, again, addresses your technical error in reading what is stated in scripture, in this instance, the fact that Jesus clearly shows he intended to present a complex message that only his followers would understand.

The fact that you're being stumbled by scripture, therefore, proves that that is the case. You as an outsider don't understand the scripture and it's complex ways, but I as an insider do. So you see, you can't dismiss something you don't understand. Nor can you dismiss the scriptures for being noncomplex when you have Jesus' own words stating precisely that.

So it's fine with me that you are finding all the errors you need in a book of confusion since you're the outsider the Bible wasn't meant for anyway. It was meant for ME and other believers to find delight and light and understanding in, which we do in abundance.

So you see, Joseph, a lot of your problems with the Bible will continue simply because you're an outsider, but don't imagine the Bible was written for you to understand. To the contrary it was written in a way to confound you, but to enlighten me. Which is exactly what is going on here. You are confounded by the darkness of scripture and I am astounded by the incredible light.

So you're definitely excused. Find all the erorrs you want. They were put there to stumble you. The Bible was not meant for outsiders and nonbelievers. On the other hand, we prophets of scripture have no problems with scripture.

L.G.

39

Bible Error: How Did Judas Die?

by JosephAlward in

matthew says that judas hanged himself, while the writer in acts says that he fell and his guts spilled out.

both of these accounts cannot be true.

either one is, or neither is, and this means that the bible is not error-free.

Larsguy

Hi Joseph, I love your posts!!! That's because they deal with scripture and I love scriptural debates.

But your problem is that you take what the scriptures say, add some inaccuracies and then imagine there is a contradiction, when there is none, or there is a logical alternative.

In this case, you simply don't understand the Jewish tradition of not overstating anything, but by insinuating more than one fact by two, seemingly opposing statements. That is, one gospel gives you one detail and another another detail leaving you to find the TRUTH between the two. That is the "gospel style".

This is the same in this case. One gospel tell us that Judas hanged himself, and another tells us he threw himself over a cliff.

Now why is it that you haven't read between the lines and realize that the way Judas hanged himself was by throwing himself over a cliff?

You know?

In other words, one way to hang yourself is to tie a rope around your neck and then jump off a cliff, so that when the rope jerked it would break your neck. Simple. Only in this case, the roped snaped back and jerked him against some jagged rocks that caused his guts to spill out! It's as simple as that. One account simply gives us some facts that helps us understand more details of what happened.

Now what annoys me further, is that you misread scripture. If you read Matthew, for instance, you can see that after Judas turned in the money to the priests that it was the priests who purchased the "field of blood". It was called the "field of blood" not because Judas killed himself there, but because it purchased the murder of Jesus.

Furthermore, according to Matthew, if he went out right there and hung himself, the field wasn't even purchased yet, but was purchased later. So Judas didn't hang himself in his own field.

To harmonize Acts, though, which says Judas purchased a field, what the priests must have done was used the money to purchase a field in Judas' name and then used it as a donation for burying the poor. So in that sense, the money he gave back to the priests purchased this field and so he is said to have purchased it. But it was purchased in his name post his death.

So again, we find you anxiously trying to find errors with words and terms that may be indecently translated into English, pretending there is some error or contradiction between the gospels, when there is none.

But a lot of this has to do with not understanding Jewish style of writing and gospel tehcnique specifically, which seems to focus on giving partial details that have to be harmonized to understand understated or unstated detail.

Now here is a WONDROUS EXAMPLE of that:

"Mary", "Joseph", "Peter" and several other names were very common names among the Jews. Mary was just as common among the Jews as is Mary is among Spanish people. Do you realize how many Marys there are in the Bible during Jesus' time alone?

Well you can add two more that are not so obvious. Those two are two additional women who had the title of "Mary Magdalene". That's right, apparently "Mary Magdalene" was a title given to Mary's who were hired as personal companions or housekeepers in the Jewish household, and because "Marion" was such a common name, there were at least three Marys who were "Magdalenes" (maids) in the immediate company of the women who were around Jesus.

So in gospel style, to cut down on confusion, since each Mary Magdalene came to visit the tomb at a different time after Jesus death, each gospel relates when each one arrived and a few details of their experience so that you can then combine all three references to complete the entire story. What you should gather though, by comparing the stories, is that there were three Mary Magdalenes that remains unstated, but should be apparent by the specific details given. But the gospels do that. They give you one half a detail here and another half there and it leaves it up to you to figure out the combined truth.

Thus one gospel tells us one Mary Magdalene appeared alone at night to the grave and saw Jesus and went and told the disciples. This was Mary Magdalene who was employed in the household of Peter and John apparently and whom Jesus expelled seven demons.

Shortly thereafter, the Mary Magdalene who was employed by "the Other Mary" came to the grave just to view it. She had no spices, but the ran into the two angels who told them Jesus had just left and on the road they ran into Jesus and kissed his feet. That was a different Mary Magdalene. This occurred just before sunrise.

Then the third Mary Magdalene worked for Jesus' mother, Mary, and was with her and her relatives who had the responsibility to bring spices to the grave. They didn't get to the grave until after sunrise. By now Jesus was long gone but they did see the angels who told them to report Jesus had risen to the disciples, but they were all too afraid to do so and so did not report back.

Now some Biblical errantists will say: "Hey, look, what a contradiction!" When really, they just don't understand Jewish writing style which doesn't like to give or repeat details but only give partial details leaving the rest for you to figure out. In this case, what was left out is that there were three Mary Magdalenes and each gospel had to cover what each did so that there was no confusion as to which one arrived at the tomb at which time.

But because people don't understand this Jewish writing style of the gospels, they imagine there is an "error" and get all excited, when really, they are just not that astute as far as gospel writing style.

There many other interesting examples, but that's usually the case, and that's the case here with Judas.

Thus the ONLY THING YOU NEED TO CONCERN YOURSELF WITH is whether or not throwing yourself over a cliff with a rope around your neck qualifies as a "hanging", which it does! Some people hang themselves by getting up on a chair and pushing it away or whatever. Judas was just a bit more creative and threw himself over a cliff, which is very creative.

Of course, the true underlying message of this information is to prove that the Jews invented bungie jumping!!!

So Joseph, keep trying, but do try to use a bit more imagination when it comes to these "errors", you need to get the facts straight first before claiming there is an error.

I still enjoy your attempts though. At least you're thinking!

LG

17

Did the Son of Man Come?

by JosephAlward in

if the author of the book of matthew can be believed, jesus left no doubt about when the apocalypse would occur.

it would be before all of jesus' disciples died, even before his disciples would be able to spread the good word to all of the cities of israel.

since all of the disciples are dead and the apocalypse hasn't occurred, we must conclude that matthew was wrong and that the bible is in error.

Larsguy

Hi Joseph,
Just for the RECORD....

When Jesus said that "some would not die until he came", he meant just that, only there were two groups back then, ones who would not die for 1900 years until he came and those who would die and then have to be resurrected.

Paul was one of these who said he would "SURVIVE until the Lord's day."

So per another interpretation, some of us anointed ones understand that some of the disciples, including John and Paul, would indeed keep living over 1900 years down to our day; therefore, your argument is circular that the death of Jesus' disciples would limit when the second coming would occur based upon those dying naturally during that generation.

But if you actually followed scripture, you would find several references where the two groups are noted; one who would die out and be resurrected and one who would not die at all but keep living.

One reason for chosing some to keep living from the 1st century appears to be the necessity to preserve some of the original members of each of the 12 tribes of Israel so that none of the 12 tribes would die out. The easiest way to ensure that, of course, is to allow certain select ones from all 12 tribes to survive down to our day and then remarry during the last generation.

Sooooo, your inability to accept yet another miracle (how strange Jesus can raise from the dead but not preserve a life over 1900 years?) has nothing to do with your misapplication of scripture or the reality of what took place.

At any rate, Paul was indeed one who was chosen to survive down to our day and I've seen him. That means nothing to you other than some believe Jesus' words were to be literal but his second coming is timed specifically to occur during the last 70th week of 1989 to 1996 and thus, indeed, some from his time would live down to our day as he said. There is no Biblical conflict. It's only a conflict because your beliefs don't allow you to accept that Jesus could cause someone to live through all that time. But in fact, he did.

On the other hand, think of the incredible advantages of someone not dying over that time. Obviously they would be in a very advantaged position financially to assist Jesus at the second coming to carry out what he needed to with respect to the kingdom interests.

So it's a matter of interpretation and faith, but you should know that some of us don't limit the second coming to the normal lifespan of Jesus' disciples back then.

L.G.