How do we know what Jesus said when no one was there, anyway?

[Juma]

DBT - Alleged bible contradiction Example #1

Whoever is not with me is against me (Matthew 12:30, Luke 11:23)

Whoever is not against us is for us (Mark 9:40)

Read the above very carefully southerhybrid. Are these statements mutually exclusive?
Is one the opposite of the other?
Is this is the type of thing your bible scholar co-worker thinks is a contradiction?

"contradiction"
kɒntrəˈdɪkʃ(ə)n
noun
a combination of statements, ideas, or features which are opposed to one another.
"the proposed new system suffers from a set of internal contradictions"
a situation in which inconsistent elements are present.
"the paradox of using force to overcome force is a real contradiction"
the statement of a position opposite to one already made.
"the second sentence appears to be in flat contradiction of the first"
synonyms: denial, refutation, rebuttal, countering, counterstatement, opposite;

?
The meaning of the first citation is to point out that: neutral = foe.
The meaning of the second citation is to point out that: neutral = friends.
That is an obvious contradiction.

 

[Lion IRC]

"Another Bible Contradictions Thread - April 2018"

DBT - Alleged bible contradiction Example #2

"God is love." - 1 John 4:8
"Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4
"God is jealous." - Exodus 20:5

If love and jealousy were mutually exclusive antonyms then nobody in love would ever feel jealousy. But that's a paradox. How can there be any love triangle jealousy without love?

And so it is that when we look at the word "jealous" (in either the English or Hebrew or Greek) we see that it can be used in both negative and positive connotations.

1 Corinthians 13:4 is therefore able to warn of the unloving form of jealousy (in context) without any contradiction of Exodus 20:5 or 1John 4:8

Note also that when the bible errancy crowd skeptics disingenuously quote-mine the phrase "God is love" they want you to think that means a hippy rainbow God of butterflies and unicorns who is supposed to love everything and everyone everywhere at all times. But that's not biblical and it's not true.

 

[Lion IRC]

The meaning of the first citation is to point out that: neutral = foe.
The meaning of the second citation is to point out that: neutral = friends.
That is an obvious contradiction.

I don't see the word "neutral" in either of those verses. Please stick to the text.
And please don't do what you would accuse me of doing if I had to stretch and contort the verse beyond recognition to come up with the desired eisegesis

 

[bilby]

You also need to consider this:

Frontier Troops Museum, Semenovskaya ulitsa 17: 221-80-74

But you must interpret it from a position of faith, of course. And remember to dial +7 4232 if calling from outside the Russian Federation.

 

[Copernicus]

One of the best, most accessible discussions of contradictions in the New Testament can be found in Bart Ehrman's Did Jesus Exist?. I say that, not because he provides a nice list, but because he explains how a serious scholar can find those contradictions. One thing you don't do is read the gospels sequentially. Rather you compare what they have to say about the very same events, such as the crucifixion. IOW, you construct a matrix in order to line up timelines, and then the discrepancies jump out at you.

In the 5-minute video below, Ehrman notes that there are lots of little discrepancies across the Bible, but there are also major ones. For example, Mark has Jesus go silently to his crucifixion and remain silent until the very end. Luke has him yakking away.

[YOUTUBE]B_EHDMVLXGw[/YOUTUBE]

Ehrman explains why there are discrepancies in the Bible, all of which are retellings of the basic resurrection story. The authors created their narratives to promote their ideas about Christian doctrine, and they all had different goals. So they embellished the tales in order to make teach their congregations lessons about what they viewed as a proper perspective on their faith. None of the gospels come to us from autographs (original form) but as copies, so it isn't even clear how accurately the current versions reflect the original source.

 

[Juma]

The meaning of the first citation is to point out that: neutral = foe.
The meaning of the second citation is to point out that: neutral = friends.
That is an obvious contradiction.

I don't see the word "neutral" in either of those verses. Please stick to the text.
And please don't do what you would accuse me of doing if I had to stretch and contort the verse beyond recognition to come up with the desired eisegesis

Bollocks. Whether ”neutral” is mentioned is nentioned or not doesnt matter. Opinions has three components: for, against and doesnt give a damn. Peoples opinion are a combination of these three. The given citation is a way of polarising the debate in only two sides: for and against. The neutrals has to take side.
The two citations has opposite view on the neutrals.

 

[DBT]

DBT - Alleged bible contradiction Example #2

"God is love." - 1 John 4:8
"Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4
"God is jealous." - Exodus 20:5

If love and jealousy were mutually exclusive antonyms then nobody in love would ever feel jealousy. But that's a paradox. How can there be any love triangle jealousy without love?

And so it is that when we look at the word "jealous" (in either the English or Hebrew or Greek) we see that it can be used in both negative and positive connotations.

1 Corinthians 13:4 is therefore able to warn of the unloving form of jealousy (in context) without any contradiction of Exodus 20:5 or 1John 4:8

Note also that when the bible errancy crowd skeptics disingenuously quote-mine the phrase "God is love" they want you to think that means a hippy rainbow God of butterflies and unicorns who is supposed to love everything and everyone everywhere at all times. But that's not biblical and it's not true.

The quoted verse specifically states "Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4, which is not something I said or implied. The terms are stated in the given verses.

It is not me who is 'quote mining' but you who happens to be ignoring what the quoted verses clearly state and clearly mean.

You are cherry picking.

You ignore the very specific terms and conditions of these verses and try to obscure their meaning and muddy the waters in order to rationalize the contradictions between two opposing sets of terms and conditions. Love and decency on the one hand and vindictiveness and cruelty on the other.

Not that I expected anything else.

 

[Juma]

Why would it matter to the romans/jews what the christians fantasy was?

Why would US citizens today care if some people believed that superman was more powerful than the US president?

Because they ALL would then have to kneel down or bow down to Jesus whereas: the US president tells superman what to do ... "Yes sir Mr. President!"

? no, they wouldnt. they would simply ignore their weird customs.

 

[bilby]

DBT - Alleged bible contradiction Example #2

"God is love." - 1 John 4:8
"Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4
"God is jealous." - Exodus 20:5

If love and jealousy were mutually exclusive antonyms then nobody in love would ever feel jealousy. But that's a paradox. How can there be any love triangle jealousy without love?

And so it is that when we look at the word "jealous" (in either the English or Hebrew or Greek) we see that it can be used in both negative and positive connotations.

1 Corinthians 13:4 is therefore able to warn of the unloving form of jealousy (in context) without any contradiction of Exodus 20:5 or 1John 4:8

Note also that when the bible errancy crowd skeptics disingenuously quote-mine the phrase "God is love" they want you to think that means a hippy rainbow God of butterflies and unicorns who is supposed to love everything and everyone everywhere at all times. But that's not biblical and it's not true.

The quoted verse specifically states "Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4, which is not something I said or implied. The terms are stated in the given verses.

It is not me who is 'quote mining' but you who happens to be ignoring what the quoted verses clearly state and clearly mean.

You are cherry picking.

You ignore the very specific terms and conditions of these verses and try to obscure their meaning and muddy the waters in order to rationalize the contradictions between two opposing sets of terms and conditions. Love and decency on the one hand and vindictiveness and cruelty on the other.

Not that I expected anything else.

But is it not written:

Mumiy Troll', Pogranichnaya Ulitsa, 6: 262-01-01 ?

It's all in the interpretation.

 

[Lion IRC]

...It is not me who is 'quote mining' but you who happens to be ignoring what the quoted verses clearly state and clearly mean.

If you don't accept that the the words love and jealousy are neither 'clear' nor mutually exclusive then you are being disingenuous. Because you don't use strict, literal definitions for abstract concepts in other areas of life do you?
Do you write to weather presenters to complain when they use the word "sunrise" literally?

...You are cherry picking.

You are committing an equivocation fallacy.

 

[DBT]

...It is not me who is 'quote mining' but you who happens to be ignoring what the quoted verses clearly state and clearly mean.

If you don't accept that the the words love and jealousy are neither 'clear' nor mutually exclusive then you are being disingenuous. Because you don't use strict, literal definitions for abstract concepts in other areas of life do you?
Do you write to weather presenters to complain when they use the word "sunrise" literally?

Never mind me or what I say. What does your bible say:

"Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4

You are committing an equivocation fallacy.

I am 'committing' nothing. I am quoting verses straight from the bible that say what they say and mean what they mean without input from me.

It is your bible that tells you that 'love is not jealous' - which says exactly what it says and means exactly what it means; that love is not jealous.

I cannot alter what it says or what it means.

Plus, jealousy being a form of fear, the fear of losing a partner to a rival, etc, the attention given being perceived as a threat to the relationship, whether rightly or wrongly.....

 

[arnoldo]

Spirit Paraclete
See also, Canonical exegesis.

http://biblehub.com/john/14-26.htm

 

[ruby sparks]

"God is love." - 1 John 4:8
"Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4
"God is jealous." - Exodus 20:5

1. God is love.
2. Love is not jealous.
3. Therefore God is not jealous.

It doesn't get much simpler than that.

Whereas the 3 statements from the bible are incompatible and contradictory.

 

[Learner]

1, God is Big
2. Big is not jealous
3. Therefore God is (still) jealous


1.God is Almighty
2.Almighty is not Jealous
3.God is (still) jealous

or

1.God is relaxed
2.Relaxed is not jealous
3. God is not jealous?

I see what you mean here.

 

[WAB]

their positions, and I wrote down their positions as he showed them to me, and I wrote down their months as they were, and the appearance of their lights till fifteen days were accomplished. 3. In single seventh parts she accomplishes all her light in the east, and in single seventh parts accomplishes all her darkness in the west. 4. And in certain months she alters her settings, and in certain months she pursues her own peculiar course. 5. In two months the moon sets with the sun: in those two middle portals the third and the fourth. 6. She goes forth for seven days, and turns about and returns again through the portal where the sun rises, and accomplishes all her light: and she recedes from the sun, and in eight days enters the sixth portal from which the sun goes forth. 7. And when the sun goes forth from the fourth portal she goes forth seven days, until she goes forth from the fifth and turns back again in seven days into the fourth portal and accomplishes all her light: and she recedes and enters into the first portal in eight days. 8. And she returns again in seven days into the fourth portal from which the sun goes forth. 9. Thus I saw their position--how the moons rose and the sun set in those days. 10. And if five years are added together the sun has an overplus of thirty days, and all the days which accrue to it for one of those five years, when they are full, amount to 364 days. 11. And the overplus of the sun and of the stars amounts to six days: in 5 years 6 days every year come to 30 days: and the moon falls behind the sun and stars to the number of 30 days. 12. And the sun and the stars bring in all the years exactly, so that they do not advance or delay their position by a single day unto eternity; but complete the years with perfect justice in 364 days. 13. In 3 years there are 1092 days, and in 5 years 1820 days, so that in 8 years there are 2912 days. 14. For the moon alone the days amount in 3 years to 1062 days, and in 5 years she falls 50 days behind: [i.e. to the sum (of 1770) there is

From the book of Enoch, emphasis mine. Not bad for a sheephearder, eh?

Not done yet...

Not saying the author of the text didn't glean it from some other source...

*

15. And three months she makes of thirty days, and at her time she makes three months of twenty-nine days each, in which she accomplishes her waning in the first period of time, and in the first portal for one hundred and seventy-seven days. 16. And in the time of her going out she appears for three months (of) thirty days each, and for three months she appears (of) twenty-nine each. 17. At night she appears like a man for twenty days each time, and by day she appears like...

- [man in the moon thingie?]

*

This is pertinent:

6. Woe to those who build unrighteousness and oppression
And lay deceit as a foundation;
For they shall be suddenly overthrown,
And they shall have no peace.

ain't done yet...

*

11. Woe to you who spread evil to your neighbours;
For you shall be slain in Sheol.
12. Woe to you who make deceitful and false measures,
And (to them) who cause bitterness on the earth;
For they shall thereby be utterly consumed.

13. Woe to you who build your houses through the grievous toil of others*,
And all their building materials are the bricks and stones of sin;
I tell you ye shall have no peace.

*Seems quite patently anti-slavery.

*

4. And see ye not the sailors of the ships, how their ships are tossed to and fro by the waves, and are shaken by the winds, and are in sore trouble? 5. And therefore do they fear because all their goodly possessions go upon the sea with them, and they have evil forebodings of heart that the sea will swallow them and they will perish therein.

- There is much of this in Melville's works, plus a whole host of others, but particularly poignant in Melville, who served on a whaling ship, a merchant ship, and many other kinds.

 

[DBT]

"God is love." - 1 John 4:8
"Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4
"God is jealous." - Exodus 20:5

1. God is love.
2. Love is not jealous.
3. Therefore God is not jealous.

It doesn't get much simpler than that.

Whereas the 3 statements from the bible are incompatible and contradictory.

Yes, indeed. Clearly and undeniably a contradiction. But that still doesn't stop believers from trying to justify the unjustifiable.

 

[WAB]

Howzabout the real doozy:

Thou shalt not kill/go and kill ye the....ad infinitum.


That being said, there is a WHOLE lot of distinction between killing and murder, as in times of war.

You're from Oz, you must have heard of Breaker Morant/Harry Morant? He and another officer were executed for murder after a trial mock trial during the Boer War.

 

[WAB]

Hmmm.

Looks like the Greek borrowed from Enoch or Enoch from the Greek.

4 On the first uppermost circle I placed the stars, Kruno, and on the second Aphrodit, on the third Aris, on the fifth Zeus, on the sixth Ermis, on the seventh lesser the moon, and adorned it with the lesser stars.

Kronos, Aphrodite, Ares, Zeus, Hermes, etc.

*

Okay, looks like the Greek predates the Enoch texts. Sorry guys, I know most of you know this stuff, but I never gave the apocryphal books much of a look until...now.

Proceed!

 

[Lion IRC]

"God is love." - 1 John 4:8
"Love is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4
"God is jealous." - Exodus 20:5

1. God is love.
2. Love is not jealous.
3. Therefore God is not jealous.

It doesn't get much simpler than that.

Whereas the 3 statements from the bible are incompatible and contradictory.

Again? Really?

DBT - Alleged bible contradiction Example #2

"God is love." - 1 John 4:8
"Leove is not jealous." - 1 Corinthians 13:4
"God is jealous." - Exodus 20:5

If love and jealousy were mutually exclusive antonyms then nobody in love would ever feel jealousy. But that's a paradox. How can there be any love triangle jealousy without love?

And so it is that when we look at the word "jealous" (in either the English or Hebrew or Greek) we see that it can be used in both negative and positive connotations.

1 Corinthians 13:4 is therefore able to warn of the unloving form of jealousy (in context) without any contradiction of Exodus 20:5 or 1John 4:8

Note also that when the bible errancy crowd skeptics disingenuously quote-mine the phrase "God is love" they want you to think that means a hippy rainbow God of butterflies and unicorns who is supposed to love everything and everyone everywhere at all times. But that's not biblical and it's not true.

 

[WAB]

The Bible is errant.

How could the Creator, the Father of fathers, allow any of His creatures to suffer in agony, for eternity?

Please explain.

And please note: I want YOUR explanation, not one from the Bible.

Would you throw your own child into a fire, to burn eternally, for a simple error, for a simple lack of belief in ancient books?

I thought not.

So how can my compassion, or your compassion, be greater than God's?

As Spinoza pointed out, the idea is absurd.