Bobbieaware Posted June 1, 2016 Posted June 1, 2016 2 hours ago, Jim Stiles said: If you change your mind, I would like to have a CFR for the bolded section. Very easy to do yourself. Simply look up "contradictions in the Bible" and you'll get hundreds of hits.
Jim Stiles Posted June 1, 2016 Posted June 1, 2016 9 hours ago, Bobbieaware said: Very easy to do yourself. Simply look up "contradictions in the Bible" and you'll get hundreds of hits. The burden of proof is on him and those who claim that there are contradictions in the Bible.
Bobbieaware Posted June 1, 2016 Posted June 1, 2016 5 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: The burden of proof is on him and those who claim that there are contradictions in the Bible. I looked it up last night and there are plenty. Don't expect Mark to jump through hoops to inform you on something you can easily inform yourself.
Jim Stiles Posted June 1, 2016 Posted June 1, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, Bobbieaware said: I looked it up last night and there are plenty. Don't expect Mark to jump through hoops to inform you on something you can easily inform yourself. The vast majority of those purported contradictions are not really contradictions. I have seen the USENET list before. I remain unimpressed. Edited June 2, 2016 by Jim Stiles
saemo Posted June 9, 2016 Posted June 9, 2016 (edited) On June 1, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Jim Stiles said: The vast majority of those purported contradictions are not really contradictions. I have seen the USENET list before. I remain unimpressed. To circle back around to this. Biblical historians (authors of the Books of the Bible) began with the conclusion that God is working in history to save his people. They then used the facts to illustrate this truth. The meaning of events was more important than accurately recording them. As long as the main story line was clear, names and facts might be added or omitted here and there. A story about Abraham would be repeated of Isaac; Goliath’s death could be attributed to two different people; the cleansing of the Temple could be situated either at the beginning or at the end of Jesus’ public career. This different concept of historical writing has caused modern readers to raise problems where the biblical authors saw none. For those who read the Bible as literally as "God said", with a view that our humanness was side-stepped, sure, the perceived "problems" will be problems. LDS have this literal view, especially with their own scripture, the Book of Mormon. The Community of Christ has removed themselves from this literalism, the LDS Church has not. So the problem created by LDS interpretation of scripture, exists for LDS, and this dichotomy is transferred to the Bible. Creating a view of of the Bible as an Inspired work, that is lacking. That's my .02. Edited June 9, 2016 by saemo 2
3DOP Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 9 hours ago, saemo said: To circle back around to this. Biblical historians (authors of the Books of the Bible) began with the conclusion that God is working in history to save his people. They then used the facts to illustrate this truth. The meaning of events was more important than accurately recording them. As long as the main story line was clear, names and facts might be added or omitted here and there. A story about Abraham would be repeated of Isaac; Goliath’s death could be attributed to two different people; the cleansing of the Temple could be situated either at the beginning or at the end of Jesus’ public career. This different concept of historical writing has caused modern readers to raise problems where the biblical authors saw none. For those who read the Bible as literally as "God said", with a view that our humanness was side-stepped, sure, the perceived "problems" will be problems. LDS have this literal view, especially with their own scripture, the Book of Mormon. The Community of Christ has removed themselves from this literalism, the LDS Church has not. So the problem created by LDS interpretation of scripture, exists for LDS, and this dichotomy is transferred to the Bible. Creating a view of of the Bible as an Inspired work, that is lacking. That's my .02. It makes me sorry to see LDS so drawn to critical scholarship that seems to me to focus on when and how the clock crowed in the Gospels (for instance. You make good points I think. 1
3DOP Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 Editing...sigh. click! ****! Clock? Kindle tries to guess the words and won't obey my fingers.
Recommended Posts