Apparent errors in the Bible. One at a time, please.

Unreasonable Faith Forum » Introduction » Announcements

Apparent errors in the Bible. One at a time, please.

(162 posts) (21 voices)

Started 1 year ago by Carlos
Latest reply from Nox

Tags:

« Previous 123…6 Next »

julie42
Member

Carlos, you are dodging the questions and making excuses.
You know that it makes absolutely no sense for a god to ask people to kill children for him. It's against his laws, it's pointless because he can kill anyone himself, he's putting someone in a horrible moral dilemma, and if there's anyone who doesn't deserve to die, it's a child.
You are avoiding this point because I'm sure if you really felt God urging you to kill a child, you wouldn't do it. You would know it was wrong, regardless of whether God commanded it or not. It seems that morality goes a bit beyond what God commands.

You can say all you want that I'm just not understanding this properly. But you're the one who is biased towards defending it no matter what. You can't look at it objectively because you go into it assuming it's all true and that you simply have to defend it, instead of waiting to see if it actually makes sense with what we know of the world.

"a little clarity is not too much to ask for." If this book is really the ultimate truth, why would it be so confusing? Why would God put passages in the bible that sound very much like he commands the killing of infants, but you have to search very thoroughly before you can actually understand it? Is it so he can weed out anyone who would question him and have an even smaller group of believers that he knows will make any excuses for his behavior? Because if so, it's working.

Posted 1 year ago #
Carlos
Member

Elemenope, there is some difficulties to newbies about the comprehension on how God dealt with men in the Old Testament, specially in the age of Mosaic Law. To try and figure it out properly, you have to study a little bit more than just to collect a few opinions about it. As said before: Old Testament Biblical Theology, the History of Israel in the Old Testament, Ancient Near Eastern history. If all Christians did that, I think we wouldn´t have so many alleged Christian denominations around the world, and a little more doctrinal unity.

In fact, as you grow in knowledge of biblical teachings, you´ll discover that, since the fall of man, there always was something seriously wrong, that is, with the world and its mentality apart from God.

As for clarity, I think the biblical message is very clear, even to you: it states about our spiritual misery and desperate need of forgiveness and reconciliation with our Maker.

As for craftiness, just look to all things created, then you´ll see what it really means in the hands of God.

Oh, by the way, there´s good news for you: there´s a new version of God´s Grace to you: it´s called the New Alliance. Presented to you by Jesus Christ, son of God, who died in the cross to pay for the sins of all those who believe in His name (John 3:16).

More information in a New Testament near you.

Posted 1 year ago #
Elemenope
Moderator

Elemenope, there is some difficulties to newbies about the comprehension on how God dealt with men in the Old Testament, specially in the age of Mosaic Law. To try and figure it out properly, you have to study a little bit more than just to collect a few opinions about it. As said before: Old Testament Biblical Theology, the History of Israel in the Old Testament, Ancient Near Eastern history. If all Christians did that, I think we wouldn´t have so many alleged Christian denominations around the world, and a little more doctrinal unity.

You're missing the point. If this message is supposed to be essential--necessary for salvation and well-being of every human being on Earth for all time--why on Earth should it take intense study of "Old Testament Biblical Theology, the History of Israel in the Old Testament, Ancient Near Eastern history" to make heads or tails of it? That makes so little sense it physically hurts to consider it. How many people are ever in a position to do as you suggest?

As for craftiness, just look to all things created, then you´ll see what it really means in the hands of God. Oh, by the way, there´s good news for you: there´s a new version of God´s Grace to you: it´s called the New Alliance. Presented to you by Jesus Christ, son of God, who died in the cross to pay for the sins of all those who believe in His name (John 3:16). More information in a New Testament near you.

Last version update was two thousand years ago? Even Microsoft has that beat pretty handily. Me, I consider the word "New" ill-applied if appended to anything that existed before sliced bread. Maybe comparatively, the "New" Testament is newer than the really, really old stuff that precedes it, but it in itself is pretty out-of-date. So out-of-date that you are driven to argue that I'd need a good solid educational background in history and theology to have a hope of getting my ass saved; at least I'm in a first-world country, so I've got a leg-up on those educational requirements. Blessed are the wealthy educated literate ones, for they know the super-secret way to read the Bible so it all makes sense.

Posted 1 year ago #
julie42
Member

You know, there's not much of a point in talking to you if you ignore all the difficult stuff and just answer back with some vague ideas about how we need to do more studying and how God is above us and doesn't need to conform to our logic.

So real quick; do you believe in the Koran? I'm guessing you don't. But have you studied all of it? You should study all holy books thoroughly before deciding that you don't believe in them.

Posted 1 year ago #
UrsaMinor
Member

Indeed, there is a great body of Islamic theology that needs to be considered before you can confidently reject Islam.

Posted 1 year ago #
Carlos
Member

Let me clarify something: salvation do not come after theology classes. All I'm saying is that these subjects I mentioned would certainly help any Christian to better comprehend some interpretative difficulties like some of those you pointed in this thread, and to understand their meaning from the historical and systematic perspectives.

The Bible is clear about the need for a person to be born again, through faith, to receive eternal life. Jesus said that in John 3:3-7 to Nicodemus. Jesus Christ shed His precious blood on Calvary, died as a substitutionary sacrifice for our sins, and now is offering eternal life in heaven as a gift. In Romans 6:23, we read, "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Eternal life is a gift, a gift from God through the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. You can not buy eternal life, or conquer it as a diploma, and you certainly do not deserve it, but it is offered to you as a gift.

In Ephesians 2:8-9, the apostle Paul reiterates the teaching that eternal life with God is a gift. "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith — and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God — not by works, so that no one can boast" No man can stand before God in eternity, and boast that they 'won' their way to heaven through hard work or study.

Nevertheless, if the act of studying does not lead us to heaven by itself, as Bible says, at least it serves to make a Christian a little more useful for the Kingdom of God, I believe: "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth" (2Timothy 2:15).

Posted 1 year ago #
Troutbane
Member

Hold on, let me start a thread in order to argue the apparent contradictions in the Bible. I will then argue two of these badly, and instead of clarifying any specific counter points, I will claim everyone EXCEPT ME is reading the Bible out of context. When the absurdity of this is pointed out, I will then fall back to the comfy warmth of evangelism and stock quote the Bible.
Well, I'm convinced. Got me some prayin to do...

Posted 1 year ago #
Troutbane
Member

Lets not have you wander to context. Math is always a fairly good way and can hardly be spun as "out of context". How old was Jehoiachin when he began to reign?

2 Kings 24:8
Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

2 Chronicles 36:9
Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

Posted 1 year ago #
julie42
Member

Haha well said.

Anticipated answer:
*Dodges questions with vague statements about the time period and uses bible verses to prove something you didn't even bring up in the first place.*
At best you'll get an explanation about who Jehoiachin was or what was going on during that time period. Not an actual answer.

Posted 1 year ago #
Elemenope
Moderator

Let me clarify something: salvation do not come after theology classes. All I'm saying is that these subjects I mentioned would certainly help any Christian to better comprehend some interpretative difficulties like some of those you pointed in this thread, and to understand their meaning from the historical and systematic perspectives.

Theoretically, you are correct that knowledge is not strictly necessary for salvation (this, of course, was the argument that the gnostics lost) under the rubric of Christianity. Practically, though, things don't work that way. The reality is that natural curiosity and rudimentary awareness of logic would lead people astray. It is hard indeed to maintain faith in the message of the Bible if the Bible presents apparent contradictions and absurdities; given that the "explanations" for these contradictions and absurdities do in fact require years of mind-bending (if not breaking) study of subtle arguments and casuistry to "mend".

So we are back to my original point. If the Bible contains even *apparent* contradictions and absurdities, such that it would take expert level knowledge to disentangle them, then the Bible is defective on a fundamental level for what it is claimed to be and to do. Why would it occur to a person to believe one part of a book if other parts lie to them in obvious ways?

Posted 1 year ago #
Len
Member

@Carlos: What is your answer to Julie's question? I'd really like to know whether or not you would kill a child if your god told you to. No side-stepping, no saying that your god wouldn't tell you to (he's said it before), no saying that I don't understand the issue - just an answer: yes or no?

As a separate item (and a little off-topic, I know), I wonder why you think that the totally immoral idea of "substitutionary sacrifice" is acceptable. The idea that an innocent person can accept blame for something he didn't do in the same way that you can transfer a financial debt. The idea that the guilty party is then not only not punished, but actually rewarded for dumping their guilt on that innocent party.

Posted 1 year ago #
Revyloution
Member

'(this, of course, was the argument that the gnostics lost)'
-Elemnope

Any by lost, he means tortured and murdered.

Posted 1 year ago #
Carlos
Member

Len and Julie: I'll go even further. Imagine the example of Abraham when God asked Him to sacrifice his beloved son Isaac. Through this act, Abraham demonstrated beyond doubt that his original faith in God and His power had been and was still genuine. He proved that his faith was alive, not dead. God, though, didn´t let him finish the job, since the purpose of His command was already fulfilled.

OFF TOPIC (Interestingly, the Islamic holy book, the Koran, also indicates the faith as the reason Abraham was accepted by God as a friend. "He who professes the religion better than he who dedicates himself to God, is charitable and follows the belief Abraham, the upright? (Himself) God chose Abraham for friend. "- the fourth Surat, verse 125, Koran - oh boy, here comes the post storm again ...)

If you are wondering what would I do in the place of Abraham, my answer is: I do not know. I have not lived the life of Abraham, I have not witnessed what he witnessed and experienced with God. Thinking about the present day, certainly I would not dare to kill any child or grown up. But that does not allow me to say that God's commands given to His Servants in the past were unfair or bad. They were given to fulfill the justice of God at the time, in order to punish the sin of bad people and surely avoid even worse consequences. You can´t comprehend that while you still deny to look at the problem of sin an its seriousness. If you die today and burn in hell for eternity, it will be fair. Thinking that your present spiritual misery has no seriousness at all won´t change the facts (that is, your destiny). Only faith and spiritual brokenness will.

I notice that you simply denies to see all grace God provided to His people in the Old Testament, the amazing grace it was the work of Jesus in the cross, and the common grace He still provides to all human race (including you), just to take a few examples. But you cannot elide what Jesus taught: "'You have heard That it was said," You Shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy. "But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for Those who persecute you, so That You May Be children of your Father in heaven, for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love Those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax-collectors of the Same? And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? The not even the Gentiles do the Same? Be perfect, therefor, to your heavenly Father is perfect. "

Did I answer your question now?

Posted 1 year ago #
Carlos
Member

Correcting the Bible quote:

"You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy.” But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax-collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." (Matthew 5:43-48)

Posted 1 year ago #
Elemenope
Moderator

If you are wondering what would I do in the place of Abraham, my answer is: I do not know. I have not lived the life of Abraham, I have not witnessed what he witnessed and experienced with God. Thinking about the present day, certainly I would not dare to kill any child or grown up. But that does not allow me to say that God's commands given to His Servants in the past were unfair or bad.

Somebody who follows "Go kill your child son" with "I am incapable of judging that that command is bad" is someone so bereft of moral sense that they should not have children (at the least). Surely you are not saying that such a command's righteousness could depend merely on the source. Surely...right?

And that is just the horror of killing your own children. Being commanded to kill someone else's children is an entirely different, but equally severe, breach of basic moral sense. So, when the plucky YHWH delivers unto the faithful Israelites their marching orders to slay everything that breathes in this, that, or the other rival tribal area, how many children are being ordered murdered there? That cannot be deflected as an "expression of faith" because no sacrifice was being made. This is just child murder for lebensraum.

I notice that you simply denies[sic] to see all grace God provided to His people in the Old Testament, the amazing grace it was the work of Jesus in the cross, and the common grace He still provides to all human race (including you), just to take a few examples.

You notice that people deny the existence of a thing they don't believe in? I'm tempted to make a snarky Sherlock line. I love "grace" the best of all Christian concepts, because it turns God into such a fickle passive-aggressive extortionist. Having failed to properly build an OSHA-compliant universe, God falls back on dangling the consolation prize (but you have to praise Him first!). Hey, you might die senselessly and horribly, but rest assured that God thinks you deserve faaaaaaar worse. It's a good thing he's willing to overlook that, right? Well, he will, for the low, low price...

Posted 1 year ago #
julie42
Member

Well you never answered Troutbane's question...

I have a very big problem with people who insist that anything is moral simply because God commanded it. You see Abraham as being faithful for almost killing his son. You would probably say that the Israelites did nothing wrong when God told them to kill everyone in a city, including the innocent ones. So is there anything God could command that wouldn't be good? He could tell someone to murder their entire family, and as long as it was his command, that would be okay.
How do you know you're not worshiping an evil god? Sure, he's nice sometimes, but he's really barbaric at others.

How is it hard to see that there's very little chance that an all-powerful, loving god commanded these things, and that it's far more likely that the Israelites simply wanted to get back at other people for what they did to them? History is written by the victors. Of course they would believe that their god was on their side and helped them win, so they embellished the details.

Posted 1 year ago #
UrsaMinor
Member

You notice that people deny the existence of a thing they don't believe in?

You fail to mention why we don't believe in the things that Carlos mentioned, and I think the point is worth bringing up. It's not simple denial because we don't like the idea; we don't believe in these things because there is no evidence that they are true. To beat what is a dead horse, assertions are not evidence.

We are not blind deniers. If there were some observable evidence that these assertions were true, we would believe in them.

Posted 1 year ago #
Theory_of_I
Member

@Carlos:

“Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

A child, God's most perfect creation according to most believers, is born. Ah, but wait, that perfect newborn is automatically defiled, it's perfection destroyed by being made to carry the burden of sins it did not commit and could not have prevented, and forced to live a lifetime accused of unrighteousness and facing damnation for mo more than the crime of being born. And you call a god that would do this, could even think to do this to it's own most precious being, perfect?

You seem rational, even thoughtful, but if you can't see the fallacy and stupidity in that disgusting concept, then you have indeed had a biblical lobotomy and lost any ability you nay have had to think independently. Sad.

Posted 1 year ago #
Kodie
Member

But that does not allow me to say that God's commands given to His Servants in the past were unfair or bad. They were given to fulfill the justice of God at the time,

Friends don't ask you to prove your loyalty to them by commanding you to kill your own child.

Thinking about the present day, certainly I would not dare to kill any child or grown up.

This fits in with my friend's theory that all Christians are deep down atheists. If anyone told you, in the present day, that they killed their children because god commanded them to prove their faith - or even came very near and at the last moment, decided not to - you'd want them in a mental ward and have their children taken away from them. It says in a book that god used to have a closer and more personable characteristic that a man might be challenged to prove his loyalty, in a book where it seems like god stood right there, plainly telling him to do it. Maybe that's not accurate, but I'm not one of the bible scholars here. But in the book, Abraham doesn't have a delusion. Here, now, you'd almost certainly suspect anyone who emulated the Abraham story does have not faith, but a delusion. Anyone who supposedly uses the command of god as an excuse to do something -you- judge as bad is surely immoral, according to you, and haven't really heard god if that's what they thought they heard, because god wouldn't ever say that, now.

in order to punish the sin of bad people and surely avoid even worse consequences. You can´t comprehend that while you still deny to look at the problem of sin an its seriousness.

I thought Abraham was supposed to be one of the good ones, though. To punish the sin of bad people, mightn't he ask the bad ones to kill their own children, both to spare the children of being reared in bad households, subject to bad parenting, and to keep them from maturing into bad people themselves? Worse consequences? If you happen to notice, nothing much has really changed, despite god seeming to have had such an active role in people's lives in the bible, and only now to fix football games and spare family bibles from house fires.

Posted 1 year ago #
Len
Member

@Carlos: Thanks for your reply. I find it encouraging that, when you actually answer the question, you say that you would not follow your god's command. Deep down you understand it, even if you can't (or are afraid to) admit it even to yourself. You tried to balance things by bringing in the story of Abraham, but what Abraham is reported as having done is irrelevant here. I suppose that you find the idea of killing children (your own or someone else's) as abhorrent as we (the atheists who are discussing with you) also find it.

It does disappoint me a little that you try so hard to make a justification for what your god commanded in the past - as if coming from your god makes it better or any more acceptable. And here Abraham's story is relevant to help paint a picture of the god you worship. He commanded a man to sacrifice his son for no reason - as if any reason could actually be sufficient or could justify that act.

What your god commanded (several times) was despicable. I guess I just hold myself to a higher moral standard than your god.

Posted 1 year ago #
Bill
Member

Q: "I'd really like to know whether or not you would kill a child if your god told you to. No side-stepping, no saying that your god wouldn't tell you to (he's said it before), no saying that I don't understand the issue - just an answer: yes or no?"

A: "If you are wondering what would I do in the place of Abraham, my answer is: I do not know. I have not lived the life of Abraham, I have not witnessed what he witnessed and experienced with God."

Any answer other than: "I would never kill a child under any circumstances," is morally indefensible.

Posted 1 year ago #
Elemenope
Moderator

I will note that, in all the discussion of killing children (that the Bible seems unpleasantly replete with), nobody ever talks about the story of Jephthah and his unfortunate daughter.

Perhaps because it is the worst of all. No last minute lamb of God to intervene on that one.

Posted 1 year ago #
julie42
Member

I think the problem with that story is that you can't really tell whether it was supposed to be a good or a bad thing. There are plenty of bible stories about people doing stupid or bad things and they're not supposed to be people to look up to.

I definitely find the story of Jephthah and his daughter disturbing and one of the many examples of the horrible things people do in the name of religion. But in the story God doesn't really command Jephthah to kill his daughter. Jephthah just makes a really stupid promise.
Now obviously there is the question of why God would let that happen, but you just have to throw that question in the huge box with all the other questions of why God lets these things happen. It's still a legitimate point, but it's much easier to excuse God from that than it is with Abraham and Isaac.

Posted 1 year ago #
TrickQuestion
Member

I would like to beg the question as to whether or not Aesop's Fables might not be a better book on morality/guideline for a good life than the bible...

Posted 1 year ago #
JonJon
Member

Jephthah's story is one of the very closest to the textbook definition of tragedy. You can find almost exactly the same scenario in Greek drama. The ultimate problem is quite simply a) hubris, and b) divided loyalties. The problem is that J has talked himself into a situation where no matter what choice he makes, it is a bad one-- oathbreaking or child murder. Child murder seems obviously bad, but that's his private life; his public life is more important and adds weight to the less bad betrayal of an oath. At any rate, the whole point of the story in my opinion is to illustrate that one can act in such a way as to remove all good decisions from the table and leave yourself only bad ones.

Then again, it's been a while since I've read it...

Posted 1 year ago #
Revyloution
Member

JonJon, thanks for that perspective. Ive always used the tale of Jephthah as an example of the insanity of the bible. In all the years of exposing people to that passage, I've never heard such a good explanation for what it might mean if it were, A. True and B. God was real. I still think it shows how morally bankrupt the Bible is, but you've reminded me of how flexible it can be.

Posted 1 year ago #
Carlos
Member

Are you people consciously saying that YOU have higher moral standards than God and Jesus Christ?

Posted 1 year ago #
Carlos
Member

Let´s talk about the moral standard required of men of God.

"I left you behind in Crete for this reason, that you should put in order what remained to be done, and should appoint elders in every town, as I directed you: someone who is blameless, married only once, whose children are believers, not accused of debauchery and not rebellious. For a bishop, as God’s steward, must be blameless; he must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or addicted to wine or violent or greedy for gain; but he must be hospitable, a lover of goodness, prudent, upright, devout, and self-controlled. He must have a firm grasp of the word that is trustworthy in accordance with the teaching, so that he may be able both to preach with sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it." (Titus 1. 5-9)

v.6 Anenklêtos - most Bibles translate this word as" blameless". The classic Vine´s Dictionary of New Testament defines this word:

"It means it can not be called to account, that is, without no charges (as a result of a public inquiry), blameless (1 Cor 1.8; Co 1:22, Titus 3:10, 1:6-7). It implies not only mere acquittal, but the lack of any charge against a person."

v.7. Oikonomos - "steward, house manager. The word emphasizes the task to someone and the responsibility involved. It is a metaphor drawn from contemporary life and portrays the administrator of a house or state." "This word has originated the word "economy" and the government means first of a family or the affairs of a household (oikos - a house, nomos - law), that is, the government or administration of property of others, stewardship (Luke 16:2).

This stewardship refers to several things, such as:

Our time – Ephesians 5:15-16 – “Be careful then how you live, not as unwise people but as wise, making the most of the time, because the days are evil."

Our goods - Proverbs 3:9 – “Honour the Lord with your substance and with the first fruits of all your produce;"

Our talents and gifts – Leviticus 23:38 – “Apart from the sabbaths of the Lord, and apart from your gifts, and apart from all your votive offerings, and apart from all your freewill-offerings, which you give to the Lord.”

Our knowledge and intelligence – Proverbs 20:15 – “There is gold, and abundance of costly stones; but the lips informed by knowledge are a precious jewel.” – 1Corinthians 1:5 – “for in every way you have been enriched in him, in speech and knowledge of every kind."

Our tithes and offerings – Malachi 3:8 – “Will anyone rob God? Yet you are robbing me! But you say, ‘How are we robbing you?’ In your tithes and offerings!”.

Our bodies – Romans 12:1 – “I appeal to you therefore, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.”

v. 7. Authade - not arrogant. "Obstinate in his own opinion, stubborn, arrogant, someone who refuses to conform to other people. And the man who keeps stubbornly to their own opinion, and asserts its own rights and does not take into account the rights, feelings and interests of other people. " Self-indulgent (autos - self, and hêdomai - indulgent), denotes a person who, overcomed by his own interest, and without any consideration for others, arrogantly asserts his own will, "superb" (Titus 1:7), "stubborn" (2 Peter 2.10) the opposite of epiekês, kind, gentle (1 Timothy 3:3).

v. 7. Orgilos - other than: irritable, prone to anger, hot tempered.

v. 7. Paroinos - Not given to wine. Literally, not having the wine as his entertainment (for, en, oinos wine) [...], not to be fond of the effects of drunkenness.

v. 7. Pléktês - not violent. Quarrelsome, striker. The word can be translated, literally, as "not ready to knock your opponent."

v. 7. Aischrokerdés - not greedy. Someone who profits dishonestly, adapting the teaching to the listeners in order to earn their money [...], refers to engaging in shady dealings. This word is made up of two Greek words: aischros (embarrassing) and kerdos (greed).

v. 8. Philóksenos - love of strangers, hospitable.

v. 8. Philágathos - lover of good, loving what is good. Denotes devotion to all that is excellent.

v. 8. Sophronia - sober. Denotes sound mind (sozo - save; phren - the mind), self-control, sobriety, is translated "prudent" in Titus 1:8.

v. 8. Dikaion - just, the one who acts justly.

v. 8. Hosios - devotee, saint. Means religiously righteous, holy, in opposition to what is crooked or contaminated. It is commonly associated with righteousness. It refers to God in Revelation 15:4; 16.5 [...] In 1Timothy 2:8 and Titus 1:8 refers to the character of the Christian. Hosios is often, in the Septuagint, the translation of the Hebrew word "Hasid", ranging between "holy" and " merciful".

v. 8. Enkratê - which has self-control. The Jerusalem Bible translates it as "disciplined." It also means "self-control, complete self-control, which controls all passionate impulses and maintains a loyal will to the will of God." Still denotes "the exercise of self-control, someone who is master of himself."

v. 9. Antechómenon - attached to, steady application. It means "to remain firmly on the side of a person." Paul uses the term involving the leader that is attached to the Word of God.

For Christians, the boundary between truth and error is well demarcated. There is rather a divine pattern that makes the difference between right and wrong. The men of God should be so well defined in their minds. Acting in accordance with the model exposed in the divine Word of God, Christians will not have problems with moral relativism.

Now, can YOU say you have a higher moral standard than the Bible?

Posted 1 year ago #
UrsaMinor
Member

Troutbane said:

Lets not have you wander to context. Math is always a fairly good way and can hardly be spun as "out of context". How old was Jehoiachin when he began to reign?

2 Kings 24:8
Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

2 Chronicles 36:9
Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

julie42 said:

Haha well said.

Anticipated answer:
*Dodges questions with vague statements about the time period and uses bible verses to prove something you didn't even bring up in the first place.*

Looks like you hit that nail on the head, julie42. Carlos has diverted the topic to a discussion of whether Biblical morality is superior when the question at hand is whether the Bible is a reliable, non-self-contradicting document worthy of being consulted as a moral authority in the first place.

Posted 1 year ago #
TrickQuestion
Member

Carlos:
Are you people consciously saying that YOU have higher moral standards than God and Jesus Christ?

I have never asked anyone to kill to prove they love me. I have never punished anyone for eternity for not doing what i say. I have never tortured someone to prove a point about how great i am. I have never killed off thousands of people in a hissy fit.

So yes.

Posted 1 year ago #