Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
@Whitefire13
I did answer you earlier. (I'm having trouble finding the quote function button and I'm still getting used to the threading post sequence here.)
Yes. Inerrant.
If I encountered a falsehood in the bible I would abandon the bible.
Two differing interpretations of the same word does not constitute an error.
Translations (modernisation) over time to reflect changing language is not error.
The word 'sunrise' is an idiom - not a scientific error regarding the motion of the earth.
Bats and birds can share the same classification. (Leviticus predates Carl Linnaeus by a thousand years.)
There are many texts, words, etc that bible scholars bicker about. I am not a bible scholar and I don’t “play one on the forum”. There are many more intelligent posters who may get into the minutia.
I’d like to think if god wrote his word for man, that man should be able to understand it. From the most intelligent to the simplest mind. It should be understood by everyone, I’d think, given it contains an important message, that many claim determines the (I don’t know how to word this) outcome of my “soul”...
Even when it gives two different numbers for the same event? You think both of those numbers are true?
Even in the example where the Catholic Church say the wrong names got into that verse by a copyist error, but because of tradition the verse hasn't been changed back?
@Nyarlathotep
Didn't we already have this conversation?
Even if it is labelled a copying error - a typo - that's NOT a contradiction.
That's everyone agreeing what the number is.
A contradiction entails two competing claims each insisting the other is wrong.
@Lion IRC
700=1,700=7,000 is a contradiction. It always has been, and it always will be. It is one of the simplest forms of contradiction. It is enough to prove by contradiction that at least two of the statements are false.
@ Lion
Well reconcile this...according to you two competing "eye witness accounts"
"Matthew explicitly states that the disciples were told to go to Galilee to see Jesus. They do so. They see Jesus there. And he gives them there his final instructions. Fair enough. But Luke explicitly states that on the day of his resurrection Jesus met the disciples in Jerusalem and point-blank told them not to leave the city. And they don't leave the city. They are there for 40 days with him, and then had ascends to heaven. And they stay in Jerusalem until the day of Pentecost and beyond. So how can Matthew be right that they went to Galilee? " Robert Ehrmann
Now that is one hell of a contradiction it also fits your definition....they cannot both be eyewitness accounts.....
Matthew:28:10 onSuddenly Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” They came to Him, grasped His feet, and worshiped Him. 10“Do not be afraid,” said Jesus. “Go, tell My brothers to go to Galilee. There they will see Me.” 11 While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests all that had happened.…
Luke 24:33-53 33 They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together 34 and saying, “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.” 35 Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.
Jesus Appears to the Disciples
36 While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.”
37 They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. 38 He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds? 39 Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.”
40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. 41 And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.
44 He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”
45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. 46 He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. 49 I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”
The Ascension of Jesus
50 When he had led them out to the vicinity of Bethany, he lifted up his hands and blessed them. 51 While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven. 52 Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. 53 And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God.
Where does Luke "explicitly" state that the disciples all stayed in Jerusalem from the day of the Resurrection until Jesus' ascension?
@ Lion
Where does Luke "explicitly" state that the disciples all stayed in Jerusalem from the day of the Resurrection until Jesus' ascension?
" 53 And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God. and of course "I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until ... But wait in the city of Jerusalem until you are clothed with power from on high." ... These words apparently were spoken on the day of his ascension (see Acts 1:4).
tsk tsk little lyin' cub.
You said "explicitly".
It does NOT explicitly say the disciples never left Jerusalem during the five weeks after His Resurrection.
Two other Gospels however actually DO explicitly state that they were in Galilee at some point during that time.
@ Lyin
"And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God."
24 hours a day, 7 days a week, never sleeping or stopping to eat.
You're making up scripture.
@ LYIN
Can;t help what the text says....and that is what it says...if you don't like it then...well is it an error? Or just add it to the long list of impossibilities you say you live by.
Muppet.
@ Lion. “ Yes. Inerrant”
Thanks. I missed your previous answer. But there are a lot of posters soooo no problem. Easy to get lost.
The Muslims claim “ inerrancy is a doctrine central to the Muslim faith that the Quran is the infallible and inerrant word of God as revealed to Muhammad”
My question, as an outsider of both religious faiths (Christian and Islamic) are both books inerrant? Are both books God’s word?
@Whitefire13
I think Muhammad was misguidedly trying to kick start a copy-cat movement thinking that he would get the job done better than Jesus. And by "better" I believe he was thinking along the same lines as Judas Iscariot - politics and worldly power.
Clearly I agree with much of what's in the Quran because Islam and Christianity and Judaism share common historical roots - Abraham, Moses, Noah, etc - and doctrines. But to the extant that the Quran mistakenly contradicts the bible, the explanation will be because it doesn't have God's nihil obstat imprimatur.
@ Lion IRC
"it doesn't have God's nihil obstat imprimatur."
Please provide the appropriate documentation that god itself approved and gave assent for the bible to be published. You made this statement, please back it up.
Else it is just unevidenced assertion.
IMO this is exactly the same as the Quran. Each "holy book" states it is perfect and complete. Both are practicing circular reasoning.
The book is perfect because ... the book says it is.
For you Lion IRC, the sole reason you became a roman catholic and not a muslim is because you were born into and raised by a catholic family.
Nope.
I wasnt born into nor raised by a Catholic family.
You know Muslims revere Jesus more than they revere Moses don't you?
Also, if God didn't want His Word published, it wouldn't be.
@ Lion IRC
"I wasnt born into nor raised by a Catholic family."
Then I retract my statement about you being born into a catholic family, and apologize.
I sincerely hope my incorrect assumption did not offend you.
@Lion IRC
"Also, if God didn't want His Word published, it wouldn't be."
Really. So everything happens with god's knowledge and approval?
According to that logic , god allows wars, pandemics, death by starvation, (still) child molestors, and of course human suffering such as bone cancer in children the and other hideous diseases. Oh yeah, plus animal suffering .
Christianity has never been able to explain the problem of evil. I turn to Epicurus:
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
Umm, are you actually capable of putting together a thought of you own? Haven't seen any evidence of that so far.
...says the person quoting Epicurus
Yes, God allows 'bad' things to happen when the end justifies the means.
@ Lion IRC
"Yes, God allows 'bad' things to happen when the end justifies the means."
When the end justifies the means?
Wow, that definitely removes your god from the list of entities capable of love and empathy. And since your god is all-powerful, knows what will happen, and has the capacity to make any changes it desires, it is thus able to teach anything without resorting to horrific deaths, pain, suffering, and children dying of cancer. Or being raped by men of the cloth.
And exactly why does your god allow priests to rape children? It is obviously not to teach us we are born sinners, that has been hammered into theists for hundreds of years and we get that message.
What is the end goal?
And since you obviously know the nature of your god by stating so many qualities, what is the end goal? And please do not resort to a sudden attack of amnesia or "god works in mysterious ways", because that would place you in the category of people who spout bullshit but retreat when their feet are put to the fire.
@Lion...” nihil obstat imprimatur.”
Holy fuck! Can’t understand this gibberish. But it’s God’s, so maybe that’s why :)
My point is how do you “determine” it? It’s a claim no different than one made for the bible.
You gave your thoughts “ I think Muhammad was misguidedly...and... I believe he was thinking along the same lines as Judas Iscariot ”
BUT I can say the same thing about the bible and the council that “rubber stamped” the final edition.
So aside from “feelings” or “thinking (as imparting motive)” both claim inerrancy. Mohammed is believed to be the Comforter foretold by Jesus and like Jesus did with his apostles, opened the meaning of the scriptures. They also think, feel that god sent Muhammad (13:43)
“And those who have disbelieved say, "You are not a messenger." Say, "Sufficient is God as Witness between me and you, and whoever has knowledge of the Scripture."
How do you determine it?
Did you not read the part of my post which says much of the Quran is true?
It says many true things about God.
But so do the gnostic Gospels.
@Lion
I don’t understand why you accuse me of not reading your post in full. Of course I did. You also told me your “thoughts”... but that doesn’t address my question.
How do you determine it? Both books claim to be Gods Word. Both have adherents and apologists. Both claim inerrancy... the Torah; then Christian scriptures; then Comforter...
Couldn’t a Jewish person (wait, they do) use the same argument for the Christian scriptures?
Lion IRC
"Did you not read the part of my post which says much of the Quran is true?"
Well of course you'd say that. Much of the Quran was lifted from the Torah
I don't see it that way due to an absence of proof. Until proved otherwise I see the Torah as the mythology of Judaism. Because it borrows heavily from the Torah, Islam is also largely based on Jewish mythology .
It has always bemused me that Islam formed Sharia law from Mosaic law.** BUT that unlike Judaism, extreme orthodox Muslims have not moved on since the seventh century. EG the Wahhabi sect which controls Saudi Arabia***
**Mosaic law consist of 613 commandments nest, not just 10
** I mentioned a specific Muslim sect. That is because it is no more meaningful to speak of Islam as a whole than it is to speak of Christianity as a whole. Keeping to your level of understanding; Muslim terrorists are to Islam as the Ku Klux Klan is to Christianity. .IMO the difference in behaviour is only because the KKK lacks the money and power power of the Wahhabi .
@ Lion IRC
I am still waiting for you to answer 'Old Man Shouts' last post #59 directed to you! You seem to have err, conveniently missed it! So here is the link & I look forward to your reply where you kick 'Old Man Shouts' arse & prove the inerrancy of your bible!
https://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums/debate-room/honor-lion-irc?page=1...
Post #59 in that link is by Tin Man and there's no substantive question in that rambling scrawl.
The post threading in this place is pretty messy.
Maybe you can post the part(s) of Old Man Shouts which you want me to address.
@ LIC
yes , on these forums you have to link to the actual post as the post # will change with the number of responses to that particular or posts prior to it..yep it sucks. Admin know it sucks. But there it is until changed!
If you are referring to the Luke question...I have answered his weak defence.
Oh this is going to be good ...
How about the assertion therein that genetics is purportedly controlled by coloured sticks? An assertion that was flushed down the toilet nearly 200 years ago?
Oh how about the assertion that dead people rose up from their graves and started walking about? Which, oh so strangely enough, was never commented upon by members of an occupying Roman power, an occupying Roman power that had a reputation for documenting items as mundane as tax returns? Which, hilariously, led to a certain Michael Licona coming under fire, when he suggested in a book he wrote that this assertion might be something other than a statement of historical fact (not that people with functioning neurons treat any assertion, let alone a mythological one, as fact).
That's two falsehoods I can think of, and that's without engaging in a thorough scan of the requisite text. The ass-backwards order of the "creation" narrative in Genesis involves its own arena of hilarity I'll leave for another time, along with the whole "global flood" fantasy.
1st
I thought the genetic, inherited camouflage colors used by animals had a direct correlation to the color of the 'sticks' in their environment.
https://images.app.goo.gl/1TC6JN59wpey7GRa9
2nd
I dont think the bible states how many people saw the ghosts/zombies/dead persons raised at Matthew 27:53. But your argument from silence is the sort of logical fallacy you would never let me get away with.
@ Lion
dont think the bible states how many people saw the ghosts/zombies/dead persons raised at Matthew 27:53. But your argument from silence is the sort of logical fallacy you would never let me get away with.
Well lets see what argument from silence you think is convincing?
Pages