Answers to athiest's dum disputes

quote:

---

I have noticed that when the bible is taken out of context,people can try to make it mean anything.

---

Out of curiosity, what exactly is the correct context under which it makes sense for Jesus to be crucified both before and after dinner?

---

"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya

quote:

---

Can you give scripture to both accounts from the bible that you say contradict one another?

---

Didn't Schraf already do that?Regardless: If you'd like more, feel free to visit this website.

quote:

---

You do know that Jews celebrate the passover,right?

---

Yeah, Mom's maiden name was Kleinberg. I had to sit through a bunch of seders as a kid. So what?

---

"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya

Word.

---

"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya

quote:

---

I thought then,that you would know that the passover is observed for 8 days.That is how it's done traditionally. It is no surprise that Jesus shared the passover with his disciples before he was killed on the cross around the time of unleavened bread.

---

I understand that passover takes place over the course of eight days. (Although it should be noted that the seder, the actual Passover supper, does not.) But one passage clearly states that he was taken away to be crucified at the sixth hour, and the other states that he was crucified three hours before that.More to the point, the passage from John clearly identifies Jesus as being taken away for crucifixion before passover. (ie, during the preperations.) So how could he have shared this last supper, a passover seder, with his disciples, when he was being carted off for crucifixion?

quote:

---

By the way,you didn't have to be so rude.

---

I wasn't aware that I was. I'm sorry that you interpreted it that way. But trust me, when I'm being rude, there are long strings of profanity involved.But I'm still curious as to what your point was in bringing up that Jews celebrate passover.

---

"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya

quote:

---

He died several hours after he was crucified.

---

Yes. That would have to be the case. But neither passage pertains to his death, so I fail to see the relevance.Again, very simply: how could he be crucified several hours before he was brought in? And again, how could he be crucified both before and after the seder? The only way I can see is if it takes place between two seders, but the passage from John eliminates that possibility. It specifically identifies the whole affair as happening before passover.

---

"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya

quote:

---

To me there is no contradiction.Jesus privately had "a passover meal"with his disciples.

---

I'm afraid I have to assume that you're intentionally not listening.If this passover meal occurred, then John is incorrect. It is not logically possible that both are true.

quote:

---

Also,there are many archeaological findings that support the holy Bible. The have found many peices of evidence that supports the facts of the people who lived in the Bible.

---

1) What is this evidence?2) There is evidence that the American Civil War happened. It does not logically follow that Gone With the Wind is a factual accounting of real events.

quote:

---

All the so called contradictions from the web site you listed are not true contradictions.

---

All 330 of them? Is there anything more to support this idea, other than a sweeping statement that they "are not true contradictions"?

quote:

---

People should search for themselves,and see the whole bible as a whole,and not break it down into just parts they want to use to form a contradiction,and it's not very good to take a scripture out of context.

---

And again... what possible context is there under which... oh, let's pick one off the list at random...Ah. Under what possible context can it be true that the tomb was both open and closed when the women arrived at the sepulchre? (Lk 24:2 and Mt 28:2)

---

"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya

quote:

---

With regards to the book of John contradicting the Synoptics about the timing of the meal and the crucifixion, my understanding (and I'm not a Jew, so I'm not totally familiar with the customs) is that the meal referred to in the Synoptics occurred on the Friday night before the sabbath, at the beginning (or before?) the actual Passover week celebration. John, in referring to when Jesus was taken away, said he was taken away before the passover celebration, not before that Friday night meal.

---

The Jewish day runs from sundown to sundown. The evening before the first day of passover is the beginning of Passover. The meal referred to above would have been the first seder.

quote:

---

For this one, Luke does indeed state that the ladies found the stone rolled away. And Matthew does state that the angel of the Lord, via an earthquake, rolled the stone away. However, if you read the Matthew account, it does not say that the ladies were at the tomb when the stone was rolled away. It only says that they were coming to see the tomb. So they easily could have been on the way when the earthquake occurred.

---

So if it happened before they arrived, who saw it, and was able to relate it to the authors of the Bible?

quote:

---

Yes, all 330 of them. Most if not all of these have already been disproven by people smarter than I, but skeptics like yourself never accept any of the explanations.

---

Bit of a cop-out, isn't it? "Trust me they've been disproved. No need to go into them."

quote:

---

We can go through more of them, but at some point you should ask yourself how may we would need to explain before you would believe.

---

Uh... even if there were no contradictions, why would that be a reason to believe? To use an example from a previous post, Gone With the Wind is pretty solid on continuity, but I'd still be pretty dissapointed if I tried to find Rhett Butler's grave.

---

"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya

quote:

---

Umm.... God saw it. And God is the author of the Bible. He inspired men to actually write it down, but He is the ultimate author.

---

So how does this authorship work, exactly? I was under the impression that the gospels were supposed to be tales of eyewitness accounts, not divine transcription, direct from the mouth of God.

quote:

---

Cop-out? No more than an evolutionist saying there is scads of evidence out there but not providing any links or any explanations.

---

Uh... guy, links to very user-friendly explanations of evidence for evolution have been posted several times on this thread alone.

quote:

---

Come on.... do you actually expect me to write up a 200 page follow-up to that link so I can answer all 330 of them?

---

If you're going to claim that there are no contradictions in the bible... well, yeah. Because there's a big fat list of them that say you're wrong. I'm sorry there are so many, but the fact that backing up your statement is so daunting a task might not be something you want to throw around in defense of your position.

quote:

---

But when I did answer the one you pulled out at random and made a vaild claim that there are explanations for the others and offered to go into more of them if you wanted, you accuse me of copping-out?

---

I'm happy to go into others with you, sure. But I already posted them up. If you want to argue against them, ball's in your court. Pick one, let's get cracking.I was simply saying that a blanket statement that the rest can be refuted doesn't cut it.

quote:

---

A pretty good analogy. However, Gone with the Wind doesn't claim to be a true story written by Almighty God. A story making these claims should obviously be treated a little more seriously than a good novel. And when that story makes no mistakes whatsoever, then it fairy reasonable to assume it is true.

---

This is fallacious. For instance, let me tell you a story. Furthermore, I claim that this story was written by Almighty God. (Me, as claimed in the story.) There are no logical inconsistencies in the story.Should it be taken more seriously as fact than any other story? Of course not.

---

"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya