|
Post by throwaway2018 on Oct 4, 2022 14:54:40 GMT
Inspired by prnolonger and his reference to PR word games. I'm hoping this inspires him to post his own list Here are some of the rationalizations I've heard given by PRs for certain passages in the Bible: 1. The contradictions in the gospel accounts of Christ's death are because each gospel author is just truthfully relaying their memory, not truthfully relaying what actually happened. 2. Having the whole of Israel march around Jericho (the city did not even cover the area of a square mile) was not absurd because everyone died when they wandered the wilderness for 40 years and they didn't reproduce like normal during that time I guess. 3. The contradictions in the accounts of Judas's death don't matter because there's some possible way to make it work. We don't even need to sit down to figure out how, we can just trust God that there is a way. (yes, this was actually the response) 4. The passage in the Old Testament that allows for divorce wasn't actually what God wanted, he just allowed Moses to make that law because he knew it would be too difficult for the Israelites to abide by that law. It showed the weakness of the Israelites. 5. The ordering of the creation account in Genesis 2 doesn't actually matter because it's not supposed to be chronological like the first account. 6. God never planned on Abraham sacrificing Isaac, nor was God lying when he told Abraham he wanted that. It was just God testing Abraham's faith. 7. When Rahab lied to save the spies God didn't condone that behavior. Even though her life was saved that didn't mean that God approved of what she did. 8. Even though God is not pleased by human sacrifice, that king/judge who offered to sacrifice his daughter in exchange for God doing what he wanted had to do so anyways because he promised. 9. The Netherlands Reformed requirement for head coverings for women is silly because that passage is clearly not meant to be taken literally. Same with the passage about greeting believers with a holy kiss - the kiss is not literal, of course. What's really funny about this is that some of the rationalizations contradict the rationalizations given by other PRs. For example, the gist of point 1 is that contradictions are ok because the Bible is only accurately conveying someone's memory, not what actually happened. The gist of point 3 is that contradictions are ok because there is some way to weave the narratives (which are perfect descriptions of what actually happened) together that result in one story, even if you have to construct a Frankenstein monster to do so. A lot of this required thinking back on my childhood Bible and catechism classes. Can you remember any rationalizations given by your PR contacts for apparent contradictions or inconsistencies in how God was portrayed in the Bible?
|
|
|
Post by theycallmetheseeker on Oct 4, 2022 15:57:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by tryingtoleave on Oct 4, 2022 16:18:17 GMT
Never really got an answer for it, but I always wondered how all the great wonderful godly men in the Bible like David and Solomon were able to have hundreds of wives and concubines and still be considered godly men to look up to. David even went as far as to send a man to his death so he could have his wife. Now compare these great men in the Bible to how easily PRs can discount you as being a “bad” person for minor things always bothered me.
|
|
|
Post by questioneverything on Oct 4, 2022 16:36:28 GMT
Inspired by prnolonger and his reference to PR word games. I'm hoping this inspires him to post his own list Here are some of the rationalizations I've heard given by PRs for certain passages in the Bible: 1. The contradictions in the gospel accounts of Christ's death are because each gospel author is just truthfully relaying their memory, not truthfully relaying what actually happened. 2. Having the whole of Israel march around Jericho (the city did not even cover the area of a square mile) was not absurd because everyone died when they wandered the wilderness for 40 years and they didn't reproduce like normal during that time I guess. 3. The contradictions in the accounts of Judas's death don't matter because there's some possible way to make it work. We don't even need to sit down to figure out how, we can just trust God that there is a way. (yes, this was actually the response) 4. The passage in the Old Testament that allows for divorce wasn't actually what God wanted, he just allowed Moses to make that law because he knew it would be too difficult for the Israelites to abide by that law. It showed the weakness of the Israelites. 5. The ordering of the creation account in Genesis 2 doesn't actually matter because it's not supposed to be chronological like the first account. 6. God never planned on Abraham sacrificing Isaac, nor was God lying when he told Abraham he wanted that. It was just God testing Abraham's faith. 7. When Rahab lied to save the spies God didn't condone that behavior. Even though her life was saved that didn't mean that God approved of what she did. 8. Even though God is not pleased by human sacrifice, that king/judge who offered to sacrifice his daughter in exchange for God doing what he wanted had to do so anyways because he promised. 9. The Netherlands Reformed requirement for head coverings for women is silly because that passage is clearly not meant to be taken literally. Same with the passage about greeting believers with a holy kiss - the kiss is not literal, of course. What's really funny about this is that some of the rationalizations contradict the rationalizations given by other PRs. For example, the gist of point 1 is that contradictions are ok because the Bible is only accurately conveying someone's memory, not what actually happened. The gist of point 3 is that contradictions are ok because there is some way to weave the narratives (which are perfect descriptions of what actually happened) together that result in one story, even if you have to construct a Frankenstein monster to do so. A lot of this required thinking back on my childhood Bible and catechism classes. Can you remember any rationalizations given by your PR contacts for apparent contradictions or inconsistencies in how God was portrayed in the Bible? To every Bible verse that hints at contradictions or inconsistencies, every single one.... "MY God can do anything" Discussion over.
|
|
|
Post by fellowhuman on Oct 4, 2022 18:12:50 GMT
2. Having the whole of Israel march around Jericho (the city did not even cover the area of a square mile) was not absurd because everyone died when they wandered the wilderness for 40 years and they didn't reproduce like normal during that time I guess. www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2026&version=NIVThere's two censuses in Numbers, one shortly after the exodus and one here shortly before the invasion and I think after battling Amalek and suffering some plagues from God (snakes and quail meat). The census is of men over 20, and there are 601,730. I think the other census had 600k men "of fighting age". Someone can fact-check me. Either way the second census would suggest Israel was, I don't know, 1.6 million to 2 million strong? Interesting to note that Egypt circa somewhere 1500-1200 or so BC had about 3 million people total. My source is The Atheist Handbook to the Old Testament, Vol. 2, but I only have it in audio right now so I'm going from memory.
|
|
|
Post by prnolonger on Oct 4, 2022 19:06:15 GMT
Inspired by prnolonger and his reference to PR word games. I'm hoping this inspires him to post his own list Here are some of the rationalizations I've heard given by PRs for certain passages in the Bible: 1. The contradictions in the gospel accounts of Christ's death are because each gospel author is just truthfully relaying their memory, not truthfully relaying what actually happened. 2. Having the whole of Israel march around Jericho (the city did not even cover the area of a square mile) was not absurd because everyone died when they wandered the wilderness for 40 years and they didn't reproduce like normal during that time I guess. 3. The contradictions in the accounts of Judas's death don't matter because there's some possible way to make it work. We don't even need to sit down to figure out how, we can just trust God that there is a way. (yes, this was actually the response) 4. The passage in the Old Testament that allows for divorce wasn't actually what God wanted, he just allowed Moses to make that law because he knew it would be too difficult for the Israelites to abide by that law. It showed the weakness of the Israelites. 5. The ordering of the creation account in Genesis 2 doesn't actually matter because it's not supposed to be chronological like the first account. 6. God never planned on Abraham sacrificing Isaac, nor was God lying when he told Abraham he wanted that. It was just God testing Abraham's faith. 7. When Rahab lied to save the spies God didn't condone that behavior. Even though her life was saved that didn't mean that God approved of what she did. 8. Even though God is not pleased by human sacrifice, that king/judge who offered to sacrifice his daughter in exchange for God doing what he wanted had to do so anyways because he promised. 9. The Netherlands Reformed requirement for head coverings for women is silly because that passage is clearly not meant to be taken literally. Same with the passage about greeting believers with a holy kiss - the kiss is not literal, of course. What's really funny about this is that some of the rationalizations contradict the rationalizations given by other PRs. For example, the gist of point 1 is that contradictions are ok because the Bible is only accurately conveying someone's memory, not what actually happened. The gist of point 3 is that contradictions are ok because there is some way to weave the narratives (which are perfect descriptions of what actually happened) together that result in one story, even if you have to construct a Frankenstein monster to do so. A lot of this required thinking back on my childhood Bible and catechism classes. Can you remember any rationalizations given by your PR contacts for apparent contradictions or inconsistencies in how God was portrayed in the Bible? To every Bible verse that hints at contradictions or inconsistencies, every single one.... "MY God can do anything" Discussion over. Be a real shame if there were a dozen or so articles in the Standard Bearer about PR's belief in God's property of non-contradiction. So, yeah man, according to your own Reformed hermeneutics, there are quite literally several things God cannot do: die, contradict Himself, stop existing, never exist, erase Himself from existence, elevate someone higher than Himself, sin, lie, just to name a few. These are all sacrosanct examples of things, according to the Reformed faith, that God cannot do. It's not just Reformed Calvinists that hold the law of noncontradiction. Church of Christ. Even the Catholics, baby! Anytime I overhear someone say "My God can do anything!" or "Through God all things are possible!" I always hear the little voice at the end of commercials that says *warning: some restrictions may apply*Stuff like "The Law of Non-Contradiction" is really fun to explore. Well, if God has to follow a law, then does that imply that there is some force beyond God that makes and enforces these laws? Why does God have to follow that law? Could it be that God could break a law, but doesn't because it's not in His nature? Maybe its' the case that He could break the law, but won't. So if God made these laws, was there a temporal construct of a time when He made them? Was there a time before God made the laws on himself that He could? If there wasn't a time before, and it always was the case and God has always been this way, then would that not imply that God's himself was predetermined by some outside force? If there is no outside force acting on God, God predetermined Himself, and God imposes these laws upon Himself, then is there a functional difference between the definitions of can't do and won't do in the context of God ? Theology, as a logic tradition, can actually be quite a fun exercise. It's a shame PR's have made it so gravely serious and authoritarian. It's also really funny too when Andy Lanning is like "God was being sarcastic and ironic in Genesis 3". Well, if God can be sarcastic and ironic and His words can mean the exact opposite of what they are conveying, then how can we know that any of the Bible is not just God being sarcastic and ironic, things which He is clearly capable of doing? What if we're doing everything wrong because our fallen natures are interpreting the Bible incorrectly, and we're taking something literally that God said ironically? And if you're saying it's true because the Bible says God is non-contradiction , then how do we know that to be true? What if God is totally able to contradict himself and was just being ironic when he said that? What if God can contradict Himself and He can change His mind Throw in some proof texts of God's behavior from the whole Abraham/Isaac sacrifice thing, throw in that time the Bible literally says that God changed His mind in Exodus 32:11-14, and boom, you got yourself a full-on theological crisis.
|
|
|
Post by questioneverything on Oct 4, 2022 19:07:45 GMT
2. Having the whole of Israel march around Jericho (the city did not even cover the area of a square mile) was not absurd because everyone died when they wandered the wilderness for 40 years and they didn't reproduce like normal during that time I guess. www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2026&version=NIVThere's two censuses in Numbers, one shortly after the exodus and one here shortly before the invasion and I think after battling Amalek and suffering some plagues from God (snakes and quail meat). The census is of men over 20, and there are 601,730. I think the other census had 600k men "of fighting age". Someone can fact-check me. Either way the second census would suggest Israel was, I don't know, 1.6 million to 2 million strong? Interesting to note that Egypt circa somewhere 1500-1200 or so BC had about 3 million people total. My source is The Atheist Handbook to the Old Testament, Vol. 2, but I only have it in audio right now so I'm going from memory. Yeah, the numbers. People read about Exodus, the crossing of the Red Sea, as if they're, the Israelites, some kind of camp. Remember too all the livestock, equipment, etc. If you believe this story, which I don't, it wasn't a camp, it was a city. Imagine the whole city of Boston crossing the Boston Main Channel at night, all on foot, young, old, animals, and possessions and completing it in one night. It takes days to evacuate a city with vehicles, let alone on foot. But... MY God can do anything.
|
|
|
Post by throwaway2018 on Oct 4, 2022 19:35:05 GMT
What makes me sad about all these rationalizations and word games is that it conceals the actually interesting parts of these stories. When you're not caught up reading the Bible as if it's an infallible history textbook, you can have discussions on why the authors chose to write what they did.
For example, why was the number of men in Israel during the exodus 600,000? Is the translation accurate? Did that number carry meaning to the ancient Jews? To the ancient Jews, was that number meant to imply that their huge population was enslaved by a smaller population of Egyptians, or was this a reasonable number of people to have enslaved? Was the number perceived as symbolic or literal, or did they not really care about the number at all?
Depending on the interpretation of that single number, you could have a story where a powerful, more numerous Jewish population was held captive because they didn't believe enough in their own power or God, or you could have a story where God miraculously delivered a fledgling group of his people from an incredibly powerful foe. There are tons of other ways you could interpret that number and its meaning.
Having open discussion about these stories and what meanings we can ascribe to them is infinitely more powerful and interesting than the literal interpretation that allows for no debate.
|
|