The Political Thread - Browncoat edition... down with the Alliance!

[Chilloutman]

Pidesco pretty much answered for me

[SonicMage117]

Of course, one has to understand that when Jesus was crucified, things changed. Alot of things became opposite. That should have been expected as a prophecy would be fufilled. That's probably why the old testemant is separated from the new as well.

 

Here, this explains what I'm trying to say better than I can:

Isn’t the Bible Full of Contradictions?It is truly amazing how often this question is asked. This question contains the assumption that the Bible is filled with many obvious discrepancies which, if true, would make it impossible to believe that the Bible has a divine origin. It is a popular idea to maintain that the Bible disagrees with itself, which casts considerable doubt on its trustworthiness.

 

If, indeed, the Bible does contain demonstrable errors, it would show that at least those parts could not have come from a perfect, all-knowing God. We do not argue with this conclusion, but we do disagree with the initial premise that the Scriptures are full of mistakes. It is very easy to accuse the Bible of inaccuracies, but it is quite another matter to prove it.

 

Certain passages at first glance appear to be contradictory, but further investigation will show that this is not the case.

 

One of the things for which we appeal with regard to possible contradictions is fairness. We should not minimize or exaggerate the problem, and we must always begin by giving the author the benefit of the doubt. This is the rule in other literature, and we ask that it also be the rule here. We find so often that people want to employ a different set of rules when it comes to examining the Bible, and to this we immediately object.

 

What constitutes a contradiction? The law of non-contradiction, which is the basis of all logical thinking, states that a thing cannot be both a and non-a at the same time. In other words, it cannot be both raining and not raining at the same time.

^My Google grab for the night from some former atheist site.

[Guard Dog]

Somehow I don't think God spends a lot of time brooding over offenses from the likes of us. But, as I've said before, my Christianity is liberally sprinkled with a helping of Deism. God creates the "system" so to speak and gives us a set of guidelines. They are few and simple in practice.  Jesus reinforced and clarified those guidelines. Now it is up to us to follow them or don't. What happens to those who don't? I don't know. It's not for me to pass judgement on anyone for anything. I am as flawed as anyone and likely more than most. I figure God is far more qualified for that than I am. But don't presume to know what He's going to say. He may be far less judgmental about things than you'd believe. 

 

The "few and simple guidelines"  have been made something that is neither few nor simple by people who appointed themselves God's messengers. The word of God (as written and interpreted by humans) has been used as a club to ensure obedience to the state, church, society (through enforcing cultural norms etc). People are told that doing, thinking, saying other is a sin and earns the wrath of God. Maybe it does but to get there you have to believe that people who usually have exempted themselves from God's rules actually speak for God. Seem like a stretch. 

 

Accept for a moment the premise that the 10 Commandments came straight to us from Him. Don't kill, lie, steal, or be envious. Don't worship idols. Love your family. Don't cheat on your spouse. Don't tell everyone "God commanded me to tell you this or to do that". Pretty simple right? Most of us are doing all that every day. You could sum it up in one sentence "don't be an a-----e." In fact Jesus did sum it up in one sentence. "Love one another as I have loved you". There are a lot of people in the world today following Christ's example without even calling themselves Christians. So what would make God happier? The self described Christian who does not follow that one simple rule or the person who follows a different faith, or none, that does? I suspect I know the answer but I can't speak for God. 

 

And for what it's worth I wouldn't call him an anarchist either. "Render unto Caesar those things that are Caesar's and unto God those things that are His" 

Edited February 19, 2019 by Guard Dog

[Pidesco]

Of course, one has to understand that when Jesus was crucified, things changed. Alot of things became opposite. That should have been expected as a prophecy would be fufilled. That's probably why the old testemant is separated from the new as well.

 

Here, this explains what I'm trying to say better than I can:

Isn’t the Bible Full of Contradictions?It is truly amazing how often this question is asked. This question contains the assumption that the Bible is filled with many obvious discrepancies which, if true, would make it impossible to believe that the Bible has a divine origin. It is a popular idea to maintain that the Bible disagrees with itself, which casts considerable doubt on its trustworthiness.

 

If, indeed, the Bible does contain demonstrable errors, it would show that at least those parts could not have come from a perfect, all-knowing God. We do not argue with this conclusion, but we do disagree with the initial premise that the Scriptures are full of mistakes. It is very easy to accuse the Bible of inaccuracies, but it is quite another matter to prove it.

 

Certain passages at first glance appear to be contradictory, but further investigation will show that this is not the case.

 

One of the things for which we appeal with regard to possible contradictions is fairness. We should not minimize or exaggerate the problem, and we must always begin by giving the author the benefit of the doubt. This is the rule in other literature, and we ask that it also be the rule here. We find so often that people want to employ a different set of rules when it comes to examining the Bible, and to this we immediately object.

 

What constitutes a contradiction? The law of non-contradiction, which is the basis of all logical thinking, states that a thing cannot be both a and non-a at the same time. In other words, it cannot be both raining and not raining at the same time.

^My Google grab for the night from some former atheist site.

 

 

After applying some zoom to that passage, it appears that it says nothing at all.

 

Here ya go, in any case.

 

In Matthew 27:3-8, Judas returns the bribe Christians believe he had immorally accepted for handing over Jesus, throwing the money into the temple before hanging himself. The temple priests, unwilling to return the defiled money to the treasury,^[107] used it instead to buy a field known as the Potter's Field, as a plot in which to bury strangers. In Acts 1:18, on the other hand, Judas, having not committed suicide out of guilt, used the bribe money to buy the field himself, and his death in the field is attributed thus: "falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his intestines gushed out."

Raymond E. Brown points to the obvious contradiction: "Luke's account of the death of Judas in Acts 1:18 is scarcely reconcilable with Matt 27:3-10."^[108]Harmonization of the two accounts has been tried since ancient times^[109] and occasionally still today.^[110] However, modern scholars tend to find these unconvincing,^[111] pointing out, for instance, the absence of any indication of suicide in the story in Acts.^[112]

 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_consistency_of_the_Bible

[Chilloutman]

edit:

 

wrong quote nvm

Edited February 19, 2019 by Chilloutman

[SonicMage117]

Sorry guys, I'm using small size to save space on thread Here is something you may like - up to you if you choose to believe it or not.

Some people have wrongly assumed that Matthew and Luke (the author of Acts) are contradictory in their account of Judas’ death. Since the Bible is inerrant Judas cannot have died by hanging and died by falling and bursting open. Rather they are two different viewpoints of the same event. For example, if I saw a car hit a pedestrian, I might simply say that the pedestrian died because they were hit by the car. The coroner who came on the scene later but did not actually see the accident might give a graphic description of the injuries to the pedestrian. Both the coroner and I are describing the same event just different aspects of it.

Here is the interestimg part though...or at least to me. Warning, it's about to get bloody!

Matthew tells us that Judas died by hanging (death is inferred from the passage). Luke, being a doctor, gives us a graphic description of what occurred following the hanging. The reason for ordering the events as such is twofold. First, if someone has fallen and their internal organs spilled out they would die and so could not subsequently die from hanging. Secondly, even when people suffer bad falls they do not usually burst open and have their internal organs spill out. The skin is very tough and even when cut in the abdominal area their internals do not usually spill out. Thus, it is unlikely that Judas could die in this manner merely from falling.

What is the thrilling conclusion of the article? Is there some science to the Bible??

Gruesome as it is, Judas’ dead body hung in the hot sun of Jerusalem, and the bacteria inside his body would have been actively breaking down tissues and cells. A byproduct of bacterial metabolism is often gas. The pressure created by the gas forces fluid out of the cells and tissues and into the body cavities. The body becomes bloated as a result. In addition, tissue decomposition occurs compromising the integrity of the skin. Judas’ body was similar to an overinflated balloon, and as he hit the ground (due to the branch he hung on or the rope itself breaking) the skin easily broke and he burst open with his internal organs spilling out.

 

There is no contradiction surrounding Judas’ death; rather, merely two descriptions given by two different authors of the same event.

I find this reminds me of a police interrogation works - I don't know why, but I do know that in police interrogations, if they're to question 2 or more individuals and the story is the same then it means the individuals pre-meditated or planned for everything to be the same but if the stories don't match then the police deem it as more believable (we've all heard of this). Why is it so? I can only assume it's like as the article states - two different viewpoints from very different individuals with different backgrounds.

 

Apology again for smallest font.

[Pidesco]

So Judas died from hanging and fell headlong from that hanging position. That's some impressive gymnastics, especially coming from a dead man.

 

Or perhaps it's the mental gymnastics that are impressive. Also, that doesn't address in any way the money issue.

[SonicMage117]

Tbh, we've seen stranger gymnastics in deaths on 1,000 Ways To Die though, and even more imprssive mental gymnastics in "proven" science in things such as carbon dating (the facts change and are constantly updated based on progression in technology).

Edited February 19, 2019 by SonicMage117

[Malcador]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/18/world/americas/venezuela-guaido-maduro-trump.html

 

Odd timing for all that aid, really.

[Guard Dog]

One thought on the gospels. Of all the disciples only Matthew and Luke were educated men and likely the only literate members. That means those two were likely to have written their own accounting. But no other writing of Matthew is known to have survived. Luke however is a contributor to several books of the New Testament so his gospel is the one best taken as the first hand eyewitness accounting of the life of Jesus. All four books are very similar with the differences being ones of perspective. But the accounting of Luke for certain and Matthew probably are the only worked written by the men who witnessed them. I don't know if that lends them more credibility in anyone's eyes or not. I don't need to know the bible is 100% true for me to accept the truth in it. If fact I'm quite certain it's not 100% true. But that changes nothing about the things I've come to believe. 

 

As an aside I read a pretty interesting book about this not too long ago. It took a little bit to get into but once I did it was intriguing. I posted about it in the books thread. The one thing I can tell you is Jesus of Nazareth was a real man. Whether he was more than that is a decision you have to make for yourself. And you don't need to believe he was God made flesh to find in him a worthy example to follow. I think it's more important that Jesus believes in you than for you to believe in Him.

 

Just my $.02

Edited February 19, 2019 by Guard Dog

[majestic]

and even more imprssive mental gymnastics in "proven" science in things such as carbon dating (the facts change and are constantly updated based on progression in technology).

 

...and the earth is flat, right?

[SonicMage117]

 

and even more imprssive mental gymnastics in "proven" science in things such as carbon dating (the facts change and are constantly updated based on progression in technology).

...and the earth is flat, right?

Wjatever you want to believe, I'll always believe the earth is round but WHAT IF some scientific evidence suggested that the earth is flat and gravitational pull bith allowed us and tricked us into thinking the earth was round. That would be something, wouldn't it? Edited February 19, 2019 by SonicMage117

[majestic]

 

 

and even more imprssive mental gymnastics in "proven" science in things such as carbon dating (the facts change and are constantly updated based on progression in technology).

...and the earth is flat, right?

Oh you're one of those flat earthers? Strange, I've never met one.

 

There are only two types of people who believe carbon dating is mental gymnastics: Young earth creationists and flat earthers.

 

So, which one are you?

[SonicMage117]

 

 

 

and even more imprssive mental gymnastics in "proven" science in things such as carbon dating (the facts change and are constantly updated based on progression in technology).

...and the earth is flat, right?

Oh you're one of those flat earthers? Strange, I've never met one.

There are only two types of people who believe carbon dating is mental gymnastics: Young earth creationists and flat earthers.

 

So, which one are you?

Oh, I like you!

 

 

Tbh, I lean more toward young earth creationist. I feel like the more scientific data we get, the more younger the earth gets.

Edited February 19, 2019 by SonicMage117

[HoonDing]

Trump is a flat earther.

[ShadySands]

[Zoraptor]

So Judas died from hanging and fell headlong from that hanging position. That's some impressive gymnastics, especially coming from a dead man.

 

Yeah, the maximum stress on a rope or bough would be at time of hanging, if it doesn't break then it will hold indefinitely. Guess 'God' could have done it, but if you use supernatural entities as an explanation you can explain anything.

 

What happened to Judas afterwards is a product of the bible being written by men. Matthew's version is a good story that has the traitor dying in a proscribed manner by killing himself, compounding his 'badness' and even if he regretted the betrayal. Frankly, Luke's account implies revenge murder, "he fell down and randomly scattered his internal organs around the immediate vicinity." isn't exactly convincing compared to "someone was angry with his betrayal and killed him in a particularly unpleasant way, at the place he bought with his blood money as reinforcement". That isn't a great story to use as a foundation for christianity though.

[Chilloutman]

Dinosaurs didn't existed, it were all dragons slayed by blond princes in process rescuing fair maidens

Edited February 19, 2019 by Chilloutman

[SonicMage117]

[ShadySands]

You may soon have to give your DNA to the state and pay $250 for the privilege in AZ Edited February 19, 2019 by ShadySands

[Guard Dog]

You may soon have to give your DNA to the state and pay $250 for the privilege in AZ

They can just come and take it from my corpse. 

[ShadySands]

Bernie announced for 2020 too. I was kinda hoping that he wouldn't, him and Biden.

[Guard Dog]

The Democrats are facing the same problem the Republicans faced in 16. Too many contenders dividing the support base. By the time the field was winnowed down in 16 the least desirable candidate had an insurmountable lead. Only undesirable candidates CAN win a race like that. Now the real questions is which one is the least desirable. That's like picking the smelliest turd. 

[Bartimaeus]

Bernie announced for 2020 too. I was kinda hoping that he wouldn't, him and Biden.

 

Any particular reason why? I'm currently unsure of how to feel about him as a 2020 candidate, but I'm thinking I still like him better than the likes of Klobuchar.

[Guard Dog]

 

Bernie announced for 2020 too. I was kinda hoping that he wouldn't, him and Biden.

 

Any particular reason why? I'm currently unsure of how to feel about him as a 2020 candidate, but I'm thinking I still like him better than the likes of Klobuchar.

 

Why? Unless the Democrats suddenly get a super majority in both houses of Congress and he has Alito, Thomas, Goresuch and Kavanaugh assassinated he won't get even a quarter of his wants. And even if all those things happen and he gets everything he wants the economy would collapse.  I'm telling you I don't see an upside here.