Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If someone points out errors or contradictions in scripture in what the Fundamentalists’ tell us is “God breathed” and so is without error,the fundamentalist’s first defense is to claim that the “original autographs” were correct but copyists introduced errors.
Since no original autograph survives, it would seem that someone can’t disprove this claim. But can they? If there are contradictions in today’s scripture, a conclusion then may be that all scriptures are suspect of possible error and, hence, are not completely reliable.
Moreover, trying to explain away a seeming contradiction might disclose yet a larger contradiction.
For example. Mark, Luke, and John have Jesus sending for and riding only one animal (it) when entering Jerusalem. Matthew claims two animals (them), a contradiction in supposedly “inerrant” scripture.
Matthew 21 (NRSV) “When they had come near Jerusalem and had reached Bethphage, at the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two disciples, 2 saying to them, “Go into the village ahead of you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her; untie them and bring them to me. 3 If anyone says anything to you, just say this, ‘The Lord needs them.’ And he will send them immediately.[a]”
6 The disciples went and did as Jesus had directed them; 7 they brought the donkey and the colt, and put their cloaks on them, and he sat on them. 8 A very large crowd[b] spread their cloaks on the road, and others cut branches from the trees and spread them on the road. 9 The crowds that went ahead of him and that followed were shouting,
“Hosanna to the Son of David!
Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord!
Hosanna in the highest heaven!”
So the Fundamentalist has to argue that “them” is singular.
But they are overlooking the rest of the prophecy.
4 This took place to fulfill what had been spoken through the prophet, saying,
5 “Tell the daughter of Zion,
Look, your king is coming to you,
humble, andmounted on a donkey,
and on a colt, the foal of a donkey.” Thus two animals!
If there is only one animal as Mark, Luke, and John claim- reference is always to “it” not “them” - then Matthew's
biblical account is in error, and Jesus did not fulfill this prophecy
Comments?
Mark, Luke and John are only addressing the the prophecy. It is unlikey the apostles would take the colt and not also take its mother. There were 2 animals, but it is absurd to thank those passages imply Jesus sat on both of them.
Is that the only biblical contradiction we should be reviewing? How many animals in a passing situation? Nothing more important, more fundamental to take under consideration?
Post your favorite supposed contradiction. Maybe it is also just not understanding the context.
The fundamentalist Ploy is that the scriptures are infallible. Claiming that the scriptures have errors that need to be corrected is the opposite of fundamentalism. You should be encouraging people to accept the possibility that the scriptures have errors
That is a common claim they fundamental secularists, but so far it comes from a lack of understanding the passages they use.
Mark, Luke and John are only addressing the the prophecy. It is unlikey the apostles would take the colt and not also take its mother. There were 2 animals, but it is absurd to thank those passages imply Jesus sat on both of them.
RESPONSE: That Jesus sat on them both is what the words say and what Matthew's OT prophecy clearly claims. Still, I agree that it is absurd but it's "God breathed".
Lots of scripture is "absurd."
Matthew 21 (NRSV)
6 The disciples went and did as Jesus had directed them; 7 they brought the donkey and the colt, and put their cloaks on them, and he sat on them.
4 This took place to fulfill what had been spoken through the prophet, saying,
5 “Tell the daughter of Zion,
Look, your king is coming to you,
humble, and mounted on a donkey,
and on a colt, the foal of a donkey.”
NOTE ESPECIALLY "mounted on a donkey, andon a colt, the foal of a donkey.”
Last edited by Aristotles child; 01-16-2018 at 07:20 AM..
If someone points out errors or contradictions in scripture in what the Fundamentalists’ tell us is “God breathed” and so is without error,the fundamentalist’s first defense is to claim that the “original autographs” were correct but copyists introduced errors.
Since no original autograph survives, it would seem that someone can’t disprove this claim. But can they? If there are contradictions in today’s scripture, a conclusion then may be that all scriptures are suspect of possible error and, hence, are not completely reliable.
While this is absolutely true, I see no reason to throw out the baby with the bath water. I think we can find a lot of genuine wisdom in the scriptures. We just need to know how to use our brains and be willing to acknowledge that however "God breathed" the original documents may have been, their message is not to be obeyed blindly.
Modern information theory, which is applied routinely in the error detection and correction techniques used in electronic data transmission, can be applied to the idea of inerrancy in the information conveyed by the scriptures.
The Bible, by its own witness, consists of an ensemble of messsages emitted by its originator, God, into the noisy channel of human history. Clearly, its divine Originator knew the character and magnitude of the noise in the channel of transmission when He composed the messages in the ensemble. Equally clearly, He would have no difficulty encoding the information in this ensemble of messages in such a way that it could be inerrantly received by every intended recipient, in spite of the effects of the noise upon its individual message elements-that is, in spite of scribal errors, editorial or redactional emendations, or by any other occurrences that would cause the text viewed by the recipient to differ in some ways from the text originally committed to the channel of transmission
Assume that the goal is to transmit the four-digit message "1234". First the digits of the message are arranged in a rectangular pattern:
12
34
Each column and row is summed up separately:
123
347
46
The eight-digit sequence "12334746" is the message that is actually transmitted. If any single error occurs during transmission then this error can not only be detected but can also be corrected as well. Let us suppose that the received message contained an error in the first digit. The receiver rearranges the message into the grid:
923
347
46
The receiver can see that the first row and also the first column add up incorrectly. Using this knowledge and the assumption that only one error occurred, the receiver can correct the error. In order to handle two errors, a 4-dimensional scheme would be required
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Riding two animals
rather than trying to avoid what they clearly say.
