Apologetics

Bandit

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,172
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I am putting this up not so much to discuss a lot, but rather for those who feel they might need it. I personally feel there is no need for apologetics on alleged discrepancies. Some feel the need and I am thankful for the ones who take the time to do it. I have not looked at all of them listed. Out of the five I did review they came very close to the same way I would explain some of them.



Have a look if you want and see if you like it.:)

http://www.apologeticspress.org/modules.php?name=Read&cat=2
 
robocombot said:
The Bible will be around long after the theories Apolgetics try to defend against.
You may be right...I think a copy of the Bible is on Voyager II (which left the solar system about a year ago) :D

v/r

Q
 
With all due respect to the link, I looked at those questions and they aren't the issues or questions that have been brought to my attention. In my opinion those questions on the link are light weight, pardon my harshness but they don't come close to the real questions being asked about the bible that many don't have answers for.

translation errors, inconsistancy in gospel accounts, contradictions in statements made by apostles, disciples, high priests, and possibly even Jesus himself, dates, passover feast( Jewish law and history states it would have been unheard of for a court hearing to take place at night as is sited in gospels of Matthew and Mark, Luke said it occured in the morning, John has it 24 hours earlier) Roman custom was to give a proper trial, Jesus only received a hearing. These are among countless debates raised.

You may read this and think I'm a blasphemer or whatever you want to say but I have only read and looked for myself at these issues and can't justify them. I still believe in Christ and the miracles and the salvation he brought but I do acknowledge serious problems of accuracy in the Bible.
 
didymus said:
With all due respect to the link, I looked at those questions and they aren't the issues or questions that have been brought to my attention. In my opinion those questions on the link are light weight, pardon my harshness but they don't come close to the real questions being asked about the bible that many don't have answers for.

translation errors, inconsistancy in gospel accounts, contradictions in statements made by apostles, disciples, high priests, and possibly even Jesus himself, dates, passover feast( Jewish law and history states it would have been unheard of for a court hearing to take place at night as is sited in gospels of Matthew and Mark, Luke said it occured in the morning, John has it 24 hours earlier) Roman custom was to give a proper trial, Jesus only received a hearing. These are among countless debates raised.

You may read this and think I'm a blasphemer or whatever you want to say but I have only read and looked for myself at these issues and can't justify them. I still believe in Christ and the miracles and the salvation he brought but I do acknowledge serious problems of accuracy in the Bible.
No, I don't see blasphemy here. But I do not see inaccuracy of the Bible either. I see a lot of misunderstandings, but no strike against God.

Jesus was not tried by a Roman court. He never set foot in a Roman court. He was tried in a courtyard, before a Roman appointed governor (for lack of a better term), afraid of the rage of a Jewish mob. Easy conviction. Rome did not want the Jews to lose it.

Stuff to think about.

v/r

Q
 
didymus said:
With all due respect to the link, I looked at those questions and they aren't the issues or questions that have been brought to my attention. In my opinion those questions on the link are light weight, pardon my harshness but they don't come close to the real questions being asked about the bible that many don't have answers for.

translation errors, inconsistancy in gospel accounts, contradictions in statements made by apostles, disciples, high priests, and possibly even Jesus himself, dates, passover feast( Jewish law and history states it would have been unheard of for a court hearing to take place at night as is sited in gospels of Matthew and Mark, Luke said it occured in the morning, John has it 24 hours earlier) Roman custom was to give a proper trial, Jesus only received a hearing. These are among countless debates raised.

You may read this and think I'm a blasphemer or whatever you want to say but I have only read and looked for myself at these issues and can't justify them. I still believe in Christ and the miracles and the salvation he brought but I do acknowledge serious problems of accuracy in the Bible.
There is a human aspect to the Bible.
Where where you 12 yrs ago on april 15 between the hours of 8pm and 11pm.

If I were not righting history the minute it happened I would not be good with dates and times to an exact point.
None of these men where historians they where fishermen tax collectors and who knows what else.
The point is to look for harmony not divsion these are not court records but the life and love stories of men just like you. Now we can pick them apart like a lawyer wanting to get the defendant off on the murder charge or we can look at the slight differences as the beauty of regular men telling as best and the way each as an individual saw it and remembered it.
You will also find that the same type date and time problems exist in Chronicles and Kings. Doesnt make them a lie.
 
I'm glad you brought up the strike against God. This is true there is absolutely no strike against God whatsover, or Jesus Christ. None of the inaccuracies change my opinion about God, God is God and can not be contained in a book. The only strike is against mankind.
 
Basstian, i agree with you for the most part. But the inaccuracies we are discussing here are enormous since what they claim to support is the difference between one's eternity in hell or heaven. When it come to a subject as delicate as that you'd better have the facts straight.
 
Think they all pretty much walked away from the cross feeling the same so I dont see the need to defend or apoligize based on heaven or hell issues I dont see them going that deep when the best thing in life is free and simple.
 
didymus said:
With all due respect to the link, I looked at those questions and they aren't the issues or questions that have been brought to my attention. In my opinion those questions on the link are light weight, pardon my harshness but they don't come close to the real questions being asked about the bible that many don't have answers for.

translation errors, inconsistancy in gospel accounts, contradictions in statements made by apostles, disciples, high priests, and possibly even Jesus himself, dates, passover feast( Jewish law and history states it would have been unheard of for a court hearing to take place at night as is sited in gospels of Matthew and Mark, Luke said it occured in the morning, John has it 24 hours earlier) Roman custom was to give a proper trial, Jesus only received a hearing. These are among countless debates raised.

You may read this and think I'm a blasphemer or whatever you want to say but I have only read and looked for myself at these issues and can't justify them. I still believe in Christ and the miracles and the salvation he brought but I do acknowledge serious problems of accuracy in the Bible.
so.
dont read it
 
You're right God is free. A freedom without limits or boundries. As far as the east is from the west.
 
Fine, Why don't both of you present your cases, and let the rest of us consider the merits of both (If i'd have said judge, i would have been hung...)
v/r

Q
 
I will present my case if we can have some order to it, such as one issue at a time. There are alot.
 
didymus said:
I will present my case if we can have some order to it, such as one issue at a time. There are alot.
Fair enough, one item at a time.

Didymus, why don't you begin.

v/r

Q
 
I feel a little hesitant doing this because my desire is not to plant doubt in people's mind nor do i want to harm anyone's faith. These questions that I pose are ones I came across while being an active christian. I didn't set out to disprove the bible. When I first stumbled across these things it was extremely hard for me to look at objectively. I had to go to the very core of my soul and my conscience to look at it from there. I am still sorting some of it out, some is plain to see.

I'll start with Jesus' baptism. I'll assume everyone has a bible so I won't quote the verses. I am using an NIV Zondervan Study Bible.

Matthew 3:13 -17
Mark 1:9-11
Luke 3:21-22
In all the above passages it states Jesus was baptized by John with other people present. A dove appeared over head and God was heard from above as saying that this was his son with whom he was well pleased.
Later John the Baptist while in prison sends out his disciples to ask Jesus if he was the one or should he wait for another. Luke 7:18-20, MATTHEW 11: 1- 3
My question is that if John knew of Jesus' mission which was implied when he said one would come of whom he wasn't worthy to carry his sandals why did he question Jesus? John was there supposedly when Jesus was baptized, did John not see the dove appear over Jesus' head, did he not hear the voice of God from above? If so he wouldn't have sent out the disciples to ask Jesus.

Now we go to John( written much later than Matthew, Mark and Luke)
John 1: 29-34

Where did this come from, all of a sudden a testimony pops up from John the Baptist. John died before Jesus did, this is totally out of line with the other gospel accounts. Here John claims he saw the dove and heard God tell him that Jesus was the one. Why in the other gospels is he sending people out to ask Jesus if he was is the one?
 
didymus said:
I feel a little hesitant doing this because my desire is not to plant doubt in people's mind nor do i want to harm anyone's faith. These questions that I pose are ones I came across while being an active christian. I didn't set out to disprove the bible. When I first stumbled across these things it was extremely hard for me to look at objectively. I had to go to the very core of my soul and my conscience to look at it from there. I am still sorting some of it out, some is plain to see.

I'll start with Jesus' baptism. I'll assume everyone has a bible so I won't quote the verses. I am using an NIV Zondervan Study Bible.

Matthew 3:13 -17
Mark 1:9-11
Luke 3:21-22
In all the above passages it states Jesus was baptized by John with other people present. A dove appeared over head and God was heard from above as saying that this was his son with whom he was well pleased.
Later John the Baptist while in prison sends out his disciples to ask Jesus if he was the one or should he wait for another. Luke 7:18-20, MATTHEW 11: 1- 3
My question is that if John knew of Jesus' mission which was implied when he said one would come of whom he wasn't worthy to carry his sandals why did he question Jesus? John was there supposedly when Jesus was baptized, did John not see the dove appear over Jesus' head, did he not hear the voice of God from above? If so he wouldn't have sent out the disciples to ask Jesus.

Now we go to John( written much later than Matthew, Mark and Luke)
John 1: 29-34

Where did this come from, all of a sudden a testimony pops up from John the Baptist. John died before Jesus did, this is totally out of line with the other gospel accounts. Here John claims he saw the dove and heard God tell him that Jesus was the one. Why in the other gospels is he sending people out to ask Jesus if he was is the one?
Interesting thought here. My opinion is that John (being human), had a moment of doubt. Here he was in prison (about to be killed), and was afraid, that he missed to boat. I think John was much more afraid of failure than he was of losing his life. But that is my opinion.

v/r

Q
 
No offence but I disagree with that. In his testimony in the gospel of John he clearly states that Jesus was the one before he baptizes him then he confirms the dove and voice of God. I believe that the accounts in Matthew, Luke and Mark are more accurate descriptions of what may have happened.
John didn't know if Jesus was the expected messiah or not, he didn't announce to all before the baptism that Jesus was the lamb of God and didn't see a dove or hear God's voice. The material in gospel of John was clearly put in years later to support arguments against Jesus as the messiah. As I said before all the gospel reports of this can not be true. If John is true then Matthew Mark and Luke are not. If Matthew mark and Luke are accurate then John is out. There isn't much middle ground here that I can see.
 
Another thing I forgot to say. Where did the testimony of John come from? Don't you find it odd that John's testimony of Jesus surfaces 70 years after Jesus' death? Why wasn't this put in the other gospels? It just doesn't add up.
 
This really comes down on what you choose to believe.
We have a very clear view even today of what the Jews expected the messiah to do. Jesus doesnt fill the bill to them thus they dont accept him as the messiah. They even before Jesus had hoped in others I believe even John was mistaken for a possible messiah. I think it very possible that John could have fallen into the "The Messiah Will Set Up His Kingdom" and in prison facing death not seeing Jesus on a throne doubted even the things he saw and said.
I too have done this same thing doubted what God has done for me what he has showed me and even how he has saved me. I would more than understand why John could have done the same.

When D are you going to write your life story as it happens or when you have time to really sit and reflect on what has transpired as a whole.
I am just glad it was written reading John blesses me each and every time.
 
Basstian, I respect your belief, however, I really can't see it that way. Sure doubt is a powerful thing but in this case, with such an overt manifestation of God(as is depicted in the gospel) any traces of doubt would be crushed.
 
Back
Top