Response to Dr Laura on homosexuality

last SG · 2008-01-27T13:33:29+00:00

Going by googoomuck reading ability, I can deduced who is the first witness to jesus resurrectionYes it is trueIt is the Flying Spaghetti Monster !!! (to man...

Icemoon SG

Yup, in fact God did reveal to His people via the prophets that sacrifices are substituted with prayers. And this is not part of a contingency plan in case the Temple is no longer standing. It is a shift in emphasis.

So the Jews have no problems with a non standing Temple. The solution is spelt out in the Hebrew Bible, long before we have those Orthodox Jewish folks. Wink

Icemoon SG

what are the questions? I see if I can rebutt.

googoomuck SG

The way you expect everything to have a proper explanation, even you cannot be satisfy yourself to the very end of the age. And where did you learn that everything must be logical? Never heard of unexplained phenomenon?

At least the Christian theologians made no attempt to bluff to cover up the inconsistencies of the gospels.

Tell me how to find witnesses for history that's a few thousand years old? Thats also a logical question.

If you can answer the question, I will reconcile the discrepancies and inconsistencies in the books.

stupidissmart SG

what are the questions? I see if I can rebutt.

Christians r not free to break all the OT rules. U know tis topic has really no clear cut answer. Jesus contradicts himself some times, Paul also contradicts himself on occasions, saints argued over it, denomination split by it and scholars debate over it. It really depend on wat section u wanna focus on in the bible. One part contradicts the other. So giving a broad answer tat "OT rules r only applicable to jews" is not scriptually true. If u can give a satisfactory answer to tis, then scholars wouldn't argue over it even now.

Not really. Sometimes people make me stumbled over logical arguments and I keep quiet after tat. I am not difficult to be satisfied.

Does everything have to be logical ? If u ask me, yes. Unexplained phenomenon doesn't means it is logically wrong, but just means there r unknown. But the things we know shouldn't be logically wrong.

For example in the bible, I did not ask why fire can drop from the sky or why god can seperate the red sea. Tis r unexplained phenomenon and I treat tat if god exists, then it is easy for him to do tat. However parts like OT contradicts NT, certain part of the bible cannot be right because it violates science etc r logical errors.

It is like saying he is so fat he cannot pass through a 10X10 meter doorway yet thin enough to go through the 2mmX2mm eye of a needle. The first part contradict the second and it is logically wrong. People can believe on the first part more and sat tis guy is fat. Some people focus on the second part more and say tis guy is thin. They can argue forever and no one know wat is really the case. Tis is because something is wrong with the statement.

At least the Christian theologians made no attempt to bluff to cover up the inconsistencies of the gospels.

Tat is true. But tat meant tat certain interpretation and sections r wrong. Tat means u can believe in the wrong things now. tat also mean the bible is not really guided completely by divine powers because there r errors in it.

U know how police tell if a witness is lying or not ? A peson can tell many stories but if he
1) contradict himself
2) defies facts and evidence
then obviously the police can know he is lying

Tell me how to find witnesses for history that's a few thousand years old? Thats also a logical question.

It is not about finding witnesses, but the stories between different eye witness giving true accounts shouldn't contradict one another. It just give the impression tat either the eye witness r wrong or not telling true account.

googoomuck SG

Breaking News!

I've read and compared the end chapters of the four gospels according Matthew, Mark, John and Luke and found no inconsistency.

Magdalene was the first person to witness the resurrection.

caleb_chiang SG

Dr Laura is wrong in judging people using old testament. Wink

Phaze SG

Well actually they did try to cover up the inconsistencies of the gospels - it's just that they did an incomplete job doing it.

Although of course, they didn't call it covering up the inconsistencies. They called it "identifying which books were divinely inspired." For the new testament, that wasn't completed until about the 4th century although different christian sects still use slightly different canon. Eg. The Catholic bible vs the protestant bible vs the book of mormon.

If you accept the Bible as a work of literature, there is no problem with inconsistencies - it's just a collection of books. If you take the stories in the bible as myth and legend, just as you would take Homer's Odessey, there's no problem with accepting the bible for what it is. The bible is not a book. It's a library or anthology. It's a collection of books from numerous authors and editors.

The problem is some people claim that it's the perfect, unchanging Word of God as is said in John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Phaze SG

Indeed, that is amazing news.

Could you explain why in Matthew 1:6-16 and Luke 3:23-31, the geneologies are different?

Even right from the beginning, the line is traced through Solomon in Matthew, and through Nathan in Luke.

Some have argued that the differences are because some of the lineage in Luke is traced through Mary - which still makes no sense because both geneologies still end with Joseph.

And for that matter, if Mary was a virgin, how can Jesus be a descendant of Joseph?

Jamie Zawinski SG

Well actually they did try to cover up the inconsistencies of the gospels - it's just that they did an incomplete job doing it.

The problem is some people claim that it's the perfect, unchanging Word of God as is said in John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

the compilation of the new testaments was done in AD500 by the Roman Church, and inconsistent (read undesirable) gospels were discarded.

the recent discovery of the dead sea scrolls and the gospel of judas tell a different story of what happened then.

googoomuck SG

Indeed, that is amazing news.

Could you explain why in Matthew 1:6-16 and Luke 3:23-31, the geneologies are different?

Even right from the beginning, the line is traced through Solomon in Matthew, and through Nathan in Luke.

Some have argued that the differences are because some of the lineage in Luke is traced through Mary - which still makes no sense because both geneologies still end with Joseph.

And for that matter, if Mary was a virgin, how can Jesus be a descendant of Joseph?

For me, there’s no significance in the genealogies of who…Joseph! For Believers, Jesus is Son of God.

The Baptism and Genealogy of Jesus

23. Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph

At least read Matthew from 1-24 to understand that Jesus is Son of God, not Joseph.

One contributor’s explanation below seems to reconcile the discrepancy. Matthew follows the natural line of descent, while Luke follows the legal line of descent.

Because of the Jewish Levirite laws, both are correct, but in different ways. In Jewish law, if a man died childless, his brother was to marry the widow, and the first son born would legally be the dead man's heir (Deuteronomy 25:5-6). In the story of Ruth, we see that this was not limited to brothers; the nearest male relative willing to take on the responsibility would marry the widow.

The logical (and traditional Roman Catholic and Orthodox) understanding is that Joseph's mother was originally the wife of Heli, but that he died without offspring. His kinsman Jacob then took the widow as his wife, and she bore Joseph. So, while "Jacob begat Joseph", legally Joseph was the son of Heli. Both were descendants of Zerubabel, and apparently Jacob was the nearest kinsman to Heli willing to fulfill the Levirite duty. Matthew follows the natural line of descent, while Luke follows the legal line of descent.

To summarise, Heli was the legal husband of Joseph’s mother. He died and Jacob took over the duty as husband and was the natural father of Joseph but legally, Heli was father of Joseph. That’s Levirite laws.

Complex relationship but intriguing.

stupidissmart SG

First thing I need to say...

I hate the new GUI for sgforum :(

Lets look at the 4 books again shall we and see wat happened on jesus resurrection day

Matthew 28

Summary:

1. 2 Mary go

2. Angel suddenly appeared, cause earthquake, talked to girls

3. Guards present

4. Suddenly jesus appeared and talk to girls. Girls tell disciples

5. Disciples all go to mountain and listen to jesus then

Mark 16

Summary:

1. 2 Mary and Salome go

2. Angel appeared, no earthquake and no guard. Angel talked to them

3. Suddenly say jesus appeared and drive out 7 demons from Mary.

4. Girls did not informed anyone

5. Mary told everyone and no one believed her

Luke 24

Summary:

1. 2 Mary and Joanna

2. Met 2 angles instead of 1. No guards.

3. Told disciples, No one believed.

4. Peter go and take a look

5. Jesus appeared to 2 guys first

John 20

Summary:

1. Mary Magdalene went alone

2. Cannot find jesus

3. Told disciples, all believed her

4. Peter come in first, found nothing then go back

5. Jesus then appeared to Mary Magdalene

Now come the question, who went together with mary to the tomb ? Wat happened ? In Matthew jesus appeared to both Mary. In Mark, Mary got possessed by devils and Jesus met her then. In John Mary was crying out tomb then see jesus. In Luke jesus appeared to 2 guys. SO wat really happened ? The story all contradict one another

laoda99 SG

I think, if the stories really contradict, then the person whom they meet will not be Jesus liao.

stupidissmart SG

If the story contradicts. Maybe there isn't jesus at all.

googoomuck SG

First thing I need to say...

I hate the new GUI for sgforum :(

Lets look at the 4 books again shall we and see wat happened on jesus resurrection day

Matthew 28

Summary:

1. 2 Mary go

2. Angel suddenly appeared, cause earthquake, talked to girls (Are you sure the angel caused an earthquake?)

3. Guards present

4. Suddenly jesus appeared and talk to girls. Girls tell disciples

5. Disciples all go to mountain and listen to jesus then

Mark 16

Summary:

1. 2 Mary and Salome go

2. Angel appeared, no earthquake and no guard. Angel talked to them (No mention of earthquake does not mean no earthquake. Similarly for guards.)

3. Suddenly say jesus appeared and drive out 7 demons from Mary.

4. Girls did not informed anyone(Your chronological order of this event is wrong. This should be above 3.)

5. Mary told everyone and no one believed her ( This confirmed Mag was first witness)

Luke 24

Summary:

1. 2 Mary and Joanna

2. Met 2 angles instead of 1. No guards. .( Not mentioned in the story does not mean there was no guard. The writer might have thought that it was irrelevant or that the witness had not mention it. Many possibilities)

3. Told disciples, No one believed..(this implies that Mag was first witness)

4. Peter go and take a look

5. Jesus appeared to 2 guys first(wrong assumption)

John 20

Summary:

1. Mary Magdalene went alone.( How do you know she went alone? It's not mentioned in the book.)

2. Cannot find jesus

3. Told disciples, all believed her(Mag told them what?)

4. Peter come in first, found nothing then go back

5. Jesus then appeared to Mary Magdalene

I’m not used to this this new format. Still exploring where and how to use the buttons. So, I use blue colour and bold for my reply.

You know what the problems are? Your theory of contradiction is base on speculation. There’s the convenience of the internet or books for your reference, yet you can get the chronological order of events wrong. You jump to wrong conclusion.

googoomuck SG

First thing I need to say...

I hate the new GUI for sgforum :(

Lets look at the 4 books again shall we and see wat happened on jesus resurrection day

Matthew 28

Summary:

1. 2 Mary go

2. Angel suddenly appeared, cause earthquake, talked to girls

3. Guards present

4. Suddenly jesus appeared and talk to girls. Girls tell disciples

5. Disciples all go to mountain and listen to jesus then

Mark 16

Summary:

1. 2 Mary and Salome go

2. Angel appeared, no earthquake and no guard. Angel talked to them

3. Suddenly say jesus appeared and drive out 7 demons from Mary.

4. Girls did not informed anyone

5. Mary told everyone and no one believed her

Luke 24

Summary:

1. 2 Mary and Joanna

2. Met 2 angles instead of 1. No guards.

3. Told disciples, No one believed.

4. Peter go and take a look

5. Jesus appeared to 2 guys first

John 20

Summary:

1. Mary Magdalene went alone

2. Cannot find jesus

3. Told disciples, all believed her

4. Peter come in first, found nothing then go back

5. Jesus then appeared to Mary Magdalene

Mark 16

Summary:

1. 2 Mary and Salome go

2. Angel appeared, no earthquake and no guard. Angel talked to them (No mention of earthquake does not mean no earthquake. Similarly for guards.)

3. Suddenly say jesus appeared and drive out 7 demons from Mary.

4. Girls did not informed anyone(Your chronological order of this event is wrong. This should be above 3.)

5. Mary told everyone and no one believed her ( This confirmed Mag was first witness)

Luke 24

Summary:

1. 2 Mary and Joanna

3. Told disciples, No one believed..(this implies that Mag was first witness)

4. Peter go and take a look

5. Jesus appeared to 2 guys first(wrong assumption)

John 20

Summary:

1. Mary Magdalene went alone.( How do you know she went alone? It's not mentioned in the book.)

2. Cannot find jesus

3. Told disciples, all believed her(Mag told them what?)

4. Peter come in first, found nothing then go back

5. Jesus then appeared to Mary Magdalene

I’m not used to this this new format. Still exploring where and how to use the buttons. So, I use blue colour for my reply.

stupidissmart SG

Chronological order ? I already clearly wrote "summary" at the tops of the chapter and I don't know tat summary need to follow chronological order. I just have to list down the points which I think is relevant to my argument and I did tat. From your reply, it is clear tat u have no answers to many of the points.

(No mention of earthquake does not mean no earthquake. Similarly for guards.)

If u felt tat absence is not equal to contradictions, for the benefit of the doubt I agree. But the number of angels seen r wrong in each book.

( This confirmed Mag was first witness)

Matthew states 3 witnesses instead of Mary alone, which u clearly left out in your reply. Luke 24 states the women see the angel and not Jesus. And then the 2 guys saw jesus tat same day, before telling to disciples which jesus then appeared. From tis account, the 2 guys r the first witnesses. For John account, it is clear tat Mary was alone. She go to tomb, saw the stone moved and told the people and all these actions no one is mentioned other than her. If u insist she is not alone, then okie lor. The other still contradict how many went to tomb in the first place anyway.

Let me tell u la... it is futile to argue over tis part of the scripture because it is a part which the catholic church had admitted they have no good chronological order or logic for it. Tat is why I mentioned tis. If u can solve all the loopholes, then u can try to apply to be a bible scholar or someone greater because they officially give up on tis.

googoomuck SG

(No mention of earthquake does not mean no earthquake. Similarly for guards.)

If u felt tat absence is not equal to contradictions, for the benefit of the doubt I agree. But the number of angels seen r wrong in each book.

( This confirmed Mag was first witness)

I tell you lah, you insulted me, you dumb schmuck. My comments are clear. If I leave no comment means it indicates that the point is correct as in the book.

I'm going to take half day off this morning. I 'm going to post the relevant verses of the four gospels with reasons later. You are the one who's trying to make the stories look silly, probably pulled out from some other like minded contributors' comments but you're not like them. They at least read through and then question the incosistencies. If they are wrong, so are you because you did not verify their questions and jumped to conclude that their speculation was without a doubt.

googoomuck SG

Notes

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

The authors were a tax-collector, a missionary, a Greek doctor and a fisherman. Each author had the liberty to omit details according to his purpose for writing the book. As they came from different background, the styles also differ.

The books were written at different times at different places and to present to different audience.- the Jews, the Romans, the Greeks and the Gentile Christians. The books also portray Jesus differently - as Messiah, servant of God, Savior of man and son of God. If all the books are in perfect agreement, anti-Christians will then allege conspiracy in the writers. The sole purpose is to discredit the gospels.

The Four Gospels are about the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ

After the death of Jesus, the stories were passed on through spoken words and it’s reasonable to expect some loss in accuracies. No one attempted to abrogate those verses to ‘improve upon’ the stories. The stories were written based on whatever the sources could mentally recalled - to the best of their abilities.

After the books were completed, the numbers of words in each book were not the same. Another inconsistency?

There is little disagreement between their accounts of the arrest, trial, death and resurrection of Jesus, and his commission to preach the Gospel to the world.

To the Christians, these issues of ‘inconsistencies’ are unimportant as compared with the important message of Jesus Christ. Only the anti-Christians with axe to grind will use every means to discredit the Gospels.

googoomuck SG

My summaries of the end chapters of the four gospels – some with comments.

Matthew

Mark

Luke

Between these two order of events – Luke did not address the issue of who was first to see Jesus. Jesus might have appeared to Mag and ‘them’..(not provable)

John

Matthew and John were two of the twelve apostles with Jesus until his death.

Mark and Luke were apostles of apostles. The books were written at approximately 30 years after the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. After such a period of time, if the eye-witnesses failed the memory test, it’s forgivable.

One point that’s certain is Magdalene was the first to see Jesus after the resurrection. Only the book of Luke did not address this issue. There’s no provable contradiction for this point.

Some verses are specific in certain details and others are not.

If the points are mentioned in one book but not in another, it’s ambiguous and open to speculation.

Any inconsistency that cannot be reconciled is incidentally insignificant.

The few events that are consistent in all four books are the most important to the Christians.

John 21:24-25 - Now it is this same disciple who is hereby giving his testimony to these things and has written them down. We know that his witness is reliable. Of course, there are many other things which Jesus did, and I suppose that if each one were written down in detail, there would not be room in the whole world for all the books that would have to be written.

A bit of exaggeration here but it makes sense.

I’ve decided not to post the verses of the four gospels here as it’s available on the internet. I used the NIV for verification.

stupidissmart SG

Wow wow wow... seems tat someone is pissed off here. Actually I have half a mind to actually not write anything till your half day leave is over then start posting replies but I guess tat is too cruel :p

After saying tat "I jumped into their speculation without a doubt", u concede tat there is really an inconsistency and contradiction between the different books and agree with my speculation . U just blame it all on the fact tat details r loss and so r accuracies after time. I don't know about u but I thought these books r probably written when the people r still alive. And these people r "spreading" the word meanwhile thus should be familiar with wat they witness. Matthew is speculated to be written about 40 while jesus is speculated to die about 33. Luke is about 80, john possibly 60 while mark is possibly earliest among the accounts. It is likely the authors still survive when writing them.

Then in tat case how do u know the other part of the bible is intact. U admit tat some books lack certain points from another book and there is no way to verify its authencity. In tat case a lot of portion u read can be wrong If u wanna go to detail, u will realise more inconsistency between the books. If the books contradicts one another, and u r expected to follow blindly, then wat conclusions can u derived out ? Nothing. It becomes your own religion where u believe wat u wanna believed.

U can say the "anti-christian" just wanna grind their axe with christian but in actual fact they raised valid points. I think tat trivialising plus slandering people who asked these questions is really nothing more than cover up.

« Previous Page Next Page »