You know Kathy, we’ve been fairly blunt with you today. Flippant, too. And it’s tough when people talk to/about you that way. I’m sorry for that.
If we could cut through all the rhetoric for a second, I’d like to commiserate with you. A little over 4 years ago, I was a very dedicated Christian. I had some doubts, but they weren’t about the Christian faith, just my understanding of it.
I felt like there were problems in my beliefs about the gospel. I believed in a literal Hell, and I believed a lot of people would be going there. But I had a very hard time squaring that with a loving God. I had matured enough to realize that most people were pretty decent. Not perfect, certainly, but good people who cared about others and typically wanted to do the right thing. I didn’t think such people deserved Hell. In fact, like Paul, I often thought that if God would accept it, I’d gladly go to Hell myself, if it would save my friends and family. And if everyone else could be added into that deal too, even better.
So if I felt that way, could I be more compassionate than God? Of course not. But I had a very hard time finding anything in the Bible that backed up an idea that most people, regardless of creed or belief would be saved.
I didn’t give up though. I knew about Universalists, so I decided to read up on their reasons for thinking everyone went to Heaven. It sounded good, but I just wasn’t convinced by their arguments. I just didn’t see the Bible teaching such a doctrine, and I still believed the Bible was the inerrant word of God.
I was in a state of flux.
And that’s the position I was in when I first ran across articles that pointed out flaws in the Bible. I was shocked by what the articles said, but since I didn’t have any answers against them at the moment, I got busy with research. I didn’t even comment on the articles — I just went to work. It wasn’t about winning any arguments; it was simply a search for answers.
I think that frame of mind I was in made all the difference for me. Deep down, I was already struggling. The doctrines I had long believed in, and even taught to others, didn’t fit together in my mind as well as they once had.
That’s probably the difference between you and me. I get the feeling that you question nothing about your faith. Not trying to put you down about that; just making an observation.
For me, discovering that the Bible was not the perfect book I had always thought it to be, and finding out that some of these church leaders I had always admired knew of these problems but never spoke of them, helped me make sense of a lot of things. It took time, and it wasn’t easy to come to the realizations, but everything finally fell into place for me when I realized Christianity was just another religion. For the first time, I finally understood the sentiment of that line from “Amazing Grace,” I once was blind, but now I see…
I don’t know if that’s helpful to you at all. Maybe one day it will be. Maybe one day, something will make you ask a few questions, and you’ll think back to those non- believers who were so insistent that Christianity was certainly not the only way. If that day comes, I hope you’ll find this exchange helpful and realize you’re not alone.
Finding Truth 
“You’d have us believe that god so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, but only provided his corrupted word in greek and hebrew.”‘ – me
sorry, meant “uncorrupted.”
LikeLike
oh, and mike, do you have a good example of a contradiction yet?
LikeLike
Kathy, RE: “Where’s the actual PROOF that disproves anything in the Bible?” –
William G. Dever is the son of a fundamentalist preacher. From a small Christian liberal arts college in Tennessee he went to a Protestant theological seminary that exposed him to “critical study” of the Bible, a study that at first he resisted. In 1960 it was on to Harvard and a doctorate in biblical theology. For thirty-five years he worked as an archaeologist, excavating in the Near East, and he is now professor of Near Eastern archaeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona. In his book What Did the Bible Writers Know and When Did They Know It he tells where scholarship regarding archaeology and the Bible has been in past decades and where it is now.
Dever associates himself with what he calls the new archaeology, something more than thirty-years old and devoted to good field work, use of the latest and most reliable dating methods and interdisciplinary analysis. His conclusions about what this archaeology tells us about the Bible will not be accepted by fundamentalists. Dever and his colleagues of high standing dismiss fundamentalists who want to consider themselves scholars without accepting that which good scholars must do: engage in extensive critical analysis.
Dever writes that the central proposition of his book is very simple. “While the Hebrew Bible in its present, heavily edited form cannot be taken at face value as history in the modern sense, it nevertheless contains much history.” He adds: “After a century of exhaustive investigation, all respectable archaeologists have given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob credible ‘historical figures.'” He writes of archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as having been “discarded as a fruitless pursuit.”
About the historical Moses he writes:
“
LikeLike
“I admit, this is news to me. I still dont think you read all of John. The day of preparation in John is the day before passover – if read John, you’d know that. ”
Sparky this is why I don;t bother with you too much. limited time and your points are always based on ignorance. I’ve read john and read the use of the word “day of preparation” in the original and in numerous biblical texts. its used there and other places as the day before a sabbath. I’ve covered this before in my posts to Nate but you are just too lazy to read them.
Therefore the passage in the culture (and as defined by mark IMPLICITLY) means the day before a sabbath. So it was a day before a sabbath of the passover. As john states the passover referred to the whole feast not just one day. and no Saturday was not the only sabbath. If you had been reading my responses to nate you would see that the day after the first day of the passover was a sabbath as well. You obviously know SO LITLE that you think sabbath can only refer to Saturday.
“AnD I dont think you’re reading anything carefully, as you’re telling me something that I’ve already said addressed, that the passover was basically the start of the feast of unleavened bread.”
LOL no you are confused sparky. By the time of the NT the feasts have been conflated into one. People referred to the entire eight days as the passover or sometimes the entire eight days as the feast of the unleavened bread. Even Josephus confirms this but of course we both KNOW you have done no research whatsoever on this and are just spouting off.
“But what you’re saying doesnt make sense for several reasons, but look at John 19:31, where the men want to take jesus body then, so that they may observe the sabbath. Now you’re saying that this sabbath, was simply saturday and that the current was actually passover”
sigh so hopelessly lost you are… a sabbath does not have to be a Saturday. The day after the the first day of the passover feast was always a sabbath according to the law.Again I covered this in responses to Nate.
“But Numbers 9 shows that the Jews would be unclean and unfit to observe the passover (what you say was this sabbath’s day of preparation) if they handled a dead body. ”
Oh vey!! such ignorance. The Priests were never going to handle a dead body. They had no power to kill anyone. That’s why they took him to Herod and Pilate and demanded that they do it. the more likely defilement they were trying to avoid was temporary from entering a gentile a place. Such uncleanness expired with the evening according to law. So none of those defilements would stop them from eating the sabbath (admittedly the defilement of the dead body would have them miss all meals). However it would forbid them from eating the next passover meal which took place BEFORE the evening.
“brilliant”
Which is the last thing you are sparky. You do even less research than does Nate.
LikeLike
“Oh vey!! such ignorance. The Priests were never going to handle a dead body. They had no power to kill anyone. That’s why they took him to Herod and Pilate and demanded that they do it. the more likely defilement they were trying to avoid was temporary from entering a gentile a place. Such uncleanness expired with the evening according to law. So none of those defilements would stop them from eating the sabbath (admittedly the defilement of the dead body would have them miss all meals). However it would forbid them from eating the next passover meal which took place BEFORE the evening.” – mike
you didnt read john 19:31 did you.
While the passover and FOUB were often talked about as the same, there was still only one “passover meal.” Sort of like christams, It is common for people to refer to the week or weekend Christams falls on as “christmas” yet there is still only one christmas dinner.
But regardless, to maintain this position you must ignore John’s “before passover.”
LikeLike
@ mike,
“John 19:14New International Version (NIV):
14 It was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about noon.
“Here is your king,” Pilate said to the Jews.”
you never read the passages…
now what was the day of preparation in preparation for? the sabbath as you claim, or the passover as John claims?
LikeLike
” Regardless, it seems to me that this line of argumentation is only “noise” you create to try and sidetrack the issues. It’s essentially an admission that the english transliterations we have today say something that you dont like,”
You always try to lie when you get shown for ignorance. I quote english translations (transliterations are an entirely different thing sparky) all the time but there is not one single Bible scholar that claims that ANY translation can carry all the meaning of the original language.
Never heard the term “lost in translation”?
There is no admission as you bare face lie that the english translations are against my point. You are just lazy and don’t want to do any research to have any integrity with the text so you fall back to this argument every time.
Refusing to reference french and word usage among french speakers when critiquing a french book is just bone headed stupid and it doesn’t matter how you and nate spin it -it will ALWAYS be a stupid/dishonest approach to claim that you shouldn’t have to reference Greek/Hebrew when dealing with the Bible written in those languages.
Stupid stupid stupid argument
LikeLike
“Stupid stupid stupid argument” – mike
yours or mine?
I have repeatedly stated that i do research the ancient text. however, yet again, i do not know ancient hebrew or greek so the possibility of a mistake is always present. When you’ve said that I’m made a mistake in not knowing the ancient languages, I have always said that is possible, asked for you top let me know what the better translation should have been…
yet you always refuse?
again, you’re only making noise.
LikeLike
mike? you there?
where’d you go? are you finally reading john now?
LikeLike
Kathy, RE: “So, it seems you’re claiming that they had lots and lots of books to select from and match up? How many would that be?Where’s the actual PROOF that disproves anything in the Bible?” – this should hold you for a while —
Epistle of the Apostles – Mid 2nd. century
Gospel according to the Hebrews – Early 2nd. century
Gospel of the Ebionites – Early 2nd. century
Gospel of the Egyptians – Early 2nd. century
Gospel of Mary – 2nd. century
Gospel of the Nazareans – Early 2nd. century
Gospel of Nicodemus – 5th century
Gospel of Peter – Early 2nd. century
Gospel of Phillip – 3rd. century
Gospel of the Savior – Late 2nd. century
(Coptic) Gospel of Thomas – Early 2nd. century
(Infancy) Gospel of Thomas – Early 2nd. century
Gospel of Truth – Mid 2nd century
Papyrus Egerton 2 – Early 2nd. century
Proto-Gospel of James – Mid 2nd. century
Secret Gospel of Mark – 58? 1758? 1958?
Acts of John – Late 2nd. century
Acts of Paul – End of 2nd. century
Acts of Peter – End 2nd. century
Acts of Pilate – Mid 2nd. century
Acts of Thecla – End 2nd. century
Acts of Thomas – 3rd. century
1st Clement – c.96
2nd Clement – Mid 2nd. century
3rd Corinthians – Late 2nd. century
Correspondence of Paul and Seneca – 4th century
The Didache – c.100
Epistle of Barnabas – c.135
Letter to the Laodiceans – Late 2nd. century
Letter of Peter to James and its Reception – Early 3rd. century
Letter of Ptolemy to Flora – Mid 2nd. century
The Preaching of Peter – Early 2nd. century
Pseudo-Clementine Literature – 3rd century
Pseudo-Titus – 5th century
Treatise on the Resurrection – Late 2nd. century
Apocalypse of Paul – 4th cenury
Apocalypse of Peter – Mid 2nd. century
(Coptic) Apocalypse of Peter – 3rd century
First Thought in Three Forms – Late 2nd. century
Hymn of the Pearl – Late 2nd. century
Origin of the World – 3rd century
Second Treatise of the Great Seth – 3rd century
Secret Book of John – Mid 2nd. century
Shepherd of Hermas – Mid 2nd. century
LikeLike
” It is common for people to refer to the week or weekend Christams falls on as “christmas” yet there is still only one christmas dinner.”
Yawn ignorance continues…. As I just informed Nate and every Jew knows there are TWO main ,meals during the passover feast….TWO not one. One was to remember the deliverance from the first born being saved and the other was to celebrate the coming out of egypt. they come one day after the other.
I’ll know you will beg this until the cows come home but its why many scholars see the reference as referring to the second meal of the passover.
““John 19:14New International Version (NIV):
14 It was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about noon.
“Here is your king,” Pilate said to the Jews.”
you never read the passages…”
Sigh…. he swears he’s pointing out something I have never read. I’ve read all of them you silly person you 🙂 . I have detailed this all before. scroll up and read my responses to nate. The word translated as the day of preparation is ONE WORD in the greek and it is a NOUN defined in mark EXPLICITLY as referring to the day before a sabbath. Second there IS NO DEFINITE ARTICLE in the greek so it literally can be read as
” before a sabbath of the passover” or as the culture had conflated it “a sabbath preparation of the passover feast”
There were at least three sabbaths during the passover. the first day of the unleavened bread (technically after the passover but as I said everything was conflated in the culture) the last day and the saturday that would intervene.
ALL THE GOSPELS INCLUDING JOHN ARE IN TOTAL AGREEMENT THAT THE FOLLOWING DAY WAS A SABBATH.
Its YOU that don’t read because in the very same chapter you quote mine is
John 19:42 (KJV)
42 There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews’ preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.
and worse again
John 19:31 (KJV)
31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
Both signifiying CLEARLY that the word preparation was in reference to the sabbath…….BUT THE PASSOVER WAS NOT A SABBATH by itself.
THE SAME WORD “preparation day” standing by itself with no reference to the passover. is confirmed TWICE in the same chapter and you missed it.
Furthermore by law the lamb of the passover was to be bought well before the day and killed only at evening. It did not require the whole day to prepare for and none of the gospels indicate that any whole day of preparation was used for their passover. I have seen little to no evidence that a day of preparation was used by the jews for anything but a sabbath and the passover again WAS NOT a sabbath.
Too bad for your sure fire contradiction but those be the facts. All the gospels agree that a sabbath was the next day. I think even Nate realizes this which is why he switched gears and started begging for a passover that begun on Saturday.
LikeLike
”
mike? you there?
where’d you go? are you finally reading john now?
”
HAHAHAHAHAHA
You poor silly soul. You really thought I hadn’t read it didn’t you? ROFL
What a nit…scroll up and see that I already covered all of this with Nate. I was just taking the time to break it down more simply for you.
tsk tsk
LikeLike
Yes, William, indeed – he is making noise. Just like the most troublesome, name-calling, pestering bully in the classroom. However, as insightful adults, it’s clear that Nate’s commenters are handling Mikey with diplomacy. We have recognized that he’ll say anything to get the attention he so desperately craves.
LikeLike
“Both signifiying CLEARLY that the word preparation was in reference to the sabbath…….BUT THE PASSOVER WAS NOT A SABBATH by itself.”
Lev 23 says it was. and maybe you could say Lev 23 is saying that the first day of teh FOUB was the high sabbath, but then you’ve gone to great lengths maintaining the passover and teh FOUB were the same, which would make the passover day one.
“The word translated as the day of preparation is ONE WORD in the greek and it is a NOUN defined in mark EXPLICITLY as referring to the day before a sabbath. Second there IS NO DEFINITE ARTICLE in the greek so it literally can be read as
” before a sabbath of the passover” or as the culture had conflated it “a sabbath preparation of the passover feast” – mike
…and yet all the scholars seem to think it should have been transalted “the day of Preparation of the Passover.” maybe if you post your credentials for review?
LikeLike
“What a nit…scroll up and see that I already covered all of this with Nate. I was just taking the time to break it down more simply for you.” – mike
all apologies. But no, I didnt think you had read it. I mean john 19:14 clearly states something different than what you’re saying.
Sure, I’m no greek scholar, buT i assume the translation was done by one, so you can understand my confusion.
plus, the jews today view the “day of preparation” as being for the passover – not for any ole sabbath.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/search?keywords=Jewish+day+of+Preparation
So no, I didnt think you had read it, and now I just think you’re making things up because you only read it after our discussion.
LikeLike
If a person wants to know more about the Christian God, where is the best place to learn? The bible, of course. So does that mean each individual needs to consult the original languages (Hebrew and Greek) in order to have a “true” picture of what the bible says? I always thought that was why we had translations — so laypeople could read in their own language.
Bible scholars, on the other hand, are individuals dedicated to biblical research and education so they learn and study the original languages, bible history, archaeology, biblical criticism (as a study), the dead sea scrolls, lost manuscripts, etc., etc. They are able to intelligently discuss various aspects of the bible and have the acquired knowledge to back them up.
Since Mike seems to think Nate (and William) are so ignorant of the finer details of the bible, perhaps he would be willing to share his scholarly credentials?
LikeLike
“Lev 23 says it was”
What a nit? 🙂 here…the first day of the unleavened bread was a sabbath not the passover day as originally set up
Leviticus 23:5-8 (KJV)
5 In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD’S passover.
Done…next day
6 And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.
7 In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.
8 But ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD seven days: in the seventh day is an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.
Can you count? seven not eight. the first and last day of the feast of unleavened bread were a sabbath not the original passover meal
“but then you’ve gone to great lengths maintaining the passover and teh FOUB were the same, which would make the passover day one.”
I haven’t gone to any lengths. You as usual are just utterly uneducated on the issues. Its a fact that after the exile and in the first century the feasts were conflated and referred in popular usage as one and the same. Josephus (the historian since you seem utterly clueless) confirms this conflation. crack a book maybe?
“and yet all the scholars seem to think it should have been transalted “the day of Preparation of the Passover.”
“the” is not in the text. and as a matte of fact some translation do note this by putting it in brackets
John 19:14 (Darby)
14 (now it was [the] preparation of the passover; it was about the sixth hour;) and he says to the Jews, Behold your king!
Translations add words “the” and “of” all the time for English readability and umm scholars are exactly where I first read of this referring to a sabbath preparation. So your claims just fell flat about all scholars. Plus all the translations of the other two references to the preparation IN THE SAME CHAPTER confirm it as a day of preparation for a sabbath even without referencing the passover
Lol try again.
LikeLike
“<emAre you trying to claim that Bush and Cheney started the war in Iraq for their own personal monetary gain? Is this your claim?” – more for their fat-cat cronies in the oil industry, whose millions got Frick and Frack selected, but I have little doubt they profited as well.
I recall a speech W made at a Dallas fundraiser, comprised of these same fat-cats, during which he opened with: “Well, here we are, among the “Haves” and the “Have Mores” – or as I like to think of you,my base –”
Reminiscent of the 47% that Romney appear to feel were insignificant – typical Republican lack of empathy for any who isn’t rich.
LikeLike
“plus, the jews today view the “day of preparation” as being for the passover – not for any ole sabbath.”
Where? all you did was link to your search at the site without indicating what you are talking about. Further the Passover has even changed more in modern times. the meal has changed and the observance has changed so that doesn’t work for the first century
anyway heres the appropriate link and yes it notes exactly how it was originally set up as two different memorials lasting eight days.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11933-passover
again citing modern day observances is not going to save your failed contradiction. I know you will continue to beg as you always but alas yet another sure fire proof has crumbled under examination
LikeLike
try again?
well which is it? is the passover and the FOUB the same ike the NT says or are they separate per the OT?
But regardless, the passover feast was on the passover, and nuimbers 9 says that they couldnt handle dead bodies on the passover – which is why the jews in John 19:31 wanted to remove the body before the passover, so that they might still observe the passover.
or are you saying that jews didnt have to be clean on the passover?
the jews today still believe that the day of preparation is to prepare for the passover.
Plus, depsite what you want it to say, john 19:14 still says what it says.
LikeLike
“So no, I didnt think you had read it, and now I just think you’re making things up because you only read it after our discussion.”
dude when you get slapped by the facts your lying gets even more pathetic.If you were not so lazy you would search the page and see that Nate and I already had this conversation so your lying that I just read it is contradicted by the easy to obtain facts that show I am saying nothing different than I said a day ago and had very much read it and studied the greek its based on
Lie on. sparky. .
LikeLike
“again citing modern day observances is not going to save your failed contradiction. I know you will continue to beg as you always but alas yet another sure fire proof has crumbled under examination”
but what are you citing? nothing. You say, “well, john could have been translated this way…” despite what the actual scholars have said.
great work detective.
LikeLike
“dude when you get slapped by the facts your lying gets even more pathetic.If you were not so lazy you would search the page and see that Nate and I already had this conversation so your lying that I just read it is contradicted by the easy to obtain facts that show I am saying nothing different than I said a day ago and had very much read it and studied the greek its based on” – mike
…coming from the guy who routinely lies about what others have said, routinely ignores posts, and routinely talks about things that have already been shown to be weak, if not a total fail…
so, i guess, this is ironic?
LikeLike
“But regardless, the passover feast was on the passover, and nuimbers 9 says that they couldnt handle dead bodies on the passover – which is why the jews in John 19:31 wanted to remove the body before the passover, so that they might still observe the passover.”
The Jews never ever handled the body at all William. My goodnesss you are clueless. NUmbers 9 has Nothing to do with it. Only the Romans had the power of death penalty in the first century. this is why debates with you are so pointless. you have ZERO clue of what you are talking about.
“the jews today still believe that the day of preparation is to prepare for the passover.”
and where might that be? Your link was a search that specified nothing.
“Plus, depsite what you want it to say, john 19:14 still says what it says.”
and despite what you say Mark defines the term used very precisely in an undeniable way
“Mark 15:42 (KJV)
42 And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation [same word in john], that is, the day before the sabbath, ”
its rare to have a word precisely defined in a text but its right there as beautifully translated in several translations. the preparation – is defined as the day before the sabbath.
In fact many scholars consider that the word was like the word Friday is to us now and that the passage means what the “friday of the passover ” would mean to us. an indicator of day during the passover.
The end.
LikeLike
“coming from the guy who routinely lies about what others have said, routinely ignores posts, and routinely talks about things that have already been shown to be weak, if not a total fail…
so, i guess, this is ironic?”
You making those claims? Why yes. The irony meter is now broken after dealing with your lst post
LikeLike