If you’ve spent any time listening to the criticisms of Christianity from skeptics, you very quickly hear the assertion that there are contradictions in the Bible. Not only are you told that the Bible contradicts itself (thus, they assure you, destroying the claim that it is the word of God) but you will be told that it contradicts itself HUNDREDS OF TIMES! Ask any skeptic and they will echo this claim with great confidence. However, when you ask them to show you an example, they very often will say something like, “There are SO MANY. I don’t even know where to begin!” And they will not be able to show you a single one. Without their help, you are left to dig into the scriptures yourself to find those HUNDREDS of alleged contradictions.
If you’re like a lot of Christians, you’ve probably read the Bible for many years without seeing ANY of these alleged contradictions. Even after you’ve been told with great bravado by your atheist friends that there are HUNDREDS of them, you may still read the Bible and not see a single one! So what’s a Christian to do? Is it possible that these skeptics can ALL be wrong? Can we really deny the confidence and bravado with which this claim is provided merely because they fail to provide any legitimate examples? Worry not friends, for with a little guidance and understanding of the rules of literary criticism, you will understand exactly what these well meaning friends on social media are talking about. With a little help, you will be able to find examples of contradictions in the Bible EXACTLY like these many internet skeptics do. It’s easy! Continue reading
One of the arguments I have heard from Old Earth Creationists* is that the universe CAN’T be as young as 6,000 years, because it LOOKS SO OLD! They argue that the universe has the APPEARANCE of age, and so if God made the universe only 6,000 years ago but made it LOOK this old, then He is intentionally deceiving us! HOW (they ask in all caps) CAN WE POSSIBLY BELIEVE in a God who would make a universe that LOOKS SO OLD when it is NOT so old? Doesn’t that make God DISHONEST?
And I’m all- “Hey, y’all think God made sin, death, disease, bloodshed and suffering and then called it “very good,” and you want to gripe because the universe doesn’t still have it’s price tag and factory wrapping?”
But I digress. Continue reading
I recently wrote an article pointing out the fact that Jesus NEVER explicitly commands his followers to never kill and eat Lesbians. I realized later that I probably needed to explain in no uncertain terms that I do not actually endorse the killing and/or eating of Lesbians, or any other humans, because there are many people who seem unable to comprehend humor.
By that I mean, I need to explain that I am opposed to the killing and or eating of ANY humans, including Lesbians, and the reason for my need to explain is that some people have no sense of humor and could have thought I was in support of eating other people. I’m not saying that the reason I do not endorse the killing and/or eating of Lesbians is because some people don’t understand humor.
You ever hear the phrase, “Dying the death of a thousand qualifications?” This is what it means.
Killing and eating lesbians is WRONG. But if you’re going to do it anyway, I have some AMAZING recipes you need to try…
Reading the Bible can be a SHOCKING experience. Just as one example which I felt I needed to share: There is not a single verse in the New Testament where in Jesus commands his followers not to murder lesbians!
The secret’s in the sauce…
I mean, it should be obvious that if Jesus was opposed to rounding up Lesbians and killing them to make a meaty Lesbian Stew, meatloaf or pasta sauce, he would have SAID so! Right?
It would be a MAJOR oversight to not address this matter if he intended us to not kill and eat them.
But not only does Jesus never explicitly forbid the murder and eating of Lesbians, but none of the apostles do either! Read the book of Acts, or Romans, or any of Paul’s letters, and you will never ONCE see a verse that says, “Do not kill and eat Lesbians.” There aren’t even verses which condemn killing them OR eating them. I mean, if Jesus had said, “The pagans kill and eat Lesbians, but you should not,” we could make a case for it. But it never even comes up! Continue reading
Truth changes over time.
What was true yesterday isn’t necessarily true today, and what is true today won’t necessarily be for tomorrow.
There is no absolute truth.
Oh wait a minute…
About what I just said…
That was true couple of years ago. That’s not true anymore.
Only an idiot would still believe that.
You don’t STILL believe that nonsense, do you?
Posted in Philosophy
The Following is from a conversation I had with a Catholic friend I like and admire.
If you are defining a “Fundamentalist” as someone who refuses to accept any part of the bible as poetic or figurative, then I do not apply. My defense of Genesis 1 as history is NOT out of some broad-brushing of the ENTIRE Bible as literal fact, every word with no exceptions. When I get to Psalms, I know God is not ACTUALLY a rock or a shield or a tower. I defend Genesis as literal history because I believe it is written as literal history, and I know that there is not a single piece of data from science which argues against it. Atheistic interpretations or atheistic fictions, yes, but FACTS of science- NO. Again, I said plenty about that in my previous email.
The following is from a conversation I had with a Catholic friend I like and admire:
You made a passing comment about the lack of uniform belief in a literal week about 6,000 years ago through church history, and of course I cannot deny this. But then, no church had a doctrine of transubstantiation for the first thousand years of church history, and most today still do not.
One must build a case for what the Bible does and does not teach by the Bible, not by popular vote.
As AiG answers this better than I could, I shall just do a little cut and paste action here to explain why this is not an argument against my position, but rather, the history behind this question is a case against the OEC position.
Is Genesis non-committal on the age of the earth, as Sproul and many other scholars today say? If so, why is it that throughout church history most of the church fathers came to a conclusion on how old the earth was? As early as 181 AD Theophilus of Antioch wrote, “All the years from the creation of the world [to Theophilus’s day] amount to a total of 5,698 years . . . .” Continue reading