From: bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver)
Subject: Re: Biblical Errors
Date: 17 Nov 92 18:47:24 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.


In article <1992Nov11.012018.3204@medtron.medtronic.com>, ds0007@medtronic.COM (Dale Skiba) writes:
|> 
|> Wait a minute, you have not answered ALL of the questions.  You seem
|> to have difficulties finding all the contradicions, so I will list
|> the contradictory answers I see impossible to SIMULTANEOUSLY resolve.
|> 
|> Q1:  Mathew 26:14-15, 27:3-8 clearly says Judas returned ALL
|>      the money to the priests.

/(pwhite)
/Really? I thought it said that he showed up with the 30 pieces of silver.
/There is an implication that he wanted to return them all. However, the
/priests did not want to take the money back. The next statement about
/the money involves Judas throwing it. How much is not stated in that
/verse. It is only by inference that you can determine how much he threw.

It is quite clear he threw all of it.  The only way that you can assume
he threw part of it is by reading more into the verse than actually exists.
If the bible had meant to say that Judas threw only part of the money,
then it would have said just that.



|> 
|>      Acts 1:18 clearly says that he bought some land with
|>      (at least some) of the money.
|> 
|> Q2:  Mathew 27:7 clearly says the priests bought it.
|> 
|>      Acts 1:18 clearly says that Judas bought it.  

/(pwhite)
/I don't agree that it is clear that Judas himself went and made the
/transaction. 

Of course it does.  That is what the verb "buy" means.  There is no mention
of some third party that did the buying for Judas.  The tense of the
verb ("buy" vs. "was bought for") makes it clear that Judas indeed bought
the field.  Of course, the priests also bought the field, which makes this
a contradiction in the bible.




|> 
|> Q3:  Mathew 27:5 clearly says he hung himself.
Agreed.
|> 
|>      Acts 1:18 says he fell and his abdomen burst open.  
Agreed.
|> 
|> Q4:  Acts 1:19 clearly says the potters field.  That is why
|>      it is named the field of blood. 
|> 
|>      Mathew does not give a location, but it probaly wasn't the
|>      potters field, becasue it is called that because the land
|>      was bought with tainted money.  (This is the weakest of the
|>      contradictions, alone it really doesn't matter very much.)
|> 
|> Q5:  Acts 1:19 cleary says because Judas dies there. 
Really? I've carefully looked at both v 18 & 19. Perhaps I missed it
but I find no mention of the word death, only falling headlong and 
bursting open. Granted, that if a person wasn't already dead such an
excercise would likely prove fatal, but cause of death is not clearly
stated in the verse. That has to be put in by inference.

You are really reaching for this, aren't you?  Hanging will kill you.
If you fall down so that your stomach breaks open, that will also kill
you.  We have two causes of death that contradict here.  The only thing
that is preventing you from seeing that is an absolute inability to
accept any error in your precious bible.  If this were the testimony
of a witness at a murder trial, you would have no problem seeing the
holes in their testimony.  But you are honor-bound to search for any
small escape hatch at all to save your religion from the terrible fate
of being contradictory. Hence, these ridiculous conclusions you come to.



|> 
|>      Mathew 27:6-8 clearly says because the priests used tainted
|>      money to purchase the plot.
|> 
|> The only answer I can give to it is that Acts 1:18-19 is reporting
|> the local gossip, and thus is not completely factual.  That seems
|> to be the best answer for this.

/(pwhite)
/I could accept this explanation too. Again it results in no Biblical
/error. However, I like it less because it requires inference.


Of course it does.  Whenever the bible reports gossip, it states it
as such:  "And the people murmured among themselves, saying . . ."

This is simply an error in the bible.

Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc