From: pwhite@ems.cdc.com (Peter White)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Biblical Errors
Date: 18 Nov 92 21:05:21 GMT
Reply-To: pwhite@ems.cdc.com
Organization: Empros Systems International, a division of Ceridian

In article <1992Nov17.184724.6785@microsoft.com>, bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:
|> 
|> 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.

I hate to have to disagree when you seem so sure about what the Bible says
and how I'm thinking etc, but,
I'm curious about how we know that I'm the one who's bound by his paradigm.
I could just as easily say that you are honor-bound to search for any
small escape hatch which makes the Bible say things it doesn't say in
order to prove that there are errors.

I don't want to start a flame war as that is counter-productive. 

I do want to say that I don't think I have some need to have the Bible
not have errors. Nothing that I know of in my faith is based on the Bible
not having errors other than that one tenet, that it doesn't have any.
If someone proves to me that there is an error, then I'l have to throw
that tenet away. The rest of my faith is super and worthwhile.
However, so far, noone has shown me an error. People have told me how it
is that it is clear to them that there is an error between such as such
passages as above. But all I can honestly say so far is it is clear to
some that there are errors, but it is not clear to me.

I mentioned in another response to Dale, that I think we've exhausted
these possibilities and would like to hear any other candidates that
he has. Since this is my first interchange with you, I thought I'd
repeat it and ask you or other readers for candidates.
-- 
Peter White
disclaimer: None of what is written necessarily reflects 
     			a view of my company.
            His anger lasts only a moment, 
			but his favor lasts a lifetime. Ps 30:5