Humanists protest against Noah’s Ark Creationist Zoo — Looks like a must see to me!!
If you think private, multi-million dollar monuments to Creationist-themed education are the sole property of First-World nations with Third-World levels of religiosity (IE: the United States), well, think again. The Noah’s Ark Zoo Farm is located in the lush countryside of Merrye Olde England, just 7 miles from the city of Bristol… and it has outraged the British Humanist Association who are urging British tourism boards to stop promoting it and asking the British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums to take action against it.
Here’s some unique commentary.
“[at the museum] I learned,” he says, “that while birds sing to ‘sound warning’ and ‘mark their territory’, they also do so in order to ‘praise their Maker’. In fact, so wonderful is the ability of birds to sing that the necessary features clearly ‘go far beyond what is biologically an advantage, and point to a musically minded Creator.’”
I found a good website called evilbible dot com. Lots of good information there.
#58 right
Thanks for another interesting site. Also of interest on that page is a link about contradictons in the Gospels. Good stuff.
Number6 – I noticed that too. See how long that page on contradictions is? Whew……goes on for miles.
#25 Alfred1
#23 You were told wrong, its not true. Therefore, none of those languages.
Let’s see. Who was present in this garden you call Eden? There was this god character, Adam and Eve and a Big Snake, right?
Someone did write Genesis, right? Adam and Eve were illiterate and why would this god person even need to know how to read and write, let alone be bothered writing Genesis, since he already knew all about it and he wasn’t likely to forget it, was he?
So… it must have been the Big Snake. I don’t see how you can so cavalierly dismiss the obvious.
According to you, the book was written in Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek. Now you’re saying it was written in NONE of those languages? Then how can it be in this book you worship?
Either you were wrong the first time or you’re wrong now. Which is it?
Just curious.
#62 Weary Reaper
That’s what I love about religion … it actually leads to such funny concepts as discussing what language a talking snake writes in.
The only thing more comical are the people who take those discussions seriously.
Who wrote Genesis? I never knew that was a big issue. I thought it was made up like the rest of the bible. But if you think about it, yea==who wrote it? Who did god inspire?
The google says: “it was possibly completed by Moses in the wilderness of Sinai in the year 1513�B.C.E”. That makes sense. Silly to talk about a talking snake===oops, No6 said it perfectly.
Alfred==I don’t buy your explanation. When intelligent people author something that is inconsistent, the simplest thing to assume is that some silly mistake was made. For example: I make them all the time. Maybe sarcasm doesn’t translate well, even in the bible? Hah, Hah. Cracked myself up.
Well, thanks Alfred. My “Argue with a Bible Thumper” low level light was on and you allowed me to check the circuits. Should be OK for another 10 years or so. I wonder about you Alfred. As nuts as you are, you still respond functionally. Why aren’t you totally bored explaining the obvious to the clueless? Well, its a mystery I can live with.
Back to normal programming:
HEY ALFIE—-only an idiot would believe that bibble stuff!!!!
#38, 39
In order to claim there are no contradictions in the Bible, I need only find one example to disprove the hypothesis. A contradiction is simply two statements or paragraphs that conflict with each other. I have done that. I made no qualification about the author of those statements nor whether it was specifically their deity that made the statements. Since their deity did not actually write any part of the book, we have no way of knowing with any certainty whether they did or did not make any contradictory statements.
So, to even enter into a discussion to prove there is contradiction in the Bible, we need ground rules. What qualifies as a contradiction?
#39
Actually, their deity is *never* speaking. All accounts in the Bible are second hand or worse. So, the best we have is someone writing about what someone else said their deity said to them.
#40
The quantity of people that believe in something has NO bearing on whether it is true. You don’t vote for truth. Second, you clearly do not understand the “beg the question” fallacy. You are presuming the existence of your deity without evidence to support its existence. You cannot even describe what is and is not your deity to any degree of specificity.
As to the rest of your post. Wow. Seriously, tone down the meds and take a class on logic. Worse that not knowing what you are doing, you think you know which is worse.
#71
If that is your definition, then I have already proven your theory false. The two scriptures I quote propound different views on associating with non-believers. It cannot be both acceptable and not acceptable to associate with non-believers.
Clearly, you need to qualify your definition if you have any hope of proving your point. Are all statements from any author in the Bible fair game?
Here’s another example:
Matthew 27:5
After Jesus is arrested, throws down his silver and hangs himself. Then the *priests* take the money and buy a field to use as a cemetery.
Acts 1:18
After Jesus is arrested, *Judas* buys a field and then spontaneously combusts and is disemboweled.
Those are two very different events being described.
#72
> One can be more
> desirable than
> the other, without
> thereby ruling out
> the other.
You are equivocating. The statements being described are clearly in contradiction to each other. You cannot reasonably claim that it is acceptable to marry non-believers but not associate with them.
> So you haven’t
> found a contradiction…you
> only found an apparent
> contradiction that clears
> up the moment the text is
> correctly interpreted in its context.
Which you have yet to do. This is exactly the issue any such discussion: the ever changing rules of what qualifies as a contradiction.
As I said, I need only find two statements in opposition to each other and I have.
#76
Again, you are waffling. The two events described are very different. In one, he hangs himself and in the other HE, not the rope, combusts. That is more than just “noticing different details”
By the way, this statement “Because there is no collusion, no conspiracy to “get the story right”” implies that you accept that the Bible is fallible.
#77
If you cannot associate with non-believers then it is ridiculous to suggest it is acceptable to marry them. I accept your defeat.
ALFIE? Try this on for size: Noah was a Muslim!
Well, a precursor, anyway. Still one of the five major prophets in Islam.
Evil Bible is a great site for refuting the thumpers. Got it bookmarked for all future refutings.
Hmmm….nice guy whoever wrote this following missive. Must have had a hangover:
4th. Commandment, Exodus 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy”.
Old Testament punishment –
Exodus 31:15 “Whosoever shall work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death”. Numbers 15:32.
“And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day…And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.”
Alphie, you work Sundays? If you ever have, you’re in huge trouble. Or do you have another explanation?
…..thought so, can’t wait to see this explanation…
What’s the deal with those quotes in the title? The British Humanist Association is a very real organisation with a long history behind it. You got them in America too. You also have First Amendment-supporting groups such as the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF). And there I was thinking JCD was the skeptical sort of crank …
#76, I’m afraid this illness of yours has left your brain unable to render accurate meaning from even simple text. Let’s review…
Facts stated in Matthew 27:
1) Judas returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests, remorseful for having betrayed the innocent blood of Jesus. He then hanged himself.
2) The chief priests used this same “blood money” to buy a potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners, which later came to be known as the “Field of Blood” (translated) because of its purchase with the money returned to them by Judas.
Facts stated in Acts 1:
1) Judas himself purchased a particular plot of land, whereupon he fell headlong and his body burst open, his intestines spilling out.
2) This same field came to be known as the “Field of Blood” because of the gory details of what happened to Judas’ body when he died there.
There can be no doubt about the factual contradictions. Who actually purchased the plot of land that came to be known as the “Field of Blood”? The book of Acts says it was Judas, but Matthew says it was the chief priests? And for which of the two different reasons given did it acquire that name? We need more witnesses to help determine if anyone is telling the truth, but at this point, we know for certain that at least one person is lying in their Biblical account of what happened. I hate to admit defeat, but this may be a cold case 😉
P.S. #74, very nice example, Thomas, but I still prefer to point out the stark moral contradictions in the Bible, but that’s just me.
Who is the father of Joseph?
MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.
Which came first, beast or man?
GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
Does contradicting reality count?
LEV 11:6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
Hare’s don’t chew cud.
#86 What – “Does contradicting reality count”
Then reality must be wrong (see, age of earth, evolution, etc)
#65 Alfred1
You know Aflred1, you waste a lot of time, effort, wear and tear on your fingers, space on this blog and other people’s patience when all you have to do is repeat the above as the answer to any query put to you about religion.
At long last, you’ve succeeded in revealing what Faith is all about. No matter how many people are picking on you or what bizarre specifics they question, concerning your peculiar version of reality, just cut and paste the above quote as your answer.
You could even shorten your answer to:
“Nobodaddy said it to someone long dead and the dead person wrote it down.”
That’s about it, right? The good news is, it works for any religion. You could switch beliefs and tomorrow you could become a Mormon or a Muslim or a Scientologist or a Jehovah’s Witness and you wouldn’t have to change a word.
#41 Alfred
You are aware at all that the New Testament is only 1/4 of what it was intended it to be? You are aware are you not?
A group of men led by Iraneus chose the books. In fact Iraneus stated that there would be four gospels, get this, like the four angels in Ezekiel, the four corners of the earth and the four winds. He allow some of the letters of Paul and was against Revelation as he said it was not for laypeople.
There were other attempts that tried to make a New Testament. Now if GOD wanted to preserve the book, why not all the other materials? In Timothy we know that ALL scripture is profitable. So why not the other texts?
See this is what makes fundamentalism dangerous. The blind following of whatever someone else said. And you need to be reminded of the blind leaders of the blind. The DITCH is your ultimate fate.
Cursor_
To paraphrase an old quotation, there are lies, damn lies, and the Bible. Unfortunately, even proof that the Bible contains falsehoods never seems to soften the constant thumping sound we hear. Belief always seems to trump truth when the two are at odds, and this is never so dangerous as when these people attempt to govern.
#90–Gary==I wonder who is more dangerous ((MJ or Alcohol)) the fundamentalist bible thumper like Alfie ((HEY ALFIE!!!!!!!)) who have decided their faith requires believing the bible is inerrent and come out looking and talking like Alfie ((HEY ALFIE!!!!!)) or the more subtle players who profess believe but then get real sophisticated in what they “believe.” The bible is allegorical, everything is ultimately a mystery, more open than a Unitarianist.
Contemplating it a bit, seems to me the nearer the mark to no dogma a religion gets, the less you hear of it.
How does that happen?
bobbo, I think our karma ran over Alfred’s dogma, but at least we left him a note 😉
#95
You have already lost this argument dozens of posts ago. The first contradiction was enough but we were kind enough to provide a second. You are like the Black Knight from “The Holy Grail” claiming you have won the battle after all your limbs have been removed.
As I said, the zealots will always attempt to twist the meaning of the actual words to fit their preconceived notion which is why I called for specific ground rules on what qualifies as a contradiction.
It would almost be worth the exercise to have Alfred find contradiction in other non-Judeo-Christian holy texts just show how either
A: All other holy texts are also infallible but describe different deities (as in multiple) than the Judeo-Christian-Muslim variant and thus, it is an impossibility to have multiple infallible documents describing different deities or
B: To illustrate how contradictions found in other texts are akin to the same contradictions that rational people find in the Bible.
I say it would “almost” be worth it, but I’m sure that Alfred will find a way of redefining the English language to shoe horn in his concept of correctness.
#97
Really. To the audience, is there anyone that thinks that Alfred1 isn’t out his mind? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Has Alfred1 convinced anyone that there are not contradictions in the Bible?
Like most zealots, your logic is wholly faulty and you don’t realize it. Worse, you think your logic is sound but in fact you are regularly use common argument fallacies. All you have proven is that you have the mind of a child.
Alfred1, you have the most impenetrable fortress of artificial reality I’ve witnessed to date. Completely ignoring some of the blatant contradictions that were pointed out earlier in this thread (#82 & #84 are good examples) doesn’t make them vanish, like one more of your mythical miracles. It simply exposes you for what you are, and makes it all the easier to marginalize you and your ilk. Thank you.
P.S. Don’t forget to send a link for this thread to all of your little Christian buddies, showing how you handily overcame the fallacious arguments of Satan’s minions with your clearly superior logic and reasoning skills.
P.P.S. I’m a little hurt when you call other people moonbats — I thought that was your pet name for me alone 😉
#101 Alfred1 wrote, not really thinking:
“I answered 82 in 83…”
I think you’re lying again. Quote the exact passage where you reconciled those two very different claims of who purchased the plot of land in question, and the different reasons why it came to be known as the “Field of Blood.” You can’t, because you didn’t write it. What’s more, the factual differences are too stark and it’s not possible to explain them away with people who have a basic grasp of language. Who purchased a particular plot of land is not a trifling matter of opinion.
“Its not plausible Matthew and Luke are contradicting each other… the disciples all died horrible deaths rather than recant Jesus is the Son of David.”
Not only is it plausible that Matthew and Luke are contradicting each other, it seems virtually inarguable when you simply read the words. Matthew says that the man named Joseph who was Mary’s husband was the son of Jacob, but Luke says that the man named Joseph who was thought by many to be Jesus’ father (another way of saying Mary’s husband) was the son of Heli. Maybe Mary had multiple partners named Joseph, one the son of Heli and the other the son of Jacob. Inquiring minds would like to know just how promiscuous she really was, but in the most straightforward interpretation, these are two flatly contradictory reports of Joseph’s family lineage. As for your claim of the disciples’ horrible deaths, I hope you have a more reliable source than the Bible itself, but either way, martyrdom proves nothing concerning the truth of a cause. I fell for that when I was a child (an acceptable excuse for having a child’s mind), but I’ve picked up a paper since then and see a lot more martyrdom in the world than I see deserving causes.
“If these were contradictory… that would have destroyed Jesus’ claim to being the Christ TO THE JEWS, all early Christians were Jews, who demanded these genealogies show Jesus connected to David.”
Indeed, this lack of credibility is only one reason why the vast majority of Jews rejected Jesus and continue even to this day believing that Christianity is an inauthentic cult. The fact that not every single Jew rejected him doesn’t change the fact that this was, and still is, the prevailing view among Jews.
“So IF these contradicted, you would have the impossible task of explaining why Christianity exists at all… as the Jews themselves would never believe a Christ who wasn’t a son of David.”
Really? You seem to make an inference from the existence of Christianity that you allow to overrule the blatant contradiction contained in the scriptures. You are straying as far as possible from the meanings of the Biblical words themselves — they absolutely contradict each other. Don’t try to qualify it with your use of a conditional “IF,” and don’t try to infer that any set of known facts somehow implies that this bald-faced contradiction of the words doesn’t really exist. Get back to the exact words in the scripture, shopping from among the different translations, and reread them. Either Matthew lied or Luke lied, and maybe even both of them. My guess is that they may have come up with these bogus records of lineage working backwards in two separate efforts to “prove” that Jesus was the Messiah descended from King David. Both accounts lead from a man named Joseph back to King David, but by very different genealogical routes, and with a significant difference in the number of generations for the two routes. Luke takes 41 generations to get from King David to Joseph, but Matthew wins because he takes only 26 generations to make that link. I can make the link from Joseph to Kevin Bacon in only six, but that’s a different game.
As for your thesis that the lack of reams of contradictions somehow implies something important about the Bible’s veracity, don’t forget that in the original compilation process, many scriptures were eliminated not because they were invalid on their face, but because there were obvious contradictions with other scriptures with better acceptance. The Church already threw out a lot of the worst crap, but there are more conflicts remaining that haven’t been discussed here. You wouldn’t be able to handle those any better than what you’ve already done, so further discussions are pointless. Look at how much noise has been generated here when all that should have been necessary is “Read the freakin’ words in your own damn Bible!”
#99
Once again, I need to instruct you on logic. I am not dismissing your argument because your are a zealot. I’m dismissing your argument because it is empty of logic and that this approach is common amongst zealots. Thus, not an ad hominem.
I happen to be quite versed in logical thinking. I have actually taken classes in college on the subject. Both logical algorithms as they relate to mathematics and logical thought as it relates to debate. The arguments you commonly make are used as the basis for illustrating logical fallacies. To wit:
http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/begging.htm
> they [the authors of the Bible]
> would have to be retarded to
> contradict themselves as you allege
You are presuming a cohesive writing process or even first hand knowledge which is not all the case. In fact, when you consider the fact that none of the writers witnessed any of the events first hand and it is likely none of the people interviewed witnessed the events first hand, it is a miracle (heh) that there is any cohesion at all. Second, it is unlikely they had access to all of the other material with which to reference which makes the contradictions all the more telling. So, the contradictions would not have been intentional but instead a result of faulty information. Lastly, if they did have material from other authors available it would have been far more than the current group. Before the Church stepped in, there were dozens of gospels so authors may been coordinating amongst authors other than the ones that eventually did get into the final book.
#100
> So IF these contradicted, you
> would have the impossible task
> of explaining why Christianity exists at all
It is very possible for people to believe things others can clearly see are false. Some people still believe that we faked the moon landing. Some people still believe that the Earth is flat. I have every confidence in the ability for human beings to believe crazy ideas in the face of overwhelming evidence.
To the rest of your rant, I merely state this: you claim that there are no contradictions in the Bible. All that is needed to falsify that hypothesis is one contradiction. We provided two but there are others. However, it is pointless to provide other examples. Your hypothesis has been proven to be false so no further proof is necessary.