I'll take a shot at this only by saying that this is not an example of a contradiction or anything like would impact string theory OR the falsification of the Bible. It's just a head-scratcher. A puzzler.
Very very briefly:
I first look at the context. Elisha has just been annointed as the chief prophet of Israel. He comes down and in the first few verses, he brings life to a spring of poisoned water. His blessing brings life and hope for the whole community living nearby. His blessings bring life to every person traveling down that road, thirsty.
Then he brings death to Israel, perhaps even that same community. As he leaves, this group of punks come up and yell "Go away, baldy!" and the like. They say "Go away" showing they were likely from the previous area. Elisha curses them, showing God's power over nature to end threats to his prophets and his covenant community.
It was a really, really bad idea to make fun of the main representative of God on earth. God brings life to those who accept Elisha's authority, he brings death to those who reject God's ambassador.
The lists at skepticsannotatedbible are not helpful. As the managing editor of a study Bible project, I reviewed them as a helpful place to start explaining the puzzlers of the Bible. I intended to write notes to "explain" anything that they highlighted as confusing.
I found that there was nothing to say in most cases because the skeptic had read the text in the most pejorative way possible. It was the writers preconceived notions of what the Bible "really meant!" that made him think that compatible accounts of an event in the life of Christ or the resurrection or of creation are examples of formal logical fallacies.
In the few cases where the skeptic had found a legitimately confusing passage (and there are dozens of examples), I inserted comments showing that the writer was intentionally topical instead of chronological, or that he intentionally misspelled the name to make it rhyme with the character flaw that was causing his downfall, or whatever.
For all the blather and bulletpoints of skepticsannotatedbible.org, they offer very little help to the reasonable person looking for answers.
Here's what they SHOULD have done. If they would have shown one--just one--legitimate formal logical fallacy, then the chase would be on. I mean an A is not equal to not-A sort of situation here. But not only they, but no one--cults and Islam have searched the Bible for genuine errors for two thousand years--have found that smoking gun.
If it's found, I hope I find it. I'm a bit scholarly, respected among my peers--I could convince more people of the truth than someone with an atheist hat on. It's all about the truth. It has to be.
Religion that hides so far from rationality and logic that it become non-falsifiable, unproven and unprovable, is hardly the robust Christianity I find in the Bible.
If you find internal consistency (within the dogma of a religion, including their trusted documents) and external consistency with the outer (earth/cosmos) and inner (conscience/mind) world, then you can start taking it seriously.
Ordinary Christianity has its share of mystery and hyper-rational statements (that is, statements that seem to be beyond 19th century rationalism to fully unpack/understand), it seems to be extremely falsifiable and, to different degrees depending on your presuppositions, provable.
I think the answer lies in understanding what faith is and is not. The short version: Faith and reason not enemies, but friends. They both inform and neither can exist without the other. If the Bible is bunk, then no faith in the world can save it. If the Bible is true, alternatively, your lack of faith does is no damage. All faith is reasonable--the object of your faith can't be A and not A at the same time and in the same relationship. And all reason demands faith in the presuppositions underneath it--unless you are an antifoundationalist, which is crazy talk to me.
Let me answer it more personally.
For me, faith and reason are friends--not enemies. Reason gives content and structure to the various aspects of anything I believe/put my faith in. Faith gives foundational structures on which I may then postulate, talk about, dream about, reason. As Augustine said, "I believe (that is, have faith) that I may understand."
Faith is a trust in ideas or persons that I cannot fully grasp by pure reason. I can tell if my faith is misplaced by whether when I put the lenses of faith on, the world appears clearer or foggier; or whether my inner world appears more or less sensical.
Sometimes truth takes time--sometimes matters of faith can fool you, appearing to be true, but really you only saw the edge of it and guessed wrong about the rest. Eh. You shrug and pray and learn and show more due diligence the next time.
Grimharvest came out of his cave and roared: "Isn't anybody going to come right out and say it? That over time the Bible has been twisted, distorted and used by whomever needed it for whatever political or personal reasons they might have until now even if one is a Christian, there's little point in reading it."
The reason people don't do this is there's no proof of that and thoughtful people don't write, for everyone and God to see, comments that are easily refuted.
Let me give you the overview--there are ancient copies of the Bible. Each division in the Bible (Law, prophets, writings, Gospels, Epistles, Apocrypha, Revelation, etc) has copies. Each book has individual copies, ranging from thousands and thousands (the book of John) of copies to comparatively few copies for others. Those copies are categorized by geography (east/west) and then further distinguished into what are called "families."
In the end, after you analyze the variances of the copies, you find that the copies form patterns that end up looking like a threaded forum. You can trace changes in the text back to the parent.
What has been discovered repeatedly, most highlighted in the Isaiah scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls, is that the changes that have taken place over the years have been miniscule.
But how minor? If you look at a Greek NT, you'll find odd numbers and letters. These numbers are verses and the letters are grades. The letters give a "grade" and sometimes the name of a specific codex or family or geographic region from which this reading came. C or D means there's healthy debate about which reading is correct, so the editors will give the name of both and the variant reading that might apply.
What I've found is that even at the highest level of scrutiny, the integrity of the text is preserved incredibly well.
You may disagree with the worldview, with the meanings of the words, with the whole idea of spirituality. Fine. But the preservation of the text of the Old and New Testament through the ages is quite remarkable.
Full disclosure: I am the editor of a study Bible project (www.bible.discovergod.org) and do textual analysis on the Bible every day. If the Bible is bunk, I have no job and, moreover, would fish on Sundays instead of preach.
While the parent humbly admits that he's not an expert or theologian, I must admit that I am. And his father taught him well; everything he says is accurate concerning the linguistic history of the Bible. Except that I would say it is a certainty that all our oldest texts from which we translate the Bible into various languages are copies.
Anti-*nix OS Troll-boy who started this Bible thread should not be modded insightful. Where are my meta-mod points....
I'm a writer and editor who appreciates these sorts of books. On Writing Well, Sin and Syntax, the list goes on. Each one gets a note card and the salient points of each book jotted down (which usually fit on one side of the note card).
So far, I have nothing jotted down for DS. What he says that is true is said better elsewhere; what he says that is new is...well, I haven't read that yet.
The first 1/3 of the book is quite energetic; I enjoy ranting with him about verb-less rhetoric. But then his rather extreme anti-capitalism and anti-Bush views get tiring. For instance, at the 1/3 point in the book, he asserts that the reason public language suffers is the decline in socialism/government management of business. To him, privatization is the Great Language Satan. I see....
Read E.B. White instead. Read the King James Bible. Awash in simple, profound language, you'll find hope of speaking well and less anger at conservatives.
I have used all sorts of human interface devices in the last 10 years of heavy computer use. The MX 1000 is the very best mouse.
This, alone with the purchase of a used SteelCase chair with ajustable arms, has giving my wrists a nice rest.
But I still want a device that can interface with the computer that uses my feet. Then my hands could stay on the keyboard and I'd get exercise by moving my feet over my cool pad!
It would the best thing since Dance Revolution 12!
...God exists because I know its true. Argument is just another way of showing how wrong you are....
That's certainly not what I intended to say, nor what I believe.
Saying that all truth leads to God affirms the opposite--that facts drive faith. That facts lead to faith. If there is or is not a God, pursuing truth will lead us to a sound conclusion.
Science is not a set of conclusions, it is a set of procedures.
That, my friend, is distilled, pure, truth. A lot of flame wars (and wars in general) would be avoided if more people could get that in their head.
IMHO, you could add this to the forumula: "Faith is not believe in a set of impossible conclusions; it's trusting that the truth always leads to God."
I was raised in rural MS, where we only received 911 service a few years ago, after the phone company got the OK to charge us $1 per month, per phone bill, to cover the cost. The government refused to pay for the unnecessary feature, citing the relatively low number of crimes or emergencies that would be serviced by such a number.
It's a service most/.'s would never imagine having, yet I'll bet rural Mississippi is not the only place in the nation that self-pays for 911 service, and rather happily did without it for many years and gripped to no end when it was added to their bill.
This suggests two points counter to our progressive/.ers--first, it's not a necessary service--necessary is in the eye of the beholder, at least in this case. Second, it's not always funded by the government nor does the government even care to fund it in some circumstances.
Slashdot Mirror
That's already been done by Christians. It seems to have two locations in it called heaven and hell.
I'll take a shot at this only by saying that this is not an example of a contradiction or anything like would impact string theory OR the falsification of the Bible. It's just a head-scratcher. A puzzler.
Very very briefly:
I first look at the context. Elisha has just been annointed as the chief prophet of Israel. He comes down and in the first few verses, he brings life to a spring of poisoned water. His blessing brings life and hope for the whole community living nearby. His blessings bring life to every person traveling down that road, thirsty.
Then he brings death to Israel, perhaps even that same community. As he leaves, this group of punks come up and yell "Go away, baldy!" and the like. They say "Go away" showing they were likely from the previous area. Elisha curses them, showing God's power over nature to end threats to his prophets and his covenant community.
It was a really, really bad idea to make fun of the main representative of God on earth. God brings life to those who accept Elisha's authority, he brings death to those who reject God's ambassador.
The bears mauling them is freaky. No doubt.
Zinging off-topic at the speed of light>>>>>
The lists at skepticsannotatedbible are not helpful. As the managing editor of a study Bible project, I reviewed them as a helpful place to start explaining the puzzlers of the Bible. I intended to write notes to "explain" anything that they highlighted as confusing.
I found that there was nothing to say in most cases because the skeptic had read the text in the most pejorative way possible. It was the writers preconceived notions of what the Bible "really meant!" that made him think that compatible accounts of an event in the life of Christ or the resurrection or of creation are examples of formal logical fallacies.
In the few cases where the skeptic had found a legitimately confusing passage (and there are dozens of examples), I inserted comments showing that the writer was intentionally topical instead of chronological, or that he intentionally misspelled the name to make it rhyme with the character flaw that was causing his downfall, or whatever.
For all the blather and bulletpoints of skepticsannotatedbible.org, they offer very little help to the reasonable person looking for answers.
Here's what they SHOULD have done. If they would have shown one--just one--legitimate formal logical fallacy, then the chase would be on. I mean an A is not equal to not-A sort of situation here. But not only they, but no one--cults and Islam have searched the Bible for genuine errors for two thousand years--have found that smoking gun.
If it's found, I hope I find it. I'm a bit scholarly, respected among my peers--I could convince more people of the truth than someone with an atheist hat on. It's all about the truth. It has to be.
Religion that hides so far from rationality and logic that it become non-falsifiable, unproven and unprovable, is hardly the robust Christianity I find in the Bible.
If you find internal consistency (within the dogma of a religion, including their trusted documents) and external consistency with the outer (earth/cosmos) and inner (conscience/mind) world, then you can start taking it seriously.
Ordinary Christianity has its share of mystery and hyper-rational statements (that is, statements that seem to be beyond 19th century rationalism to fully unpack/understand), it seems to be extremely falsifiable and, to different degrees depending on your presuppositions, provable.
But that's just me.
That's a fair question, Grimharvest.
I think the answer lies in understanding what faith is and is not. The short version: Faith and reason not enemies, but friends. They both inform and neither can exist without the other. If the Bible is bunk, then no faith in the world can save it. If the Bible is true, alternatively, your lack of faith does is no damage. All faith is reasonable--the object of your faith can't be A and not A at the same time and in the same relationship. And all reason demands faith in the presuppositions underneath it--unless you are an antifoundationalist, which is crazy talk to me.
Let me answer it more personally.
For me, faith and reason are friends--not enemies. Reason gives content and structure to the various aspects of anything I believe/put my faith in. Faith gives foundational structures on which I may then postulate, talk about, dream about, reason. As Augustine said, "I believe (that is, have faith) that I may understand."
Faith is a trust in ideas or persons that I cannot fully grasp by pure reason. I can tell if my faith is misplaced by whether when I put the lenses of faith on, the world appears clearer or foggier; or whether my inner world appears more or less sensical.
Sometimes truth takes time--sometimes matters of faith can fool you, appearing to be true, but really you only saw the edge of it and guessed wrong about the rest. Eh. You shrug and pray and learn and show more due diligence the next time.
I hope that helps.
Grimharvest came out of his cave and roared: "Isn't anybody going to come right out and say it? That over time the Bible has been twisted, distorted and used by whomever needed it for whatever political or personal reasons they might have until now even if one is a Christian, there's little point in reading it."
The reason people don't do this is there's no proof of that and thoughtful people don't write, for everyone and God to see, comments that are easily refuted.
Let me give you the overview--there are ancient copies of the Bible. Each division in the Bible (Law, prophets, writings, Gospels, Epistles, Apocrypha, Revelation, etc) has copies. Each book has individual copies, ranging from thousands and thousands (the book of John) of copies to comparatively few copies for others. Those copies are categorized by geography (east/west) and then further distinguished into what are called "families."
In the end, after you analyze the variances of the copies, you find that the copies form patterns that end up looking like a threaded forum. You can trace changes in the text back to the parent.
What has been discovered repeatedly, most highlighted in the Isaiah scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls, is that the changes that have taken place over the years have been miniscule.
But how minor? If you look at a Greek NT, you'll find odd numbers and letters. These numbers are verses and the letters are grades. The letters give a "grade" and sometimes the name of a specific codex or family or geographic region from which this reading came. C or D means there's healthy debate about which reading is correct, so the editors will give the name of both and the variant reading that might apply.
What I've found is that even at the highest level of scrutiny, the integrity of the text is preserved incredibly well.
You may disagree with the worldview, with the meanings of the words, with the whole idea of spirituality. Fine. But the preservation of the text of the Old and New Testament through the ages is quite remarkable.
Full disclosure: I am the editor of a study Bible project (www.bible.discovergod.org) and do textual analysis on the Bible every day. If the Bible is bunk, I have no job and, moreover, would fish on Sundays instead of preach.
While the parent humbly admits that he's not an expert or theologian, I must admit that I am. And his father taught him well; everything he says is accurate concerning the linguistic history of the Bible. Except that I would say it is a certainty that all our oldest texts from which we translate the Bible into various languages are copies. Anti-*nix OS Troll-boy who started this Bible thread should not be modded insightful. Where are my meta-mod points....
I'm a writer and editor who appreciates these sorts of books. On Writing Well, Sin and Syntax, the list goes on. Each one gets a note card and the salient points of each book jotted down (which usually fit on one side of the note card). So far, I have nothing jotted down for DS. What he says that is true is said better elsewhere; what he says that is new is...well, I haven't read that yet. The first 1/3 of the book is quite energetic; I enjoy ranting with him about verb-less rhetoric. But then his rather extreme anti-capitalism and anti-Bush views get tiring. For instance, at the 1/3 point in the book, he asserts that the reason public language suffers is the decline in socialism/government management of business. To him, privatization is the Great Language Satan. I see.... Read E.B. White instead. Read the King James Bible. Awash in simple, profound language, you'll find hope of speaking well and less anger at conservatives.
I have used all sorts of human interface devices in the last 10 years of heavy computer use. The MX 1000 is the very best mouse. This, alone with the purchase of a used SteelCase chair with ajustable arms, has giving my wrists a nice rest. But I still want a device that can interface with the computer that uses my feet. Then my hands could stay on the keyboard and I'd get exercise by moving my feet over my cool pad! It would the best thing since Dance Revolution 12!
That is +5 vorpal funny. I'm almost crying. And I can't repeat it to ANYONE I know.
I was raised in rural MS, where we only received 911 service a few years ago, after the phone company got the OK to charge us $1 per month, per phone bill, to cover the cost. The government refused to pay for the unnecessary feature, citing the relatively low number of crimes or emergencies that would be serviced by such a number.
/.'s would never imagine having, yet I'll bet rural Mississippi is not the only place in the nation that self-pays for 911 service, and rather happily did without it for many years and gripped to no end when it was added to their bill.
/.ers--first, it's not a necessary service--necessary is in the eye of the beholder, at least in this case. Second, it's not always funded by the government nor does the government even care to fund it in some circumstances.
s tory.html
It's a service most
This suggests two points counter to our progressive
For an interesting history of 911-ish systems, see: http://www.911dispatch.com/911_file/history/911hi