“The Archaeological Evidence for the Bible is Non-Existent!”

Well that would not exactly be an inconsistency in the Bible then. To be honest, if you wanted to bring up inconsistencies in the Bible there are far better ones than this.

Anyways, the Bible tells us that Mt. Sinai was in Arabia, not the Sinai Peninsula so either way that is enough evidence to say that the location may be wrong.

 

Jeremiah 32:27 - "I am the Lord, the God of all mankind. Is anything too hard for me?"

Judges 1:19 - "The Lord was with the men of Judah. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had chariots fitted with iron."

 

What exactly is the inconsistency?

You need to explain that if you want me to debunk it. I have no desire to figure out your question as well as the answer.

 

Jeremiah 32:27 uses a rhetorical question to declare that God is all-powerful. Judges 1:19 says that god couldn't even help the men of Judah win a battle.

 

Does it say God tried and failed?

You have to read it all in context.

 

It explicitly says "The Lord was with the men of Judah". That makes it pretty clear that he wasn't just a passive observer.

 

Now you are assuming he was there to help.

You cannot have an inconsistency based off an assumption. I could give you a more direct answer but I am not doing your research for you.

I will give you a hint though. Go read the entire two stories you mentioned and the answer will be obvious. What you are doing is cherry picking random verses and calling it an inconsistency.

That is a boring game to play.

 

What else could it mean?

 

If you had bothered to read the story which you obviously didn't you would have seen that God was indeed with them and they failed not because the iron chariots were too strong for Omnipotence, or because he refused to help them; but because their courage and faith failed when they saw them.

If you know the Bible you will realize that God will not usually help those who lose faith. They chose to be afraid instead of relying on the power of God to save them.

 

Why not? Wasn't Daniel able to both tell Nebbe what he dreamed and interpret it for him?. Figuring out both the question and the answer is child's play compared to that.

 

This is all stuff people can research on their own if that are interested in it. There is no inconsistency in the bible that has not been able to be debunked and there are websites dedicated to this. That is why I can make that statement in confidence, because I have tried to find inconsistencies myself from the perspective of an atheist but could never find one that withstood all tests.

You would need something like "god said he killed john" then read later that "god said he never killed john" to actually find one that works.

 

The Bible is a construct of the Roman Imperial Biblical Canon.

Why do you think only 4 Apostles Gospels exist in the Bible?

Religion is a construct of man for use as a system of control.

AboveAlpha

 

Like this?

 

As if he could not do something to restore their courage and faith.

 

There are tons of exaggerations in scripture, it was a story telling culture and the point was the spiritual lesson and it was written in a way that lent itself to memorization and it worked great for them. Then we put our Romanized brains to it and got sidetracked by minutia and tend to miss the forest for the trees. But beyond that, I was going through and trying to work out the timeline between Kings and Chronicles. Kings lists the kings of both Nations, Chronicles, just the kings of Judah. I was reading through both and trying to get a good sense of each from both sources and bang! There was a king in one book listed as "Good" and the same king in the other book listed as "Evil".

I dug and dug and dug thinking that maybe it was different kings with the same name or something, but nope, same guy. These books were written by two different authors so they were giving different viewpoints, written in different time periods, different audience and with different purposes, but still, "Good" in one book and "Evil" in the other? Not a lot of overlap in those two descriptions.

So I was wrestling with that when the thought came to me: Am I good or evil? Depending on the case one wants to make, there is a good deal of support for either position! Same with guy I guess.

Take care,
Zorro

 

All assumption of course.

- - - Updated - - -

Sure he could have but that would go against freewill wouldn't it? Did it occur to you that he wasn't there to win any battle but to test the men?

 

More like this.

Galatians 4:25

 

Not an assumption.

AboveAlpha

 

That is the point of reading the Bible of course. When we do and allow the Holy Spirit into us we realize things that God wants us to know. This nitpicking bible verses can be entertaining for a short period but that is not the point of the Bible. The point is to communicate with God in a way through it.

- - - Updated - - -

Ok then.

 

Free will has no Biblical basis.

Ephesians 1:4-5 - "For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will"

Romans 8:29 - "For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers."

2 Timothy 1:9 - "Who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,"

 

There is a whole thread based on freewill where we talk about this you know. Probably still on the first couple of pages if you like. Either way, my point was to show that there could possibly be an explanation to your question, which I did, which shows there is no inconsistency there.

 

Yes. I love it. First and Second Samuel have to be two of the finest books ever written. Israel's enemies advanced into the iron age before they did and the incredible frustration they dealt with struggling against better armed and more advanced foes. The losses, the defeats, the struggle to rally themselves to continue the fight. And then if you bounce out to psalms you can eavesdrop on their innermost thoughts of these folks, 3,000 years ago and in many ways our struggles are the same just stamped on different contexts.

But anyway, they did manage to pick up some iron weapons off the battlefield and boy did they keep track of them. There apparently were three swords in all of Israel, and every so often the entire story stops while they go through and review, at that point in the story, where each of the three swords are in the nation.

But yes, it is a unique book collection and I highly value and enjoy it.

 

Locations in the Bible are frequently screwed up.

 

so up to what historical point do we consider the Bible to be truthful?

 

But my point is made.

There was no solid inconsistency with the issue you brought up that did not have another possible explanation.