Skeptic's Annotated Bible

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
Password	(Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Flag
Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf, pdf Max filesize is 16 MB. Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000. You may upload 5 per post.

Skeptic's Annotated Bible Anonymous 02/19/15 (Thu) 02:56:36 957236 No.7

What do Christians think of the Skeptic's Annotated Bible?

Anonymous 03/05/15 (Thu) 22:15:35 957236 No.56

It's a better read than the actual bible. All the contradictions have hyperlinks.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html

Anonymous 03/17/15 (Tue) 19:03:56 957236 No.72

>>56

>contradiction

>Bill saw an angel and thought he was scared
>Bob saw an angel and was happy about it
>MUH KUNTRADICK SHUN

I'm sure this Bible is hilarious, but if you're serious about learning something, you should look for study Bibles.

The very idea that "contradictions", when they are real, is a problem in a volume spanning several millennia in 3 ancient languages, containing over 60 different books in genre as varied as law, poetry, chronics, history, prophecy, letters, sermons, etc, is just hilarious.

Skeptics think the Bible is the result of 1 man writing under dictation, like the Quran. That's absolutely hilarious.

It's like a kid who points to the phone book and asks if you wrote it.

Top kuk.

Anonymous 03/19/15 (Thu) 22:13:35 957236 No.77

>>72
>Muh straw man
How about reading a few pages so you know the quality of the 300+ of contradictions that exist? I'm guessing you are Catholic, so how can a book be divinely inspired if it it so imperfect? And why wouldn't God take steps to preserve a perfect document for us? He could have etched all his words in unbreakable stone. He did put his commandments in stone for Moses.

Anonymous 03/31/15 (Tue) 23:25:03 957236 No.81

>>77
These aren't even "contradictions," it's just taking verses completely out of context.
Here's just the first one i clicked on:

>Was Abraham justified by faith or works?

>He was justified by faith.

>For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory. Romans 4:2
He was justified by works.

>Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? James 2:21

This book was obviously not written by anyone who actually studied the Bible. Here's James 2:22-2:24:

2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

Do two minutes of your own research instead of blindly believing whatever uneducated source gives you your confirmation bias.

Anonymous 04/10/15 (Fri) 19:24:03 957236 No.83

>>81
You just quoted some random passages from the bible that have nothing to do with the argument. You have not rebuked the question, how can you believe the book is divinely inspired if it is so imperfect.

Anonymous 04/11/15 (Sat) 15:47:44 957236 No.85

>>56
They aren't contradictions at all. I've read through a number of them and the notes were written by some kind of autist. They're laughable. It's not that they even lack biblical knowledge, it's that whoever wrote it lacks literary knowledge. I don't get skeptic/atheists' obsession with literalism.

Anonymous 09/05/15 (Sat) 03:11:33 957236 No.121

What is that book? I cannot stop reading KJV to pick it up.

Anonymous 10/30/15 (Fri) 03:44:12 957236 No.136

>>85

>I don't get skeptic/atheists' obsession with literalism.

It's because most them on the internet were brought up in some Evangelical denomination in the american midwest that pushes absolute literalism above all else… with a healthy dose of championing self-interpretation and 'priesthood of all believers' above 2000 years of scholarly theology.

Anonymous 02/13/16 (Sat) 01:19:10 957236 No.161

>>83

The passages he quoted weren't

>random

they were the context left out of the Skeptic's Annotated Bible which takes the alleged contradiction between Paul's letter to the Romans saying none can be justified by works, and the first portion of a letter to James from Paul which appears to say that people CAN be justified by works, but that appearance of a contradiction fades as one continues reading and realizes that Abraham wasn't justified by his works, but that his works were done by his faith in God and it was that faith (the kind of faith that calls people to action) that he was justified.

Anyway, I still don't think Paul was an apostle, but one's beliefs of Paul do not matter. OT has better contradictions, but they are solely due to the fact that certain records required more accurate counts than other records.

Now Matt, Mark, Luke and John are the only books needed to find salvation, and they have small differences in their finer details, but even these differences between stories do not disprove the Bible, they simply enforce the fact that they are simply 4 testimonies about the life of the messiah prophesied by the prophets of old.

If their stories all matched completely, it would be suspiciously rehearsed, but their differences confirm the authenticity of their testimonies, and if you take the bits and pieces from their stories and view the story of Jeshua through 4 different viewpoints, you can piece together the full story, and compare it against the prophecies of old.

Never-the-less, I do enjoy the Skeptic's Annotated Bible as it allows me to see some of the problems through the non-believing perspective and as such it allows me to better understand their true issues and to deal with those rather than each individual "contradiction"