>Bhagavad Gita. >Contradictions (2). >The Bible. >557

>Bhagavad Gita
>Contradictions (2)
>The Bible
>557
How do we explain this? Is Gita the scientifically superior holy source?

https://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/first/contra2_list.html

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    anon stop riling them up, you're not doing anyone any favors

  2. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    To the translations of Christians and/or Rabbis?
    Could be. But neither are rigorous scientific writings as far as I'm aware, though I've only read bits of the Gita in translation.

  3. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    'Skeptics' are as misguided as fundamentalists. Neither is capable of reading beyond the literal. Just say no to being a hylic.

    • 1 week ago
      Schizo Retard

      skeptics are way less moronic than you are, homosexual

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Look who's talking.

        • 1 week ago
          Schizo Retard

          bruh you don't know anything about me and you just assume i'm a moron? that's a pretty moronic way to think

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Black person

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Take off that trip name homosexual, you're another fed

        • 1 week ago
          Schizo Retard

          you're right i'm a fed
          and i'm putting you under arrest
          stick em up
          homosexual

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        bruh you don't know anything about me and you just assume i'm a moron? that's a pretty moronic way to think

        yeah you have to read it as "allegory" and "metaphor" because it's a bunch of moronic bullshit that never happened

        >Based Freaking Anti Pajeet-lore

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Skepticism is the literal first step to ascension, you goober. Skepticism is healthy and important to ascension. The danger with skepticism is that it can evolve into jaded cynicism, which for most is a dead end that they never escape from. However, for some individuals (usually with master life path numbers and/or with heavy Scorpio placements) this stage of jaded cynicism is an absolutely necessary precursor step to their ascension. Souls with large egos and high degrees of self-awareness actually need to become a jaded cynic for a bit.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I put 'skepticism' in quotes because I was referring to the 'skeptical community' of closet materialists who think they have everything figured out. Skepticism as a general quality is useful when not applied autistically to anything you don't understand or disagree with.

        • 1 week ago
          Schizo Retard

          I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING SO IT DOESN'T EXIST

  4. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    just because someone uses different comparisons or examples doesn't mean they're saying contradictory things

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Some of these contradictions are straight up inexcusable though
      https://ia801303.us.archive.org/31/items/ContradicitonsInTheNewTestament/194ContradInNt.pdf

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        these passages aren't contradictions they are different angles of the same story about jesus and each writer focused on different parts when you look at them all together you get the full picture

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >these passages aren't contradictions
          They explicitly contradict each other. You're just burying your head in the sand.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            the gospel writers had different perspectives and purposes so they emphasized different details

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            But those details contradict each other, is the point. The New Testament in its entirety isn't internally consistent because of them.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            that's your interpretation

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            That's anyone's interpretation who reads it without the lens of "exegesis" (headcanon) to retroactively hand-wave away all the contradictions.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            but they're giving different perspectives on the same story it's like looking at a painting from different angles

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            You're so used to thinking in terms of one "external reality" that you impose constraints on myths that take place in different worlds. Embarrassing.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            but they're giving different perspectives on the same story it's like looking at a painting from different angles

            >It doesn't matter if the story is self-contradictory, it's all myth to begin with!
            Kind of a weird arguments for Christians to be making about their own Bible, no?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            when did I ever say it was a myth?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            If you have to suspend "external reality" / if the story in question is open to interpretation (i.e. has multiple equally viable different interpretations) then what your describing is myth. Not sure which one of you I'm replying to so just covering my bases.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            History is a spook. There are only myths. Learn how to read them.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >t. reads scripture literally

          • 1 week ago
            Schizo Retard

            yeah you have to read it as "allegory" and "metaphor" because it's a bunch of moronic bullshit that never happened

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >when the left brain runs amuck
        sad

  5. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >kinds of people
    There are three gunas, ropes, modes of material nature - sattva, raja, tama - serene, passionate, stagnant.
    The next verses talk about how they swirl and mix, and how sometimes some modes are more prominent than others.
    This swirling leads to the four societal divisions of people:
    priestly/educators which are mostly sattva
    warrior/peacekeeper which are mostly raja
    entertainer/business which are an even mix of raja and tama
    service and labor which are mostly tama
    Divine and demonic are more about attitude within these areas. you can divine and demonic brahmins, or ksatriyas, or vaisyas, or sudras. It's more an indication of direction toward or away from the Absolute.
    >types of food
    The three gunas show up again in dividing food by preparation and type as who inherently likes to eat what.
    sattva likes fresh fruits and greens
    raja likes big, heavily spiced meals with the things
    tama likes overly processed and putrefied style cooking a la pickling
    Then mention of FOUR types is an entirely different style of category which is dealing with basic culinary art and giving the eater a mix of ways to eat the food: chewed, licked, sucked, and slurped.
    And dont ask me on why those four - I never bothered to learn vedic culinary presentation.
    Any contradictions not cleared up in the Gita?
    Want me to introduce a few more, since these must come from someone not reading the Gita very well?

  6. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    contradictions don't all have the same weight
    i mean dude just look at fricking india

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      ....after it was pillaged nonstop by the west for hundreds of years, given a westernized government, western technology, and increasingly westernized culture

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        exactly. 4 centuries of getting their shit pushed in, pathetic. weakness is the original sin

  7. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    The Bible is not a collection of trivia like a rulebook for a game, it's a collection of stories recounted by humans of things that happened. Those people may be errant or give their own accounts, but the truth of their story is correct. Think about how you tell a story.
    Say you saw a family reconcile at a traffic stop. You may not know these people, you certainly don't know all the details of what lead up to their meeting at a street corner, but as you view their conversation you're going to remember the broadest strokes: They arrived they spoke, they embraced, and they left together.
    In recounting that story, your recollection would probably not include a perfect recounting of all that they said. Some other witness may give a slightly different order to events, may have noticed a certain thing said that you omitted in your telling, but would agree that they came, spoke, embraced, and left. Neither of you would be lying, even if your stories were generally the same. In investigative studies one of the surest signs of a hoax or conspiracy is when stories line up 100% in every detail.
    Also, your source is specifically biased against Christianity, as the things listed as incongruity include miracles and other mysterious events, but the same isn't true for the bhagavad gita.

  8. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    bonus dormitat Homerus

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *