Biblical Inconsitencies

*shurgs* just trying to give you the benfit of doubt but hey if your to dang lazy to find your own.

 

dude..... listen man, i don't want to rag on you but what the hell are you talking about? who cares if he or someone else found the inconsistencies? he posted the original site, so he's not exactly tricking anybody.

yikes.

 

Never said he was tricking someone. People bash xians becaues of the bible and how they just follow it. I just find it funny that everyone does the same thing to prove the bible wrong. If he has read all those ehh okay least he took the time. But just copy'n and paste'n off a site...thats no diffrent then someone saying "Gays are evil cause the bible says so". Insted its "The bible is wrong caues this site says so" *shurgs*

 

He was using information off of a site to point out biblical inconsistancies, he never said "the bible is wrong because this site says so"

Those inconsistantcies come straight from the bible, not made up from that site.

What you are doing is called a "Red Herring" argument, and is a logical fallacy.

 

Hmmmm...is this an attempt to try to get him to read the bible or is it the typical "I can't refute the message so I'll attack the messanger"?

Just wonderring.

 

Im sure many of these are taken completly out of context

 

my guess is you're just really really hoping that.. might be interesting for you to take the Bible and see for yourself about the inconsitencies

 

I glanced at a couple the other day and noticed a few that looked out of context.
Anyways, the contradictions were put there on purpose by God. It is your job to find out why.

 

ROFL.. hehehehe.. haha.. *cough*.. teehee... that REALLY made my day.. hehehe.. *sniff*..

.. but besides that.. so you admit God is fucking with ya? Hehehe.. oh my.. this is wrong on sooo many levels.. hehehe.. I'm sorry.. can't help it but.. lol....


ok let me stop.. teehee..

 

LOL, OMG, you freak!

(I was going to put a more serious reply to this, but you know, I'm laughing so hard I can't think stright - I'll come back later and try again )

 

The contradictions were put there by men who had different ways of explaining gods divine will, they lived at different times and in different places, therefore contradictions will be inevitable.

 

Just trying to get him to read what hes posting. He can either admit he read them and that most of them don't really stand for squat. Or that he hasn't read them and he dosen't know what hes talking about.

 

Yeah most are them ARE made up from the site. Don't use "logical fallacy" on me when the "biblical inconsistancies" are deceptive and are just twisted out of context

 

This ones simple. All actions are caused by God (even yours), so when Jesus acts it is an act of God. God is greater than the being God creates to interact with other beings that God creates.

There are times when it is appropriate to judge someone and there are times when it is not appropriate.

God gives judgement to the Son so the Son may judge in some cases, in others the Father exercises judgement.

You are under judgement until you are able to judge righteously.

It is testifying concerning himself that his testimony is untrue for he does not know everything about himself. When he testifies of himself (where he has gone, what he has done) it is true.

You will not choose to come to Jesus unless the Father caused you to feel drawn to Jesus.

It's not a quote from the OT, Jesus used his own words to describe the spirit of God dwelling within man pouring out.

Nothing about being lost. You should quote the literal translation.
None will be plucked out of the Fathers hand, although some will be seduced by demons etc. because the father has planned for them to be- this doesn't mean they are lost- it means God is making their life dramatic and exciting.

I and the Father are one as well, but the Father is greater than me. I only do as God my Father wills me too. I do my Fathers will as part of my Fathers will, everything I do is an action of my Father using me.

JN 12:31 "31now is a judgment of this world, now shall the ruler of this world be cast forth; " Says nothing of the devil. The world did cast forth God because of it's poor judgement, however God was still in the world, even if it was hidden from the eyes of those who have not been granted discernment.

None of the passages sighted say that any will not be saved. The revelation quote leaves out the part later that describes the multitudes washed in the blood of the lamb (everyone else besides the 144,000 pure ones set aside by God).

This quote is at a later time. Someone can ask you something a few hours before and then later on when you do not ask them the same question they can say that you are not asking the question.

This is cuz he would lose none prior to his crucifixion, anyways, Judas's role was essential, therefore he will be rewarded in heaven for playing it.

Nope. Mentions that none will be destroyed but the son of destruction so what was written would be fulfilled, the son of destruction probably is refered to by another name in the OT.

Newton came to the world to bear witness to gravity.
Gravity has always been evident.

"for not yet did they know the Writing, that it behoveth him out of the dead to rise again. " This is a statement, Jesus isn't even saying it.

The holy spirit was received on more than one occasion. You can eat food on more than one occasion too! Pretty crazy!

"I made concerning all things, O Theophilus, that Jesus began both to do and to teach, till the day in which, having given command, through the Holy Spirit, to the apostles whom he did choose out, he was taken up, "
This refers to things which this apostle witnessed and heard.


So far all of these "inconsistencies" have been faulty. I wouldn't be surprised if they all were. I'm gonna go eat dinner.

 

Exactly...

But you know, people don't need to live in diffrent times to have diffrent views of god - you should see some of the answers I get in my god survey: http://theworldofdan.co.uk/god/ (which I'll be publishing soon).

 

My personal opinion is that the purported "word of god" should need no rationalization by his followers, but should stand upon some evidential truth. That such supposed evidential truth is obfuscated throughout the bible with inconsistencies suggests that the minds that put it together were trying to implant meaning rather than faithfully replicate any known truth.

 

The juvenility of your suggestion is explained by your age. I will however respond as you obviously have much to learn.
Your presumtion that "the bible is wrong because this site says so" and all information posted must be an original find by the poster is a furphy. Most, if not all, contentious postings have corroborative substantiation from diverse sources and authors, or references are requested. That you negate this process of validation brings your motives into question. Seems you're looking to deflect attention from your ineptitude in dealing with it and your inability in accepting factual inconsistencies.
I personally made no claims, though I do subscribe to the overall contention that inconsistencies are rife in a supposed "divinely inspired inerrant word of god." The presence of any inconsistencies are proof that the word is more concoction than inspiration, let alone the presence of so many!
Any "divinely inspired inerrant word of God" should need no counter rationalization by the followers of such "god", but should stand as truth in it's own right. But it doesn't because it cannot.

Your presumption of generalized "xtian bashing" is invalid. There is an exercise called "seeking the truth", and is aimed at those who convolute beliefs into whatever they want it to be rather than as it actually exists, eg xtians with cognitive dissonance (a psychiological disorder common to religion) don't even know they have a problem with reality, but by honestly searching for truth rather than trying to manufacture it into their scriptures, they will indeed find that it is right there under their deluded noses!

PS ~ xtian books from my bookshelf that I own and learned from (not including library borrowings) ~
Wycliffe Bible Commentary
Halleys Bible Handbook
Christ's Object Lessons
The Practice of the Presence of God
The Imitation of Christ
The Prophet
Jesus the Son of man
The Language of Parable
Number in Scripture
Friend of My Heart
Wisdom from the Proverbs
Let go and Let God
The Sermon on the Mount
Love Never Faileth
The Kingdom of God
The New Thought Christian
Who Wrote the New Testament?
Holy Bible ~ KJV; NAB; KJV 1854;

I suppose your presumtion now is that because I didn't write any of these books, they are irrelevant to my or anyone else's learning!?

These books formed the basis and reason that led to my "seeking the truth". It is there "for those with eyes to see." Those not looking will not find. It's that simple.

 

It does. You have to look for the truth that the bible describes even though it is right in front of your face. Your heart must change like a racists repenting of racism and coming to the realisation that we should treat all people with love, not just our own ethnicity. A racist must learn to look for the signs of kindness and accept them as kindness instead of looking at them with suspicion (that Jew is just bein' nice so he can trick me out of my money).

In the same way a non believer must not look at signs from God with skepticism, but except them with love and the signs will come flowing in as faith and the wisdom it brings sharpen your ability to discern the truth- that everything that happens is orchestrated by God.

The mind (not minds) that put it together did it purposefully. The 'inconsistencies' that you wrote of (at least the ones I commented on in my message- and I went straight down the list) were not inconsistencies - although there may be some that are valid that I did not get to. After testing 18 of the supposed inconsistencies in your last message and not finding one actual inconsistency, I didn't feel like reading the rest of your posts.

It's like the list of biblical 'inconsistencies' was written by some teenager with a rudimentary understanding of the english language who doesn't understand the bible, and in many cases did not even quote (or paraphrase) the bible correctly.

 

I can kindly see where your going with the Age thing so i'll let that be.
However I've read just as many books as you have on the subject. Now I'll let you in on a little secret. My dad is a Pastor, I used to attended a UPC church, and I resented all of this for the past year or two of my life. So needless to say I did my fair share of studying. So please do not give a landury list of all the "christian" books you have read as proof of your insight on the subject. And what i've learnt is...the inconsitencies lie in the translation from Greek/Hebrew to the english lanuage not the text itself. Also if you are so "read up" on this subject surely one of the books you've read would of told you of scrwed up translation which is the KJV...You've read KJV twice? and the New American Bible...Wow...My advice to you is to use a Parrell it has two or three diffrent translation side by side also the Amplfied bible is a good one to study with .

I'll admit i have a hella lot to learn. That I will never know it all. I'll also admit that the "xian" bashing was really a bad example. However do not use your "knowldege" on the subject as proof that you "Know" more then me. My "reasons" for posting on this thread is becaues i was bored, and stupid trival things like this are really easy to post on.

 

Young's literal translation might be fairly accurate as well. Anyone know? It's the one I check if a phrase seems a little off.