Bible contradictions

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by w1z4rd, Mar 19, 2007.

  1. mikenostic Stop pretending you're smart! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,624

    Saquist,
    I can interpret the Corinthian scripture as, God is just a stubborn SOB that requires someone to believe in Him before He will do a damn thing for you. Merciful my behind. You would think that God would want all his people to be able to read the bible. It sounds to me like He's playing favoritism.

    I know for a 100% fact that I'm honest hearted, but I reserve the right to question anything. I also don't like being called prideful for having this mentality.
    Being accused of having too much pride because I legitimately question something that does have contradictions and all kinds of stuff that just doesn't add up, is pure and utter bullshit.

    Saquist, you said you would answer a few valid questions from me in an earlier post. I'd like to cash in on one.
    Why is it, that God does not want us to question his word, etc. Don't you think it's kind of contradictory to free will itself. He gives us free will to choose (which I would also assume to mean question as well), yet we get accused of being prideful and power hungry when we do? What kind of crap is that?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,973
    Thank you for your response, Saquist.

    Could you please answer the following two related questions for me?

    Firstly, according to the Bible, why did Jesus speak to the people in parables, instead of speaking clearly to them on topics that were of such great importance to all of mankind?

    Secondly, please explain the Romans 9:10-22 passage to me when you have the time.

    Again, Thanks!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    Note that God allowed Pharoh's heart to be harden.
    Exodus 14:4
    "So I shall indeed let Phar'ah's heart become obstinate, and he will certainly chase after them and I shall get glory for myself by means of Phar'oah-"


    Both Exodus and Romans show that God makes use of both the good and the wicked. The Good he uses to further his purpose but the wicked are made examples of. They clearly show the consequences of openly defying his purpose. Because it is that purpose that will bring peace to the Earth. To defy that purpose means to actively seek to take away that gift from those who do want it.

    Roman's 9:21
    What? Does not the potter have authority over the clay to make from the same lump one vessel for an honorable use, another for a dishonorable use?

    God created this entire Earth and the Universe through his Son Jesus Christ. While God didn't create these individuals he does use them. The bible show us that the wicked are a product from Satan's system...his world. He allows these creations and HE MOLDS THEM and then reserves them for evident demonstration. They are predicatable and manuverable piece toward his purpose. So yes he makes them or molds them to his purpose.

    Note that create and make are to differnt words in most languages. Without going into lengthy explanations I believe there is indeed a difference. I have noticed that difference in Spanish and Mandarin.

    In other words he is excercising intelligent manipulation of the wicked to assert his purpose. Humans do this in the form of coercsion and manipulation. We attempt to predict what our opponent will do. But God has infinite insight and when he so choses he uses it to direct fire away from his servants, make evident the truth in his word the bible or the destroy other wicked elements.

    Peter 2:9
    "Jehovah (Yah Weh) knows how to deliver people of godly devotion out of trial, but to reserve unrighteous people for the day of judgment to be cut off."

    Which is very passive rather than out right destroying the wicked elements hear and now. The reasoning for why he hasn't destroyed the wicked yet is to allow them to make the choice...good or bad. Judgment is not yet and that means Salvation is also not yet. We're not saved untill all this has been put back together as it was originally to be.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Saquist Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,256
    Seti, your post in 595 is a valid question and I believe it is answerable in the voice of reason...However time today doesn't allow me to continue but I will return if you wish and lay it all out as I understand it with the least amount of interpretation and rationalizing as I can.
     
  8. Satyr Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,896
    You forget the even bigger lie of Christianity, of which Santa is but a tiny piece of.

    Attempting any sort of intelligent "discourse" with the likes of you - pretense and kindly aloofness included - would be a total waste of time.
     
  9. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,973

    Please do! I may not ever be able to agree with you since God has probably blinded me from ever doing so, in order that I will be damned, but I will respect you for trying.

    Give it some careful thought and get back with me at your convenience.

    Take Care!
     
  10. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    So, Christ died for our sins. Apparently he was resurrected, so he didn't really die. See the contradiction?
     
  11. Satyr Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,896
    No. i see the bullshit.

    A "sacrifice" which is not one at all.
     
  12. Exploradora Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    264
    You have to die to be resurrected, or else *cough* you were just so sick or injured as to appear dead and then got better enough to, if you lived around 1 BC, walk out of your tomb.
     
  13. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    Since God knows all he knew he was going to resurrect jesus anyway.
     
  14. Medicine*Woman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,346
    *************
    M*W: Then what was the purpose of it all? Nada. And it still is nada. Then it had to be a fakey crucifiction. The purpose of crucifiction was to eliminate those who were charged with crimes. Sometimes death didn't come quickly, so the rule was to break their legs or pierce their body to ENSURE they died. Somehow Jesus's legs weren't broken and he managed to live and walk outta the tomb. Ha, likely story! If he lived, what purpose was his death in the first place? Show and tell? Otherwise, he didn't actually die, but who cares, because he didn't actually live. How can 2 billion people be right? What's worse, how can 2 billion people be wrong?
     
  15. Exploradora Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    264
    I saw something on the discovery channel that said it was possible for people to survive crucification, and that it did happen even if infrequently. I do not believe they had a really good way, back then, of knowing someone was dead.
     
  16. Medicine*Woman Jesus: Mythstory--Not History! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,346
    *************
    M*W: You are probably right. I bet some of them were unconscious, of course, with the blood loss resulting in near asphyxiation or worse. In the case of Jesus, I don't believe he existed, so it wouldn't apply to him historically. Crucifixion was a type of Roman punishment, however, but I wonder if ever someone who was crucified but did not die was let go. I always believed it to be a form of execution, but could it have been just a form of punishment? Undoubtedly, someone would pass out before they died (i.e. the 'swoon' theory).
     
  17. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    Thanks for sharing what you believe, it is very er valuable.
     
  18. Satyr Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,896
    So if Jesus was resurrected, and He, being God, already knew this would happen, how is this a “sacrifice”?
    Hell, I’ll jump off a plane if I know that I’ll get back on my feet again.

    How did Jesus absolve us from our sins again?
    He gave up a few days of his eternity and a few days of suffering?
    Wow, I’m touched.
     
  19. kerux Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    99
    Another Follies?



    How did Judas die?

    a. In Matthew 27:5 Judas hangs himself.

    b. In Acts 1:18 he bursts open and his insides spill out.

    c. According to the apostle Paul, neither of the above is true. Paul says Jesus appeared to "the twelve" after his resurrection. Mark 14:20 makes it clear that Judas was one of the twelve.

    In Matthew 19:28, Jesus tells the twelve disciples, including Judas, that when Jesus rules from his throne, they will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.


    Matthew recounted the reports that Judas Iscariot hanged himself and because the eyewitness saw his body burst open and the insides spilled out, the report was recounted in the Acts of early christians.

    Apostle Paul never mentioned JESUS APPEARED TO THE TWELVE apostles. LOL. You make me laugh.

    Yeah that was true, they will sit (BEING a promise). How about if one of the twelve will not continue? And really afterwards being unfaithful, Judas welcomed satan unto himself...therefore the twelfth which was Matthias must be the fulfilling of Matthew 19:28.
     
  20. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,973

    Here is the passage where Paul teaches that Jesus did appear to the "Twelve".

    1 Corinthians 15:4-6
    4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.

    If he never appeared to the Twelve, as the gospels teach because Judas was dead, then how can anyone be sure that He appeared to the five hundred, as Paul also teaches, either?

    Hmmm...
     
  21. kerux Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    99
    12 not 12 first apostles

    5and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve.
    Of course, there was no other Peter there than St. Peter, Apostle to the Jews. The Twelve does not mean the Twelve apostles because Paul would sound to be in an illogical mind. If those pertained to the TWELVE APOSTLES, Paul must have said "..and that he appeared to Peter, one of the twelve. Then, the eleven..." YOU SHOULD THINK MORE...

    1Cr 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

    And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

    why not ask my presiding minister... esoriano.wordpress.com
     
  22. Wisdom_Seeker Speaker of my truth Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,184
    This only proves that the Bible was translated and changed in the process... But I don´t think this should be used as an argument against Jesus, God, or the disciples. The Romans were political evil doers.
     
  23. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,973

    If it was "translated and changed in the process" then how does anyone know what the truth really is? And which church, if any, teaches "the truth" today?
     

Share This Page