Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Bible is rife with inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Did one thief repent or did both? Did Judas hang himself or did he jump off a cliff? Who found the empty tomb: Mary Magdalene alone (John); MM and "the other Mary" (two-Matthew); or several (Mark)?
The Bible is NOT completely Spirit-breathed or all details would line up. Nevertheless, enough comes through that we can learn about God's redemptive plan for mankind. That it is riddled with inconsistencies merely points to the irrefutable fact that man is wholly imperfect and that he manages to soil everything he touches, including the Scriptures.
The Bible is rife with inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Did one thief repent or did both? Did Judas hang himself or did he jump off a cliff? Who found the empty tomb: Mary Magdalene alone (John); MM and "the other Mary" (two-Matthew); or several (Mark)?
The Bible is NOT completely Spirit-breathed or all details would line up. Nevertheless, enough comes through that we can learn about God's redemptive plan for mankind. That it is riddled with inconsistencies merely points to the irrefutable fact that man is wholly imperfect and that he manages to soil everything he touches, including the Scriptures.
The inconsistencies and contradictions are deliberate. It is the only way that clues could be left about what to revise as we matured spiritually and in knowledge. The carnal minds were not equipped to understand anything but "milk." As we evolved and matured and our minds began to notice the inconsistencies and contradictions . . . that is when we were supposed to search deeper for the real spiritual answers and revise our understanding. The religious leaders over the centuries had another agenda and retained the "milk" and forbade ever acknowledging or even considering the inconsistencies and revising doctrine and dogma. They retained the ancient ignorance for over 2000+ years relatively unchanged under fiat and threat of hell for denying that the Bible was infallible and inerrant. Gross negligence of the worst sort. They have a heavy burden.
Faith is not blind. The Bible has the fingerprints of God all over it.
If there are any fingerprints to be found, they are those of the mediocre scribes who cobbled together the Bible by plagiarizing earlier religious texts and creating their own version of a monotheistic god by condensing the traits of half a dozen or more earlier regional polytheistic deities.
And why can't you Quote that as scripture?
Because it is not scripture.
'All Scripture is the word of God?' This is your words, not God's.
'The Bible is the word of God!!!" This is your words, not God's.
You can not quote this belief as scripture.
Because this belief is not it's self scripture.
I can "quote" scriptures I believe.
You repeat a false interpretive doctrine not scripture.
I'll try one last time to explain this to you, so try to understand it. Everything that the writers of the Bible included in the various books of the Bible is the word of God. For instance, God allowed the failures of Solomon during that period of his life when he had turned away from God because of his many wives (1 Kings 11:4) to be included in the Bible. That is what the book of Ecclesiastes is about. Even though Solomon was in disobedience to God, God included his failures as a part of the word of God in order to show what happens to the thinking of a person when he turns aside from God.
Solomon found himself at a number of dead ends after experimenting with sex, money, fame, philosophy, and reputation in an attempt to find happiness under the sun. God allowed Solomon to tell others what to expect if they head down those roads - failure, regret, pain, emptiness.
God did not approve of Solomon's disobedience and failures, but to teach a lesson his failures were included in the word of God.
Another example is Satan's lie to the woman in the garden, Gen 3:4 'And the serpent said to the woman, ''You surely shall not die!'' God included Satan's lie in the word of God and the lie was recorded with perfect accuracy.
Everything that is in the Bible is part of the word of God, a part of the Scriptures because God directed those things to be recorded and preserved as a part of God's message to man.
You made this statement, ''All Scripture is the word of God?' This is your words, not God's.''
The word of God itself refutes your statement as I have previously shown you. Here it is again one last time.
The Bible is rife with inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Did one thief repent or did both? Did Judas hang himself or did he jump off a cliff? Who found the empty tomb: Mary Magdalene alone (John); MM and "the other Mary" (two-Matthew); or several (Mark)?
The Bible is NOT completely Spirit-breathed or all details would line up. Nevertheless, enough comes through that we can learn about God's redemptive plan for mankind. That it is riddled with inconsistencies merely points to the irrefutable fact that man is wholly imperfect and that he manages to soil everything he touches, including the Scriptures.
Judas hanged himself from a tree at the edge of a cliff overlooking the valley of Hinnom. The rope broke and Judas fell onto a rock at the bottom of the cliff.
The gospels do not say anything about both thiefs repenting.
There were a number of women who found the empty tomb of Jesus. The different gospel writers simply named one or more of the women who found the tomb. But all the women were there. You make the mistake of thinking that each writer had to include the full details of the event.
Matt 28:1 Mary Magdalene and the other Mary.
Mark 16:1 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James, and Salome.
Luke 24:10 Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James. Also the other women.
John 20:1 Mary Magdalene.
Salome and Joanna might be different names for the same person, or they may have been two of the 'other women.'
Why would you or anyone think that there is any contradiction here?
Each gospel writer chose which of the women to mention in his gospel.
Judas hanged himself from a tree at the edge of a cliff overlooking the valley of Hinnom. The rope broke and Judas fell onto a rock at the bottom of the cliff.
The gospels do not say anything about both thiefs repenting.
There were a number of women who found the empty tomb of Jesus. The different gospel writers simply named one or more of the women who found the tomb. But all the women were there. You make the mistake of thinking that each writer had to include the full details of the event.
Matt 28:1 Mary Magdalene and the other Mary.
Mark 16:1 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James, and Salome.
Luke 24:10 Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James. Also the other women.
John 20:1 Mary Magdalene.
Salome and Joanna might be different names for the same person, or they may have been two of the 'other women.'
Why would you or anyone think that there is any contradiction here?
Each gospel writer chose which of the women to mention in his gospel.
If you think about it, if all the gospels matched exactly, in these sorts of details, wouldn't that actually erode their credibility (make one think the gospel writers conspired together on the facts)?
If you think about it, if all the gospels matched exactly, in these sorts of details, wouldn't that actually erode their credibility (make one think the gospel writers conspired together on the facts)?
If you think about it, if all the gospels matched exactly, in these sorts of details, wouldn't that actually erode their credibility (make one think the gospel writers conspired together on the facts)?
Amen, we all pick up on different details and when put together complete the story in more fullness. It is what happens in a court of law when the people are honest.
If you think about it, if all the gospels matched exactly, in these sorts of details, wouldn't that actually erode their credibility (make one think the gospel writers conspired together on the facts)?
No, I think that one would expect a divinely inspired group of accounts of the same event to reflect the same non-contradictory accounts. As it stands, the differences in the Gospels seem to reflect the type of testimony one would expect from multiple human witnesses succumbing to the frailties that time, repitition and personal biases exhibit.
To say that multiple accounts with conflicting details are proof of their veracity is a contradiction in itself. Each gospel writer understood the events in different ways, which is normal human behavior.
In other words - God (as the usual assumption of authorship or inspiration goes) does not forget and get details wrong.
Humans, on the other hand, are notorious for such behavior, and that is what an examination of the Gospel accounts reveal.
The only contradiction is human limited understanding of what one is reading. The Gospels perfectly dovetail together. It just takes more prayer and study to understand it. If one does not believe Christ to begin with, all debate is useless. One can have a lot of theology but no depth of in the Truth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
