Bible Contradictions

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
561

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
Your first paragraph is hilarious. So my argument is unfair because it’s a “full all out argument”? It’s just simply too concrete to even begin debunking? The video may seem overwhelming, but it’s actually a very simple premise. All he is doing is laying out the life of Jesus as accounted for in the bible, then he actually goes out of his way to try and reconcile them FOR the Christians. Of course, this can’t be done, so at the end of the video he turns the question over to the Christians and that brings us to this point.

All you (or anyone else for that matter) has to do is reconcile these contradictions about the life of Jesus and the entire argument falls apart. This should be easy as I’m sure you all have read and comprehended your bible… Right?

Understand, the only reason why there is more than one issue to deal with here is because there is more than one contradiction in your so-called “flawless” Holy book.

[/quote]

You’re being emotional, which is not conductive to civil discourse.[/quote]

Asserted, but not explicated. So typical of your posts. =/

562

Are you all incapable of comprehending verbal and visual information? Is text the only thing you undertsand???
The video goes into detail about every verse there is an issue with and even creates a visual timeline to accompany it. I’m embarrassed for you.

Here’s something that should be easy for you. When was Jesus cricified?

According to John 19:14-16, it was “After noon on the day before the Passover meal”, but according to Mark 14:12 and Mark 15:25, it was “Mid-morning on the day after the Passover meal”.

So, who is correct, Mark or John?

563

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

First, the word disciple comes from the Latin discipulus meaning “student”, “one who is ready to learn”. So yes, I am a disciple of psychohistory, in fact, I am a disciple of all science. I fully understood your point and re-asserting it doesn’t make it any more correct nor does it address anything I just wrote.

If redirecting responsibility from your own life onto something else is foreign to Christianity, why are all events considered an act of God? Why is it you must give yourself in totality to God if you are to remain independent at the same time? This is a very hard thing for you to see from the inside, almost impossible, but I assure you that from the outside it is very easy to see how this is a mere parental projection and how it is a matter of surrendering your life and responsibility for it over to “God”.

I call them so-called religions because the root of religiousness is internal search. These colloquial “religions” serve only to corrupt others for personal gain. It is a twisting of language to make otherwise psychotic things seem divine and righteous. How lame would life be if the answers to our deepest selves could be explained in mere words and written down into a book to be generalized over every living person. We’re all individuals. No one book can dictate how everyone should or even CAN be. It’s utterly ridiculous. Persons follow these “holy” books only because REAL internal search requires great courage and effort. Nobody wants to do it. It’s easier to pretend, it’s easier to look to the outside world for a “purpose” and it becomes especially easier when everyone else pretends with you. A truly religious person needs no holy book. His whole existence is his holy book.

If you think that there is ever a time where one MUST be suffering, then this isn’t a matter of me being too young, but of you being too old and accumulating a foolish philosophy to accompany it. [/quote]
I think you have some serious misconceptions about Christianity. Let me attempt, at least, to correct them for you, so you don’t debate with straw men.

First, not all events are considered as acts of God. In fact the view of most Christians myself included is that there are very few occasions that are acts of God with most things occuring within the framework of the universe He created.

Second, giving yourself to God is not giving over control of your life it is merely accepting He is your creator and then trying to follow a moral order. It is not a dictated life and there is no surrender of responsibility to God. Rather there is responsibility, because God. I can see how from the outside you find this to be parental projection, but you should understand from the inside it is the opposite, as in parent child relationships reflect (imperfectly mind you) our relationship with God. I could reiterate your words here and say something like this is difficult to see from the outside, maybe even impossible…

Third, as to [quote] Ryuu: How lame would life be if the answers to our deepest selves could be explained in mere words and written down into a book to be generalized over every living person.[/quote] That would be lame. I’m not sure what you mean by [quote] answers to our deepest selves[/quote], but if you mean it lays out our origins it does that and it lays out morals to live by, but I don’t think it generalizes anything regarding everyones lives beyond that.

Fourth, [quote] Ryuu: We’re all individuals. No one book can dictate how everyone should or even CAN be. It’s utterly ridiculous. Persons follow these “holy” books only because REAL internal search requires great courage and effort. Nobody wants to do it. It’s easier to pretend, it’s easier to look to the outside world for a “purpose” and it becomes especially easier when everyone else pretends with you. A truly religious person needs no holy book. His whole existence is his holy book. [/quote]

Are you familiar at all with any Christian Saints or mystics? If not I suggest you read some of their works. Christianity confirms individuality and does not dictate in anyway how everyone should or can be. As for following holy books instead of internal search, that is not what Christianity is about. Christian mystics were known for large amounts of internal searching, and I agree it takes great courage and effort (I’ll concede that a lot of people don’t do this, Christian and other). You are wrong that no one wants to engage in this internal reflection. I understand when you say it is easier to pretend when others pretend with you. I get that I really do, but it cuts both ways. As for a truly religious person needing no holy book and their whole life being their holy book, well that just means there is a lot of bad literature out there (sorry, I have to make some jokes in otherwise serious discussion).

Lastly, [quote] Ryuu said: If you think that there is ever a time where one MUST be suffering, then this isn’t a matter of me being too young, but of you being too old and accumulating a foolish philosophy to accompany it. [/quote] This was in response to me saying you are very young after you said [quote] Ryuu: It’s all just for fun. [/quote]
There may be some things about which I am foolish, but I guarantee you that if you live by

[quote] It’s all just for fun[/quote] you will end up empty and unfulfilled. There are times when one should (not must because no one is forced to do anything) cast aside their own comfort yes. For instance being a parent you will have to sacrifice, being a friend, I think you get the idea. Living by “It’s all just for fun” would make you the most self absorbed person on the planet (unless of course you temper this with realizing that it isn’t fun when your fun hurts others etc…).

Now, it’s late and it’s bed time…[/quote]

God is omnipotent and all power, yes? Therefore EVERYTHING that is allowed to happen is God’s will. If it is not his will, he wouldn’t allow it to happen. Sure you can say “but we have free will and can choose to do evil in spite of god’s will”, fine, but you’ve opened up yet another contradiction. If God already knows every action we will ever make then how do we have free will? All our actions are already predestined by God’s knowledge. If they aren’t, then God is not omnipotent, if they are, then we have no free will and everything is God’s will.
So, how do you reconcile free will with God’s supposed omnipotent?

Christianity is about individuality and not conformity? Then I suppose the ten commandments really should have been called the “ten suggestions”. =/

Selfishness is not a bad thing. It can be a very beautiful thing if you understand it. Selfishness is simply considering your happiness first, greed is when you wand others to consider you first and there is nothing more greedy than saying to someone “you shouldn’t be so selfish!” because you are essentially saying they should put YOUR wants before their own. You never have to put yourself second and anyone whom says you do is merely expressing their greed. This is an important difference. You must first love yourself before you can love others, this is selfish, but it is also unnecessary. A greedy persons expects to be loved without having to give any. When you consider yourself first, nothing has to be a suffering. Pain will come, sure, pain come with change and is inevitable, but suffering only happens when you resist change. Pain is cause by change, suffering is cause by you.
If you are ever suffering in your life, it’s because you are swimming against its tide.

[/quote]
Sorry, I’ve grown weary of chopping down your straw men, so I am only going to chop one down right now.

Omnipotence does mean all powerful, but it does not mean that power has to be used all the time. Knowing what someone is going to do is not the same as causing it/forcing it. Allowing something to happen against your will has nothing to do with how much power you could wield.

You are absolutely full of misinformation that someone has fed you. I don’t blame you for this, but you really ought to think about some of the things you’ve been taught. I imagine that whole omnipotence, free will, predestination, God’s foreknowledge thing you brought up is a complete rehash of something you heard someone else say or write (quite likely the same guy that made your Jesus timeline video).

You should go lift now Ryuu and try to get rid of some of you anger/angst.

564

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:
<<<[quote]Tiribulus wrote: get your crap together Jake[/quote]
Got it, sorry about that.[/quote]No need to apologize. Jist tryin to be helpful. It will make your posts more accessible.

565

[quote]forlife wrote:
<<< Think how lost most people would be if their religion was indisputably proven to be false. >>>[/quote]The trouble there, with the one true God that is, is that folks would have to stand on God’s Earth, breath God’s air, bear God’s image, incessantly confront God’s universal revelation and generally assume His indisputable majesty while they indisputably prove He didn’t exist. They do it all the time.

566

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

First, the word disciple comes from the Latin discipulus meaning “student”, “one who is ready to learn”. So yes, I am a disciple of psychohistory, in fact, I am a disciple of all science. I fully understood your point and re-asserting it doesn’t make it any more correct nor does it address anything I just wrote.

If redirecting responsibility from your own life onto something else is foreign to Christianity, why are all events considered an act of God? Why is it you must give yourself in totality to God if you are to remain independent at the same time? This is a very hard thing for you to see from the inside, almost impossible, but I assure you that from the outside it is very easy to see how this is a mere parental projection and how it is a matter of surrendering your life and responsibility for it over to “God”.

I call them so-called religions because the root of religiousness is internal search. These colloquial “religions” serve only to corrupt others for personal gain. It is a twisting of language to make otherwise psychotic things seem divine and righteous. How lame would life be if the answers to our deepest selves could be explained in mere words and written down into a book to be generalized over every living person. We’re all individuals. No one book can dictate how everyone should or even CAN be. It’s utterly ridiculous. Persons follow these “holy” books only because REAL internal search requires great courage and effort. Nobody wants to do it. It’s easier to pretend, it’s easier to look to the outside world for a “purpose” and it becomes especially easier when everyone else pretends with you. A truly religious person needs no holy book. His whole existence is his holy book.

If you think that there is ever a time where one MUST be suffering, then this isn’t a matter of me being too young, but of you being too old and accumulating a foolish philosophy to accompany it. [/quote]
I think you have some serious misconceptions about Christianity. Let me attempt, at least, to correct them for you, so you don’t debate with straw men.

First, not all events are considered as acts of God. In fact the view of most Christians myself included is that there are very few occasions that are acts of God with most things occuring within the framework of the universe He created.

Second, giving yourself to God is not giving over control of your life it is merely accepting He is your creator and then trying to follow a moral order. It is not a dictated life and there is no surrender of responsibility to God. Rather there is responsibility, because God. I can see how from the outside you find this to be parental projection, but you should understand from the inside it is the opposite, as in parent child relationships reflect (imperfectly mind you) our relationship with God. I could reiterate your words here and say something like this is difficult to see from the outside, maybe even impossible…

Third, as to [quote] Ryuu: How lame would life be if the answers to our deepest selves could be explained in mere words and written down into a book to be generalized over every living person.[/quote] That would be lame. I’m not sure what you mean by [quote] answers to our deepest selves[/quote], but if you mean it lays out our origins it does that and it lays out morals to live by, but I don’t think it generalizes anything regarding everyones lives beyond that.

Fourth, [quote] Ryuu: We’re all individuals. No one book can dictate how everyone should or even CAN be. It’s utterly ridiculous. Persons follow these “holy” books only because REAL internal search requires great courage and effort. Nobody wants to do it. It’s easier to pretend, it’s easier to look to the outside world for a “purpose” and it becomes especially easier when everyone else pretends with you. A truly religious person needs no holy book. His whole existence is his holy book. [/quote]

Are you familiar at all with any Christian Saints or mystics? If not I suggest you read some of their works. Christianity confirms individuality and does not dictate in anyway how everyone should or can be. As for following holy books instead of internal search, that is not what Christianity is about. Christian mystics were known for large amounts of internal searching, and I agree it takes great courage and effort (I’ll concede that a lot of people don’t do this, Christian and other). You are wrong that no one wants to engage in this internal reflection. I understand when you say it is easier to pretend when others pretend with you. I get that I really do, but it cuts both ways. As for a truly religious person needing no holy book and their whole life being their holy book, well that just means there is a lot of bad literature out there (sorry, I have to make some jokes in otherwise serious discussion).

Lastly, [quote] Ryuu said: If you think that there is ever a time where one MUST be suffering, then this isn’t a matter of me being too young, but of you being too old and accumulating a foolish philosophy to accompany it. [/quote] This was in response to me saying you are very young after you said [quote] Ryuu: It’s all just for fun. [/quote]
There may be some things about which I am foolish, but I guarantee you that if you live by

[quote] It’s all just for fun[/quote] you will end up empty and unfulfilled. There are times when one should (not must because no one is forced to do anything) cast aside their own comfort yes. For instance being a parent you will have to sacrifice, being a friend, I think you get the idea. Living by “It’s all just for fun” would make you the most self absorbed person on the planet (unless of course you temper this with realizing that it isn’t fun when your fun hurts others etc…).

Now, it’s late and it’s bed time…[/quote]

God is omnipotent and all power, yes? Therefore EVERYTHING that is allowed to happen is God’s will. If it is not his will, he wouldn’t allow it to happen. Sure you can say “but we have free will and can choose to do evil in spite of god’s will”, fine, but you’ve opened up yet another contradiction. If God already knows every action we will ever make then how do we have free will? All our actions are already predestined by God’s knowledge. If they aren’t, then God is not omnipotent, if they are, then we have no free will and everything is God’s will.
So, how do you reconcile free will with God’s supposed omnipotent?

Christianity is about individuality and not conformity? Then I suppose the ten commandments really should have been called the “ten suggestions”. =/

Selfishness is not a bad thing. It can be a very beautiful thing if you understand it. Selfishness is simply considering your happiness first, greed is when you wand others to consider you first and there is nothing more greedy than saying to someone “you shouldn’t be so selfish!” because you are essentially saying they should put YOUR wants before their own. You never have to put yourself second and anyone whom says you do is merely expressing their greed. This is an important difference. You must first love yourself before you can love others, this is selfish, but it is also unnecessary. A greedy persons expects to be loved without having to give any. When you consider yourself first, nothing has to be a suffering. Pain will come, sure, pain come with change and is inevitable, but suffering only happens when you resist change. Pain is cause by change, suffering is cause by you.
If you are ever suffering in your life, it’s because you are swimming against its tide.

[/quote]
Sorry, I’ve grown weary of chopping down your straw men, so I am only going to chop one down right now.

Omnipotence does mean all powerful, but it does not mean that power has to be used all the time. Knowing what someone is going to do is not the same as causing it/forcing it. Allowing something to happen against your will has nothing to do with how much power you could wield.

You are absolutely full of misinformation that someone has fed you. I don’t blame you for this, but you really ought to think about some of the things you’ve been taught. I imagine that whole omnipotence, free will, predestination, God’s foreknowledge thing you brought up is a complete rehash of something you heard someone else say or write (quite likely the same guy that made your Jesus timeline video).

You should go lift now Ryuu and try to get rid of some of you anger/angst.[/quote]

You know, you keep saying “straw-man”, but you’ve never once shown exactly how my arguments are straw-men, you just sort of assert it.

I made an error in my last post, however. I meant to write omniscient, not omnipotent. How can God be omniscient if we have free will?

567

We have free will in the fact that we have no knowledge of any future event.

A scary scenario (but it is only to illustrate a point):

If you knew that in 10 years you were going to die in a plane crash, and there was nothing you could do to stop it, then it doesn’t matter what you do, you’re gonna die, and its gonna be on a plane. Even if you avoid planes, somehow in 10 years you’ll end up on a plane and crash and burn (or drown if it crashes in an ocean).

Now in reality you dont know when you’re gonna die, or how, so every move you make can potentially be a fatal one, but since you can’t NOT do anything, everything you do is your own free choice.

568

We have free will in the fact that we have no knowledge of any future event.

A scary scenario (but it is only to illustrate a point):

If you knew that in 10 years you were going to die in a plane crash, and there was nothing you could do to stop it, then it doesn’t matter what you do, you’re gonna die, and its gonna be on a plane. Even if you avoid planes, somehow in 10 years you’ll end up on a plane and crash and burn (or drown if it crashes in an ocean).

Now in reality you dont know when you’re gonna die, or how, so every move you make can potentially be a fatal one, but since you can’t NOT do anything, everything you do is your own free choice.

569

[quote]forbes wrote:
We have free will in the fact that we have no knowledge of any future event.

A scary scenario (but it is only to illustrate a point):

If you knew that in 10 years you were going to die in a plane crash, and there was nothing you could do to stop it, then it doesn’t matter what you do, you’re gonna die, and its gonna be on a plane. Even if you avoid planes, somehow in 10 years you’ll end up on a plane and crash and burn (or drown if it crashes in an ocean).

Now in reality you dont know when you’re gonna die, or how, so every move you make can potentially be a fatal one, but since you can’t NOT do anything, everything you do is your own free choice. [/quote]

Non-sequitur. The problem is our free will vs. God’s omniscience, not our free will vs. OUR omniscience (or lack thereof). If we only have free will to the extent that we don’t know the future, then it’s not free will you’re talking about, it’s common ignorance.

The problem still stands, if God knows everything then our actions are predetermined. If our actions are not predetermined then God can’t know everything as there would be factors yet to be determined.

570

Yes, God has predestined some to inherit his kingdom, and some to reject it. I don’t know who are the elect, or who are the damned. This is God’s will and nothing can be done about it. Since you don’t know who the elect are, assume everyone is, including yourself, and accept the Lord.

I do not fully understand all concepts of God, but he is the very definition of Love and he wants you to join him.

Think of it.

If God were to not exist, even if you believed in him, hey, at the end of it all, nothing good or bad happens. You just simply wont exist anymore.

But if he does exist and you reject him…things won’t be pretty.

571

Yes, God has predestined some to inherit his kingdom, and some to reject it. I don’t know who are the elect, or who are the damned. This is God’s will and nothing can be done about it. Since you don’t know who the elect are, assume everyone is, including yourself, and accept the Lord.

I do not fully understand all concepts of God, but he is the very definition of Love and he wants you to join him.

Think of it.

If God were to not exist, even if you believed in him, hey, at the end of it all, nothing good or bad happens. You just simply wont exist anymore.

But if he does exist and you reject him…things won’t be pretty.

572

Yes, God has predestined some to inherit his kingdom, and some to reject it. I don’t know who are the elect, or who are the damned. This is God’s will and nothing can be done about it. Since you don’t know who the elect are, assume everyone is, including yourself, and accept the Lord.

I do not fully understand all concepts of God, but he is the very definition of Love and he wants you to join him.

Think of it.

If God were to not exist, even if you believed in him, hey, at the end of it all, nothing good or bad happens. You just simply wont exist anymore.

But if he does exist and you reject him…things won’t be pretty.

573

[quote]forbes wrote:

Think of it.

If God were to not exist, even if you believed in him, hey, at the end of it all, nothing good or bad happens.
[/quote]

How could I make myself believe he exists even if I wanted to?

574

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Wow! This thread has gone into a quagmire…
Are you guys really going to try to educate this kid in a debate format over a forum?

I have read a few of his posts and they are so incredibly errant I wouldn’t know where to begin. It is very clear the opinions are emotive and is very loosely based on scattered facts.
The problem is a lack of education on the matter. Trying to wrestle all strawmen presented, contending with the hubris, and the "I know you are, but what am I"s has to be daunting.

[/quote]

Notice I haven’t actually argued anything…because I am not sure where to start. He’s got a I win, you lose non-argument argument and a video he posted and expected answers to, and lack of religious knowledge.[/quote]

Neither has he. I sense that he just wants to argue for the sake of argument. Pointing out historical or time line inconsistencies in the bible is certainly nothing new. It’s not a history book so the point is moot.

P.S. Did you get my PM? I am not asking because I am seeking an answer, I ask because I don’t think my PM’s are getting through and I have no way of verifying except to ask.

575

[quote]forbes wrote:
Yes, God has predestined some to inherit his kingdom, and some to reject it. I don’t know who are the elect, or who are the damned. This is God’s will and nothing can be done about it. Since you don’t know who the elect are, assume everyone is, including yourself, and accept the Lord.

I do not fully understand all concepts of God, but he is the very definition of Love and he wants you to join him.

Think of it.

If God were to not exist, even if you believed in him, hey, at the end of it all, nothing good or bad happens. You just simply wont exist anymore.

But if he does exist and you reject him…things won’t be pretty. [/quote]

So God actually wills for some to burn in hell for all eternity? How can you call him a loving God when he does something like this?

Ever heard of Pascal’s wager? That’s essentialy the argument you’re making and it has long since been debunked.

First of all, this argument can be applied to ALL religions. So which one do I choose? how do I know which God is the right one to follow?
Second, if all acts are God’s will then why did he create other “wrong” religions in the first place? Hell, why did he create ANYTHING if he already knew how it would all play out before he even created it?

576

[quote]forbes wrote:
Yes, God has predestined some to inherit his kingdom, and some to reject it. I don’t know who are the elect, or who are the damned. This is God’s will and nothing can be done about it. Since you don’t know who the elect are, assume everyone is, including yourself, and accept the Lord.

I do not fully understand all concepts of God, but he is the very definition of Love and he wants you to join him.

Think of it.

If God were to not exist, even if you believed in him, hey, at the end of it all, nothing good or bad happens. You just simply wont exist anymore.

But if he does exist and you reject him…things won’t be pretty. [/quote]

Well this simply doesn’t work. So let’s clarify things, do you believe in predestination or not? Because if you do, people cannot choose to do anything. Therefore, they cannot choose how they behave, what they do, how they do it, or where they will ultimately end up.

577

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:
Yes, God has predestined some to inherit his kingdom, and some to reject it. I don’t know who are the elect, or who are the damned. This is God’s will and nothing can be done about it. Since you don’t know who the elect are, assume everyone is, including yourself, and accept the Lord.

I do not fully understand all concepts of God, but he is the very definition of Love and he wants you to join him.

Think of it.

If God were to not exist, even if you believed in him, hey, at the end of it all, nothing good or bad happens. You just simply wont exist anymore.

But if he does exist and you reject him…things won’t be pretty. [/quote]

Well this simply doesn’t work. So let’s clarify things, do you believe in predestination or not? Because if you do, people cannot choose to do anything. Therefore, they cannot choose how they behave, what they do, how they do it, or where they will ultimately end up. [/quote]

Yes I certainly do believe in predestination. Scripture clearly points this out.

Don’t you?

578

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:
Yes, God has predestined some to inherit his kingdom, and some to reject it. I don’t know who are the elect, or who are the damned. This is God’s will and nothing can be done about it. Since you don’t know who the elect are, assume everyone is, including yourself, and accept the Lord.

I do not fully understand all concepts of God, but he is the very definition of Love and he wants you to join him.

Think of it.

If God were to not exist, even if you believed in him, hey, at the end of it all, nothing good or bad happens. You just simply wont exist anymore.

But if he does exist and you reject him…things won’t be pretty. [/quote]

Well this simply doesn’t work. So let’s clarify things, do you believe in predestination or not? Because if you do, people cannot choose to do anything. Therefore, they cannot choose how they behave, what they do, how they do it, or where they will ultimately end up. [/quote]

Yes I certainly do believe in predestination. Scripture clearly points this out.

Don’t you?[/quote]

I disagree that scripture clearly points that out. But if you believe in predestination, you do realize that nothing I can say or do or want will change anything. Actually, I don’t even have the choice.
I believe in freewill, period. I can choose God or reject God. That’s my choice. If there’s no choice, why bother doing anything?

579

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
all information is borrowed. I could of written out the arguments outlined in the video[/quote]

I’m sure the great debaters use the same excuse. [/quote]

Excuse? Are you actually criticizing my argument because it ISN’T made up? The information was already organized into this video long before even this thread was started, why would I not use it as opposed to saying the same thing in text? What difference would it make other than filling up this thread with needless posts and killing vast amounts of time?
You’re merely obfuscating the issue again. [/quote]

Actually I am not. If I wanted to debate the author of the video I would click onto YouTube, log on, and debate. Debaters, like the one who created the video, take in vast amounts of data and put it into a short and concise argument. You just posted someone else’s debate.[/quote]

Posted someone else’s debate? Is this going to be your excuse for not addressing the argument? “Oh, well, you didn’t invent it, so it’s not even worth addressing!”

Last time I checked, YOU didn’t write the bible. Should I immediately disregard your arguments because they are rooted in a book you didn’t write? Does that sound logical to you?

Stop being such a baby. My argument is laid out, you can come up with a million and one excuses to ignore it (like this childish attempt here), but at the end of the day both you and me know it is merely an excuse to avoid the reality that your bible is a mere fiction novel with an astounding array of continuity errors.

Either address the argument, or stop pretending that you can. [/quote]

No one wants to debate your weblink because it is a full all out argument. As soon as they respond to point one, you will prevent them from addressing the rest by continually arguing that one point. So it is impossible to ever make any progress.

If you find the argument compelling why not pick a point or two, lay them out and then ask for an answer.

Have you ever even looked to see if there is a response to some of the problems that are outlined in that video?

I found online sources in a matter of seconds for the first couple. I don’t neccessarily accept them, but you don’t have to debate someone to find out if your conclusion is correct.

Argument by web link is considered by most people that I know a complete waste of time, and very unrewarding.[/quote]

Your first paragraph is hilarious. So my argument is unfair because it’s a “full all out argument”? It’s just simply too concrete to even begin debunking? The video may seem overwhelming, but it’s actually a very simple premise. All he is doing is laying out the life of Jesus as accounted for in the bible, then he actually goes out of his way to try and reconcile them FOR the Christians. Of course, this can’t be done, so at the end of the video he turns the question over to the Christians and that brings us to this point.

All you (or anyone else for that matter) has to do is reconcile these contradictions about the life of Jesus and the entire argument falls apart. This should be easy as I’m sure you all have read and comprehended your bible… Right?

Understand, the only reason why there is more than one issue to deal with here is because there is more than one contradiction in your so-called “flawless” Holy book.

[/quote]

Then you must not have understood my first paragraph. I never said the video was unfair. I said that as soon as someone answered the first objection and started to move on you would begin to stall the debate with objections.

I am not interested in responding to the video because I have answered many of these issues on this board, as well as others. It gets old repeating the same conversations over again. If you would like though we could simply post responses to your video argument from the web and wait for you to answer them.

Here I will get you started on point one of the video.

http://christianthinktank.com/quirinius.html

By the way the statement that scholars have been tying to reconcile these issues like it is a crissis in Christian theological circles is just blatantly false. They are recycled arguments that have been answered, but not everyone accepted the answer.

acceptance though is not the mark of an answer. If it was we wouldn’t have the wonderful(sarcasm) flat earth society.[/quote]

If the argument in the video is totally fair, then you have nothing to complain about. That’s all there is to it. If the video points out many issues it’s not my fault nor the fault of the video maker, it’s the fault of the Bible for having so many flaws packed into one story.

How convenient is it that all of you have apparently debunked this argument so many times, but none of you are willing to actually do it or even show me where it is debunked.

Oh, what’s this? You’ve posted a link? FINALLY somebody had the balls to address the argument! Even if it did amount to little more than the old ‘>>BEFORE<< the census of Quirinius’ argument. This has already been debunked here: Jesus Timeline Part IV - YouTube

Ah hell, before you bring it up here’s part 2 and 3 aswell:

Do you now see that this is unsolvable? Your best have tried and failed. I would say massive continuity erros relative to the life of the very man your entire religion is based on is a pretty fucking big crisis, or at least it should be if you want to be taken seriously. [/quote]

nice rebuttal via web link. by the way you didn’t read the link that was not his argument. Instead he reconciles it with Tertulian’s account as well as Justin Martyr.
Here is a rebuttal to that exact video

http://www.forerunner.com/blog/my-response-to-a-cynic-on-the-chronology-of-jesus-life

By the way why does he even start the video off with the absolutely crazy notion that we take the 25th of december as a real date for the birth of Christ? No scholar really accepts that.

That right there degrades him being taken seriously.

580

Trust me on this Pat (though I suspect you won’t), You do not understand biblical predestination. If you let God define Himself first and then go to His definition of man? Predestination is taught in the bible from cover to cover in ultra hi def clarity. It just is. I have heard every attempt in the history of planet Earth to explain away the absolute Godhood of God and I am not even talking primarily about Catholic objections now.

Try this example from the 1st of Ephesians. (ESV, lest there be any quibbling over translations):

[quote]3-Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4-even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5-he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6-to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7-In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8-which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9-making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

11-In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, 12-so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. 13-In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him,were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14-who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.[/quote]What you’ll do now is dig up some passages that appear to contradict this (I’ll give ya some if ya want) and go SEE SEE SEE, man is free and not predestined. I reject that whole method of biblical interpretation and I don’t care what tradition says what. The ultimate eternal God statements such as the numerous ones like the the one above govern the statements describing or regarding man and not the other way around. God defines man and it is a woefully deficient intellectual apprehension of the nature of the thrice holy most high God at very best to force Him into a humanistic straight jacket defined by man.