Boro Nut

Really? If only they'd told me that the most important doctrine was that no two resurrection accounts agree I might still be a Christian. How foolish of them.

Boro Nut

Boro Nut

The clearest contradiction <can't be bothered with refs> is telling us that all the land promises made to Abraham were entirely fulfilled fully in their full entirety and nothing was left out not even a single bit just like I said it would so there and they all lived happily ever after amen. And in the very next breath provide a long detailed list all the promised bits that weren't fully fulfilled, which by my reckoning includes every single one of the buggers to this day. That is what a contradiction is.

Boro Nut

angelo

[QUOTE=Gracchus;4728648]Well, at the very least, if the god of the Bible were the real god, then he deserves all the respect and worship due to any sadistic, egomaniacal, moron. But the god of the Bible is just as false as Zeus, Odin, Amon-Ra, or Ahura Hey hold on a minute. I drive a Mazda. Fine car. I never realized it was named after a god. :Cheeky:

premjan

That Mazda comes from "Matsuda".

Gawen

James 1:13: "Let no man say . . . I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."
vs.
Genesis 22:1: "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

John 8:14: "Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true."
vs.
John 5:31: "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

No one sees god:
John 1:18
Exodus 33:20
John 6:46
I John 4:12
vs. people see god:
Genesis 32:30
Exodus 33:11
Isaiah 6:1
Job 42:5

angelo

The whole bloody mess of the bible is one great contradiction. From Genesis right up to Revelation. All B/S. And then was made even worse by fundamentalist interpretation in later years.

Tartantyco

-I just had to say something about this; if he has split humanity into two camps, for and against, then the sentence, the saying, loses it's meaning. The entire point of saying "those who are not for me are against me" is to imply that the undecided and the who-gives-a-flying-fuck people, etc, are through their inaction against him. The same holds true for the opposite statement. It means he is just spewing pointless crap.

angelo

[QUOTE=Tartantyco;4734680] -I just had to say something about this; if he has split humanity into two camps, for and against, then the sentence, the saying, loses it's meaning. May I add that the people for, are shrinking in number year by year. [The traditional christians anyway.]

Wayne Delia

On the Existence of God forum I often use the so-called "Deadly Trilemma:"

1 John 4:8 - "God is love."
1 Corinthians 13:4 - "Love is not jealous/envious."
Exodus 20:5 - "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God."

Such a God cannot logically exist.

Also: Matthew 10:9-10 indicates Jesus, when delivering the so-called "Great Commission" to the twelve disciples, tells them not to bring sandals or a staff. Mark 6:8-9, during the same instructions, Jesus tells them to bring sandals and a staff. Not surprisingly, the most common apologetic for this contradiction is "But that's not a major point of Bible theology."

WMD

Wayne Delia

That technically isn't a contradiction, but rather a contrived cover-up for an unexpected situation in which the elders didn't know what actually happened. It's inconsistent with the way soldiers would be punished for making such an admission of negligence - from what I have heard, soldiers could be killed for that level of incompetence (falling asleep while on watch).

My question about this particular story is how could it ever be reported by the author of Matthew, since there were no Christian-supporter eyewitnesses or earwitnesses to anything that was said in this particular conversation between the elders and the bribed soldiers. (Oh - right... God "inspired" that material.)

WMD