Name Any "Inconsistency" Of The Bible, And I'll Explain How It's NOT Inconsistent

god tells us not to punish other ppl and that we should always forgive them but the jack@ss, god always punishes first and THEN forgives them after they're ruined or dead. kind of hypocratical if u ask me.

AND there is no god. i would seriously rather get my knowledge from a science book with proven scientific facts rather than some 1000 yr old book that was translated by KING JAMES, normal human being who probably mistranslated whole parts of the bible. the original bible was written by HUMAN HANDS, which are capable of lying and i would seriously doubt that after 1000 yrs, the story would remain consistant. there are also missing gospels that were just discovered that contradicts the modern bible and they were DEFINITELY part of the original bible.

wait wait wait.....

"Name Any "Inconsistency" Of The Bible, And I'll Explain How It's NOT Inconsistent "

a little high and mighty there arent we? sorry....that just makes you seem like a very....errr......."righteous" person

heres an inconsistency for ya-

what do you think of the lilum?
lilith?
do you know what im talking about? if not, brush up.

oh heres another-

why isnt the text commonly referred to as "gods word" not from "god" at all?

Originally posted by silQ
god tells us not to punish other ppl and that we should always forgive them but the jack@ss, god always punishes first and THEN forgives them after they're ruined or dead. kind of hypocratical if u ask me.

AND there is no god. i would seriously rather get my knowledge from a science book with proven scientific facts rather than some 1000 yr old book that was translated by KING JAMES, normal human being who probably mistranslated whole parts of the bible. the original bible was written by HUMAN HANDS, which are capable of lying and i would seriously doubt that after 1000 yrs, the story would remain consistant. there are also missing gospels that were just discovered that contradicts the modern bible and they were DEFINITELY part of the original bible.

GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

king james, hahahha! theres a joke in the phrase "honest translation" for ya. i dont have any specifics, but i can prolly find some. i know theres tons about him leaving out lillith.

but heres an intersting note- in cinderella, the text originally wrote that she had a FUR slipper. some moron mistook FUR for GLASS....so yes, we have been lied to all this time!!!!!!! sorryi just think thats a funny instance of mistranslation.

and the human hands part- oh you are wonderful, thank you for saying what i was gonna say to this thread before i even read it!

Originally posted by SonsOfLiberty
I am a he Simple Truth

. Your doing an excellent job by the way, I'm just here to help.

Ok, sacrifices were necessary before Jesus Christ came. Sacrifices were made to cleanse oneself of sin, this had to be done repeatedly all ones life in order to please God. However, God sent His son, Jesus Christ, as the ultimate and final sacrifice. Jesus was crucified then resurected symbolizing his sacrifice, this is why He is sometimes called the Lamb of God (the belmishless lamb was used in Old Testament times as a sacrifice). When Jesus died on the cross, the vale in the Temple split in half and fell away. This symbolized the seperation of man and God falling away. No longer would man have to make blood sacrifices to God, no longer did man have to go through priests (the tribe of Levi) in order to "commune" with God. Jesus Christs sacrifice was the final and ultimate sacrifice, therefore we no longer have to commit blood sacrifices.

Thank, I even know the answer, sometimes you dont see the answer.

Originally posted by SpittinCobra

Originally posted by SonsOfLiberty
I am a he Simple Truth

. Your doing an excellent job by the way, I'm just here to help.

Ok, sacrifices were necessary before Jesus Christ came. Sacrifices were made to cleanse oneself of sin, this had to be done repeatedly all ones life in order to please God. However, God sent His son, Jesus Christ, as the ultimate and final sacrifice. Jesus was crucified then resurected symbolizing his sacrifice, this is why He is sometimes called the Lamb of God (the belmishless lamb was used in Old Testament times as a sacrifice). When Jesus died on the cross, the vale in the Temple split in half and fell away. This symbolized the seperation of man and God falling away. No longer would man have to make blood sacrifices to God, no longer did man have to go through priests (the tribe of Levi) in order to "commune" with God. Jesus Christs sacrifice was the final and ultimate sacrifice, therefore we no longer have to commit blood sacrifices.

Thank, I even know the answer, sometimes you dont see the answer.

Gday all,

would like to comment on this one,

Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

does this mean he practiced what the Law (Torah) said?

I mean look, as the NT tells us that this isnt really what happend with Jesus(pbuh), this is just a copy of a copy of a copy, agree?
According to.....
There is clearly a 3rd person involed here, copying something from something or even worse, he could be hearing something and then he writes it down.

Salaam

Guerilla

SilQ, thanks for your opinion, but please, this is a thread that is addressing the issue of whether there are inconsistencies in the bible or not. You are welcome to participate, but you will have to be more specific about which parts lead you to believe what you do, so that we can address them here. It sounds you are interested in debating on if we can actually take the bible as the word of God. This is a great topic, but is a separate topic. I was actually thinking of starting that one after this one wears down some. So save it for that, or start your own now. Thanks very much.

Originally posted by Scat
wait wait wait.....

"Name Any "Inconsistency" Of The Bible, And I'll Explain How It's NOT Inconsistent "

a little high and mighty there arent we? sorry....that just makes you seem like a very....errr......."righteous" person

heres an inconsistency for ya-

what do you think of the lilum?
lilith?
do you know what im talking about? if not, brush up.

oh heres another-

why isnt the text commonly referred to as "gods word" not from "god" at all?

By no means am I trying to be arrogant or trying to look as smart as possible. It's just that I'm christian and am very confident in the story of the gospel and what the bible says. I happen to have been studying it a lot lately, independently I might add, so I feel very familiar with it. And as a christian, I thought that maybe I could clear up some misconceptions about the bible.
About lilith, I know what you're talking about. However, I'm not going to talk about that here because lilith is not mentioned in the bible, and therefore there is no inconsistency about it. We could talk about it in a thread that I'm thinking of doing after this one winds down about if and how we can know if the bible is authentically from God and not from man. I think it would be a good thing to discuss.

Guerilla your post is confusing, what exactly are you asking? As for your excerpt from Mathew, Jesus's birth and subsequent life and resurection fulfilled prophecy from the Old Testament (i.e. see SimpleTruth's signature).

Gday all,

would like to comment on this one,

Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

does this mean he practiced what the Law (Torah) said?

I mean look, as the NT tells us that this isnt really what happend with Jesus(pbuh), this is just a copy of a copy of a copy, agree?
According to.....
There is clearly a 3rd person involed here, copying something from something or even worse, he could be hearing something and then he writes it down.

Salaam

Guerilla


Hey Guerilla, thanks for chiming in. Maybe I'm just dumb, but I didn't catch what you were really getting at, especially the second part. About the Torah, Jesus did follow some of it, and fulfilled the other parts of it. Anyway, could you please clarify for me? Thanks and sorry.

Originally posted by SimpleTruth

Originally posted by Scat
wait wait wait.....

"Name Any "Inconsistency" Of The Bible, And I'll Explain How It's NOT Inconsistent "

a little high and mighty there arent we? sorry....that just makes you seem like a very....errr......."righteous" person

heres an inconsistency for ya-

what do you think of the lilum?
lilith?
do you know what im talking about? if not, brush up.

oh heres another-

why isnt the text commonly referred to as "gods word" not from "god" at all?

By no means am I trying to be arrogant or trying to look as smart as possible. It's just that I'm christian and am very confident in the story of the gospel and what the bible says. I happen to have been studying it a lot lately, independently I might add, so I feel very familiar with it. And as a christian, I thought that maybe I could clear up some misconceptions about the bible.
About lilith, I know what you're talking about. However, I'm not going to talk about that here because lilith is not mentioned in the bible, and therefore there is no inconsistency about it. We could talk about it in a thread that I'm thinking of doing after this one winds down about if and how we can know if the bible is authentically from God and not from man. I think it would be a good thing to discuss.

IT IS IN THE BIBLE

no, i dont have specific verses for you, but throughout the bible, people are referred to as "the lillum" or "children of the lillith"

why was lillith taken out? did king james accidnetaly forget to erase the rest of her connections throughout the big book?

thats a pretty big loophole youre using though, the fact that its not there is the inconsistency.

Scat,

You saying "it's in the Bible" doesn't really do much for me. If you want a response on some great conspiracy of the de-lillith-ation of the Bible, you're going to have to do the upfront homework and produce some evidence of what you are claiming.

We're not going to do your work for you.

Hey, if they are there, just simply cite it please, that's all. I'm trying to keep this thread as friendly as possible. I'm not trying to offend you or attack you. Read the rest of it if you haven't already. We've covered a lot already and things have been going smoothly. Just be specific about what you are bringing up so we can address it. Thanks.

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
Basically, the sons of God are angels. However, these angels in Genesis 6 aren't just angels in general. They took fancy to the daughters of men, and married them, but more relevant is the fact that they had sex with them. Now, angels and humans are separate creations of God. He didn't want a cross of creations like this. So the angels we're talking about here are the fallen angels. Satan's followers and rebels.

You haven't told me anything I didn't know....but perhaps I didn't phrase my question correctly.

The "Sons of God" indicates that God (IMHO)--in whatever terms you want to accept it-- had offspring.
His sons saw that what their father had created was beautiful and so took them as wives.

You attempt to say that these were fallen angels. They couldn't have been. The fall happened before this occurred.

God would NOT have allowed fallen angels to come to earth to breed with "mans daughters"

Do you know the reason angels fell?

They wanted free will....


And to me (again IMO) it seems that people forget where the bible comes from.
It's not like there were different versions .
There is one original bible that is the Torah
The rest are offshoots of different religion and so have different interpertations.

The Greeks translated the Torah and it pretty much went from there.

What you are attempting to do is answer questions about the Bible based on your faith and beliefs.
And that is fine.

But you can't just say that the Sons of God were fallen angels, because they would be mentioned no where in the original Old Testament, simply because they would be "bad" and would not be called the Sons of God.

Again, IMO .

Now answer this.
Do you know what a "mudra" is?

"Mudras are a non-verbal mode of communication and self-expression, consisting of hand gestures and finger-postures. They are symbolic sign based finger patterns taking the place, but retaining the efficacy of the spoken word, and are used to evoke in the mind ideas symbolizing divine powers or the deities themselves. The composition of a mudra is based on certain movements of the fingers; in other words, they constitute a highly stylized form of gestureal communication. It is an external expression of 'inner resolve', suggesting that such non-verbal communications are more powerful than the spoken word. "

Most people associate mudras with Buddha, but if you look at A LOT of paintings, drawings, etc of Jesus AND others, they also, use mudras.





OR





Can you explain to me, how to separate religions BOTH have the same form of "communication"?

Ok Netstorm, thank you for your reply. First, about the sons of God, Valhall and I decided it was too involved and a big topic by itself, so Valhall just started a thread on that. I will lay out my case and back it up with detail on that thread when I have time. It'd be cool if you contribute to it too.

About the mudra's. Honestly, I don't know much about these gestures. However, I really want to try and just focus on the bible and its text and discuss possible inconsistencies within it. So maybe start a new thread for it? But I can't say much about it anyway. Also, I really didn't understand what you meant by separating two religions on that last line you wrote.

Whatdoes a painting have to do with anything? Jesus did not do the painting did he?



anyway.


This whole conversation comes down to wha bible you use. if its the KJV NIV or new american bible ect you will find 100s of errors andmistranslations and even more inconsistancies. In the original 1611 KJV they used pagan symbols and mentioned shakespear in the psalms while leaving out key phrases like commiting adultury. Most bibles today are literally translatins from satan to
cause even more of exactly whats happening in this forum. and i garuntee most of yu are using the bibles i mentioned.




Ill have more ater peace.

Originally posted by Truth

Whatdoes a painting have to do with anything? Jesus did not do the painting did he?



anyway.


This whole conversation comes down to wha bible you use. if its the KJV NIV or new american bible ect you will find 100s of errors andmistranslations and even more inconsistancies. In the original 1611 KJV they used pagan symbols and mentioned shakespear in the psalms while leaving out key phrases like commiting adultury. Most bibles today are literally translatins from satan to
cause even more of exactly whats happening in this forum. and i garuntee most of yu are using the bibles i mentioned.




Ill have more ater peace.

Hey Truth. About errors and such about mistranslations, I strongly disagree. A few things don't carry well through the translations from Hebrew to English, but nothing extreme enough to cause what you say. There are still copies of the bible that predate the KJV, so if what we have now was so distorted, it would be easy to tell by comparing to the very old copies. I truly believe that satan definitely is actively trying to decieve and mislead, but not too much has happened to the bible. For the very concern of what you are talking about, I decided to learn Hebrew. So far, I don't see any big discrepancies. But, I would like to hear what you have to say about what you know. But could you maybe start another thread for that? I want to keep this thread focused on the topic. Thanks.

dude....i stated my inconsistancy: god says that we can't punish others for their wrong doing and that we should forgive them but god punishes them severly, sometimes with death and THEN he forgives! WTF IS UP WITH THAT?!?!?!?

SilQ please give a specific instance for us to work off of, not just a broad based accusation .

netstorm-

that first "mudra" is also the same hand position used in classical ballet.

the second looks nothing like the first.

and how can two groups have the same communication? the same way two unrelated groups show love, sadness, happiness, or anger.

or...worship?

they fell because they wanted free will.....thats beautifully tragic. so humans, having free will, does that make us all follwers of satan, like these renegade angels? you would think not, but isnt it the same correlation. one could say we are, until we stand by gods side. but wouldnt that be forking up all the free will you have to simply blindly follow some faith bestowed upon you?

god is love and happiness and blah blah blah right? then why is he casting away those who wish to think freely? acceptance is key to following god, unless of course, you are god. huh? this scares me. it seems as if what we are has become more important than what we believe. OH! image input!



sorry if im coming off as mean or attacking, im just very passionate on the subject.


as to lillith, the myth goes something like this-
"It is said that Lillith was the twin sister of Adam and dwelt with him in the Garden at Paradise. Adam was king of Eden and Lillith wished to be co-ruler with him, but the Lord of Light permitted it not. Lillith was beautiful and wise. She wearied of her brother, Adam, who was less wise than she. Lillith refused to bear children from Adam. The Lord of Light was angered and turned Lillith out of Paradise. Samuel, an angel of the Lord of Light and a son of god, fell in love with Lillith. To Samuel, Lillith bore three half-god, half-human children, all called the nephilim. Their wisdom, power and beauty was so great that the children of Darkness were afraid of them and called them monstrous names to defile them. She lived as a daughter of the night mother, calling the people to dance and be joyous by the light of the moon. Her symbol was the night owl, and those who followed her called her Arionrhod."

in the bible-

Isaiah 34:14
Wildcats shall meet with hyenas,
goat-demons shall call to each other;
there too Lilith shall repose,
and find a place to rest.
There shall the owl nest
and lay and hatch and brood in its shadow

Dead Sea Scrolls-

And I, the Sage,
declare the grandeur of his radiance
in order to frighten and terrify
all the spirits of the ravaging angels
and the bastard spirits,
demons, Liliths, owls and [jackals...]
and those who strike unexpectedly
to lead astray the spirit of knowledge....

many pictures in renaissance paintings depict the serpant as a woman, possibly lillith? these are disputable, but an interesting comparison to note the christian animosity for her, seeing how she was a woman whom defied god. first, god is perfect, second, her being a woman stings even more, seeing how at the time of the bible being written, women were property, objects.




from the temptation scene at the notre dame cathedral




michelangelo's Temptation and Fall (sistene Chapel)




Detail from Temptation, Fall, and Expulsion
from Les Tres Riches Heures du Duc de Berry, 1411-1416.

Alphabet of Ben Sira-

"The angles who are in charge of medicine: Snvi, Snsvi, and Smnglof. After God created Adam, who was alone, He said, 'It is not good for man to be alone' (Gen. 2:18). He then created a woman for Adam, from the earth, as He had created Adam himself, and called her Lilith. Adam and Lilith began to fight. She said, 'I will not lie below,' and he said, 'I will not lie beneath you, but only on top. For you are fit only to be in the bottom position, while am to be in the superior one.' Lilith responded, 'We are equal to each other inasmuch as we were both created from the earth.' But they would not listen to one another. When Lilith saw this, she pronounced the Ineffable Name and flew away into the air. Adam stood in prayer before his Creator: 'Sovereign of the universe!' he said, 'the woman you gave me has run away.' At once, the Holy One, blessed be He, sent these three angles to bring her back."


A contrasting debate on the existence of lilith-

The legend in question was inspired by the Bible's dual accounts of the creation of the first woman, which led its author to the conclusion that Adam had a first wife before his marriage to Eve. Adam's original mate was the demonic Lilith who had been fashioned, just like her male counterpart, from the dust of the earth. Lilith insisted from the outset on equal treatment, a fact which caused constant friction between the couple. Eventually the frustrated Lilith used her magical powers to fly away from her spouse. At Adam's urging, God dispatched three angels to negotiate her return. When these angels made threats against Lilith's demonic descendants, she countered that she would prey eternally upon newborn human babies, who could be saved only by invoking the protection of the three angels. In the end Lilith stood her ground and never returned to her husband.

The story implies that when Eve was afterwards fashioned out of Adam's rib (symbolic of her subjection to him), this was to serve as an antidote to Lilith's short-lived attempt at egalitarianism. Here, declare the feminists matronizingly, we have a clear statement of the Rabbinic Attitude Towards Women!

There is only one slight problem with this theory: The story of Lilith is not actually found in any authentic Rabbinic tradition. Although it is repeatedly cited as a "Rabbinic legend" or a "midrash," it is not recorded in any ancient Jewish text!
The tale of Lilith originates in a medieval work called "the Alphabet of Ben-Sira," a work whose relationship to the conventional streams of Judaism is, to say the least, problematic.

Eventually the tale of Lilith was included in a popular English-language compendium of Rabbinic legend, and some uncritical readers--unable or unwilling to check after the editor's sources--cited it as a representative Rabbinic statement on the topic. As tends to happen in such instances, subsequent authors kept copying from one another until the original error turned into an unchallenged historical fact.

could the myth of lillith simply been mere coincidence? or could this legend have scared the christians enough to portray her demonically (paintings, verses) in their later texts to which they adapted to the torah?

lillith- she's evil because shes equal?! couldnt this be connected to the fallen angels, kicked out of paradise because they wanted equality...free will?

a heated debate, no less

Originally posted by silQ
dude....i stated my inconsistancy: 1god says that we can't punish others for their wrong doing and that we should forgive them but 2god punishes them severly, sometimes with death and THEN he forgives! WTF IS UP WITH THAT?!?!?!?

hmmmmmm....true!
lets look at one-

1
Genesis 50:17 - So shall ye say unto Joseph, Forgive, I pray thee now, the trespass of thy brethren, and their sin; for they did unto thee evil: and now, we pray thee, forgive the trespass of the servants of the God of thy father. And Joseph wept when they spake unto him.

Psalms 36:7 - How excellent is thy lovingkindness, O God! therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of thy wings.

2

Genesis 6:13 - And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

Genesis 9:17 - And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth.

whoever said this was too broad and needed specifics, there you go!

and add to this- the story of cain and abel????