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

Originally posted by Gazrok
Here it is....the ultimate inconsistency....

No need for verses, it's just in principle..

It is stated that God is both perfect, and omniscient.

Being so, how can he put the onus on man for man's transgressions? How can a perfect being create anything of imperfection? It's a paradox. If God was omniscient, then he knew of man's eventual failing, therefore isn't the onus then upon God?

Ah, Mr. Clever huh? If you read the thread, what you bring up was one of the first inconsistencies discussed. He didn't create imperfection. HUMANS screwed it up. Satan was responsible for tempting and decieving, and Adam and Eve are responsible for giving in to it. God did NOT cause the sin, He is completely opposite of that. We were capable of messing up because we had a choice. We were given free will by God, because without that, love is not possible. Love is not love, if you have no choice about the matter. So, I SUPPOSE God could have created us so that we COULDN'T mess up, but we would be mindless robots. Does THAT sound better to you? Btw, read the thread where we went into it.

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
We were capable of messing up because we had a choice. We were given free will by God

no, we werent. god made us to tend to his fields.

we werent given free will.

we took it.

Originally posted by Scat

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
We were capable of messing up because we had a choice. We were given free will by God

no, we werent. god made us to tend to his fields.

we werent given free will.

we took it.

Yes, sorry for that, you're right Scat. I should have said that He allowed it. Understand, that if He truly didn't want Adam and Eve to take the fruit, He definitely could've stopped them. He could've destroyed satan then and there before he talked to Eve, or any number of ways. I mean, He created everything and has complete power to have things go His way. But He didn't stop it, He let it happen. Why the heck WOULD He? It is so we have our own will and choices. It is so that, when we love Him and praise Him, that is because we WANT to, and so makes it genuine love. Like I said, otherwise we would be zombies pure and simple.

Hello again,

Sorry about my post, i did it in a rush before work, i had to ask a question!!

Well you answerd my question, but you said he fulfiled SOME of the Laws, but how on earth would we know that he wasnt a practacing Jew, i mean he did get kinda angry when people were selling stuff in front of the Temples, how do you or we know that he didnt go in there and pray and do what other normal jews did?

i mean hes mission was quite clear he wanted people to go back to how they were, he was angry at them for going astray, he was also angry at the fact that the leaders were theselves liers, and i think he was just teaching the people to learn there scriptures.

Please correct me if im wrong please.

Salaam

Guerilla

if the bible was the absolute truth, there would be no need for this thread.
the fact that there are different versions of the bible is an inconsistency.
the nebulous style of verse is so open to interpretation that it is virtually useless.
the idea of god requiring blood sacrifice is inconsistent with a supposedly loving, forgiving god.
god cannot be omnipresent and not be everything. that means that god is not just the 'good', but is the 'evil' too.
after moses came down with the tablets that clearly state, 'thou salt not kill', he ordered the slaughter of five thousand people(i may be wrong on the number, but there was some smotin' goin' on).
god punishes us for the temptation he created. not very forgiving.

older translations say the elohim did a lot of the creatin'. that's plural. not trinity, either.
simpletruth, the truth is anything but simple.

god is the word. think about that.

Originally posted by Guerilla
Hello again,

Sorry about my post, i did it in a rush before work, i had to ask a question!!

Well you answerd my question, but you said he fulfiled SOME of the Laws, but how on earth would we know that he wasnt a practacing Jew, i mean he did get kinda angry when people were selling stuff in front of the Temples, how do you or we know that he didnt go in there and pray and do what other normal jews did?

i mean hes mission was quite clear he wanted people to go back to how they were, he was angry at them for going astray, he was also angry at the fact that the leaders were theselves liers, and i think he was just teaching the people to learn there scriptures.

Please correct me if im wrong please.

Salaam

Guerilla

Yeah, that's a really good question. First, about the old testament: The old testament contains Genesis(describes through narrative the creation, and the early history of humans), Exodus and a few other books(these talk about how Moses and the Hebrews and how they escaped Egypt and established their own land "promised land"), then a few books of laws and guidelines of how to live a holy life, a few others that demonstrate God's judgment and His forgiveness for those who repent, some books that follow the history of Israeal and its kings(for example king David) and then many books of the prophets. (like the book of Isaiah, Daniel, Jeremiah, etc.) These books of prophets all are accounts of these different men who tell of the Messiah to come, in other words, Jesus. (see my signature btw from Isaiah) They wrote the prophecies they received through God. The cool thing about all these different men and authors is that they lived at various time periods, yet they all fit together and support each other.

So this was basically the books the Jews had at the time of Jesus. And yes, you are right when you say Jesus told them to revert back and do what the old testament told them (basically the books that addressed the laws and guidelines to live) Jesus did this because the high priests and leaders of the Jews would yes, follow some of the laws, BUT overttime they had added A TON of stuff to it like really unnecessary practices, and some parts from the old testament they ignored them altogether. So basically, the Jews had turned themselves obsessive about doing certain acts and following rules for the SAKE of just DOING them, and they had lost sight of some of the important ones, and more crucially, they lost sight of how God really wanted them to be. You could say they became OVERLY religious.

So yes, Jesus tried to renew in a sense the laws as they were written and emphacized why these laws are important, which was the fact that they were for God, and not important for the sake of just doing them in a robotic manner of sorts. And yes, you're right that these leaders were selfish and more worried about their positions and used and followed the laws just to impress people of how "obediant" and "holy" they could be. So this was part of Jesus mission. It was important, but His primary purpose was to show Himself to be the Messiah that the other parts of the old testament (like the books and parts that foretell who and what the Messiah will do), and to then die. He died to recieve all the punishment that was earned by mankind, and so took the judgment of God that HAD to be implemented to pay for the sin (instead of just sweeping it all under the rug) so that we could be pure of it and once again be clean in order to make it to heaven.

So you ARE right that Jesus did what He did. He WAS a Jew. But He came not only to redirect the Jews back to following the laws appropriately, but to fulfill what was foretold of Him, and because He did, some things of the old testament (not all) but some were no longer needed. Such as animal sacrifices, because He became the sacrifice from that point onward, and a few other things. Obviously, some of the Jews, especially many of the leaders and high priests either didn't believe He was the Messiah because they failed to see that He fulfilled what the old testament said, or they were jealous of Him because they were no longer as important as before. So they tried to hinder Him, discredit Him, and eventually had Him crucified. (which ironically, fulfilled the last part to prove that Jesus was the Messiah) Of course, many Jews saw Him for what He was and became Christians. So they were Jews by heritage, and Christians because they believed in Jesus. So the Jews split in this way and the ones who didn't believe, are still waiting for the Messiah to come the first time to this day. Did that clear it up?

[Edited on 8-3-2004 by SimpleTruth]

Originally posted by billybob
if the bible was the absolute truth, there would be no need for this thread.
the fact that there are different versions of the bible is an inconsistency.
the nebulous style of verse is so open to interpretation that it is virtually useless.
the idea of god requiring blood sacrifice is inconsistent with a supposedly loving, forgiving god.
god cannot be omnipresent and not be everything. that means that god is not just the 'good', but is the 'evil' too.
after moses came down with the tablets that clearly state, 'thou salt not kill', he ordered the slaughter of five thousand people(i may be wrong on the number, but there was some smotin' goin' on).
god punishes us for the temptation he created. not very forgiving.

older translations say the elohim did a lot of the creatin'. that's plural. not trinity, either.
simpletruth, the truth is anything but simple.

god is the word. think about that.

BillyBob, thanks for chiming in. Have you read the rest of this thread? If you haven't, we've been through many of the things you brought up. Read through it and see if my answers ( and Valhall and SonsOfLiberty helped too) make any of what you see as contradictions, seem to make more sense. If not, then I tried. You could bring up more of any problems you have in the bible or with my answers then. But I think my answers are valid and should make sense to you. I know the bible to be true, and just want to help people who have misconceptions about it understand it better.

About all the different versions, yes there are several out there, but because language evolves all the time, in order for the bible to be understood and carry on for newer generations to be able to read, it needs to be revised periodically to match the current state of language. Versions are not so negative, because they are a type of translation. Just as you need to translate the bible into Chinese so they can understand it, you need to translate it to the current state of language (or any language) from the last time when the language was slightly different. Very very old copies are still around, so if there were any REAL big problems with all the new versions, it would be easy to tell by looking back to the oldest available and comparing the newest to it. Make sense?

Simpletruth: so why would God try to harm people by creating gene deformities?? Also which passages in the bible say that God introduced these genetic deformities to the incestous procreating man and woman??

Hi there again,
Those are great answers, but you are not providing me with proofs, please brother if you don�t mind I would like some proofs on what you are saying, if its ok and if you have time that is.

I would like some proof of when and where in the OT, did they predict he will die, I would also like the word Die in the prophecy too.

�Many Jews saw Him for what He was and became Christians�
Would it be right for us to call them �Christians�, or that they were following the message that Jesus(pbuh) came down to tell them?
Most of them that did choose to follow Prophet Jesus(pbuh) would have infact done everything that he taught them to do, so they would probly go to the temples to pray, Circumcise(If that�s how u spell it) there Kids and follow the Laws of the Torah-(The real Laws). Just as Prophet Jesus(pbuh) asked them too, or am I wrong?
So if im not wrong, and if some Jews did infact follow him, before St Paul came along, it is safe to say that they had just reverted back to the Law?

Now if I am correct on this, what has happened to the present day �Christians�?
Why is it that when I ask a Christian, Aren�t you ment to follow The Law?
Some of them say, �We are free from Laws�, what does that mean, please explain?

Salaam, Thanks

Guerilla

Originally posted by Guerilla
Hi there again,
Those are great answers, but you are not providing me with proofs, please brother if you don�t mind I would like some proofs on what you are saying, if its ok and if you have time that is.

I would like some proof of when and where in the OT, did they predict he will die, I would also like the word Die in the prophecy too.

�Many Jews saw Him for what He was and became Christians�
Would it be right for us to call them �Christians�, or that they were following the message that Jesus(pbuh) came down to tell them?
Most of them that did choose to follow Prophet Jesus(pbuh) would have infact done everything that he taught them to do, so they would probly go to the temples to pray, Circumcise(If that�s how u spell it) there Kids and follow the Laws of the Torah-(The real Laws). Just as Prophet Jesus(pbuh) asked them too, or am I wrong?
So if im not wrong, and if some Jews did infact follow him, before St Paul came along, it is safe to say that they had just reverted back to the Law?

Now if I am correct on this, what has happened to the present day �Christians�?
Why is it that when I ask a Christian, Aren�t you ment to follow The Law?
Some of them say, �We are free from Laws�, what does that mean, please explain?

Salaam, Thanks

Guerilla

There were, in fact, what was called the Ebionite Jews. These were practicing Jews that had converted to Christianity. i.e. They followed the Judeaic rituals of the Jewish religion, but had accepted Christ and his sacrifice.

That a person can be of the Christian faith, and still follow the pious acts of the Jewish religion in no way contradicts itself. Even a Jew who is of the Jewish faith and does NOT accept the Christ will tell you that a gentile convert to Judeaism is under less of a burden than a practicing Jew because the rituals are not required by the convert, but are required by the Jew.

There was, in fact, a rather large broo-ha-ha between Peter and Paul on this issue. Several of the disciples were, in fact, practicing Jews who had converted (but in no way relinquished their Jewish faith). Peter and Paul had a rather heated argument about whether the new converts to Christianity should be "burdened" with the rituals of circumcision and such. The conclusion of it all was, they should be taught about the rituals and what they represent, but that there was no requirement to perform the rituals in connection with attaining salvation.

Originally posted by Valhall

There were, in fact, what was called the Ebionite Jews. These were practicing Jews that had converted to Christianity. i.e. They followed the Judeaic rituals of the Jewish religion, but had accepted Christ and his sacrifice.

That a person can be of the Christian faith, and still follow the pious acts of the Jewish religion in no way contradicts itself. Even a Jew who is of the Jewish faith and does NOT accept the Christ will tell you that a gentile convert to Judeaism is under less of a burden than a practicing Jew because the rituals are not required by the convert, but are required by the Jew.

There was, in fact, a rather large broo-ha-ha between Peter and Paul on this issue. Several of the disciples were, in fact, practicing Jews who had converted (but in no way relinquished their Jewish faith). Peter and Paul had a rather heated argument about whether the new converts to Christianity should be "burdened" with the rituals of circumcision and such. The conclusion of it all was, they should be taught about the rituals and what they represent, but that there was no requirement to perform the rituals in connection with attaining salvation.

Hi Vall,

Thanks for your answers.

But again can we call them "Christians", or even better yet would Jesus(pbuh) call them Christians??

Because if i am correct didnt Jesus(pbuh) teach his followers of the Law, and the Law talks about The One True God, so infact they would have worshiped The One True God and not Jesus(pbuh) himself?
Because Jesus(pbuh) did infact worship the One God, or didnt he??

Also can i get the passage of where Paul and Peter had an argument about this issue please, if it possible.

Salaam, thanks

Guerilla

Christ is not to be worshipped in any form or fashion.

Christ, in fact, did worship God and taught that the great commandment was to Love God with all your heart and all your soul and to love your brother as yourself.

That pretty much sums it up there...Jesus taught to get your priorities straight.

The early Christians did not worship Christ, they worshipped the one true God that he came to share with the world. Modern Christians (if they know what they're doing!) do not worship Christ. They worship the one true God.

They uphold Christ as their mediator to the one true God, because that in essence is what he did. He replaced the archaid Judeaic system of the High Priest mediating between the laity and God...Christ now does that for us. We do not pray to Christ, but we pray in his name as the mediator who stand before the one true God and petition for us and our needs.

I will look that scripture up now and post it here.

[Edited on 8-3-2004 by Valhall]

Please read the 15th Chapter of Acts.

I hope you can see it in my view as a Muslim and this also goes for the Jews too, but we must be wrong about, that God can hear us in our prayers. so in order for our prayers to get to God, we must pray to Jesus(pbuh)?

Although i might have been wrong about Christians praying to Jesus(pbuh), why is it then that Most/some Christians like my Uncle say that Jesus(pbuh) is god, and so they Pray in his name?
Does that mean that you and my uncle are complete oposites?
Dont get me wrong my Uncle is a Devot Christian man, i can send you all the stuff i have to rebuttle against him. He sends me countless amounts of emails, telling me how bad Muhammad(pbuh) is, yet he doesnt even know how to spell his name
But even though i still love and respect him as my uncle, and no matter how much things he can try to accuse Prophet Muhammad(pbuh), I still answer all his questiones, in full detail, most of the time through the help of some brothers.

Thanks Heaps

Guerilla

If your uncle prays to Jesus instead of God...yes, him and I would believe different.

There is no foundation to praying to Jesus instead of God. When Jesus was on earth he was emphatic that the authority that he had at that time was strictly from the Father. He also was very clear that he was not omniscient - only the Father knew certain things.

Maybe one of the most mistaught and misleading characteristics of Christ is his divine nature. The most misused quote from Christ may very well be "the Father and I are one". I simply do not understand how anyone with a Bible can read the 4 gospel accounts and pick this single quote out - say Christ and God are exactly the same - and then ignore the MULTIPLE isntances of Christ pointing out that he is LESS than God.

The analogy that I like to use is as follows: my bedroom is 100% part of my house. You cannot be in my bedroom without being in my house. You most definitely can be in my house, without being in my bedroom. So, my bedroom is 100% my house, BUT it is not 100% OF my house...my house is more than my bedroom - but they have the same nature (i.e. they are one).

It is an unfortunate twisting of the Gospels and the lack of study by believers that leads to confusion about Christ - and it's a sad, sad situation.

Jumping in for the fun-of-it... 1) Why is it that two creation stories can be read within Genesis? Genesis 1:27 Genesis 2:18- 2) Can a being such as God ever get tired? Isaiah 40:28 but... Exodus 31:17 3) We know that dragons never existed... but Isaiah seems to think differently. Isaiah 30:6 [Edited on 8-3-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

Thanks for you Answers,

To me, and this is my own personal opinion, you and Christians like you, are good people.
Thanks for not turning this into a debate.
This ayah is for you.

[002:062] Those who believe (in the Quran), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

Salaam

Thanks

Guerilla

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord


3) We know that dragons never existed...

[Edited on 8-3-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

Wow...that's a bold statement isn't it? Knowledge puffeth up...lol.