1gr8bldr
Senior Member
Yes they doThere is no need to make a defense, what you said was simply not correct. The four Gospel accounts in no way contradict each other. It is your responsibility to show otherwise.
Yes they doThere is no need to make a defense, what you said was simply not correct. The four Gospel accounts in no way contradict each other. It is your responsibility to show otherwise.
If that’s your motive, you might want to review your tactics very closely. That’s a very reversed way to build faith - one has to have faith to believe that Jesus died and rose again, then you come along pointing out what you call contradictions in that story in order build their faith in it more??????My motive in showing that the bible has contradictions in it is to build one's faith, not tear it down.
My faith is not in a book. It's in the underlying basic story found within. Not in the details that you guys so vehemently protectIf that’s your motive, you might want to review your tactics very closely. That’s a very reversed way to build faith - one has to have faith to believe that Jesus died and rose again, then you come along pointing out what you call contradictions in that story in order build their faith in it more??????
Understood, but when you’re dealing with folks on the street, the majority haven’t even got to the book yet, let alone the tons of links and translations out there of everyone else claiming they got it right, too. For the record, the Book works, try it over skeptics.My faith is not in a book. It's in the underlying basic story found within. Not in the details that you guys so vehemently protect
You post among a plethora of skeptics in which the book has done more to drive their skepticism than reaffirm their beliefsUnderstood, but when you’re dealing with folks on the street, the majority haven’t even got to the book yet, let alone the tons of links and translations out there of everyone else claiming they got it right, too. For the record, the Book works, try it over skeptics.
If it’s anything worth considering, I’ve previously asked 1gr which one of the 3 A’s he considers himself.? He hasn’t confirmed but he doesn’t appear to be a Christian Apologetic - defender of the Christian faith, Christian being a follow of Jesus Christ and his teachings. A follower of Christ’s teachings also believes in certain things concerning Jesus / God in the Godhead. So you may be exactly right and I stand corrected bullet with one exception, it isn’t the Book that drives their skepticism, they align their research to fit their skepticism.You post among a plethora of skeptics in which the book has done more to drive their skepticism than reaffirm their beliefs
Are you telling me my reasons and experiences?If it’s anything worth considering, I’ve previously asked 1gr which one of the 3 A’s he considers himself.? He hasn’t confirmed but he doesn’t appear to be a Christian Apologetic - defender of the Christian faith, Christian being a follow of Jesus Christ and his teachings. A follower of Christ’s teachings also believes in certain things concerning Jesus / God in the Godhead. So you may be exactly right and I stand corrected bullet with one exception, it isn’t the Book that drives their skepticism, they align their research to fit their skepticism.
Good question. Because I have the same question each time we debate.Are you telling me my reasons and experiences?
1. You didnt answer me with a yes or no.Good question. Because I have the same question each time we debate.
1. I gave my “opinion”, that is, we all favor research that supports our stance on anything - I receive your opinion when I’m told that my experiences are of my imagination, or I refuse to overlook contradictions, research, and deny what you call evidence. Truth is, if the evidence is that solid for either of us we wouldn’t be having this debate.1. You didnt answer me with a yes or no.
2. Have I ever told you what you believe and why? And if I have, since this is our most recent debate, can you show me where I did that?
I am included with "their".So you may be exactly right and I stand corrected bullet with one exception, it isn’t the Book that drives their skepticism, they align their research to fit their skepticism.
1. I gave my “opinion”, that is, we all favor research that supports our stance on anything - I receive your opinion when I’m told that my experiences are of my imagination, or I refuse to overlook contradictions, research, and deny what you call evidence. Truth is, if the evidence is that solid for either of us we wouldn’t be having this debate.
2. See # 1 ^^^^
A contradiction is one Writer saying Jesus died in a boat while another saying he was killed in a train wreck.Where did I say your experiences are your Imagination?
The contradictions exist. We have pointed them out.
It is not my opinion that causes the contradictions to exist.
You have taken an awful lot of time trying to explain and make excuses as to why the contradictions may sound like contradictions but because we weren't there that we dont really know what was said or what was meant that they are not, or might not be contradictory.
But as written in the versions available to us, they are contradictory and many examples have been given to show that.
The Evidence used by believers, which is contained in the Bible as the infallible and inerrant word of your God, has been shown that it is in fact errant and fallible as written right now in whichever version you have to reference. Your argument is that since we were not there, and since the authors of the gospels may not have been there that Man may have gotten things incorrect....!BUT! continue to expect us to believe that the contents of the Bible is the infallible and inerrant word of God.
The reality of all this is that we have discussed one issue. "We" can bring up verse after verse that contradicts and is in error from various books and chapters. If believers want to argue that "man" may have messed up in some spots and the skeptics were not there to tell a story any differently, then you have to include yourself into the mix and realize you were not there, the errorless book is full of errors and it has been shown that whatever version of the book you are reading and referencing right now is not the same (by your own admission of "Man's" involvement and what is lost in translation or scribes "corrections")version as what was originally said in the original language.
Yup right up there ^^^^^^ post # 316. The Bible isn’t my only source of “evidence” as to “why” I believe what I do.2. Have I ever told you what you believe and why? And if I have, since this is our most recent debate, can you show me where I did that?
Spotlite, we differ in that I fact check the fact checkers. I don't have stance, I go with the facts that provable and probable. If the facts favored the Bible I would be an Apologist. If the accounts of a crucifixion are not consistent with crucifixion then Houston We Have A Problem.A contradiction is one Writer saying Jesus died in a boat while another saying he was killed in a train wreck.
Writers mentioning certain details and some not does not mean the missing detail didn’t occur.
What you think the soldiers should have done when an ear was cut off, or how they should have acted doesn’t validate truth or false.
If you want to find a problem with your new truck, you will.
We both can find links to support our stance
Negative GhostRider...Yup right up there ^^^^^^ post # 316. The Bible isn’t my only source of “evidence” as to “why” I believe what I do.