Did Jesus claim to be the messiah?

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
There 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 do :)
 

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
My motive in showing that the bible has contradictions in it is to build one's faith, not tear it down. For example, millennial's are leaving the faith after having grown up in church. Why, their teachers have lost all credibility. All their church days, they were told that the bible has no mistakes, no contradictions, eyewitnesses accounts, etc. Then they go to college, take a religious course as an elective, and then are shown these things as if the instructor is brilliant for having been able to read. Then they are faced with a crisis. They look back at their past teachers and write them off as being non credible. Then they see the church they once was a part of as all wrong, the blind leading the blind, and never return... and lose faith. However, if they had been taught correctly, from child hood, that the bible does have mistakes, contradictions, etc, that it was not eyewitness accounts in all cases, that our translations are biased, as one might expect.....even showing where these are, discussing how they got there, how it does not mean it never happened, etc, then we would see a different outcome from millennial's. Consider that this infallible does more harm than good. Consider that what I am saying has merit. I do believe the bible is inspired. There is amazing inspired context within. But man's finger prints are all over. For example, Solomon, instead of being the wise man he thought he was.... Solomon is the perfect example of what man, each and every one of us would be if we were given all we wanted, no restraints. Power, money, servants, wives, on and on. Unbridled, what ever you want. Seriously, was not 50 wives enough.. Solomon was the most empty man in the bible. No friends, not knowing what love was, only knowing lust. He turned over every rock he could find looking for happiness. Building things, showing off his splender to other kings and queens, amassing "things", having the people serve him rather than he serve the people. In the end of his wretched life, he was envious of the simple man, who had a simple job, a wife that loved him. Yet, in his day, he thought he was so smart, writing volumes of nothing worthwhile, all the while, not realizing he was the perfect example of unbridled man. This is major inspiration found in the bible. Not Solomon's worthless proverbs that can be overridden by simply Love one another.
 

Spotlite

Senior Member
My motive in showing that the bible has contradictions in it is to build one's faith, not tear it down.
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??????
 

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
Lets talk about embellishments, of context. In Matt, he told of a great earthquake. Yet MK, Luke and John don't mention it. If you are writing about the death of Jesus, would it not be strange not to mention it? is this simply just left out as if it was not important? Was it merely that same old story that men can see the same event yet tell it differently? Did they think, Matthew already told it so I don't need to? Or... is it a total embellishment in Matthew? This can't be reconciled with common sense. Realize that Matthew , mark and John have Jesus drinking from the sponge, yet don't all speak of the earthquake that shook violently, busting open graves, splitting the temple curtain top to bottom. Interesting that John did not mention the sun not shinning either? Being that John left out all except the vinegar, then let's remove him from the conversation since it would be ambiguous to speculate as to what or why he writes as he does. But for Mark and Luke to tell us about the curtain, darkness over the land, yet not mention the most horrifying aspect of the event, the earthquake that was enough to bust open graves???? Embellishment is the word
 

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
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 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
 

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
More, Context problems, if Mary had seen and expected Jesus to do miracles, such as water to wine, why would she and the family go to take charge of him for they said he is out of his mind?
 

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
More context problems. If the soldiers had seen Peter cut off the ear of one of those arresting Jesus, then Jesus put it back on, there is no way that they would have beat him or mock him. No way. Most would have converted right there on the spot. One or the other never happened, beating Jesus or the ear replaced by Jesus. Which one is an embellished story?
 

Spotlite

Senior Member
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
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.
 

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
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.
You post among a plethora of skeptics in which the book has done more to drive their skepticism than reaffirm their beliefs
 

Spotlite

Senior Member
You post among a plethora of skeptics in which the book has done more to drive their skepticism than reaffirm their beliefs
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.
 

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
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.
Are you telling me my reasons and experiences?
 

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
Good question. Because I have the same question each time we 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?
 

Spotlite

Senior Member
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?
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 ^^^^
 
Last edited:

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
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.
I am included with "their".
Your statement is not stated as opinion.

Absolutely 100% I can tell you that reading the Bible has caused me to question the Bible.
 

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
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 ^^^^
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.
 

Spotlite

Senior Member
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.
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:cheers:
 

Spotlite

Senior Member
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?
Yup right up there ^^^^^^ post # 316. The Bible isn’t my only source of “evidence” as to “why” I believe what I do.
 

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
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:cheers:
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.
 

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
Yup right up there ^^^^^^ post # 316. The Bible isn’t my only source of “evidence” as to “why” I believe what I do.
Negative GhostRider...
I am just saying the words in the bible as touted as being inerrant and infallible as Evidence used by believers....
It was an example of ONE of the things believers use.
I picked out THAT particular example specifically.
Nowhere did I say that was what YOU use exclusively.

This is how ancient writings get jumbled centuries later. Add a word, take a word away, interpret things to what a person thinks was said in order to fit a false narrative instead of what is actually said....
 
Top