Were You Ever A Christian?

[Mriana]

It's a penetrating discourse, isn't it?

 

I'm thinking masturbation.

 

Phanta

 

 

lol....the only one satisfied is Prove....lol.

 

Now that is something when a Xian has fellow Xians irritated with him/her. One really has to be deluded to have fellow Xians upset with him/her. The worst of it is, they can't see just how irritating they really are when even though they have their own people irritated.

[OnceConvinced]

Pro 16:9 A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps.

Say that as you step behind the cockpit of an airplane, having never flown nor having any understanding of the controls.

 

 

Ignorance is a sin, you know. And so is using God's name in vein, which you are doing.

 

Rom 2:1 ¶Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

 

Mat 7:3-5 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

[lunaticheathen]

How do you know I'm not speaking from God, and you are not listening because.....

 

 

because.......

 

 

 

because.......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's been awhile pulling that one out. But if the harness fits.....

 

 

 

 

 

This is nothing to be proud of. You make God sad this way.

 

This made my YEAR!

[bornagainathiest]

I'm kinda changing my mind on the 'ban' issue - I'm enjoying 'prove' getting his ass so completely handed to him.

And the irony is that he thinks he's handing ours to us.

 

And he really avoids the tough questions COMPLETELY, it's sooo funny!

 

He still hasn't answered if they sacrifice the proper animals after having a baby and that he doesn't touch his unclean wife for two months in accordance with scripture.

#584375 Those laws don't apply to us today. When Jesus died on the cross He completed (fulfilled) that Law bringing in the New Testament which is why I gave you that passage:

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

Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, [so] making peace;

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

 

Yes Prove, exactly right!

 

"Those laws don't apply to us today. When Jesus died on the cross he completed (fulfilled) that Law bringing in the new Testament which is why I gave you that passage."

 

So then why, when I asked you to give us examples of Christians (who are not under OT Law) who have done what Jesus commanded, you cited the examples of Zacharias and Elisabeth (Luke 1: 5 & 6) - who were?

 

Your reply to Ancey's post shows that you clearly understand the difference between those under the New Testament and those under the Old.

 

So why then, did you cite the names of two people who were still under the Old Covenant - that is, people who were NOT Christians?

 

How could they have been obedient to Jesus' commandments when he hadn't even been born?

 

How could they have been obedient to Jesus' commandments, decades before he gave them?

 

How could they have been obedient to Jesus' commandments when He hadn't yet completed (fulfilled) the Law - as you said to Ancey?

 

Yes, you knew about the difference between the Old and the New Covenants, but you still ****ed up on my question, didn't you? (Care to quote-mine something from scripture to answer this question? )

 

 

 

So then, your to-do list's getting longer and longer.

Here's what's outstanding...

 

1. You still haven't given us the 'True' meaning of Romans 12: 1 & 2 and how Christians should apply it.

2. You still haven't told us how God wants all Christians to live.

3. You still haven't given us specifics, details and worked examples from the Bible, where Christians did these things.

4. You still haven't given us specifics, details and worked examples from your own life, where you did these things.

5. You still haven't told us just what part of the Bible Jesus, Paul, Peter, John, James, Luke, Mark and Matthew would have considered as, 'scripture'.

 

As I said before, I can take a hint. Just lmk if you won't be answering these questions. Or hit me with a 2 Tim 2 : 23, since that seems to be the get-out-of-jail-free card you like to play when cornered.

 

Otherwise, I'll just keeping on asking them and perhaps adding a few more.

 

Enjoy!

 

BAA.

[Shyone]

2Ti 3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God...

Logical fallacy: Petitio principii. A Bible quote about the Bible being divinely inspired is circular reasoning, and completely inadmissible as evidence for divine inspiration.

 

From a logic point-of-view, your quotation from 2 Timothy is identical to Me posting the statement "Astreja is the Springy Goddess; therefore everything She writes is divinely inspired."

But... You are. You wrote it, I believe it, that settles it.

[Astreja]

From a logic point-of-view, {Prove_17's} quotation from 2 Timothy is identical to Me posting the statement "Astreja is the Springy Goddess; therefore everything She writes is divinely inspired."

But... You are. You wrote it, I believe it, that settles it.

You *do* know, Shyone, that one of My other avocations is writing fiction?

 

(shrugs) Ah, it's a fair cop... I suppose it *could* be divinely-inspired fiction. (dispatches Her guardian dragon Glori with a gift certificate for 40% off Shyone's next Random Equipment Malfunction)

[prove_17]

So why then, did you cite the names of two people who were still under the Old Covenant - that is, people who were NOT Christians?

 

How could they have been obedient to Jesus' commandments when he hadn't even been born?

How could they have been obedient to Jesus' commandments, decades before he gave them?

 

How could they have been obedient to Jesus' commandments when He hadn't yet completed (fulfilled) the Law - as you said to Ancey?

 

Yes, you knew about the difference between the Old and the New Covenants, but you still ****ed up on my question, didn't you? (Care to quote-mine something from scripture to answer this question? )

 

BAA.

 

I answered all your questions. They just weren't to your satisfaction. Nevertheless, it's hard to pass up a good lesson:

 

1Cr 10:1 ¶Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

1Cr 10:2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

(...)

1Cr 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

 

 

Jhn 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

 

Jhn 1:1 ¶In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

[prove_17]

It's a penetrating discourse, isn't it?

 

I'm thinking masturbation.

 

Phanta

 

 

lol....the only one satisfied is Prove....lol.

 

Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

Rom 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

Rom 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

[OnceConvinced]

 

 

I answered all your questions. They just weren't to your satisfaction. Nevertheless, it's hard to pass up a good lesson:

 

Pro 12:8

A man is praised according to his wisdom,

but men with warped minds are despised. (not seeing you praised around here Prove. Only dispised.)

 

 

Pro 16:5

The LORD detests all the proud of heart.

Be sure of this: They will not go unpunished.

 

 

Pro 16:18

Pride goes before destruction,

a haughty spirit before a fall.

 

Pro 16:7

When a man's ways are pleasing to the LORD,

he makes even his enemies live at peace with him. (you're obviously not at peace with anyone on this site!)

 

 

Pro 18:12

Before his downfall a man's heart is proud,

but humility comes before honor.

 

Pro 18:6

A fool's lips bring him strife,

and his mouth invites a beating.

 

Pro 26:12

Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? (Yep! Prove!)

There is more hope for a fool than for him.

[Shyone]

From a logic point-of-view, {Prove_17's} quotation from 2 Timothy is identical to Me posting the statement "Astreja is the Springy Goddess; therefore everything She writes is divinely inspired."

But... You are. You wrote it, I believe it, that settles it.

You *do* know, Shyone, that one of My other avocations is writing fiction?

 

(shrugs) Ah, it's a fair cop... I suppose it *could* be divinely-inspired fiction. (dispatches Her guardian dragon Glori with a gift certificate for 40% off Shyone's next Random Equipment Malfunction)

How did you know I have Random Equipment Malfunctions?

 

Hmmmmm.

[Ancey]

anyone else getting a headache?

.... yeeeeeaaaaah.....

This is one hard-to-ignore troll.

[prove_17]

BTW, Prove, there are versus that state that the laws in the Old Testament should be followed FOREVER. Which means you haven't been sacrificing your baby goats as needed. As a rebuttal to your last post regarding your following of proper pregnancy procedures.

 

1 Chronicles 16:15

Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations ... an everlasting covenant.

 

Psalm 119:151-2

Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth. Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.

 

Matthew 5:18-19

Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven.

 

Luke 16:17

It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

 

 

 

Then there are also versus that say "No! You don't have to follow OT Law!

 

 

Galatians 3:13

Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law.

 

Ephesians 2:15

Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances.

 

OH NO BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS!!!!!!

 

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

 

Jhn 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

 

Hbr 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions [that were] under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Hbr 9:16 ¶For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

Hbr 9:17 For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

[Shyone]

BTW, Prove, there are versus that state that the laws in the Old Testament should be followed FOREVER. Which means you haven't been sacrificing your baby goats as needed. As a rebuttal to your last post regarding your following of proper pregnancy procedures.

 

1 Chronicles 16:15

Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations ... an everlasting covenant.

 

Psalm 119:151-2

Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth. Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.

 

Matthew 5:18-19

Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven.

 

Luke 16:17

It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

 

 

 

Then there are also versus that say "No! You don't have to follow OT Law!

 

 

Galatians 3:13

Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law.

 

Ephesians 2:15

Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances.

 

OH NO BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS!!!!!!

 

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

 

Jhn 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

 

Hbr 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions [that were] under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Hbr 9:16 ¶For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

Hbr 9:17 For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

It is a battle to the Death! Bible versus bible! Who will win?

 

Ancey starts with contradictory bible verses, Prove counters with - irrelevent bible verses.

 

Contradictory bible verses win!

[OnceConvinced]

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

 

1 Kings 22: 21-23

Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the LORD and said, `I will entice him.'

`By what means?' the LORD asked.

I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,' he said.

`You will succeed in enticing him,' said the LORD. `Go and do it.'

"So now the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The LORD has decreed disaster for you.

 

Jhn 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

 

2Th 2:11

And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie,

 

Hbr 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions [that were] under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

 

Deuteronomy 22:23-24

If there is a girl who is a virgin engaged to a man, and {another} man finds her in the city and lies with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city and you shall stone them to death; the girl, because she did not cry out in the city, and the man, because he has violated his neighbor's wife. Thus you shall purge the evil from among you.

 

Hbr 9:16 ¶For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

 

Leviticus 25:44-46

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.

 

Hbr 9:17 For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

 

Numbers 31:15-18 - Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

[bornagainathiest]

So why then, did you cite the names of two people who were still under the Old Covenant - that is, people who were NOT Christians?

How could they have been obedient to Jesus' commandments when he hadn't even been born?

How could they have been obedient to Jesus' commandments, decades before he gave them?

How could they have been obedient to Jesus' commandments when He hadn't yet completed (fulfilled) the Law - as you said to Ancey?

Yes, you knew about the difference between the Old and the New Covenants, but you still ****ed up on my question, didn't you? (Care to quote-mine something from scripture to answer this question? )

 

BAA.

 

I answered all your questions. They just weren't to your satisfaction. Nevertheless, it's hard to pass up a good lesson:

 

Don't thank me Prove. You've just ****ed up again - as I will demonstrate below.

 

Before I show you where and how you added another fail to your growing tally, let me say this. On a personal level, I am satisfied with your answers.

 

I am fully satisfied that you have no idea what a 'True' Christian is and what 'True' Christianity is.

I am totally satisfied that you failed to even understand my question concerning Romans 12: 1 & 2.

I am completely satisfied that you failed to answer my question and failed to quote the passages of the Bible, where Christians did change their lives in accordance with Jesus' spoken commands.

I am quite satisfied that the more you post here, the more you are wasting your time and making yourself look foolish, into the bargain.

 

However, on a Biblical level, my satisfaction isn't relevant.

You simply got your facts wrong. You didn't read my question properly, or if you did, you failed provide the correct answers. Answers that a 'True' Christian would surely have known.

I asked you about Christians changing their lives, by obeying Jesus' spoken commands - words that He spoke only when He was incarnated as a human being and at no other time in history. So this discounts ALL of the Old Testament. Jesus was not incarnate of the flesh in OT times. After His ascension into heaven, He was not physically present on Earth. So this discounts everything from the Book of Acts thru to Revelation. What does this leave? Hmmm.... let me see now....

 

Oh Yes! That just leaves the Gospels! That must be when Jesus gave spoken commands to His disciples and followers, the very people who would go on to be called Christians.

 

See, Prove? You didn't even know when and where in the Bible Jesus gave specific, spoken commands to His followers. Not in the OT. Not in Acts or the Epistles or Revelation. Nor in those chapters of the Gospels where He hadn't even been born, either!

Not exactly the trademark of a 'True' Christian, this ignorance of yours, is it?

 

Ok, now I'll dismember the irrelevant quotes you've posted below.

 

[quote]1Cr 10:1 ¶Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

1Cr 10:2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

(...)

And Jesus of Nazareth was where when the Israelites passed thru the sea?

 

Ok, the twelve tribes were baptized into Moses, but this was done so that he could go up into the presence of God on Mount Sinai, as a representative of them all. The example of Moses described here, precedes that of Christ - by many centuries.

Just as Christians are baptized into Christ, so the Israelites were baptized into Moses. Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God who died on the cross for the sins of all the world was not physically present at this time or in this place. Got that?

In the passage you've quoted from, the Apostle Paul is instructing the Corinthians by using the earlier Mosaic example to illustrate what Jesus did for all Christians. The baptism of all-Israel-into-Moses is a lesser and earlier example of the greater and final baptism of all-Christians-into-Christ. Paul is not saying that Jesus was there in the flesh, with Moses and the Israelites, passing thru the sea. No. It is entirely mistaken and non-scriptural to say that this is so.

Agreed, Jesus was there as one of the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but that was not what I asked in my question was it? I asked you about Christians following Jesus' spoken commands - commands that He gave in the flesh, not in the spirit.

Sorry Prove, you're wrong again.

 

1Cr 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

 

Yes, this is a wonderful spiritual image/symbol/metaphor for Jesus. But was He there in the flesh? No! No more than He was with Moses and the Israelites when they passed thru the Red/Reed Sea.

Once again, Paul is teaching the Corinthians, using metaphors to help their understanding. Was Jesus the water that the Israelites drank? No! Was Jesus the rock? No! Once again Prove, you are mixing metaphors with reality. Pauline metaphors about Jesus are not the same as His solid, physical reality in the holy land, during His incarnation on Earth. Don't believe me? Then ask yourself this question...

Were the hands and feet that had nails driven thru them real ones of flesh-and-blood or were they just metaphorical hands and feet?

 

Jhn 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Jhn 1:1 ¶In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I'll deal with both of these irrelevancies together, because you're just making the same mistake as before.

 

Jesus was before Abraham and before Adam and before all things, but not as a flesh-and-blood man. Jesus, the Word-made-Flesh was there in the beginning, together with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. Three persons, seamlessly and eternally united. One God, but three personalities. So far, so good. But now for the big question.

When was Jesus physically present, here on Earth, in the form of a man, with disciples and followers who listened to, recorded and then put His spoken commands into action?

In the beginning? No!

In the time of Moses? No!

In the time you quoted from the gospel of Luke? No!

Jesus hadn't even been physically conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary during the time you gave as your answer. It would be three decades (or so) before He gave any spoken commands. It would be three decades (or so) before He had any disciples or followers to hear and remember His commands. It would be longer still, to the time when His non-metaphorical hands and feet were nailed to the cross. Sorry Prove, but you were wrong then and you're still wrong now.

Quote-mining spurious references to post-Gospel metaphors about Jesus doesn't change that fact.

 

In fact, all you've done is to show us just how shaky your grasp of Bible history, the Trinity and the difference between the Old and New Covenants, really is.

 

Keep it up, 'True' Christian!

 

(Or did you ever get it up in the first place? )

 

BAA.

[Ancey]

 

It is a battle to the Death! Bible versus bible! Who will win?

 

Ancey starts with contradictory bible verses, Prove counters with - irrelevent bible verses.

 

Contradictory bible verses win!

 

YAAY! Do I get a cookie??

 

Bible Contradictions are interesting: You'd think the word of God would not contradict itself... Yet it does. a lot. Even on really simple things, like the fig tree Jesus cursed and how Judas died.

[prove_17]

It is a battle to the Death! Bible versus bible! Who will win?

 

Ancey starts with contradictory bible verses, Prove counters with - irrelevent bible verses.

 

Contradictory bible verses win!

 

YAAY! Do I get a cookie??

 

Bible Contradictions are interesting: You'd think the word of God would not contradict itself... Yet it does. a lot. Even on really simple things, like the fig tree Jesus cursed and how Judas died.

 

There's no contradictions! It's well known that people can make the bible say what they want it to. The way Judas died is not a contradiction but a lack of information. It says in Matthew:

 

Mat 27:5 And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.

 

 

Then in Acts:

 

Act 1:18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

 

There are too many questions to call this an contradiction:

How long after he hung himself did this occur? Did the rope give way and as he was falling this happened? Had an animal start to eat the mid section of him overnight and when they cut him down he fell head first and his mid section was weak from and animal? Did he fail at the attempt to hang himself and fall head first landing on a jagged rock opening up his insides? There's no time frame or enough detail given in the passage to really know why it's written the way it is.

 

That's not what's being emphasized, this is:

 

Act 1:20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.

So there's no need to be specific about what transpired during his death.

[Shyone]

 

There are too many questions to call this an contradiction:

How long after he hung himself did this occur? Did the rope give way and as he was falling this happened? Had an animal start to eat the mid section of him overnight and when they cut him down he fell head first and his mid section was weak from and animal? Did he fail at the attempt to hang himself and fall head first landing on a jagged rock opening up his insides? There's no time frame or enough detail given in the passage to really know why it's written the way it is.

You realize that you have to add to the text to make these passages comport with one another.

 

Consider why the one with the bowels bursting open doesn't mention the hanging.

 

And the one mentioning the hanging doesn't mention the bowels bursing open.

 

More importantly, there is another inconsistent difference which you seem to have overlooked.

 

mat. 27:3. When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders.

4. "I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood." "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility."

 

acts 1:18. (With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out.

19. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

 

Which is it? Did he return the money filled with remorse, or buy a field?

 

 

I'm going to start a new thread with some other questions like this. Wiggle, wiggle little worm.

[centauri]

There's no contradictions! It's well known that people can make the bible say what they want it to.

I'm still waiting for you to provide the verse(s) from the Hebrew scriptures that says a king messiah would end the law and replace it with faith in his blood sacrifice.

 

The way Judas died is not a contradiction but a lack of information. It says in Matthew:

 

Mat 27:5 And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.

 

Then in Acts:

 

Act 1:18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

 

There are too many questions to call this an contradiction:

How long after he hung himself did this occur? Did the rope give way and as he was falling this happened? Had an animal start to eat the mid section of him overnight and when they cut him down he fell head first and his mid section was weak from and animal? Did he fail at the attempt to hang himself and fall head first landing on a jagged rock opening up his insides? There's no time frame or enough detail given in the passage to really know why it's written the way it is.

If there are too many questions to call it a contradiction then there are also too many questions to call it inspired by God.

What you're conveniently overlooking is that Luke stated he was writing his history to confirm with certainty things that had been taught to his reader.

The events surrounding the death of Judas are not in harmony and require multiple qualifiers and combining the two stories in order to reconcile them.

You're also stuck with the birth narratives of Jesus being grossly out of agreement, the genealogies of Jesus not agreeing, and the account of where the resurrected Jesus first appeared to his disciples as group not agreeing either.

Matthew and Luke are not in harmony with each other, and harmony is what divine inspiration is supposed to produce.

Writing a story in order to manufacture prophecy fulfillments is not inspired nor is it honest. It's the tool of a salesman, pitching his broucher at the gullible.

[Crazy Donna]

 

There are too many questions to call this an contradiction:

How long after he hung himself did this occur? Did the rope give way and as he was falling this happened? Had an animal start to eat the mid section of him overnight and when they cut him down he fell head first and his mid section was weak from and animal? Did he fail at the attempt to hang himself and fall head first landing on a jagged rock opening up his insides? There's no time frame or enough detail given in the passage to really know why it's written the way it is.

You realize that you have to add to the text to make these passages comport with one another.

 

Consider why the one with the bowels bursting open doesn't mention the hanging.

 

And the one mentioning the hanging doesn't mention the bowels bursing open.

 

More importantly, there is another inconsistent difference which you seem to have overlooked.

 

mat. 27:3. When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders.

4. "I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood." "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility."

 

acts 1:18. (With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out.

19. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

 

Which is it? Did he return the money filled with remorse, or buy a field?

 

 

I'm going to start a new thread with some other questions like this. Wiggle, wiggle little worm.

Brilliantly executed, Shyone. No contradictions indeed? As far as I know, death by hanging does't usually result in intestines spilling out. I'm no doctor, but that's pretty obvious.

 

THe bible is full of contradictions. That is because it is man made. Prove can pretend there are none, but pretending doesn't change reality. Otherwise I'd be Napoleon.

[bornagainathiest]

Still waiting on your answers Prove! Coming up to three weeks since I first asked!

 

Lmk if you want any help, 'True' Christian, ok?

 

BAA.

[EdwardAbbey]

According to the bible, the only way to become a Christian is:

 

 

Act 2:37 Now when they heard [this], they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men [and] brethren, what shall we do?

Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

 

 

The bible is so wrong. The only way one becomes a Christian is by suspending reason .

[★ Citsonga ★]

It's well known that people can make the bible say what they want it to.

 

Damn straight! Apologists do it all the frickin' time, much like you proceeded to do later in your post.

 

As for me personally, I'm not interested in what people can make the bible say, I'm interested in what the bible really says. When looking at what it really says, there are contradictions and absurdities.

[Overcame Faith]

Was this man baptised?

 

39One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"

 

40But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? 41We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."

 

42Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[f]"

 

43Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." Luke 23:39-43.

 

 

He was not. Nevertheless, the bible doesn't leave us clueless on this subject: According to this passage, Jesus had the authority to forgive the "Thief of the cross" as he is known by, of his sins:

Mat 9:6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.

 

Do unbaptised babies who die go to hell? They must since only christians go to heaven and, according to you, baptism is essential for becoming a christian. And if you don't believe unbaptised babies go to hell, then it must be the case that baptism is not essential for everyone to become a christian and thus escape hell.

 

The bible doesn't say where babies go so how can I?

 

If Jesus was able to save the thief on the cross who had not been baptized and if Jesus is still alive, then he still has that authority. Therefore, baptism is not necessary to go to heaven and your thesis that baptism is necessary is wrong. But if it is right, then you have already answered the question about babies. If unbaptized at death, they will go to hell. Your refusal to answer the question about unbaptized babies, shows that you don't like the true answer according to your own theology.

[ExChristianAuthor]

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn.........

 

Can I ask a question to the xtian spewing scripture that means absolutely nothing to any of us...

 

What is your purpose for being here and asking your questions?

 

Please give a direct answer and leave all the bullshit out...

 

What's your purpose for being here?