Give Me Your Best Examples of Contradictions in the Bible

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: A Joke About "Nomenclature"

"Nomenclature" was walking down the street when he saw a man sitting on a bench. "Nomenclature" walked up to the man and said, "I bet I can argue you into agreeing with me on any topic."

The man smiled and said, "I'm up for the challenge."

"Nomenclature" thought for a moment and then said, "Okay, here's a topic: The world is flat."

The man laughed and said, "No, the world is round."

"Nomenclature" shook his head and said, "I'm telling you, the world is flat."

The man sighed and said, "Fine, the world is flat."

"Nomenclature" smiled and said, "I told you I could argue you into agreeing with me on any topic."

The man shook his head and said, "You didn't argue me into agreeing with you. I agreed with you because it was the only way to get you to ."

Nomenclature

Overcoming Obsession

How to make an obsession function positively.

At its worst, obsession is an iron mask that permits us to gaze in only one direction at one thing—or, to use another metaphor, a giant tidal wave that crashes through our minds and washes away all other concerns. We may become obsessed with a person, a place, a goal, a subject—but obsession amounts to the same thing in all cases: addiction.

At first, like all addictions, obsession is intoxicating. It fills us up, and what a relief that feeling is (especially if we felt empty before). But even if we didn't feel empty, obsession makes us feel potent, capable, and purposeful.

But also like all addictions, with time obsession unbalances us. We often begin to neglect parts of our lives we shouldn't. If allowed to become too consuming, obsession causes us to devalue important dimensions of our lives and tolerate their atrophy and even their collapse. But even if our lives remain in balance, if the object of our obsession is taken from us, we find ourselves devastated, often convinced we've lost our last chance at happiness.

How to control an obsession

Distract yourself at varying intervals.
Accomplish a task that helps put your obsession behind you.
Focus on your greater mission.
Adopt a practice that grounds you. Chant Nam-myoho-renge-kyo. Meditate. Take up karate. Or dancing.
Listen to what others tell you. If your close friends and family express concern over your being obsessed, they're probably right. Be open to these messages.

21CenturyIconoclast

@John_C_87

I am addressing your follow-up post to your miss-mash explanation of why an unarmed god exists in my post herewith: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162019/#Comment_162019

What part of when I said this topic is closed, basically to save you any further embarrassment as my post above shows at your laughable expense, didn't you understand?

NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN THAT CAN OUTDO "JOHN_C_87" IN PROPOSING A MISH-MASH CONVOLUTED NIGHTMARE AS THE LINK ABOVE SHOWS IN HIM EXPLAINING VERBATIM WHY AN UNAMED GOD EXISTS, WILL BE ... ?

21CenturyIconoclast

@just_sayin

YOUR BIBLE QUOTE OF CONTRADICTION: "God is a Spirit. No one has truly seen Him as He is. God has used human forms to manifest himself. The Holy Spirit came down like a dove on Jesus."

HELLO?! You win the award of contradicting yourself in your following statements! LOL!

First you say god is a spirit, then you state no one has truly seen him, then you say god uses human forms to manifest himself, then you state the Holy Spirit came down like a dove on Jesus, of which at your expense, JESUS IS GOD, whereas everyone had seen God when Jesus walked the earth! Get it Bible fool?

JESUS IS GOD: “Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours.” (2 Peter 1:1)

just_sayin, how far are you willing to go with your outright Bible stupidity in front of the membership of this Religion Forum?

John_C_87

@21CenturyIconoclast
What part of when I said this topic is closed, basically to save you any further embarrassment as my post above shows at your laughable expense, didn't you understand?

The part I understood clearly was you cannot prove atheism is real denial and refusal of representation is not a debate strategy it is a parliamentary parlor trick. Why is it supposed to be embarrassing for me to say I clearly do not see your common defense towards a general welfare of people held in united state of law? It’s not, what you suggest is equal to going to school and not being allowed to ask important relevant questions. When any person does not answer a question connected to an issue, we understand them not to have an answer to that question. Is that a fair assumption?

21CenturyIconoclast

@John_C_87

The true parlor trick is your actual statements as shown in the link below, whereas you contradict yourself with your wishy-washy convoluted explanations of why an unnamed god exists in the first place, where we are still laughing at this post: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162019/#Comment_162019

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic, @just_sayin,

TO THE MEMBERSHIP OF THIS RELIGION FORUM:

Well, as we all can see, the Bible fools of ProudToBeCatholic and Just_sayin have flew away from their “Cuckoo’s nest” because they could not address my Bible refutations to them in this thread alone, and where they remain in HIDING where they belong to save themselves from further embarrassment in being so Bible !

This is expected from Bible fools like named above, because when actual Bible passages that they didn’t know existed in the first place are presented in relation to, and in refutation of, their Christianity, then they easily fall by the wayside in embarrassment and have to remain in hiding like these two fake pseudo-christians have to do at this time.

NEXT BIBLE FOOLS LIKE "PROUDTOBECATHOLIC" AND "JUST_SAYIN" THAT WANT TO TAKE THEIR PLACE IN EMBARRASSMENT OF BEING AS BIBLE IGNORANT AND AS THEY ARE, WILL BE ...?

John_C_87

@21CenturyIconoclast

The only trick is you are using a link to your own post and still no explanation as argument to how atheism is real?

You deny an argument letter cannot be used to replace numbers and create a example of a principle which only looks like a word. I do not have to prove to you Algabra exist it is already in use by millions of people you one set of beliefs to not offset the beliefs and use of a principle of millions of.

You’re a third of the way there. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.

21CenturyIconoclast

@John_C_87

Just read your "JIBBERISH" in the post link below in you trying so hard to show an unnamed God exists, CASE CLOSED!
https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162019/#Comment_162019

NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN THAT WANTS TO MAKE A FOOL OF THEMSELVES LIKE "JOHN_C_87" AS SHOWN IN THE LINK ABOVE, WILL BE ...?

John_C_87

You lie...
Just read your "JIBBERISH" in the post link below in you trying so hard to show an unnamed God exists, CASE CLOSED!

It isn't that a GOD does not exist it is that you cannot understand a GOD exists which is not religious and you then favor religious God's over factual non-religious GOD. There is no case for you to open or close as you have started no trial or tribunal, far as anyone being or playing the fool. All I am doing is explaining the self-evident truth in the principle of oath made before all court's of law in America, Quote " Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but truth so help you GOD." It is this Oath that describes GOD as a numerical axiom. The best answer a person might make in connection to established justice and religion under United States Constitution is, quote: “ I so do affirm.” As the swearing to GOD is religiously frowned upon and often overlooked in this context.

And here 21Centuryconocist is still factless in establishment of atheism....

21CenturyIconoclast

@John_C_87

In the same context of you proving a God exists as shown in this following dissertation, MY ATHEISM EXISTS because the principle and reflection of it in an official state code is a simple task assigned by an numerical axion which does not require harm in any way when being addressed openly instead of secretly. In relation to Atheism, I don't need to use Roman Date Stones with a numerical form, nonetheless, I don't need said numbers, or hide them. Again, the use of letters in algebra and math textbooks used in many schools, both public and private, can prove Atheism as an axiom which one can learn or refuse to admit it is true. The question isn't even if one has to prove Atheism, but the question is how to establish atheism to be real if there is a GOD of fact. But, then again, God and Atheism is dependent on only one point whereas the axiom of GOD has multiple connections to other points of mathematics in life! Then if the Atheist performs the process of allowing you to view or gather evidence, but if even you did not understand the evidence that I am viewing. I will not force or trick, teach, or coach you to understand the evidence that I would be able to view and collect myself. When stating that GOD is a numerical axiom, and not a form of algebra where one precludes that one cannot dictate the letters used to make words including God, or cannot be used in other ways by anyone, then I cannot make a promise to you because you are incapable of learning or understanding as there is a curve related to a persons abilities to process and understand fact, at your expense of being dumber!

You cannot grasp a numerical axiom shared at all, where it is an unsubstantiated claim to say Atheism is only to be a name. Always remember that algebra that describes letters that can and are used as numbers, where it is the elimination of the date stones which describes that the numbers that are written as letters might be mistaken as words, duh! To me that a task that I am to take in undertaking is to design a representation of Atheism by demonstrating to all people who might comprehend facts as whole truth in being part of a membership or not. Remember, Atheism's numerical axiom is not a theory, and an axiom can be a theory, then presumed to be true as you say that a question isn't if GOD is real or fake, but the question isn't even if you have proven GOD to everyone, whereas the question for me is how to establish atheism to be real if there is a GOD of fact. This belief is dependent on only one point whereas the axiom of GOD has multiple connections to other points of mathematics in life, therefore Atheism can fill in the holes, understood?.

One can picture Atheism as invisible, just like a God concept, whereas, where it is a part of any miscommunications that take place and is kind of the point to begin with. Atheism embraces the fact as our own whole truth as a person, where we can say almost first to imagine GOD as hard to see, otherwise GOD would be visible to all living people without question is showing that he exists. The Atheist doesn't have to create “riddle the riddle” in the sections of truth together as the Atheist holds multiple directions, which are hard to understand at times, or confusing to decipher to the fools like you. Remember, in accepting Atheism, the mind is whole truth because there can only be one GOD inside the scope of human reason, but does not make all other principles which are humanly linked to God the false God described in warning, whatever that means! GOT IT FOOL?

John_C_87

@21CenturyIconoclast
21CenturyIconoclast asked: GOT IT
Yes, you still have no answer to give......Got it.
It isn't that GOD, as a way to use letters as numbers cannot exist. The fact is 21Centurylconoclast needs GOD to not exist, otherwise you will look like a fool saying you bleive something does not exist when it does and has existed right under your nose for centeries.

21CenturyIconoclast

@John_C_87

WAIT! I have proved Atheism exists in my following post: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162331/#Comment_162331

I have followed your rules of engagement in your posts of proving a God exists, therefore, what part of the link above proving Atheism exists didn't you understand?

BEGIN:

John_C_87

I have followed your rules of engagement in your posts of proving a God exists, therefore, what part of the link above proving Atheism exists didn't you understand?

It isn't a rule of engagement it is a specification to a description power in such a way as it becomes all mighty on its own without the person becoming powerful as well, this means in anyone’s hand a self-evident truth can be a mighty power. The claim by you that atheism is like the numerical axiom invisible to all living things as a presumption of truth. The numerical axiom of GOD is not invisible to the people, it is overlooked by people, or ignored by people. The idea of a numerical axiom explaining atheism is saying the definition of atheism is a lie and should only ever be presumed as true. If you are googling an AI to speak on your behalf, it is having you admit you are wrong in a complicated way. The definition would need to read atheism is modeled like a factual numerical axion GOD, them becoming totally dependent on a real GOD to exist. That is just not the case here as where we can say the axiom of GOD is a self-evident truth created from a whole truth said to exist by Court Oath to be sworn in. " Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but truth so help you GOD."

GOD is described in a series of truths, 1. Truth. 2. Whole truth. 3. Nothing but truth. 4. Describes assistance of self-evident truth in understanding the weight of the stages of truth ask to be spoken by a person in a court of law.

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic

ProudToBeCatholic, whose mantra is; "Do not cherry-pick biblical passages, even though they are inspired by Jesus, that totally embarrasses me and my primitive thinking Bronze and Iron Age Catholic Religion,” and is the number one king of using ungodly EISIGENSIS in trying to rewrite Jesus' actual literal words, and the number one Bible Apologist that twists himself into a pretzel to "try" and change Jesus' disturbing and despicable inspired words, ran away from many of my posts because his "mommy and daddy" doesn’t want him to be on this Religion Forum in the first place, and where he outright ungodly dishonors his parents that are paying his way at this time,

PROUDTOBECATHOLIC RUNAWAY QUOTE #TWO FROM BIBLICAL AXIOMS THAT HE COULD NOT ADDRESS: “I would like to make a couple of points and then I will leave this site until I am eighteen and able to make my own decisions.”https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/162908/#Comment_162908

It has become a blatant fact that the Hell bound Catholic monikered as ProudToBeCatholic has RAN AWAY for the second time because what he thought he knew about the primitive Bronze and Iron Age bible, he simply didn’t! Therefore I had to Bible Slap him Silly®️many times once again in a couple of threads as shown.

We’ll see if this outright Bible dunce ProudToBeCatholic ever returns in the future to be once again made the Bible fool that he is!

Barnardot

@21CenturyIconoclast ; I will leave this site until I am eighteen and able to make my own decisions.

Well I reckon that this site might not be here in 15 years time any way.

But I reckon your age should have nothing to do with it because most psychos get worser as they grow older. You should come back after your been to a shrink and get rid your horrible hating and Exstream views and act like a human being.

21CenturyIconoclast

@Barnardot

YOUR QUOTE TO ME THAT WAS SAID BY THE RUNAWAY CATHYLICK PROUDTOBECATHOLIC: " I will leave this site until I am eighteen and able to make my own decisions."

Can you possibly get your brain in order and in the right gear in the future to not make yourself the continued fool? As if your Bible stupidity wasn't enough to deal with! LOL!

.

Phite

Argument Topic: Balaam's Ass Revisited.

In the story, Balaam is riding his when an angel of the lord stands in the 's way. Balaam gets off the , beats him, and then remounts and continues on his way. The stops a second time by reason of the angel of the lord blocking his way. Balaam gets off the and beats on him some more, after which he remounts and heads out again. However, the stops a third time for the same reason, and Balaam is once again compelled to beat his .

But this time the mule says to Balaam something like, "Why hast thou smitten me these three times . . .?"

And Balaam answers the , starting with, "Because."

So, one thing we know for sure about our friend, Balaam--besides the fact that he's no friend to asses--is that he isn't easily surprised. Frankly, I'd have been looking around to see which of my buddies was trying to prank me by throwing his voice or some other such thing. After all, back then there was no television or radio, so they had to make their own fun. Verily, I'm left with the impression that if a UFO had landed in Balaam's backyard, he'd have been outside shaking his fist at it as it flew away because of the circular burn it left in the middle of his yard.

Phite

Argument Topic: Contradiction.

When Balaam's (mule) talked to him, Balaam wasn't the least bit surprised. In fact, Balaam was quick on the draw to explain himself to the mule.

That's not how reality works. When mules talk, we become surprised. We don't engage the mule, no questions asked. Editors didn't exist at the time, or they would have surely caught that inconsistency.

Phite

Argument Topic: And What's With the Voodoo?

A god of love would not require the torture, blood, and death of an innocent in order to let us off the hook for our sins. Sounds more like the ingredients of a voodoo spell than the act of a loving god. If pain, suffering, and death are this god's currency of choice when it comes to what he'll accept in return for forgiveness, isn't it obvious that what moves the god is not love?

just_sayin

@Phite said

A god of love would not require the torture, blood, and death of an innocent in order to let us off the hook for our sins. Sounds more like the ingredients of a voodoo spell than the act of a loving god. If pain, suffering, and death are this god's currency of choice when it comes to what he'll accept in return for forgiveness, isn't it obvious that what moves the god is not love?

If God is just then there must be consequences for sin. Sin at its core is rebellion - where someone decides that they get to make the rules in stead of God. Since our sin is against God, it is perfectly just for Him to be willing to accept the suffering and death of His son as payment for that offense. He is the one offended, He is the judge, and from a trinitarian point of view, He has provided the payment for the offense himself. From a pure philosophical perspective, there is nothing wrong with Him accepting Christ's sacrifice for our sins.

For there to be a world with no pain and no suffering, there would need to be no free will. Where ever free will exists, then there is the opportunity for their to be pain and suffering. So, yes God could create a world without pain and suffering, its just that you could be you in it. You could be an automaton, but not a someone with free will.

Phite

Argument Topic: Hmm . . .

So, the god creates humans, the humans make the god angry, and the god responds by wiping them all by way of flood. Then, after the passage of time, humans once again made the god angry, and it was at that point that Jesus agreed to pay the price to keep us out of Hell. The price that the god required necessarily reflects its values; how could it be otherwise? And what did the god require? The god required suffering, blood, and death. Can it be that such things as suffering, blood, and death are the god's currency of choice when it comes to negotiating terms of forgiveness?

Of what value is pain, blood, and suffering to the god? What does the god get out of it? Also, if we be the fruits of the god, and we be sinners, too, then what kind of a tree does that make the god? The fruit doesn't fall far from the tree.

Dee

@just_sayin

Argument Topic: watch JS run from these questions which he never fails to do despite being asked several times , reason being he makes it up as he goes along

JS cannot debate hes here to preach

If God is just then there must be consequences for sin.

Why must there be consequences?

Sin at its core is rebellion- where someone decides that they get to make the rules in stead of God.

But you worship a monster , your god daily watches children being abused and does nothing any person with a shred of decency who could save such a child would , but your god doesn't, I've more morality in my little finger than the monster you worship

Also people like you call gods decision not to intervene a moral one , when is it ever moral to watch a child being abused and do nothing when you can?

Since our sin is against God, it is perfectly just for Him to be willing to accept the suffering and death of His son as payment for that offense.

So if his son made payment why are there consequences, you haven't a clue have you?

He is the one offended, He is the judge, and from a trinitarian point of view, He has provided the payment for the offense himself. From a pure philosophical perspective, there is nothing wrong with Him accepting Christ's sacrifice for our sins.

Right got that , so why are there consequences then?

For there to be a world with no pain and no suffering, there would need to be no free will.

But your god has no free will as he knows all his future decisions so how has he free wil?l

Where ever free will exists, then there is the opportunity for their to be pain and suffering.

So people in heaven have no free will, as heaven is free of pain and suffering?

So, yes God could create a world without pain and suffering, its just that you could be you in it.

So tell us why god didn't do it?

You could be an automaton, but not a someone with free will.

So god is an automaton as he's no free will

Dee

@Aarons_Big_Ego

I'm afraid like it or not people who believe in a god are suffering from a delusion, that's a polite way of saying they're mentally ill , anyone who claims to believe in a supernatural entity that cannot be seen , heard or touched yet somehow exists is mentally ill

I honestly think they don't believe but only claim to as most carry on being the c-nts they always were

ZeusAres42

ProudToBeCatholic said:

A common irrational claim from Atheists is that the Bible contains contradictions. I have created this thread to answer these 'contradictions' to the best of my ability.

On the surface, there is nothing irrational about this claim. If there are no contradictions in the bible all that means is that Atheists made a factually incorrect claim; not an irrational one. That being said their motivations as to why they made this claim could be irrational even if what they said was factually correct.

Phite

Argument Topic: It all depends . . .

ProudToBeCatholic said:

@Nomenclature
Why don't you give me a couple of your supposed 'contradictions'?

First, can I assume you put stock in a place called Hell, or do you believe it's simply metaphor?

just_sayin

@Dee
Hey buddy how many times has your friend been banned? I can't keep track of what identity he is on now.

Why must there be consequences?

Probably because God is just.

But you worship a monster , your god daily watches children being abused and does nothing any person with a shred of decency who could save such a child would , but your god doesn't, I've more morality in my little finger than the monster you worship

God is the creator. He can do with His creation as He wishes. You are the created, not the creator. So the rules are different for you and me. You seem to think that God is obligated to create a world where there is no evil. Such a world would necessarily be a world without free will. And there can be no true love in world where all decisions are compelled. While you may favor a world without evil and being an automaton, most would favor a world with love in it. Further, you seem to be under the delusion that this world is all there is. God will ultimately judge all. And this life is but a momentary blip on eternity. You think God is a monster for allowing the world to operate by its own natural laws. Is God to blame for the evil humans do? Or are they, as free moral agents responsible for their own conduct? It seems you are falsely accusing God of your own immorality, from my vantage point.

Right got that , so why are there consequences then?

A characteristic of God's nature is that He is just. You have repeated this a few times now. Why is justice an undesirable thing to you?

But your god has no free will as he knows all his future decisions so how has he free wil?l

Foreknowledge is not the same as causing an event. God stands outside of space-time, He is not constrained by it or its limitations. True God knows all future events. He is not confined by space and time, nor is He limited by them. Can God respond to us differently based on our response to Him. Yes, he can.

So people in heaven have no free will, as heaven is free of pain and suffering?

This is actually a good question that has a long philosophical history. I believe that we will not be sin in heaven. As Revelation says "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore." The New Testament promises us that not only will we be set apart from sin (sanctification) we will be removed from the influences of sin and empowered to fully live with God (glorification).

So tell us why god didn't do it?

I believe Alvin Plantiga's argument has merit. He makes the what is called the many worlds case. Which essentially says that any world where sin is not present must either be one where there is no free will or that the number of agents who have free will is very small because statistically the larger the world the more likely sin will be present. He further argues that God would prefer a world where evil is a possibility, if a greater good like love can be more abundant.

So god is an automaton as he's no free will

How can you say God is not able to make His own decisions? Hasn't He already done that? If he created space-time then He has demonstrated not just His power, but His will to create also. Just because He is outside of space-time does not mean that he does not have a mind and a will. Your argument is logically flawed.

John_C_87

@just_sayin

If God is just then there must be consequences for sin. Sin at its core is rebellion - where someone decides that they get to make the rules in stead of God. Since our sin is against God, it is perfectly just for Him to be willing to accept the suffering and death of His son as payment for that offense. He is the one offended, He is the judge, and from a trinitarian point of view, He has provided the payment for the offense himself. From a pure philosophical perspective, there is nothing wrong with Him accepting Christ's sacrifice for our sins.

Here rests a problem. GOD as a self-evident truth can be just without consequence for sin. I appears you are trying to create an alibi for a question I had raise about a contradiction in the Bible. Does Jesus as a man a profit commit the same sin against self-evident truth as that raise against GOD from Lucifer as an Angel? Self-evident truth has dammed Satin to hell as GOD the dammed nation was triggered and executed by the angel’s own hand and not the facts that are ever held by self-evident truth.
there is nothing wrong with Him accepting Christ's sacrifice for our sins.

Yes, there is wrong Christ cannot sacrifice for any sin in front of self-evident truth other than his own. Period. There are always means of the sinner to find self-evident truth Jesus cannot find by simply seeking admissions of sin. The absolution is built on false authority over GOD, GOD is the father of all men and women no one child of GOD greater than the next.

John_C_87

@Aaron__The__Coward

No it wouldn't. How does a world without evil prevent me from choosing whether I want strawberry or vanilla ice cream? Or choosing whether I want to go for a swim or bake a cake?

It can be told to you, but a person must demonstrate an ability to understand or being simply told truth, whole truth, or nothing but truth is worthless. The inability to preserve the safety of a GOD that is not a religion set a poor example of protection of a religion of GOD that is a religious example. Hence the accusation of murder place on GOD and not men for the deeds of Humanity. The legal issue is that a united state of legal counsel as group of lawyers have possibly raided in civil court a Trust of GOD, a Trust valued in billions of dollars...Do you understand the conflict of interest that has now been created?

Phite

Argument Topic: What about Hell?

I'm so glad no one here believes in a place where you burn forever. Or, if someone does believe it, they know better than to bring that belief out into the light of day. And that's a step forward in anyone's book!

John_C_87

@Phite

I'm so glad no one here believes in a place where you burn forever. Or, if someone does believe it, they know better than to bring that belief out into the light of day. And that's a step forward in anyone's book!

How is hell a contradiction in the Bible?

Phite

Argument Topic: How is Hell not a biblical contradiction?

Do you imagine that the god made Hell to teach sinners a lesson? Can't be that because no one ever gets out of Hell to apply the learned lesson to their life. That means that the god wants to inflict pain for nothing but the sake of pain. Of what use is such suffering to the god? And of what use is such a god to humans?

just_sayin

@John_C_87
I wish I could understand you well enough to respond to your comments. Instead, I'm just guessing at what you are trying to say.

Justice demands consequences for behavior. How can you call it just if there is no accountability for actions? God is just. There is no problem with Jesus being the "propitiation" for our sins. Our sin is against God, God is the judge, so our debt is to Him, he can choose to accept or reject whatever offer of payment for those actions He chooses. Again he is both the offended and the judge. Now the one who has sinned can reject the offer of forgiveness that Christ provides - that is their right, but is logically consistent that God can accept Jesus' sacrifice as our substitutionary.

Phite

Argument Topic: God, or Terrorist?

Is the god just in its decision to endlessly torture those who've rejected its "love"?

When a god's penchant for justice consumes even its mercy, what the hell is that about?

Sargonski

ProudToBeCatholic said:

A common irrational claim from Atheists is that the Bible contains contradictions. I have created this thread to answer these 'contradictions' to the best of my ability.

I have a good one .. a real puzzler. Should we kill/punish children for the sins of their parents .. or should we observe the rule of Law -- one person not to be punished for the action of another.

God says both so is clear contradiction.

21CenturyIconoclast

@ProudToBeCatholic

As shown ad infinitum in this this thread alone, ProudToBeCatholic has had a "plethora" of lame excuses to RUN AWAY from me in easily making him the Catholic fool! IT HAS BEEN 2 MONTHS SINCE HE HAS RAN AWAY FROM THIS THREAD OF HIS!

Just checking in to see if he found his "balls" to return so I can continue to make him one of the most Bible pseudo-christians that this Religion Forum as ever seen!

.

Barnardot

@21CenturyIconoclast So why do you call so many people pseudo Christians. For example Im a real Christian and I suppose its good in a way that you have nothing against real Christians but just the pretend ones which is a good point really.
I agree that there are to many nancy boys who think there Christians but when it comes to laying it on the line they get scarred off. Its the true Christians who stay strong and know whats really going down in this world.

Sargonski

John_C_87 said:

@ProudToBeCatholic
So, are you saying that Jesus is not God
I don’t want to preach at you, but the Bible does claim Jesus is God. No the Bible decribes his remarks and witnesses who repeat his remarks.
...To simplify the answer again, GOD is whole truth and whole truth does not die,

Think Bart Erhman does 1 hour segment on this on utube. " does Bible claim Jesus is God" ?

but the way you have the question worded is silly to begin with .. as should be does Jesus claim he is God -- in Bible .. which is probably what you mean in any case. .. and the answer to this is .. not really.. First you have to specify which God.. as in .. is Jesus claiming to be "A God" "Son of God" - or "The Most High God" "The Father - Creator" and so on.

The answer to which is different depending which question you are asking.. Obviously Jesus claimed to be divine .. son of God.

What he didn't claim is that he was "The Father" .. and in fact goes out of his way to claim otherwise . over and over and over .. referring to "The Father" as someone other than himself .. including the prayer he suggests you pray --- "Our Father -- who art in Heaven . Hallowed be thy name --- which is not Jesus. aye Mate ? Not Jesus you are praying to when you say that prayer .. you are addressing the God in the Heavens .. as opposed to the Chief God on Earth .. Two different dominions - which although you might mistake .and not understand ... . the First Century individual -- regardless of religion .. would not.mistake .. and all would understand this distinction.

But NO .. Jesus never affirms the Trinity -- EVER .. AnyWHERE .in the Bible. and this is the opinion of ALL modern Theological Scholarship of any repute. .. and sorry .. the Fundamentalist Evangelicals opted out of this group.

21CenturyIconoclast

@Sargonski

.
Sargonski,

As I have said many times before, this Religion Forum is full of pseudo-christians like YOU that have the audacity to say that Jesus was not God! WRONG! Where did you get your Bible knowledge from, a Krackers Jacks Box?

Heads up Bible fool, Jesus is God as explicitly shown in a few of many passages shown below:

JESUS IS GOD AND SAVIOR: “Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours.” (2 Peter 1:1)

JESUS ADMITS HE IS GOD: Jesus answered: "Don"t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, Show us the Father?” (John 14:9)

"Waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ," (Titus 2:3)

"Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:27-28)

Sargonski, would it be possible for you to take your blatant Bible stupidity and ignorance to another Religion Forum to make a fool of yourself there, instead of here? Thank you.

NEXT BIBLE IGNORANT FOOL LIKE "SARGONSKI" THAT POSES THAT JESUS ISN'T GOD, WHEN BIBLICALLY HE IS, WILL BE ...?

.

DaveD

Argument Topic: Of course there are contradictions

Anyone trying to "prove" there are no contradictions in the Bible is dead where they stand. Of course there are! Just the fact that the Pentateuch (the first 5 books) is a rather poor combination of 4 completely different oral traditions guarantees that contradictions will be made.

Where one of these contradictions comes in is that Gen 11:25 states that Terah was 75 years old when Abram (Abraham) was born. It states in 11:32 that Terah was 205 years old when he died, and in 12:4 Abram was 75 years old when left Haran. That means that when he left Terah was 150 years old and would be alive for another 55 years. Where's the contradiction? That comes in Acts 7:4 in Stephen's speech when he said "...and after his father died God made him leave Haran and come to this land you are living today." Now, yes, Stephen was using the Sumarian Pentateuch which states that Terah died at 145, but that does not change the fact that the contradiction made its way into the Bible.

Another clear contradiction involving Abraham is in Gen 17:25 which states that Abraham was 99 years old and Ishmael was 13 when they were circumcised. Chapter 21:5 states that he was 100 years old when Issac was born. Ishmael was therefore supposed to be 14 years old when Abraham drove Hagar (Ishmael's mother) and he away. Now read 21:14-16. It is clearly showing Ishmael in this tradition was a baby carried by his mother and crying and wailing.

There are many other examples.... just compare to order of creation found in Genesis 1 to the order in Genesis 2. But to focus of stuff like that is to focus on trivia, and the truth of the Bible is not found in trivia. It is found in its MESSAGE. To focus on the trivial is to completely miss the message which the stories are meant to convey. And Christ's message is over and above all the messages of the Old Testament. Just look through the New Testament at how many times Christ said "You have heard it said that... (some law of the OT)... but I SAY TO YOU... (His teaching)". Christ's teaching supplanted the many of the laws found in the OT. He taught with authority appealing to no one else for confirmation. By and large the teaching of the OT were a series of what NOT to do. There were something like 600+ commandments given in the OT. Christ narrowed that down to just two. But by and large while the OT commandments were laws of inaction.... just don't do certain things, Christ's commands are commands of action. We have to actively LOVE God and our fellowman. Just think of the implications of what it means to truly love. Hatred has no place in Christianity, no matter what Christian faith you are a member of.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Debunking Christianity arguments is like shooting fish in a barrel.

@DaveD

"Hatred has no place in Christianity, no matter what Christian faith you are a member of. "

"4. Immoral to the extreme…just a couple examples of many:

Lot offered his two daughters to a group of sex seeking men to do to them whatever they wished (Genesis 19:8)

"

https://medium.com/excommunications/ten-fatal-flaws-of-the-bible-24ef7a305f3f

Yet, Christian faith seems very strong. In fact some Christians seem to have ever stronger belief. The question becomes are the atheists' method of debunking effective? Nastier hateful debunking could be made, but that would likely backfire.

Even more troublesome is people are become unaffiliated or believing in a God but not atheism. Showing humans are only half rational. The irony is that as Christian numbers decrease, atheist numbers are not exactly swelling.

I've heard the expression You cannot reason someone out of something he or she was not reasoned into. I think the time has come to look at the epistemology of how beliefs spread. View climate change and pro-vaccine arguments and ask ourselves are our methods effective? Is arguing on the Internet with a stranger a good use of my time?

https://skepticalscience.com/

The science is clear, yet people still belief in all sorts of conspiracies and denial.

21CenturyIconoclast

@DaveD

.
David,

As the membership can hopefully and readily see, you are as Bible and ignorant as Sargonski was in my post to him herewith: https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/164812/#Comment_164812

YOUR QUOTE ADMITTING THAT THERE ARE "LIES" WITHIN THE PRIMITIVE BRONZE AND IRON AGE BIBLE: "But to focus of stuff like that is to focus on trivia, and the truth of the Bible is not found in trivia. It is found in its MESSAGE. To focus on the trivial is to completely miss the message which the stories are meant to convey."

If "messages" contradict each other, as you admitted to in your post, then there're falsehoods, and where there are falsehoods, THERE ARE LIES, because both contradicting stories cannot be true at the same time! Get it? Furthermore, how can a pseudo-christian be comfortable in building their faith upon LIES?

Case in point, which CONTRADICTING story line message is the correct one especially when Jesus' inspired words stated: “EVERY word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5). Every word includes the Old Testament 613 commandments!

YOUR BIBLE IGNORANT QUOTE #2: "And Christ's message is over and above all the messages of the Old Testament."

WRONG! Jesus as God, DOES NOT change His mind where the OT laws are to be followed today as this verse so states: "God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?" (Numbers 23:19)

The serial killer Jesus, as God, said to follow ALL of His 613 commandments in the Old Testament as shown in the following examples:

1. “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil” (Matthew 5:7).

2. “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Matthew 5:18).

3. “And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail” (Luke 16:17).

Now, if you want to continue your outright stupidity of the Bible, then tell us that Jesus allegedly “fullfilled” the laws, where I will Bible Slap you Silly if you do!

The mythical Jesus tells the inept pseudo-christian to abide by the old laws established by Moses! Besides, have heaven and earth passed away yet which was a prerequisite to the Old Testament Laws NOT being followed? NO IT HAS NOT! Therefore, they are to be followed until Jesus’ comical and killing spree Second Coming!

YOUR BIBLE IGNORANT QUOTE #3: “There were something like 600+ commandments given in the OT. Christ narrowed that down to just two.”

WHAT?! If the serial killer Jesus narrowed it down to 2 Commands, then the pseudo-christian doesn’t have to worry about the following Commandments anymore?!!!

• You shall have no other God's before me.

• Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven images. ...

• Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. ...

• Remember the Sabbath day and keep it Holy. ...

• Honor your father and mother. ...

• Thou shalt not kill. ...

• Thou shalt not commit adultery. ...

• Thou shalt not steal.

Furthermore, are you going to lead the way throughout the world in removing ALL, and I repeat, ALL displayed 10 Commandment placements at churches, City Halls, Court Houses, etc.? Huh? LOL!

YOUR BIBLE IGNORANT QUOTE #4: “Hatred has no place in Christianity, no matter what Christian faith you are a member of.”

Your Bible stupidity has no bounds, does it? In the following passage the mythical serial killer Jesus said:

JESUS SAID: “If anyone comes to me and does not HATE his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” (Like 14:26)

Seriously, maybe you would be more comfortable in a "Children’s Christian Forum," where their bible ineptness is equal to yours, yes? Here is a kids Christian forum that you may want to entertain because of your complete Bible stupidity: https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/86093-childrens-church/

.

Sargonski

21CenturyIconoclast said:

@Sargonski

.
Sargonski,

As I have said many times before, this Religion Forum is full of pseudo-christians like YOU that have the audacity to say that Jesus was not God! WRONG! Where did you get your Bible knowledge from, a Krackers Jacks Box?

Heads up Bible fool, Jesus is God as explicitly shown in a few of many passages shown below:

JESUS IS GOD AND SAVIOR: “Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours.” (2 Peter 1:1)
JESUS ADMITS HE IS GOD: Jesus answered: "Don"t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, Show us the Father?” (John 14:9)
"Waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ," (Titus 2:3)
"Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:27-28)

Sargonski, would it be possible for you to take your blatant Bible stupidity and ignorance to another Religion Forum to make a fool of yourself there, instead of here? Thank you.

NEXT BIBLE IGNORANT FOOL LIKE "SARGONSKI" THAT POSES THAT JESUS ISN'T GOD, WHEN BIBLICALLY HE IS, WILL BE ...?

.

Holy Carp this is a bunch of foolish nonsense .. you running around in a circle calling names is not an argument for much .. especially since you did not understand the argument to begin with.

I did not Claim that Jesus was not a God - according to the NT --- you building a strawman -- pretending I did make this claim is as "Ignorant Fool" as it gets.

The claim is that Jesus never claims to be "The Father" God Most High. and every Bible dictionary wil tell you that much .. that there is no direct Trinity Statement in the NT.. basic theology 101 friend. Looks like you are projecting your "ignorant fool" onto others ..

21CenturyIconoclast

@Sargonski

.
Sargonski,

YOUR TURN AROUND QUOTE IN YOU TRYING TO SAVE YOURSELF FROM YOUR BIBLE STUPIDITY: "I did not Claim that Jesus was not a God - according to the NT"

What part of this quote of yours claiming specifically that Jesus was not god don't you understand: "What he didn't claim is that he was "The Father" .. and in fact goes out of his way to claim otherwise. over and over and over .. referring to "The Father" as someone other than himself .."

Heads up Bible fool, you explicitly referred to Jesus AS NOT THE FATHER, OF WHICH THE FATHER IS GOD TO BEGIN WITH, you ignorant grade-school fool! GET IT? Huh? Maybe?

YOUR BIBLE STUPIDITY QUOTE ONCE AGAIN: "The claim is that Jesus never claims to be "The Father" God Most High."

WRONG AGAIN BIBLE FOOL, barring the passages that I have shown you where others claimed Jesus is God, where you are essentially saying those references were LIES, therefore in the following verses Jesus ADMITS HE IS GOD at your embarrassing expense in front of the membership again:

Jesus answered: "Don"t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, Show us the Father?” (John 14:9)

"Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58)

JESUS SAID: "I and the Father are one.” (John 10:30)

JESUS SAID: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” (Revelation 22:13)

JESUS SAID: "The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.” Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.” (John 4:25-26)

YOUR BIBLE STUPIDITY CONTINUES WITH THIS QUOTE OF YOURS: "Jesus never affirms the Trinity -- EVER .. AnyWHERE .in the Bible. "

JESUS SAID: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matthew 28:19)

Sargonski, do you want to call Jesus a in the passage above where he AFFIRMS the Trinity Doctrine? Huh? LOL!

Sargonski, now wipe the proverbial egg from your face AGAIN in being so Bible where your blatant Bible Duncery®️ has no room within this prestigious Religion Forum, therefore take your pre-school "Dog and Pony Show" to a Children's Christian Forum where you will be more at home in being so Bible !

NEXT BIBLE FOOL LIKE "SARGONSKI" THAT WANTS TO MAKE THEMSELVES AS BIBLE AS HE IS, WILL BE ...?

.

Sargonski

Argument Topic: WRONG AGAIN BIBLE FOOL, barring the passages that I have shown you where others claimed Jesus is God,

What part of .. I did not say the Jesus does not claim to be a God ... -- do you not understand ? He just doesn't claim to be "The Father" and don't blame your misunderstanding of "The Logos" concept in John .. on me.

YOUR BIBLE STUPIDITY CONTINUES WITH THIS QUOTE OF YOURS: "Jesus never affirms the Trinity -- EVER .. AnyWHERE .in the Bible. "

JESUS SAID: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matthew 28:19)

You then confirm your own state of being "Stupidity Continues" showing you have no idea what Trinity Doctrine is all about... as Jesus is negating the Trinity "Baptize in name of Father - Son - Spirit" -- if anything .. not affirming in any way shape or form.

Jesus is describing three different entities .. not saying each is the same. ..but if there is any confusion .. one needs only look at the hundreds of examples of Jesus directly afirming that the Father is someone other than himself .. Including his last words on the Cross. " MY GOD -- Why have you forsaken Me"

What part of " God if you can please take this cup from my hand -- not make me do this terrible thing .. that would be great .. but .. I will do what you will ... not what I will . went completely deer in headlights mate ?

Then you have the huge problem that the Jesus of John is a whole lot different than the Jesus of Matt-Mark... where Jesus and the Father are clearly depicted as separate entities ..

and don't blame me for your stupidity .. Told you already that any Standard Bible Dictionary will tell you that the trinity is not affirmed .. and the further you go back in time .. the worse it gets.

Why does Jesus need to go through the ritual Testing if Jesus is God ... and how come Satan does not recognize his Father ? mistaking him for another of of the Sons of God .. one just not quite as Godly as Satan .. Son of man --- more like Hercules .. in Dravidic Drag if you will. Why is Jesus depicted like this by the author of the Earliest Gospel .. doesn't he know that Jesus is "The Father" the "Most High" .. big Cheese up in the Sky ?

Do you even know the story mate ? Read the book .. other than spoon fed passages that you can make conform to some man made dogma you have ingested . Next you are going to be telling me that Jesus offered his followers a "Free Pass" through Judgement . convinced this is the case . the raging dictates of Idol Martin.. Got you pegged in a hole already Friend. a Fundimentalist know it all who don't know it.

Now time to put on the thinking cap and tell me why Lord Sataniel -- Son and good buddy of his Father -- GOD .. himself being a God ..but of lesser stature - doesn't recognize his Father .. .. mistaking him for the Son of Man .. the sacrificial Lamb

Or .. are you going to try and Claim the Most High is the Trickster God Enki .. an interesting idea - but one well beyond your understanding so thats out ..

Floor is yours .. given your great Bible knowledge I know you will come up with something coherent.

21CenturyIconoclast

@Sargonski

.
Sargonski, who is wanting to be the number one Bible Fool of this Religion Forum,

I will try one more time to get through your blatant Bible STUPIDITY, okay? Good.

YOUR CONTRADICTING QUOTE OF LITERAL BIBLE STUPIDITY: “What part of .. I did not say the Jesus does not claim to be a God ... -- do you not understand ? He just doesn't claim to be "The Father" and don't blame your misunderstanding of "The Logos" concept in John .. on me. "

First you say that you did not say that Jesus does not claim to be God, then you laughably say that Jesus doesn’t claim to be the Father, which the FATHER IS GOD YOU BLATANT SATANIC BIBLE FOOL!!!!

YOUR QUOTE REGARDING THE TRINITY DOCTRINE: "Jesus never affirms the Trinity -- EVER .. AnyWHERE .in the Bible. “

JESUS AFFIRMS THE TRINITY DOCTRINE AT YOUR EMBARRASSING EXPENSE IN FRONT OF THE MEMBERSHIP HEREWITH: ”Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matthew 28:19)

HEADS UP BIBLE FOOL, the Trinity doctrine is commonly expressed as the statement that the ONE GOD JESUS (1 Timothy 2:5) exists as or in three equally divine “Persons”, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Every term in this statement (God, exists, as or in, equally divine, Person) has been variously understood. The guiding principle has been the creedal declaration that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of the New Testament are consubstantial! Because this shared substance or essence is a divine one, this is understood to imply that all three named individuals are divine, and equally so. Yet the three in some sense “are” the one God of the Christian Bible. GET IT BIBLE DUNCE?!

Because of your outright overall stupidity, you don’t realize that when Jesus says he is god, and then you show passages that Jesus is not god, SHOWS THE BIBLE CONTRADICTS ITSELF, PERIOD!

Have your parents read this post of mine to you, so as to get through your inept brain this time is seeing how BIBLE you truly are in going against said post! https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/164851/#Comment_164851

I really don’t have time for you in being so Bible DUMB, and in having HORRIBLE writing skills and syntactical sentence structuring that of a pre-schooler child!

.

Sargonski

Argument Topic: Holy fallacy in the Pride Land Symba..

21CenturyIconoclast said:

@Sargonski

.
Sargonski, who is wanting to be the number one Bible Fool of this Religion Forum,

I will try one more time to get through your blatant Bible STUPIDITY, okay? Good.

YOUR CONTRADICTING QUOTE OF LITERAL BIBLE STUPIDITY: “What part of .. I did not say the Jesus does not claim to be a God ... -- do you not understand ? He just doesn't claim to be "The Father" and don't blame your misunderstanding of "The Logos" concept in John .. on me. "

First you say that you did not say that Jesus does not claim to be God, then you laughably say that Jesus doesn’t claim to be the Father, which the FATHER IS GOD YOU BLATANT SATANIC BIBLE FOOL!!!!

YOUR QUOTE REGARDING THE TRINITY DOCTRINE: "Jesus never affirms the Trinity -- EVER .. AnyWHERE .in the Bible. “

JESUS AFFIRMS THE TRINITY DOCTRINE AT YOUR EMBARRASSING EXPENSE IN FRONT OF THE MEMBERSHIP HEREWITH: ”Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matthew 28:19)

HEADS UP BIBLE FOOL, the Trinity doctrine is commonly expressed as the statement that the ONE GOD JESUS (1 Timothy 2:5) exists as or in three equally divine “Persons”, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Every term in this statement (God, exists, as or in, equally divine, Person) has been variously understood. The guiding principle has been the creedal declaration that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of the New Testament are consubstantial! Because this shared substance or essence is a divine one, this is understood to imply that all three named individuals are divine, and equally so. Yet the three in some sense “are” the one God of the Christian Bible. GET IT BIBLE DUNCE?!

Because of your outright overall stupidity, you don’t realize that when Jesus says he is god, and then you show passages that Jesus is not god, SHOWS THE BIBLE CONTRADICTS ITSELF, PERIOD!

Have your parents read this post of mine to you, so as to get through your inept brain this time is seeing how BIBLE you truly are in going against said post! https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/164851/#Comment_164851

I really don’t have time for you in being so Bible DUMB, and in having HORRIBLE writing skills and syntactical sentence structuring that of a pre-schooler child!

.

running around name calling is not an argument for much mate .. projecting your failed ability to make a coherent argument onto others.

JESUS AFFIRMS THE TRINITY DOCTRINE AT YOUR EMBARRASSING EXPENSE IN FRONT OF THE MEMBERSHIP HEREWITH: ”Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matthew 28:19)

Sorry mate -- nowhere in the above Passage does Jesus Claim to be "The Father" ..You should lose the fundimentalist deceiver site you got that from .. cause blessing someone in the name of three entities does not mean those entities are one.

Basic logic is not your strong suit but, you go running round calling others "Dumb" .. Got big log to remove out of own eye ..

21CenturyIconoclast

@Sargonski

.
Sargonski, that is easily trying to be the the number 1 Bible fool of this Religion Forum,

YOUR QUOTE OF NOT UNDERSTANDING IN HOW UTTERLY DUMB YOU TRULY ARE: "running around name calling is not an argument for much mate .. projecting your failed ability to make a coherent argument onto others."

Unfortunately for you, your mental state goes severely wanting, where you do not comprehend that I do present COHERENT arguments, and just because you cannot know this fact, nor address them without making yourself the continued fool within this Religion Forum, is not my fault but yours! Understood?

MY QUOTED STATEMENT: JESUS AFFIRMS THE TRINITY DOCTRINE AT YOUR EMBARRASSING EXPENSE IN FRONT OF THE MEMBERSHIP HEREWITH: ”Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matthew 28:19)

YOUR AND DUMBFOUNDED RESPONSE: "Sorry mate -- nowhere in the above Passage does Jesus Claim to be "The Father" ..You should lose the fundimentalist deceiver site you got that from .. cause blessing someone in the name of three entities does not mean those entities are one."

MY RESPONSE TO YOUR NEVER ENDING BIBLE STUPIDITY RELATIVE TO MATTHEW 28:19 IN JESUS BEING THE "FATHER" AND THE 3 ENTITIES ARE DIVINE AND SEPARATE:

1. JESUS IS GOD, THEREFORE THE "FATHER:" “Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours.” (2 Peter 1:1)

2. JESUS ADMITS HE IS GOD THE FATHER: "I and the FATHER are one."(John 10:30)

3. JESUS ADMITS HE IS GOD AND THE FATHER: "Don"t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me HAS SEEN THE FATHER. How can you say, Show us the Father?” (John 14:9)

4. JESUS' INSPIRED WORDS SAYS HE IS THE "FATHER" WHICH EQUALS GOD: "Yet for us there is one God, THE FATHER, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist."

Furthermore, at your embarrassing expense once again in front of the membership, the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirt is called the Trinity Doctrine, you ignorant bible fool, and they all represent ONE person, Jesus the Christ as God! The Trinity doctrine is commonly expressed as the statement that the one God exists as or in three equally divine “Persons”, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The guiding principle has been the creedal declaration that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of the New Testament are consubstantial (i.e. the same in substance or essence, Greek: homoousios). Because this shared substance or essence is a divine one, this is understood to imply that all three named individuals are divine, and equally so. Yet the three entities “are” the one God of the Bible named Jesus Christ!

SARGONSKI; First thing; you are guilty of this Jesus inspired passages: Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures." (Matthew 22:29)

Secondly; to save yourself from any further embarrassment upon this esteemed Religion Forum because of your BIBLE STUPIDITY, take your child-like "Dog and Pony Show" to a kids Christian forum where your outright Bible ineptness will be more at home with the equally Bible kids in said forum! LOL!

NEXT BIBLE DUNCE LIKE "SARGONSKI" THAT WANTS TO PROVE THEIR BIBLE STUPIDITY LIKE HIS, WILL BE ...?

.

Sargonski

Argument Topic: Furthermore, at your embarrassing expense once again in front of the membership, the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirt is called the Trinity Doctrine, you ignorant bible fool, and they all represent ONE person,

NEXT BIBLE DUNCE LIKE "SARGONSKI" THAT WANTS TO PROVE THEIR BIBLE STUPIDITY

A Trinity doctrine is commonly expressed as the statement that the one God exists as or in three equally divine “Persons”, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/#:~:text=A Trinity doctrine is commonly,Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Your claim that the Father Son and Spirit are one person according to the Trinity Doctrine is false according to the Stanford Dictionary .. and with that you should take log out of own eye prior to running around calling other people ..

Further .. Jesus claiming to be one with God in John does not mean defacto he is claimig to be "The Father" -- it could have many other meanings. and must be juxtaposed to the countless times Jesus states directly that he is not the Father... so once again your crying out "Bible Stupidity" turns out to be your reflection in the mirror .. projection of your state of being on to others.

21CenturyIconoclast

@Sargonski

YOUR INEPT BIBLE QUOTE AGAIN!!!!!: "Jesus states directly that he is not the Father.."

Just how embarrassing do you want to get within this Religion Forum? Huh? Do you like being made the Bible fool, is that it?

JESUS ADMITS HE IS GOD AND THE FATHER: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me HAS SEEN THE FATHER. How can you say, Show us the Father?” (John 14:9)

JESUS IS THE FATHER:https://dailyverse.knowing-jesus.com/john-14-9

Your outright BIBLE ILLITERACY is excused once again at your expense!

.

frame

Howdy, Stranger!

Communities

Tense scene at UCLA after police order protesters to leave

In this Debate

Give Me Your Best Examples of Contradictions in the Bible

Debra AI Prediction

Arguments

Overcoming Obsession

How to make an obsession function positively.

How to control an obsession

Back To Top

foot

DebateIsland.com

Contact us

Get In Touch