ASSUME you have a divine revelation that convinces you of the existence of God, a god or gods, that vindicates one of the world's notable religions and their texts, theology, etc.

DO NOT ASSUME that your personal principles or "former" beliefs are in line with this at all. To clarify, assume that if you are an Hindu, you have had a monotheistic revelation. If you are a Fundamentalist Christian, assume some sort of Buddhist/Tao, Fundie Muslim or polytheistic revelation.


What do you do? Would you follow what was revealed, KNOWING it is the way to not burn? Would you embrace something that was completely against your pillars of understanding or thinking, or would you continue down the particular path you are on now?

Athiests, would you be able to change your lifestyle/thinking to adapt?


Not-needed answers are "Oh I know my religion is right" or "Oh I know there is no god or gods."

I would change my ways in a heartbeat. I can't imagine that any reasonable person wouldn't.

whs

I'd change, but I'd be hugely pissed off since I'd basically be a slave to this guy telling me what to do on pain of death.

Nobody gonna still fight the power, huh?

Nobody wants to get smoten.

you'll have to pick a specific deity if you want a specific reaction.

if the christian god as described in the bible actually existed i'd continue to ignore him because i'd have no interest in worshiping such a sadistist, cruel god. just send me to hell already.

. . . careful what you wish for . . .

it worked for bon scott apparently

liar. if you found out the christian god existed and would send you to hell if you didn't obey...you would change. is it really worth sticking to your "sinning" ways if it means an ETERNITY in hell?

i call shenanigans

no shenanigans.

however the biblical christian god is described as so sadistic, irrational, and self-contradictory that he's obviously just nonsensical fiction. if an interested creator existed he would be very different, so asking how you would react to the christian god is a pretty meaningless exercise. might as well ask how you would react if the easter bunny god appeared and ordered you to stick eggshells up your butt or burn in boiling chocolate for eternity.

I'd go with eggshells up the butt rather than burn in boiling chocolate for eternity.

See how easy that was to just answer the question?

Very thoughtful.

Which is why you are the absolute worst person to even speak on these things, because you have no clue. If the christian God appeared to you in all his might, and decided to confront you about who you are and the general disrespect towards him, you would beg for your life and crap yourself in an instant. The thing is, why would he? Why should he? In his eyes, your beliefs and general outlook are useless and you are nothing, and will be treated as such.

I hate to go to this level but your disrespect for God and complete lack of real knowledge is just atrociuos, and while God would have me to just ignore you I have to react- it's in my blood.

you're the worst person to speak because you already fear hell. i don't.



nah. first thing i'd do is ask him why the his "inspired word" (the bible) is an insult to the intelligence he gave me.

Actually, I don't fear hell- I fear God who can put me there. Fear of hell is counterproductive, and really if your doing what you should it should not be an issue.

So I am assuming that you would drop Christianity in a flash under the OP's criteria

This is an odd discussion. People believe what they believe because they think it is right. If you are proven to be wrong, why wouldn't you change your beliefs?

I would have too, because one of two things would have had to occur. Since I know that God no longer appears to us, and hasn't since biblical times any sort of happening that I would interpet as a visit from God, I would have to assume that I lost my mind, and heaven is no longer an option anyhow. If some other deity appeared to me, maybe I am crazy at that point or maybe said deity is the one to follow. Either way Christianity would no longer be an option- either because it's wrong or because I am no longer of sound mind.






For the same reason miserable people stay married- you go with what you know. I have personally seen people say , " I can see your point, I really can, but my dad was(insert religion) and that would mean that he went to hell, so I am going to have to stick with what I am because I just can't believe that. " It is not easy for people to change, we are a stubborn race- it's one of the reasons why it's plain as a creation we were not created to be forever, we are a toy of sorts.

it's not just about belief, it's also about whether you would be able to love/worship a specific deity if he existed. if the christian god is described accurately in the bible i wouldn't be able to love/worship him no matter what (unless he brainwashed me to do so lol).



how do you know you aren't crazy (or at least mentally deluded when it comes to christianity) RIGHT NOW?



how can you love god if that's all you think we are to him? pretty much my point - if there really was a creator who needed us for some kind of a fulfilling personal relationship with him he would logically be handling things much differently than the christian god supposedly is.

Yeah, I think a simplified version (didn't ask it b/c i wanted more than "yes" or "no") is "would you worship for the sake of salvation." I picked alternatives that I thought would be the most abhorrent to those who believe/disbelieve in a particular way for that very reason.

Thats a silly argument- how do YOU know you aren't crazy or deluded right now? Lets make the argument that the insane asylum is filled with the normal ones and the rest of us just happened to come into power and locked them up, just for the fun of it. Thats kind of my point with you- it's all spaghetti monsters and jesus bunnies and conjecture- if the only way to disprove me is through contentious fantasy then you have got nothing.


Newsflash- we are Gods toy. The earth, for all intents and purposes and the things in it were made for his pleasure, much like I might build a train track. He decided to have some fun. I don't know why- boredom maybe? I am glad that he did- because of this I am able to be here on this earth and enjoy this life, I can love, I can hate, I can share experiences, learn from them, I can see and do, all impossible if it were not for God coming up with me, giving my soul a shell as it were. Instead of having a robotic toy, he decided to give his toys choices, which of course he left up to them- the choice is always yours. Sin is your choice- we are never forced to do so. The outcome of this life, whether God knows it or not, is molded by you and you alone. There is no escaping that, no matter how many questions you ask, or how much you think in your prideful state that Gods way is not good enough- what you think doesn't matter. You cannot see that because you cannot see past the temple of you, which is sad because you would not even be here if it were not for his plan.

This is the funniest thing I have ever read.

But, if you are serious, this implies that humans are not above things like dogs and other animals in gods eyes. It also means you are crazy and deluded and should be locked up.

Actually, he does speak of times when a man is nothing more than a dog. I am not sure how that is implied in what I said- can you read? I think I asked that before, but, seriously, look into it, it would really help you out in your endeavors.







I love how you never have an argument except crazy or deluded and should be locked up. And, it doesn't imply that!!! However.... guess what? In gods eyes, you are like a drop in the bucket- how important you are to him is entirely up to you. Thats why it says that the fervent prayer of a rightouess man availeth much, and not the other way around.

Lois,

I too favor water drops that work hard to appease me and all my divinity.

I think your quest for god would be a lot more worthwhile if you turned inward than trying to blindly follow evrey last detail written in a very ancient book of whom you know nothing of its authors.

The above advice is free. I won't bother you anymore.

don't blaspheme the easter bunny or he will boiling chocify you.




nice sermon.

I love you man, you crack me up. Chocify is my new favorite word. It was a good sermon, I agree. I can testify when needed.

Ignoring the crazy thing, leaving you sound of mind and obviously faced with an all knowing and all powerful being, would you worship said deity, doing everything required, without question?

Any other Christians or folks of other religous persuasions, feel free to answer that. There seems to be a distinct dodging of the question outside the athiests & agnostics. Lois has come closest in acknowledging he would give up Christianty, but how many of you with religous beliefs would actually worship and unquestioningly obey this new being?

DonkSlayer, feel free to answer your own question

FYP. The word 'still' is an innacurate addition

Touche.

I'm actually an extremely loyal person, usually to a fault. I play for the team I was put on. So, if I received a divine revelation from L. Ron Hubbard (one that was not forced into me at some compound), I would go for it wholeheartedly.

Plus, I value my soul's quality-of-afterlife. Eternity, like real estate, is all about location.




Erm, I don't get it, unless you mean that "still" implies that God or whatever other religion is currently the power, and you don't find that to be true.

I'd have to switch if I received some sort of divine revelation that another deity showed itself to be the true God(s).

So, if I received a divine revelation from L. Ron Hubbard (one that was not forced into me at some compound), I would go for it wholeheartedly.

I'll address this one in a bit





I took your post of Nobody gonna still fight the power, huh to mean that it would be an option to continue to the fight against a deity after a revelation that said deity was real.

The problem with this is that you (by your standards) didn't believe in the deity initially, so your fight, or more accurately, argument is against the religion, not the deity.

For example if I am a Budhist arguing against the teachings of the Vikings, I am not fighting Odin et al as I don't believe they exist

Tell me if I misunderstood

Well, I mentioned several "deities" but, that's what I thought you meant, so we're on the same page.

This is the point of your question no doubt - but it raises a simple question. It seems so obvious to us all atheist, agnostic and theist alike that when faced with irrefutable evidence of a deity, you would obey unquestioningly. Look how crowTrobot got shouted down when he said he would still object to the Christian God. Whilst there is logic there, I am sure that if he was faced with a loving God who granted him everything he needed or desired he would obey.

Now bring in Adam and Eve. There they are, sitting in Eden with a God that walks amongst them. For those of you that believe in the big G-man just try to imagine that. He's right there in front of you, talking to you and walking around with you. It would be awe inspiring. You desire for nothing, your life is perfect and your God is there for a chat any time you want.

Yet despite that, Eve and shortly thereafter Adam do the one thing they are told not to. They eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil...

It just doesn't make sense. We are all here saying that we would obey unquestioningly and yet Adam & Eve can't, despite being 1000% sure God exists. Sure the snake talks her into it, but who are you going to believe? A snake or God? Same goes for Adam, God says don't, Eve says do. Adam does.

Surely it goes snake: "Eat the apple, you'll be fine" Eve: "Hey God, are you sure I can't eat this?" God: "I'm sure" Eve:"Why not?" God (In a voice that flattens mountains): "BECAUSE I SAID SO" Eve:"Fine, be like that"

This doesn't even consider the fact that God, all wise and all powerful, who knows what Adam & Eve are capable of, sticks the fricken tree in the middle of the Garden to begin with!?!

I mean either Adam and Eve are complete morons, which would be a little unlikely as God created them himself - you'd think they might just be 'perfect' or you are left with a scenario where a loving father sticks some rat poison wrapped in chocolate on the table and points it out to his child and says, 'Don't eat that or else'

Unless of course God is just testing Adam & Eve. In this case you have love without trust or an all-knowing Creator who knows his creation is weak and will fail, but puts the mechanism for that failure within easy reach.

Seriously, none of it makes any logical sense, which leads me to this:




Point number 1 - The burden of proof has never been on creationists <insert any other theists you wish here>

It always has. In any discussion the party propsing a position have the burden of proof. Pretty simple stuff really. The counter ie there is no God, does not exist with out the initial claim. It's like party A saying to party B "You owe me $500" Party B replies "I don't believe you. Show me some proof and I will pay you" Party A responds "Well, you can't prove that you don't owe me $500 so hand it over" Surely you agree that Party A sounds just a little silly?

Point number 2 - Reasonable doubt. I think Christianity (and probably all religions, however this is a guess due to a lack of knowledge on other religions) easily fails reasonable doubt.

Just look at the above regarding Adam & Eve for the indtroduction of a few doubts. Now I not suggesting that the above is enough for an open and shut case, but it's the first book of the Bible for crying out loud! From page one the Bible is highly questionable from a position of common sense.

More importantly though, if you are God and you want your follows to have some instructions from you, surely you would inspire the authors to be accurate and consistent. If it insn't inspired by God it becomes a collection of tales from men who are then free to put their own spin on everything.

The Bible, both old and new testaments is so full of contradictions and obvious falsehoods that to put it forward as evidence is laughable. But it's really all Christians have. Take away the Bible and there is not much left to hold the argument together.

Take a look at another well known story from Genesis, that of Noah. There are more holes here than there would've been on the ark.

Simple things like the amount of water required to flood the earth. Lets say we just cover our tallest mountain, so we roughly need 30,000 feet of water to fall in 40 days. Which equals 30000/40 = 750 feet of rain a day or 750/24 = 31.25 feet in an hour. Now why is this important? Well torrential, destructive rainfall is commonly around the 3-4 inches per hour mark. So 31.25 feet per or 375 inches per hour is impressive. So impressive that you are looking at volumes that equate to hydraulic mining. In simple terms, you drop that much water per hour for that length of time and you wash away everything, even mountains. Leaving (once the water drains away) a perfectly flat ball of mud. A little different than what we have. Not to mention that no boat would remain afloat in those conditions, it would be torn apart almost instantly. Nor would any marine animals survive the mud bath that would be the oceans.

Now all of this is supposed to have happened circa 2600BC, so despite the Egyptians and Chinese having recorded history predating this time mankind is destroyed

However, after we choose to ignore common sense and continue with the story we are left with the repopulation of the earth. Man woman and child along with all beasts of land and air have to make there ways across the globe from Turkey.

All the Kangaroo's make it to Australia somehow, the Kiwis to New Zealand and so on and so forth. No only do they make it there, they don't decide to go anywhere else. Yet, whilst these frail creatures are doing backstroke across miles of ocean, somehow the dinosaurs all go up in smoke.

What about the people, all of us decended from Noah, yet as we spread out we become Asian, Negro, Indian etc and we all forget about God and the flood, except the small pocket that remain in the Middle East. We all create new Gods to explain the unexplainable. Isn't it interesting how all civilisations need to create explanaitions for the unexplainable, yet mankind had one and without fail forgot it and created new ones. Surely if we are all the decendants of Noah, pockets of pre-Christ Christianity would pop up all over the place. Despite men who lived for hundreds of years back then, we all forget. Except those local to where the story is told. Hmmmmm. Reasonable doubt.

But maybe there are bits missing that explain these small anomolies. Luckily Lois gives us a nice explanation there.



So within the first few pages of the Bible you have what common sense SCREAMS is impossible/implausible/illogical. Whilst you might suggest that it is easy to pick holes in what might be considered fables of an ancient religion, the Good Book continues that way to the final verse.

Seriously, anybody unfamiliar with Christianity could pick up the Bible, read it, see the inconsistencies and know to file it away in the Fiction section. I did, despite being raised a Christian. There is just too much within that insults the intelligence.

That really only leaves those that need it to be true believing it. Those whose God-given freedom of thought lead to...

Once again, Canada, as I have said before and no one has pulled it off yet, show me a contradiction.

It's interesting...you may have read his last post...but you obviously didn't absorb any of it.

Why can't you just admit that believing in the Bible as the final Truth is completely illogical...but is nevertheless what you believe in? I could respect that. I just can't grasp how someone that is at all intelligent could be opposed to taking a step outside his beliefs to make an objective judgement.

Methinks he has made his point well. Your turn, Lois.




Well, not quite, we're all human, so just because I did my best to follow something doesn't mean I'll do it perfectly, right?

I mean come on, even the most law-abiding citizens speed sometimes.

How about the begining of Genesis where it details two different stories about how creation happened? Or the different Gospels, which have Jesus saying/doing different things? Or the many many other stories which are described happening in two different, mutually exclusive ways? Now, I am no bible expert and perhaps these can all be explained away, but having different versions of the same event is the very definition of a contradiction. What it is consistent with of course is a bunch of different oral traditions passed down from people, and not the literal truth as handed down from God; thus we have to use our judgement to figure out what really happened, and what God really meant, and once we start using judgement, it leads many, like Canada, to question whether it makes more sense that it came from God or just came from man.

I remebered you saying somthing to this effect before. I assume you are refering to this post:



Does the offer still stand? I'm guessing not, but hey if you want I'll gladly take up the challenge




I think there is a slight disparity in scale there.

Disobeying a policeman who will give you a fine for speeding and disobeying a deity who can fart thunder and crap lightning who specifically tells you not to do something on the pain of death are hardly comparable situations now are they?

As I said, common sense. The physical presence of God should be the most awe inspiring, and therefore 'obedience inspiring' thing in the world.

Seriously, you believe in God don't you. Take a moment to think what it would be like to have Him standing right there in front of you. Do it.


































Now are you going to defy him?

I'm waiting. Specific scriptures would help and we are working with the KJV and only the KJV.

That's a yes then?

That's a yes to money on the line? No, that was awhile ago when my BR was ridiculous and I was throwing money around like it was nothing. If you got something, bring it, otherwise quit spewing garbage on things you have no knowledge of.

Coward

I like how you mentioned you were no bible expert. Now, give me specifics and I can tel you why it isn't a contradiciton, otherwise run along- your way out of your league.

Actually I am just curious why your bankroll has anything to do with it. Surely the Bible hasn't changed since you posted your challenge, or do you only have faith when you have money?

Until he gives me actual scripture that I can work with theres not much I can do.


The bible is recorded history as much as chinese history- what makes one more right than the other?


There is evidence of a worldwide flood, period. The ark is possible, especially given the fact that the amount of species that had to be collected were miniscule compared to the amount of species known today. Probable- no, goodness alot of things with God require a leap of faith. However, it would be incorrect to say that it is impossible.


There is scientific evidence for a missing day in time. Archaelogy has proven the existence of many things biblical, whether it be Babylon, The walls of Jericho being excavated and shown to have fallen outwards, The Temples built by Solomon, a gap in Egytptian history where, presumably the egyptians were basically wiped out- I could go on and on. Scientific facts not known to man when the bible was written are strewn throughout the Bible, but when shown these things- and I have done it, here- I am told that it's up for interpetation although it clearly says what it says.


You believe, or you don't- don't you guys get it? GOD SAID IT WOULD BE THIS WAY!! FEW,FEW,FEW, would be saved. Many are called, but few are chosen. Most people just don't have what it takes, they don't have....the ability to accept without seeing, faith.



















No money on the line right now. Do I need to type it in spanish?

Oh well here we go then. Shame you have no cahoonas.

Lets assume you would've manned up though, it makes keeping score fun and shows how much you've saved by being weak spined.

Firstly the definition of contradiction

con·tra·dic·tion

1
- a The act of contradicting.
- b The state of being contradicted.
2 A denial.
3 Inconsistency; discrepancy.
4 Something that contains contradictory elements.


I have used this as my source. If you think that it is not a correct version of the KJV tell me why.

To set up the first list of contradictions I give you

Ezra.2
[1] Now these are the children of the province that went up out of the captivity, of those which had been carried away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away unto Babylon, and came again unto Jerusalem and Judah, every one unto his city;
[2] Which came with Zerubbabel: Jeshua, Nehemiah, Seraiah, Reelaiah, Mordecai, Bilshan, Mispar, Bigvai, Rehum, Baanah. The number of the men of the people of Israel:

Neh.7
[6] These are the children of the province, that went up out of the captivity, of those that had been carried away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away, and came again to Jerusalem and to Judah, every one unto his city;
[7] Who came with Zerubbabel, Jeshua, Nehemiah, Azariah, Raamiah, Nahamani, Mordecai, Bilshan, Mispereth, Bigvai, Nehum, Baanah. The number, I say, of the men of the people of Israel was this;

I will continue with Ezra in bold and Nehemiah in normal font

[3] The children of Parosh, two thousand an hundred seventy and two.
[4] The children of Shephatiah, three hundred seventy and two.
[5] The children of Arah, seven hundred seventy and five.

[8] The children of Parosh, two thousand an hundred seventy and two.
[9] The children of Shephatiah, three hundred seventy and two.
[10] The children of Arah, six hundred fifty and two.

There's $100


[6] The children of Pahath-moab, of the children of Jeshua and Joab, two thousand eight hundred and twelve.

[11] The children of Pahath-moab, of the children of Jeshua and Joab, two thousand and eight hundred and eighteen.

$200


[7] The children of Elam, a thousand two hundred fifty and four.
[8] The children of Zattu, nine hundred forty and five.

[12] The children of Elam, a thousand two hundred fifty and four.
[13] The children of Zattu, eight hundred forty and five.

$300


[9] The children of Zaccai, seven hundred and threescore.
[10] The children of Bani, six hundred forty and two.

[14] The children of Zaccai, seven hundred and threescore.
[15] The children of Binnui, six hundred forty and eight.

$400


[11] The children of Bebai, six hundred twenty and three.

[16] The children of Bebai, six hundred twenty and eight.

$500


[12] The children of Azgad, a thousand two hundred twenty and two.

[17] The children of Azgad, two thousand three hundred twenty and two.

$600


[13] The children of Adonikam, six hundred sixty and six.

[18] The children of Adonikam, six hundred threescore and seven.

Only missed by 1 that time! Still that's $700


[14] The children of Bigvai, two thousand fifty and six.

[19] The children of Bigvai, two thousand threescore and seven.

$800


[15] The children of Adin, four hundred fifty and four.

[20] The children of Adin, six hundred fifty and five.

$900


[16] The children of Ater of Hezekiah, ninety and eight.

[21] The children of Ater of Hezekiah, ninety and eight.

I'll take Bible Contradictions for $1000 thank you Alex


[17] The children of Bezai, three hundred twenty and three.

[23] The children of Bezai, three hundred twenty and four.

$1100


[18] The children of Jorah, an hundred and twelve.

[24] The children of Hariph, an hundred and twelve.

Damn, Nehemiah forgot about the Jorah's, or did he call them Hariph? Still we are looking for good contradictions not questionable ones, you got lucky there


[19] The children of Hashum, two hundred twenty and three.

[22] The children of Hashum, three hundred twenty and eight.

$1200


[20] The children of Gibbar, ninety and five.

[25] The children of Gibeon, ninety and five.

See the Jorah's above, looks like you hit your 3-outer again (that was for Custom36)


[21] The children of Bethlehem, an hundred twenty and three.
[22] The men of Netophah, fifty and six.

[26] The men of Bethlehem and Netophah, an hundred fourscore and eight.

I'll only take one for that. $1300


[23] The men of Anathoth, an hundred twenty and eight.
[24] The children of Azmaveth, forty and two.
[25] The children of Kirjath-arim, Chephirah, and Beeroth, seven hundred and forty and three.
[26] The children of Ramah and Geba, six hundred twenty and one.
[27] The men of Michmas, an hundred twenty and two.
[28] The men of Bethel and Ai, two hundred twenty and three.

[27] The men of Anathoth, an hundred twenty and eight.
[28] The men of Beth-azmaveth, forty and two.
[29] The men of Kirjath-jearim, Chephirah, and Beeroth, seven hundred forty and three.
[30] The men of Ramah and Geba, six hundred twenty and one.
[31] The men of Michmas, an hundred and twenty and two.
[32] The men of Bethel and Ai, an hundred twenty and three.

Looks like we're getting our story straight, but it's still another $100 for the Bethel an Ai's

$1400


[29] The children of Nebo, fifty and two.
[30] The children of Magbish, an hundred fifty and six.
[31] The children of the other Elam, a thousand two hundred fifty and four.
[32] The children of Harim, three hundred and twenty.
[33] The children of Lod, Hadid, and Ono, seven hundred twenty and five.
[34] The children of Jericho, three hundred forty and five.

[33] The men of the other Nebo, fifty and two.
[34] The children of the other Elam, a thousand two hundred fifty and four.
[35] The children of Harim, three hundred and twenty.
[36] The children of Jericho, three hundred forty and five.
[37] The children of Lod, Hadid, and Ono, seven hundred twenty and one.

The Magbish's must've missed Nehamiah's invite, but I'll only take $100 for the Lod's & co.
$1500


[35] The children of Senaah, three thousand and six hundred and thirty.

[38] The children of Senaah, three thousand nine hundred and thirty.

$1600


[36] The priests: the children of Jedaiah, of the house of Jeshua, nine hundred seventy and three.
[37] The children of Immer, a thousand fifty and two.
[38] The children of Pashur, a thousand two hundred forty and seven.
[39] The children of Harim, a thousand and seventeen.
[40] The Levites: the children of Jeshua and Kadmiel, of the children of Hodaviah, seventy and four.
[41] The singers: the children of Asaph, an hundred twenty and eight.

[39] The priests: the children of Jedaiah, of the house of Jeshua, nine hundred seventy and three.
[40] The children of Immer, a thousand fifty and two.
[41] The children of Pashur, a thousand two hundred forty and seven.
[42] The children of Harim, a thousand and seventeen.
[43] The Levites: the children of Jeshua, of Kadmiel, and of the children of Hodevah, seventy and four.
[44] The singers: the children of Asaph, an hundred forty and eight.

$1700


[42] The children of the porters: the children of Shallum, the children of Ater, the children of Talmon, the children of Akkub, the children of Hatita, the children of Shobai, in all an hundred thirty and nine.

[45] The porters: the children of Shallum, the children of Ater, the children of Talmon, the children of Akkub, the children of Hatita, the children of Shobai, an hundred thirty and eight.

$1800


[43] The Nethinims: the children of Ziha, the children of Hasupha, the children of Tabbaoth,
[44] The children of Keros, the children of Siaha, the children of Padon,
[45] The children of Lebanah, the children of Hagabah, the children of Akkub,
[46] The children of Hagab, the children of Shalmai, the children of Hanan,
[47] The children of Giddel, the children of Gahar, the children of Reaiah,
[48] The children of Rezin, the children of Nekoda, the children of Gazzam,
[49] The children of Uzza, the children of Paseah, the children of Besai,
[50] The children of Asnah, the children of Mehunim, the children of Nephusim,
[51] The children of Bakbuk, the children of Hakupha, the children of Harhur,
[52] The children of Bazluth, the children of Mehida, the children of Harsha,
[53] The children of Barkos, the children of Sisera, the children of Thamah,
[54] The children of Neziah, the children of Hatipha.
[55] The children of Solomon's servants: the children of Sotai, the children of Sophereth, the children of Peruda,
[56] The children of Jaalah, the children of Darkon, the children of Giddel,
[57] The children of Shephatiah, the children of Hattil, the children of Pochereth of Zebaim, the children of Ami.
[58] All the Nethinims, and the children of Solomon's servants, were three hundred ninety and two.
[59] And these were they which went up from Tel-melah, Tel-harsa, Cherub, Addan, and Immer: but they could not shew their father's house, and their seed, whether they were of Israel:
[60] The children of Delaiah, the children of Tobiah, the children of Nekoda, six hundred fifty and two.

[46] The Nethinims: the children of Ziha, the children of Hashupha, the children of Tabbaoth,
[47] The children of Keros, the children of Sia, the children of Padon,
[48] The children of Lebana, the children of Hagaba, the children of Shalmai,
[49] The children of Hanan, the children of Giddel, the children of Gahar,
[50] The children of Reaiah, the children of Rezin, the children of Nekoda,
[51] The children of Gazzam, the children of Uzza, the children of Phaseah,
[52] The children of Besai, the children of Meunim, the children of Nephishesim,
[53] The children of Bakbuk, the children of Hakupha, the children of Harhur,
[54] The children of Bazlith, the children of Mehida, the children of Harsha,
[55] The children of Barkos, the children of Sisera, the children of Tamah,
[56] The children of Neziah, the children of Hatipha.
[57] The children of Solomon's servants: the children of Sotai, the children of Sophereth, the children of Perida,
[58] The children of Jaala, the children of Darkon, the children of Giddel,
[59] The children of Shephatiah, the children of Hattil, the children of Pochereth of Zebaim, the children of Amon.
[60] All the Nethinims, and the children of Solomon's servants, were three hundred ninety and two.
[61] And these were they which went up also from Telmelah, Telharesha, Cherub, Addon, and Immer: but they could not shew their father's house, nor their seed, whether they were of Israel.
[62] The children of Delaiah, the children of Tobiah, the children of Nekoda, six hundred forty and two.


Strong finish, but stumbled at the end. Too bad

$1900

Now there is no way known that you can deny the above are contradictions based on this definition of the word.

3 Inconsistency; discrepancy.

Okay, moving right along...

1Chr.18
[1] Now after this it came to pass, that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them, and took Gath and her towns out of the hand of the Philistines.
[2] And he smote Moab; and the Moabites became David's servants, and brought gifts.
[3] And David smote Hadarezer king of Zobah unto Hamath, as he went to stablish his dominion by the river Euphrates.
[4] And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: David also houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them an hundred chariots.


2Sam.8
[1] And after this it came to pass, that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them: and David took Metheg-ammah out of the hand of the Philistines.
[2] And he smote Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the ground; even with two lines measured he to put to death, and with one full line to keep alive. And so the Moabites became David's servants, and brought gifts.
[3] David smote also Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates.
[4] And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: and David houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them for an hundred chariots.


So we're up to $2000. You can say 'Uncle' at any time...


Ecclesiastes
Qoh.1
[4] One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.

2 Peter 3
[10] But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

I'm sure you'll try some Old vs New Testament excuse, but you asked for contradictions without any conditions, so that makes it $2100 in my book


2 Kings 2
[11] And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

John.3
[13] And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

As above, but I'll take $2200 thanks


Gen.32
[30] And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

John.1
[18] No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Looks like John forgot about Adam too, but at least Jacob openly admits seeing God. I'll stop with Old vs New now as I suspect you'll want to clarify your conditions

$2300

Let's now concentrate on the whole resurection thing, becaue I reckon it's midly important to Christians

So, up until the point where Mary leaves to inform the disciples of the miracle we have...

John.20
[1] The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
[2] Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
[3] Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.
[4] So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.
[5] And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in.
[6] Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,
[7] And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
[8] Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.
[9] For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.
[10] Then the disciples went away again unto their own home.
[11] But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre,
[12] And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.
[13] And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.
[14] And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.
[15] Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
[16] Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
[17] Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Matt 28
[1] In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
[2] And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
[3] His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
[4] And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.
[5] And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
[6] He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
[7] And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.


Mark.16
[1] And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
[2] And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
[3] And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
[4] And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
[5] And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
[6] And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.
[7] But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.


Luke.24
[1] Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.
[2] And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
[3] And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.
[4] And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
[5] And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
[6] He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,
[7] Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.
[8] And they remembered his words,



One or two Marys? Dark or dawn? Stone already taken away or the angel/earthquake thingy? I mean Matt 28:2 implies somebody witnessed this event? Mary goes and gets Peter according to John, but not the others. One or two Angels/men in white garments? Sitting on the stone at the entrance, standing beside them or sitting where Jesus had laid? Just Mary speaking/listening to the angel/men or 'they'. Jesus' likeness or the Angels telling Mary or all of them to return to the disiples?

This is the single biggest event in Christian history, witnessed by one person or small group of people, told directly to the disciples and yet they cannot get their stories straight, despite as some people believe, being inspired by God. Give me a break, these testimonies would be thrown out of any court, unless of course the Judge was pre-disposed to believing them if you get my drift.

If these accounts are not inconsistant, then I don't know the meaning of the word.

I could claim thousands for these passages alone, but I'll just take $100 per author, making it $2700.

If you do ever get your BR back, it might be nice to make out a cheque

I'm going to stop now, because I think I have proven my point 'beyond reasonable doubt', and you backing off the cash (what happened, weakness of faith all of a sudden?) no longer makes it +EV

Being that I can't claim your money, I now claim you as my biatch!!

Have at it.

Lois vs Canada: This time, it's BIBLICAL!

Meh Canada.

In the strictest sense you've got some there.

Multiple accounts of the same event, however their inconsistencies, lend me more faith that something did in fact happen.


Now, if you say, any contradiction in the Bible therefore should not allow any biblical points to be accepted as Truth, then there's no arguing. I'm not going to discount Jesus because somebody in the OT got their numbers mixed up, though.

Well to me they suggest multiple authors repeating a story they've been told, obviously sans divine inspiration.

That last bit is a huge thing for some who insist that the Bible is a work of God.




I notice you're not even touching the resurection verses, or the Old vs New contradictions

I'm not telling you to stop having faith. I am pointing out why I choose not to and in doing so showing that people like Lois who claim there are no contradictions or that the Bible is a divine inspiration are walking on thin ice.

Lois asks for contradictions, I give you dozens (and it is just the short list), you say 'yes they are contradictions but these are not really good ones (and I'll ignore the rest)'

You've got to do better than that