"but Thats The Old Testament"

[zzz 0]

constantly get this phrase thrown at me. It seems that Christians are very quick to disown 90% of their "perfect" Word of God, as if they would cut out the Old Testament if they could, and use only the New Testament. Christians always use this excuse to distance themselves from the heartless brutality of the killing of women and children at the hands of Moses, Joshua, David, etc., and yet they are sure quick to whip out Old Testament laws when it is convenient for them to do so. When the time comes for fire and brimstone, they'll quote from Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Numbers and Judges; but when the Freethinker brings up all the genocide and cruel inhumanity contained in those books, well, then they back off and say: "That's the Old Testament. Jesus came to bring the New Covenant." When they wish to heap upon us the 10 Commandments, the Creation Story in Genesis that they want to force into our schools, Noah and his Big Boat, the Wisdom of Solomon (well, he DID have 700 wives and 300 concubines), or ask us to swallow Jonah and his Whale, they will pull out their bibles and open up right to the appropriate Old Testament verse. But when we complain about the cruelty and irrationality of Moses, the infinite cruelty of the Plagues of Egypt and the Pharaoh who was intentionally hardened by God, the butcher Joshua, the criminal David and his murderous raids, Saul the Terrible and the murder of the Amalekites and the hewing of the captured king, they say "Well, that's the Old Testament." Wait a minute... we are talking about THE Bible here. We are talking about the one and only God that the Christians worship, aren't we? Are there two bibles, two gods? What these Christians are doing is arguing for something that they claim NOT to believe in... namely "moral relativism": they are saying that morality is not fixed, and changes over time as humanity changes. Go figure... Exactly how do they do this? How do they create two bibles from the one? They say things like: "Jesus said he came to fulfill the law-- the old law passed away." I think what has happened here is that some ministers have intentionally misunderstood the book of Hebrews. It says: "For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law." (Hebrews 7:12) The laws changed, not passed away. What changed was the need for a daily animal sacrifice (Hebrews 7:27-28). That is what the New Covenant was-- Jesus was a "human sacrifice" for the forgiveness sin, replacing the Old Covenant of sacrificing burnt offerings-- slaughtered animals-- for sins. (Hebrews 8:13). See also all of Chapter 9 of Hebrews, which describes the Old Covenant of burnt offerings, and Chapter 10 which describes how the New Covenant replaces the Old for the purging of sins. THAT is what the New Covenant is all about-- it means that Christians do not have to put on the butcher's apron and slaughter goats. That's what was changed. If the Christians are right about the "old laws passing away", then we could do away with the 10 Commandments, couldn't we? The "New Covenant" does not release Christians from the killing of homosexuals, or witches, blasphemers and the worshippers of other gods either. The leaders of both the Catholic and Protestant Churches knew this when they murdered hundreds of thousands of people just a few hundred years ago. The next time some Christian tells you to live by the 10 Commandments, tell them: But that is the Old Testament. The 10 Commandments have been replaced by Jesus' new rules to live by: Resist not evil. (Let evil take over the country, the world, I suppose?) Love thine enemies. (What Christian ever did this? Is this even possible?) (Matthew 5:44) Pray in secret... do not let men see you pray. (Matthew 6:1-7) Marrying a divorced woman is adultery (carrying the death penalty). (Matthew 5:32) Don't plan for the future. (Matthew 6:34) Don't save money. (Matthew 6:19-20) Don't become wealthy. (Mark 10:21-25) Sell everything you have and give it to the poor. (Luke 12:33) Don't work to obtain food. (John 6:27) Don't have sexual urges. (Matthew 5:28) Make people want to persecute you. (Matthew 5:11) Let everyone know you are better than the rest. (Matthew 5:13-16) Take money from those who have no savings and give it to rich investors. (Luke 19:23-26) If someone steals from you, don't try to get it back. (Luke 6:30) If someone hits you, invite them to do it again. (Matthew 5:39) If you lose a lawsuit, give more than the judgment. (Matthew 5:40) If someone forces you to walk a mile, walk two miles. (Matthew 5:41) If anyone asks you for anything, give it to them without question. (Matthew 5:42). "Whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men to do so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:19 Are any of these ridiculous sayings wise? Is it possible to extract the least bit of common sense from them? Is this what you would teach to your own children? When Christians throw up the excuse "But that's the Old Testament", I ask: "What do you mean, it's the Old Testament?" Christians say "Well, it was different in those days..." All right then-- how? How was it different, so that cruel wars of extermination and the slaughter of innocent children were perfectly acceptable to Christians? Did people value their lives less in those days? The 50,070 who were killed by God for looking into the Ark of the Covenant, the 70,000 innocent men whom God killed because Joseph chose 3 days of pestilence, the hundreds of innocent townspeople murdered by David during his thieving "raids" in Gath, the tens of thousands of children and babies butchered by Moses, Joshua and Saul... and of course, the 42 little children whom God killed for mocking one of his prophets. Did they value their lives less than we do today? Remember that Jesus said "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I come not to destroy, but to fulfill." Therefore, Jesus came to fulfill Old Testament Law, such as: Ex. 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed. Lev. 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death. Ex. 31:15 Whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Ex. 21:15 He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. Ex. 21:17 He that curseth his father or his mother, shall surely be put to death. Ex. 22:19 Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death. Lev. 20:13 If a man lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Lev. 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death. Ex. 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live 1 Sam 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft (so much for the American Revolution). Mal. 2:1-4 And now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you. If you will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name,...behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces. (Will Jesus do the spreading of the dung??) I can understand why Christians would want to divorce the New Testament from the bloody Old Testament. You would have to to be able to maintain any kind of moral rectitude. But honestly, it cannot be done. The very first chapter of the very first book of the New Testament lists the genealogy of Jesus back to Abraham. In Matthew Chapter 17, Jesus speaks to Old Testament figures Moses and Elijah, who's figures appeared before him. Moses... the monster who ordered a man's death for picking up sticks on the Sabbath, and who commanded Joshua to enter the Promised Land and leave no one breathing: men, women and children. Matthew 24:37 is an undeniable link to the brutality of the Old Testament, where Jesus compares his second coming to the destruction of the Great Flood that killed the world's population. In the New Testament Jesus makes constant references to "scripture". In Matthew 22:29 Jesus says: "You are in error, because you do not know the scriptures, or the power of God." Now, just what were these scriptures that Jesus was making reference to? The New Testament? I don't think so. At the time there was no such thing as a New Testament! There were only the scriptures of bloodthirsty villains like Moses and David. Every reference to "scripture" in the New Testament establishes one more link to the Old Testament. How many times does the New Testament refer to Old Testament "scriptures"? 52 times. In the New Testament, Abraham is referred to 68 times, the ancient Israelites are mentioned 73 times, Jacob 26 times, Issac 20 times, Elijah 29 times, Isiah 22 times, Noah 8 times, King David is mentioned 58 times. How about this-- the name Mary (not just the Virgin Mary, but ALL Mary's) is mentioned 54 times in the New Testament. The name Moses, on the other hand, appears 80 times! You think these numbers don't establish an important connection? You don't think that Jesus held that the teachings of Moses were important? How about this. Jesus gives an absolute endorsement of the teachings and laws of Moses. "If you believe Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?" John 5:45 Are you going to sit there and tell me that the New Testament is not inexorably linked in the deepest ways to the Old Testament? Will any Christian deny that, according to the bible, Jesus is the one and only same personage as the God of the Old Testament? Did Jesus condemn ANY of his father's bloody massacres? No. In Matt 5:48 he says "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in Heaven is perfect." (Matthew 5:48) Do you think Jesus would have questioned any of his father's actions, like the many acts of genocide that litter the pages of the Old Testament? No. Remember what Jesus said when he gave the Lord's Prayer to his followers-- "Our Father who art in heaven... thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven." Do you think Jesus would have ever disobeyed his father's commands, like when he ordered that his servants should "kill everyone that breathes" upon their entry to the Promised Land? No. In John chapter 10 verse 30, Jesus said: "I and the Father are one." Jesus would have been swinging a sword, hacking nonviolent men, women and children to death, right along side of Joshua and his armies of Israelites! Just picture that. Jesus, the Prince of Peace, splitting a small child in two with his blood-drenched sword. In John 1:1, we read "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." In verse 14, we read: "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us." We are told explicitly that Jesus Christ IS THE GOD OF THE OLD TESTAMENT! You probably already accept this. But, by logical extension, you must also accept therefore that it was Jesus Christ who ordered the Israelites to slaughter millions of defenseless men, women and children in the conquest of Canaan; it was Jesus Christ who killed every firstborn child in Egypt; it was Jesus Christ who ordered king Saul to butcher thousands of children and babies in the genocide of the Amalakites; it was Jesus Christ who ordered the Israelites to capture and mass-rape 32,000 young girls of the Midianite tribe after killing their families; it was Jesus Christ who struck dead 50,000 innocent people at Beshemish for merely looking into the ark of the covenant; it was Jesus Christ who caused the painful asphyxiation of every man, woman, child and animal on the face of the earth during the flood of Noah (with the exception of 8); and it was Jesus Christ who condemned every person ever born to a state of eternal suffering, all because 6000 years ago a curious and naive woman ate a piece of fruit. And, of course, it was Jesus Christ who sent 2 bears to chase down 42 little kids and disembowel them for just acting like kids (see What's So Bad About Killing Children?) WWJD?

[Mattnxtc 0]

I skimmed through most of that and to be honest i have no clue what in the world ur talkin about. Nobody has discounted the the OT. All your verses are correct. So other than taking a long time I am not sure what you were tryin to prove...But thanks for helpin to show how well the OT and NT match up

[zzz 0]

I skimmed through most of that and to be honest i have no clue what in the world ur talkin about. Nobody has discounted the the OT. All your verses are correct. So other than taking a long time I am not sure what you were tryin to prove...But thanks for helpin to show how well the OT and NT match up

The only possible way of understanding it is by actually reading it.

[Canada 0]

I skimmed through most of that and to be honest i have no clue what in the world ur talkin about. Nobody has discounted the the OT. All your verses are correct. So other than taking a long time I am not sure what you were tryin to prove...But thanks for helpin to show how well the OT and NT match up

He's simply demonstrating he can cut and pastehttp://freethought.mbdojo.com/butthatstheoldtest.htmlcrtl+c, ctrl+v <> debate

[Mattnxtc 0]

The only possible way of understanding it is by actually reading it.

So far after skimming it...i have seen christians accused of:1. moral relativism2. discounting the OT3. discounting the 10 commandments4. breaking the bible into 2 booksYes there are differences between the OT and the NT. One lives under an unbending Law while the other lives under the Grace of God...quite a difference...but nowhere have i seen anybody contradict the bible or anything like that...I am sorry if you have all this anger you want to bring out about christians but as far as i know, nobody on this site has ever done any of those things

[zzz 0]

So far after skimming it...i have seen christians accused of:1. moral relativism2. discounting the OT3. discounting the 10 commandments4. breaking the bible into 2 booksYes there are differences between the OT and the NT. One lives under an unbending Law while the other lives under the Grace of God...quite a difference...but nowhere have i seen anybody contradict the bible or anything like that...I am sorry if you have all this anger you want to bring out about christians but as far as i know, nobody on this site has ever done any of those things

i am trying to help people understand that there is a lot of stuff written in the bible that is absurd and wrong. If you do not begin to realize this by actually reading instead of skimming through these two posts then you are too set in your beliefs and current way of thinking to have an open mind. I am sorry for your continued pursuit of ignorance.

[brvheart 1,752]

He's simply demonstrating he can cut and pastehttp://freethought.mbdojo.com/butthatstheoldtest.htmlcrtl+c, ctrl+v <> debate

If he agrees with what's said, it doesn't matter.

[crowTrobot 2]

you are too set in your beliefs and current way of thinking to have an open mind.

what kind of response did you expect? christians by necessity must do whatever it takes mentally to MAKE the evidence fit their belief, since their belief is validated by faith and can't possibly be proven wrong by any kind of logical reasoning. christian fundamentalism and open mindedness are mutually exclusive.

[Mattnxtc 0]

what kind of response did you expect? christians by necessity must do whatever it takes mentally to MAKE the evidence fit their belief, since their belief is validated by faith and can't possibly be proven wrong by any kind of logical reasoning. christian fundamentalism and open mindedness are mutually exclusive.

i havent had to make anything fit the evidence...my beliefs have no changd..nor has christianities beliefs changed...sorry...we have a book we have stuck to for 2000 years...without making changes to it

i am trying to help people understand that there is a lot of stuff written in the bible that is absurd and wrong. If you do not begin to realize this by actually reading instead of skimming through these two posts then you are too set in your beliefs and current way of thinking to have an open mind. I am sorry for your continued pursuit of ignorance.

Yet you havent done it..All you have shown is that you are able to take things out of context to fit ur predetermined answer...do you see that? You have not read the bible with an open mind yet..I believe you said already that God is love..thats all we need to know..only 1 corinthians 13 and 14 are necessary out of the whole bible...and then you expect us to believe u?

[crowTrobot 2]

i...we have a book we have stuck to for 2000 years...without making changes to it

i'm talking about how you interpret it.

[Mattnxtc 0]

i'm talking about how you interpret it.

hmm...i go to the greek if anything is unclear. I go look at historically how it was to have been applied and then i interprete it that way. yes for a long time man hasnt had the tools that we have in modern day. so interpretations have varied some. Nowadays i can go to sites that give me the meaning of every greek word used. Most didnt have that. I can go and look up all the historical facts I need to..s most never had that.

[zzz 0]

what kind of response did you expect? christians by necessity must do whatever it takes mentally to MAKE the evidence fit their belief, since their belief is validated by faith and can't possibly be proven wrong by any kind of logical reasoning. christian fundamentalism and open mindedness are mutually exclusive.

Good point. There is no sense arguing any further with these religous fanatics.

[Farnan 0]

All you have shown is that you are able to take things out of context to fit ur predetermined answer...do you see that?

Oh the irony.

[Mattnxtc 0]

Oh the irony.

please show how...what predetermined answer do i have?

[Farnan 0]

please show how...what predetermined answer do i have?

It isn't a specific answer--rather you and other bible-quoting Christians (i don't mean that in any derrogatory way--just those who take it very seriously by quoting verses) have a pre-determined set of opinions as to how the bible is interpreted. Despite conflicts, inconsistencies and other arguments, you quickly dismiss them in order to preserve your views.Everyone does it (and by that i mean, everyone interprets things to reinforce their own beliefs to some extent, regardless of the topic)I don't know of even one Christian who says they strive to (or are even willing to) follow every verse in the Bible. There are so many things found to be an "abomination", yet i bet you wear blended fabrics in your clothing or eat rare meat or pay interest on your credit card. Do you follow those rules too? Or do you dismiss them as being no longer relevant? I'm willing to bet that you find a reason around it to support your beliefs--like everyone else does.The problem with organized religion is that we have MEN who wrote these books who SAY it is the word of God and we have to TRUST them that they're telling the truth (and that they're not INSANE). Then it is translated by a person who's biases in translation can impact the meaning. And we are interpreting text that is 2000 years old--and very few if any of us know how words were used, the context in which it was written, etc. It is all a guessing game. It is like faxing a faxed piece of paper a couple of times. At first it looks clear but after a while you can't really make out what it says. I just don't think you can take all of these verses so literally without stepping on your own feet or let your argumentative integrity lapse once in a while.

[Mattnxtc 0]

It isn't a specific answer--rather you and other bible-quoting Christians (i don't mean that in any derrogatory way--just those who take it very seriously by quoting verses) have a pre-determined set of opinions as to how the bible is interpreted. Despite conflicts, inconsistencies and other arguments, you quickly dismiss them in order to preserve your views.Everyone does it (and by that i mean, everyone interprets things to reinforce their own beliefs to some extent, regardless of the topic)I don't know of even one Christian who says they strive to (or are even willing to) follow every verse in the Bible. There are so many things found to be an "abomination", yet i bet you wear blended fabrics in your clothing or eat rare meat or pay interest on your credit card. Do you follow those rules too? Or do you dismiss them as being no longer relevant? I'm willing to bet that you find a reason around it to support your beliefs--like everyone else does.The problem with organized religion is that we have MEN who wrote these books who SAY it is the word of God and we have to TRUST them that they're telling the truth (and that they're not INSANE). Then it is translated by a person who's biases in translation can impact the meaning. And we are interpreting text that is 2000 years old--and very few if any of us know how words were used, the context in which it was written, etc. It is all a guessing game. It is like faxing a faxed piece of paper a couple of times. At first it looks clear but after a while you can't really make out what it says. I just don't think you can take all of these verses so literally without stepping on your own feet or let your argumentative integrity lapse once in a while.

predetermined set of answers before we interprete the bible? on the moral level this is absurd. Bible says do not kill, do not lust, do not steal, do not commit homosexual acts....how is that open to interpretation? Usually interpretation is not done on commands...It is done on other things.As for your rant about it being man-made...this is a common liberal view and it doesnt hold much weight. The Bible is merely men writing down historical events that occurred detailin the life of Jesus. Was it writin by man? of course...but was it writin with God's help...yes again. As for the translations...That is just plain wrong. Heck if you have a problem with a translation...go to the greek...I have said that everytime a problem has come up...the greek is the original language of the NT so why not go straight to that. There are many many sites that will show you teh greek for the word...its not a hard concept.It really isnt a guessing game...All it takes is somebody to actually spend time studying and undrstanding it to appreciate the bible. Just like for instance Shakespeare. Do you raelly think that after reading shakespeare once or twice you would understand everything that was meant in the play? Of course not...But would you have ur opinions right or wrong on the plays? of course. As I have said over and over...if you have something that appears to be a contradiction please please introduce it...I would love to see it. Im not some naive person...If you have something then put it out for us all to see...its not a hard concept

[zzz 0]

predetermined set of answers before we interprete the bible? on the moral level this is absurd. Bible says do not kill, do not lust, do not steal, do not commit homosexual acts....how is that open to interpretation? Usually interpretation is not done on commands...It is done on other things.As for your rant about it being man-made...this is a common liberal view and it doesnt hold much weight. The Bible is merely men writing down historical events that occurred detailin the life of Jesus. Was it writin by man? of course...but was it writin with God's help...yes again. As for the translations...That is just plain wrong. Heck if you have a problem with a translation...go to the greek...I have said that everytime a problem has come up...the greek is the original language of the NT so why not go straight to that. There are many many sites that will show you teh greek for the word...its not a hard concept.It really isnt a guessing game...All it takes is somebody to actually spend time studying and undrstanding it to appreciate the bible. Just like for instance Shakespeare. Do you raelly think that after reading shakespeare once or twice you would understand everything that was meant in the play? Of course not...But would you have ur opinions right or wrong on the plays? of course. As I have said over and over...if you have something that appears to be a contradiction please please introduce it...I would love to see it. Im not some naive person...If you have something then put it out for us all to see...its not a hard concept

Bible ContradictionsNot only are there errors in the Bible, there are also severe contradictions. These contradictions exist because the Bible was written by fallible men. The following verses are the most problematic contradictions that I know of.Bible contradiction #1: How are we saved?We are saved by faith alone: "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith -- and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast." (Eph. 2:8-9) "And if by grace, then it is no longer by works ..." (Rom. 11:6) We are not saved by faith alone: "You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone." (James 2:24) Both concepts cannot be true. Paul created a theology of salvation by faith alone. The Jerusalem apostles, who came into conflict with Paul on occasions, knew Jesus and his teachings much better than Paul. They continued Jesus' teachings of salvation through good works with faith playing a secondary role. The question to be answered is, "Who do you trust more? Jesus or Paul?" Nevertheless, NDE accounts generally show that we are already saved!Bible contradiction #2: Is God a sinner?God is jealous: "For the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God." (Exod. 34:14) Jealousy is a sin: "The acts of the sinful nature are obvious ... jealousy" (Gal. 5:19-20) If jealousy is a sin, and God is jealous, then the only conclusion we can draw is that God is a sinner. The two scripture verses above flat out contradict each other. This absurd conclusion makes God out to be less than perfect. The same can also be said of the notion of a "God of wrath" because Jesus taught that wrath is a sin.Bible contradiction #3: Has anyone ever seen God?Nobody has seen God: "No one has ever seen God ..." (John 1:18) Abram saw God: "When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him and said, "I am God Almighty; walk before me and be blameless." (Gen. 17:1) Jacob saw God: "It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared." (Gen. 32:30) The leaders of Israel saw God: "But God did not raise his hand against these leaders of the Israelites; they saw God, and they ate and drank." (Exod. 24:11) There are several Bible verses which state that nobody has ever seen God. But there are also several Bible verses which describes a large number of people who saw God.Bible contradiction #4: Does God love or hate sinners?God loves sinners: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son ..." (John 3:16) God hates sinners: "You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil; with you the wicked cannot dwell. The arrogant cannot stand in your presence; you hate all who do wrong." (Psalm 5:4-5)---from near-death.com--a website I highly recommend.That good?

[Mattnxtc 0]

ill do them one at a time again as i have time...Ill hit contradiction 1 right now...contradiction 1 is actually not one at all...Go look on the list of posts and ull see my explanation of James 2 and why it says what it says...

[zzz 0]

ill do them one at a time again as i have time...Ill hit contradiction 1 right now...contradiction 1 is actually not one at all...Go look on the list of posts and ull see my explanation of James 2 and why it says what it says...

That clears that one right up. Thanks! How about contradiction 2?

[Farnan 0]

predetermined set of answers before we interprete the bible? on the moral level this is absurd. Bible says do not kill, do not lust, do not steal, do not commit homosexual acts....how is that open to interpretation? Usually interpretation is not done on commands...It is done on other things.As for your rant about it being man-made...this is a common liberal view and it doesnt hold much weight. The Bible is merely men writing down historical events that occurred detailin the life of Jesus. Was it writin by man? of course...but was it writin with God's help...yes again. As for the translations...That is just plain wrong. Heck if you have a problem with a translation...go to the greek...I have said that everytime a problem has come up...the greek is the original language of the NT so why not go straight to that. There are many many sites that will show you teh greek for the word...its not a hard concept.It really isnt a guessing game...All it takes is somebody to actually spend time studying and undrstanding it to appreciate the bible. Just like for instance Shakespeare. Do you raelly think that after reading shakespeare once or twice you would understand everything that was meant in the play? Of course not...But would you have ur opinions right or wrong on the plays? of course. As I have said over and over...if you have something that appears to be a contradiction please please introduce it...I would love to see it. Im not some naive person...If you have something then put it out for us all to see...its not a hard concept

You really don't see how no matter what evidence is put forth to you, you'll find some way to discount it? You come from the mindset that the text is interpreted correctly and that it doesn't have errors or contradictions---with that mindset, you aren't open that there might actually be a mistake, exaggerations, tons metaphors, and outright storytelling from a person who might have made some or a lot of it up.What about picking and choosing which parts of the bible you follow? What about legislating certain provisions of the bible but not others (considering all sins are equal, in God's eyes)? Why not make a law banning blended fabrics?

[Mattnxtc 0]

That clears that one right up. Thanks! How about contradiction 2?

I will get to them when I can..number 2 is not hard to show but will take a bit of thought to understand...I will write out a more detailed explanation of it...Number 4 is not a real good contradiction either as you can still love someone but hate them for being a sinner...as an example you could love some one b/c hes your brother but hate him for being a racist (just an example)...but that should basically clear up 4. I dont even remember what 3 is right now so i wont touch on that one yet

[crowTrobot 2]

I will get to them when I can..number 2 is not hard to show but will take a bit of thought to understand...I will write out a more detailed explanation of it...Number 4 is not a real good contradiction either as you can still love someone but hate them for being a sinner...as an example you could love some one b/c hes your brother but hate him for being a racist (just an example)...but that should basically clear up 4. I dont even remember what 3 is right now so i wont touch on that one yet

i'm still waiting to find out whether mary got to the tomb and saw one angel decend and roll the stone away and the angel spoke to her outside the tomb (matthew), or whether the stone was already rolled away when she got there and she spoke to the angel inside the tomb (mark), whether there were one or two (luke) angels etc etc...or more importantly why a creator who cares that we believe in and accept jesus as our savior would allow all four of the "inspired" (discounting those not in the canon) accounts of jesus' life to look exactly like embellished 2nd-hand retelling of oral tradition.

[Mattnxtc 0]

i'm still waiting to find out whether mary got to the tomb and saw one angel decend and roll the stone away and the angel spoke to her outside the tomb (matthew), or whether the stone was already rolled away when she got there and she spoke to the angel inside the tomb (mark), whether there were one or two (luke) angels etc etc...or more importantly why a creator who cares that we believe in and accept jesus as our savior would allow all four of the "inspired" (discounting those not in the canon) accounts of jesus' life to look exactly like embellished 2nd-hand retelling of oral tradition.

and how do u really feel crow? haha If u had asked that before then I am sorry I either didnt see it or forgot. ill add it to the list... but the short answer is that if the stories were exactly the same wouldnt u be here telling us that they just copied each other? You shouldnt expect that each story was exact if it is written by a variety of writers..(you and another listen to a lecturer and take notes and see if your notes are exact). I think that if they were exactly the same that there would be less believers. As for why would God allow this? Why wouldnt He? It doesnt hinder the message of the Gospel. It doesnt change anything.

[crowTrobot 2]

the short answer is that if the stories were exactly the same wouldnt u be here telling us that they just copied each other?

if they were exact word for word clones then obviously yes, but if they just told stories in the author's own words that matched up better then no - it wouldn't be an issue.

You shouldnt expect that each story was exact if it is written by a variety of writers..(you and another listen to a lecturer and take notes and see if your notes are exact).

there's a difference between retelling events in your own words and retelling radically different events.

As for why would God allow this? Why wouldnt He? It doesnt hinder the message of the Gospel. It doesnt change anything.

right - it doesn't change anything for you because you believe the stories must be true no matter what due to your pre-existing faith. that point has already been made a couple times in this thread.

[Farnan 0]

right - it doesn't change anything for you because you believe the stories must be true no matter what due to your pre-existing faith. that point has already been made a couple times in this thread.

This is exactly why it is tough to have a logical argument against a faith.