Christians: Does this embarrass you?

[Avoice]

Christians: Do you ever feel like you have been left 'holding the bag' having to defend the Christian Testament? Forced to come up with all sorts of torturous explanations to defend the writings of your religion? Respond to the following:
EXAMPLE:

BELOW IS QUOTE FROM GALATIONS AND THE PASSAGE IN GENESIS THAT GALATIANS REFERS TO.

"But the promises were spoken to Abraham and his seed. He does not say, And unto seeds, as of many; but as of one; And thy seed, which is Christ."

"Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father. And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed"

THE CLAIM: Galatians claims that it says seed not seeds. Therefore it means one seed meaning Jesus.
THE PROBLEM: In Hebrew, the word seed is written the same in the singular and the plural: ZERA. The same way the word sheep in English is the same for singular and plural.

THE QUESTION FOR CHRISTIANS: How do you defend Galations that claims if it meant more than one seed it would have said it. As if the word ZERA would say ZERAS if it meant plural. NO IT WOULDNT.
How does it feel having to conjuring up some explanation to save the ignorant writer of Galatians who didn't know that the word seed in Hebrew is the same in singular and in the plural

CHRISTIANS: YOU HAVE BEEN DECEIVED. ARE YOU ANGRY WITH ME FOR SHOWING YOU OR ANGRY THAT THE WRITER OF GALATIANS USED DECEPTION TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE?

[Clownboat]

the idea that humans can predict the future gives me pause.

It makes me downright skeptical.

As it should.

Can you make the idea that humans can tell the future reasonable or is such a thing just an unreasonable assertion and that must be assumed to be true via faith?

It doesn't take genius to learn from history, nor to analyze future events based upon present circumstances. The art of military and politics largely depend on it.

I agree with you. Now is this you admitting that humans cannot predict the future? We are talking about prophesies specifically, not making educated guesses.

Have you ever met someone with the ability to predict the future?

Your unbelief in the God of the Bible to prophecy accurately, as well as give that prophecy to His people to make known, is not an argument about contradiction in the Bible.

I totally agree. Now, back to the question that was asked: "Have you ever met someone with the ability to predict the future?"

Unless you can show a prophecy in the Bible, that was supposed to come to pass, and did not.

I reject that this is a requirement in order to show contradictions in the Bible. The prophecy of Tyre comes to mind, but that would take us off topic.

There have been many false prophets, especially in the name of the LORD

This is very telling if you ask me.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #105]


Not that you won't, you cant. Prove it otherwise.

See post 120 where I show you that I in fact can and did. There are many more examples where it seems like Paul is creating his own flavor of a religion (for the Gentile specifically).
I have to admitted that I could be wrong though, due to the fact that Jesus himself did not write down anything for us to examine. That is a sad fact in itself though isn't it?

The all powerful, all knowing creator: "I have a message meant for everyone! Jesus, you stay out of this message, Paul will handle it".
This comes across as an very odd way for an all powerful God to deliver a message meant for every human, don't you think?

[RBD]

[Replying to RBD in post #106]

Arguing against Jesus Christ being the Messiah is only by intepretation of prophecy.

Any prophecy which is so ambiguous as to be open to interpretation falls into the catagory of myth.

No, any prophecy that cannot possibly be physically nor spiritually true, is myth. Such as the myths of Mesopotamia, Greece, Rome, Babylon, etc... along with Aesop's fables.

And the first prophecy of Messiah coming to the earth is of 'that prophet' like Moses, and the LORD Himself coming to judge the earth and govern all nations.

Deu 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;

We know that Prophet had not come to the children of Israel before Jesus.

Jhn 1:25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

We also know many Jews believed He was that prophet.

Jhn 6:14 Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.

And finally the witnesses of Jesus' resurrection declared Him to be that Prophet:

Act 3:23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

Whether anyone believes their witness is irrelevant to the fact that the Bible plainly states who that Prophet is. To say otherwise, is just unbelief under a pretence of speculation.

[RBD]

[Replying to RBD in post #114]

Gen 21:12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called...And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed.

Isaac and Ishmael are mentioned here. And here, again, the Messiah is not.

True. Christ is mentioned in Gal 3 leading into Gal 4. Someone can disbelieve it, but why pretend Messiah is not mentioned at all? What's the point? Especially if none of the NT is believed?

Why not just proceed to find error in the OT to prove Bible errancy? That would be sufficient to prove the whole Book is not written by one Author, or that Author is flawed and not the LORD God as He says.

When you resort to not believing the NT as Bible, then you can stick to the rest of the Book. Any contradiction in the Bible is enough to prove it is not inerrant, which would prove the Book was not written by one Author alone: The LORD God as He calls Himself.

The Tanakh and the NT are separate, just as the NT and the Book of Mormon are separate.

They are not written at the same time, even as Malachi is written long after Numbers. Unless errancy is shown, they are all the same Book from Genesis to Revelation.

And any Mormon can easily say, "Whether anyone believes it, is irrelevant to what the Book says."

Certainly. But no Moromon can say Smith's book is the same book as the Bible, only written later. The cover makes itself known, that it does not agree with the Bible: Any other testament of Jesus Christ written after the Bible, is in opposition to Gal 1, and so the latter cannot be a part of the former.

Simple logic book's title, as well as from the Koran's rejection of the Son of God, proves that neither can be part of the Bible written after Revelation.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to RBD in post #123]

No, any prophecy that cannot possibly be physically nor spiritually true, is myth. Such as the myths of Mesopotamia, Greece, Rome, Babylon, etc... along with Aesop's fables.

Who are you to judge whose myths are or aren't spiritually true?

As for not being physically true, Genesis 1 arguably falls into that catagory.

We know that Prophet had not come to the children of Israel before Jesus.

Jhn 1:25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

Again, you go to a Christian source to try to justify Christian sources.

We also know many Jews believed He was that prophet.

Jhn 6:14 Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.

Many Jews believed that Simon bar Kochba was the Messiah.

And finally the witnesses of Jesus' resurrection declared Him to be that Prophet

.....you assume, because the Christian Bible declares that he was resurrected.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to RBD in post #124]

Christ is mentioned in Gal 3 leading into Gal 4. Someone can disbelieve it, but why pretend Messiah is not mentioned at all?

The Messiah isn't mentioned at all in the promises made to Moses in Genesis.

Why not just proceed to find error in the OT to prove Bible errancy? That would be sufficient to prove the whole Book is not written by one Author, or that Author is flawed and not the LORD God as He says.

Arguably that could be done, but I've been picking my battles. My issue here hasn't been with Judaism.

They are not written at the same time, even as Malachi is written long after Numbers. Unless errancy is shown, they are all the same Book from Genesis to Revelation.

Don't you mean Genesis to Moroni?


And any Mormon can easily say, "Whether anyone believes it, is irrelevant to what the Book says."

Certainly. But no Moromon can say Smith's book is the same book as the Bible, only written later. The cover makes itself known, that it does not agree with the Bible: Any other testament of Jesus Christ written after the Bible, is in opposition to Gal 1, and so the latter cannot be a part of the former.

Simple logic book's title, as well as from the Koran's rejection of the Son of God, proves that neither can be part of the Bible written after Revelation.

Then what proves that the "New Testament" is part of the Tanakh written after 2 Chronicles*?


*(That's another giveaway----2 Chronicles is actually the last book in the Jewish Bible. Christian translators changed the order of the books to put Malachi last so it would look like the Tanakh was ending on a "to be continued...." note.)

[RBD]

2 Tim 3:16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

I acknowledge this to be Christian dogma. I trust you understand as to why it is not considered authoritative or meaningful.

I understand some people don't believe it, which makes it unauthoritative and meaningless to themselves alone. Not to the Author, nor to me.

What it does mean, is that any accusation of an apostle in the Bible contradicting Jesus in the gospels, is Jesus Christ contradicting Himself.

Just to be clear, if there is any contradiction in the Bible, then it is one Author with Himself.

How would one author contradict himself? Sorry, I'm trying to understand what you mean, but this reads as nonsensical.

You've never heard of an author contradicting himself in his own book or books, and so needs good critical analysis to correct it? Are you saying that every author of every book is inerrant? Have you never needed to correct your own words after the fact? I know I have.

It's the Author of the Bible who has not. And since it is written by so many people, over so much time, from so different backgraounds, then it is intelligently possible to believe there is the Author of the whole Book, and He is who He says, the LORD God Almighty Himself.

If there is a contradiction between any 'apostle' with Scripture, then it is a false prophet and apostle of Jesus Christ, who has no part in the Bible.

It seems as if you are arguing that we should reject the words of Paul?

I know that you should, since you claim he is in error.

There is no error in the Bible. Not between Jesus Christ and His prophets, nor His apostles. Inerrancy allows at least the intelligent literary conclusion, that the Author is one, and is the Lord of heaven and earth. Whether anyone believes He is Lord, or there is one God and Lord, is irrelevant.

Rom 10:16But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report…For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written,

People reject His words all the time on earth. But if He is Lord and God, then that rejection ends in the grave. Then it's turn to reject others.

If so, I personally agree and think that Jesus would be rolling in his grave if he knew what Paul had done. .

Since the Book says Jesus is no longer in the grave, then He is angry at what people did to Paul for his faithful service, as well as that of others:

Gal 6:17 From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.

2Th 1:4 So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure: Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer: Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

As well as ready to judge anyone twisting His words to make Him contradict Himself:

2 Peter 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

However, since Jesus didn't write any parts of the Bible, it is hard to know for sure what can accurately be attributed to him.

Since someone doesn't believe the Author of the Bible is who He says He is, then it's strange why anyone would care what He says. Other than simple curiosity.

Unless of course they have a personal axe to grind, and only want to find fault. In that case, any praise for the Book is faint praise indeed.

There have been many false prophets and apostles speaking and writing in the name of the God of the Bible...

This seems likely upon a reading of the Bible.

Sure, I've only shown one quote from the Bible. There are many others about false teachers, leaders, and christs...Unlike simple unbelievers, they actively change the Bible, teach against it, abuse the power of their office, or try to say the Bible is false.

These are the enemies of the Author, that He condemns more than neutral unbelievers.

which is why they are not included in the Bible.

I don't see a need to address contradictions that are not found in the Bible.

Me neither. I got bored with the intellectual exercise of correcting them, the same as dissecting fake news. I only address wilfull contradictions made against the Bible by people, who actively deny it is true. Once again, there is a difference between simple unbelievers in the Bible, and Bibliophobes whose only interest is in attacking it.

Perhaps it's a conscience thing:

Act 7:56 And Stephen said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.

[servant1]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #120]


Your lack of understanding truth is the problem. Paul did not make up what you said about Jesus just to start his own religion-He( Saul) hated Christians, he was their #1 adversary until Jesus appeared to him and turned him. He thought was serving God though like the rest of Israel. But Jesus assured them unless they did Matt 23:39, verse 38 shows they are cut off of being Gods chosen. To this day are mislead in a religion that rejects Jesus, yet think they are Gods chosen. All the false Christian religions=99% of them think they belong to Jesus as well.
The bible speaks of the real Jesus. There are 4 different ones being taught, 1 is correct. 99% are being mislead.
Paul is in harmony with Jesus. If there is a point about bible teachings you do not understand ask me a direct question i will answer you.

[Clownboat]

What it does mean, is that any accusation of an apostle in the Bible contradicting Jesus in the gospels, is Jesus Christ contradicting Himself.

Than you should amend your thinking on the matter due to the fact that Jesus didn't supply anything in the Bible, the gospels included.

You've never heard of an author contradicting himself in his own book or books, and so needs good critical analysis to correct it?

I'm sorry, I thought you were talking about the Bible, a book claimed to be from an all powerful God with a message meant for everyone. I take no issue with your stance on authors of books and how they might accidently contradict themselves. Humans are not all powerful nor all knowing after all.

It's the Author of the Bible who has not. And since it is written by so many people, over so much time, from so different backgraounds, then it is intelligently possible to believe there is the Author of the whole Book, and He is who He says, the LORD God Almighty Himself.

You don't get to just add the word 'intelligently' before uttering 'possible' to make what you then suggest to be actually intelligent. Especially in this case where it is not logical nor is it intelligent for a God to create a message for everyone, but then require pastors, priests and theologians to then interpret the said book which then go us to the over 45,000 denominations of the religion.

I know that you should, since you claim he is in error.

I demonstrated such a thing...

<snipped a claim about there not being errors in the Bible>

Rom 10:16But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report…For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written,

People reject His words all the time on earth. But if He is Lord and God, then that rejection ends in the grave. Then it's turn to reject others.

People do reject words in the Bible that you believe come from your preferred God. Since it has not been demonstrated that this god concept is some Lord God, then the grave ending is irrelevant.

Since the Book says Jesus is no longer in the grave, then He is angry at what people did to Paul for his faithful service, as well as that of others:

I know what the Book says. Do you not think that Jesus would be rolling in his grave if he was shown a small part of what Paul did to Jesus's alleged message?

However, since Jesus didn't write any parts of the Bible, it is hard to know for sure what can accurately be attributed to him.

Since someone doesn't believe the Author of the Bible is who He says He is, then it's strange why anyone would care what He says. Other than simple curiosity.

Uh sure.... No idea how that addresses my fact that Jesus didn't write any parts of the Bible though and we therefore cannot know for sure what can accurately be attributed to him. You're not trying to distract from this point are you?

Unless of course they have a personal axe to grind, and only want to find fault. In that case, any praise for the Book is faint praise indeed.

A person wanting to find fault in a book would not praise the book. I probably should have just <snipped> this for being irrelevant.

Sure, I've only shown one quote from the Bible. There are many others about false teachers, leaders, and christs...Unlike simple unbelievers, they actively change the Bible, teach against it, abuse the power of their office, or try to say the Bible is false.

How dare they! Next thing we know, we'll have 45,001 denominations of Christianity due to all these false teachers and leaders. If only there was a God that provided a message for everyone. Then false teachers and leaders would be much more powerless to change the said message.

These are the enemies of the Author, that He condemns more than neutral unbelievers.

I sure hope that having a belief such as this, does not cause you to hate.
Only when Christians and Muslims stop telling their children that there is a God that loves them so much as to send them to heaven, but hates the other so much as to send them to hell will we ever stop the violence and bloodshed.

<snipped a claim about there being differences between unbelievers and Bibliophopes because it seems meaningless here>
<snipped a verse about Stephen and Saul>

If I snipped anything that you think deserves an answer, I apologize and ask that you state your point as a question or at least in a way that I can address. I really don't see a need to respond to scriptures you are simply quoting at me without any argument for why.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #120]


Your lack of understanding truth is the problem. Paul did not make up what you said about Jesus just to start his own religion-He( Saul) hated Christians, he was their #1 adversary until Jesus appeared to him and turned him. He thought was serving God though like the rest of Israel. But Jesus assured them unless they did Matt 23:39, verse 38 shows they are cut off of being Gods chosen. To this day are mislead in a religion that rejects Jesus, yet think they are Gods chosen. All the false Christian religions=99% of them think they belong to Jesus as well.
The bible speaks of the real Jesus. There are 4 different ones being taught, 1 is correct. 99% are being mislead.
Paul is in harmony with Jesus. If there is a point about bible teachings you do not understand ask me a direct question i will answer you.

Sorry, but your lack of understanding of truth is the problem.

Your way of debate is super easy!

I read the rest of your empty claims by the way and don't see anything worth responding to. If I missed something important, please lay it out for me.