Give me a contradiction in the bible / And give me a chance to prove it wrong.

[QuicksandATL]

Go.

[JAGERBOY]

Genesis, creation, what came first.

[QuicksandATL]

Genesis, creation, what came first.

How is that a contradiction?

[Quintis Vindex]

Old AND New Testament?

What gives?

[QuicksandATL]

Old AND New Testament?

What gives?

How about a serious question?

[Spartan#x]

God doesn't exist.

Prove it wrong, please.

[LatissimusDorsi]

MK 16:17-18 A believer can handle snakes or drink poison and not experience any harm.

[QuicksandATL]

God doesn't exist.

Prove it wrong, please.

First, let me ask you why you think he doesn't exist.

[Spartan#x]

Because I believe religion was created as a means to control people. I have no reason to believe in a God.

[QuicksandATL]

MK 16:17-18 A believer can handle snakes or drink poison and not experience any harm.

First, it should be noted that almost all Bible scholars agree that these verses were not originally part of Mark's Gospel. One of the better known theologians, Charles Ryrie, says The doubtful genuineness of verses 9-20 makes it unwise to build a doctrine or base an experience on them (especially 16-18).

There is also the telling fact that two of the oldest and most highly regarded Bible manuscripts, the Vatican 1209 and the Sinaitic, do not contain this section; they conclude Mark's Gospel with verse eight. There are also a number of ancient manuscripts that contain a short ending of just about one verse beyond eight; and other manuscripts contain both conclusions. So, some manuscripts end with verse eight, others have a short ending, others have a long ending, and some even give both endings. In addition to this testimony of the Greek manuscripts, all of which combines to cast doubt on Mark's having written anything beyond verse eight, there are a number of the oldest versions (or translations) that do not contain the verses in question. Among such are ancient Syriac, Armenian and Ethiopic versions. One of the most well known bible scholars from England (Dr. Westcott) states that the verses which follow [9-20] are no part of the original narrative but an appendage. Among other noted scholars of the same opinion are Tregelles, Tischendorf, Griesbach and Goodspeed.

[Quintis Vindex]

MK 16:17-18 A believer can handle snakes or drink poison and not experience any harm.

I like this one.

[16] He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
[17] And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
[18] They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

I'll make a T-shirt out of it and walk around with a jar of Hemlock - you know - to test people's faith.

[TheLasher]

Because I believe religion was created as a means to control people. I have no reason to believe in a God.

Lies you better shape up or you'll die and go to hell for all eternity.

[Quintis Vindex]

First, it should be noted that almost all Bible scholars agree that these verses were not originally part of Mark's Gospel. One of the better known theologians, Charles Ryrie, says The doubtful genuineness of verses 9-20 makes it unwise to build a doctrine or base an experience on them (especially 16-18).

There is also the telling fact that two of the oldest and most highly regarded Bible manuscripts, the Vatican 1209 and the Sinaitic, do not contain this section; they conclude Mark's Gospel with verse eight. There are also a number of ancient manuscripts that contain a short ending of just about one verse beyond eight; and other manuscripts contain both conclusions. So, some manuscripts end with verse eight, others have a short ending, others have a long ending, and some even give both endings. In addition to this testimony of the Greek manuscripts, all of which combines to cast doubt on Mark's having written anything beyond verse eight, there are a number of the oldest versions (or translations) that do not contain the verses in question. Among such are ancient Syriac, Armenian and Ethiopic versions. One of the most well known bible scholars from England (Dr. Westcott) states that the verses which follow [9-20] are no part of the original narrative but an appendage. Among other noted scholars of the same opinion are Tregelles, Tischendorf, Griesbach and Goodspeed.

Post your source.

[QuicksandATL]

Because I believe religion was created as a means to control people. I have no reason to believe in a God.

Here is some previous information I have, I'm going to copy and paste it here and put it in italics, tell me what you think.

Thomas H. Huxley, who also helped to popularize the Darwinian theory of evolution. Huxley noted that the churches claimed to have a special gnosis (knowledge) about God and the origin of things. He gave one reason why he could not accept this gnosis, and hence was an agnostic:

If we could only see, in one view, the torrents of hypocrisy and cruelty, the lies, the slaughter, the violations of every obligation of humanity, which have flowed from this source [the churches] along the course of the history of Christian nations, our worst imaginations of Hell would pale beside the vision.

Doubtless Huxley's faith in the existence of God was shaken by his acceptance of the theory of evolution. Nevertheless, his faith was further shaken by the conduct of those who should have been in a position to help him, the churches. Their record through the centuries was no recommendation for belief in God.

Socialist Harold Laski, political theorist and educator, wrote in a similar vein. ?I was brought up in an orthodox Jewish household; but I cannot even remember a period in which either ritual or dogma had meaning for me,? he confessed. Why? He explained: Both in England and America I have never been able to see in any of the organized churches a faith in its principles sufficient to make it do serious battle for justice.

Again, he said: I cannot see, in the historic process, that the churches have been other than the enemies of reason in thought and of justice in social arrangements.

So, it is true, their hypocrisy and wrong conduct are a matter of historical record. Note, however, that the Bible, the foremost source of information about God, foretold the rise of just such a perversion of the Christian faith: They will preserve all the outward form of religion, although they have long been strangers to its meaning. 2 Timothy 3:5 In fact, the shortcomings of established religion are no reason to conclude that God does not exist.

If a sick person has been cheated by a quack doctor, he should not thus conclude that no cure is possible. Rather, he should look around for a genuine doctor. Similarly, the fact that the established churches have turned many people away from God does not mean that God cannot be found. It merely means that you have to look somewhere else for him. Don't you agree with this?

[QuicksandATL]

Post your source.

I don't have an online source for you to view for the Ryrie, quote, that is taken from his book "Survey of Bible Doctrine".

http://www.solagroup.org/articles/hi...hotb_0002.html - Westcott

[Spartan#x]

Lies you better shape up or you'll die and go to hell for all eternity.

lol, yeah, by such a loving "god".

[Spartan#x]

Here is some previous information I have, I'm going to copy and paste it here and put it in italics, tell me what you think.

Thomas H. Huxley, who also helped to popularize the Darwinian theory of evolution. Huxley noted that the churches claimed to have a special gnosis (knowledge) about God and the origin of things. He gave one reason why he could not accept this gnosis, and hence was an agnostic:

If we could only see, in one view, the torrents of hypocrisy and cruelty, the lies, the slaughter, the violations of every obligation of humanity, which have flowed from this source [the churches] along the course of the history of Christian nations, our worst imaginations of Hell would pale beside the vision.

Doubtless Huxley's faith in the existence of God was shaken by his acceptance of the theory of evolution. Nevertheless, his faith was further shaken by the conduct of those who should have been in a position to help him, the churches. Their record through the centuries was no recommendation for belief in God.

Socialist Harold Laski, political theorist and educator, wrote in a similar vein. ?I was brought up in an orthodox Jewish household; but I cannot even remember a period in which either ritual or dogma had meaning for me,? he confessed. Why? He explained: Both in England and America I have never been able to see in any of the organized churches a faith in its principles sufficient to make it do serious battle for justice.

Again, he said: I cannot see, in the historic process, that the churches have been other than the enemies of reason in thought and of justice in social arrangements.

So, it is true, their hypocrisy and wrong conduct are a matter of historical record. Note, however, that the Bible, the foremost source of information about God, foretold the rise of just such a perversion of the Christian faith: They will preserve all the outward form of religion, although they have long been strangers to its meaning. 2 Timothy 3:5 In fact, the shortcomings of established religion are no reason to conclude that God does not exist.

If a sick person has been cheated by a quack doctor, he should not thus conclude that no cure is possible. Rather, he should look around for a genuine doctor. Similarly, the fact that the established churches have turned many people away from God does not mean that God cannot be found. It merely means that you have to look somewhere else for him. Don't you agree with this?

You see, all this tells to me is that the original creators of "religion" and "god" came up with all of this BS to safeguard themselves from skeptics.

[Gadsden]

You see, all this tells to me is that the original creators of "religion" and "god" came up with all of this BS to safeguard themselves from skeptics.

so do you honestly think the creators of religion, specifically Christianity, the creators of which being the Apostles all of whom save one were executed for their religion really spent countless years of writing, traveling, and the final hours of their life in agonizing pain, "created" religion just for the purpose of controlling people/so skeptics could not criticize them?


you can believe that they were wrong, but that they wanted to control people is pretty ludicrous seeing as how the founders who you speak of lived in poverty and life on the lam.

[QuicksandATL]

lol, yeah, by such a loving "god".

There's no such thing as a burning hell. Think about this. If the idea of roasting people in fire had never come into God?s heart, does it seem reasonable that he created a fiery hell for those who do not serve him? The Bible says, God is love. (1 John 4:8) Would a loving God really torment people forever?

Webster's Dictionary says that the English word hell is equal to the Hebrew word Sheol and the Greek word Hades. In German Bibles Hoelle is the word used instead of hell; in Portuguese the word used is inferno, in Spanish infierno, and in French Enfer. The English translators of the Authorized Version, or King James Version, translated Sheol 31 times as"hell," 31 times as grave, and 3 times as pit. The Catholic Douay Version translated Sheol 64 times as hell. In the Christian Greek Scriptures the King James Version translated Hades as "hell" each of the 10 times it occurs.

Next, let me make clear that the Hebrew word Sheol and the Greek word Hades mean the same thing. This is shown by looking at Psalm 16:10 in the Hebrew Scriptures and Acts 2:31 in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Notice that in quoting from Psalm 16:10 where Sheol occurs, Acts 2:31 uses Hades. Notice, too, that Jesus Christ was in Hades, or hell. Are we to believe that God tormented Christ in a hell of fire? Uh, no. Obviously this was just the common grave of mankind.

[JAGERBOY]

How is that a contradiction?

Read Genesis 1 and 2. Genesis 1 clearly says animals came first then man. Then Genesis 2 goes on to say that God made man first, then created animals to keep him company.

[QuicksandATL]

You see, all this tells to me is that the original creators of "religion" and "god" came up with all of this BS to safeguard themselves from skeptics.

You don't have to admit that there is a loving God, but you do have to admit that there is some sort of intelligent design in place. Are you ready for a science lesson?

Among the many precise conditions vital to life on the earth is the amount of light and heat received from the sun. The earth gets only a small fraction of the sun?s energy. Yet, it is just the right amount required to sustain life. This is because the earth is just the right distance from the sun?an average 93,000,000 miles. If the earth were much closer to the sun or farther away from it, temperatures would be too hot or too cold for life.

As it orbits the sun once a year the earth travels at a speed of about 66,600 miles an hour. That speed is just right to offset the gravitational pull of the sun and keep the earth at the proper distance. If that speed were decreased, the earth would be pulled toward the sun. In time, Earth could become a scorched wasteland like Mercury, the planet closest to the sun. Mercury?s daytime temperature is over 600 degrees Fahrenheit. However, if Earth?s orbital speed were increased, it would move farther away from the sun and could become an icy waste like Pluto, the planet whose orbit reaches farthest from the sun. Pluto?s temperature is about 300 degrees below zero Fahrenheit.

In addition, the earth consistently makes a complete rotation on its axis every 24 hours. This provides regular periods of light and darkness. But what if the earth rotated on its axis, say, only once a year? It would mean that the same side of the earth would be facing the sun all year long. That side would likely become a furnacelike desert, while the side away from the sun would likely become a sub-zero wasteland. Few, if any, living things could exist in those extreme circumstances.

As Earth rotates on its axis, it is tilted 23.5 degrees in relation to the sun. If the earth were not tilted, there would be no change of seasons. Climate would be the same all the time. While this would not make life impossible, it would make it less interesting and would drastically change the present crop cycles in many places. If the earth were tilted much more, there would be extremely hot summers and extremely cold winters. But the tilt of 23.5 degrees allows for the delightful changing of seasons with their interesting variety. In many parts of the earth there are refreshing springtimes with plants and trees awakening and beautiful flowers coming into bloom, warm summers that allow for all kinds of outdoor activity, crisp autumn weather with gorgeous displays of leaves changing colors, and winters with beautiful scenes of snow-draped mountains, forests and fields.

Also unique?indeed, amazing?is the atmosphere that surrounds our earth. No other planet in our solar system has it. Nor does our moon. That is why astronauts needed space suits to survive there. But no space suits are needed on the earth, because our atmosphere contains the right proportions of gases that are absolutely essential for life. Some of those gases, by themselves, are deadly. But because air contains safe proportions of these gases, we can breathe them without harm.

One of those gases is oxygen, making up 21 percent of the air we breathe. Without it, humans and animals would die within minutes. But too much oxygen would endanger our existence. Why? Pure oxygen becomes toxic if breathed too long. Kind of reminds me of when I was scuba diving and I got oxygen poisoning, didn't feel too good. In addition, the more oxygen there is, the more easily things burn. If there were too much oxygen in the atmosphere, combustible materials would become highly flammable. Fires would easily burst forth and would be difficult to control. As if the one's we have now aren't bad enough. Wisely, oxygen is diluted with other gases, especially nitrogen, which makes up 78 percent of the atmosphere. But nitrogen is much more than just a dilutant. During thunderstorms, millions of lightning bolts occur earth wide every day. This lightning causes some nitrogen to combine with oxygen. The compounds produced are carried to the earth by rain, and plants make use of them as fertilizer.

Carbon dioxide makes up less than one percent of the atmosphere. What good is such a small amount? Without it, plant life would die. That small amount is what plants need to take in, giving off oxygen in return. Humans and animals breathe in the oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. An increasing percentage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would tend to be harmful to humans and animals. A decreasing percentage could not support plant life.

The atmosphere does more than sustain life. It serves as a protective shell too. About 15 miles above the ground, a thin layer of ozone gas filters out harmful radiation from the sun. Without this ozone layer, such radiation could destroy life on earth. Also, the atmosphere shields the earth from bombardment by meteors. Most meteors never reach the ground because they burn up in their descent through the atmosphere, appearing to us as falling stars. Otherwise, millions of meteors would strike all parts of the earth, resulting in extensive damage to life and property.

In addition to being a protective shell, the atmosphere keeps the warmth of the earth from being lost to the coldness of space. And the atmosphere is itself kept from escaping by the earth?s gravitational pull. That gravity is just strong enough to accomplish this, but not so strong that our freedom of movement is hampered.

Besides the gravitational setup of our universe, many other things testify to intelligent design. The fossil record, animal, instinct, design of living things, chances of spontaneous creation, etc. I can type all night about this.

And yes, about half of what is above is copy and pasted, with the other half of my own notes thrown in.

[Spartan#x]

so do you honestly think the creators of religion, specifically Christianity, the creators of which being the Apostles all of whom save one were executed for their religion really spent countless years of writing, traveling, and the final hours of their life in agonizing pain, "created" religion just for the purpose of controlling people/so skeptics could not criticize them?


you can believe that they were wrong, but that they wanted to control people is pretty ludicrous seeing as how the founders who you speak of lived in poverty and life on the lam.

I believe that the Church as a whole has created religion as a means to control.

[Spartan#x]

You don't have to admit that there is a loving God, but you do have to admit that there is some sort of intelligent design in place. Are you ready for a science lesson?

Among the many precise conditions vital to life on the earth is the amount of light and heat received from the sun. The earth gets only a small fraction of the sun?s energy. Yet, it is just the right amount required to sustain life. This is because the earth is just the right distance from the sun?an average 93,000,000 miles. If the earth were much closer to the sun or farther away from it, temperatures would be too hot or too cold for life.

As it orbits the sun once a year the earth travels at a speed of about 66,600 miles an hour. That speed is just right to offset the gravitational pull of the sun and keep the earth at the proper distance. If that speed were decreased, the earth would be pulled toward the sun. In time, Earth could become a scorched wasteland like Mercury, the planet closest to the sun. Mercury?s daytime temperature is over 600 degrees Fahrenheit. However, if Earth?s orbital speed were increased, it would move farther away from the sun and could become an icy waste like Pluto, the planet whose orbit reaches farthest from the sun. Pluto?s temperature is about 300 degrees below zero Fahrenheit.

In addition, the earth consistently makes a complete rotation on its axis every 24 hours. This provides regular periods of light and darkness. But what if the earth rotated on its axis, say, only once a year? It would mean that the same side of the earth would be facing the sun all year long. That side would likely become a furnacelike desert, while the side away from the sun would likely become a sub-zero wasteland. Few, if any, living things could exist in those extreme circumstances.

As Earth rotates on its axis, it is tilted 23.5 degrees in relation to the sun. If the earth were not tilted, there would be no change of seasons. Climate would be the same all the time. While this would not make life impossible, it would make it less interesting and would drastically change the present crop cycles in many places. If the earth were tilted much more, there would be extremely hot summers and extremely cold winters. But the tilt of 23.5 degrees allows for the delightful changing of seasons with their interesting variety. In many parts of the earth there are refreshing springtimes with plants and trees awakening and beautiful flowers coming into bloom, warm summers that allow for all kinds of outdoor activity, crisp autumn weather with gorgeous displays of leaves changing colors, and winters with beautiful scenes of snow-draped mountains, forests and fields.

Also unique?indeed, amazing?is the atmosphere that surrounds our earth. No other planet in our solar system has it. Nor does our moon. That is why astronauts needed space suits to survive there. But no space suits are needed on the earth, because our atmosphere contains the right proportions of gases that are absolutely essential for life. Some of those gases, by themselves, are deadly. But because air contains safe proportions of these gases, we can breathe them without harm.

One of those gases is oxygen, making up 21 percent of the air we breathe. Without it, humans and animals would die within minutes. But too much oxygen would endanger our existence. Why? Pure oxygen becomes toxic if breathed too long. Kind of reminds me of when I was scuba diving and I got oxygen poisoning, didn't feel too good. In addition, the more oxygen there is, the more easily things burn. If there were too much oxygen in the atmosphere, combustible materials would become highly flammable. Fires would easily burst forth and would be difficult to control. As if the one's we have now aren't bad enough. Wisely, oxygen is diluted with other gases, especially nitrogen, which makes up 78 percent of the atmosphere. But nitrogen is much more than just a dilutant. During thunderstorms, millions of lightning bolts occur earth wide every day. This lightning causes some nitrogen to combine with oxygen. The compounds produced are carried to the earth by rain, and plants make use of them as fertilizer.

Carbon dioxide makes up less than one percent of the atmosphere. What good is such a small amount? Without it, plant life would die. That small amount is what plants need to take in, giving off oxygen in return. Humans and animals breathe in the oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. An increasing percentage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would tend to be harmful to humans and animals. A decreasing percentage could not support plant life.

The atmosphere does more than sustain life. It serves as a protective shell too. About 15 miles above the ground, a thin layer of ozone gas filters out harmful radiation from the sun. Without this ozone layer, such radiation could destroy life on earth. Also, the atmosphere shields the earth from bombardment by meteors. Most meteors never reach the ground because they burn up in their descent through the atmosphere, appearing to us as falling stars. Otherwise, millions of meteors would strike all parts of the earth, resulting in extensive damage to life and property.

In addition to being a protective shell, the atmosphere keeps the warmth of the earth from being lost to the coldness of space. And the atmosphere is itself kept from escaping by the earth?s gravitational pull. That gravity is just strong enough to accomplish this, but not so strong that our freedom of movement is hampered.

Besides the gravitational setup of our universe, many other things testify to intelligent design. The fossil record, animal, instinct, design of living things, chances of spontaneous creation, etc. I can type all night about this.

And yes, about half of what is above is copy and pasted, with the other half of my own notes thrown in.

Alright I'm sorry dude, but I am not reading all that ****.

[QuicksandATL]

Read Genesis 1 and 2. Genesis 1 clearly says animals came first then man. Then Genesis 2 goes on to say that God made made first, then created animals to keep him company.

No it doesn't.

New World Translation:
Genesis 1:

20 And God went on to say: ?Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls and let flying creatures fly over the earth upon the face of the expanse of the heavens.? 21 And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind. And God got to see that [it was] good. 22 With that God blessed them, saying: ?Be fruitful and become many and fill the waters in the sea basins, and let the flying creatures become many in the earth.? 23 And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a fifth day. 24 And God went on to say: ?Let the earth put forth living souls according to their kinds, domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth according to its kind.? And it came to be so. 25 And God proceeded to make the wild beast of the earth according to its kind and the domestic animal according to its kind and every moving animal of the ground according to its kind. And God got to see that [it was] good.

Genesis 2:

18 And Jehovah God went on to say: ?It is not good for the man to continue by himself. I am going to make a helper for him, as a complement of him.? 19 Now Jehovah God was forming from the ground every wild beast of the field and every flying creature of the heavens, and he began bringing them to the man to see what he would call each one; and whatever the man would call it, each living soul, that was its name. 20 So the man was calling the names of all the domestic animals and of the flying creatures of the heavens and of every wild beast of the field, but for man there was found no helper as a complement of him. 21 Hence Jehovah God had a deep sleep fall upon the man and, while he was sleeping, he took one of his ribs and then closed up the flesh over its place. 22 And Jehovah God proceeded to build the rib that he had taken from the man into a woman and to bring her to the man.

[QuicksandATL]

Alright I'm sorry dude, but I am not reading all that ****.

Cliffs Notes:

Lot's of things that work with extreme precision.
Highly improbable for these things to happen and life to be sustained.
Too many things like this for everything not to have intelligent design.

[Gadsden]

I believe that the Church as a whole has created religion as a means to control.

and what of the founders?

[JAGERBOY]

No it doesn't.

Yes, yes it does.

Genesis 1 Account

Genesis 1: 24-26:And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Genesis 2 Account
Genesis 2:15-20:The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.

[JAGERBOY]

Cliffs Notes:

Lot's of things that work with extreme precision.
Highly improbable for these things to happen and life to be sustained.
Too many things like this for everything not to have intelligent design.

Because the odds are so unlikely, this is precisely the reason we are the only known planet that can support life. That does not mean it was designed. The universe is HUGE (possibly infinite), so there may be very few planets out there that could harbor life.

[amgdoc]

and what of the founders?

church made that up too, to help the people feel like the founders are like them and can relate.

[QuicksandATL]

Yes, yes it does.

Genesis 1 Account

Genesis 1: 24-26:And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Genesis 2 Account
Genesis 2:15-20:The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.

Your quoting the scripture out of context and leaving the most important part out, God made Woman as Man's helper and complement.