How many contradictions in your belief system before you'd leave it?

Nothing you copy and pasted shows inaccuracy.

Both say a man spoke to them, saying the exact same thing.

Because one mentions there was another guy in the area doesn't make the whole account false.

Like I said... you guys who try and push this agenda, and always fail I might add, hang onto the smallest things.
There are a whole lot bigger things you could have attempted to use, which would fail also, but at least more meaningful than 2 different people's telling of a story.

Holy....
Another error. Well, make that 2.

You are sitting there making references to a book of the Bible you didn't even quote from, ffs.
It was Mark, not Matthew, Einstein.

And Luke was written around 60-61 AD.... Mark 50-60 AD... according to the most accurate accounts.
Putting them both around 17-27 years after Christ's death.... not the 50 you ignorantly throw out there.

Regardless.... you don't even know what books you are quoting from.
And the web site you are being brainwashed by is feeding you it's own errors.
How are we supposed to take anything else you say with the slightest bit of credibility ?

Rhetorical.

 

Im not disappointed in you, I never thought you had the capacity to deal with a simple demonstration that the bible is not 100% accurate.

Cowboy wise, we out west we speak of those who are "All hat, no cattle."

 

How is it wrong? They both mentioned there was a man there who spoke to them.

Just because one account says there happened to be another man there, doesn't make them contradictory.

ffs, that's like saying "the sky is blue and there is a bird" contradicts "the sky is blue".

Get some substance, and try this again.

 

I'm very familiar with the stories.
Some have two beings, some one.
Sometimes they see one first outside the tomb, sometimes inside.
It's interesting to do a side by side comparison of the three synoptic gospels and see the many, many discrepancies in the accounts. It's easy to do, fun and very enlightening.

 

So you accept that the Gospels aren't literal truth then.

 

How do you know which are the most accurate? Did you pray and god told you or is that what your preacher told you?

If you claim the bible is literally true then you fail. If you claim that it is based on a basic truth with inaccuracies then thats more acceptable

 

?
And person with an ounce of Reading Comprehension can tell by the very title, The New TESTAMENT that the gospels are at account on what happened in 32AD ACCORDING to the testimony of the writers who are telling the truth as far as they know it to be.

The Truth is what Christ personified as he told those witnesses, "I am the Truth, and the way, and the life." John 14:6.

The testimony of the writers has convinced men that Truth is worth dying for as Rev Matin luther King demonstrated in this age.
THAT is absolutely TRUE.

The message of the NT is true.

 

Did the Curtain rip before or after Jesus died?

 

Yeah, they are criticizing from omissions they see here, rather than a contradiction.
But these Bible writers apparently are reporting testimony from other people who told them the story since they, themselves, admitted did not witness these events as they clearly reported.

 

Yeah, its now scripture = transcript of the witnesses' testimony.
What's the problem?

 

So the message is true, but the details are a mish-mash of irreconcilable recollections.
Got it.

 

None for me. It's a record of people that don't agree.
Got it.

 

How is this different from any secular hearing where the witnesses swear to tell the truth, its written down, and recorded by the court and then if the trial is asks the jury to decide on the merits of the testimony?

In this case, Christians believe that witnesses are telling the truth, as God as helped them.
Christians refer to the verbatim statements as "gospel" because it came on the heels of the actual events by people who were there, and had every reason to tell the Truth since they could and were, eventually, killed for doing so.

BUT what is so silly of you two guys is that what the Gospels sum to in that the savior for mankind is Truth.

"I am the Truth," and we see how men will crucify that.

So, are you guys actually taking the position that Truth is NOT our salvation...
Is you point that things like Empirical Science are meanless exercises in foolishness?????

 

LOL
If they agreed explicitly and without any sign of normal human differences in perception, you would also be the first to point that out, and criticize them for promoting a canned verse for our benefit.

 

Big difference in the court proceedings.
No one suggests those proceedings are inerrant. Quite the opposite. A trial is the process of sifting through evidence and determining what can be considered credible, not that all of it is.
Do you see the difference?
If truth is your salvation, why be so fast and loose with it?

- - - Updated - - -

So you agree that scripture is not inerrant, right?

 

Id so like the people who have such weird and wonderful ideas as we see from the goddies
trying to make their bible "true", I'd like to see how they'd feel if they were on trial.

Lets make it some third world theocracy, they are on trial for their lives, and the prosecutor, judge and jury all have made up their mind before the trial, all evidence entered is interpreted to mean guilt.

Dont matter if two witnesses say different things; they are both true, and mean only guilt.

Would they then hold fast to their ideas about evidence?

 

Nothing "irreconcililable".

The thing that is actually being testified to by them all is that Christ was the Elijah who had returned and done exactly what Jewish Tradition said he MUST and WOULD do.



This is actually the one, singular, most important testimony that an honest "juror" cn glean from the testimony:

They both did the same miracles, which was traditional supposed to identify Elijah when would come back.


Both Elijah and Jesus raised the dead.

Both Elijah and Jesus were immortal.

Both Elijah and Jesus disappeared from the foot of a mountain.

Both Elijah and Jesus ascended into Heaven before witnesses.

Both Elijah and Jesus troubled Israel.

Both Elijah and Jesus were hunted down by the Jewish authorities.

Both Elijah and Jesus hid in a cave/tomb.

Both Elijah and Jesus pondered in the wilderness 40 days.

Both Elijah and Jesus walked over water.

Both wrote letters to people on Earth after they had ascended.

Both appointed a successor, Elisha by Elijah, and Peter, by Christ.

Both were hunted by the Jewish authorities.

Both gave a successor the power to raise the dead.

Both gave a successor a symbolic authority, the cloak to one, the keys to the other.

Both asked that the this "cup" or task be taken from them.

Both are said to have had miraculous births.

Both multiplied the meal for many people they feed in the crowd.

Both destroyed the pagan worshippers and priests, one Baal, the other, the Pantheon of Rome.

Both were promised faithfulness three times, Elisha in the former and Peter, in the latter.

If we compare 1Kings to the gospel accounts we see that Christ duplicated the first appearance of Elijah in 800BC, and the Elijah is immortal because he never died and came back again.

- - - Updated - - -

The there is zero errors in the scriotures of the NT.
It faithfully records the testimony given at the time.

 

So now there is important testimony and unimportant testimony, according to you.
The NT doesn't accurately report what happened, but simply accurately reports what was said about it.
Got it.
None of your long list is discussed in the tomb narrative. Fascinating, of course, but not relevant.

 

Yeah, it's very popular on all the "contradiction" sites... although most of them are just copy and pasted from each other.
Often they post verses relating to 2 completely different things, and try and claim they are contradicting each other... but the biggie is the old law vs. new law reality that they can't seem to grasp... all while claiming "I read the Bible many times" .... lol

They have no grasp on how or when the Bible was written, and some idiots don't even know what book they are copying from as we just saw.

"Leviticus says you can't eat shellfish and Romans says you can !!!!! Gotcha !!!"

Lol... they're funny.

 

For humour, try the hydroplate theory, or any other attempt to show that the "noahs ark" story is real.

 

A man talking to 2 women.... is not "different" than a man talking to 2 women, while there is another man there.
Wtf is so hard to understand ?


You are amazingly intelligent... if you edit out all the things you type.

 

Was the man outside on the stone or inside the tomb?
Who went into the tomb first?
Who was the first person the women met after leaving the tomb?
If the gospels differ on these questions (and more) doesn't someone have to be wrong?

 

Meaningless minutiea is not an argument about the veracity of scripture.