I did, on page six. Calm down man, you need to relax.

Well Tribo, she seemed so tentative I was putting my kid gloves on

Oh no. Not another "Warrior For God". The world has enough of that crap already.

I thought that it's the Protestant's position that only the Holy Spirit can speak for God and not men (or women!)

In fact, didn't we just get done talking about how "God's Word" strictly forbids women to speak of religious issues in public?

And now we have women who are preparing for "Battle" to become God's chosen spokesperson?

And this is a thread about CONTRADICTIONS?

What an IRONY!



Jay Leno could use this for a skit!

This is the whole problem with religions that claim to have the "Word of God", everyone falls into the trap of wanting to become a Paper Pope.

What ever happened with idea of "A Personal Walk With God?"

That went out the window with the bath water I guess.

answers outside of scripture, to many maybes and conjectures, It also makes wonder now how many more things are just copyist mistakes? how many more letters and numbers and words and meanings are incorrect? thnx spider, this just makes me more convinced that it can not be relied upon. -

Belushi most definitely wins this round unquestionably - YEA - my votes for belushi!!!!

One would think the Chief Engineer would have clued in his technicians (priests) on the workings of the uterus and about what a placenta really is. Instead, we have the same people who are supposedly accurately channeling the True Word of the Big Kahuna acting more like Eric Cartman doing a Wizard-Of-Oz "Pay No Attention to the man behind the curtain-Girls have cooties" spiel.

Menstrual huts. Sheesh.


-Kerry O.

Well I’m glad this period thing I've had to deal with is actually significant to someone, even if they hate and resent me for it

Truly.

Spider was trying to toss my argument out claiming that I was just speculating and look what he does!

So much for being consistent about his own rules.

I agree, Belushi found contradicting scriptures.

I also agree that Krimsa found contradicting principles in the Bible with the obvious contradiction between God telling people to be fruitful and multiply and then the Bible has birth being somehow 'spiritually unclean'. I think she clearly made her case. And Eljay's medical argument didn't stand because the Bible clearly states that the women is not to touch anything that is "Holy". They are making it perfectly clear that her 'uncleanliness' is seen as a spiritual uncleansliness, not a physical one.

I accept that as being a contradiction of principles. A God tells people to do something and then it becomes a spiritually unclean act? No way.

That's a clear-cut contradiction IMHO.

well then with smiles vote for you, my vote for belushi, and now my vote for you - since no one has stepped up to disprove or knock down your answer and maybe Krimsa's vote to?? i think - you have the 3 - necessary votes to call this "throw down" decided in my take.

unless someone disputes this other wise - contest is over - anymore questions/answers can be started on another new post, class dismissed

By the way, I think a LOT of what we've been discussing here is relavent to of whether or not biblical picture of God changes.

If women were considered to be 'unclean' after birth, then why don't modern Christians still believe this to be the case?

What would have CHANGED? Would God have changed his mind about this???

The same things holds with women not being permitted to talk about religious issues in public.

If that's what God wanted back then why would it not still be that way today.

What would have CHANGED? Would God have changed his mind about this too???

I think the Bible (or at least the religion as a whole) has certainly contradicted itself concerning the idea of their God being unchanging.

They preach against homosexuality (which they get from way back in the Old Testament) like as if it holds firm FOREVER!

Yet, they don't contine to believe that women are unclean after birth, or that women should not speak on important matters in public (especially regarding religion)

Clearly the whole religion is one HUGE contradiction.

Okay, can I go on with another "discrepancy, inconsistency or contradiction" or are we still on these last few? I know a couple of mine were kind of disregarded as being photons or light not directed from the sun because of course pheasants in biblical times had accessibility to quantum physics texts and batteries...but aside from that, shall we move on?

The 10 commandments are on the hearts of everyone. The written laws were given to the Israelites, but everyone already knew the laws.

In Genesis 26:4-5, God commends Abraham for obeying his commandments.

Genesis 26:4-5


Five of the seven Noahide laws are found in Genesis 1-2.

1. Idolatry and Blasphemy. Genesis 2:16 "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:" The fact that God is commanding Adam, means that Adam is subserviant to God. "LORD God" establishes that God is the God for mankind, thus forbidding Idolatry.

2. Sexual immorality. Genesis 1:24 "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. " Men should marry one woman and they will become one flesh.

3. Theft. Genesis 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. Taking something which doesn't belong to you is wrong.

4. Murder. Geneis 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. and Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. and Genesis 2:16 "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:" Men are made in the image of God, subserviant to God and men should not steal. Since all men belong to God, murder is wrong for destroying the image of God and taking something which belongs to God and destroying one of God's servants.

Some also include a sixth law of the Noahide laws, cruelty to animals.

Genesis 1:29


This verse illustrates God commanding Adam and Eve to only eat herbs, vegatables, fruit and other products of plants.

Tribo,

For there to be a contradiction, one of the verses would have to be possible and the other impossible.



These two don't contradict one another, because ACTS 1:18 describes an event happening to Judas in which he either died or was already dead. Matthew 27:5 describes an action which Judas took to end his own life. Are you denying the possiblity that the rope broke and Judas fell and was split open from the fall? If it's a possiblity, then no contradiction exists. A contradiction would have to mean that one verse made the other impossible, which neither verse does.

But if you believe that Belushi was the winner, that can be your vote. I'm enjoying the discussion, more "contradictions" please.

mannnn!!! that is the farthest stretch so far spider!! are you kidding?? you cant be serious? Where in your gods aname did you get this info? from some theological texas cemetary? I give up even listening to you any more.

as i said 3 VOTES have been cast - abra and belushi are the winners.

It's taught and accepted in Jewish and Christian circles. Probably also in Muslims circles, because they have some wonderful scholars also.

There was nothing in the rules about "three votes", I said "three wins". I was thinking that I would be one side and those who proposed contradictions would be the opposing team. I expected we would give a voting period and then close voting to declare a winner for that round. Once three rounds were won by one team, that team would be declared the winner. I believe that I wasn't very clear.

Point of interest, you didn't refute my arguments. Since you believe that they are "the farthest stretch so far spider", would you care to explain why?

These two don't contradict one another, because ACTS 1:18 describes an event happening to Judas in which he either died or was already dead. Matthew 27:5 describes an action which Judas took to end his own life. Are you denying the possiblity that the rope broke and Judas fell and was split open from the fall? If it's a possiblity, then no contradiction exists. A contradiction would have to mean that one verse made the other impossible, which neither verse does.

But if you believe that Belushi was the winner, that can be your vote. I'm enjoying the discussion, more "contradictions" please.


tribo:

i dont believe that a man hanging by his neck from a rope fall any way but feet first at least and no more than sideways at best, to totaly invert and fall head first is extremely unlikely concidering the height of the hanging. so no i dont vote for your theory on that

VOTE = BElUSHI

But to where? Despite the rules, they'll just come up with more convoluted arguments.

Like... hmmm. Okay, try this one. Once upon a time there was a company called Lucas Electric that made many of the electrical components installed in British sports cars. Some of these components were unreliable, so there were jokes like this one:

"Lucas Electric headlights don't give off light, they suck darkness." :)

So, just like that one, you'll hear that your contradictions aren't really contradictions at all, it's just Truth written backwards for heathens.

-Kerry O., remembering Joseph Lucas, the Prince of Darkness

ok your rules, sorry, i donot wish to participate any longer, this is foolishness, childishness, believe what you want to believe.

To die quickly, one would have to fall a between five and nine feet(http://people.howstuffworks.com/death-by-hanging.htm). I think it's safe to assume that Judas MIGHT have choosen to fall that distance, so that he died instantly. Maybe he choose a high tree or a scaffolding near a cliff.

The field Judas died in is below a cliff, as you can see in this picture: http://www.jerusalemshots.com/Jerusalem_en111-5327.html

As far as Judas falling headfirst, maybe the tree was near the cliff and when the rope broke or limb snapped, he flipped 180 degrees to fall on his head. Unlikely you say? Perhaps. But still possble, excluding the possiblity of a contradiction.

Don't play the wounded victim. You could have objected to the rules before I pointed out your folly. Honestly, what did you think that the requirement of evidence would be? Did you really think that the side with the most votes would be able to run roughshod over the other? To be FAIR, you must expect logic and evidence for every argument presented. I have done that so far, has Abra? Have you? For what reason should my post about the commandments given to Adam be rejected, because you say so? REFUTE THEM. This isn't a playground where the kid with the most friends wins every fight. The rules were clear and nobody had issue with them until I asked that they be enforced. "Your really reaching here spider" isn't a refutation, it's a comment that speaks to how you think my argumetns are written. That's fine and dandy, but you then need to add logic and evidence to support that opinion.

more assumptions and maybes no biblical proof at all.

spider look, all of this stuff your posting is theologians trying to come up with anything that will sound in their and others minds as "reasonably persuasive" at the most. i ain't buying it.

why don't you try what wouldee and feral and morning song say they do - depending on god through his holy spirit to guide you instead of cemetery teaching your spouting here, OK?

your making a fool of yourself and your bible beliefs in my opinion. If Jesus was here and I or anyone asked him these things, do you really believe he would give the answers your giving? i REALLY doubt it spider. In my opinion DavidBen could give better answers than you - i may not understand them, but i believe they would still be better than yours!

as i say i really don't want to participate in this thread anymore - sorry.