That is irrelevant to the discussion which is does the bible make conflicting statements. Yes I have shown you twice where it has. When you insisted that the word "tempt" actually meant "test" I then gave you the example of Gideon testing god. Yet we are NOT to test god.

Moses was basically telling them to ignore "the man behind the curtain." This actually comes up again in the bible.

Krimsa,

Just between you and me, do you understand the difference I have been trying to explain to you? Could you explain it in your own words?

Do you understand one word of what I have posted? Or you get it but refuse to acknowledge it?

Problem with this statement is that those who refute the bible do not "hate" it. They don't even dislike it, if someone can actually have these feelings for inanimate objects, people want logic. The bible is not logical at most levels. The logic it does provide in small ways are the logic of hurting others in any way for any reason is not acceptable. Even this small "logic" is then disputed by bible thumpers by the practices of discrimination against those who do not believe as they do, people who do not practice the "loving relationships" accepted by them, those who will not concede that they are "right", etc....

I slam people for making the assumption they are right for all. If you are right for yourself, great, but it is not universal, no matter how hard you try to make it. Belief is just that, a personal belief.

Should evolution be taught as scientifically correct, of course, it is closer than any faith has gotten to the truth of us being here.

Krimsa,

I understand your point. It's fallacious, but I understand the point you are making. You are saying that it is always wrong to test God, but Gideon tested God, so it's a contradiction. Is that correct? If so, please answer my question.

What I am saying is that when you look at these conflicting statements that I have posted from the bible, on the surface and taken at face value, yes they are absolutely contradictory. I have shown this several times. I realize that you are feverishly looking up websites right now to attempt to cloud the issue with a bunch of exegesis.

Im asking that if you read these passages I have posted and attempted to decide for yourself using your own brain and not whatever crap you've learned in church, how would you interpret them spider? Im asking you to reach back to how you were before you "found god"

Krimsa,

I have only looked to two websites, http://www.blueletterbible.org/ for the original texts and the definitions of the words and www.Biblegateway.com for the NASB version. My arguments have been based on facts and evidence. The rational mind would have to agree with my exegesis. You continue to insist you are right, while you don't even understand my point. I'm really starting to feel sorry for you, I'm not sure if you can't understand my point or if you refuse to. Either way, it's a sad situation.

Well I have relied on one website in order to copy and paste the actual versus. My arguments have been based in the passages taken directly from the bible in which they conflict with one another. I think probably an 8 year old would be able to see the points I have made on both accounts, whether dealing with "tempting god" or "testing god." We are told not to do it and then we are told its okay in certain cases and Gideon was a prime example. I actually thought that story was funny because I raise fleece animals.

Anyway the point being that I clearly understand that you are attempting to refute my evidence in some way yet it has not happened, at least not to my satisfaction. Yes yes I realize you are asking me to make a distinction between testing the existence of god, and testing his will. Blah. Thats not what this discussion is addressing at all.

Anyway Spider, what about Abraham and his children? You did not even attempt to refute that one.

Cat got your tongue? Alright here is another

Is it wrong to commit adultery?

YES

Hebrews 13:4
Whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

NO (Its permissible under certain circumstances)


Numbers 31:18
But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Hosea 1:2
And the Lord said to Hosea, Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms....

Hosea 3:1
Then said the Lord unto me, God yet, love a woman beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress.

"feralcatlady" according to Creationism
God made Man directly from dirt..

according to evolution Man mutated from dirt

Where do you find these, Lee?

"With Gorilla gone, will there be hope for Man?

With Man gone, will there be hope for Gorilla?"

from the chia pet website

cha cha cha chia

funny picture sites

Krimsa seems to be a very difficult person and not worth the time arguing with. But here's an answer. Isaac was the "promised" son, his "only" son with Sarah - his "real" wife. The son with the handmade was not a "lawful" son. In the OT it was written in the "code of Hammarabi" (Babaloynian King) that it was OK to have children with a handmade, not in the Torah. I've always found it hard to imagine this practice myself until I found this in my appendix. Then again, don't we follow a lot of the laws of land that go against scripture - like paying taxes to this Beast Government. Abraham was leaving the land of Babalyon, just like we must do. "Come out of her my People"

According to the Old Testament, Isaac, Abraham's son, had an older brother called Ishmael.

Genesis 16:15 And Hagar bare Abram a son: and Abram called his son's name, which Hagar bare, Ishmael.

Genesis 21:3 And Abraham called the name of his son that was born unto him, whom Sarah bare to him, Isaac.

In several places in the Old Testament, however, Isaac is referred to as Abraham's only son.

Genesis 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.

What happened to Ishmael?

This was my question. Please dont start fights here. I have not been difficult This is an open forum and I can ask as many questions as I like. There is no reason to make personal attacks on one's character. That is also against forum rules as far as I understand.

I did answer your question. Under the Torah he had 1 son. Under the Code of Hammarabi, he had 2 sons.

So in that case you are telling me I have to use the Code of Hammurabi as a key of sorts to decipher the OT? Why even mention Ishmael at all then if he was a bastard?

Abraham was told to sacrifice his ONLY son to God, and Ishmael did not die before Abraham, Ishmael was alive until after Abraham, so therefore the only son that these passages are referring to are Ishmael and NOT Isaac. Everyone knows that Ishmael was born before Isaac, so therefore Ishmael would have been called the only son and not Isaac because when Isaac was alive so was Ishmael so therefore Isaac could not have been the only son. Only Ishmael could have been called the only son since he was Abraham’s first child.

As you see there is a problem, the text wrongly puts the name Isaac which does leave a person confused, it seems the author who wrote this story could not keep track of Abraham's children and forgot about Ishmael!

It wouldnt be the first problem here.