|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 12:51 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:18 pm
You don't need answers because this is another one of those websites that tries to hurl elephants at you and make large claims while citing verses that they take out of context or just completely misrepresent. Read some of the verses cited on that site (they're kind enough to link you to them), and read the actual quotation in context. It's a load of hot air. Example John's first encounter with Jesus was while both of them were still in their mothers' wombs, at which time John, apparently recognizing his Saviour, leaped for joy (Luke 1:44). Much later, while John is baptizing, he refers to Jesus as "the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world", and "the Son of God" (John 1:29,36). Later still, John is thrown in prison from which he does not return alive. John's definite knowledge of Jesus as the son of God and saviour of the world is explicitly contradicted by Luke 7:18-23 in which the imprisoned John sends two of his disciples to ask Jesus, "Are you the one who is coming, or do we look for someone else?" John's disciples weren't sent to Jesus for the purpose of asking if he is the messiah. They were curious of their own volition. This website puts words in the Bible where they don't belong, and uses translations that best fit their own interpretation. Also note that while the page is labeled New Testament Contradictions, many of the supposed points raised are just questions for the ignorant who hasn't read the New Testament and don't have anything to do with contradictions.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:25 am
What about the genealogy thing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:33 pm
GotQuestions.org With these concepts in view, most conservative Bible scholars assume Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), though David’s son Nathan. There was no Greek word for “son-in-law,” and Joseph would have been considered a son of Heli through marrying Heli's daughter Mary. Through either line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph, “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23). [1]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:28 pm
Hello, i am not trying to pull teeth but there are two things in the bible that i wish people would pay attention to . One Madeline was not the whore that is mentioned in the bible. and 2 She was the one aposle that Jesus is said to have kissed often. i'm just saying if you are going to tell it tell it all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 6:49 pm
...What? Where did you hear this? Can you quote me some scripture to back that up? I don't remember ever reading about any female apostle, let alone anything in any of the Bible about Jesus kissing Mary Magdalene. The only places with that kind of heretical teaching are the Gnostic gospels, not anything in the Biblical canon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2010 2:42 pm
This guy is taking things completely out of context...that and he's doing exactly what he accuses the apostles are doing. As written by Paul Carlson concerning the Ascension: Quote: According to Luke 24:51, Jesus' ascension took place in Bethany, on the same day as his resurrection. According to Acts 1:9-12, Jesus' ascension took place at Mount Olivet, forty days after his resurrection. First and formost, Luke wrote both the Gospel Luke and Acts, therefore they are both technicaly the same accounts. Luke wouldn't be so careless as to write both of his accounts in contridiction. Second, no where in the Gospel of Luke did it mention anything about it being the day of Christ's ressurection. (NASV) Third, Mt. Olivet is the route from Jerusalem to Bethany, So depending on where they were on the Mt. of Olives, they very well could be in the vicinity of Bethany ahaha, sorry I kinda went on a theology rant there. As for Mary Magdalene being an Apostle and the whole kissing thing, I seriously doubt you'll find scriptual proof to back that up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:05 am
Aneko7 This guy is taking things completely out of context...that and he's doing exactly what he accuses the apostles are doing. As written by Paul Carlson concerning the Ascension: Quote: According to Luke 24:51, Jesus' ascension took place in Bethany, on the same day as his resurrection. According to Acts 1:9-12, Jesus' ascension took place at Mount Olivet, forty days after his resurrection. First and formost, Luke wrote both the Gospel Luke and Acts, therefore they are both technicaly the same accounts. Luke wouldn't be so careless as to write both of his accounts in contridiction. Second, no where in the Gospel of Luke did it mention anything about it being the day of Christ's ressurection. (NASV) Third, Mt. Olivet is the route from Jerusalem to Bethany, So depending on where they were on the Mt. of Olives, they very well could be in the vicinity of Bethany ahaha, sorry I kinda went on a theology rant there. As for Mary Magdalene being an Apostle and the whole kissing thing, I seriously doubt you'll find scriptual proof to back that up. Actually you might if you take a look at the original version of the Bible. As far as Mary M. being a whore, that's doubtful. I remember hearing or even reading that she was a woman of nobility. And many people more than likely didn't like her and wrote her off as a whore. But again, to find all the answers, it's best to consult the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic scriptures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 3:08 pm
Aneko7 This guy is taking things completely out of context...that and he's doing exactly what he accuses the apostles are doing. As written by Paul Carlson concerning the Ascension: Quote: According to Luke 24:51, Jesus' ascension took place in Bethany, on the same day as his resurrection. According to Acts 1:9-12, Jesus' ascension took place at Mount Olivet, forty days after his resurrection. First and formost, Luke wrote both the Gospel Luke and Acts, therefore they are both technicaly the same accounts. Luke wouldn't be so careless as to write both of his accounts in contridiction. Second, no where in the Gospel of Luke did it mention anything about it being the day of Christ's ressurection. (NASV) Third, Mt. Olivet is the route from Jerusalem to Bethany, So depending on where they were on the Mt. of Olives, they very well could be in the vicinity of Bethany ahaha, sorry I kinda went on a theology rant there. As for Mary Magdalene being an Apostle and the whole kissing thing, I seriously doubt you'll find scriptual proof to back that up. I'll kick a decomposed horse just for the sake of it. Just because Luke wrote wrote both accounts does not mean that they do not contradict each other. Bye bye, dead group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:37 am
Oh wow. I remember making this thread...
Anyway, I could probably list a bunch more contradictions in the Bible (is killing bad? Does God's love endure forever? Did Jesus die for everyone?) but its main problem isn't that it contradicts itself, it's that it contradicts history, science, and reality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2022 1:44 pm
Yeah I agree, Voldy. I was a real zealot and a pompous p***k in this thread (and others). Even internal consistency (which is debatable in this case) doesn't matter when the truth of the matter is it's not based in reality at all. I'm sure we've all done some growing up since then. smile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
