GX

The act of "proving" your faith by works then is in effect boasting. Why and to who do you need to prove your faith to? God? If God knows your heart, he knows that you have faith and there is no need to "prove" anything via works. "Proving" is thus intended for other humans and proving your faith to other humans is in effect, boasting and we know what the bible says about boasting and faith:

"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith -- and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast." (Eph. 2:8-9)

They therefore do not "complement" each other, they clearly contradict. Sorry, the contradiction stands and the above passage clearly states that it is not by works whereby James says it is. Your logic on this one falls apart like the house of cards that is traditional christianity.

Then pray tell, why is "envyings" included in addition to "emulations" in this passage? Do explain! Also you failed to print the "authorized" version of the following passage and dissect the word "jealous":

God is jealous: "For the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God." (Exod. 34:14)

And who "authorized" the "authorized version"? This just proves Ogs point that you state your opinions and omit evidence. The contradiction stands.

I will concede this one as I do not wish to spend time researching it and the fact that I made my point on the first contradiction.

According to theologians, hate has 3 different meanings in the bible:

"The word "hate" is used in at least three different manners in God's Book. First, there is "Malicious and unjustifiable feeling towards others." God's Word condemns this kind of hate. Then, there is a hate defined as: "A feeling of aversion for that which is evil or wrong." A third kind of hate in found in "a relative preference of one thing over another." In this aspect, "hate" simply means to "love less." "

You nor they dont mention how you came to these conclusions. This is merely your (and their) opinion and interpretation. Contradiction stands.

These are not false conclusions especially the first obvious contradiction. This just goes to show the the utter foolishness of parsing words from a 2000 year old document and claiming them to be the ultimate truths. The bible is a fallible document of various ancient tribes quest for spirituality. It clearly states that we will do greater things than Jesus. If we are to do that, we must evolve our spirituality and that involves moving beyond the lessons learned by the ancients and not by blind obedience to a 2000 year old fallible document. Sticking with 2+2=4 as the ultimate mathematical truth denies us the advanced mathematical experience of calculus. This is what not only christians but members of other faiths do: they fervently and blindly stick with "2+2=4" and that is sadly, their only experience. Biblical contradictions even put that "truth" into question.

Abel, your arguments are weak, your refutations are based on opinion and not evidence or logic, and your biases are exposed under the light of scrutiny. I am glad you are here so that the contrast can be seen and that your weak position may be exposed. It just goes to further affirm the house of cards that traditional christianity is built on. The bible has some great teachings and Jesus said some awesome things but as a whole it should not be considered the ultimate truth. At best is should be merely viewed as a fallible yet useful tool to evolve ones own self and to be discarded when one reaches the next level.

NOTE: For the record, I would like to provide a correction: the contradictions I listed in the earlier posting were cut and paste from near-death.com. In my zeal (not jealousy or envy ) to challenge abel with them and the fact that it was a weekday and I was in a rush, I forgot to credit the source. My error.

GX

This is getting to be fun! Lets continue with bible errors. Care to comment Abel?

Bible Errors (copied and pasted from near-death.com)

As many intelligent people know, the Bible is not a science book. It is not a doctoral dissertation on the astrophysical origins of the cosmos. But many people throughout history believed it to be. Some believe the Bible to be perfect and without error. After all, even the Bible itself suggests this to be the case:

"All scripture is God-breathed …" (2 Tim. 3:16)

But at the time Paul wrote this, scripture did not yet include the New Testament. Because of this, people who limit divine revelation to the Bible, should throw out the entire New Testament because it was added into canon hundreds of years after the death of Christ.

The idea of an errorless Bible does not fit the truth. The following examples show beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are sound reasons why an errorless Bible is itself an error.

Bible error #1: The earth was formed out of water and by water.

"But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water." (2 Peter 3:5)


The above verse is in error because the geographical evidence shows the earth was formed from molten lava. For those who believe the Bible to be a greater authority than science, need to choose which is the greater revelation of God: the Bible or the universe. The Bible needed the help of fallible men to be created. God did not need the help of men to create the universe.

Bible error #2: The earth is thousands of years old.

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth … So God created man in his own image … And there was evening, and there was morning – the sixth day." (Gen. 1:1-31)


These verses of the Genesis creation are false. The Bible states that Adam was created on the sixth day. It is derived that approximately four thousand years transpired between Adam and Jesus. This would mean the universe is approximately 6,000 years old. But this is impossible for a number of reasons. Perhaps the simplest to understand is that the light we see from stars have been traveling for billions of years. This proves the universe to be much older than 6,000 years; in fact, it proves the universe is billions of years old.

Bible error #3: Noah's ark contained 2 of all living creatures on earth.

"You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you." (Gen. 6:19)


An ark containing two of all living creatures is a physical impossibility. Noah's ark was 300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits in size according to Genesis 6:15. A cubit was approximately 18 inches, yielding a volume (if perfectly rectangular, the most voluminous possible shape of three unequal dimensions) of 1,518,750 cubic feet. Into this volume, Noah supposedly fit two of each of the 22,100 species of animals on earth plus the food to keep all of them alive for a month. But it would be impossible to fit such a tremendous amount of animals and food in such a relatively tiny volume of that dimension. There are also other reasons why the flood and the ark story is a myth.

Abel

My opinion of Erhman is as biased as his opinion is against the Bible. But my opinion is not wrong. He is not a Christian, he has no spiritual understanding, and therefore no right to speak as a Biblical expert. He is a fool, and has caused you to look foolish.

In your biased defence of Erhman, you stated the he had a vast amount of evidence, but not proof. Proof and evidence are the same thing:
ev·i·dence Audio Help / Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ev-i-duhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -denced, -denc·ing.
–noun 1. that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.
2. something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign: His flushed look was visible evidence of his fever.
3. Law. data presented to a court or jury in proof of the facts in issue and which may include the testimony of witnesses, records, documents, or objects.

I did not state his proof because he offered no proof. Opinions were all he presents.

__________________
God loves you and I'm trying.

Og

You're seriously holding onto this notion that proof and evidence are the same thing? You underline "prove" but ignore the modification of prove: "tends to"???

Evidence is NOT proof. Not in a legal sense or in a scientific sense or any other sense of the term. A proof is obtained via acceptance of axioms. Proof can be used in a colloquial sense when you're not interacting with someone who is part of the discovery process, but it's not the strict distinction that is required when participating in a process of self correcting scientific discovery.

Furthermore, perhaps you could listen to this NPR interview with Ehrman:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=5052156

He addresses specifically the stoning of the adulteress story and puts it in a historical context and references how the story doesn't exist in our oldest manuscripts of the bible but was inserted sometime in the first millenia. He even sites historical pressures on individuals producing translations.

I was offering evidence of biblical inconsistencies (you asked for them in this thread). This seemed to be one of them. Perhaps you could illustrate how he is mistaken about this particular story in the bible and how it is clearly not a component of the original. Then perhaps you could talk about why we're supposed to accept the bible as fact given that it was written within 80-100 years AFTER jesus died?

You simply make statements that he is wrong, but offer no reason for your statement. This doesn't mean that your statement is incorrect but it doesn't provide reason for anyone to accept it.

__________________
Vi veri veniversum vivus vici. (By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe)
Satchitananda - True Being, Pure Consciousness, and Bliss
Tat Tvam Asi - Thou art That.
You & I, no distinction.
Mettā & Namaste

Abel

GX
Again you need to read the James text in it's entire context. Our works are evidence of our faith:James 2:18 "Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works." It is not required for salvation, but it is proof of our salvation. We are to show forth our works, not to boast, but to bring glory to God:1 Peter 2:12 "Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation." No Contradiction.

God is a jealous God, but He is not an envious God. You need to understand the difference in the meaning of these two words. Jealous is not wanting to loose what you have... ie His people lost to Satan. Envy is wanting what another possesses. No Contradiction.

You, yourself, admit there are several meanings for the word "hate". You challenge the experts of Greek (not me) on it's proper use without any credence of your own? Please. No Contradiction.

Also understand that you and I are entering these debates with presuppositions. Because of this I will never convince you, and you will never convince me. What seems plain and logical to me appears foolish to you, and vise versa. But I will play along as you wish. I'll respond to your supposed errors later. I'm a little busy right now.

__________________
God loves you and I'm trying.

xexon

Its a terrible thing to see God Almighty reduced down to a human level by something as petty as jealousy.

Even a human saint conquers that one early on.



x

__________________
Destroyer of Worlds

Abel

I thank God that He loves me enough to be jealous for me and my well being. What you call "petty", I call grace, mercy, and compassion. I'm sorry you do not experience these from the Almighty God.

__________________
God loves you and I'm trying.

xexon

You have the same traits within you, otherwise you wouldn't recognize them.

You have them because you've always had them. You've always had them because you have never been separated from that which made you. The illusion that you are a separate entity from God comes from belief. That belief comes from religion.

I don't experience the world as most. Rather than rely on a mythological proxy for grace, mercy, and compassion, I manifest them myself.

Tall order, but somebody has to set an example.


x

__________________
Destroyer of Worlds

Abel

GX
For your first error. The Bible does not say the earth was formed by water: 2 Peter 3:5 "For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water". Again, you are using a perverted translation. No Error.

On your second error. This one was a good argument I had not faced before. This supposed error was refuted by Dr. Russell Humphreys in his book Starlight and Time. This work passed peer review by qualifying reviewers in 1994. Of course this work has been critized by experts in evolution. Dr. Humphries has answered most if not all of these critizisms. Not being a scientist I'm not even going to begin to attempt to explain his findings. I invite you to read for yourself. No Error.

On your third error you referenced Noah bringing in two of every creature. Noah was not commanded to bring in two of every creature, but two of each "sort" of animal: Genesis 6:19 "And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female." This means, for example, two dogs. Not two Great Danes, two bull dogs ...etc. Just two dogs.

Actually if you read Gen.7:2 you will see where Noah was commanded to bring in 7 each of clean animals and only two unclean animals. The following information comes from the website www.christiananswers.net. Dr.'s Morris and Whitcome estimate that the ark was able to carry approx 1,518,000 cubic feet (750 off from your estimate). They also estimate that since Noah was commanded to bring in "sorts" then only 35,000 individual animals were brought on board. Let's suppose even more were brought on, say 50,000. This many animals, roughly the size of sheep as an average, would fill up 207 standard railroad stock cars. An ark holding 1,518,000 would hold 569 stock cars. More than enough room. No Error. Again, I invite you to the website to research this for yourself.

There is one other correction I need to make. Jesus never said you would do greater things than He. You are a non-believer. Jesus' promise was only for those who believe in Him: John 14:12 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father."

__________________
God loves you and I'm trying.

jimmy77611

So, all of the different species of monkeys, dogs, cats, lizards, snakes, horses, pigs, etc, etc. all evolved from one single "sort" of these animals brought onto the ark 4000 years ago, and all migrated all over the world from mt. ararat, scaling the oceans to do so?

Of couse you'll say "God probably placed them all over the earth", which would be an assumption on your part (one you have made before in other posts), with not even biblcal evidence to support such a stance.

If you believe this, then you are definitely in denial of reality.

Since you don't believe in evolution, I want to know your explanation of how the many different species of monkeys came from one single species within the last 4000 years.