Originally Posted by alias

Wrong. I wish to limit it because of time and giving full attention to them one at a time. Your first one is too easy, but at least you are going to learn something. At the title of each gospel it says "The Gospel According to So and So". That means each writer is giving his account of what happened.

Originally Posted by alias

Each account of the 4 gospels are accurate. The contradictions are in the minds of those who would love to believe there are contradictions (such as yourself). There is no contradiction here. You have 2 writers giving their interpretation of what happened. Actually the statement was uttered twice, once in the room and once out of it (John and Luke).

Originally Posted by alias

You can also stop calling me stupid anytime now. One thing I am not is stupid. You just are having a hard time with things. I understand that and I am trying to show patience with you. I know you are confused.

Originally Posted by alias

Okay, next bible contradiction please.......

Originally Posted by foundit66

If the accounts differ, that throws EVERYTHING the bible says into question as being possibly "colored" by the "interpretation" of the author.
Maybe God didn't say this, but he actually meant that...



That's got to be my favorite apologetic technique, and the most popular one I've seen for this one.
Claiming that it "happened twice", and that the one person is reporting what happened in this spot at this time, while the other is reporting what happened in another spot at another time.

And your proof of this claim is?



No, alias, you are stupid. We BOTH know this, except I'm honest enough to admit it.
I'm not just talking about disagreeing on things, but rather in how you CANNOT COMPREHEND what my argument actually is in the first place.
And how you throw one thing out there and think it's an argument, when it's actually a non-sequitur to the issue.



Oh no. You don't get to just make up something and call it solved.
PROVE what you claim.
PROVE those two statements were uttered at separate places.

Originally Posted by alias

Sure are a demanding person aren't you. I gave you the explanation and you have no reply except to ask for proof and then call me stupid. Everytime you call me stupid, you lose the right to ask me another question. Time to grow up homo.

Originally Posted by foundit66

You MADE UP an explanation.

Over and over again, YOU demand proof of things. And that proof is supplied.
But here, when I ask you to provide ANY proof of your claim, you prove completely incapable of doing it.

And then you make up a lame excuse as for why you won't do it, instead of admitting you can't.

Your explanation makes no sense. Are we to believe that one author decided, "Hey. I know Jesus said two completely different things in two completely different spots, but I'm going to quote this one." And the other author makes a similar decision regarding the other comment???

That's just hilarious. Husbands who are caught red-handed cheating come up with better excuses...

But you can't come up with any proof of your claim, and you aren't honest enough to admit it, so I'll move on.


That one was just warm-up anyways. Like I said, I've already seen your answer to that one a dozen times, and each time the person involved can't give proof of their made-up explanation.
That was just a warm-up. Now onto the real fun.

The Bible claims Jesus was sinless and that he fulfilled the Mosaic law.
This is not true.

Mosaic law clearly established that gathering food on the Sabbaoth was a sin. The best example of that would be the Jews in the desert with the Manna. Exodus 16:22-30

But then Jesus and his disciples EXPLICITLY gathered food on the Sabbaoth, and were busted red-handed.
Matthew 12:1-2

Jesus sinned according to Mosaic law.

Originally Posted by foundit66

You MADE UP an explanation.

Over and over again, YOU demand proof of things. And that proof is supplied.
But here, when I ask you to provide ANY proof of your claim, you prove completely incapable of doing it.

And then you make up a lame excuse as for why you won't do it, instead of admitting you can't.

Your explanation makes no sense. Are we to believe that one author decided, "Hey. I know Jesus said two completely different things in two completely different spots, but I'm going to quote this one." And the other author makes a similar decision regarding the other comment???

That's just hilarious. Husbands who are caught red-handed cheating come up with better excuses...

But you can't come up with any proof of your claim, and you aren't honest enough to admit it, so I'll move on.


That one was just warm-up anyways. Like I said, I've already seen your answer to that one a dozen times, and each time the person involved can't give proof of their made-up explanation.
That was just a warm-up. Now onto the real fun.

The Bible claims Jesus was sinless and that he fulfilled the Mosaic law.
This is not true.

Mosaic law clearly established that gathering food on the Sabbaoth was a sin. The best example of that would be the Jews in the desert with the Manna. Exodus 16:22-30

But then Jesus and his disciples EXPLICITLY gathered food on the Sabbaoth, and were busted red-handed.
Matthew 12:1-2

Keep reading Matthew 12. Read from verse 1 through 8 and Jesus himself gives you your answer. Now who's stupid?

Jesus sinned according to Mosaic law.

Originally Posted by alias

Keep reading Matthew 12. Read from verse 1 through 8 and Jesus himself gives you your answer. Now who's stupid?

Originally Posted by foundit66

Yes. He does say something there.
But he NEVER addresses the fact that IT IS A SIN according to Mosaic law.

Show me WHAT he said in those verses which established his actions weren't a sin.
At best he gave a REASON for why he was doing it, and using an incredibly crappy example at that. HIS situation, and the scenario he was using, were ENTIRELY different...

Either gathering grain on the Sabbaoth is a sin, which the bible CLEARLY established, or it isn't.
Unless you're saying that the Bible's stance on gathering food on the sabbaoth is a contradiction...

Originally Posted by alias

What do verses 6 and 8 say?

Originally Posted by foundit66

Mat 12:6 But I say unto you, That in this place is [one] greater than the temple.
Mat 12:7 But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
Mat 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

So is Jesus saying he is exempt from the Mosaic law?
That he doesn't have to fulfill it, because it doesn't apply to him?

This passage gives NO explanation as to why he isn't breaking Mosaic law...
Possibly an excuse for why it would be "okay" for him to do so, but that would violate other portions of the Bible...