Dear Kathy,
Since you graciously agreed (in our recent conversation) to let me present you with some examples of the Bible’s problems, I decided to do it in this way so it would have its own comment thread. As I’ve said, when I was a Christian, one strike against the Bible was not enough to shake my faith — maybe it only seemed problematic, maybe there was an explanation we hadn’t uncovered yet, maybe the historical accounts were wrong, etc. But as the problems began to mount up, I reached a point where I could no longer deny the fact that the Bible had actual errors.
A couple of suggestions before we begin. Try to be as open-minded about this as possible. As you go through these examples, ask yourself if God would allow such problems to exist in a message that he wanted all people to accept and believe? According to the Bible, whenever God sent someone a message, whether it was Pharaoh or Gideon or Nebuchadnezzar or Paul, they had no question whom it was from. They didn’t always follow it, as we see with people like Pharaoh and Solomon, but they didn’t question the source of the message or what it stated. So why would God operate differently today? Why would he want us to be so confused about his message that we’re able to question whether or not it’s really from him?
Another thing to keep in mind is that even if you come to the conclusion that the Bible has actual problems, that doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. There are a number of Christians who don’t believe in inerrancy. And even if you lose faith in the Christian god, that still doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. A number of people, including several of our founding fathers, were deists. I have a lot of sympathy for that view and plan to do a post on it soon.
Some of the items listed here will have links that provide additional information, especially when the issue is too detailed to list here. I hope that you’ll check out those links, since some of them are quite significant points. And regardless of how this article strikes you, I hope it will help serve as a great springboard to launch you into your own research.
Some of the Problems
Creation
The creation accounts in Genesis do not match what we’ve learned through science. This isn’t shocking news, but it bears looking into. Evolution and the Big Bang Theory had nothing to do with my deconversion, but I’ve learned more about both since leaving Christianity. It’s shocking how much misinformation I had been operating under. Not to say that all Christians are that way — that was simply my experience. But the evidence for both evolution and the Big Bang are far more substantial than I had ever realized. Two good resources for learning more about these issues are the following (though I’d also recommend checking out the recent Cosmos series, as well as some of the PBS NOVA specials):
Another problem with the creation accounts is that Genesis 1 says that plants and trees were made on the 3rd day, while man was made on the 6th. But Genesis 2:5-9 says that man was created before there were any plants or trees in the land. Also, the 1st chapter says that man was created after all the animals, but the 2nd chapter implies that it was the other way around. It seems strange that such discrepancies would exist only a chapter apart, but there are a number of textual clues that suggest the first 5 books of the Bible were assembled over a long period of time from various writings written by a number of different people. Many scholars believe that Genesis 1 and 2 represent two separate versions of the creation story that were both included because the compilers didn’t know which was more accurate. Whatever the reason, there’s no question that the differences exist and are hard to explain.
10 Plagues
During the 10 plagues, God afflicts all of Egypt’s livestock with a disease (Ex 9:1-7), and it specifies that it would affect the “horses, the donkeys, the camels, the herds, and the flocks.” We’re told that all of Egypt’s livestock died. But the later plague of boils was said to affect both man and beast (verse 10 of chapter 9). Maybe it meant non-livestock animals. But Ex 11:5 says that the death of the firstborn would also affect Egypt’s cattle, and in Exodus 14, Pharaoh pursues the Israelites with horses.
Hares Chew the Cud
Leviticus 11:6 tells us that hares chew the cud. They do not. Animals that chew the cud are called ruminants. When they eat plant matter, it goes to their first stomach to soften, and then it’s regurgitated to their mouth. They spend time re-chewing it, and then it is swallowed and fully digested. Ruminants (cows, sheep, goats, etc.) are recognizable because their chewing of the cud is very obvious. Hares (rabbits) don’t chew the cud; however, their mouths do move frequently, so it’s possible to see why some people may have assumed that they do chew the cud. Of course, God would know they didn’t, and this is why the passage is problematic. You can read more about this here.
Arphaxad
In the genealogy given in Genesis 11:10-12, we see that Noah fathered Shem and Shem fathered Arphaxad. At the age of 35, Arphaxad fathered Shelah. This information is confirmed in 1 Chron 1:18. But Luke 3:35-36 tells us that Arphaxad’s son was Cainan, and he was the father of Shelah.
Where does Luke get this information? It disagrees with the Old Testament, so who should we believe? Some have suggested that Genesis and 1 Chronicles simply left out Cainan for some reason. But why would they do that? To further complicate it, how could Cainan have fit in there? Genesis tells us that Arphaxad was 35 when he fathered Shelah. Does it really seem likely that Arphaxad became a grandfather by 35, especially when you consider the extreme old ages that people lived to at that time?
Another explanation is that some copyist messed up when copying Luke and Cainan is just a mistake. But this is not much better. First of all, the error would have needed to occur early for it to be in all our copies of Luke. Secondly, are we really comfortable saying that we have the inspired word of our creator, but it got messed up by some guy who wasn’t paying close attention? To me, that doesn’t lend a lot of credence to the idea of inspiration or inerrancy.
Instead, the most likely explanation is that Luke made a mistake. This, of course, would indicate that he was not inspired.
Problems in the Book of Daniel
In Daniel 5, the writer refers to Belshazzar as the son of Nebuchadnezzar 7 different times. Yet we know from multiple contemporary sources that Belshazzar’s father was Nabonidus, who was not related to Nebuchadnezzar. The same chapter says that Darius the Mede took over Babylon, but this person does not seem to have ever existed. Daniel says that he was the son of Ahaseurus, and in mentioning this, the author of Daniel indicates that he was thinking of a later ruler — the persian emperor Darius the Great, whose son was Ahaseurus. This post in particular goes into the problems surrounding the 5th chapter, but if you’d like to learn about the problems in the rest of the book, you can access each article in the series here.
Jairus’s Daughter
In Mark 5:23, Jairus finds Jesus and says that his daughter is at the point of death. While they’re on their way to the house, some of his servants find them on the way and say that she has died and there’s no point in troubling Jesus further.
However, in Matthew 9:18, Jairus already knows that his daughter has died, but tells Jesus that if he’ll lay his hands on her, she’ll live. This may seem like a minor difference, but honestly, there’s only one scenario that could be true. Either the girl was already dead, or she wasn’t. And if Jairus already knew she was dead, then there was no point in his servants coming to tell him that (so of course, they don’t appear in Matthew’s account).
The Centurion
This is similar to the previous issue. Matthew and Luke both record a centurion who asks Jesus to heal his sick servant. Matthew 8:5-13 says that the centurion himself comes before Jesus to ask for help. Luke 7:1-10 says that the Jewish elders went on his behalf, and then he sent servants to follow up. In Luke, Jesus never speaks to, or even sees, the centurion at all.
Hight Priest
In Mark 2:23-28, Jesus talks about the occasion from the Old Testament when David ate the showbread, which Jesus said was in the days of Abiathar the high priest. However, in 1 Samuel 21:1-6, it appears that Ahimelech was the high priest. Some have tried to answer this problem by saying that Abiathar was alive during that particular episode, so Jesus’ statement is still true. But that’s obviously not the intent of the passage. After all, we would correct anyone who said that the tragedy of 9/11 occurred during the days of President Barack Obama. He may have been alive at the time, but that event did not happen while he was President.
430 Years
Galatians 3:16-17 says this:
The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.
Here, Paul says that the law came 430 years after the promises were made to Abraham. But in Exodus 12:40-41, we see:
Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt was 430 years. At the end of the 430 years, to the very day, all the LORD’s divisions left Egypt.
If the Israelites were in Egypt 430 years, then there could not have been 430 years between Abraham’s promises and the law. God made the promises to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3, and as we read on through Genesis, we see that Abraham had no children at this time. Later, he had a son named Isaac. When Isaac was 60 years old, he had Jacob (Gen 25:24-26), and Jacob had 12 sons that produced the 12 tribes of Israel. Already, we can see that some time has passed since Abraham received the promise. Once Jacob’s sons were all grown with families of their own, they finally settled in Egypt. Jacob was 130 years old at this time (Gen 47:9), and this marks the beginning of that 430 year period that the Israelites spent in Egypt.
That means that the time between the promise to Abraham and the giving of the law was actually over 600 years. So why did Paul say 430 years? I think it’s obvious that this was a simple mistake. He remembered the 430 year figure because that’s how much time the Israelites spent in Egypt, and so he simply misspoke. It’s not a big deal… except that he’s supposed to be inspired by God.
Jesus’ Birth
There are a number of issues surrounding Jesus’ birth. First, Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts contradict one another on virtually all the details, which you can read about here. Secondly, Matthew seems to invent an episode where Herod kills all the children in Bethlehem who are 2 and under, causing Mary, Joseph, and Jesus to flee to Egypt (instead of just returning home to Nazareth, because only Luke says that they started in Nazareth). Matthew does this in order to “fulfill” some Old Testament passages that actually have nothing to do with Jesus or killing babies. You can read about Matthew’s misuse of the Old Testament here — it’s quite blatant.
The Virgin Birth is one of the most famous aspects of Jesus’ story, and it was supposedly done in fulfillment of a prophecy from Isaiah. But it turns out that Isaiah was prophesying no such thing — he was talking about an event that was happening in his own time, and Matthew (once again) just appropriated the “prophecy” for his own devices. You can read all the details here.
Another problem concerning Jesus’ birth narratives is that Matthew and Luke both offer genealogies for Jesus, but they are completely different from one another. Worse, they don’t match the genealogies listed in the Old Testament, either. And Matthew claims that there was a pattern in the number of generations between Abraham and David, between David and the Babylonian captivity, and between the Babylonian captivity and Christ. But to get this neat division, he is forced to leave out some names. In other words, that pattern didn’t happen. You can read more about that here.
The Triumphal Entry
While not as blatant as most of these other issues, when Matthew recounts Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, he once again borrows from the Old Testament, but seems to make a mistake in his implementation. See here for more info.
Judas’ Death
Judas is well known for being the disciple that betrayed Jesus, but what’s not as well known is there are two different accounts of his death, and it’s very hard to reconcile them. According to Matthew, Judas threw his money down at the chief priests’ feet and went out and hanged himself. We’re not told where he did this. The priests then take the money, and instead of putting it back in the treasury (since it’s blood money), they buy a field to use for burying strangers. Because they bought the field with this money, it’s called the “Field of Blood.”
According to Acts, Judas bought a field with his money (we’re not told that he was remorseful), and he somehow fell down, bursting open in the middle and bleeding to death. The field was called “Field of Blood” after that because of the manner in which Judas died.
To make things more complicated, Matthew (of course) says that this happened in accordance with Jeremiah’s prophecy, but there’s nothing in Jeremiah that matches up. The closest reference comes from Zechariah, not Jeremiah.
These issues really complicate the notion of divine inspiration, and you can read more about them here.
The Crucifixion
There are several big problems with the way the gospels record the events of Jesus’ death, including the fact that different times of day are given for it, and even different days altogether. You can read more about this here.
The Resurrection
There are also a number of problems concerning the resurrection, some minor, some major. They’re too involved to get into here, but you can read all about them here and here.
The Problem of Hell
The notion of Hell is fraught with problems. It might even surprise you to learn that the Bible’s teachings on the afterlife change dramatically between the Old and New Testaments. I go into detail about Hell’s problems here, here, and here.
The Problem of Evil
Another huge problem for Christianity is the problem of evil, which I talk about here. This post also addresses the “problem of Heaven.”
The Bible’s Morality
While a number of people believe that the Christian god is the source of all morality, the Bible is actually filled with some monstrous acts that are either commanded by God, done with his consent, or carried out by him directly. I talk about some specific examples here, and I address some of the common responses to them here.
Conclusion
Kathy, there are a number of other examples that could be given, including the prophecy of Tyre that we’ve been discussing. But to me, these are some of the most significant and clear-cut problems. We could try to manufacture explanations for every one of these — some might be more believable than others. But why should we have to? If a perfect God inspired this book, why should it contain so many discrepancies? And honestly, some of these issues can’t be explained. They’re just wrong. The problems go well beyond internal contradictions and unfulfilled prophecies. There are problems of authorship, problems with the doctrines, and problems with the way the texts were written, transcribed, and compiled.
I’m sure you’ve spent your time as a Christian trying to reach those who are lost. You’ve always believed that Christianity is truth, and it’s the one thing that everyone needs. But could it be that Christianity is just as false as every other religion in the world? And if that’s the case, wouldn’t you want to leave it behind? When one is dedicated to finding truth, they have to be prepared to follow it wherever it leads. It’s not always easy or popular. It’s not even a guarantee that you’re right. All it means is that you follow the evidence where it leads to the best of your ability. If you find out that you’re wrong about something, you adjust course when the evidence dictates. If God exists, and if he’s righteous, what more could he ask for than that? I’ll close with my favorite quote:
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.
— Marcus Aurelius
Finding Truth 
ron, I cant even believe they’re really trying to sell that… i really cant
LikeLike
… and now, mike is trying to say that a long time ago, dead didnt mean dead…
idiotic.
it always meant dead, although there may have been times that people mistakenly thought a passed out guy was really dead…
and Ron, you’re right, mike just did more to harm christianity by that silly assertion.
LikeLike
ROFL….What a pack of nits. Theres nothing to sell. the passage says the seed is capable of growing wheat without any miracle at all so it admits theres some life in there. So yeah ez peazy its talking about how things appear – lifeless dead, mostly dried up. Happens all the time in winter. Spring comes and you call a tree dead because the exterior is – it takes a little longer to sprout and then it returns to life/vibrance
Its hilarious that you think you have the knock out blow to Christianity here. 🙂 Shows how weak all your other material is
Here knock yourselves out
Jude 1:12 (KJV)
12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
oooh the Bible says a tree can die twice…lol
Colossians 3:3 (KJV)
3 For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.
ohhh the Bible says you can be dead and alive the same time
Have fun with those sparkies. Freebies,
l
LikeLike
“… and now, mike is trying to say that a long time ago, dead didnt mean dead…
idiotic.”
There is not a world in which you are smarter than me poor will. As matter of fact we still use the word dead to refer to lifeless/motionless and other similar meanings. See if all the meanings you find in this link equal biologically dead.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dead
Stay in school
LikeLike
Dear Arch..
Can you just shut up? Reading your stupidity is a complete
waste of time. Thanks!
LikeLike
“There is not a world in which you are smarter than me poor will. As matter of fact we still use the word dead to refer to lifeless/motionless and other similar meanings. See if all the meanings you find in this link equal biologically dead.” – mike
you’re saying that when jesus said “dead” he didnt mean dead, but motionless? (lifeless also means dead as something without life isnt living).
oh? so jesus didnt really die on the cross? he just swooned I guess.
maybe he didnt really fly into heaven and maybe he wasnt really the son of god… I think you’re on to something.
if you want to compare apples to oranges it’s on you.
This issue is so cut and dry, why you strain so hard to make into something it’s not is beyond me. Sure, you want the bible to be true, but it’s just an old book of outrageous and unfounded claims provided by man, and you’re swallowing it whole, why? You treat it differently than every other book, or do you maintain the koran’s truthfulness in the same manner?
because of ezekiel’s “straight forward” prophecies?
it just gets hard to nail something down as specific when you’re always having to say “it doesn’t mean what it says.”
and you say you’re smart all you like, but I’d advise being quiet and listening, because over half the time you type something you reveal your true self.
LikeLike
“This issue is so cut and dry, why you strain so hard to make into something it’s not is beyond me.”
Hard? Copy and paste from a dictionary? Jeepers. video games are ruining our youth
“I’d advise being quiet and listening, because over half the time you type something you reveal your true self.”
clearly someone who speaks from experience.
LikeLike
Nate, as per Arch’s point.. I appreciate you being “nice” to me.. I really do. And I want to be nice to you also.. I’m trying. But it’s hard to be nice while confronting what I view as dishonesty. Please know that I’m trying to do it/ I desire to do it in the nicest way possible. But I assume this blog is not about being “nice”.. but about “FINDING TRUTH”. So, I hope that you are able to get past my directness… we must be honest, and not shy away from what we feel is hindering obtaining that truth. And yes, I realize that means you can point out what you believe I’m doing wrong.. please do. But if I sense any ulterior motive, other than a desire to find the truth, I’m going to call you out.
I’ve spent considerable time putting forth a point to you about Christianity.. that it has the most credentials of all the widely known religions/ cults. I know you are aware of the basics of these other widely known religions.. because you’ve obviously rejected them also. There is no honestly objective reason to not answer my question.. of which religion you believe has the most credentials to attest to it’s CLAIMED truth, if not Christianity. Again, you don’t have to believe that ANY of them are true.. it’s a simple question that requires honesty.. because you know that if you put forth any religion other than Christianity, I will ask you WHY you believe it is more credentialed. I should have to FORCE you to be honest.. but that is what this has come to. And this is a two way street.. it’s not like I’m not being “fair”.. you are free to ask me these same kinds of questions.
I’m only asking for objectivity Nate… which is ESSENTIAL if you TRULY desire to find the truth!
LikeLike
As for Jesus’ seed analogy.. His meaning could be as simple as the common knowledge that a seed gets “buried” before it multiplies. Atheists always try to apply everything in literal terms.. because that’s the easiest way to “disprove” the Word. Not every word in the Bible is meant to be taken literally.
LikeLike
“it just gets hard to nail something down as specific when you’re always having to say “it doesn’t mean what it says.””
Too stupid. Anyone but a skeptic reading that passage (as millions have) knows exactly what that passage is saying. The only people who strain at it are skeptics begging fora hyper literal biological meaning so they can cite it as some error.
LIve with it. Its a FACT. People walking around 2,000 years ago did not reference biological catalyst , photosynthesis or any biological activity within plants. If something dried up and appeared lifeless hard and cold they called it dead. Period. if they cut down a tree last month and it dried up they would not care squat that inside it it might still have biological activity that could cause something to sprout up in a few weeks. They ‘d call it a dead tree and hence that would be one of the meaning of the word “dead” because words in ALL languages are derived from usage within their cultures. its why the word cool means what it does in our culture without anything to do with temperature – word usage you nits.
So for all your clap trap about idiotic and stupid you once again show you don’t have a clue what it is to study an ancient text and own your own insults.
LikeLike
Kathy, I understand what you’re asking, but it’s a nonsensical question to me, and that’s why I won’t answer it. It would be similar to me asking you in which way you would most like to blaspheme Jesus. Any answer you give would put you at a disadvantage, or would potentially give someone the wrong idea about your worldview.
I don’t believe Christianity has valid credentials, so I can’t say its credentials are “better” than anything else’s.
I hope that helps clarify. If we’re able to move beyond it and continue our discussion, that’s great. However, if it’s not something you can move beyond, then I understand that too, and I guess we’ll have to just end the discussion here.
Thanks
LikeLike
“As for Jesus’ seed analogy.. His meaning could be as simple as the common knowledge that a seed gets “buried” before it multiplies. Atheists always try to apply everything in literal terms.. because that’s the easiest way to “disprove” the Word. Not every word in the Bible is meant to be taken literally.” – kathy
or jesus could have been wrong. believers always do whatever they can to justify everything in their faith, while saying that’s “objective.”
LikeLike
Ark’s comment:
“I’m asking, which religion, based on what you do know.. is the most credentialed.
Are you unable to see how daft this question is, Kathy?
This is like acknowledging that religion is corrupt but trying to force Nate to state which religion he believes is the least corrupt.”
Ok.. SO?? It’s STILL an answerable question.. and so no reason for Nate to not answer it. That he is having such a hard time answering it reveals a lot.
No religion is ‘credentialed’. To even suggest this means you have to either produce evidence of the religion’s bone fides; the veracity of its claims, or , as you all do, start from a position of supposition.
In other words, faith.”
Absolutely wrong Ark. Are you familiar with the judicial system? Often there are no “bone fides”.. but still there is evidence presented and a decision is made by a group of people. This is no different. Sorry but evidence most definitely exists.. and the evidence for Christianity is far MORE for compelling than for any other religion/ cult. And standing alone w/o comparison, it still argues powerfully for the truth of the Bible.
LikeLike
“Too stupid. Anyone but a skeptic reading that passage (as millions have) knows exactly what that passage is saying. The only people who strain at it are skeptics begging fora hyper literal biological meaning so they can cite it as some error.” – mike
yeah, I know what he’s trying to say, but he’s still wrong.
it’s like saying “as the earth is flat, so must my pancakes be flat on my plate.” We know whoever would say such a things means “flat” but he’s still wrong in using the earth as an analogy of something being flat.
so, yes, too stupid.
“hyper literal?” that’s funny. someone says “dead” and it’s hyper literal to assume they meant :dead.” It’s also hyper literal to say jesus was the son of god, smart guy. Or that he rose from the dead. is it okay to take that “hyper literally?”
LikeLike
“Absolutely wrong Ark. Are you familiar with the judicial system? Often there are no “bone fides”.. but still there is evidence presented and a decision is made by a group of people. This is no different. Sorry but evidence most definitely exists.. and the evidence for Christianity is far MORE for compelling than for any other religion/ cult. And standing alone w/o comparison, it still argues powerfully for the truth of the Bible.”
I dont know about this.
I dont think the bible has good credentials to be from god. I think it fails badly – as the others. I havent studied those as much as the bible. I decided they were bogus over much, much less that made me decide the bible was.
But again, i’ve asked before, what’s the evidence for the bible? at one time you sai dthere was factual evidence and mike offered some prophecies… but honestly, those arent factual – cant be taken literal, and take a lot, and i mean a lot of work and a tremendous amount of hope to agree with…
kathy, how many religions have you studied? honestly? have you read the whole bible? now have you read the holy books of any other religion? how much history and archaeology have you studied? have you really set the bible on equal ground with the others, or are you trying to prove the bible and disprove the rest?
there are issues with the bible, that so far, I have seen no answer for.
I’ve asked mike countless times, but he keeps dodging, so i’ll ask you, what day was jesus crucified on? Passover like mark says, or before passover like john says?
when and where and how many angles did they meet at the tomb of jesus and who spoke to them?
And if you find or invent a hypothetical answer rectifying these, what contradiction cannot be “rectified” in such ways? could you provide an example of that?
LikeLike
“it’s like saying “as the earth is flat, so must my pancakes be flat on my plate.” We know whoever would say such a things means “flat” but he’s still wrong in using the earth as an analogy of something being flat. ”
There is no description or definition of death in the passage
The word dead is older that any biological meaning we now attach to it. Claiming that its wrong to use it without reference to its recent biological meaning is just silly. Particularly in relationship to plants and agriculture if something reached the stage where it showed the signs of being dead dry, hardened etc it was dead. demanding that Jesus should have made up some other word than how people would have taken it makes no sense.
LikeLike
Funny how Mike now turns to a modern dictionary for his definitions of what death really meant in ancient times.
For comparison,
Merriam-Webster’s leading definitions are:
And Strong’s G599 rendering of the Greek word found in John 12:24 says:
apothnēskō
It’s plain to see the author was describing death in its literal sense.
LikeLike
“There is no description or definition of death in the passage” – mike
that’s right mike, because “death” like most words is already defined. If you’re only going to make stupid remarks, please stay out of the discussion. I’m embarrassed for you.
I cant even believe this… dear jebus, help us.
really, why even make such a remark? do you realize people are reading what you post?
“The word dead is older that any biological meaning we now attach to it.” – mike
Mike, please, just stop. your continuing to say this is unwittingly undermining your whole position. If dead doesnt mean dead, and could mean about anything, then that leaves the door opened (that you propped open) to say that jesus didnt really die and what’s more, is that youre basically saying that there is nothing in the bible than means jesus really died…
please, just stop talking about it. what are you doing?
kathy? where are you in all this? Do you agree with mike, or do you think he’s out of his mind?
LikeLike
“or jesus could have been wrong. believers always do whatever they can to justify everything in their faith, while saying that’s “objective.””
Well, let’s see.. what else has Jesus been wrong about? And if you think you have answers to that, just make sure you can back them up.
LikeLike
Nor, Ron, it would seem, much about his own Torah.
LikeLike
Nate, you said:
“Kathy, I understand what you’re asking, but it’s a nonsensical question to me, and that’s why I won’t answer it.
It would be similar to me asking you in which way you would most like to blaspheme Jesus.”
Nate, do you even realize what you’ve just done?? You’ve compared saying anything “positive” about Christianity like “blaspheme”. Blaspheme against WHO?? wow.. either you don’t realize it or you do and are ok with it…. but you are being used. You’ve teamed up with the enemy and it appears you don’t even realize it.. (I’d like to give you the benefit of the doubt that you aren’t aware of this). What happened??? If you truly were a Christian and loved God.. WHAT HAPPENED Nate?? What is your primary reason for turning your back on God??
LikeLike
That was a side-splitter, William – Ark could take lessons! God knows he – oh, Hi, Ark – I didn’t see you lurking there —
LikeLike
“Well, let’s see.. what else has Jesus been wrong about? And if you think you have answers to that, just make sure you can back them up.” – kathy
kathy, this isn’t an argument.
I guess i don’t know, but let me point out, that everything jesus is quoted as saying, is merely a claim by the authors of the bible. How do you even know jesus said those things?
And I haven’t gone through and cataloged all that jesus is quoted as saying, but i do know that he was wrong about seeds.
and I dont mean to be a jerk, but i’ve seen you criticize others for skipping over questions you’ve asked, but you’ve skipped over several of mine. would you answer some of them?
LikeLike
Kathy, I don’t even understand your most recent comment…
LikeLike
“WHAT HAPPENED Nate?? What is your primary reason for turning your back on God??” – kathy
read his blog. read his about section and follow the links. he’s walked you through it.
and I think you’ve misread his analogy.
LikeLike