Back to Bible Contradictions

It's quite simple to prove that the moon landings did indeed take place, there are plenty of sufficiently powerful telescopes available. Disbelieving the moon landings is up there with the flat and hollow earth craziness. Still, it makes it easier to spot the fruitcakes I guess.

Originally posted by sonship
The nation of [b]Israel was a truly theocratic nation. As far as I know, the only real one in history.[/b]

Do you agree with Jewish settlers on the occupied territories on the West Bank that they have the right to live there and take the land of non-Jews because your God promised the land to them?

Originally posted by OdBod
I will have to get back to you on that,I am not very good at computer/internet stuff,I will have to get someone to help me,unless you can explain in your own words?

No problem. I'll let you read some interesting explanations on the Bibles view on prophecy and destiny and how God would fit into this. This is from the site I posted for you:

"First, God’s ability to foreknow and foreordain is clearly stated in the Bible. Jehovah himself sets forth as proof of his Godship this ability to foreknow and foreordain events of salvation and deliverance, as well as acts of judgment and punishment, and then to bring such events to fulfillment. His chosen people are witnesses of these facts. (Isa 44:6-9; 48:3-8) Such divine foreknowledge and foreordination form the basis for all true prophecy. (Isa 42:9; Jer 50:45; Am 3:7, 8)

A second factor to be considered is the free moral agency of God’s intelligent creatures. The Scriptures show that God extends to such creatures the privilege and responsibility of free choice, of exercising free moral agency (De 30:19, 20; Jos 24:15), thereby making them accountable for their acts. (Ge 2:16, 17; 3:11-19; Ro 14:10-12; Heb 4:13) They are thus not mere automatons, or robots. Man could not truly have been created in “God’s image” if he were not a free moral agent. (Ge 1:26, 27; see FREEDOM.) Logically, there should be no conflict between God’s foreknowledge (as well as his foreordaining) and the free moral agency of his intelligent creatures.

A third factor that must be considered, one sometimes overlooked, is that of God’s moral standards and qualities, including his justice, honesty, impartiality, love, mercy, and kindness. Any understanding of God’s use of the powers of foreknowledge and foreordination must therefore harmonize with not only some of these factors but with all of them. Clearly, whatever God foreknows must inevitably come to pass, so that God is able to call “things that are not as though they were.”—Ro 4:17."

So this is on a smaller scale since I don't think a few here would like me posting the whole article on this. But I'll try....

Originally posted by OdBod
I will have to get back to you on that,I am not very good at computer/internet stuff,I will have to get someone to help me,unless you can explain in your own words?

Predestinarian view.

" The view that God’s exercise of his foreknowledge is infinite and that he does foreordain the course and destiny of all individuals is known as predestinarianism. Its advocates reason that God’s divinity and perfection require that he be omniscient (all-knowing), not only respecting the past and present but also regarding the future. According to this concept, for him not to foreknow all matters in their minutest detail would evidence imperfection. Examples such as the case of Isaac’s twin sons, Esau and Jacob, are presented as evidence of God’s foreordaining creatures before their birth (Ro 9:10-13); and texts such as Ephesians 1:4, 5 are cited as evidence that God foreknew and foreordained the future of all his creatures even before the start of creation."

Oh yeah this is from the Insight Book Volume 1.

Originally posted by OdBod
I will have to get back to you on that,I am not very good at computer/internet stuff,I will have to get someone to help me,unless you can explain in your own words?

"To be correct, this view would, of course, have to harmonize with all the factors previously mentioned, including the Scriptural presentation of God’s qualities, standards, and purposes, as well as his righteous ways in dealing with his creatures. (Re 15:3, 4) We may properly consider, then, the implications of such a predestinarian view.

This concept would mean that, prior to creating angels or earthling man, God exercised his powers of foreknowledge and foresaw and foreknew all that would result from such creation, including the rebellion of one of his spirit sons, the subsequent rebellion of the first human pair in Eden (Ge 3:1-6; Joh 8:44), and all the bad consequences of such rebellion down to and beyond this present day. This would necessarily mean that all the wickedness that history has recorded (the crime and immorality, oppression and resultant suffering, lying and hypocrisy, false worship and idolatry) once existed, before creation’s beginning, only in the mind of God, in the form of his foreknowledge of the future in all of its minutest details."

Originally posted by OdBod
I will have to get back to you on that,I am not very good at computer/internet stuff,I will have to get someone to help me,unless you can explain in your own words?

"If the Creator of mankind had indeed exercised his power to foreknow all that history has seen since man’s creation, then the full weight of all the wickedness thereafter resulting was deliberately set in motion by God when he spoke the words: “Let us make man.” (Ge 1:26) These facts bring into question the reasonableness and consistency of the predestinarian concept; particularly so, since the disciple James shows that disorder and other vile things do not originate from God’s heavenly presence but are “earthly, animal, demonic” in source.—Jas 3:14-18."

Originally posted by OdBod
I will have to get back to you on that,I am not very good at computer/internet stuff,I will have to get someone to help me,unless you can explain in your own words?

"If the Creator of mankind had indeed exercised his power to foreknow all that history has seen since man’s creation, then the full weight of all the wickedness thereafter resulting was deliberately set in motion by God when he spoke the words: “Let us make man.” (Ge 1:26) These facts bring into question the reasonableness and consistency of the predestinarian concept; particularly so, since the disciple James shows that disorder and other vile things do not originate from God’s heavenly presence but are “earthly, animal, demonic” in source.—Jas 3:14-18."

Originally posted by OdBod
I will have to get back to you on that,I am not very good at computer/internet stuff,I will have to get someone to help me,unless you can explain in your own words?

Did God predestine Judas to betray Jesus in order to fulfill prophecy?

"The traitorous course of Judas Iscariot fulfilled divine prophecy and demonstrated Jehovah’s foreknowledge as well as that of his Son. (Ps 41:9; 55:12, 13; 109:8; Ac 1:16-20) Yet it cannot be said that God foreordained or predestinated Judas himself to such a course. The prophecies foretold that some intimate acquaintance of Jesus would be his betrayer, but they did not specify which of those sharing such acquaintance it would be. Again, Bible principles rule against God’s having foreordained Judas’ actions. The divine standard stated by the apostle is: “Never lay your hands hastily upon any man; neither be a sharer in the sins of others; preserve yourself chaste.” (1Ti 5:22; compare 3:6.) Evidencing his concern that the selection of his 12 apostles be wisely and properly made, Jesus spent the night in prayer to his Father before making known his decision. (Lu 6:12-16) If Judas were already divinely foreordained to be a traitor, this would result in inconsistency in God’s direction and guidance and, according to the rule, would make him a sharer in the sins that one committed.

Thus, it seems evident that at the time of his being selected as an apostle, Judas’ heart presented no definite evidence of a treasonous attitude. He allowed a ‘poisonous root to spring up’ and defile him, resulting in his deviation and in his accepting, not God’s direction, but the Devil’s leading in a course of thievery and treachery. (Heb 12:14, 15; Joh 13:2; Ac 1:24, 25; Jas 1:14, 15; see JUDAS No. 4.) By the time such deviation reached a certain point, Jesus himself could read Judas’ heart and foretell his betrayal.—Joh 13:10, 11."

That's all I'll post as I know some will jump on me. But when you can go there, you'll see more info on this question you have....

Originally posted by OdBod
I will have to get back to you on that,I am not very good at computer/internet stuff,I will have to get someone to help me,unless you can explain in your own words?

Hear, hear. I second that.

galveston75, why not summarize the crux of it in a brief paragraph of your own?

Originally posted by FMF
Hear, hear. I second that.

galveston75, why not summarize the crux of it in a brief paragraph of your own?

I actually don't feel I could bring out the points it does here as good. Plus I'm fairly slow on typing, so it could take a while for me to get that much done. Sorry!!

Originally posted by galveston75
I actually don't feel I could bring out the points it does here as good. Plus I'm fairly slow on typing, so it could take a while for me to get that much done. Sorry!!

Does the "fairly slow on typing" thing mean that you're also,l in fact, not actually willing to argue the corner of any of the content of your lengthy copy pastes?

Originally posted by sonship
[b] a ha, you're back talking about the moon are you? Did you run away from the science thread? I am still waiting for that reference.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wasn't discussing it in the science thread. Was I?

And how did I conclude my exhanges with you on that?
As I recall I s ...[text shortened]... ly, pulling off the hoax may have been as incredible a feat as just going to the Moon - (maybe).[/b]

Funny, the Russians, the Chinese, never dissed Apollo. You seem to forget I was there, I saw the technology of the day, my thing, Apollo tracking and timing, a transponder on board Apollo that received a very well designed digital code and transmitted up to it and the transponder sent that code back out nearly instantaneously on another frequency, and comparing the two codes told them how far out in space they were. That is not lying, I had to draw out the entire schematic as a classroom exercise and BTW got 100% on that task. I also as a student at Goddard, was assigned the task of finding where Mars was, and locking on to a signal sent out by a Mars orbiting craft using a student radio telescope maybe 12 feet in diameter, tiny compared to Goldstone for instance, and I did and achieved lock on the Mars orbiter. There was no lying about that. Nobody in a secret room pulling strings in some vast conspiracy to keep even us technicians duped. To say that is in my mind pure and unadulterated treason and I will tell anyone who says that to his or her face. You denigrate the greatest engineering and explorational feat of the entire human race and denounce it as lies. YOU are the traitor not NASA. NASA may have done some disreputable things but lying about Apollo is not one of them.

Your whole purpose of this thread is to (in your own mind) to squash any notion of errors in the bible and I write one biggie about the analysis of the age of Earth based on who begat whom and all you can do is come up with your lies about Apollo? You don't want to enter the conversation about that one do you? All you want is to denigrate me, thinking that wins an argument. What it does in reality is to show everyone else how insecure you really are.

Age of the earth?

Assuming the Creation account is true....

How old would Adam have appeared at the moment he was created?

Why wouldn't the earth and Universe be created with age as well?

Adam is dead and turned to dust. Tha created earth and universe still exist.

Originally posted by FMF
Does the "fairly slow on typing" thing mean that you're also,l in fact, not actually willing to argue the corner of any of the content of your lengthy copy pastes?

I'll discuss it but arguing is really not needed is it?

Originally posted by galveston75
I'll discuss it but arguing is really not needed is it?

"Arguing"?

The turn of phrase "to argue the corner of" means to defend something that you believe in by putting forward an argument or to defend a position or viewpoint you have taken.