Luke 24:51 Jesus ascends to heaven the 1st night after the resurrection.
Acts 1:3, 9 Jesus ascends to heaven at least 40 days after the resurrection.
Once again the bible conflicts with itself and is obviously wrong on at least one count. Of course the most likely case is that the bible is wrong on both counts because Jesus was never resurrected.
Removed
Joined
15 Sep '04
Moves
7051
16 Oct '09 23:341 edit
Originally posted by 667joe Luke 24:51 Jesus ascends to heaven the 1st night after the resurrection.
Acts 1:3, 9 Jesus ascends to heaven at least 40 days after the resurrection.
Once again the bible conflicts with itself and is obviously wrong on at least one count. Of course the most likely case is that the bible is wrong on both counts because Jesus was never resurrected.
I do not see any contradiction.
Second of all, the Book of Acts and Gospel of Luke quite likely were written by the same author. Do you really think that the author would be so stupid to make such a glaring contradiction in his own works?
Thirdly, you have already been warned by several people that the Gospels should not be read as strict history. They have a deeper spiritual and moral message. In the case of the genealogies, the authors clearly alter it to emphasise certain themes: Matthew to show Jesus' royalty, Luke to show Jesus' prophethood. You would make a very good fundamentalist.
Originally posted by Conrau K I do not see any contradiction.
Of course, since the first night after the resurrection happened 40 days afterwards... there were no nights during those 40 days.
.. or they were talking about two different resurrections?
Removed
Joined
15 Sep '04
Moves
7051
16 Oct '09 23:45
Originally posted by PsychoPawn Of course, since the first night after the resurrection happened 40 days afterwards... there were no nights during those 40 days.
.. or they were talking about two different resurrections?
No. But the Gospel of John and the Book of Acts all report Jesus ascending and descending, appearing and disappearing, on multiple occasions. Luke reports the traditional three sightings: at the tomb, with the travellers to Emmaus, and finally in front of the eleven disciples. He does not exclude any other appearances, which John includes: a second appearance before Thomas and the conversation with Peter.
Anyway, there would only be a strict contradiction if Luke said 'On the first night, Jesus ascended and never came back and there were no other appearances' -- but he doesn't, and there is also strong evidence that Luke and Acts had shared authorship.
Originally posted by Conrau K No. But the Gospel of John and the Book of Acts all report Jesus ascending and descending, appearing and disappearing, on multiple occasions. Luke reports the traditional three sightings: at the tomb, with the travellers to Emmaus, and finally in front of the eleven disciples. He does not exclude any other appearances, which John includes: a second appearan - but he doesn't, and there is also strong evidence that Luke and Acts had shared authorship.
John 20:26 and 1Cor 15:6-8 also shows that Jesus appeared at different times during those 40 days...
Originally posted by Conrau K No. But the Gospel of John and the Book of Acts all report Jesus ascending and descending, appearing and disappearing, on multiple occasions. Luke reports the traditional three sightings: at the tomb, with the travellers to Emmaus, and finally in front of the eleven disciples. He does not exclude any other appearances, which John includes: a second appearan ...[text shortened]... - but he doesn't, and there is also strong evidence that Luke and Acts had shared authorship.
your are fighting a battle not only against ignorance Conrad, but against wilful negligence on the part of those who post these allegations, for anyone can google 'bibble contradiction', yet it is plainly obvious, the accusers have not the slightest inclination of what they are referring to, otherwise, they would not post such thinly veiled lies.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie your are fighting a battle not only against ignorance Conrad, but against wilful negligence on the part of those who post these allegations, for anyone can google 'bibble contradiction', yet it is plainly obvious, the accusers have not the slightest inclination of what they are referring to, otherwise, they would not post such thinly veiled lies.
It would seem that one should do a little research first before one speaks. It seems that 667joe does not.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie your are fighting a battle not only against ignorance Conrad, but against wilful negligence on the part of those who post these allegations, for anyone can google 'bibble contradiction', yet it is plainly obvious, the accusers have not the slightest inclination of what they are referring to, otherwise, they would not post such thinly veiled lies.
If anyone does Google for "bible contradiction," they will be presented with 227,000 results.
If anyone does a Google search for "Physicians' Desk Reference contradiction," they will be presented with only 5,690 results.
How do you reconcile these facts with your position that finding contradictions in the Bible is merely a result of ignorance and negligence? Would you contend that people are generally more diligent and well-informed about pharmaceuticals than they are about the Bible?
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles If anyone does Google for "bible contradiction," they will be presented with 227,000 results.
If anyone does a Google search for "Physicians' Desk Reference contradiction," they will be presented with only 5,690 results.
How do you reconcile these facts with your position that finding contradictions in the Bible is merely a result of ignorance and negligence?
i think that it is self evident Doc, considering the efforts so far, of which this is the third attempt. the allegation has been made, but it is so devoid of biblical understanding as to be termed ignorant, for it takes no account of what is actually recorded, as Conrad and Galveston have clearly shown. also there is a plethora of websites as you yourself have stated, dedicated to this kind of thing, one cannot say, that it takes any degree of original thought, to find one and post its allegations, can one? and yes you would be amazed what people know about pharmaceuticals 🙂
Removed
Joined
15 Sep '04
Moves
7051
17 Oct '09 00:36
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles If anyone does Google for "bible contradiction," they will be presented with 227,000 results.
If anyone does a Google search for "Physicians' Desk Reference contradiction," they will be presented with only 5,690 results.
How do you reconcile these facts with your position that finding contradictions in the Bible is merely a result of ignorance ...[text shortened]... erally more diligent and well-informed about pharmaceuticals than they are about the Bible?
The majority of these supposed contradictions are unimportant. I doubt there are many Christians in the world thinking 'Oh no, did Jesus ascend after one day or forty days? How can I possibly lead a moral life in accordance with the Gospels without knowing the precise number of days?' If there really are contradictions between the genealogies or the resurrection narratives, they are pretty much peripheral.
And, besides, a Christian can always contend that these contradictions are only superficial. '40' is a significant number: the Hebrews spent 40 years in the desert and Jesus spends 40 days being tempted. So a Christian can respond to this supposed contradiction by saying that the 40 shoulds be considered symbolic as it has a particular religious meaning. But some atheists, like 667Joe, however, are rarely interested in real Christian exegesis. They act like fundamentalists arguing only for a literal interpretation.
Originally posted by Conrau K The majority of these supposed contradictions are unimportant. I doubt there are many Christians in the world thinking 'Oh no, did Jesus ascend after one day or forty days? How can I possibly lead a moral life in accordance with the Gospels without knowing the precise number of days?' If there really are contradictions between the genealogies or the resurre ...[text shortened]... Christian exegesis. They act like fundamentalists arguing only for a literal interpretation.
Luke 24:45 shows that not all can understand what they read or think they know. Only by God's help do ones get the correct understanding of the scriptures. And it's obvious that some on this forum don't get it...
Originally posted by galveston75 It would seem that one should do a little research first before one speaks. It seems that 667joe does not.
I am confident of my research. My whole purpose is to show the bible is full of errors and contradictions and can not be taken as literal truth as the word of god. I have to remind myself that the defenders of the bible believe in the virgin birth, resurrection, faith healing, walking on water, flying of to heaven, devils, ghosts, and all sorts of other nonsense. Their make believe world has too many barriers for logic and critical thinking to penetrate. Facts mean nothing to them.
Originally posted by 667joe Luke 24:51 Jesus ascends to heaven the 1st night after the resurrection.
Acts 1:3, 9 Jesus ascends to heaven at least 40 days after the resurrection.
Once again the bible conflicts with itself and is obviously wrong on at least one count. Of course the most likely case is that the bible is wrong on both counts because Jesus was never resurrected.
When are you going to give it up Joe?
You've been proven wrong 100% of the time after each thread you start trying to find contradictions and errors.
People have been trying to do that for as long as the Bible has been around and no one has succeeded yet. Nor will they ever.
Originally posted by 667joe I am confident of my research. My whole purpose is to show the bible is full of errors and contradictions and can not be taken as literal truth as the word of god. I have to remind myself that the defenders of the bible believe in the virgin birth, resurrection, faith healing, walking on water, flying of to heaven, devils, ghosts, and all sorts of other ...[text shortened]... has too many barriers for logic and critical thinking to penetrate. Facts mean nothing to them.
There aren't any facts Joe. 🙄
Tell you what I'll do for you. You find your best error/contradiction, and if you'll pay attention, I'll show you where your wrong. That way you can give up your quest and spend your time in pursuit of more meaningful things.
Originally posted by 667joe I am confident of my research. My whole purpose is to show the bible is full of errors and contradictions and can not be taken as literal truth as the word of god. I have to remind myself that the defenders of the bible believe in the virgin birth, resurrection, faith healing, walking on water, flying of to heaven, devils, ghosts, and all sorts of other ...[text shortened]... has too many barriers for logic and critical thinking to penetrate. Facts mean nothing to them.
The Bible Goofs Again!
16 Oct '09 22:21
Back to Top