What is a Christian?

[Dan.]

It's not a biased source. If you can find me a christian website that purposely lists contradictions in the bible then by all means go for it.

My point was with that analogy which you so gracefully dodged is that god is all powerful. He's not human. He can do anything. Or he's supposed to be able to.

So then if we are to assume he can do anything, he should be able to be around sin, in my above analogy god could just cure the sick person, or he could stand in the room and be perfectly fine.

However his excuse for the punishment of eternal hell is that he can't be around sin. Ergo he either can't do everything, or he simply doesn't love everyone and therefore isn't omni-benevolent. (if you of course believe he exists) However even if he couldn't be around sin, if he loved everyone couldn't he simply create a place for them to go that isn't eternal torment? I mean if I love someone, I'm not going to shoot them in the face if they don't love me back (unless of course I'm the psycho stalkerish type but thats another thing entirely)

I'm not even going to bother replying because A, I'm tired, and B, I'm so excited cause I just found out my school is closed tomorrow! YYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY

 

[Flame]

If you don't know how to read the Bible in the first place there are going to be a lot of "contradictions." These atheist sights are designed by people who probally hate me, hate my religion, and hate anything that has to do with God b/c they are supposedly "free thinkers". Just my opinion though. Sheo if you want I can go through that list of atheistic dogma and take it on one-by-one over the summer. I've already done that with friends b4, and I have some answers for you via pm.

GR1M I love how open-minded you are towards Christians. It just makes me feel tidilated inside about how much you actually know about that Christian forum of mine. Yes of course, you're the genius and know everything so obviously you'd know about all the comings and goings of one of my four forums wouldn't you? :rolleyes: And people call Christians judgmental hah!

 

[Green Ranger]

GR1M I love how open-minded you are towards Christians. It just makes me feel tidilated inside about how much you actually know about that Christian forum of mine. Yes of course, you're the genius and know everything so obviously you'd know about all the comings and goings of one of my four forums wouldn't you? :rolleyes: And people call Christians judgmental hah!

Um...
























































...wat?

 

[Flame]

Key word in bold. I'm sure they crucify each other when noone's looking.

Just for reiteration purposes I'll tell you again. That statement was one of the most obnoxious, and arrogant statements that I have EVER heard about Christians in general. If you ever heard me saying any thing like that about YOUR beliefs people in this forum would bombard me, I guarantee it.

I've never heard anyone say anything so revolting, and offensive in a long time.

 

[Green Ranger]

Just for reiteration purposes I'll tell you again. That statement was one of the most obnoxious, and arrogant statements that I have EVER heard about Christians in general. If you ever heard me saying any thing like that about YOUR beliefs people in this forum would bombard me, I guarantee it.

I've never heard anyone say anything so revolting, and offensive in a long time.

Honestly if that's the most offensive thing you've read on this forum, you're not looking hard enough.

Fact of the matter is the hand of christianity has a tendancy of stabbing it's own fingers.

 

[Flame]

How so? Oh btw it was the most offensive statement I've read in a long time b/c it cattegorized all Christians as cruel, spiteful, malicious, and deceitful people, in one smooth strike. How many "Christians" have you actually known?

Christians can and have collaborated peacefully with society for hundreds of years. That statement was truly judgemental, and revolting imo. But then again I'm one of those ignorant, stoopid, Christians who ends up stabbing my own fingers aren't I?

Don't forget I'm close-minded too, you might want to add that to your list of the sins Christians have committed on top of crucifying each other.

 

[JM76]

However his excuse for the punishment of eternal hell is that he can't be around sin. Ergo he either can't do everything, or he simply doesn't love everyone and therefore isn't omni-benevolent. (if you of course believe he exists) However even if he couldn't be around sin, if he loved everyone couldn't he simply create a place for them to go that isn't eternal torment? I mean if I love someone, I'm not going to shoot them in the face if they don't love me back (unless of course I'm the psycho stalkerish type but thats another thing entirely)

The reason he can't be around sin is not a "God problem", it's an "us problem". If God is perfect and holy, then it is impossible for an imperfect and unholy being to be in his presence.

That is why, from a Christian perspective, Jesus died on the cross, so God could be known personally and we could eventually dwell in Heaven with him.

 

[Green Ranger]

How so? Oh btw it was the most offensive statement I've read in a long time b/c it cattegorized all Christians as cruel, spiteful, malicious, and deceitful people, in one smooth strike. How many "Christians" have you actually known?

Let's see, there's about 9/10th's of my close and extended social circle actively participate in a christian religion, going to church etc. My entire extended family is christian, my sister is a passionate christian, i used to go to church when I was younger and still talk to some people from church...

Christians can and have collaborated peacefully with society for hundreds of years. That statement was truly judgemental, and revolting imo. But then again I'm one of those ignorant, stoopid, Christians who ends up stabbing my own fingers aren't I?

I was referring to the fact that the differing christian sects undermine each other. I can understand if you missed that, but that was the point I was trying to convey.

Don't forget I'm close-minded too, you might want to add that to your list of the sins Christians have committed on top of crucifying each other.

Actually you're proving an inability to debate level-headed. If you're just going to rip into me I suggest leaving the current affairs area for a bit, or just logging off. Debate rules apply.

 

[Flame]

Let's see, there's about 9/10th's of my close and extended social circle actively participate in a christian religion, going to church etc. My entire extended family is christian, my sister is a passionate christian, i used to go to church when I was younger and still talk to some people from church...



I was referring to the fact that the differing christian sects undermine each other. I can understand if you missed that, but that was the point I was trying to convey.



Actually you're proving an inability to debate level-headed. If you're just going to rip into me I suggest leaving the current affairs area for a bit, or just logging off. Debate rules apply.

Just cause you "participate" in "the Christian religion" doesn't make you a Christian. Some people just like to feel religious and emotional.

2) Why didn't you come out and say it??!! :confused:

3) I have not attacked you once. I have ripped into your comment. Unlike many other members of this board who get away with mocking people like me and Niner, I have not insulted you once! I called your comment obscene and obnoxious. Is that "breaching" site rules now? Am I not allowed to voice MY OPINION?

Was that statement you said "level-headed?" I think I see a double-standard here. You accused Christianity of "stabbing itself in the hand" so to speak, and I was just giving you more sins to add onto it. Perhaps it was an unessasarry (think I spelled that wrong grrr) comment, but then again I thought yours was too. Just my opin though.

 

[JM76]

Just cause you "participate" in "the Christian religion" doesn't make you a Christian. Some people just like to feel religious and emotional.

Just because you're in a garage doesn't mean you're a car, as my old religion teacher liked to say.

 

[Jaqen H'ghar]

If you don't know how to read the Bible in the first place there are going to be a lot of "contradictions." These atheist sights are designed by people who probally hate me, hate my religion, and hate anything that has to do with God b/c they are supposedly "free thinkers". Just my opinion though. Sheo if you want I can go through that list of atheistic dogma and take it on one-by-one over the summer. I've already done that with friends b4, and I have some answers for you via pm.

We don't really have any dogma *shrug* We just believe in one lesser god than you do. Thats all it takes to be an atheist, to not believe in any gods. Short of that you can be a buddhist, taoist, shaman, new age, scientist, anything really. As long as you don't believe in god. I've met a guy who believed in spirits and things like astral travel and karma, but he didn't believe in god.

More than likely the person who wrote that article doesn't hate you, or your family, or what you believe in. He just simply disagrees with it and is listing his reasons why, one of which is the severe amount of contradiction within the bible. I don't hate you, I find your religion a bit funny and at times annoying, but there are things to be learned from it that have value. I certainly don't hate something I don't believe in (god). So there goes that generalization that atheists hate you and the idea that your the victim.

I do hear that alot though, that you have to "read the bible right" it tends to be the defense for anyone when faced with the fact that the bible really does contradict yourself when you look at it without trying to find some way to fit it inside a nice neat box.

Theres nothing wrong with that to me though, like I said the bibles got some good ideas. That doesn't make it perfect though.

The reason he can't be around sin is not a "God problem", it's an "us problem". If God is perfect and holy, then it is impossible for an imperfect and unholy being to be in his presence.

That is why, from a Christian perspective, Jesus died on the cross, so God could be known personally and we could eventually dwell in Heaven with him.

Again, gods perfect, he should be able to be around us even if we're sinful and not cause us any problems, he can do anything right?

 

[Green Ranger]

Work in 44 degree heat (that's celsius @you yanks) isn't fun, and it's the reason I haven't responded sooner. Here we go...

Just cause you "participate" in "the Christian religion" doesn't make you a Christian. Some people just like to feel religious and emotional.

You're commenting outside of stuff you know, so i'll forgive you. But I can assure you they are devout christians of whatever sect they personally are a part of. I'm probably the least religious person I know in real life, except for one atheist who annoyed the shit out of me in high school.

2) Why didn't you come out and say it??!! :confused:

Because i was doing roughly fifteen things at the time. Forgive me if I wasn't paying 100% attention to what I was posting.

3) I have not attacked you once.

Yes of course, you're the genius and know everything so obviously you'd know about all the comings and goings of one of my four forums wouldn't you? :rolleyes: And people call Christians judgmental hah!

Hm.

Was that statement you said "level-headed?" I think I see a double-standard here. You accused Christianity of "stabbing itself in the hand" so to speak, and I was just giving you more sins to add onto it. Perhaps it was an unessasarry (think I spelled that wrong grrr) comment, but then again I thought yours was too. Just my opin though.

The way you were writing does not suggest a level head. Sometimes you need to take a step back and have a breather before responding to a post, otherwise you can come across as overly emotional, which never helps an argument.

 

[Will]

I would say a christian is someone who follows the teachings of the bible, in any form, seeing as many denominations seem to interpret things differently.

It may be accurately dated to that time, but that doesn't mean that these works were the first of their kind. What's not to say there were drafts pre-dating the documents we know of that were lost to time?

And there was that time that a large amount of the books of the bible were burned and lost.

 

[Caleb]

To Sheo: Since no one else took up the cause, I thought I'd take a closer look at your list of "inconsistencies".

MK 16:14-19 The Ascension took place (presumably from a room) while the disciples were together seated at a table, probably in or near Jerusalem.
LK 24:50-51 It took place outdoors, after supper, at Bethany (near Jerusalem).
AC 1:9-12 It took place outdoors, after 40+ days, at Mt. Olivet.
MT 28:16-20 No mention is made of an ascension, but if it took place at all, it must have been from a mountain in Galilee since MT ends there.)

Mark 16:9-20 does not appear in any of the oldest and most reliable manuscripts. Most theologians agree that it was not authored by Mark, and therefore not properly considered part of the Gospel. Bethany is on the Mount of Olives. Just because Matthew ends in Galilee it doesn't mean that is where the ascension took place. Matthew is not an exhaustive historical account.

LK 1:15 John the Baptist had the Holy Spirit from before his birth or the birth of Jesus.
LK 1:41 Elizabeth had it long before Jesus went away.
LK 1:67 So did Zechariah.
LK 2:25 So did Simeon.
LK 11:13 It is obtained by prayer (presumably at any time).
JN 7:39, JN 16:7, AC 1:3-5 The Holy Spirit cannot come into the world until after Jesus has departed.

Firstly, the verses in Luke 1-2 refer to a compulsion of the Holy Spirit, being “controlled” or “impelled” by the Holy Spirit as He (the Holy Spirit is a distinct member of the trinity, not an “It”) carries out the will of God; this is born up by the original language.

Secondly, nowhere did Christ indicate that the Holy Spirit was obtainable by pray, merely that God would generously provide for His children if they asked – it should also be noted that asking to receive the Holy Spirit is used elsewhere are a reference to conversion.

Thus, these passages maintain consistency.

LK 8:12 The Devil causes unbelief.
MK 4:11-12 Jesus is responsible for unbelief in at least some cases.
2TH 2:11-12 God is ultimately responsible for unbelief in at least some cases.

The first is true. The second makes no mention of unbelief other than stating that some will hear parables and yet not understand them – it refers to those who are willfully ignorant of Christ’s teaching, not simple misunderstand. The third, honestly, I don’t see how 2 Timothy 2:11-12 can be construed to represent God’s responsibility in unbelief, so, until you explain your reasoning, I’m just going to flat out reject it.

LK 14:26 No one can be a disciple of Jesus unless he hates his parents, wife, children, brothers and sisters.
1JN 3:15 Whoever hates his brother is a murderer.
1JN 4:20 If anyone claims to love God but hates his brother, he is a liar.

I’ve been over this one with you before. Given the context of Luke 15: 28: “For which one of you, when he wants to build a tower, does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if he has enough to complete it?” It is clear that Christ is not referring to a literal hatred, but a consideration of what His discipleship costs. A man must be willing to put Christ ahead of his mother and father, brothers and sisters, children, “yes, even his own life” (26b), or else he cannot be Christ’s true disciple. It refers to a love of Christ that, by comparison, makes love of others seem insignificant.

LK 18:9-14 Do not boast of your virtue.
RO 11:20, 1PE 5:5 Do not be proud.
RO 15:17, 2CO 1:12, HE 3:6, 2CO 2:14, 5:12, 11:17 Paul boasts of his faith and says that one should be proud of it.

When Christ instructs the Pharisees not to boast in their virtue, he is clearly referring to the external “religiosity” and piety that they historically loved to lord over the common man. Paul, on the other hand, is boasting in his faith because it is a gift from God, not a work of human hands (Eph 2: 8-9). I’m not going to list each verse there, but I know specifically in Romans 15, Paul states that he will only boast in what Christ has accomplished through him, not his own accomplishments; Paul is giving glory to God, first and foremost, and is boasting ABOUT Christ.

LK 22:3-23 Satan entered Judas before the supper.
JN 13:27 It was during the supper.

Satan entered Judas on two separate occasions. Once when he arranged the blood-price, before Passover, and then during the supper when he actually betrayed Christ.

LK 23:43 Jesus promises one of those crucified with him that they will be together, that very day, in Paradise.
JN 20:17, AC 1:3 Jesus was not raised until the third day and did not ascend until at least forty days later.

The souls of those crucified with Christ as well as Christ’s spirit immediately ascended into heaven upon death.

LK 23:55-56 The women followed Joseph to the tomb, saw how the body had been laid, then went to prepare spices with which to anoint the body.
JN 19:39-40 Joseph brought spices with him (75 or a 100 lbs.) and annointed the body (as the women should have noticed).

Joseph of Aremethea secretly took the body of Christ, buried him in a family tomb, and anointed him per the Jewish traditions as he did so. The women were not aware of Joseph’s involvement and had no idea of his relationship with Christ and thus had no way of knowing the body had already been anointed.

JN 1:1, 10:30 Jesus and God are one.
JN 14:28 God is greater than Jesus.

Christ is referring to his current status as incarnate in human flesh. At the present time, his glory was indeed less than that of the fathers, but the full weight of Christ’s authority was returned upon his resurrection (Matt 28:18)

JN 1:1 Jesus was God incarnate.
AC 2:22 Jesus was a man approved by God.

The correct work is “attested” not approved and the verse is the introduction to Peter’s sermon to the Jews of Jerusalem which culminates in this statement. “Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him (Jesus) both Lord and Christ - this Jesus whom you crucified” (Acts 2:36).

JN 3:17, 8:15, 12:47 Jesus does not judge.
JN 5:22, 5:27-30, 9:39, AC 10:42, 2CO 5:10 Jesus does judge.

Christ was not born of a virgin or come to Earth as man to judge, but to save. However, at his second-coming, He WILL judge, having revealed the message of His salvation to all nations.

JN 5:22 God does not judge.
RO 2:2-5, 3:19, 2TH 1:5, 1PE 1:17 God does judge.

Christ is referring in John 5:22 to the Last Judgment, also known as the Judgment of Souls, at the end of time. The other passages refer not to a court ruling, but to a discriminatory judgment – as in, God does not judge people based on merit.

JN 5:24 Believers do not come into judgement.
MT 12:36, RO 5:18, 2CO 5:10, HE 9:27, 1PE 1:17, JU 1:14-15, RE 20:12-13 All persons (including believers) come into judgement.

John 5:24 is CLEARLY refers to believers/disciples not receiving ETERNAL judgment, whereas the other passages either refer to either unbelievers receiving eternal judgment, OR to the judgment of heavenly rewards, the Crown or Bema Judgment, that all Christians will freely partake in AFTER sin has been destroyed.

JN 5:31 Jesus says that if he bears witness to himself, his testimony is not true.
JN 8:14 Jesus says that even if he bears witness to himself, his testimony is true.

Christ says in John 5:31 that if He testifies to Himself alone His testimony is not true – a reference to John the Baptist (33-35) as the Forerunner who’s distinct role WAS to testify to the coming Messiah. 8:14 is based on Christ’s response to the Pharisees. He is explaining to them the prophecies of Messiah/Christ, and they (the Pharisees) are testifying by themselves he says that they do not understand these prophecies, whereas Jesus is testifying to himself and DOES understand the prophecies.

JN 5:38-47 Men have a choice as to whether or not to receive Jesus.
JN 6:44 No one can come to Jesus unless he is drawn by the Father.

I’m not going to explain the entire doctrine of Election and Justification, suffice it to say, the two are not mutually exclusive: we are enabled by God to receive Christ, it is an act of volition that is impossible without God’s intervention.

JN 7:38 Jesus quotes a statement that he says appears in scripture (i.e., the OT).
(No such statement is found in the OT.)

Christ is paraphrasing Ezekial 47: 1-9, Zecheriah 13:1 and numerous texts in Isaiah in reference to “living water.”

JN 10:27-29 None of Jesus' followers will be lost.
1TI 4:1 Some of them will be lost.

The answer to both of these questions is found in 1 John 2:19: “They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they are all not of us.” The Bible makes clear distinction between “true believers” and “professing” or “nominal” believers.

JN 12:31 The Devil is the ruler (or "prince") of this world.
1CO 10:26, RE 1:5 Jesus is the ruler of kings--the earth is his.

The Earth is presently the dominion of Satan, a situation which will be rectified with Christ’s triumphal return. The Universe, however, belongs to God by means of creation.

JN 12:32 Jesus implies that all persons will be saved.
1TI 2:3-4, 2PE 3:9 God wants all to be saved.
JN 12:40, AC 2:21, 2:39, RO 9:27, 10:13 Some will not be saved.
RE 14:1-4 Heaven will be inhabited by 144,000 virgin men (only?).

Jesus does not imply that all will be saved. Nowhere does John 12:32 suggest salvation; Christ is referring to His crucifixion as the defining moment of both redemptive and human history. The second-and third are not contradictory: God doesn’t wish hell on anyone, but He is just and therefore must rule justly. That final one un-contextual almost to the point of inanity. The 144,000 are messengers of Christ specifically for the time of Christ’s return. Nowhere does it indicate that they are the only inhabitants of heaven.

JN 13:36 Peter asks Jesus where he is going.
JN 14:5 Thomas does the same.
JN 16:5 Jesus says that none of them have asked him where he is going.

They HAD asked in John 13/14, but by the time 16 rolled around, the disciples were to stricken with concern over their own well being (6) that it apparently was no longer their chief concern.

JN 17:12 Jesus has lost none of his disciples other than Judas.
JN 18:9 Jesus has lost none, period.

Christ didn’t lose “one of his own” because Judas was never “one of his own”.

JN 17:12 Mentions a "son of perdition" as appearing in scripture (meaning the OT).
(Note: There is no "son of perdition" mentioned in the OT.)

John 17:12b says: “ ‘And I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that Scripture would be fulfilled.’ ” Nowhere does Christ say, “according to the scriptures, THE SON OF PERDITION WILL BE LOST”, he simply gives Judas the title “son of perdition” (appearing nowhere in the Old Testament) and then makes a reference to the prophecy of Judas’s betrayal that is found in the Old Testament (Psalm 41:9, 109: 8.)

JN 18:37 Jesus came into the world to bear witness to the truth.
RO 1:18-20 The truth has always been evident.

The truth that is evident in Romans 1, that is, the truth of man made in the image of God and thus man being accountable to his creator is not a truth which can produce salvation. Your conscience alone and the creation around you, both aspects of God’s truth, are enough to convict, but not acquit. Christ came into the world to bear witness to the truth of God’s grace, and He did so effectively.

JN 20:9 Jesus quotes a statement that he says appears in scripture (meaning the OT). (No such statement is found in the OT.)

No one quotes anything in John 20:9, it’s narrative: “For as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that He must rise again from the dead.” If you’re talking about “did not understand the Scripture”, it’s referring to the prophecy of Christ’s resurrection in general which is found in the OT (Psalm 16:10).

JN 20:22 In his first resurrection appearance before the assembled disciples, Jesus gives them the Holy Spirit.
AC 1:3-5, AC 2:1-4 The Holy Spirit was received much later (on Pentecost.)

Christ did NOT give them the Holy Spirit, He breathed on them and then told them to receive the Holy Spirit. This verse is followed by an instruction from Christ to stay in Jerusalem until the Holy Spirit came to them.

JN 21:25 The world probably could not contain the books if all that Jesus did were to be recorded.
AC 1:1 The author of Acts has already written about all that Jesus began to do.

The author of Acts is Luke who is also the author of the Gospel of Luke and the things “written about all Jesus began to do” is a reference to the Gospel of Luke. The point is this: the Gospels are not exhaustive. They do not contain every word spoken between Christ and disciples or even every event that takes place. This is the reason why there are different events in several of the Gospels, as the different writers portray different themes.

AC 5:19, 12:6-11 The disciples take part in a jailbreak made possible by an angel.
AC 5:40-42 The disciples disobey the Council and continue to teach and preach Jesus.
RO 13:1-4, 1PE 2:13-15 Obey the laws of men (i.e., government). It is the will of God.

Obey the laws of man insofar as they do not contradict God’s law.

AC 5:29 Obey God, not men.
RO 13:1-4, 1PE 2:13-15 Obey the laws of men (i.e., government). It is the will of God.

See above.

AC 9:7 Those present at Paul's conversion heard the voice but saw no one.
AC 22:9 They saw a light but did not hear a voice.

I believe the word you’re looking for in Acts 22: 9 is “understood”. Only Paul understood the voice.

AC 9:7 Those present at Paul's conversion stood.
AC 26:14 They fell to the ground.

In the Greek, “Stood Speechless” literally means “were in awe”. I will add this caveat, my understanding of the original language is basic, I don’t think , (his'-tay-me) has a physical connotation, but I can’t be certain.

AC 9:19-28 Shortly after his conversion, Paul went to Damascus, then Jerusalem where he was introduced to the Apostles by Barnabas, and there spent some time with them (going in and out among them).
GA 1:15-20 He made the trip three years later, then saw only Peter and James.

Paul made a number of trips to Jerusalem during his ministry. To be specific, Acts 9 refers to his first missionary journey, and Galatians 1 refers to his second.

AC 9:23 The governor attempted to seize Paul.
2CO 11:32 It was the Jews who tried to seize Paul.

Acts 9:23 says: “When many days had elapsed, the Jews plotted together to do away with him”. It’s 2 Corinthians where “In Damascas the ethnarch under Aretas the king was guarding the city…” (2 Cor 11: 32). In any case, the two are by no means mutually exclusive, maybe the ethnarch was Jewish, maybe the Jewish community convinced the king that Paul was dangerous (as they had done on a number of occasions), maybe in Acts Luke decided that the mention of the Jews was sufficient information.

AC 10:34, RO 2:11 God shows no partiality. He treats all alike.
RO 9:11-13 God hated Esau and loved Jacob even before their birth.

Firstly, the reference of Esau and Jacob are actually references to the nations of Esau and Jacob – Edom and Israel respectively. Furthermore, God shows no “partiality” as Paul goes on to explain in Romans 9: 14-15: “What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For he says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’ ” We are all equally guilty of breaking God’s laws. His lack of partiality refers to his decision to chose ANYONE, but not EVERYONE, for redemption – the question, as always, should not be “why won’t God save everybody” but rather “why should a just God save ANYBODY?”.

AC 10:34, RO 2:11 God shows no partiality. He treats all alike.
RO 9:18 God has mercy on whoever he chooses, etc.

See above.

AC 16:6 The Holy Spirit forbids preaching in Asia.
AC 19:8-10 Paul preaches in Asia anyway.

The Holy Spirit did not lay an eternal ban on preaching in Asia, He just forbade Paul from teaching there in that instance. The passage in Acts 19: 8-10 takes place much later. Furthermore, Paul probably (difficult to be conclusive here) never left Ephesus (Acts 19: 9-10) – the text does not specifically indicate WHO preached in Asia, merely that those in Asia heard the word. The most likely circumstance is that Paul’s converts in Ephesus, an important trade-city straddling a major road into Turkey, took the Gospel back with them into Asia Minor.

AC 20:35 Quotes Jesus as having said: "It is more blessed to give than to receive." (No such statement of Jesus is found elsewhere in the Bible.)

The Bible does not record everything that Jesus said.

RO 2:12 All who have sinned without the law will perish without the law.
RO 4:15 Where there is no law there is no transgression (sin).

This takes a more intimate understanding of Old Testament Law and New Testament distinctions. Under the Old Covenent of Mosas, the Israelites were required to perform certain rituals of the Law, IE: circumcision, Sabbath keeping, laws of cleanliness etc. That is the law to which Paul is referring in Romans 4. He is, in effect, saying, “those Israelites in Old Testament time were judged according to the Mosaic laws, but those of us who don’t have that law (gentiles and Israelites after Christ’s ministry) aren’t transgressing if we don’t keep it.”

RO 2:13 Doers of the law will be justified.
RO 3:20, GA 3:11 They will not be justified.

In Romans 2, Paul is referring to “Doers” rather than “hearers”. That is, people who act on the message they receive, rather than those who simply receive it. He is making the distinction between true believers and “professing” believers. The key verse is Romans 3: 23-24 where Paul says, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus”. Justification is a gift, not attainable by works. However, those who HAVE BEEN justified will demonstrate their status as “true believers” by obeying the law/not sinning.

RO 2:15 The law is written on the heart. Conscience teaches right from wrong.
1JN 2:27 Anointing by Jesus teaches right from wrong.

The “anointing” that we have received from Jesus is the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit both testifies to the law of God and convicts the sinning Christian. Both statements are true.

RO 4:9 Faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness.
JA 2:21 Abraham was justified by works (which made his faith perfect).

Just look back a verse before, James 2: 20 says: “But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is dead?” If Abraham had refused God’s demand that he take his son to the altar to sacrifice him before God, where would his faith in God have been? As it was, Abraham did not refuse, and ultimately God kept him from sacrificing Isaac. Therefore, Abraham’s faith was justified, or proved, by his works.

RO 10:11 (An alleged OT quote; no such statement in the OT.)

The quote is found in Isaiah 48: 23.

RO 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything that might cause your brother to stumble or be offended.
CN 2:16 Let no one pass judgement on you in matters of food and drink.

Lets say you’re a Christian who likes a glass of wine every now and again. That’s fine, I believe that drinking is a Christian liberty, so long as it is in moderation. Now let’s say you invite a young believer over for Christmas who just happens to be a recovering alcoholic. You gonna’ start poppin’ corks before or after the prayer?

1CO 7:8-9 Widows should not marry (although it is better to marry than burn).
1TI 5:14 Young widows should marry, bear children, rule the household, etc.

The first refers to older widows, past childbearing age, who could devote themselves more fully to the Church, the second refers to widows who lost their husbands at a very young age – who presumably married to keep themselves from immorality in the first place, exactly what Paul warns against in 1 Cor 7.

1CO 8:4 There is only one God.
2CO 4:4 Satan is God of this world (therefore there are at least two gods).

This one is just stupid. There is only one true God. Satan is a (lower case g) god of this world, an object of worship who is not deserving of any of the praise he receives.

1CO 10:33 Paul says that he tries to please men (so they might be saved).
GA 1:10 Paul says he would not be a servant of Christ if he tried to please men.

Paul does not suggest in 1 Corinthians 10 that he is seeking the praise of men, or that he is trying to “get on man’s good side”, rather, if you examine the context of 9: 19-20, 22, he says this: “ ‘For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews…To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.’ ” Galatians 1: 10 refers to someone who pleases man in order to gain accolades.

2CO 12:16 Paul says that he does use trickery.
1TH 2:3 Paul says that he does not use trickery.

The whole section in 2 Corinthians 12: 14-21 is Paul’s defense to the Corinthian church in light of a rumor that HE HAD tricked them. 16 says, “But be that as it may, I did not burden you my-self; nevertheless, crafty fellow that I am, I took you in by deceit!” He’s speaking sarcastically. The whole issue was one over payment to pastors; while Paul was in Corinth he maintained his own trade (leatherworker) and financed his own preaching. The rumor-mill suggested that Paul tricked the Corinthians into giving him monetary gifts.

GA 6:2 Bear one another's burdens.
GA 6:5 Bear your own burden.

The burden in verse 5, actually the better translated word is “load”, is not a reference to specific trials that a Christian might experience, but the over-arching burden of life. In other words, “help your brothers and sisters in the hard times, but, ultimately, each of you must bear the burden of life.”

1TH 2:2 God gave Paul the courage to continue his work.
1TH 2:17-18 Satan hindered Paul.
(Note: Who is stronger, Satan or God?)

As it turns out, God. The answer to this one is in 2 Corinthians 12: 7-9: “Because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, for this reason, to keep me from exalting myself, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me – to keep me from exalting myself! Concerning this I implored the Lord three times that it might leave me. And He has said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness.” Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me.”

1TI 1:15 Paul says that he is the foremost of sinners.
1JN 3:8-10 He who commits sin is of the Devil. Children of God do not sin.

Children of God do not sin without repentance. Also, Paul is referring to his state before salvation as a persecutor and murderer of Christians.

TI 6:20, 2TI 2:14-16, 3:1-7 Do not argue with an unbeliever.
2JN 1:10-11 Anyone who even greets an unbeliever shares his wicked work.
1PE 3:15 Always be ready to answer any man concerning your faith.

To the first, the point is do not be rancorous or combative with unbelievers as that is a poor testimony. To the second, 2 John 1 is specifically referring to false teachers who come bearing teachings about anyone other than Christ – he’s saying “don’t welcome people to the pulpit if they’re not going to teach about Christ.” To the third, that’s what I’m doing.

JA 4:5 (Quotes an alleged scripture [OT] verse not found in the OT.)

James is summarizing a basic OT teaching .

RE 8:7 All of the grass on earth is burned up, and then ...
REV 9:4 An army of locusts, which is about to be turned loose on the earth, is instructed not to harm the grass.

In Revelation 8:7, you’ll find that “all of the GREEN* grass was burned up.” *emphasis mine.

Not one of the passages on this list was taken in the correct context of even the nearby verses, it demonstrates poor scholarship, a limited understand of the arguments being used, and most importantly an attack on the consistency of the Bible that, quite simply, does not hold up to close scrutiny.