frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.


Communities




Are there contradictions in the bible?

13



Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    Post deleted
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    >Your denial of contradictions is typically you as it leaves you in a position you love as in to rabidly attack anyone who disagrees with you, watch now as my little taster drives you into your usual rage.

    It's funny you haven't bleated that I'm already in a "rage".

    >Remember also you tell everyone “Read the text as written without your spin on it“

    I only say that to spinners like you.

    >can you do so with this clear biblical contradiction? Bet you start spinning right away .......

    Lol. Your calling it a "clear" contradiction isn't spin is it?

    >Which came first: Adam or the vegetation?

    The vegetation!Genesis 1:11-27:

    And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so […] And the evening and the morning were the third day […] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them […] And the evening and the morning were the sixth day

    Adam!Genesis 2:5-9:

    And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground […] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food

    >Will you make to here without spin?

    I can make to here only with the verses you cut out added back in.

    Gen 2.1 says,

    Thus the Heavens and the Earth were finished, and all the host of them.

    Thus Chapter 2 starts with creation finished. Do you believe this to be another creation account?

    Verse 4 says, these are the generations of the Heavens and the Earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the Earth and the Heavens,

    [These are the generations of....]

    Verse 5 - every plant of the field before it was in the Earth, and [the generations of] every herb of the field, before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the Earth...

    Verse 7 - And the Lord God formed man out if the dust of the ground...

    The creation story in chapter 1 is an overview of creation. Now in chapter 2 we get the detailed creation story.

    Verse 8 - And the Lord God planted a garden ..... and there He put the man who He had formed.

    Verse 9 - And out of the ground [of that garden] made the Lord to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food...

    This is not the creation of plants, but the planting of the garden of Eden.

    So where does it say, other than in your poor reading comprehension, that Adam was created before plants?

    Is this really your best "contradiction"? Nonsense you've assumed into the story?

    And cutting the story mid-idea at chapter 2 verse 5?

    Well, now you can ignore what I just said and keep insisting I had no answer, and repost the verse till your circle-jerk is bored, or you can stupidly contend that I was in a "rage".

    What will it be?

    But nowhere in chapter 2 does it say Adam was created before plants. Chapter 2 begins with creation completed.

    The ssame creation story is retold with fine details like the location of the garden, the rivers that defined its borders, and the reason for, and the creation of Eve.

    Did you really believe you had found a "contradiction" missed for 2,000 years? Really?

  • jesusisGod777jesusisGod777 115 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    All I have to say to do is be quiet.

    Apparently, you didn't take me seriously when I said I was ignoring you.

    Jesus IS God and Lord.
    ethang5
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5

    Thats ET’s best spin , maybe get help next time from some of your Christian circle as it’s a pretty lame effort .....let me corrrect you again ......

    The two contradictory creation accounts.

    The Book of Genesis begins with two contradictory creation accounts (1:1-2:3 and 2:4-3:24). In the first, God created humans (male and female) after he finished making all of the other animals. In the second, God made one man ("Adam") and then created all of the animals in order to find a helpmeet for Adam. God brought all of the animals to Adam, but none of them appealed to him. So God made a woman from one of Adam's ribs to serve as his helpmeet. 

    Here are two of the more obvious contradictions between the two creation accounts. 


    In the first creation story, humans are created after the other animals.

    And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:25-27

    In the second story, humans were created before the other animals.

    And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. Genesis 2:18-19

    In the first creation story, the first man and woman were created simultaneously.

    So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:25-27

    In the second account, the man was created first, then the animals, then the woman from the man's rib.

    And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them.... And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.Genesis 2:18-22


    ET why not buy a bible and read what’s actually in it.....tricky stuff but there ya go 

  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    @dee

    You did exactly as I said you would.

    You did not address my reply, and immediately went to yet another so called "contradiction".

    You did not address the questions in my post either.

    You left out verses showing your claim to be nonsense. So much so that you started a verse with "... and"

    You have nothing. You are an empty anti-theist with no argument, and no logic.

    Writing in huge script will not help you. Side commentary will not help you.

    I'm still looking for that atheist that will actually debate a supposed "contradiction" to a logical conclusion.

    You ain't it dee dee
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5

    You say ......I'm still looking for that atheist that will actually debate a supposed "contradiction" to a logical conclusion

    My reply .....Why do you want to debate a “supposed” contradiction when I give you an example of a clear contradiction?

    i even left big black bold print to help you and your fellow “Christians” accept the obvious contradictions ......Maybe go off and pray on it ET?
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    I'm still looking for that atheist that will actually debate a supposed "contradiction" to a logical conclusion

    >Why do you want to debate a “supposed” contradiction when I give you an example of a clear contradiction?

    If it was a "clear" contradiction, why couldn't you address my rebuttals?

    >i even left big black bold print to help you and your fellow “Christians” accept the obvious contradictions

    You left big print because you're an posting for others.

    >......Maybe go off and pray on it ET?

    And you're too dumb to realize that Christians are not ashamed of Christianity. Your silly attempts at insult only work on people with your view of theism.

    As I said, you ain't it dee dee.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited August 2019


    You say .....

    If it was a "clear" contradiction, why couldn't you address my rebuttals?

    My reply .....Your arguments were beaten from the off I gave you the order of creation according to the Bible , second time I even gave it in bold type .....You’re welcome 

    You say ......You left big print because you're an posting for others.

    My reply .....The big bold print was just for you , the only here is you who thinks slavery is right because god approves 


    You say .......Are  you're too dumb to realize that Christians are not ashamed of Christianity.

    My reply .....They should be most decent people do not approve of those who say owning people as property is fine because god says so 

     You say .....Your silly attempts at insult only work on people with your view of theism.

    My reply .....They’re not attempts at insult ET they’re statements of fact

    You say ......As I said, you ain't it dee dee.

    My reply ......Just chalk it up to another loss for yourself ET , tell you what get your jerk circle including preacher at your local church to work a defence out if that helps? 
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    If it was a "clear" contradiction, why couldn't you address my rebuttals?

    >Your arguments were beaten from the off I gave you the order of creation according to the Bible,

    You stupidly claimed a retelling of the story from the overview was a new story. That is why you were dishonest with the verses.

    >second time I even gave it in bold type .....You’re welcome

    Your claim is not proof Cletus. At the beginning of chapter 2 it says creation is concluded, and from there only the planting of the garden of Eden is mentioned, no creation of plants.

    You left big print because you're an posting for others.

    >The big bold print was just for you,

    Both of us know better loser. Why you internet dingbats use so much bolding and caps will always be a mystery to me.

    >...the only here is you who thinks slavery is right because god approves 

    Too bad you can't debate it but have to simply assert it, on a debate website no less. If you can't debate it, I can dismiss your claims for the nonsense they are.

    You're too dumb to realize that Christians are not ashamed of Christianity.

    >They should be most decent people do not approve of those who say owning people as property is fine because god says so

    Most decent people do not substitute lies for debate. Even if you don't know how to debate, lying is still not necessary.

    Your silly attempts at insult only work on people with your view of theism.

    >They’re not attempts at insult ET they’re statements of fact

    This is a debate site. Facts are facts because they are proven, not because they come out of your pie-hole.

    As I said, you ain't it dee dee.

    >Just chalk it up to another loss for yourself ET,

    Lol. When you declare yourself "winner" its funny.

    >tell you what get your jerk circle including preacher at your local church to work a defence out if that helps?

    Why? You like dodging large groups? You make a claim, cannot address rebuts or questions put to you, and then crown yourself winner without logic or debate.

    And you actually think the Gentle Readers can't see your stupidity.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @ethang5

    Just quickly I’m sorry I called you before for believing snakes talked , I mocked a whole group when I said that. I know you’s don't believe snakes can talk , it was just one snake and a long time ago. 


    You seem obsessed with other people’s opinions as in “ gentle readers” , newsflash ET you’re the poster boy of the Christian trolls on here you know it and everyone else does.

    Your wall of insults and denials are typically you as you type of a mini novel of nonsense as a response.

    Get a Bible , start at the beginning and read it slowly get help if you wish .....BTW it mentions it’s cool to own people as property as well something else you denied was in the Bible ......
    ZeusAres42
  • ZeusAres42ZeusAres42 Emerald Premium Member 2673 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    I think if there weren't any contradictions within the Bible or about the Bible itself there wouldn't be the following types of Judaism - Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, Reconstructionist, Messianic, or Karaite Judaism and much more.

    In regards to Christianity I also think there would not be the following:
    Christianity can be taxonomically divided into five main groups: the Church of the East, Oriental Orthodoxy, Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism, and Protestantism. Protestantism includes many groups which do not share any ecclesiastical governance and have widely diverging beliefs and practices https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_denomination
    As you can see, these are all religious movements that either completely disagrees with each other or disagree with certain aspects of each other. Now, it seems very easy for a "self-proclaimed Christian" to say that discussing contradictions and/or disagreements about Christianity is no more than an attack on Christianity by Atheists. So then, it would be interesting to see what they have to say about the Jewish people who protest and claim that Jesus Christ was not the Messiah, and never rose from the dead; is this an attack by Jewish people on Christians? 

    Just because someone says they don't agree with you doesn't mean they are attacking you. As American psychiatrist and Christian Morgan Scott Peck (Author of the road less traveled) said "Share our similarities but celebrate our differences.

    Forgive my little rant at the end here but I am getting rather tired now of people who claim to be religious just because they read a few passages in a book and/or attended church on Sundays; this does not make you religious or give you the right preach it.
    Dee대왕광개토



  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    Sure there are contradictions, some humans can be contradictory individuals.
    ZeusAres42
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @TKDB

    You say .....
    Sure there are contradictions, some humans can be contradictory individuals

    My reply .....But we are talking about gods word , humans can be contradictory you as a Christian agree that god can also be contradictory .....wasn’t hard was it?
    qwerrtyPlaffelvohfen
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    >Just quickly I’m sorry I called you before for believing snakes talked, I mocked a whole group when I said that.

    I don't care what you call me or who you mock. Just use logic and be honest. If your post contains only childish insults, it's a waste of my time.

    >I know you’s don't believe snakes can talk , it was just one snake and a long time ago.

    I haven't a clue why you're now rambling about talking snakes. Can I conclude you've accepted defeat on the topic?

    >You seem obsessed with other people’s opinions as in “ gentle readers”,

    I mention that others read the thread and your conclusion is that I'm obsessed? Lol. Will that sway your choir?

    >newsflash ET you’re the poster boy of the Christian trolls on here you know it and everyone else does.

    Yet you have to tell us?

    >Your wall of insults and denials are typically you as you type of a mini novel of nonsense as a response.

    What do you call your insults? A door?

    >Get a Bible , start at the beginning and read it slowly get help if you wish .....BTW it mentions it’s cool to own people as property as well

    Then why are you afraid to debate it? Hey , claims are not facts.

    >...something else you denied was in the Bible

    Something you claim is in the bible and want us to take it on faith in your claim.

    You can't debate it, so you think repeating it enough will be a win.

    As I said, morons like you are a dime a dozen on the net. Your m.o. is tired and stale.

    The one "contradiction" you offered was rebutted, and you instantly abandoned debate and simply insisted you were right, and then started babbling about snakes.

    Beating you should not be this easy.
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    >I think if there weren't any contradictions within the Bible or about the Bible itself there wouldn't be... [ many denominations of Christianity]

    Is this thinking logical?

    Let's assume for sake of argument, that there were no contradictions in the bible, how would that change enemies of Christianity? How would that change people who see profit in asserting contradictions in the bible?

    We see that a consistent bible would not stop the claims of there being contradictions in the bible.

    If the bible had no contradictions, how would that stop people who will be confused, misled, or mistaken about what the bible says?

    On what fact is based the belief that no contradictions in the bible would guarantee unanimity?

    Is there any literary document on Earth that people do not have conflicting views about?

    The claim that, "If the bible did not have contradictions, there would be no divisions in Christianity" is an illogical claim.

    And less logical if Christianity is true, since if Christianity is true, it has real enemies, whose interest is to claim contradictions and falsehoods.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5



    You say .....I don't care what you call me or who you mock. Just use logic and be honest. If your post contains only childish insults, it's a waste of my time.


    My reply .....My post contains words from the Bible which mentioned a talking serpent and a talking donkey as well , if you think this is mocking you well it’s your gods words not mine as I don’t believe in either talking animal 



    You say .....I haven't a clue why you're now rambling about talking snakes


    My reply ....Apologies I forgot you never read the Bible 


    You say .....Can I conclude you've accepted defeat on the topic?


    My reply ....Why would you conclude that when i proved my claims with my very first posting?



    You say ......I mention that others read the thread and your conclusion is that I'm obsessed? Lol. Will that sway your choir?


    My reply .....I don’t believe anyone reads your rants and when they do you know as they also point out your fallacies 



    You say ......Hey , claims are not facts.


    My reply .....Yours are not I agree mine certainly are 


    You say ....Something you claim is in the bible and want us to take it on faith in your claim.


    My reply ....I keep forgetting you’ve never read the Bible 


    You say ......You can't debate it, so you think repeating it enough will be a win.


    My reply .....Yet I thrash you every time Doofus 


    You say ......As I said, morons like you are a dime a dozen on the net. Your m.o. is tired and stale.


    My reply .....Says the dummy who believed Jesus walked in water because a book of fairy stories says so .......comedy gold  


    You say .......The one "contradiction" you offered was rebutted, and you instantly abandoned debate and simply insisted you were right, and then started babbling about snakes.


    My reply .....Rebutted Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha .......You copy and paste a pile of Christian apologetic bull that only a village would believe , your village it appears is full to the brim 


    You say ......Beating you should not be this easy.


    My reply .....Your fantasies demonstrates how out of touch with reality you are 

  • I think if there weren't any contradictions within the Bible or about the Bible itself there wouldn't be the following types of Judaism - Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, Reconstructionist, Messianic, or Karaite Judaism and much more.

    In regards to Christianity I also think there would not be the following:
    Christianity can be taxonomically divided into five main groups: the Church of the East, Oriental Orthodoxy, Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism, and Protestantism. Protestantism includes many groups which do not share any ecclesiastical governance and have widely diverging beliefs and practices https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_denomination

    Actually, I am not sure that it does logically follow that any supposed contradictions in the bible lead to the different sects of Judaism and Christianity.

    However, what I am more sure about what is logical is to say that there are contradictory views that revolve around the Bible, and hence a reasonable explanation for the different sects of the one or more of the monotheistic religions.



  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  

    I don't care what you call me or who you mock. Just use logic and be honest. If your post contains only childish insults, it's a waste of my time.

    >My post contains words from the Bible which mentioned a talking serpent and a talking donkey as well , if you think this is mocking you well it’s your gods words not mine as I don’t believe in either talking animal

    I just told you I don't care who you mock. All I require from you is logic and honesty.

    I haven't a clue why you're now rambling about talking snakes

    >Apologies I forgot you never read the Bible 

    Threads have topics . Don't just start blathering on a different topic when your point has been crushed.

    Can I conclude you've accepted defeat on the topic?

    >Why would you conclude that when i proved my claims with my very first posting?

    Because simply posting a verse is not proving a claim. You posted nothing about talking snakes in your first post.

    You I mention that others read the thread and your conclusion is that I'm obsessed? Lol. Will that sway your choir?

    >I don’t believe anyone reads your rants and when they do you know as they also point out your fallacies 

    Lol. All beside the point. You offered your one best "contradiction". You deceitfully edited a verse to aid your lie. I pointed out that there was no additional account of creation or another creating of plants. 

    You began blathering about talking snakes.

    Hey , claims are not facts.

    >Yours are not I agree mine certainly are 

    OK .

    You simply claim something is in the bible and want us to take blind faith in your claim.

    >I keep forgetting you’ve never read the Bible 

    Must be why you tried to edit verses in Genesis chapter 2. Didn't work did it?

    You can't debate it, so you think repeating it enough will be a win.

    >Yet I thrash you every time Doofus 

    You wouldn't need to lie, edit scripture, and babble about snakes if you did loser. And you would be able to answer questions instead of running.

    As I said, morons like you are a dime a dozen on the net. Your m.o. is tired and stale.

    >Says the dummy who believed Jesus walked in water because a book of fairy stories says so .......comedy gold  

    My beliefs do not change your tired and stale troll m.o.

    The one "contradiction" you offered was rebutted, and you instantly abandoned debate and simply insisted you were right, and then started babbling about snakes.

    >Rebutted Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha .......You copy and paste a pile of Christian apologetic bull that only a village would believe , your village it appears is full to the brim 

    You could not address it. This is a debate site. You dishonestly edited verse 2 of chapter 2. Address that.

    Chapter 2 does not give a new account of creation. Address that.

    There is no second account of the creation of plants. Address that.

    Stupidity will only take you so far.

    Beating you should not be this easy.

    >You fantasies demonstrates how out of touch with reality you are 

    I keep trying to get you to address our topic, and you keep babbling about anything but.

    Where oh where is the atheist who can debate one "contradiction" to a logical end without having to run to talking snakes or she-bears?

    You ain't it dee dee.

  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @ZeusAres42

    >Actually, I am not sure that it does logically follow that any supposed contradictions in the bible lead to the different sects of Judaism and Christianity.

    Thank you. If only your fellow atheists could think as clearly.

    >However, what I am more sure about what is logical is to say that there are contradictory views that revolve around the Bible, and hence a reasonable explanation for the different sects of the one or more of the monotheistic religions.

    I agree. And this is true for most other documents, religious or otherwise.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @ethang5

    Dear oh dear another wall of text which is merely you ranting , raging and firing off insults. Biblical scholars agree the two accounts are indeed contradictory but also complimentary that you do not even know this comes as no surprise as most American Christians are sadly lacking even basic knowledge of the Bible and the historicity regarding it ......

    let me correct you yet again ...... Genesis 2:19 as "Now God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky," implying that this act had already taken place before Adam was created, back in verse 7. This is kind of hard to swallow, considering that in verse 18 God said "I will make a helper suitable for him" and then Adam searched for a helper among the animals in verses 19 and 20, implying that God decided to create the animals after Adam  already existed so that he'd have a pool of potential helpers to choose from.


    Your non argument is beaten yet again ......next 

  • billbatardbillbatard 133 Pts   -  
    like totally
    The passion for destruction is also a creative passion. Mikhail Bakunin

  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ZeusAres42

    You say .......

    However, what I am more sure about what is logical is to say that there are contradictory views that revolve around the Bible, and hence a reasonable explanation for the different sects of the one or more of the monotheistic religions.

    My reply .....Every branch of Christian belief see the Bible and it’s words differently and each quote it to one’s owns ends and particular take on Christianity,  just look at the way Catholics perceive divorce compared to Protestants both use completely different biblical verses to justify their particular stances so basically they use the Bible to contradict the Bible and fight like cat and dog over such.

    One would think that an all powerful creator god could have made his intentions clearer apparently not, all Christian churches are  merely piggy backing off the oldest institution in the The western world as in the Roman Catholic Church 
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    >Dear oh dear another wall of text which is merely you ranting , raging and firing off insults.

    Surprise, surprise, the debate champ declares himself winner in his first sentence without debate or argumentation. Congrats.

    >Biblical scholars agree the two accounts are indeed contradictory but also complimentary...

    This makes no sense. There is only one account. Your poor reading comprehension is not evidence. Please list a biblical scholar who thinks Genesis chapters one and two are different accounts of creation.

    >...that you do not even know this comes as no surprise as most American Christians are sadly lacking even basic knowledge of the Bible and the historicity regarding it ......

    Lol. I know English grammar.

    >let me correct you yet again ...... Genesis 2:19 as "Now God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky," implying that this act had already taken place before Adam was created, back in verse 7.

    Of course.

    >This is kind of hard to swallow, considering that in verse 18 God said "I will make a helper suitable for him" and then Adam searched for a helper among the animals in verses 19 and 20, implying that God decided to create the animals after Adam  already existed so that he'd have a pool of potential helpers to choose from.

    Why does it "imply" that animals were created after Adam? That is not in the text. Its your poor reading comprehension and irrational bias.

    >Your non argument is beaten yet again ......next

    Lol. You claim a passage "implies" (to you) that animals were created after Adam, and then conclude you've won?

    You seem to stupidly believe the text is chronologically linear and every subsequent verse describes an event later than the verse before it. How dumb are you?

    God creates plants
    God creates Animals
    God creates Man
    No animal is a suitable mate for Man
    God creates Woman

    This order is not changed or repeated in the bible.

    Nowhere in genesis is there an additional account of any creation. If the common tools of language like metaphors and flashbacks fool you, get a better education.
    NeopesdomProudToBeCatholic
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5


    You say ......Surprise, surprise, the debate champ declares himself winner in his first sentence without debate or argumentation. Congrats.


    My reply ....It’s no surprise it’s all there in  my opening salvo the contradiction is obvious even to biblical scholars .....pst .....you ain’t one 



    You say .....This makes no sense. There is only one account. 


    My reply ....To you of course it wouldn’t to me and scholars it’s obvious 


    You say .....Your poor reading comprehension is not evidence. 


    My reply .....Hilarious  you’re accusing biblical scholars of poor reading comprehension Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha 


    You say ......Please list a biblical scholar who thinks Genesis chapters one and two are different accounts of creation.


    My reply .....I stated they claimed “ two contradictory accounts “ and as one expert claims .....”One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts” oh dear that’s you E T by one of your own and I totally agree you’re exegetically totally blind .

    Beaten again ET even Christian scholars disagree with your stupidity in print regards the rest of your tantrum you need to calm down and maybe think about getting an education? 


    Read it and weep 


    There are two separate accounts of creation, one in the first chapter of Genesis and one in the second chapter. Many Bible scholars (in particular those applying the historical-critical exegetical method) freely accept that these two accounts of creation, if read literally, are inconsistent with each other because they were written by different people. According to the Documentary hypothesis, which tried to trace how the Bible formed, Genesis 1 came from the "priestly source" (an Aaronic priest writing ca. 500 BCE), while Genesis 2 came from the "Yahwist source" (scriptures concerning a precursor to the Jewish God from the land of Judah, written ca. 900 BCE).

    On the other hand, according to Biblical literalists, both chapters were written by Moses on instructions from God. Since they are both held to be literally true, they must be consistent in all particulars, though they are not.



    Andrews University Seminary Studies, Vol. 49, No. 1, 45-65. Copyright © 2011 Andrews University Press.

    A FRESH LOOK AT TWO GENESIS CREATION ACCOUNTS: CONTRADICTIONS?

    Jiří Moskala Andrews University

    One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts.1 The majority of scholars stress discrepancies between them because they assume there are two different authors or sources with several redactors involved in putting these texts together. They claim that the first creation story was composed by the “Priestly” (P) writer, the second by the “Jahvist,” (J), and later an unknown redactor or redactors put them together.2 Richard E. Friedman states: “In many ways they duplicate each other, and on several points they contradict each other.”3 Are these two creation narratives really contradictory? Do they stand in opposition to each other?

    1The first creation account is found in Gen 1:1–2:4a, and the second account is in Gen 2:4b-25.

    Bible scholars are divided over whether Gen 2:4a belongs to the first creation story or whether it is an introductory formula to the second account. Among those exegetes who take the first creation story as Gen 1:1–Gen 2:4a are Claus Westermann, Genesis 1–11: A Continental Commentary (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994), 78, 178, 197; Jacques B. Doukhan, The Genesis Creation Story: Its Literary Structure, Andrews University Seminary Dissertation Series, 5 (Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 1978), 59, 78-79; E. A. Speiser, Genesis, 3d ed., AB 1 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1981), 3-13. Those who see Gen 2:4a as an introductory formula to the second account include Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, WBC, 1 (Waco: Word, 1987), 5, 36, 49; Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1–17, NICOT 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 150-153; John H. Walton, Genesis, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 35- 36, 39-41, 65, 163; Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis, JPS Torah Commentary (Philadelphia: JPS, 1989), 14-17; Bruce K. Waltke, Genesis: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 79, 83-84. For discussions for and against these positions, see Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: From Adam to Noah, trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem: Magnus Press, 1961), 1:96-100; Hamilton, 150-153; and Wenham, 5-10. The arguments in this article about the function of the first and the second creation accounts do not depend on either position. I concur with Cassuto that it may well be that Gen 2:4a belongs to both stories as a transitional statement.

    2For a discussion on the authorship of Gen 1–2, see Richard E. Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible? (New York: Harper & Row, 1987), 50-246; John J. Collins, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004), 47-65; Gleason L. Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, rev. and expanded (Chicago: Moody, 1994), 89-147; Gerhard F. Hasel, Biblical Interpretation Today (Washington, DC: Biblical Research Institute, 1985), 7-28; Gordon J. Wenham, Exploring the Old Testament: A Guide to the Pentateuch (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2003), 159-185; Umberto Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis: Eight Lectures, intro. Joshua A. Berman (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1961).

    3Friedman, 50.

    45

  • As for contradictions in the Bible being a current or previous subject of discussion among Theological Scholars, if memory serves me correctly that still is/was the case. 



  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  

    @dee

    Hey dee dee, I'm going to show you the difference between a real education, and internet mining OK?

    Surprise, surprise, the debate champ declares himself winner in his first sentence without debate or argumentation. Congrats.

    >It’s no surprise...

    I know. It was sarcasm festus.

    >...it’s all there in  my opening salvo the contradiction is obvious even to biblical scholars

    Just not to half the ones you listed, or the one you quoted eh?

    > .....pst .....you ain’t one 

    I've never claimed to be, which is why I don't need to lie with my links.

    This makes no sense. There is only one account. 

    >To you of course it wouldn’t to me and scholars it’s obvious 

    Lol. You and scholars?

    Your poor reading comprehension is not evidence. 

    >Hilarious  you’re accusing biblical scholars of poor reading comprehension

    No, just you. Pay attention. It's below. 

    Please list a biblical scholar who thinks Genesis chapters one and two are different accounts of creation.

    >I stated they claimed “ two contradictory accounts “ 

    Ah, nice back peddle. But as yet you have shown no contradiction.

    >..and as one expert claims .....”One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts” oh dear that’s you E T by one of your own and I totally agree you’re exegetically totally blind .

    One of my own? I thought it was you and the scholars against me?

    I never said they were not different, I said one was a summery and the other was more detailed. They are supposed to be different doofus.

    >Beaten again ET...

    While you crown yourself, I'll show you why your argument is nonsense OK?

    >...even Christian scholars disagree...

    They aren't Christian, they are just scholars. Keep the unnecessary lying in check. 

    >...with your stupidity in print regards the rest of your tantrum you need to calm down and maybe think about getting an education?

    If your grammar represents one with an education, I think I'll pass thank you.

    >Read it and weep

    I read it but I laughed. But you may weep after I educate you.

    >A FRESH LOOK AT TWO GENESIS CREATION ACCOUNTS: CONTRADICTIONS?

    What you present is not conclusion but a question. Meaning it is not settled, though you try to use the  question as an established conclusion.

    >One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts.1 

    Of course there are differences, but differences are not necessarily contradictions. Your claim was the accounts contradicted, this remains untrue. Whether you take the accounts as separate or not, there is no record of the creation of plants in the second, thus you cannot infer an order of creation.

    That is why you had to deceitfully cut verse 2 of chapter 2.

    Your link asks...

    >"Do these two creation narratives really contradictory? Do they stand in opposition to each other?

    Does that sound like a conclusion?

    Though you try dishonestly to say "bible scholars" agree with you, your own link lists many who do not, including Victor P. Hamilton, John H. Walton, Bruce K. Waltke, and Gordon J. Wenham, 

    Your link says "Bible scholars are divided over whether Gen 2:4a belongs to the first creation story or whether it is an introductory formula to the second account."

    You lie when you try to imply they agree with you. Nothing in your link discusses whether there were two creation events, the link discusses the differences in the two accounts of the same event.

    Not a single scholar you listed believes that Genesis is accounting two separate events.

    You have not proven your claims. 1. The two accounts are not accounts of separate events, but a summery and a detailed account of the same event.

    2. The second account has no creation story of plants being created at all, much less AFTER the creation of man. You let your bias insert that into the text.

    3. Finally, your own link disagrees with your conclusion, he says...

    >The arguments in this article about the function of the first and the second creation accounts do not depend on either position. I concur with Cassuto that it may well be that Gen 2:4a belongs to both stories as a transitional statement.

    Your link contradicts you.

    Go ahead and crown yourself. I'll just be satisfied with logic and truth.

  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    @ZeusAres42

    >As for contradictions in the Bible being a current or previous subject of discussion among Theological Scholars, if memory serves me correctly that still is/was the case.

    This is true. But what many atheists miss is that Christian biblical truth is not decided by human consensus or "expert" opinion.

    But some people trying to enlist all scholars as on their side either way, is quite dishonest.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5


    Let’s try one more time ET the contradictions are obvious take of your Jesus glasses and try reading the text as given without the spin which you keep accusing atheists off .....


    The rest of your wall of insults and personal attacks I dismiss as your usual rage at being exposed yet again .......

    Which came first: Adam or the vegetation?

    The vegetation!Genesis 1:11-27:

    And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so […] And the evening and the morning were the third day […] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them […] And the evening and the morning were the sixth day

    As clear as day and the differences are obvious and totally contradictory as below clearly verifies......





    Adam!Genesis 2:5-9:

    And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground […] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for foo

    Which came first: the animals or Adam?

    The animals!Genesis 1:25-27:

    And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good [...] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them





    Adam!Genesis 2:7-19:

    And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul [...] And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof


  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  


    You say .....This is true. But what many atheists miss is that Christian biblical truth is not decided by human consensus or "expert" opinion

    My reply .....Atheists couldn’t care less about so called “Christian truths” unless those” truths “ impact on them which historically have, either way what’s that got to do with clear biblical contradictions? 
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    >...the contradictions are obvious...

    Then why did you edit the verse and lie? The "contradiction" is not obvious, which is why you needed a lame atheist website to tell you.

    I don't really care what you believe, but I do know that honest people will see that you simply remove my rebuts and repost your stupidity.

    If you really had a contradiction, you would not need to be dishonest. Your bias and lack of familiarity with the text causes you to be an .

    For example, when God says, "It is not good that the man should be alone;..."

    You assume the "alone" means no animals. That is why you hide the context. Alone meant without another person. Hence Eve was created.

    Or do you claim not to be alone when you're at home with only your cat?

    Genesis chapter 2 begins with creation already completed, that is why you start at verse 5 of chapter 2. Verses 1 through 4 show your argument is idiotic. So you ignore them.

    >Atheists couldn’t care less about so called “Christian truths” 

    Which is why they mistakenly tend to think it is determined by by human consensus or "expert" opinion.

    >...what’s that got to do with clear biblical contradictions?

    Nothing, as does your post. But I was talking to someone else about something else. Pay attention to the posts addresses to you.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5

    You say ......If you really had a contradiction, you would not need to be dishonest. Your bias and lack of familiarity with the text causes you to be an .


    My reply ......But I have several and the experts agree with me , you said not one expert agrees with me and when you were corrected on you lies you sulked . You’ve never read the Bible so instead go to copy and past nonsense from Christian apologetics sites like the clown you are .......


    Let’s see what biblical scholars say again ......”There are two contradictory accounts “ and as one expert claims .....”One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts” 


    Oh dear that’s you E T by one of your own and I totally agree you’re exegetically totally blind .



    The vegetation!Genesis 1:11-27:

    And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so


    And it was SO ......Vegetation clearly before man 





    Adam!Genesis 2:5-9:

    And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground […] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life



    Man first for no plants existed as it had not rained ...........


    No matter what spin you put on it it’s just your usual evasion as in you also denied biblical slavery and denied passages regarding owning people as property and instructions on how one may beat a slave as non existent.


    Your stupidity I blame on your lack of education your ignorance because you base your worldview on a book of fairytales and contradictory nonsense .


    The rest of your wall of text I didn’t read as it’s just your usual rage and tantrums because biblical experts and I think you’re an  

  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5

    You say ......But I was talking to someone else about something else. Pay attention to the posts addresses to you.

    My reply .....I know , I was correcting you ....again ....What? You’re welcome ........
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    >But I have several and the experts agree with me , you said not one expert agrees with me and when you were corrected on you lies you sulked.

    Lol. Not a single expert in your link thinks Genesis 2 is an account of another creation event. Some think it is different from the account in Genesis one. None of them support your claim.

    >You’ve never read the Bible so instead go to copy and past nonsense from Christian apologetics sites like the clown you are ....

    OK . But perhaps you will one day address Genesis 2, 1 - 4. The verses you edited out.


    >Let’s see what biblical scholars say again ......”There are two contradictory accounts “ and as one expert claims .....”One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts” 

    This has been answered . There are differences, one is a summery and the other goes into detail. Differences are not necessarily contradictions.

    Stupidly deleting the paragraph above and then reposting your quote shows you know you've lost.

    >Oh dear that’s you E T by one of your own and I totally agree you’re exegetically totally blind.

    I see the differences moron, I do not see the contradiction you claimed. You still haven't posted it.

    >Man first for no plants existed as it had not rained ....

    If you edit out the first 4 verses of the chapter. (Chapter 2, 1 - 4) As soon as you start lying and editing out verses, I win.

    So far, you've avoided verses 1 to 4 of chapter 2. Why loser? Your link mentioned them. Here is what he said.

    >I concur with Cassuto that it may well be that Gen 2:4a belongs to both stories as a transitional statement.

    Concur means to be in agreement with doofus.

    >No matter what spin you put on it it’s just your usual evasion as in you also denied biblical slavery and denied passages regarding owning people as property and instructions on how one may beat a slave as non existent.

    My responses do not become  nonexistent because you delete them from your reply .

    The passage needs no spin, that is why you have deleted verses 1 to 4, so that you can spin chapter as another creation event. You fail.

    >Your stupidity I blame on your lack of education your ignorance because you base your worldview on a book of fairytales and contradictory nonsense.

    Did your "education" include English grammar? Mine did.

    >The rest of your wall of text I didn’t read.... 

    No wonder then that your replies were so . If you don't read the post, trying to reply it is stupidity. And if your reply a post, not first reading it is stupidity.

    >..as it’s just your usual rage and tantrums because biblical experts and I think you’re an

    Lol. They're back to being your experts again huh?

    OK .

    >I know , I was correcting you ....again ....What? You’re welcome ........

    OK . But next time, don't leave verses unaddressed in a post addressed to you, to answer a post not addressed to you. Your buds might think you're running.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ET ;

    Yet another wall of childish insults and  temper tantrums from ET 

    demonstrating your hypocrisy and double standards bet you tell your kids to “ turn the other cheek “ like the two faced fool you are


    What do biblical scholars and experts think of E T’s position regarding the creation myth ........


    One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts.1 The majority of scholars stress discrepancies between them because they assume there are two different authors . They claim that the first creation story was composed by the “Priestly” (P) writer, the second by the “Jahvist,” (J), and later an unknown redactor or redactors put them together.2 Richard E. Friedman states:




    Regarding your lack of education on the subject let’s continue to educate you 

    The addition of chapter and verse numbers to the Bible was a recent invention. While sections, chapters, and divisions were often used; the standard version of which we see used in modern Bible editions were only invented sometime during the 13th century by Bishop Stephen Langton.Even then, it wasn't until the 19th Century that Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 were really considered "separate."

    In fact, in the original languages, the names used for God differed between the two contradictory stories indicating with near certainty different origins for the stories. 




    Let’s see what biblical scholars say again ......”There are two contradictory accounts “ and as one expert claims .....”One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts” 


    Oh dear that’s you E T by one of your own and I totally agree you’re exegetically totally blind .



    The vegetation!Genesis 1:11-27:

    And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so

    And it was SO ......Vegetation clearly before man 





    Adam!Genesis 2:5-9:

    And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground […] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life


    Man first for no plants existed as it had not rained ...........


    No matter what spin you put on it it’s just your usual evasion as in you also denied biblical slavery and denied passages regarding owning people as property and instructions on how one may beat a slave as non existent.


    Your stupidity I blame on your lack of education your ignorance because you base your worldview on a book of fairytales and contradictory nonsense .


    The rest of your wall of text I didn’t read as it’s just your usual rage and tantrums because biblical experts and I think you’re an  

  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  

    Since you're now stupidly spamming the same dumb posts to multiple threads, I'll just give you the same answer OK?

    >Yet another wall of chiljdish insults and  temper tantrums from ET demonstrating your hypocrisy and double standards, bet you tell your kids to “ turn the other cheek “ like the two faced fool you are

    Not to morons like you. For idiots like you, we get the whip.

    >Here are the two contradictory accounts regarding the creation myth clearly marked and explained with your god clearly saying it “was so “ ........that’s the part you keep ignoring, I wonder why?

    Because you're ? You think by deleting my response in your reply you can claim I "ignored" it. How are you?

    >Regarding your lack of education on the subject let’s continue to educate you

    Lol. I've already passed the sixth grade dee dee. But thanks.

    >The addition of chapter and verse numbers to the Bible was a recent invention. 

    Irrelevant and off topic. Address the verses you're dodging. Numbered or not, the verses are there. Address chapter 2: 1 to 4

    >What do biblical experts and scholars think?

    Depends. Some in your link think there are differences between chapter 1 and 2, but none think they describe separate creation events.

    If you had an argument, you wouldn't have to keep posting debunked nonsense.

    On DDO right now I have an similar to you, simply reposting his stupidity. You idiots are a dime a dozen. If you're posting just to spite me, you better get comfortable.

    I don't get angry. I don't tire. I don't get flustered. I don't care what others think. I will allow you to be as as you want to be for as long as you want to be.

    >....biblical slavery 

    Stay on topic. You will not be allowed to run to another subject because you're being beaten on this one. Address verses 1 to 4

    >Your stupidity I blame on your lack of education your ignorance because you base your worldview on a book of fairytales and contradictory nonsense .

    No one is here to hear what you blame anything on. Address the verses you're dodging.

    >The rest of your wall of text I didn’t read as it’s just your usual rage and tantrums because biblical experts and I think you’re an

    The biblical experts did not pretend chapter 2, verses 1 to 4 did not exist.

    Perhaps you should have read the entire passage before you made the ignorant post.

  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  


    Oh dear , you’re posting the same tired repetitive nonsense now on several threads in attempt to get fellow Christian to support you , yet they even know your idiocy cannot be supported. 
     

    Poor ET in a rage again and dodging and swerving again in an attempt to avoid addressing what he’s failed to do so far as in address the simple question he keeps fleeing from 

    The vegetation!Genesis 1:11-27:

    And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so

    And it was SO ......Vegetation clearly before man 





    Adam!Genesis 2:5-9:

    And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground […] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life


    and there was not a man to till the ground.........


    Still man first ET?  Can you defend that without flying into a rage myself and the gentle readers await your response or should I say wall of rants , rages and insults 

  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    You spammed the same stupidity in the "Be very careful today if you intend mocking someone , it can come with dreadful consequences" thread.

    Your reply is there. Now you only have to delete my reply once. You're welcome .
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5

    You spammed the same stupidity in the "Be very careful today if you intend mocking someone , it can come with dreadful consequences" thread.

    Your reply is there. Now you only have to delete my reply once. You're welcome Moses 
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    Lol. Mirror posting again huh ?

    We'll see how well it'll work for you this time.

    None-the-less, the reply to this nonsense you've spammed on both threads is there.
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 3985 Pts   -  
    Asking if there are contradictions/inconsistencies in the Bible is like asking if the water is wet... 
    Dee
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5

    Lol. Mirror posting again huh ?

    We'll see how well it'll work for you this time.

    None-the-less, the reply to this nonsense you've spammed on both threads is there.
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @ethang5

    Your recent effort at kissing a fellow Christians has not worked out has it? I know you hoped he might praise your efforts at groveling but so far nothing , maybe he is one of the many who mark all your arguments as irrelevant ....... 

    jesusisGod777
  • jesusisGod777jesusisGod777 115 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    Debra gave you a f.

    There are no contradictions in the Bible. Jesus the God of creation oursmart's you all.

    Jesus is Lord.

    P.S. someone was brought to Jesus yesterday and Jesus saved him. 
    Zombieguy1987대왕광개토
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @jesusisGod777


    Debra gave you a f.

    I give you and Debra a combined z

    There are no contradictions in the Bible. Jesus the God of creation oursmart's you all.
    There are hundreds , none are so blind as those who cannot see. Your god is as dumb as a rock read the Bible for confirmation of this fact 

    P.S. someone was brought to Jesus yesterday and Jesus saved him. 


    Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha....Hilarious 

  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    >Your recent effort at kissing a fellow Christians has not worked out has it?

    Paranoia looks good on you. But maybe it did work. You're dodging verses 1 to 4 of chapter 2.

    >I know you hoped he might praise your efforts at groveling but so far nothing,

    Instead of using your omniscience to find out what I hoped, try telling us what Gen 2: 1 to 4 means.

    >maybe he is one of the many who mark all your arguments as irrelevant .......

    Lol. Talk about kissing up. Your posts are empty loser. Address the topic and stop blathering about off topic nonsense.

    Why are you dodging the verses? You brought that passage up.

    How are you?
    Plaffelvohfen
  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -  
    >Asking if there are contradictions/inconsistencies in the Bible is like asking if the water is wet... 

    Yet when we splash water on you, you get wet.

    I challenged any atheist to give me one contradiction and let us debate it. The moron dee dee offered what she thinks is a contradiction.

    Here she is now mirror posting spam after being caught doctoring the verses in question.

    If Asking if there are contradictions/inconsistencies in the Bible is like asking if the water is wet, how come when the atheist is challenged, he cannot show or debate the contradiction?

    Do you agree with dee dee? Then take up the challenge. Show the contradiction. Cause all the dee is doing now is being a court jester for the crowd.

    Or offer up one "contradiction" of your own, and let's see if you will have more integrity than the .

    Is this not a debate site?
  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5

    Poor ET attempting to flee by running off to verses 1 to 4 in Genesis in an attempt to avoid what’s clearly stated below as in a clear biblical contradiction to go with the hundreds of others , ET thinks posting up a wall of rants and insults is debating all because it doesn’t know what’s in his bible ......Come on ET try at least to defend your .......

    The vegetation!Genesis 1:11-27:

    And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so

    And it was SO ......Vegetation clearly before man 





    Adam!Genesis 2:5-9:

    And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground […] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life


    and there was not a man to till the ground.........


    Still man first ET?  Can you defend that without flying into a rage myself and the gentle readers await your response or should I say wall of rants , rages and insults 

  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  


    @ethang5

    How Hilarious ET’s latest defence is the verses below are “doctored” yet they are straight from the Bible he’s never read Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha 

    Poor ET attempting to flee by running off to verses 1 to 4 in Genesis in an attempt to avoid what’s clearly stated below as in a clear biblical contradiction to go with the hundreds of others , ET thinks posting up a wall of rants and insults is debating all because it doesn’t know what’s in his bible ......Come on ET try at least to defend your .......

    The vegetation!Genesis 1:11-27:

    And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so

    And it was SO ......Vegetation clearly before man 





    Adam!Genesis 2:5-9:

    And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground […] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life


    and there was not a man to till the ground.........


    Still man first ET?  Can you defend that without flying into a rage myself and the gentle readers await your response or should I say wall of rants , rages and insults 

  • ethang5ethang5 258 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    >How Hilarious ET’s latest defence is the verses below are “doctored” yet they are straight from the Bible he’s never read...

    The verses you're dodging like a cheap skank from a vice cop are the ones you doctored. Don't worry, I cited them, the Gentle Readers know you're dodging.

    Apparently you think lying makes you win.

    >Poor ET attempting to flee by running off to verses 1 to 4 in Genesis...

    Running off to the verses YOU posted? Hilarious. At least I've shamed you enough to acknowledge the existence of the verses you're dodging.

    >and there was not a man to till the ground.........

    >Still man first ET?  

    It is never man first . The verse you're cutting into at the middle doesn't say what you want it to, so you're starting at verse 5, stupidly thinking your doctoring would work.

    The verses say creation is over, and you want to make some silly lie, so you thought you'd cut out the verses contradicting your lie.

    Surprise! Verses 1 to 4 of chapter 2 are still there goober.

    What moron? Mirror posting stopped working for you? Spamming not doing the trick?

    Really. How are you?

  • DeeDee 5395 Pts   -  
    @ethang5


    Mirror posting cannot help you and repeating what I’ve corrected you on cannot help you. Your stupidity is the stuff of legend but no doubt you will persist in repeating yourself 
    More doctored verses all pulled out of context you really ought to take better care at cherry picking your doctored verses and read them without your usual spin , you tried the same B S with the verses on slavery .......Read again and have another sulk and rant unfortunately for you I’m not responsible for your stupidity.....




    The vegetation!Genesis 1:11-27:

    And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so

    And it was SO ......Vegetation clearly before man 






    Adam!Genesis 2:5-9:

    And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground […] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life


    and there was not a man to till the ground.........

Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch