Open letter to Christians

[orangebox21]

So you concede the argument then?  If something doesn't exist then it can't have contradictions.  Is this the kind of foolishness you would like us to converse in?

I concede nothing because I don't agree with your half-baked definition.

You did agree with my definition because you used it to claim the Bible doesn't exist (#57).  It was only after I pointed out the implication of your claim (a necessary concession of the argument) do you now reject my definition.  

I was already too lenient on you before.  As you defined it, a Bible is ANY "collection of 66 books written by about 40 authors, in three different languages, on three different continents, and over approximately 1,600 years."  I can include Shakespeare and unicycle assembly instructions so long as I meet your criteria.  If you are going to grill me on what a contradiction is and then demonstrate that you've given no thought to the definition of what I can only assume is the most important book on earth in your eyes, then I cannot help but perceive you as a clown.

Also, the Bible is not 66 books because 1 Samuel through 2 Kings is one book.

If you are going to lie about me I am not going to be able to respond to you.  

To be very clear you didn't ask me to provide a definition of the Bible that you agree with, just to provide a definition.  You continue to move the goal posts.  First it was:  define the word Bible.  Now it's define the word Bible in a manner I agree with.  First it was:  provide a scriptural reference showing the Jews listed a genealogy non-chronologically.  Now it's provide two scriptural examples showing the Jews listed genealogy as such.  There is no satisfying an ever changing criteria.  

Would you like me to refine my definition of the term Bible?

...You have yet to prove that the propositional statement:  "the third Zedekiah, and the fourth Shallum" is synonymous with "Shallum is younger than Zedekiah."  It is factual that the brother's are listed.  The criteria by which the brother's are listed isn't explicit.

It seems you will be satisfied that a contradiction exists so long as I can prove that 1 Chronicles 3:15 lists the sons in chronological order.

The ISV says,

Josiah’s descendants included Johanan his firstborn, his second born Jehoiakim, his third born Zedekiah, and his fourth born Shallum.

It isn't wise to base a theological argument on a word found in a translation but not appearing in the original manuscript.  As you can see the word translated as firstborn does include the word born.  However, the word 'born' doesn't appear as a qualifier of any of the rest of the ordinal numbers  .  Given the context it is possible to translate the word 'second' as second born but it is not necessarily the case.  Given the clear chronology given in Kings and the Jews treatment of genealogy, the list in 1 Chronicles 3:15 is not chronological.