Conflicting statements in the bible

[A_Nony_Mouse]

[quote='A_Nony_Mouse' pid='439800' dateline='1367530847']
I will take your poorly thought out excuse fact. The OTHER children which you think you were clever to invent, living outside the garden, had already been expelled from the garden for no know reason.

What on Earth are you talking about? Genesis 5:4 clearly states that Adam and Eve had more kids later on. John V didn’t invent anything.[/quote]

It appears the dropping brain damage includes your inability to comprehend time. C&A are AFTER being kicked out. Every bible hugger declares they were the first children of A&E -- you are stuck with that story else you can claim to be a new prophet with a new revelation. If so I demand to know your authority.

But since you agree to LATER ON lets run with that. Do you have the least comprehension of the consequences of totally inbred incest? I assume you are not.

Moving right along, you can't to another "land" to find a wife unless there is an entire incestuous breeding population in Nod in the first place. Ignoring the fact that such an incestuous population cannot exist, just to keep the ridicule going, sons and daughters of A&E must have migrated to Nod many generations before Cane was born.

WHEN did they migrate from Eden to Nod? There are many other problems which your explanation must address although the absence of a breeding population that applies to A&E also applies to Nod.

Is this not enough for you crazy young earth creationists? How much more does it take? You are massively contrary to so much that is well known about the universe

---

Looking for contradictions in the bible is like looking for contradictions in the Wizard of Oz. Neither describe real events. What difference could it possibly make?

---

[quote='A_Nony_Mouse' pid='439800' dateline='1367530847']

Care to explain how the Jews and the Christians missed you version until Saint Augustine the sex hater invented the original sin story?

Augustine didn’t invent original sin, it’s clearly taught in scripture by Paul.

Of course you will find an excuse to explain why no matter how many times I demand the Chapter and Verse you will never produce a single one mentioning Eden. I often wonder what it is like after I challenge these nonsense claims when believers go rushing to their bibles and learn I am correct.

[quote] How do you expect to be taken seriously when all of your (lame) responses are all predicated upon young earth creationism?

I believe that those whom he wants to take him seriously do take him seriously. I for one do not care whether someone who is ignorant enough to think that a blue whale, a bacterium, a mosquito, and a human are all blood relatives takes me seriously or not, in fact I’d be a bit worried if they did.[/quote]

More evidence believers are crazy and stupid and ignorant and down right uneducated. I think it is good you are letting your hair and telling it like it is as now there is no question you are crazy, ignorant, stupid and uneducated.

[quote] Sorry to break it to you but it never happened. ALL FOUR of those people are myths. You are trying to explain away contradictions in stories about people and events which never occurred written by unknown people at unknown times for unknown reasons

You’re really getting desperate aren’t you? First you claim there are contradictions in scripture and then when that claim gets destroyed you resort to tossing out fallacious red herrings like the one above. Keep things relevant and defend your original claim that there are contradictions in scripture.[/quote]

Why might you be so concerned that there are contradictions in stories about the Land of Oz? There is no difference between Oz and the OT in this matter. Why are you so concerned that you work to claim there are no contradictions in stories about the same things that never happened? That does not appear reasonable.

[quote] Speaking of being dropped upon one's head ... how stupid can you get?

Why are you personally attacking him? He’s been destroying you in this debate, so calling him stupid only makes you look even worse.[/quote]

This is not a debate.

[quote] The bible has a very obvious contradiction, creation itself.

What is logically contradictory about the idea of creation?[/quote]

4004BC is contrary to all observed facts about the universe. Are you claiming you did not know that?

Logic depends upon validated and observed premises being true before applying the rules of logic. It is always the date not the fact. It always has been. Because science has moved the date back a tad from the bible begat age does not change the fact that infallible divine revelation is not just wrong but ridiculous.

[quote] As with so many things when you point that out the believers try to distract us, an usually are really distracting themselves debating the validity of which bloodline and why both are correct.

They are both correct; Matthew refers to Jesus’s blood line through Mary while Luke is referring to Jesus’ bloodline through his adopted father Joseph. A person can have two different genealogies, one on their mother’s side and one on their father’s side? Imagine that![/quote]

Imagine a believer who pretends not to know that bloodline and genealogy does not mean bloodline. Imagine a believer pretending not to know that adoption is not bloodline. Imagine a believer claiming there was no word for adoption in ancient times else it would have been used. Imagine the bastard son of Mary. I have nothing against bastards but believers do not seem to like the word.

As to the father's side of a real genealogy, what is the bloodline of your god and why does it have blood? Words are words. Words have meanings. They had the same meanings when they were used in the past as they do today.

Joseph was not in his bloodline and not manner of adoption can make it so and at the time adoption NEVER meant anything like it.

But you will continue to pretend people 2000 years ago did not know the difference between adoption and bloodline -- because you are stupid.

[quote] Sorry believers HERE is the one and only bloodline of Jesus for Christians, MARY. God has no blood. Mary was the only human involved. QED

Jesus was adopted by Joseph, therefore he has two genealogies.
[/quote]

As you do not have Chapter and Verse on this adopting I DEMAND to know why and how you claim to have the authority of divine revelation as to this otherwise unremarked adoption. I want to know the exact basis upon which you claim the authority to add to divine revelation. Please be very, very specific in your response.