This thread is between raphiemontella and a
christian;Felixomor,who claimed the bible is void
of contradictions...
Infact he claimed the bible has no contradiction in
it...

DEFINITION OF CONTRADICTION
contradiction
 /ˌkɑːntrəˈdɪkʃən/

noun plural contradictions

1 : the act of saying something that is opposite or
very different in meaning to something else

2 : : a difference or disagreement between two things which means that both cannot be true


this is the definition of contradiction...
Felixomor...comment on this thread and lets begin...

raphieMontella:
This thread is between raphiemontella and a
christian;Felixomor,who claimed the bible is void
of contradictions...
Infact he claimed the bible has no contradiction in
it...

DEFINITION OF CONTRADICTION
contradiction
 /ˌkɑːntrəˈdɪkʃən/

noun plural contradictions

1 : the act of saying something that is opposite or
very different in meaning to something else

2 : : a difference or disagreement between two things which means that both cannot be true


this is the definition of contradiction...
Felixomor...comment on this thread and lets begin...

I am here.
How u dey, I hope u r doing great?

raphieMontella:
This thread is between raphiemontella and a
christian;Felixomor,who claimed the bible is void
of contradictions...
Infact he claimed the bible has no contradiction in
it...

DEFINITION OF CONTRADICTION
contradiction
 /ˌkɑːntrəˈdɪkʃən/

noun plural contradictions

1 : the act of saying something that is opposite or
very different in meaning to something else

2 : : a difference or disagreement between two things which means that both cannot be true


this is the definition of contradiction...
Felixomor...comment on this thread and lets begin...

I am here.
How u dey, I hope u r doing great?
D:

felixomor:

I am here. How u dey, I hope u r doing great?
I am here. How u dey, I hope u r doing great? D:

okay... I begin ..

Its not a matter of just answering o..T is a thing of ''how well''

felixomor:


the ancients (especially the Romans) used the term purple when speaking of various shades of red, which includes scarlet. Consequently, these different colors sometimes would be called by the same name.
Just like the way "son in law" is used interchangably with "son" in some places where translation was done in ealier times.

You definitely couldnt expect people to have such knowledge of shades of colours like we do now, at the time when the bible was translated?
So no contradiction there.

The ancients had a distinction between ''purple'' and ''scarlet''...in the bible itself...

Exodus 25:4Amplified Bible (AMP) 4 blue, purple, and scarlet fabric, fine twisted linen, goats’ hair, Amplified Bible (AMP)

here we see yahweh telling moses to bring him three fabrics of three different colours
Blue
purple
and scarlet..
To further prove this...
The word used in john 19:2 is''porphurov'' which means dyed in purple,derived from ''porphura'' (greek) which is the
name given to the TYRIAN PURPLE DYE
produced from a kind of shellfish..which was a deeper shade...
In 1464 CE that Pope Paul II ordered the replacement of purple robes with scarlet ones(made from a different dye) for
Church vestments.

also...the word used in matthew 27:28 is ''kokkinos'',,from ''kokkos'' which is the name given to the insect;''kermes'' from which the dye;kermes dye was gotten from...and the kermes dye gives the scarlet colour which as described by pliny the younger as a ''bright red''

Revelation 17:4Amplified Bible (AMP) 4 The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet and adorned with gold, precious stones and pearls,
[and she was] holding in her hand a gold cup full of
the abominations and the filth of her [sexual]
immorality.

scarlet in those days..was adressed as distinct from purple..

---

How the hell did you even get four likes for this?

raphieMontella:
Mrfelixomor
What was the colour of jesus's robe?
Scarlet(matt 27:28)
or red?(john 19:2)?.

the ancients (especially the Romans) used the term purple when speaking of various shades of red, which includes scarlet. Consequently, these different colors sometimes would be called by the same name.
Just like the way "son in law" is used interchangably with "son" in some places where translation was done in ealier times.

You definitely couldnt expect people to have such knowledge of shades of colours like we do now, at the time when the bible was translated?
So no contradiction there.

raphieMontella:

.When did the fig tree wither?
Instantly(matt 21:19)
the next day(mark 11:20).

Mark 11:20 And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots.

Clearly this is mischief.
Mark 11 never even tries to say the time, it withered. It only states the time at which the tree was seen.
While Matthew specifies when it happened.
Moreover, it is clear that they walked away after the tree was cursed, so they obviously didnt wait to see the changes.
And Mark then specifies they saw it the next morning.

Please dont always be in a hurry.

raphieMontella:

.where was jesus after his death??
Paradise/heaven(luke 23:42-43)
shoel/hell(matt 12:40).

"Paradise" before Jesus died refers to the bossom of Abraham (a place of righteous dead souls) as illustrated in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. It doesnt mean where God is at that time before His death.

Luke 23:43 doesn’t say that Jesus would be in the presence of God; it says he would be in the presence of the thief (“Today you will be with me in Paradise”), and based on the Old Testament and Luke 16, it seems likely that the now-repentant thief would be at Abraham’s side, a place of comfort and rest for the righteous dead, which Jesus here calls “Paradise.”

Following his death for sin, then, Jesus journeys to Hades, to the City of Death, and rips its gates off the hinges. He liberates Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, John the Baptist, and the rest of the Old Testament faithful, ransoming them from the power of Sheol (Psalm 49:15; 86:13; 89:48). They had waited there for so long, not having received what was promised, so that their spirits would be made perfect along with the saints of the new covenant (Hebrews 11:39–40; 12:23).

After his resurrection, Jesus ascends to heaven and brings the ransomed dead with him, so that now Paradise is no longer down near the place of torment, but is up in the third heaven, the highest heaven, where God dwells....

Garrit?

raphieMontella:

.is anything impossible with god?
Luke 18:27 no
judges 1:19 yes iron chariots belittle him.

U r clearly using "God" and "Judah" interchangably. Wrong
Moreover, u also analyzed the sentence as a single event. Wrong
The 2 things occured at different times. And events transpired in between the first conquest and the army they(Judah) couldnt conquer.

My advice: Study bible chronology

In the said scripture.
Judah conquered at first but couldnt conquer men with iron chariots because they fell into some unbelief.
It was such a common trend in the bible.


All things are possible with God. But u must continue to have faith and do ur own part. Otherwise some things will be "impossible"

raphieMontella:


.does yahweh tell lies?
Heb 6:18 No
jer20:7 yes

Sorry, an accusation by Jeremiah during his time of despair and depression automatically means God is guilty as such?

Wow, please do u have any other so called "contradictions"?

These ones are straight to the point.

#FeelingBlessed

Its not a matter of just answering o..T is a thing of ''how well''

felixomor:


the ancients (especially the Romans) used the term purple when speaking of various shades of red, which includes scarlet. Consequently, these different colors sometimes would be called by the same name.
Just like the way "son in law" is used interchangably with "son" in some places where translation was done in ealier times.

You definitely couldnt expect people to have such knowledge of shades of colours like we do now, at the time when the bible was translated?
So no contradiction there.

The ancients had a distinction between ''purple'' and ''scarlet''...in the bible itself...

Exodus 25:4Amplified Bible (AMP) 4 blue, purple, and scarlet fabric, fine twisted linen, goats’ hair, Amplified Bible (AMP)

here we see yahweh telling moses to bring him three fabrics of three different colours
Blue
purple
and scarlet..
To further prove this...

The word used in john 19:2 is''porphurov'' which means dyed in purple,derived from ''porphura'' (greek) which is the
name given to the TYRIAN PURPLE DYE
produced from a kind of shellfish..which was a deeper shade...
In 1464 CE that Pope Paul II ordered the replacement of purple robes with scarlet ones(made from a different dye) for
Church vestments.

also...the word used in matthew 27:28 is ''kokkinos'',,from ''kokkos'' which is the name given to the insect;''kermes'' from which the dye;kermes dye was gotten from...and the kermes dye gives the scarlet colour which as described by pliny the younger as a ''bright red''

Revelation 17:4Amplified Bible (AMP) 4 The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet and adorned with gold, precious stones and pearls,
[and she was] holding in her hand a gold cup full of
the abominations and the filth of her [sexual]
immorality.

scarlet in those days..was adressed as distinct from purple..

---

How the hell did you even get four likes for this?

Bot just de ban me anyhow

Sorry, an accusation by Jeremiah during his time of despair and depression automatically means God is guilty as such?

sorry i dont understand...
Is the bible no longer the word of god?
Jeremiah lied? He made a likewise statement in jeremiah 4:10..did he lie again?
Or wait...you need where they said God said?...

Ezekiel 14:9Good News Translation (GNT) 9 “If any prophets are deceived into giving a false answer, it is because I, the Lord, have deceived
them. I will remove them from the people of Israel.

? Prophets lied...even in the bible
...so?

Wow, please do u have any other so called "contradictions"?

them full ground...should i bring it on?

These ones are straight to the point.

#FeelingBlessed

they aint straight...
You fell for the trap.

Cc felixomor

(Ro)bot get mind ban me sha

Mark 11:20 And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots.

Clearly this is mischief.
Mark 11 never even tries to say the time, it withered. It only states the time at which the tree was seen.
While Matthew specifies when it happened.
Moreover, it is clear that they walked away after the tree was cursed, so they obviously didnt wait to see the changes.
And Mark then specifies they saw it the next morning.

Please dont always be in a hurry.

no! this is michief from you...

Mark 11:14-15
Amplified Bible (AMP)
14 He said to it, “No one will ever eat fruit from you again!” And His disciples were
listening [to what He said].
15 Then they came to Jerusalem.

Mark 11:20-21Amplified Bible (AMP) 20 In the morning, as they were passing by, the disciples saw that the fig tree had withered away
from the roots up. 21 And remembering, Peter said to Him, “Rabbi (Master), look! The fig tree which
You cursed has withered!”

---

Matthew 21:19-21Amplified Bible (AMP) 19 Seeing a lone fig tree at the roadside, He went to it and found nothing but leaves on it; and He said to
it, “Never again will fruit come from you.” And at
once the fig tree withered. 20 When the disciples saw it, they were astonished and asked, “How is it that the fig tree has withered
away all at once?” 21 Jesus replied to them, “I

take note of all the bolded words...
Then tell me how there's no contradiction

U r clearly using "God" and "Judah" interchangably. Wrong
Moreover, u also analyzed the sentence as a single event. Wrong
The 2 things occured at different times. And events transpired in between the first conquest and the army they(Judah) couldnt conquer.

My advice: Study bible chronology

In the said scripture.
Judah conquered at first but couldnt conquer men with iron chariots because they fell into some unbelief.
It was such a common trend in the bible.


All things are possible with God. But u must continue to have faith and do ur own part. Otherwise some things will be "impossible"

will you just stop making things up?

Judges 1:19King James Version (KJV) 19 And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive
out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had
chariots of iron.

where did i substitute judah as God?
The passage says God was with judah but he wasnt able to defeat the valley dudes because they had iron chariots...(more powerful than judah's resource)
Not because they didnt have faith..
In the whole of judges 1..i cant find a place which hints that their ''faith'' caused so or they fell into unbelief...
Can u provide something that hints so?

"Paradise" before Jesus died refers to the bossom of Abraham (a place of righteous dead souls) as illustrated in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. It doesnt mean where God is at that time before His death.

Luke 23:43 doesn’t say that Jesus would be in the presence of God; it says he would be in the presence of the thief (“Today you will be with me in Paradise”), and based on the Old Testament and Luke 16, it seems likely that the now-repentant thief would be at Abraham’s side, a place of comfort and rest for the righteous dead, which Jesus here calls “Paradise.”

Following his death for sin, then, Jesus journeys to Hades, to the City of Death, and rips its gates off the hinges. He liberates Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, John the Baptist, and the rest of the Old Testament faithful, ransoming them from the power of Sheol (Psalm 49:15; 86:13; 89:48). They had waited there for so long, not having received what was promised, so that their spirits would be made perfect along with the saints of the new covenant (Hebrews 11:39–40; 12:23).

After his resurrection, Jesus ascends to heaven and brings the ransomed dead with him, so that now Paradise is no longer down near the place of torment, but is up in the third heaven, the highest heaven, where God dwells....

Garrit?

okay good

DEFINITION OF CONTRADICTION contradiction
 /ˌkɑːntrəˈdɪkʃən/
noun plural contradictions
1 : the act of saying something that is opposite or
very different in meaning to something else
2 : : a difference or disagreement between two things which means that both cannot be true
this is the definition of contradiction...

this is what were are working on...
The bots ban me...when ever i want to answer the first contradiction in detail...no idea why...
But youre wrong there..
The both words used have different origins in relation to the dyes used in producing them..
Read exo 25:4, rev17:4...you'd find out the two colours were treated differently..

Cc felixomor..


Should i roll in More contradictions?

raphieMontella:


Bot just de ban me anyhow

Eiya, I am sure u must have written some irrelevant stuff as usual

raphieMontella:


sorry i dont understand...
Is the bible no longer the word of god?
Jeremiah lied? He made a likewise statement in jeremiah 4:10..did he lie again?
Or wait...you need where they said God said?...

? Prophets lied...even in the bible
...so?

Even the bible contains quotes from satan, quotes from men etc.
So u can see that u dont even understand the term "bible"?

If u like quote what the devil said from the bible (e.g when the devil tempted Jesus) and begin to argue that the bible is the word of God.
Even a kindergatten kid knows thats called "quoting out of context"

So no point there, sorry

And please read about prophets in the bible who lied. Its all there. Again, quoting out of context cant be used as an alarm raiser.
You simply cut and paste a part of Jeremiah's lamentations and use it to make a claim. Yeah right.

Its as good as cutting "God exists" from a sentence from Richard Dawkins book and using it to conclude that Richard Dawkins believe in God. Stupidity!

Nevertheless, I know why u keep quoting out of context, its because u just want to keep talking by all means.

But even kids can read and know better. You can really improve.

raphieMontella:

them full ground...should i bring it on?

Hehehehehe, Wetin u dey wait for. I was even expecting bones, u brought milk

raphieMontella:

they aint straight...
You fell for the trap.

Cc felixomor

The last time I checked, u were the one in the devil's trap. he has tricked u into believing he doesnt exist. Please come out.

raphieMontella:

this is what were are working on...
The bots ban me...when ever i want to answer the first contradiction in detail...no idea why...
But youre wrong there..
The both words used have different origins in relation to the dyes used in producing them..
Read exo 25:4, rev17:4...you'd find out the two colours were treated differently..
Cc felixomor..

Again, u show ur desire too keep talking to hide a defeat of ur argument.

What has color description got to do with the dye it is produced with?

Well, Here is a scripture where red is used to describe "crimson" and "crimson" is linked to "scarlet"

Isa. 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.


Here is the word for "scarlet" in the hebrew manuscipt of the bible.

שׁני
shânı̂y
shaw-nee'
Of uncertain derivation; crimson, properly the insect or its color, also stuff dyed with it: - crimson, scarlet (thread).

Now here is the original greek translation from the part of the bible u are arguing.

"scarlet" in Matthew 27:28

κόκκινος
kokkinos
kok'-kee-nos
From G2848 (from the kernel shape of the insect); crimson colored: - scarlet (colour, coloured).

Those are straight from the original manuscript of the bible.

I purposely copied them straight so as to show that u have never ventured in your life to study the hebrew and greek writings from which the bible were translated to English. That is really sad of u.

U just jump in cut and paste and come to argue.

But u can see above that the bible uses red, crimson and even scarlet to some time refer to the same colour.

U have fired blank there!

If u like argue against the original greek translation, the truth is obvious now.

raphieMontella:

Should i roll in More contradictions?

As i Said before, what r u waiting for?
Or u don tire to quote bible out of context?

raphieMontella:

okay good

Oh, so u see that there was no contradiction just that u were in a hurry and thought u had found suya meat for ur argument abi?

raphieMontella:
(Ro)bot get mind ban me sha
no! this is michief from you...
take note of all the bolded words...
Then tell me how there's no contradiction

I say it again,
There is no contradiction there Mr. man

One of the verses is more detail than the other. Even a child can see that. But u r trying to capitalize on the information deficiency of Matthew in comparison to Mark. Thats all.

Matthew is clearly deficient on the time of the day when the disciples noticed the dry tree while Mark clearly specifies that they saw it in the next morning when they were returning.
Even a kid can clearly read that.

raphieMontella:

will you just stop making things up?
where did i substitute judah as God?
The passage says God was with judah but he wasnt able to defeat the valley dudes because they had iron chariots...(more powerful than judah's resource)
Not because they didnt have faith..
In the whole of judges 1..i cant find a place which hints that their ''faith'' caused so or they fell into unbelief...
Can u provide something that hints so?

Again u show ur desperate style of bible study:

U read Judges 1 but why didnt u go to Judges 2?

because u r in a hurry to come and argue abi?

See God showing them the reason for their failure in battle of the valley?

Judges 2:1-4 -

And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.
Jdg 2:2 And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this?
Jdg 2:3 Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from before you; but they shall be as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare unto you.
Jdg 2:4 And it came to pass, when the angel of the LORD spake these words unto all the children of Israel, that the people lifted up their voice, and wept.


U can see that ur bible study is below par abi?

Well, i am not surprised. Ur heart is crooked, thats why. Repent now.

Meanwhile, have u got any other so called "contradictions"?

I expected bones, u r bringing milk.

Felixomor na where you dey copy these lies from?

Ranchhoddas:
Felixomor na where you dey copy these lies from?

Why can't you just GET OUT of this thread?!!!!

promise10:

Why can't you just GET OUT of this thread?!!!!

Is your use of capitals supposed to scare me or something?

raphieMontella:


sorry i dont understand...
Is the bible no longer the word of god?
Jeremiah lied? He made a likewise statement in jeremiah 4:10..did he lie again?
Or wait...you need where they said God said?...

? Prophets lied...even in the bible
...so?

Even the bible contains quotes from satan, quotes from men etc.
So u can see that u dont even understand the term "bible"?

If u like quote what the devil said from the bible (e.g when the devil tempted Jesus) and begin to argue that the bible is the word of God.
Even a kindergatten kid knows thats called "quoting out of context"

So no point there, sorry

And please read about prophets in the bible who lied. Its all there. Again, quoting out of context cant be used as an alarm raiser.
You simply cut and paste a part of Jeremiah's lamentations and use it to make a claim. Yeah right.

Its as good as cutting "God exists" from a sentence from Richard Dawkins book and using it to conclude that Richard Dawkins believe in God. Stupidity!

Nevertheless, I know why u keep quoting out of context, its because u just want to keep talking by all means.

But even kids can read and know better. You can really improve.

raphieMontella:

them full ground...should i bring it on?

Hehehehehe, Wetin u dey wait for. I was even expecting bones, u brought milk

raphieMontella:

they aint straight...
You fell for the trap.

Cc felixomor

The last time I checked, u were the one in the devil's trap. he has tricked u into believing he doesnt exist. So that u never get to confess your sins and fornication and ask God for forgiveness and as a result go to hell, if u die prematurely.
Please come out. Jesus loves u

raphieMontella:

this is what were are working on...
The bots ban me...when ever i want to answer the first contradiction in detail...no idea why...
But youre wrong there..
The both words used have different origins in relation to the dyes used in producing them..
Read exo 25:4, rev17:4...you'd find out the two colours were treated differently..
Cc felixomor..

Again, u show ur desire too keep talking to hide a defeat of ur argument.

What has color description got to do with the dye it is produced with?

Well, Here is a scripture where red is used to describe "crimson" and "crimson" is linked to "scarlet"

Isa. 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.


Here is the word for "scarlet" in the hebrew manuscipt of the bible.

שׁני
shânı̂y
shaw-nee'
Of uncertain derivation; crimson, properly the insect or its color, also stuff dyed with it: - crimson, scarlet (thread).

Now here is the original greek translation from the part of the bible u are arguing.

"scarlet" in Matthew 27:28

κόκκινος
kokkinos
kok'-kee-nos
From G2848 (from the kernel shape of the insect); crimson colored: - scarlet (colour, coloured).

Those are straight from the original manuscript of the bible.

I purposely copied them straight so as to show that u have never ventured in your life to study the hebrew and greek writings from which the bible were translated to English. That is really sad of u.

U just jump in cut and paste and come to argue.

But u can see above that the bible uses red, crimson and even scarlet to some time refer to the same colour.

U have fired blank there!

If u like argue against the original greek translation, the truth is obvious now.

raphieMontella:

this is what were are working on...
The bots ban me...when ever i want to answer the first contradiction in detail...no idea why...
But youre wrong there..
The both words used have different origins in relation to the dyes used in producing them..
Read exo 25:4, rev17:4...you'd find out the two colours were treated differently..
Cc felixomor..

Again, u show ur desire too keep talking to hide a defeat of ur argument.

What has color description got to do with the dye it is produced with?

Well, Here is a scripture where red is used to describe "crimson" and "crimson" is linked to "scarlet"

Isa. 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.


Here is the word for "scarlet" in the hebrew manuscipt of the bible.

שׁני
shânı̂y
shaw-nee'
Of uncertain derivation; crimson, properly the insect or its color, also stuff dyed with it: - crimson, scarlet (thread).

Now here is the original greek translation from the part of the bible u are arguing.

"scarlet" in Matthew 27:28

κόκκινος
kokkinos
kok'-kee-nos
From G2848 (from the kernel shape of the insect); crimson colored: - scarlet (colour, coloured).

Those are straight from the original manuscript of the bible.

I purposely copied them straight so as to show that u have never ventured in your life to study the hebrew and greek writings from which the bible were translated to English. That is really sad of u.

U just jump in cut and paste and come to argue.

But u can see above that the bible uses red, crimson and even scarlet to some time refer to the same colour.

U have fired blank there!

If u like argue against the original greek translation, the truth is obvious now.

this is what were are working on...
The bots ban me...when ever i want to answer the first contradiction in detail...no idea why...
But youre wrong there..
The [b]both words used have different origins in relation to the dyes used in producing them..
Read exo 25:4, rev17:4...you'd find out the two colours were treated differently..
Cc felixomor.[/b]


Again, u show ur desire too keep talking to hide a defeat of ur argument.

What has color description got to do with the dye it is produced with?

Well, Here is a scripture where red is used to describe "crimson" and "crimson" is linked to "scarlet"

Isa. 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.


Here is the word for "scarlet" in the hebrew manuscipt of the bible.

שׁני
shânı̂y
shaw-nee'
Of uncertain derivation; crimson, properly the insect or its color, also stuff dyed with it: - crimson, scarlet (thread).

Now here is the original greek translation from the part of the bible u are arguing.

"scarlet" in Matthew 27:28

κόκκινος
kokkinos
kok'-kee-nos
From G2848 (from the kernel shape of the insect); crimson colored: - scarlet (colour, coloured).

Those are straight from the original manuscript of the bible.

I purposely copied them straight so as to show that u have never ventured in your life to study the hebrew and greek writings from which the bible were translated to English. That is really sad of u.

U just jump in cut and paste and come to argue.

But u can see above that the bible uses red, crimson and even scarlet to some time refer to the same colour.

U have fired blank there!

If u like argue against the original greek translation, the truth is obvious now.


Should i roll in More contradictions?

As i Said before, what r u waiting for?
Or u don tire to quote bible out of context?



okay good


Oh, so u see that there was no contradiction just that u were in a hurry and thought u had found suya meat for ur argument abi?


[b[i]]no! this is michief from you...
take note of all the bolded words...
Then tell me how there's no contradiction[/i][/b]

I say it again,
There is no contradiction there Mr. man

One of the verses is more detail than the other. Even a child can see that. But u r trying to capitalize on the information deficiency of Matthew in comparison to Mark. Thats all.

Matthew is clearly deficient on the time of the day when the disciples noticed the dry tree while Mark clearly specifies that they saw it in the next morning when they were returning.
Even a kid can clearly read that.



will you just stop making things up?
where did i substitute judah as God?
The passage says God was [b]with judah but he wasnt able to defeat the valley dudes because they had iron chariots...(more powerful than judah's resource)
Not because they didnt have faith..
In the whole of judges 1..i cant find a place which hints that their ''faith'' caused so or they fell into unbelief...
Can u provide something that hints so?[/b]



Again u show ur desperate style of bible study:

U read Judges 1 but why didnt u go to Judges 2?

because u r in a hurry to come and argue abi?

See God showing them the reason for their failure in battle of the valley?

Judges 2:1-4 -

And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.
Jdg 2:2 And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this?
Jdg 2:3 Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from before you; but they shall be as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare unto you.
Jdg 2:4 And it came to pass, when the angel of the LORD spake these words unto all the children of Israel, that the people lifted up their voice, and wept.


U can see that ur bible study is below par abi?

Well, i am not surprised. Ur heart is crooked, thats why. Repent now.

Meanwhile, have u got any other so called "contradictions"?

I expected bones, u r bringing milk.

Please do sharp sharp. Afterall its very easy to always quote out of context. Nevertheless, I am #FeelingBlessed

cc raphieMontella

felixomor:



Hehehehehe, Wetin u dey wait for. I was even expecting bones, u brought milk

i wanted to...but i wont...
stop playing around

The last time I checked, u were the one in the devil's trap. he has tricked u into believing he doesnt exist. So that u never get to confess your sins and fornication and ask God for forgiveness and as a result go to hell, if u die prematurely.
Please come out. Jesus loves u

argument ad hominem...
Learn to adress the point bruh...

felixomor:


Even the bible contains quotes from satan, quotes from men etc.
So u can see that u dont even understand the term "bible"?

If u like quote what the devil said from the bible (e.g when the devil tempted Jesus) and begin to argue that the bible is the word of God.
Even a kindergatten kid knows thats called "quoting out of context"

So no point there, sorry

And please read about prophets in the bible who lied. Its all there. Again, quoting out of context cant be used as an alarm raiser.
You simply cut and paste a part of Jeremiah's lamentations and use it to make a claim. Yeah right.

Its as good as cutting "God exists" from a sentence from Richard Dawkins book and using it to conclude that Richard Dawkins believe in God. Stupidity!

youre the stupid person here...
A prophet of God who is supposed to be under the influence of the holy spirit said your god lied...not once but twice...i asked a simple question...did jeremiah lie?
A simple yes or no is not costly...
Do you even know how you sound?

According to you...
The bible said in a place; god is all good and all loving and all merciful

in another place a prophet said and recorded that god flooded the whole earth including babies...

God is all loving so the prophet made a false accusation...god didnt flood the babies


or the concept of hell....the prophets are liers since god said he is all merciful...


Serzly are you okay?

Nevertheless, I know why u keep quoting out of context, its because u just want to keep talking by all means.

i see you have psychosis...

Read the whole of jer 20 and jer 4 and state how i quoted out of context...
I remember vividly...i gave you where your god himself admitted to being a lier...(eze 14:9)
Which you stylishly ignored..
In your bible...cases like that happened.
1 kings22:23 etc..

Simply say you dont know instead of feigning knowledge

But even kids can read and know better. You can really improve.

an argument at hominem wont help you...
Claiming i copped out a statement but in the case of the fig tree you did so...
Mind you..you havent answered the other contradictions
The fig tree et all..
I wont bring more since you have no answer but claim to do...until you do

raphieMontella:

this is what were are working on...
The bots ban me...when ever i want to answer the first contradiction in detail...no idea why...
But youre wrong there..
The both words used have different origins in relation to the dyes used in producing them..
Read exo 25:4, rev17:4...you'd find out the two colours were treated differently..

Cc felixomor..


Should i roll in More contradictions?

Again, u show ur desire too keep talking to hide a defeat of ur argument.

What has color description got to do with the dye it is produced with?

Well, Here is a scripture where red is used to describe "crimson" and "crimson" is linked to "scarlet"

Isa. 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.


Here is the word for "scarlet" in the hebrew manuscipt of the bible.

?
sha^ni^y
shaw-nee'
Of uncertain derivation; crimson, properly the insect or its color, also stuff dyed with it: - crimson, scarlet (thread).

Now here is the original greek translation from the part of the bible u are arguing.

"scarlet" in Matthew 27:28

??´
kokkinos
kok'-kee-nos
From G2848 (from the kernel shape of the insect); crimson colored: - scarlet (colour, coloured).

Those are straight from the original manuscript of the bible.

I purposely copied them straight so as to show that u have never ventured in your life to study the hebrew and greek writings from which the bible were translated to English. That is really sad of u.

U just jump in cut and paste and come to argue.

But u can see above that the bible uses red, crimson and even scarlet to some time refer to the same colour.

U have fired blank there!

If u like argue against the original greek translation, the truth is obvious now.

raphieMontella:

youre the stupid person here...

Actually more than ten people have prviously confirmed your stupidity on nairaland.
So u r actually trying to assign ur attributes to me.
I dodge am.

raphieMontella:

A prophet of God who is supposed to be under the influence of the holy spirit said your god lied...not once but twice...i asked a simple question...did jeremiah lie?
A simple yes or no is not costly...
Do you even know how you sound?

Ignoramus, Just look at u quoting out of context again.
That he is under the influence to write, doesnt mean he cannot write poetically to express his complains.
Please can u take a minute to just study about the history of the bible books u r quoting?
Moreover that u quoted twice doesnt mean u cant quote out of context.
U can even quote out of context a thousand times.
Its what fools do.

You dont even know what the Lamentations of Jeremiah were all about.
Somebody like u only enter Jeremiah, when u want to find verses for argument.
Please go and use wikipedia and enlighten urself.

The bible contains the words of people who were complaining, it contains words of who were prophecying, words of who were cursing, words of who were praying, words of who were admonishing etc.
The bible even contains the words spoken by satan, spirits etc.
U cant even differentiate such.

Even Jesus said "my God, my God why has thou forsaken me?" In Matt. 27:46

So going by ur logic, it also means God forsook Jesus abi?

Just kwantinue with ur subhuman interpretations.

U clearly dont know how to differentiate the different moods of the scriptures u r quoting.

Go and read the book of Job. Job also complained too. People like u will also read such and conclude that God abandoned Job too.

Bro, Please stop quoting out of context.

raphieMontella:

According to you...
The bible said in a place; god is all good and all loving and all merciful

in another place a prophet said and recorded that god flooded the whole earth including babies...

God is all loving so the prophet made a false accusation...god didnt flood the babies


or the concept of hell....the prophets are liers since god said he is all merciful...

14 2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Ignoramus,
God is all merciful (as u quote) but he has conditions. As u can read in the above scripture.
U can see that u only quote scriptures forgetting that there are scriptures somewhere else that are terms and conditions to the one u are quoting.
Everything comes with terms and conditions.
Moreover, if God chooses to destroy what he made, abeg wetin concern u?
Who r u to judge him?
U that has not finished battling with your sins and addictions?
Abeg Abeg.

raphieMontella:


Serzly are you okay?

Many people on this forum know u r the least okay between us both.

raphieMontella:



i see you have psychosis...

Bros, thats actually ur diagnosis. Especially for somebody who says gravity is a "code" (on another thread ) Hmmmm.

raphieMontella:


Read the whole of jer 20 and jer 4 and state how i quoted out of context...
I remember vividly...i gave you where your god himself admitted to being a lier...(eze 14:9)
Which you stylishly ignored..
In your bible...cases like that happened.
1 kings22:23 etc..

Simply say you dont know instead of feigning knowledge

Keep quiet. I never ignored any scripture.
God sometimes deceives evil prophets.
Yes, and its all for the greater good.
That doesnt make him a liar.
Just like the way police killing evil people doesnt make them "murderers".(literally speaking)
Its called Justice.

raphieMontella:


an argument at hominem wont help you...
Claiming i copped out a statement but in the case of the fig tree you did so...
Mind you..you havent answered the other contradictions
The fig tree et all..
I wont bring more since you have no answer but claim to do...until you do

Mumu, there was no cop out anywhere.
The nairaland robots erased my replies to ur questions.

I have made another thread as result here:
https://www.nairaland.com/3382900/felixomors-christian-reply-raphiemontella-atheist

As stated earlier.
Matthew clearly is less detailed than Mark as regards the episode of the fig tree.
Even primary school children know this.
Mark states the time of the day the disciples noticed it. Matthew doesnt.

U read Matthew straight ahead like a storybook without punctuation and u come in a hurry with argument.
Please, park well and read it properly.

When I told u to study bible chronology, u thought I meant to ridicule u, sorry its a good advice.

Sometimes the gap, between two sentences in a verse could be hours, days or even years.

If u dont reference a bible verse with others properly, u become doomed and begin to claim "contradictions", not knowing u r quoting out of context.

Receive Healing.

#FeelingBlessed

promise10:

Why can't you just GET OUT of this thread?!!!!

Thank u brother.

Ranchhoddas:
Felixomor na where you dey copy these lies from?

Well, If u dont have any meaningful contribution to the so called "contradictions"

Just obey the instruction above from Promise10 and gerrarahia

felixomor1:


Actually more than ten people have prviously confirmed your stupidity on nairaland.
So u r actually trying to assign ur attributes to me.
I dodge am.

why are being so childish?
Is it an inseparable trait of christianity?

[s]Ignoramus, Just look at u quoting out of context again.
That he is under the influence to write, doesnt mean he cannot write poetically to express his complains.
Please can u take a minute to just study about the history of the bible books u r quoting?
Moreover that u quoted twice doesnt mean u cant quote out of context.
U can even quote out of context a thousand times.
Its what fools do.[/s]

ad hominem

[s]You dont even know what the Lamentations of Jeremiah were all about.
Somebody like u only enter Jeremiah, when u want to find verses for argument.
Please go and use wikipedia and enlighten urself.

The bible contains the words of people who were complaining, it contains words of who were prophecying, words of who were cursing, words of who were praying, words of who were admonishing etc.
The bible even contains the words spoken by satan, spirits etc.
U cant even differentiate such.[/s]

gish gallop!

Even Jesus said "my God, my God why has thou forsaken me?" In Matt. 27:46

So going by ur logic, it also means God forsook Jesus abi?

do i look like a christian fanatic?
In a thread i interpreted it to ''myself myself...'' since he is god(una say na prophecy fulfiled)..
The trinity is a contradiction if analyzed...but this is not what we i asked you bruh

Just kwantinue with ur subhuman interpretations.

U clearly dont know how to differentiate the different moods of the scriptures u r quoting.

Go and read the book of Job. Job also complained too. People like u will also read such and conclude that God abandoned Job too.

Bro, Please stop quoting out of context.

simple question o...thats bringing this essay
is jeremiah a liar?

14 2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Ignoramus,
God is all merciful (as u quote) but he has conditions. As u can read in the above scripture.
U can see that u only quote scriptures forgetting that there are scriptures somewhere else that are terms and conditions to the one u are quoting.
Everything comes with terms and conditions.

ive not even brought out verses and you're already bluffing...
Do you even know what a contradiction is?

Moreover, if God chooses to destroy what he made, abeg wetin concern u?
Who r u to judge him?
U that has not finished battling with your sins and addictions?
Abeg Abeg.

ad hominems

Many people on this forum know u r the least okay between us both.

fallacious statement...
Is that all you have?



[/quote]
Bros, thats actually ur diagnosis. Especially for somebody who says gravity is a "code" (on another thread ) Hmmmm.[/quote]
what is wrong with you?
See why i said you have psychosis?
What has dna got to do with bible contradictions?
If you have anything to say about the dna and gravity...say it there and stop derailing this thread...
Haba

Keep quiet. I never ignored any scripture.
God sometimes deceives evil prophets.

so you've accepted he lies...good

Yes, and its all for the greater good.
That doesnt make him a liar.
Just like the way police killing evil people doesnt make them "murderers".(literally speaking)
Its called Justice.

so ezekiel was an evil prophet etc when god lied to him(a false prophesy) in Ezekiel 29:8-14 about egypt
or jeremiah in jer 34:2-5 about zedekiah which was not what happened in jer 52:9-11

Mumu, there was no cop out anywhere.
The nairaland robots erased my replies to ur questions.

I have made another thread as result here:
https://www.nairaland.com/3382900/felixomors-christian-reply-raphiemontella-atheist

As stated earlier.
Matthew clearly is less detailed than Mark as regards the episode of the fig tree.
Even primary school children know this.
Mark states the time of the day the disciples noticed it. Matthew doesnt.

U read Matthew straight ahead like a storybook without punctuation and u come in a hurry with argument.
Please, park well and read it properly.

When I told u to study bible chronology, u thought I meant to ridicule u, sorry its a good advice.

Sometimes the gap, between two sentences in a verse could be hours, days or even years.

If u dont reference a bible verse with others properly, u become doomed and begin to claim "contradictions", not knowing u r quoting out of context.

Receive Healing.

#FeelingBlessed

Still did nothing...except..

felixomor1:


Well, If u dont have any meaningful contribution to the so called "contradictions"

Just obey the instruction above from Promise10 and gerrarahia

Is the bot still chasing you in your dreams?

felixomor1:
this is what were are working on...
The bots ban me...when ever i want to answer the first contradiction in detail...no idea why...
But youre wrong there..
The [b]both words used have different origins in relation to the dyes used in producing them..
Read exo 25:4, rev17:4...you'd find out the two colours were treated differently..
Cc felixomor.[/b]


Again, u show ur desire too keep talking to hide a defeat of ur argument.

What has color description got to do with the dye it is produced with?

Well, Here is a scripture where red is used to describe "crimson" and "crimson" is linked to "scarlet"

Isa. 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.


Here is the word for "scarlet" in the hebrew manuscipt of the bible.

שׁני
shânı̂y
shaw-nee'
Of uncertain derivation; crimson, properly the insect or its color, also stuff dyed with it: - crimson, scarlet (thread).

Now here is the original greek translation from the part of the bible u are arguing.

"scarlet" in Matthew 27:28

κόκκινος
kokkinos
kok'-kee-nos
From G2848 (from the kernel shape of the insect); crimson colored: - scarlet (colour, coloured).

Those are straight from the original manuscript of the bible.

I purposely copied them straight so as to show that u have never ventured in your life to study the hebrew and greek writings from which the bible were translated to English. That is really sad of u.

U just jump in cut and paste and come to argue.

But u can see above that the bible uses red, crimson and even scarlet to some time refer to the same colour.

U have fired blank there!

If u like argue against the original greek translation, the truth is obvious now.


Should i roll in More contradictions?

As i Said before, what r u waiting for?
Or u don tire to quote bible out of context?



okay good


Oh, so u see that there was no contradiction just that u were in a hurry and thought u had found suya meat for ur argument abi?


[b[i]]no! this is michief from you...
take note of all the bolded words...
Then tell me how there's no contradiction[/i][/b]

I say it again,
There is no contradiction there Mr. man

One of the verses is more detail than the other. Even a child can see that. But u r trying to capitalize on the information deficiency of Matthew in comparison to Mark. Thats all.

Matthew is clearly deficient on the time of the day when the disciples noticed the dry tree while Mark clearly specifies that they saw it in the next morning when they were returning.
Even a kid can clearly read that.



will you just stop making things up?
where did i substitute judah as God?
The passage says God was [b]with judah but he wasnt able to defeat the valley dudes because they had iron chariots...(more powerful than judah's resource)
Not because they didnt have faith..
In the whole of judges 1..i cant find a place which hints that their ''faith'' caused so or they fell into unbelief...
Can u provide something that hints so?[/b]



Again u show ur desperate style of bible study:

U read Judges 1 but why didnt u go to Judges 2?

because u r in a hurry to come and argue abi?

See God showing them the reason for their failure in battle of the valley?

Judges 2:1-4 -

And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.
Jdg 2:2 And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this?
Jdg 2:3 Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from before you; but they shall be as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare unto you.
Jdg 2:4 And it came to pass, when the angel of the LORD spake these words unto all the children of Israel, that the people lifted up their voice, and wept.


U can see that ur bible study is below par abi?

Well, i am not surprised. Ur heart is crooked, thats why. Repent now.

Meanwhile, have u got any other so called "contradictions"?

I expected bones, u r bringing milk.

Please do sharp sharp. Afterall its very easy to always quote out of context. Nevertheless, I am #FeelingBlessed

cc raphieMontella

will answer this in the evening....
Ma go field first

Ranchhoddas:
Is the bot still chasing you in your dreams?

Hahaha, very funny

raphieMontella:

why are being so childish?
Is it an inseparable trait of christianity?




ad hominem




gish gallop!

do i look like a christian fanatic?
In a thread i interpreted it to ''myself myself...'' since he is god(una say na prophecy fulfiled)..
The trinity is a contradiction if analyzed...but this is not what we i asked you bruh


simple question o...thats bringing this essay
is jeremiah a liar?


ive not even brought out verses and you're already bluffing...
Do you even know what a contradiction is?


ad hominems




fallacious statement...
Is that all you have?




Bros, thats actually ur diagnosis. Especially for somebody who says gravity is a "code" (on another thread ) Hmmmm.
what is wrong with you?
See why i said you have psychosis?
What has dna got to do with bible contradictions?
If you have anything to say about the dna and gravity...say it there and stop derailing this thread...
Haba



Keep quiet. I never ignored any scripture.
God sometimes deceives evil prophets.
so you've accepted he lies...good

Yes, and its all for the greater good.
That doesnt make him a liar.
Just like the way police killing evil people doesnt make them "murderers".(literally speaking)
Its called Justice.
so ezekiel was an evil prophet etc when god lied to him(a false prophesy) in Ezekiel 29:8-14 about egypt
or jeremiah in jer 34:2-5 about zedekiah which was not what happened in jer 52:9-11



Mumu, there was no cop out anywhere.
The nairaland robots erased my replies to ur questions.

I have made another thread as result here:
https://www.nairaland.com/3382900/felixomors-christian-reply-raphiemontella-atheist

As stated earlier.
Matthew clearly is less detailed than Mark as regards the episode of the fig tree.
Even primary school children know this.
Mark states the time of the day the disciples noticed it. Matthew doesnt.

U read Matthew straight ahead like a storybook without punctuation and u come in a hurry with argument.
Please, park well and read it properly.

When I told u to study bible chronology, u thought I meant to ridicule u, sorry its a good advice.

Sometimes the gap, between two sentences in a verse could be hours, days or even years.

If u dont reference a bible verse with others properly, u become doomed and begin to claim "contradictions", not knowing u r quoting out of context.

Receive Healing.

#FeelingBlessed

Still did nothing...except..

Not even a single point made!
.
Please have u run out of scriptural "contradictions"?

I am waiting.

#StillFeelingTheBlessing