₦airaland Forum

Image123:
Yes it was, you wouldn't know if it was would you? It's like a blind man asking me how there's green colour in the Nigerian flag.

actually...its more like a specie of blind men..each tellinng each other what the colour of the flag is..if there is even a flag to begin with

raphieMontella:
actually...its more like a specie of blind men..each tellinng each other what the colour of the flag is..if there is even a flag to begin with

But you are the one that keeps asking if there is a flag, the joke is on you.

Image123:
But you are the one that keeps asking if there is a flag, the joke is on you.

no..you keep on telling me there is a flag..and that you know the colour

MrMontella:
no..you keep on telling me there is a flag..and that you know the colour

Not forgetting the mention that you are a blind man arguing about the colour. senseless.

Image123:
Yes it was, you wouldn't know if it was would you? It's like a blind man asking me how there's green colour in the Nigerian flag.

answer the OP!

hopefulLandlord:
answer the OP!

So that? Well, i already did.

Image123:
So that? Well, i already did.

Cop out without contributing anything reasonable..

EyeHateGod:
Cop out without contributing anything reasonable..

What is the definition of reasonable, anti-christianity? Find something useful to do with life please, it's short.

Image123:
What is the definition of reasonable, anti-christianity? Find something useful to do with life please, it's short.

Go up five steps and see it..

EyeHateGod:
Go up five steps and see it..

The first thing i did was to answer the OP. It is not my fault or problem that you don't like the answer.

winner01:
Why do these people say the same thing over and over? We have addressed this issues severally. Are y'all out of accusations?

I honestly dont think atheists are going to be bringing new arguments against christianity anytime soon.

What arguments have you guys debunked. The contradiction in the synoptic gospels has been seen for over a 1000 years and till date those contradictions have never been reconciled.

Please if you have a rebuttal to the contradiction between Matthew and Luke on genealogy of Jesus kindly share it and enlighten everyone.

Thank you

LiberaDeus:
What arguments have you guys debunked. The contradiction in the synoptic gospels has been seen for over a 1000 years and till date those contradictions have never been reconciled.

Please if you have a rebuttal to the contradiction between Matthew and Luke on genealogy of Jesus kindly share it and enlighten everyone.

Thank you

There's no contradiction there, although you seem to be derailing the thread.

LiberaDeus:
What arguments have you guys debunked. The contradiction in the synoptic gospels has been seen for over a 1000 years and till date those contradictions have never been reconciled.

Please if you have a rebuttal to the contradiction between Matthew and Luke on genealogy of Jesus kindly share it and enlighten everyone.

Thank you

Has been refuted for 1000s of years


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWq3fVQuSuA

Richirich713:
Has as been refuted for 1000s of years


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWq3fVQuSuA

This are no refutation my Friend did you even watch ya video?

EyeHateGod:
This are no refutation my Friend did you even watch ya video?

Lol, it's funny how confident you lie to yourself.

Image123:
Lol, it's funny how confident you lie to yourself.

Like i said those are no refutation..

Richirich713:
Has as been refuted for 1000s of years


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWq3fVQuSuA

lol..the op is not about bible contradictions...
Read it

raphieMontella:
Author=Anonymous
Dating= Suspected to be around 80-100C.E though it may have been composed during the mid-2nd century as 1st century and early 2nd century christian apologists make no reference or citations to it.
Source of most of its contents=Biblical Markan Gospel.

The gospel of matthew is largely regarded as an account of a zealous fictional jewish christian writer who was neither an apostle of jesus nor an eyewitness to the period of jesus's life....
The book itself begins with a contradiction..
Matthew and Luke give two contradictory
genealogies for Joseph
(Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). Matthew and Luke cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was...
This was as a result of the writers trying to explain fix the messianic Jesus into the descendants of David which was supposed to be the literal(natural) bloodline of the messiah..
The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the
seed of David" (Romans 1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same Greek
word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or "offspring." The point is that the Messiah had
to be a physical descendant of King David through
the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical
descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus,Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah
if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line
of David was required...
This also proves that the apostle Paul had no idea of the acclaimed virgin birth prophecy matthew claimed was fulfiled in matthew 1:22-23:
In the original context, however,
Isaiah made this statement as a sign to Ahaz, king
of Judah, that an alliance recently formed against him by Rezin, the king of Syria, and Pekah, the king of Israel, would not succeed in defeating him. The
Lord (Yahweh), as he was prone to do in those days, had sent Isaiah to reassure Ahaz that the
alliance would not prevail. Isaiah begged Ahaz to ask for a sign that his prophecy was true
.Finally,
Isaiah said to him, "Hear now, O house of David! Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will you
weary my God also? Therefore Yahweh Himself will
give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive,
and bear a Son, and shall call his name
Immanuel" (Isaiah 7:13-14).
The context
clearly shows that this so-called prophecy was made not to foretell the birth of Jesus some 700
years later but the birth of a child to that time and
that situation.(believed to be isaiah's wife)
How could a birth that would happen 700 years later, after Ahaz was dead and the battles
had long since been fought, have been a sign to
him that the Syrian-Israelite alliance would fail?.
"Immanuel". Since that name means
"God with us", it was supposed to show Ahaz that
God was on his side..Mary nor Joseph never called Jesus ''Immanuel''
The Hebrew word "almah" which is used in the
Isaiah verse does not mean "virgin" but "young
woman" and mean the ''young woman'' is with child/pregnant.. It is correctly translated in the Tanakh, the
Revised Standard Version, the Revised English
Bible, and the New Jerusalem Bible,and the Catholic bible..

However The Hebrew word "bethulah" means "virgin." In
the book of Isaiah, "bethulah" appears four times (23:12, 37:22, 47:1, 62:5), so its author was aware of the word;and would have used the word ''bethulah'' since that concept was totally foreign to them and would have been a remarkable event
This was most likely as a result of trying to elevate the christian mystic saviour's status to god-man/superrnatural as opposing organizations like the cult of asclepius and most christian followers at that time were gentiles who were conditioned by pagan beliefs..
OTHER FALSE PROPHECIES
Moving on..
In Matthew 2:4-6..He claims that the prophecy in Micah 5:2 was fulfiled..

.

"Bethlehem Ephrathah" is the name of the descendants of eprahtah and also the name of a person
person: Bethlehem the son (or grandson) of
Ephrathah (1 Chronicles 4:4, 2:50-51)
This prophecy could therefore refer to either a native of
the clan or to a descendent of the person. If the
latter, Jesus does not qualify since neither of his
alleged genealogies list
either Bethlehem or Ephrathah.


Moving on..

In Matthew 2:17,,Matthew claimed the fulfilment of a NON-prophecy in Hosea11:1

But..the passage Hosea 11:1 actually reads:When isreal was a child,I loved him,and out of Egypt I called my son..
However, Matthew quotes only the second half of Hosea 11:1. The first half of the verse makes it very clear that the verse refers to God
calling the Israelites out of Egypt in the exodus led
by Moses, and has nothing to do with Jesus....

Moving on..
In Matthew 2:17..Matthew claimed that Jeremiah 31:15 was fulfiled

This is a pure invention on Matthew's part. Herod
was guilty of many monstrous crimes, including the
murder of several members of his own family.
However,it is not mentioned in neither Apocrypha nor the Talmud, ancient historians such as Josephus, who
delighted in listing Herod's crimes, do not mention
what would have been Herod's greatest crime by far. It simply didn't happen.

Still moving..
In Matthew 2:23..he claimed that a prophecy that Jesus would be called a Nazarene(an inhabitant of Nazareth) was fulfiled

As a matter of fact,bible scholars have not found any statement from any old testament prophet that could be referenced to this...
The word Nazareth, as well as
Nazarene, was never even mentioned in the Old
Testament.
Even Josephus who listed out the cities in galilee made no mention of Nazareth..
Now this begs the question-Why would Yahweh,Jesus or the Holy spirit guide Matthew to make such a claim?

Moving on...

In Matthew 21:1-7..Matthew claimed Zech9:9 was fulfiled..

No event was too trival for matthew to see prophecy fulfilment in it
There are two conspicuous points of difference in
Matthew's version of this event and Mark's and
Luke's: (1) Matthew had Jesus riding BOTH a
donkey and her colt;(Circus style;stunt rider)
Mark and Luke had Jesus
riding only a colt, and (2) Matthew saw it as
fulfillment of a prophecy; Mark and Luke said nothing at all about prophecy fulfillment being
involved...This on matthew's part is as a result of misunderstanding
hebrew poetry...as this is a case of parallel emphasis
Examples of parallel emphasis in the bible include Zech 7:1,,Zech 12:6,,Deut 4:13 etc...
Lets move on..
In Matthew 27:9...Matthew falsely claimed that Jeremiah made a prophecy about the purchase of the potters field

There is NO Place in Jeremiah that this statement is made...
Biblical scholars suggested that Matthew was quoting "loosely" a
statement that was actually written by Zechariah
(11:12-13) rather than Jeremiah. If this is true, then
one can only wonder why a divinely inspired writer, being guided by the omniscient Holy Spirit,
would have said Jeremiah instead of Zechariah.
Why would Yahweh,Jesus or the Holy spirit guide Matthew to make such a claim?
looking closely at the suggested zech11:12-13...it stresses largely on the word ''ME''
Also,,Many versions (RSV, NRSV, JB, NAB, REB, GNB, NWT translate this passage to read ''Treasury''



Matthew, in his zeal to prove that Jesus was the
Messiah, searched the Old Testament for passages
(sometimes just phrases) that could be construed
as messianic prophecies and then created or
modified events in Jesus' life to fulfill those
"prophecies.''...he was however,,also a fictional writer and an inventor..
E.g The massacre of kids by herod...
The invasion of Jerusalem by zombies(matt 27:52-53),,The instant withering of the fig tree...which creates a contradictory account to mark's own account(mark may have been symbolic#the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70AD though God was with them)

[color=blue]CONTRADICTIONS IN MATTHEW IN RELATION TO THE OTHER GOSPELS
The status of the fig tree...
The number of blind men on the road to jericho...
Where Jesus met his disciples before converting them...
The colour of Jesus's robe...
Contradictions on Jesus's utterances at pilate's hearing..
Conflicting arrest accounts..
Conflicting resurrection stories but to mention a few...


can this gospel account really be divinely inspired?..or its just another heretic account?

Image123:
There's no contradiction there, although you seem to be derailing the thread.

the op was never focused on contradictions

Image123:
The first thing i did was to answer the OP. It is not my fault or problem that you don't like the answer.

raphieMontella:
Author=Anonymous
Dating= Suspected to be around 80-100C.E though it may have been composed during the mid-2nd century as 1st century and early 2nd century christian apologists make no reference or citations to it.
Source of most of its contents=Biblical Markan Gospel.

The gospel of matthew is largely regarded as an account of a zealous fictional jewish christian writer who was neither an apostle of jesus nor an eyewitness to the period of jesus's life....
The book itself begins with a contradiction..
Matthew and Luke give two contradictory
genealogies for Joseph
(Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). Matthew and Luke cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was...
This was as a result of the writers trying to explain fix the messianic Jesus into the descendants of David which was supposed to be the literal(natural) bloodline of the messiah..
The apostle Paul says that Jesus "was born of the
seed of David" (Romans 1:3). Here the word "seed" is literally in the Greek "sperma." This same Greek
word is translated in other verses as "descendant(s)" or "offspring." The point is that the Messiah had
to be a physical descendant of King David through
the male line. That Jesus had to be a physical
descendant of David means that even if Joseph had legally adopted Jesus,Jesus would still not qualify as Messiah
if he had been born of a virgin - seed from the line
of David was required...
This also proves that the apostle Paul had no idea of the acclaimed virgin birth prophecy matthew claimed was fulfiled in matthew 1:22-23:
In the original context, however,
Isaiah made this statement as a sign to Ahaz, king
of Judah, that an alliance recently formed against him by Rezin, the king of Syria, and Pekah, the king of Israel, would not succeed in defeating him. The
Lord (Yahweh), as he was prone to do in those days, had sent Isaiah to reassure Ahaz that the
alliance would not prevail. Isaiah begged Ahaz to ask for a sign that his prophecy was true
.Finally,
Isaiah said to him, "Hear now, O house of David! Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will you
weary my God also? Therefore Yahweh Himself will
give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive,
and bear a Son, and shall call his name
Immanuel" (Isaiah 7:13-14).
The context
clearly shows that this so-called prophecy was made not to foretell the birth of Jesus some 700
years later but the birth of a child to that time and
that situation.(believed to be isaiah's wife)
How could a birth that would happen 700 years later, after Ahaz was dead and the battles
had long since been fought, have been a sign to
him that the Syrian-Israelite alliance would fail?.
"Immanuel". Since that name means
"God with us", it was supposed to show Ahaz that
God was on his side..Mary nor Joseph never called Jesus ''Immanuel''
The Hebrew word "almah" which is used in the
Isaiah verse does not mean "virgin" but "young
woman" and mean the ''young woman'' is with child/pregnant.. It is correctly translated in the Tanakh, the
Revised Standard Version, the Revised English
Bible, and the New Jerusalem Bible,and the Catholic bible..

However The Hebrew word "bethulah" means "virgin." In
the book of Isaiah, "bethulah" appears four times (23:12, 37:22, 47:1, 62:5), so its author was aware of the word;and would have used the word ''bethulah'' since that concept was totally foreign to them and would have been a remarkable event
This was most likely as a result of trying to elevate the christian mystic saviour's status to god-man/superrnatural as opposing organizations like the cult of asclepius and most christian followers at that time were gentiles who were conditioned by pagan beliefs..
OTHER FALSE PROPHECIES
Moving on..
In Matthew 2:4-6..He claims that the prophecy in Micah 5:2 was fulfiled..

.

"Bethlehem Ephrathah" is the name of the descendants of eprahtah and also the name of a person
person: Bethlehem the son (or grandson) of
Ephrathah (1 Chronicles 4:4, 2:50-51)
This prophecy could therefore refer to either a native of
the clan or to a descendent of the person. If the
latter, Jesus does not qualify since neither of his
alleged genealogies list
either Bethlehem or Ephrathah.


Moving on..

In Matthew 2:17,,Matthew claimed the fulfilment of a NON-prophecy in Hosea11:1

But..the passage Hosea 11:1 actually reads:When isreal was a child,I loved him,and out of Egypt I called my son..
However, Matthew quotes only the second half of Hosea 11:1. The first half of the verse makes it very clear that the verse refers to God
calling the Israelites out of Egypt in the exodus led
by Moses, and has nothing to do with Jesus....

Moving on..
In Matthew 2:17..Matthew claimed that Jeremiah 31:15 was fulfiled

This is a pure invention on Matthew's part. Herod
was guilty of many monstrous crimes, including the
murder of several members of his own family.
However,it is not mentioned in neither Apocrypha nor the Talmud, ancient historians such as Josephus, who
delighted in listing Herod's crimes, do not mention
what would have been Herod's greatest crime by far. It simply didn't happen.

Still moving..
In Matthew 2:23..he claimed that a prophecy that Jesus would be called a Nazarene(an inhabitant of Nazareth) was fulfiled

As a matter of fact,bible scholars have not found any statement from any old testament prophet that could be referenced to this...
The word Nazareth, as well as
Nazarene, was never even mentioned in the Old
Testament.
Even Josephus who listed out the cities in galilee made no mention of Nazareth..
Now this begs the question-Why would Yahweh,Jesus or the Holy spirit guide Matthew to make such a claim?

Moving on...

In Matthew 21:1-7..Matthew claimed Zech9:9 was fulfiled..

No event was too trival for matthew to see prophecy fulfilment in it
There are two conspicuous points of difference in
Matthew's version of this event and Mark's and
Luke's: (1) Matthew had Jesus riding BOTH a
donkey and her colt;(Circus style;stunt rider)
Mark and Luke had Jesus
riding only a colt, and (2) Matthew saw it as
fulfillment of a prophecy; Mark and Luke said nothing at all about prophecy fulfillment being
involved...This on matthew's part is as a result of misunderstanding
hebrew poetry...as this is a case of parallel emphasis
Examples of parallel emphasis in the bible include Zech 7:1,,Zech 12:6,,Deut 4:13 etc...
Lets move on..
In Matthew 27:9...Matthew falsely claimed that Jeremiah made a prophecy about the purchase of the potters field

There is NO Place in Jeremiah that this statement is made...
Biblical scholars suggested that Matthew was quoting "loosely" a
statement that was actually written by Zechariah
(11:12-13) rather than Jeremiah. If this is true, then
one can only wonder why a divinely inspired writer, being guided by the omniscient Holy Spirit,
would have said Jeremiah instead of Zechariah.
Why would Yahweh,Jesus or the Holy spirit guide Matthew to make such a claim?
looking closely at the suggested zech11:12-13...it stresses largely on the word ''ME''
Also,,Many versions (RSV, NRSV, JB, NAB, REB, GNB, NWT translate this passage to read ''Treasury''



Matthew, in his zeal to prove that Jesus was the
Messiah, searched the Old Testament for passages
(sometimes just phrases) that could be construed
as messianic prophecies and then created or
modified events in Jesus' life to fulfill those
"prophecies.''...he was however,,also a fictional writer and an inventor..
E.g The massacre of kids by herod...
The invasion of Jerusalem by zombies(matt 27:52-53),,The instant withering of the fig tree...which creates a contradictory account to mark's own account(mark may have been symbolic#the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70AD though God was with them)

[color=blue]CONTRADICTIONS IN MATTHEW IN RELATION TO THE OTHER GOSPELS
The status of the fig tree...
The number of blind men on the road to jericho...
Where Jesus met his disciples before converting them...
The colour of Jesus's robe...
Contradictions on Jesus's utterances at pilate's hearing..
Conflicting arrest accounts..
Conflicting resurrection stories but to mention a few...


can this gospel account really be divinely inspired?..or its just another heretic account?

you did not sire...

Image123:
Not forgetting the mention that you are a blind man arguing about the colour. senseless.

we are both blind...and you claim to be an authority on the colour of a flag that either there or not..
Without evidence

MrMontella:
lol..the op is not about bible contradictions...
Read it

I wasn't responding to the op post.

MrMontella:
the op was never focused on contradictions

Exactly, that's why i gently reminded him that he was derailing the thread by talking about contradictions.

MrMontella:
you did not sire...

i clearly did in the post quoted below.

Image123:
Yes it was, you wouldn't know if it was would you? It's like a blind man asking me how there's green colour in the Nigerian flag.

MrMontella:
we are both blind...and you claim to be an authority on the colour of a flag that either there or not..
Without evidence

Good that you agree to your blindness. So how would you know if i told you the colour of the flag. The flag is clearly there, it's the book of Matthew in this case. You want to know if it is divinely inspired. How would you know or authenticate when i tell you it's colour?

EyeHateGod:
This are no refutation my Friend did you even watch ya video?

Did u watch the video?

Richirich713:
Did u watch the video?

It was talking about genenology..