You sure do tell people who they are, what they think, and what they feel quite often, Ed. It's rude comments like that that get others so irritated with you. Why don't you just offer the challenge instead taking stab after stab? You're the dimmest light for god I've ever seen. And I'm not saying that to be rude, it's just something that's becoming so apparent to me. People are supposed to see Jesus in you. You're supposed to be a diplomat for god. I don't see Jesus in you. All I see is a spoiled, self rightcheous child.

This post was last modified: Jul 24, 2008 04:13 PM by 8 Ball.

God does not forigive blaspheming the holy spirit, period.

"You sure do tell people who they are, what they think, and what they feel quite often,'


8 Ball
I didn't tell anyone anything,I said I was taking a guess, so I guessed wrong.Once again, do not turn a thread into being about me.The topic is contradiction or lack there of in the Bible.

George,
Here’s the deal.

You are insisting that there are contradiction throughout the Bible.
My claim is that there are many who have made that same accusation, and never once have I come across one that was legit. I’m 100% sure, you’re not going to be the first person in history to show there are contradictions.
You can post 100 of these examples, they all can be explained w/o contradiction. But, I’m sure you’ll keep believing there are contradictions and that’s what is wearisome

The 40 years comment you made has to do with consequences of sin, not the forgiveness of sin.If my child disobeyed me or her mother, and she said she was sorry, we would forgive her, but that doesn’t mean she escapes the consequences of that sin. She would still lose out on going out with friends or something like that.

You can post 100 of these examples, they all can be explained w/o contradiction. But, I’m sure you’ll keep believing there are contradictions and that’s what is wearisome.

Actually, I posted what I did, to spur conversation about it. You have made claims in the past that there are no contradictions in the bible. I posted that video, because they seem valid to me. You then wanted to respond. Then I responded to your responses. You haven't nailed the coffin shut on any of the proposed contradictions yet. They may not be contradictions in your mind, but you haven't shown that to all of us yet. This is how conversations on public forums works. So do you just want to address what I may or may not "keep believing," or do you want to play out the conversation on this?

The 40 years comment you made has to do with consequences of sin, not the forgiveness of sin.

So sometimes, he instantly forgives and doesn't punish us with 40 years of desert wandering, and sometimes he does. This seems inconsistent, but I will agree that the 40 years thing alone, does not present a contradiction. I would say the eternal punishment thing does.

Secondly, you didn't wrap up an address to my iron chariots issue. Here is the text of where we left off on the issue, if you feel like addressing it:

I understood that the "he" is referring to Judah, but it specificallly states that the LORD was with him and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain, but not the valley, because of the iron chariots. This implies that he was able to drive out the mountain inhabitants BECAUSE the lord was with him. So the only way that this is NOT a contradiction, is if the lord chose not to help him drive out the chariot users. So if you say that this is not a contradiction, then you have to say that it is incorrect in stating that the lord was with him, because why would the lord be with him and not help him defeat the iron chariot users, like he helped him drive out the mountain dwellers? You need to clarify this. You can't just look past it.

"G"

Apologies for the Google answer. But this explains it better than I could.

It has been suggested that the Bible is filled with contradictions. One of the supposed contradictions is between Joshua 17:18 and Judges 1:19. Let us look closely at these verses and their contexts to see if any real contradiction exists.

Joshua 17:18: “But the mountain country shall be yours. Although it is wooded, you shall cut it down, and its farthest extent shall be yours; for you shall drive out the Canaanites, though they have iron chariots and are strong.”

Judges 1:19: “So the Lord was with Judah. And they drove out the mountaineers, but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the lowland, because they had chariots of iron.”

After reading the two verses, it may look like they contradict one another. Did the children of Israel defeat the Canaanites with their chariots of iron as Joshua apparently had said they would, or were the chariots just too powerful for the people of Judah to overcome?

These two passages have several plausible ways of reconciliation. And, please remember that the exact way to reconcile any contradiction need not be pinpointed, as long as a possible way can be provided. The rest of this brief answer will deal with only two of the many possible ways to reconcile the passages.

The first way to reconcile the passages is to show that Joshua was informing his listeners that they had the power to drive out the Canaanites only if they would follow God faithfully and be confident in His promises. Judges chapter 2:1-3 says:

Then the Angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said: “I led you up from Egypt and brought you to the land of which I swore to your fathers; and I said, ‘I will never break My covenant with you. And you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land; you shall tear down their altars.’ But you have not obeyed My voice. Why have you done this? Therefore I also said, ‘I will not drive them out before you; but they shall be thorns in your side, and their gods shall be a snare to you.’ ”

God’s promise through Joshua was not an unconditional guarantee that the children of Israel would possess all of the land they had been promised. It was conditional, based upon the faithfulness of the Israelites and their obedience to God’s commandments. After all, God never would force the Israelites to clear the wooded areas against their will. Neither would He force them to conquer the iron chariots. The two verses under discussion easily could be dealing with land that God chose not to clear of its previous inhabitants because of the disobedience of the people of Judah.

A second possible solution could be that the children of Israel did conquer the mountain country and succeeded in driving out its inhabitants for a brief time, but they were unable to maintain control of the cities. Thus, by the time referred to in Judges 1, the cities already could have been retaken by the chariots of iron.

As a final word, notice that Joshua said that “the mountain country” and “its farthest extents” were the promised possession of the Israelites. In Judges 1:19, the children of Israel did, indeed, drive out “the inhabitants of the mountains.” Unless we force the phrase “its farthest extents” in Joshua 17:18 to read “lowland” as in Judges 1:19, then there is absolutely no hint of a contradiction, and this entire explanation is unnecessary.

“Blasphemy of the Spirit”, the unforgivable sin, is recorded in Matthew 12 and Mark 3. However, these passages are referring to the same event that took place at a pivotal, turning point in Jesus ministry.



Jesus healing on the Sabbath in total disrespect of the rules of the religious leaders was the “last straw”. In response, the unbelieving religious leaders decided that Jesus must be eliminated (Mark 3:6; Matt. 12:14). That’s when they began to discredit his power by saying that it was from Satan (Mark 3:22; Matt. 12:24). Jesus response to them was four-fold:

1) First, He asked them the logical question: Why would Satan give me power to destroy his kingdom? (Mk. 3:23-27; Matt:12:26)

2) He then provided a more logical conclusion: If my power is from the Spirit of God, then God’s Anointed must be in your midst. (Matt. 12:28)

3) He then warned the unbelieving religious leaders about the implication of rejecting him and his offer of forgiveness: It would be an unforgivable sin, a sin with ‘eternal’ consequences. (Matt. 12:31-32; Mark 3:28-29)

4) He then pointed them to the most irrefutable evidence that he would provide to prove he was the Savior—his future resurrection from the dead—so that they would change their mind and turn to him as Savior. (Matt. 12:38-40)

The unforgivable sin is the rejection of the work of God for man.
A christian cannot commit the 'unforgivable sin' because he is saved for all his sins; past, present and future by the blood of the lamb, the redeemer who died for all our sins. ALL.
It is a very powerful lie of the devil to believe that a saved saint can be denied living in eternity before the One who paid for him with his blood.