-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Biblical Contradictions
- Thread starter Vadergirl123
- Start date
Vadergirl123
Active Member
Wondering if you ever got around to this one: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2921144-post88.html
It's been over a month now.
It's been over a month now.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
The meal that they ate was the Passover meal!!!
You said
"The lambs were slaughtered on the first day of unleavened bread(14th) and then eaten the next night(15th)"
I quote Exodus again.
Exodus 12:5-9
5Your lamb shall be without blemish, a year-old male; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats. 6You shall keep it until the fourteenth day of this month; then the whole assembled congregation of Israel shall slaughter it at twilight. 7They shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and the lintel of the houses in which they eat it. 8They shall eat the lamb that same night; they shall eat it roasted over the fire with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. 9Do not eat any of it raw or boiled in water, but roasted over the fire, with its head, legs, and inner organs.
They prepped the Passover meal, then when it was time (as Luke so explicitlysays), they ate the Passover meal...it was all done the same night.
13*and they, having gone away, found as he hath said to them, and they made ready the passover.
14*And when the hour come, he reclined (at meat), and the twelve apostles with him,
15*and he said unto them, `With desire I did desire to eat this passover with you before my suffering,
The only reason it would say, when the hour had come, is because it is letting the reader know it was the proper time to eat the Passover. Why do you think it says (at meat)? BECAUSE IT WAS PASSOVER!!! Then Jesus explains how did desire to eat the meal that they just ate. This translation was taken from Youngs Literal Translation, one of the best translations of the bible.
Earlier you tried to add a different meaning to the context of the word desire...you wanted it to mean covet or to desire over something restricted...there is one majorproblem with this, NO BIBLE TRANSLATION SAYS THIS!!!
Passover was the Last Supper.
I'm done explaining this...if you can't understand this...it's because you choose not to.
Last edited:
Vadergirl123
Active Member
You still don't understand what I'm saying.I'm talking about the meal on the 14th NOT the 15th, You're disagreeing with me and Jay when you say the meal they ate on the 14th was the passover.
Yes I did, and I thought you agreed that they ate the passover on the 15th.
You're not explaining what you're saying very well. You just keep saying the passover meal was on the 15th and they ate the passover. Again I agree the Passover meal was on the 15th, but you don't seem tro realize I'm talking about the meal ON THE FOURTEENTH, Here can I ask just one more question. Do you believe they ate a meal on the 14th? You haven't answered this question yet and I've asked like three times. Or is your answer that they ate the passover meal. If so then you'd be saying they ate it on the 14th, and therfore contradicting yourself.
I do understand the passage. In fact I'm begining to think you're the one chosing not too.
Last edited:
Vadergirl123
Active Member
How do you know they didn't eat a meal before the 14th was finished?
I don't think the phrase, "at meat" automatically implies they're eating the passover. It means they're eating a meal. Wouldn't it make more sense to say you desire to eat a meal that hasn't yet come? So then you take an english translation over the meaning of the greek and hebrew words?
I don't know why, but the greek word that was translated into english had the meaning of a type of forbidden desire. I gave you some good examples which you can look up and see for yourself.
Vadergirl123
Active Member
Oh gosh I'll get around to it hahaha, but yeah sorry sometimes I look over things, my bad.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
I'm positive me and Jay are on the same page about this...it is you who is confused...you have no idea of what you're talking about, that much is evident. If I had any sense, I'd ignore you as well.
I am trying to understand you. Are you seriously suggesting that the ate the last supper right before sundown for the specific reason of not making it a Passover?
Or is it that you still don't understand that if they had it after sundown it would have been a Passover?
Last edited:
Vadergirl123
Active Member
No. 50 Did Jesus tell his apostles to go barefoot and without a staff?
Looking Unto Jesus - Go with or without sandals? - Limestone Church of Christ, Kingston, Ontario, Standing for New Testament Christianity, Bible, faith, Bible study, word of God, Christianity, Christian, church, truth, atheism, answers, gospel, salva
Looking Unto Jesus - Go with or without sandals? - Limestone Church of Christ, Kingston, Ontario, Standing for New Testament Christianity, Bible, faith, Bible study, word of God, Christianity, Christian, church, truth, atheism, answers, gospel, salva
Vadergirl123
Active Member
waitasec
Veteran Member
oh now that is settled i'm beginning to see the light...
Vadergirl, I still don't think you have adequately addressed the issue of the crucifixion occurring both before and after passover.
And copying links here is a rather pointless exercise. We are all perfectly capable of googleing for ourselves.
And copying links here is a rather pointless exercise. We are all perfectly capable of googleing for ourselves.
Vadergirl123
Active Member
You're right I haven't and I'm still looking into it, however I wanted to post other things while also looking deeper.fantôme profane;2979045 said:
You must not have read my post. I'm supplying links to the contradictions that already have christain replies, and the ones that don't(I think it's about 30-50)I'll look into myself.fantôme profane;2979045 said:
SnackerBob
Member
That's lazy & requires little thought. You could at least put these things into your own words.
As far as the Crucifixion/Passover thing, you are dealing with the 3 synoptic Gospels & John. John is attempting to DIRECTLY correlate Jesus with the Passover lamb- hence emphasis on the Last Supper NOT being on Passover. This allows John to place Jesus death on Passover itself, as the final Sacrificial Lamb.
This explains away another issue in John's version of the Passion. John is the only Gospel that specifies that Jesus' bones were not broken, again tying in the lamb. This type of interpretation is unique to John, which is the only Gospel to call Jesus the Lamb of God, as well.
Keep in mind that John comes from a very different school of thought about Christ than the other three Gospels, and was written much later.
As far as the Crucifixion/Passover thing, you are dealing with the 3 synoptic Gospels & John. John is attempting to DIRECTLY correlate Jesus with the Passover lamb- hence emphasis on the Last Supper NOT being on Passover. This allows John to place Jesus death on Passover itself, as the final Sacrificial Lamb.
This explains away another issue in John's version of the Passion. John is the only Gospel that specifies that Jesus' bones were not broken, again tying in the lamb. This type of interpretation is unique to John, which is the only Gospel to call Jesus the Lamb of God, as well.
Keep in mind that John comes from a very different school of thought about Christ than the other three Gospels, and was written much later.
I understand what you are doing, and I do remember your post telling us that you were going to do this. What I don't understand is why you are doing this. Do you think we are incapable of finding these links for ourselves? I just think you are wasting your time doing this.You must not have read my post. I'm supplying links to the contradictions that already have christain replies, and the ones that don't(I think it's about 30-50)I'll look into myself.
Vadergirl123
Active Member
Oh and not at all, you can look them up for yourself if you want, but you know how sometimes one feels lazy and doesn't want to look it up for themselves haha. The main reason though is that the links that reply to the list is just convenient for me. Because the answers the links give is the same one that I end up getting when I do the research myself. And as I said I am pretty busy. I don't spend my days researching biblical contradictions and I want to have all of them done within the year.fantôme profane;2979282 said:
Vadergirl123
Active Member
Yes it is lazy(although I prefer the term convenient
) and well I could but then I'd kind of be plagerizing(I had some people accuse me of it earlier in the thread.) Also I am going to personally look into the ones that don't already have christain responses. And 460 contradictions is alot and I don't want to spend my time researching the answers to the ones that have already been given. Especially when I could spend that research time looking into the ones without christain responses.