There are no contradictions in the bible

Also could you respond after theres only few hours left because i wont be able to use the internet until Tuesday. I appreciate your quick responses but this time a very slow response or a withheld response would do a lot of good. 1. Scientific "~~~~Basically, just to be lenient, I request that my opponent find a biblical interpretation that finds the earth to be over 100,000 years old. Still extremely young, but it's a stepping stone. YET, don't drop the resolutional analysis~~~~" Here are biblical interpretations that make the earth over 100,000 years old: Day-Age theory: "day-age" interpretation of Genesis one - that is, that each "day" is actually a long period of time during which God created life. This interpretation is not figurative in any way, but adheres to the scientific method in its analysis of the biblical texts. At its foundation is a literal translation of the Hebrew word, yom, which can mean a twelve hour period of time, a twenty-four hour period of time, or a long, indefinite period of time. and this is how they defend their belief:. http://godandscience.org... Gap theory: This view states that life was immediately and recently created on a pre-existing old Earth. One variant rests on a rendering of Genesis 1:1-2 as: "In the beginning . .. [when] the earth became formless and void. " (It is argued that the word 'was', hayah, can also be correctly translated as 'became'. ) This is taken by Gap creationists to imply that the earth already existed, but had passed into decay during an earlier age of existence, and was now being "shaped anew". This view is more consistent with mainstream science with respect to the age of the Earth "Even according to Young Earth Creationists (YEC), the earth is likely less that 10,000 years old" Young earth creationists are called young earth creationists because they believe in a young earth for example 6000 years but there are other groups like old earth creationists who believe in a old earth. "And finally, remember that my opponent has to defend ALL of the Christian religions" I said the bible has no contradictions wherefore I dont have to defend all Christian religions. So I dont have to defend religions/beliefs which assert something that is not in the bible for example the age of the earth and you can use Usshers chronology but all you can prove is that mankind lived about 6000 years. Now you can say that "according to Usshers chronology, CREATION was 4004 BC" but thats only from the young earth creationists viewpoint because they believe that the earth was created in six literal days. In conclusion you have to prove that Day-Age theory, Gap theory and other interpretations which reject young earth creationism must be wrong. 2. Historical No this time Im not defending the bible but I will quote what I said before. 1)"Clarification:" Traditional biblical chronology" is a reference to Usshers chronology (or any other similar type)" 2)"Which according to this website is inaccurate(. http://www.biblicalchronologist.org.......).If this website is right and Usshers chronology is inaccurate then your argument is invalid" 3)"Dr. Bryant Wood has proposed that Ai should instead be located at the site of Kirbet el-Maqatir arguing that the evidence for this site being Ai is stronger than at et-Tell. ". http://en.wikipedia.org.........(Bible).This argument is valid because were never given a map by the author but only a description. "Although there is evidence for et-Tell "This argument is valid because were never given a map by the author but only a description". 4)"You have to first prove that Usshers chronology is accurate and that the chronology the website presents is inaccurate. Then you have to prove that the city Ai was located at et-tell. "You've failed to prove this although you did try to prove that the city of Ai was located at et-Tell. 3. Internal I suppose I should do the same. However I cant because you claim that this is an example of plagiarism. Also one is a history book, 2 Kings, maybe written by Jeremiah, the other, Isaiah lived the events. So, separated by decades, Jeremiah would quote the source he could rely on. The Bible was complied over a 1500 year period by over 40 authors. That more then one of them repeat a source quoted by someone else was not unusual. Remember that each of the books was composed as a separate book, and not complied into a single volume until centuries later. So each author designed his book to "stand alone". So it was only logical that after 36 chapters of warning, Isaiah would want to include the fulfillment of his prophecies. Have two authors repeat the same story word for word and it is "plagiarism". Yet let two authors retell the stories with the slightest different between them, and then it is "contradictions" and "mistakes". Which want do you want it? 4. Logical No theres no contradiction only your lack of understanding. This subject is best explored in the book of Job. In round one there was a contradiction "Apparently, EITHER God or Satan inspired David in fighting Israel. "I refuted this contradiction but now you say that your argument is "my argument was that God wouldn't order an evil creation that is Satan to do his work for him" however the book of Job refutes this because the whole book is about Job being tempted by Satan with Gods permission. Im not here to lecture you about why would God do this although I can but i will refute any contradiction you present. There are two more rounds and Ill be gone until Tuesday so you have plenty of time and space to show me how is God ordering Satan a contradiction. "Isn't Satan the one that tricked Adam into eating that apple? It would seem that Satan is a deceptive little devil to me. " Are you saying that Christian God according to the bible isnt all powerful. .. Please be more clear in the next round. 5. Numerical No your argument doesn't stand until you prove that the measure of capacity didnt change after the captivity as I stated in the previous round. However I will prove that NIV translation is incorrect concerning 1 Kings 7:26! .. .Hopefully :) I have e-Sword which anyone can download for free(just type e-Sword in google. com). If you go to 1 Kings 7:26 you'll see that the Hebrew word (which KJV translated as contained and NIV translated as held) is "כּוּל kï¿½l kool A primitive root; properly to keep in; hence to measure; figuratively to maintain (in various senses): - (be able to, can) abide, bear, comprehend, contain, feed, forbearing, guide, hold (-ing in), nourish (-er), be present, make provision, receive, sustain, provide sustenance (victuals). " e-Sword definition of כּוּל. Now the other word in the other quote which both versions translated as "held" is כּוּל kï¿½l kool. Yes its the same Hebrew word. Meaning that the word contain for 1 Kings 7:26 should be used because otherwise theres a contradiction. Lets say the word qwer could be defined as 5 and ten. If previously qwer meant 5 and theres another sentence which would make sense if you use 10 would a good translation use 5 again? no. Vote Pro! 753 remaining characters