I just woke up, so can't write in too much detail... at least not without making a mess that probably won't make sense. But for contradictions, I can point you here.
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/bible.htm#110

Hi,
First, I'm amazed about the civilisation in here. I frequently visit an atheist blog, and some of the comments are threats to the author like "you are going to hell because you've created this blog" and so on. In 56 posts so far, none of this has happened, and this is quite impressive for me.
Thank you asault_freak. This is a really interesting page. I am almost sure I won't change my atheist views with it, but it's a really comprehensive list of contradictions answered by christians, which is really useful, to discover both the good and bad points made by them, and by the people who raise them, of course.
Thanks also to Thunderfist799. I was looking for some evidence that supported the claim of muslims that Alla is the only God, but this also helps. You see, each religion has its own History, predictions, miracles and superstitions. To summarise my position: I don't consider everything false, but those predictions may be some kind of coincidence (sorry for the blasphemy). However I dismiss the main fact, that that is the word of God, mainly because of all the attrocities in these holly books, and also because of the contradictions and translation errors in them.

Sukil, you're welcome. I'm not expecting it to change your views... that wasn't my intent in sharing it. As bladestorm said, we are trying to share the good news and show people what our faith is like, not shove anything down anyone's throat. And I think attrocities are a misconception that seems to be prevolent among non believers of any religion, whether Christianity or otherwise... they don't invalidate any religion. Man will be man, whether God is involved or not... and those attrocities you're mentioning about in the Bible or Qurahn are not always bad for the sake of being God. We have a much smaller glimpse of the big picture than we would like to think, and sometimes things  that happen that seem attrocious or horrendous at the time, may turn out to have good results later on. It is impossible to tell. And as for the rest... Bladestorm's post right above mine says everything I intended to.

Hi,
OK, as I don't visit the forum often, I'll go replying post by post:
58 (@thunderfist799): What do I mean with attrocities? Well, let me quote some extracts of the quran. Before I begin, I must admit I don't know anything about it, so I'm just using a Spanish blog as the source for the extracts, and then looking for them in English.
"9:123 O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
"9:5 Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."
"4:56 Lo! Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment. Lo! Allah is ever Mighty, Wise."
"8:12 When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger."
Etc.

59 (@Bladestorm360): And the second comes when God doesn't kill Adam for eating the fruit (Gen 2). That's even stranger, and it's more difficult to justify, because according to some passages God is immutable. I must have a look at @asault_freak's link, and see if I get a logical answer to that.
Moreover, you say:

Therefore, I'll end up in hell. But wait, there are more ways, like insulting the holly spirit, according to:

60 (@asault_freak): I hadn't thought about that possibility. However, I think we both agree that a God who is all just can't kill innocent children (David's son, "every living substance" (Gen 7:4) (including animals, children and plants).

@Thunderfist799: in post 50 you did exactly what I thought you would do, and unfortunately I think it illustrates one of the principle problems between believers and non-believers. As a skeptic, someone of a scientific background, I am looking for empirical scientific evidence for a godlike being and not a passage of text taken from the Bible, Koran, or some other holy book. However, when I mentioned I am unable to find any empirical evidence for a god you responded by quoting from the Koran which is not a convincing argument for a skeptic and here is why.

To begin with I do not believe in or entertain the belief in a supernatural deity call it God, Allah, etc but in my mind such a thing probably does not exist. So it follows if I do not believe in his existence it follows that I do not believe that the Bible, Koran, etc are inerrant and god inspired texts. To my mind they are just as fictional as Harry Potter or Star Wars. As a result a believer can quote scripture and passages from those books all day and not prove a thing because I am not looking for texts that backup a person's beliefs, but actual some evidence that is undeniable and scientifically demonstratable.

I think you tried to do so by quoting the verse about the heavens and the earth being signs of Allah's existence, but in fact those things are not any such thing. Today there are alternate theories on how the universe and our planet was created that have no need for a supernatural creator. I personally believe that the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution explains our origins well enough that there is no need to fall back on ancient creation myths that the world and universe were created by a supernatural god. So asking me and others from a scientific world view to look at nature for proof of a god just won't work because we already have a satisfactory explanation which does not require a god to explain it all.

The point I am making is simply this. If you want to prove that God, Allah, etc exists quoting scripture at him or her isn't going to be very productive because a non-believer is likely to find it unconvincing at best. The only thing that would sway me and others like me is something that would be supernatural, couldn't easily be explained away by science, and something that can be demonstrated at a moments notice. Such things might include people who lost limbs in combat or a serious automobile accident suddenly re growing that limb, someone snapping his/her fingers and a demolished building is restored good as new, or if someone really wants to be convincing perhaps your god can appear before a bunch of unbelievers and announce his reality in some way that can not be faked. In short, those kinds of examples might sway an unbeliever, and if your god can not or perhaps will not do that a skeptic will remain unconvinced of your god's reality.

To put this in a simpler form to digest think about it this way. I know lions are real. I do not have to believe in them because I can go to almost any zoo in America and see a lion. Before I lost my sight I could look in any book about the African safari and see pictures of lions. There essential and undeniable reality is unquestionable. However, so far as I know there is no place on earth I can go to see your god, no book of pictures of your god, and no way to see him, touch him, smell, him, or interact with him outside of kneeling down on a prayer mat and speaking out loud to an empty room. I find that kind of one way exchange unsatisfactory and unfulfilling. Not to mention I am not even sure I'm talking to myself or supposed creator of the universe.

I hope I have explained my position well enough. I really and truly think that because we are coming from two completely different points of views that finding some middle ground might be difficult. I'm coming from a point of disbelief you are coming from belief and we are going to obviously view the supposed evidence differently. Something you find convincing may not convince me.

Since this is a discussion about beliefs and the like and we have crossed into somewhat personal grounds without actually killing each other, I'm just going to throw out something that amuses me to no end on a regular basis, though admittedly it didn't used to.  It's interesting that I, as a Christian, may be perceived as a judgmental, hypocritical, narrow minded fool regardless of how much I study, how much I can produce for anyone that is anyone who is interested.  Dare I ask anyone to keep their mind open to any evidence I present I am automatically suggesting they renounce their own belief system in favor of mine.  I must not, offer a contradiction based on what I believe, nor should I endeavor to illustrate through words or otherwise what I feel is right and true, regardless weather someone else does exactly that in my presence because at the point of disagreement I am automatically ignorant, selfish, and inconsiderate.  If one's truth is hurtful to me personally, it is not acceptable for me to say so, nor can I begin to offer an explanation as to why.  I am intolerant because I cannot in fair conscience look the other way when I believe that people I am supposed to love as myself are doing the wrong thing, uncaring if I do my best to carry on a civil discussion about my beliefs when they converse about theirs.  Unfortunately, were it a live discussion over a meal or at a party, I do believe that if I kept my mouth shut I would be at most, doing them a disservice, at the very least, be seen as rude for not bothering to open my mouth and atemtping to carry on a conversation.  Should I open my mouth and join in on their side, I'd be a liar, a pretender, a no good hypocrite, not that this really matters because I already am, I suppose.  lol
No, atheists; in spite of what you might have been told, I don't hate you.  No, Buddhist, I have no resentment toward you.  No, catholic, I will not disassociate myself from you because your beliefs are if only ever so slightly different from mine.  And no, a thousand times no, a million times no, will I ever hold a grudge against anyone regardless of name, creed, nationality, ethnicity or even, dare I say it, religiocity.  If you want to believe that aliens currently inhabit our planet as disguised TV personnel be my guest.  I'll joke with you, laugh with you, eat with you, join you over dinner either at your place if I am privelaged and graced by your invitation, or at mine if you so choose to come home with me for whatever reason, and then, if you will allow it, I will humbly tell you that what you believe is not in my bible, and I will ask you if you wish to hear more.  Beyond that, I will not intrude, will not proceed, will not turn the page, and as soon as you leave, you can feel free to call me a bible thumping, Jesus loving, fire and brimstone preaching, homophobic hatemonger and, should you return, I'll welcome you back with open arms and even buy you a beer to boot though I don't drink the stuff myself.  I'll send you off with a thank you for coming, a handshake if you desire it, a God bless you if it won't bother you, and you will continue to be in my thoughts and personal prayers.  My forgiveness need not be bought or bargained with, does not require any condition or catch.  I forgive you because I whole heartedly believe that God forgave me and continues to forgive us all when we turn to him, and if you can't take a stand with me on this matter, that's fine too.  You'll hate me for not taking stands with you on various issues; I shal not.  You'll say I'm no friend if I can't take you as you are given what I believe and you would be wrong.  It is not I who require that you change for me, nor I who want you to change to meet my needs.  If you ever considered yourself my friend, I thank you.  If you ever considered yourself my enemy or do as the result of who I am now, I'm sorry.  I cannot go back, cannot look at my life the way I did before and ignore all I've learned, though I admit I do reminisce, do grow nostalgic, do consider what might have been if I had not embarked upon this path.  There is sadness, pain, even anger at times when I regard every matter that is of importance to me now because I failt to understand them all and why they are what they are.  But when I consider that there is only one life to live and that it could possibly make all of the difference in the world compared to no difference at all, I stop and think about what may and may not be true, what is and is not reality.  In the end, if you are right and I am wrong, what I lost won't matter because it was temporary anyway.  If I'm right, what I lost is nothing compared to the eternity I gained.

Hi.

@nocturnus. Wow that was an amazing post. Funny thing is; I didn't think I'd be posting hear again at all and suddenly I find myself posting hear again.

@Bladestorm, having grown up a Christian I can certainly understand your point of view even though I no longer agree with it in principle.

One thing that bothers me about your argument is the way in which you define the term theory. In your post you said Evolution is "just a theory" which makes me think you do not understand the difference between the scientific definition of a theory and a layman's definition of a theory. In layman's terms a theory is an unproven guess or idea. In scientific terms a theory is a fact based on research, empirical evidence, and is backed up with well reasoned arguments based on said research and evidence. Thus when a scientist uses the term theory such as the Theory of Relativity  he or she is not talking about some vague idea but something that is factual and can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

For example, if you believe the sun is at the center of our solar system that is known as the Helios-Centric Theory. I sincerely doubt one will find many relatively educated people going around that the Helios-Centric Theory is just a theory in the way you mean that Evolution is just a theory. The reason is that after five centuries of research and evidence we know the Helios-Centric Theory to be a fact, and anyone who would argue that the Earth is the center of our solar system is either badly misinformed or poorly educated. Therefore if people were to call Helios-Centric Theory a theory in the layman's sense of the word, meaning some idea or guess, they would sound utterly ridiculous and very uneducated.

I'm saying this to point out that for biologists Evolution is a fact not just a vague idea or guess on their part. Weather you know it or not, agree with it or not, there is ample evidence besides fossil records supporting Evolution. We have DNA as well as extensive lab research which supports Evolution. I get the feeling the people who say Evolution is just a theory probably don't know how much credible evidence there actually is supporting Evolution, and probably would not be so quick to dismiss it if they did know.

That isn't to say Evolution is perfect. It certainly is not. There are issues that still need to be worked out, and no it isn't a 100% answer to the kinds of questions people have because it hasn't progressed that far yet. There are as you mentioned some ideas, hypothesis, on the table that life didn't begin here on our planet but is extraterrestrial in nature having been brought here by an asteroid or similar encounter with a non-terrestrial object. The difference between science and religion is religion claims to know all the answers weather or not they can be backed up with evidence but with science we have to progress without a complete understanding until evidence comes along that supports a given hypothesis. I often think, this is just my opinion, is that a lot of people who embrace religion just are not comfortable with not knowing certain things and want answers to stuff we can and may never know for sure. Thus they grab onto whatever religious explanation seems to answer their questions regardless of if it can be proven or not.

You brought up the subject of faked fossil evidence. Yes, unfortunately there were a few famous, perhaps infamous cases, such as the Piltdown Man hoax that left a number of archeologists and biologists with egg on their face. However, faked fossil evidence is very few and far between, and is nowhere as bad as the Christian community would have people believe. I know some Creationist groups like Answers in Genesis are bad about spreading the roomer that a lot of the fossil evidence is fakes, hoaxes, but those claims are largely unsubstantiated or are based on real cases that had no real impact on present day understanding of Evolution. So if you really want to convince me that Evolution is based purely on faked fossil evidence I'd like some academic papers, books, and books written by accredited scientists saying as much.

Lastly, you made the point that only the universities and not scientists are carrying on the Theory of Evidence. Since I don't know what resources you are basing your opinion on it is hard for me to mount a effective counter argument. All I will say I think that your opinion that in twenty years or so that the Theory of Evolution will be dead is wishful thinking based on misinformation.  All I can say is that time will tell which of us is right.

@Nocturnus, the problem I have with Christians is they simply think they know what is best for me and try to tell me how to run my life. It isn't so much that I find them judgmental, hypocritical, or foolish but I simply find them a bit nosy. I have literally been sitting down in a restaurant and have had Christians walk up to my table and start asking me if I'm a Christian, if I have been saved, and ask if they can pray for me, etc. Having grown up in a Christian home I know such people think they are doing it out of love, think they are doing it for my own good, but what they are doing is being rude and offensive just by walking up to me and trying to share their beliefs with me when I've abandoned those beliefs long ago and really want nothing more to do with them.

I certainly do not hate Christians or any other religious person. I would simply ask that if that person wants to be my friend, to share my company, to please keep their beliefs to themselves. I really do not like being preached to. Especially, if I am sitting down having a dinner at a restaurant or mingling at a party the last thing I want is for some person to start asking me questions about if I'm saved, if I am a believer in their religion, or if I'd like to know more about their religious faith. I try not to be rude to those people, but they really do get under my skin because they are so blasted persistent to evangelize to everyone and anyone regardless if that evangelism is wanted or not.

What I am saying is I understand how and why you feel compelled to express your faith with others. That in of itself is not a problem if someone expresses an interest in hearing it. The problem comes in someone like me has expressly asked not to be preached to and for whatever reason a religious person keeps coming back, dropping hints, or posting bible verses on their Facebook page, in the hopes I'll take notice of their religious beliefs. That gets under my skin and makes me more than a little upset with Christians because I'd prefer they just leave me alone. So my advice to use if you are going to express your opinion you might want to take into consideration the person's views on the matter before telling him or her what you think. As it can be frustrating and down right annoying to be a non-Christian and have to put up with people trying repeatedly to convert you.

Hello,
So I don't know about christianity much, and I just want something clerrified. Can anyone prove any other sources for christianity other than the bible? if they can, i'd be extremely interested, as it might prove the existance of christianity. Literary sources don't really define what happened in reality if they're not backed up by other sources, so it would be a good thing for christianity if there were any other resources in support of it.

First off, what do you mean by other sources to prove christianity? There's archeological dating of the biblical manuscripts, and while I don't know the exact number, but I do remember that the New Testament is proven to be a historically accurate document, partially due to the fact that it is one historical document which is known to have the most surviving manuscripts, and among those copies is one that dates back to as close to the believed time of these documented events... which supports Christianity in some ways. But I just woke up, so I probably shouldn't try explaining any more than that... lol.
As to your hypothesis about artificial intelligence. The same could be said of a national ruled by a governmental body. If you really believe that once you become conscious noone has the right to tell you what to do, that would imply that under the government they shouldn't have any right to tell you what to do, punish you, or anything of the sort. In essence, if you felt like murdering someone, the government shouldn't tell you not to do it... because free will, right? If those artificial intelligences did indeed become conscious and develop a will of their own, if they did not follow the laws and regulations we set down and rebelled? What would we do then? We are not God, and all those science fiction scenarios of artificial intelligences catching humans off guard and becoming the rulers of the earth would probably come to pass... unless we irradicated them out of existence.
to sum up, bladestorm has already said it numerous times. It's not about the rules. It's about whether you follow Jesus and desire a relationship with God... the rules are not black and white do's and don't's. They are boundaries set by God to govern the things we should consider when making decisions and following his word and what he tells us. We do have free will, hence oour ability to choose whether to follow God or not... when Jesus was alive, he didn't spend a lot of time dealign with absolutes when it came to living... but came to grey areas, and the appostle paul dealt with it the same way. Hell is not something God created to punish us because he's spiteful and doesn't care... but this area, unfortunately, is absolute. You either are with God or you aren't... and if you aren't, that's where you end up. But you end up there purely by your own choice, because without Christ, all our good works mean nothing... because as again has been said earlier, all have sinned and fallen short of god's glory. The so-called rules are again not all encompassing, but boundaries to help us lead lives inaccordance of the will of God. If you want to talk about rules and religion, Christianity is hardly one I would call chalk full of rules compared to others, but that's another discussion.

I'm afraid I don't think this is a valid comparison. After all, national governments didn't create us and give us all of our properties, we've had most of those before we even knew what a government actually was. But what if we created entities literally from the ground up, gave them rules which they should follow, and then gave them free will? I think this was illustrated in the artificial intelligence example and that's something quite different.