Contradiction: The Christian "Test".

[SA Huguenot]

The “True Christian test”
This is perhaps one of the best "evidence" used by Atheists and Muslims to somehow prove to a Christian that their religion can be tested and proven false. Dr Zakir Naik used this against Dr campbell in 2000, where he remarked in fromt of about a 2 000 plus strong audience that Dr Campbell must prove to everyone that Christianity is a true religion. "I will not ask you to drink poinson, because I want us to continue this debate, but I am going to ask you to read from one of the 17 languages written on this Indian Roupee note. You can choose any language and then translate it to proove the Bible is true!"
To the joy of the Muslim majority audience, Naik gave Campbell a Roupee note and gestured that he is waiting for Campbell to show everyone that he is a true Christian.
here is his reference for this antics
Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mark 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

At that stage, still an Atheist, I simply loved the argument, and kept it in mind as I went through the rest of the Debate footage. I already mentioned that after I investigated the "Reflecting Moonlight", I realised the guy was lying through his teeth.
This was one of the so called "errors" he mentioned that I investigated lateron.
The Answer:
This answer was actually given to me on a platter being Afrikaans, and I obviously opened an Afrikaans Bible translation which I had somewhere in a box stored for years. As I read it, I saw the error was only one of "Translation".
let me explain. The Afrikaans Bible had this verse in the past tense, and not the present tense as the English as I later found out buying a NKJ version.
it renders the verse as:
Mar 16:17“And these signs shall follow those that have believed” (Darby Translation 1889 & Afrikaans 1933 version) instead of: “And these signs will accompany those who believe” (N.I.V.)

I looked at the Greek explanation of the verse and learned that the Greek tense used in verse should be the past tense (Aorist). This explained the Afrikaans and Darby Translation. Strongs say:

“The English reader need not concern himself with most of these finer points concerning the aorist tense, since in most cases they cannot be rendered accurately in English translation, being fine points of Greek exegesis only. The common practice of rendering an aorist by a simple English past tense should suffice in most cases”.

Conclusion:
It is so simple! Those apostles that heard from Maria that Jesus rose from the dead, and believed it to be true, Only they received the gift to take up serpents and to drink poison. They could cast out devils and speak in languages. Jesus gave it to them personally! The other apostles who did not believe Maria; did not receive those gifts! As for the rest of the Christian believers, they obviously did not obtain those gifts.
I also discovered another passage where Jesus did the exact same to the Apostles and Disciples.

Luk 10:17 And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name.
Luk 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Luk 10:19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.

This fact is also supported in Matt 10: 1 to 4 and Mark 6: 7 to 13 where Jesus called the 70 and they were given "Gifts" to heal and cast out Devils.
Jesus gave those gifts only to certain people?

Therefore, this so called "Christian Test" is invalid and not some evidence that the Bible is false!
Greetings

 

[Howard Is]

I wonder who gave me my gifts.
I won’t cast pearls before swine and mention what they are.

 

[Twilight Hue]

So how do you know if the past tense one isn't correct? Based on another one that used present tense?

How in the world does that work?

 

[SA Huguenot]

So how do you know if the past tense one isn't correct? Based on another one that used present tense?

How in the world does that work?

Well, I dont know of a manuscript that does not use the aorist tense.
Therefore the Past tense is the correct one.
Furthermore, if you take into consideration that Jesus was at that time speaking to the Apostles and Disciples, he directed these powers to them.
Oh, but you will not take anything into consideration.
Else you would have to consider Jesus as God and saviour.

 

[SA Huguenot]

I wonder who gave me my gifts.
I won’t cast pearls before swine and mention what they are.

What gifts did you receive?
Gifts from the Holy Ghost perhaps?
I totally agree with human receiving such gifts, but lets see what they are.

1Co 12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
1Co 12:2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
1Co 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
1Co 12:4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
1Co 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
1Co 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
1Co 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
1Co 12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
1Co 12:9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
1Co 12:10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
1Co 12:11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

Here we have:
Wisdom
Knowledge
Faith
Healing
Miracles
Discerning of spirits
Speaking in Tonges
Interpretation of Tongues

I will find it interesting to learn which do you have?

I think drinking poison will fall under someone who received the gift of miracles. as for the rest, I witnessed firsthanded.

 

[Brickjectivity]

So how do you know if the past tense one isn't correct? Based on another one that used present tense?

How in the world does that work?

Its irrelevant in my view.

Its true that the books don't always agree, but anyone who knows their canon will find most contradictions arguments lacking. Some are solid, but most are bad scholarship going for bulk and claiming things like "We found thousands of Bible contradictions." Its just an annoyance and nonsense.

This is perhaps one of the best "evidence" used by Atheists and Muslims to somehow prove to a Christian that their religion can be tested and proven false.

Not even near to one of the best, and whoever this Naik guy is...well its not one of the best. Bit of showmanship is all "Do a miracle! You can't can you?" Its just one of the thousands of bad arguments, and its used as a straw argument by you to claim all arguments are worse than it. They aren't. Just because its a terrible argument doesn't mean they all are. There are good reasons to say that books in the canon don't perfectly harmonize. Therefore its definitely not the best one as you claim, and it also has nothing to do with atheism. Its simply that the books don't always harmonize, and there is nothing to be done about it whether you're a Christian or a money grubbing preacher or an angry ex Christian or somebody trying to get web traffic by claiming you've found tens of thousands of Bible Contradictions. There are some clear areas where the books don't harmonize, but this is vague and useless showmanship.

Also claiming that anybody who disagrees with you is an atheist? Not cool. Atheists often are very faithful people who believe in God in various ways, just not in words. Everybody seems to know it except for you. Obviously you are interested in throwing mud onto them or you wouldn't keep making these inane threads. If an atheist saves a child's life does that not count as faith to you? Really? I think its how you live and not what you say that matters. It seems that when it comes to faith that its not your words in prayer but the unspoken utterings and yearnings that cannot be expressed through words.

 

[Brickjectivity]

As for you @Nowhere Man I think you will be surprised to find out you are more of a believer than you think. Sure I could be mistaken. Its mostly irrelevant to me what you say about it, except that you obviously don't want people telling you who you are and what to accept. Of course I should not try to impose my opinions onto you. That would be like breaking the birds wings to keep it around.

 

[Twilight Hue]

As for you @Nowhere Man I think you will be surprised to find out you are more of a believer than you think. Sure I could be mistaken. Its mostly irrelevant to me what you say about it, except that you obviously don't want people telling you who you are and what to accept. Of course I should not try to impose my opinions onto you. That would be like breaking the birds wings to keep it around.

Well I do have a background in Christianity and was a believer for a very long time.

My debates and discussions now in threads like these and others revolves around the narratives now, by which I sometimes use a de facto position of belief as it relates to the topic at hand to better serve what is being debated or discussed.

Rest assured, I won't be coming back to the religion anytime soon as a prodigal son. ;O)

Anyways, Zen Buddhism is Hotel California. One can check out anytime they like, but one could never leave.

I'll be damned if that wasn't the case.

Think of it as visiting the folks once in awhile. You kind of like them in terms of flavor, but you know you're just never going to move back there.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Well I do have a background in Christianity and was a believer for a very long time.

My debates and discussions now in threads like these and others revolves around the narratives now, by which I sometimes use a de facto position of belief as it relates to the topic at hand to better serve what is being debated or discussed.

Rest assured, I won't be coming back to the religion anytime soon as a prodigal son. ;O)

Anyways, Zen Buddhism is Hotel California. One can check out anytime they like, but one could never leave.

I'll be damned if that wasn't the case.

Think of it as visiting the folks once in awhile. You kind of like them in terms of flavor, but you know you're just never going to move back there.

Yeah, but that was not what I meant. I wasn't suggesting you'd be returning to old patterns or ideas or even that I wished it.

 

[SA Huguenot]

Its irrelevant in my view.

Its true that the books don't always agree, but anyone who knows their canon will find most contradictions arguments lacking. Some are solid, but most are bad scholarship going for bulk and claiming things like "We found thousands of Bible contradictions." Its just an annoyance and nonsense.

Not even near to one of the best, and whoever this Naik guy is...well its not one of the best. Bit of showmanship is all "Do a miracle! You can't can you?" Its just one of the thousands of bad arguments, and its used as a straw argument by you to claim all arguments are worse than it. They aren't. Just because its a terrible argument doesn't mean they all are. There are good reasons to say that books in the canon don't perfectly harmonize. Therefore its definitely not the best one as you claim, and it also has nothing to do with atheism. Its simply that the books don't always harmonize, and there is nothing to be done about it whether you're a Christian or a money grubbing preacher or an angry ex Christian or somebody trying to get web traffic by claiming you've found tens of thousands of Bible Contradictions. There are some clear areas where the books don't harmonize, but this is vague and useless showmanship.

Also claiming that anybody who disagrees with you is an atheist? Not cool. Atheists often are very faithful people who believe in God in various ways, just not in words. Everybody seems to know it except for you. Obviously you are interested in throwing mud onto them or you wouldn't keep making these inane threads. If an atheist saves a child's life does that not count as faith to you? Really? I think its how you live and not what you say that matters. It seems that when it comes to faith that its not your words in prayer but the unspoken utterings and yearnings that cannot be expressed through words.

This is a very wise post.
I was on leave for a few days, and came back on line this morning again.
I want to make it clear. I do not have any problem with any person on this earth.
I do have a problem with the philosophies people adhere too.
For instance, I dont have a problem with a person who is an atheist, I have a problem with the ones that attacks my religion with false claims such as the Bible is false and so on. The problem is not even on what they say about the Bible, but what they construct as a strawman argument in an attempt to disregard any facts from the Bible.
I have yet to see an atheist to tell me, it is fine that you are a christian, but I choose not to be one because I REFUSE TO BE ONE!
All atheists makes it their lifes work to claim atheism on the grounds of THE BIBLE IS FALSE! OR THE GOD OF THE BIBLE DOES THIS OR THAT, OR JESUS NEVER EXISTED, OR THERE IS NO EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE BIBLE!
do you see where I am going?
They are out to validate their religion of Atheism, by looking for any escape, and if one escape is to find "contradictions" in the Bible, or not to like "Some Church", or to blame it on the Crusades, they will soothe their minds that way.
As for Naik, yes he is a clown, but he feeds of Atheism's information they concocted against the Bible.
And he is a fool too, thinking the Christians dont know it.
Even whilst I know the fool is a fool, I use him as an example of all the other fools who think they can disprove the Bible.
I was a foll too, untill I learned the value of reading the Bible for myself.
Anyway, I understand that you get the idea that I am of opinion that you are an atheist, but believe me, I speak of Atheist in the general sense as those that does not believe in Jesus.