What is the most glaring bilbical discrepancy that is difficult for xtians to refute?

  • What is the most glaring biblical discrepancy that is difficult for xtians to refute? I'd really like some examples from A.R. readers. I'm in a dispute with my brother, we were both raised in a strict xtian religion, but I left a long time ago. HE went on to become an elder/overseer. There are numerous examples, but what do YOU think is the most obvious one they can't make excuses for?

    Like this post to subscribe to the topic.
  • My newest discovery is a major one, that is as exciting as the DaVinci code but based in accounts that are laid out in the Bible itself; that is, certain passages from both Peter and Paul, widely relied upon to “prove” the immortality of Jesus and therefore his position as right hand of God almighty… don’t actually refer to Jesus at all. They refer to the Melchizedek priesthood cooperating through time with the line of David that had more power than his family’s royalty and was the true source of importance in the prophesied messiah of Judaism – not a pacifist preacher messiah, but a militaristic one that sought to rule the Middle East. Also, it turns out that there was a triple agent named Ananias, who worked ultimately for the Roman Empire but played the part of pacifist Christian miracle worker and preacher, as well as a long-standing high council Pharisee Jew who altogether (1) made Peter the apostle seem imbued with the fire of God, (2) gave Saul of Tarsus his vision back after a supposed hallucination of Jesus, and told him to preach a new version of Christianity under the name Paul (perhaps the most important apostle aside from Peter), and (3) later persecuted the same Paul he sent forth with gospel in hand, in the garb of his Pharisee high council position, for preaching it at the Jerusalem temple… in hopes of making him a martyr to the new pacifist version of Christianity. In that Pope Clement I - the first pope about whom anything is really known - is known as the “fellow laborer” of Paul, yet was actually part of the Flavian family who ruled the Roman Empire at the time… the usurpation of familial and priesthood power consolidation that would give rise to a militant Judaic takeover of the Middle East was completed, and Rome’s more widespread totalitarian hegemony initiated. If you’re intrigued now, please visit http://www.theoldestorder.com to read the detailed exegetical articles I’ve written on this subject.