PS Just a few specific points though, as I catch up with page three...
Ptolemy, the example of the fig tree you give does speak to the seeming inconsistency in the Bible - but I dont think that any of what your talking about is the point of that incident being recounted. I havent given the particular verse much thought, but my faith assures me that the story is told for a reason, and that some (even if not many) people have derived its intended meaning, over time. It doesnt matter to me if Mark got the timing different than Matthew, or if it seems Jesus didnt know something that He should have. I'm sure He did, and even that isnt the point.
As for other examples of seeming inconsistency... here's the thing about the Bible, and the way it was written... God is not like the false pagan gods. He didnt take possesion of the people He used to write the Bible (Origen talks about the mad fits that pagan oracles got, and how the way our true God works sets Him apart from that stuff). These were human beings, free to write or not to write, and to make literal errors in their transcribing, or forget, or any other number of human actions that might explain what atheists like to simplistically point to as "errors" and proof that the Bible is flawed. For all its seeming surface imperfections, it is in fact, perfect, not in our sense, but in His, and God uses it, written by humans who had free will in every moment that they wrote it, in His way.
As for your unusual assertion, Aineo (err, or was it Ptolemy... or was it both of you....) that Jesus, while incarnate, was less than wholly a part of the divine Trinity at the same time, at all times... thats simply not true. Origen puts it well when he says (in the intro to De Principiis, italics mine) of Jesus:
...divesting Himself (of His glory), became a man, and was incarnate although God, and while made a man remained the God which He was; that He assumed a body like to our own, differing in this respect only, that it was born of a virgin and of the Holy Spirit: that this Jesus Christ was truly born, and did truly suffer, and did not endure this death common (to man) in appearance only, but did truly die; that He did truly rise from the dead; and that after His resurrection He conversed with His disciples, and was taken up (into heaven).
... and now, much to my dismay, I cant find where either of you said it...
I'll try to, though.
Oh, ok, Aieno, you said it on your last post on the second page, first line. Ptolemy said something like it earlier on this page.