Biblical Contradictions

[Untouchable_Fire]

The part that really caught my interest though was the idea that there are places where the bible contradicts itself. I took a brief look at some of the contradictions posted and they were simply a lack of understanding. It reminded me of kindergartners interpreting astrophysics.... kind of ridiculous.

 

Anybody know of some honest and real contradictions? I'm sure there has to be something worthy of real discussion.

Edited January 8, 2013 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[IcedEarth]

I'm agnostic, so you have a point there. I find militant atheism to be every bit as bad as militant christianity. I am not so arrogant as to say "I know for SURE there is/isn't a god". Frankly I do not know, and am not qualified to state for sure.

 

Many biblical contradictions come from what's written vs. what's interpreted, like the anti-gay stuff has no bearing on today and it's written right next to calling wearing blended materials the same abomination as homosexuality.

[Mr Scorpio]

I read a few pieces from a dumb thread about hating atheists. Personally I find most non-spiritual people who are nice to self classify as Agnostic. So, in a way it's true that most Atheists tend to be jerks with a Napoleon complex.

 

My guess is that those agnostics are using the word incorrectly, as it seems most people do. One could be an agnostic and an athiest, or an agnostic and a Christian.

[Mr Scorpio]

I'm agnostic, so you have a point there. I find militant atheism to be every bit as bad as militant christianity. I am not so arrogant as to say "I know for SURE there is/isn't a god". Frankly I do not know, and am not qualified to state for sure.

 

That is the distinction between "strong" vs "weak" atheism.

[BetheButterfly]

The part that really caught my interest though was the idea that there are places where the bible contradicts itself. I took a brief look at some of the contradictions posted and they were simply a lack of understanding. It reminded me of kindergartners interpreting astrophysics.... kind of ridiculous.

 

Anybody know of some honest and real contradictions? I'm sure there has to be something worthy of real discussion.

 

I don't hate Atheists at all. I respect their right to not believe in God or a Supreme Being or gods and I very much understand why they don't think God or gods exist. Freedom of religion is an awesome thing that includes freedom to be atheist and not be condemned, insulted, or persecuted for it!

 

One of the honest and real contradictions that my Dad and I have struggled with concerning the Christian Bible is the difference between the historic accounts of the Old Testament where God ordered genocide, with the extreme (and better, in my opinion) opposite found in Jesus' teachings to love one's enemies.

 

It is interesting that you put this thread in the political section, because it appears that this is one of the contradictions I still do not understand concerning many people who call themselves Christians in regards to patriotism and politics.

 

For example, when 9/11 happened, I am sad to say that I did not hear many Christians say that we need to forgive the extremists at fault for killing innocent people. Rather, many Christians and Atheists and people of many beliefs were up in arms and seemed to have no problem invading Afghanistan, ignoring the thousands of innocent men, women, and children who were murdered as "collateral".

 

Is this what Jesus preached? Nope. Jesus preached to love one's enemies. During the time of Jesus, his people, the Jewish people living in Israel, were under the oppressive regime of the Roman Empire. However, Jesus did not teach his people to go kill Roman soldiers who were oppressing them. Rather, he taught love.

 

So, to me there is a huge contradiction in between the times of war and killing people (men,women, and children) which seemed to be ordered by God, accounted in the Old Testament, with the teachings and example of Jesus, accounted in the New Testament. The apostles of Jesus did not kill anybody. They did not raise arms against the Romans who were oppressing their people. Rather, they taught about what Jesus said and did with help through the Holy Spirit. They were persecuted and most killed for following Jesus, not for killing anybody.

 

What do you think of this? Personally and as a Christian, to me I think what Jesus says and did is very good and noble and helps promote love, whereas killing innocent people (which happens in wars) does not promote love but rather simply eliminates threats, instead of transforming foes into friends.

Edited January 8, 2013 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[jwi71]

 

The part that really caught my interest though was the idea that there are places where the bible contradicts itself. I took a brief look at some of the contradictions posted and they were simply a lack of understanding. It reminded me of kindergartners interpreting astrophysics.... kind of ridiculous.

 

Anybody know of some honest and real contradictions? I'm sure there has to be something worthy of real discussion.

 

You are of course referring to my post.

 

Those were two contradictions I knew of but had to Google to get the correct bible verses.

 

On one hand, there is the belief of the all knowing and all seeing God - from whom people hide. Contradiction - if God knows and sees all how can the Bible also claim people have hidden from him.

 

Here is a You tube video, done well and humorously, about a quiz show on the bible.

 

Edited January 8, 2013 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[TaraMaiden]

Even if there were, I wouldn't either go find them, or sit here listing them.

 

it's not my place.

 

Biblical scripture is already full of much, that an awful lot of people do not understand, cannot fathom, or believe to be a Mystery only God can explain - without going further to pick holes and jab believers in the eyes with.

 

I have my own opinion on biblical writings, but unless it's an invited debate, and one I could have with a Theist who is equally familiar with Buddhist suttas and teachings, I prefer to keep my own counsel, and respect the views of others.

 

I frankly don't care about possible contradictions.

That's for Christians to deal with, it's their responsibility, not mine.

[M30USA]

The term "contradiction" in reference to the Bible assumes at the outset that humans possess the ability to understand all things. We do not.

 

The Bible has verses, for example, which clearly state that God is sovereign over the universe and preselects those people who will follow him. On the other hand, the Bible also clearly states that all men choose whom they follow.

 

A contradiction? Or, in a higher level of understanding (ie, God), can they both be true simultaneously?

 

The whole "contradiction" argument is arrogant, in my opinion.

[M30USA]

I'm agnostic, so you have a point there. I find militant atheism to be every bit as bad as militant christianity. I am not so arrogant as to say "I know for SURE there is/isn't a god". Frankly I do not know, and am not qualified to state for sure.

 

Many biblical contradictions come from what's written vs. what's interpreted, like the anti-gay stuff has no bearing on today and it's written right next to calling wearing blended materials the same abomination as homosexuality.

 

There are several other references to homosexuality in the Bible than the culture-specific one you mentioned. Due to LS rules I can't quote them, but I encourage you--if for no other reason than to increase your knowledge of the Bible--to research these.

[pureinheart]

I'm agnostic, so you have a point there. I find militant atheism to be every bit as bad as militant christianity. I am not so arrogant as to say "I know for SURE there is/isn't a god". Frankly I do not know, and am not qualified to state for sure.

 

Many biblical contradictions come from what's written vs. what's interpreted, like the anti-gay stuff has no bearing on today and it's written right next to calling wearing blended materials the same abomination as homosexuality.

 

To my knowledge, God is not against the gay person, but against the sin...as with all sin.

[pureinheart]

The part that really caught my interest though was the idea that there are places where the bible contradicts itself. I took a brief look at some of the contradictions posted and they were simply a lack of understanding. It reminded me of kindergartners interpreting astrophysics.... kind of ridiculous.

 

Anybody know of some honest and real contradictions? I'm sure there has to be something worthy of real discussion.

 

IMO there are no contradictions. If God said it, I believe it...now "man" is quite a different matter.

 

The Bible has many facets. It's a history book, an owners manual, and guide to the things to come.

 

I think what some call contradiction is merely an account of what went down at the time.

 

It's a trip UF, God was really dealing with me today on the part, "My ways are not your ways"....so I agree with M30 that it a higher level of understandng.

[pureinheart]

You are of course referring to my post.

 

Those were two contradictions I knew of but had to Google to get the correct bible verses.

 

On one hand, there is the belief of the all knowing and all seeing God - from whom people hide. Contradiction - if God knows and sees all how can the Bible also claim people have hidden from him.

 

Here is a You tube video, done well and humorously, about a quiz show on the bible.

 

 

My answer on his one would be, people think they are "hiding" from Him, but would have to look up the word "hiding" in the original Hebrew.

[M30USA]

My answer on his one would be, people think they are "hiding" from Him, but would have to look up the word "hiding" in the original Hebrew.

 

 

I agree. I've never seen the original Hebrew, but here's what I know: if God wants to reach you, there is literally no use hiding.

 

The reverse, however, can be true. God frequently can "hide his face" from us--as in the psalm by David. He can do this spiritually by taking away his hand from our lives, such as in the case of the continually unrepentant sinner whom God "gives over" to their selfish desires; or he can hide in a physical sense, such as in the "cloud" which covered him in the Old Testament so that nobody could see his face.

 

This brings up the question of WHY God would hide from us. I believe Scripture says it's because we cannot be in his presence while we have the current sinful nature. He is perfectly holy and won't have sin near his presence. However, he DOES love us. This presents a paradox in which he cannot be in our presence, yet he is developing a plan whereby we are being drawn to him and eventually WILL be in his presence.

Edited January 8, 2013 by M30USA

[TheFinalWord]

The part that really caught my interest though was the idea that there are places where the bible contradicts itself. I took a brief look at some of the contradictions posted and they were simply a lack of understanding. It reminded me of kindergartners interpreting astrophysics.... kind of ridiculous.

 

Anybody know of some honest and real contradictions? I'm sure there has to be something worthy of real discussion.

 

This goes back to the poor in spirit discussion we had a while back. When one comes with a contrite heart, God will teach and mold. Until such time, let them be.

 

Jesus replied, “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them; they are blind guides. If the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.”

 

“The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because Spiritual things are Spiritually discerned.” 1 Cor 2:14

 

Paul expounded further...

 

But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

 

Regarding the Old Testament, the meaning is veiled; notice even Christ did not expound the meaning of his parables except to his disciples; and even they did not understand until after the resurrection. The veil was over their eyes, and these men walked with and had direct access to the Son of God:

 

But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

 

Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

[Mina]

The part that really caught my interest though was the idea that there are places where the bible contradicts itself. I took a brief look at some of the contradictions posted and they were simply a lack of understanding. It reminded me of kindergartners interpreting astrophysics.... kind of ridiculous.

 

Anybody know of some honest and real contradictions? I'm sure there has to be something worthy of real discussion.

 

The big things that are pointed out as contradictions are not from the Bible itself (even though I feel the whole book itself and the content in it is a farce), it is the contradictions of the people that "follow" it's "teachings" that people point out.

[M30USA]

The big things that are pointed out as contradictions are not from the Bible itself (even though I feel the whole book itself and the content in it is a farce), it is the contradictions of the people that "follow" it's "teachings" that people point out.

 

When you say the Bible is a farce, are you referring to the historical accounts, the spiritual truths, or both?

[pureinheart]

I don't hate Atheists at all. I respect their right to not believe in God or a Supreme Being or gods and I very much understand why they don't think God or gods exist. Freedom of religion is an awesome thing that includes freedom to be atheist and not be condemned, insulted, or persecuted for it!

 

One of the honest and real contradictions that my Dad and I have struggled with concerning the Christian Bible is the difference between the historic accounts of the Old Testament where God ordered genocide, with the extreme (and better, in my opinion) opposite found in Jesus' teachings to love one's enemies.

 

It is interesting that you put this thread in the political section, because it appears that this is one of the contradictions I still do not understand concerning many people who call themselves Christians in regards to patriotism and politics.

 

For example, when 9/11 happened, I am sad to say that I did not hear many Christians say that we need to forgive the extremists at fault for killing innocent people. Rather, many Christians and Atheists and people of many beliefs were up in arms and seemed to have no problem invading Afghanistan, ignoring the thousands of innocent men, women, and children who were murdered as "collateral".

 

Is this what Jesus preached? Nope. Jesus preached to love one's enemies. During the time of Jesus, his people, the Jewish people living in Israel, were under the oppressive regime of the Roman Empire. However, Jesus did not teach his people to go kill Roman soldiers who were oppressing them. Rather, he taught love.

 

So, to me there is a huge contradiction in between the times of war and killing people (men,women, and children) which seemed to be ordered by God, accounted in the Old Testament, with the teachings and example of Jesus, accounted in the New Testament. The apostles of Jesus did not kill anybody. They did not raise arms against the Romans who were oppressing their people. Rather, they taught about what Jesus said and did with help through the Holy Spirit. They were persecuted and most killed for following Jesus, not for killing anybody.

 

What do you think of this? Personally and as a Christian, to me I think what Jesus says and did is very good and noble and helps promote love, whereas killing innocent people (which happens in wars) does not promote love but rather simply eliminates threats, instead of transforming foes into friends.

 

IMO there are no contradictions. If God said it, I believe it...now "man" is quite a different matter.

 

The Bible has many facets. It's a history book, an owners manual, and guide to the things to come.

 

I think what some call contradiction is merely an account of what went down at the time.

 

It's a trip UF, God was really dealing with me today on the part, "My ways are not your ways"....so I agree with M30 that it a higher level of understandng.

 

Hi Bethy, just wanted you to kow I hadn't yet read your post, and realise it could be perceived that I was speaking to your post by the bolded statement...just wanted you to know I wasn't trying to pull you out indirectly....loves ya:love:

[jwi71]

My answer on his one would be, people think they are "hiding" from Him, but would have to look up the word "hiding" in the original Hebrew.

 

I'm pretty sure we won't ever agree on this as you are unlikely to renounce religion and I'm unlikely to accept it. It would be argument that accomplished nothing good.

 

Just because I do not believe in the existence of a deity in no way minimizes your belief. After all, we are all trying to find our way in this world and none of us was born with all the answers - we just have different ways of finding our truth.

[BetheButterfly]

Hi Bethy, just wanted you to kow I hadn't yet read your post, and realise it could be perceived that I was speaking to your post by the bolded statement...just wanted you to know I wasn't trying to pull you out indirectly....loves ya:love:

 

Hi Pureinheart,

 

Oh it's ok! I agree with you! The following are very good points you wrote which are important to take note while studying this ancient and amazing group of manuscripts!

 

"The Bible has many facets. It's a history book, an owners manual, and guide to the things to come.

 

I think what some call contradiction is merely an account of what went down at the time."

 

That makes sense. Also, as you pointed out in another thread, it's important to study the original language of the text. As a translator, it is interesting to me how important it is to convey the meaning intended. This is often difficult because different languages do not always translate smoothly into another. Sometimes, translating literally does not make sense. Errors can occur during translating, though good translators strive to be as flawless and true to the meaning as possible.

 

Errors can also occur during copying. Scribes are not perfect and have made mistakes. Even when I write down Bible verses that inspire me in my relationship with God, I am careful to reread and to try to copy perfectly the text. Sometimes I make mistakes, which irks me because I don't like to make mistakes.

 

The Tanakh (the Old Testament in the Christian Bible) has been copied by many scribes throughout the centuries in Hebrew, and has also undergone being translated into other languages. The New Testament manuscripts have also undergone the same, though the original language is predominately Greek. I personally believe many of the contradictions are the direct result of errors made by scribes and translators long after the originals were written.

 

The contradictions however in both the Old Testament and New Testament are not ones that have a huge impact on the meaning. Now, some people say there are contradictions concerning God. However, people can have those same contradictions in us. For example, people can be both loving and hateful at the same time. A person for example can love their children and hate those who want to hurt their children. Does that make a person a contradiction? Interestingly, God is both loving/merciful/forgiving and just/righteous/hating sin. Some people call this a paradox, but in that case, life in itself is a paradox.

 

I realize you know all this... I'm just thinking out loud through writing.

 

Love you too!

[Mina]

When you say the Bible is a farce, are you referring to the historical accounts, the spiritual truths, or both?

 

The definition of "historical accounts" can vary. Things like the Book of Revelations may be taken as a "historical account" (coming from a religion teacher, not me trying to make a point) by some people, while others would call it an entirely spiritual thing.

 

Another aspect of the Bible that I feel make it a farce is there are practically no biblical manuscripts that can be dated past the 9th century. Much of what is in the bible was passed through oral tradition in the early dark ages, and through old manuscript fragments and writings, many of which varied greatly to the point of being no where close to each other, even in the same language. On top of that, the Clergy choosing what did and didn't go into the bible, and what was canon and non canon, makes the bible less of "holy teaching" and more man made, especially given the fact that the clergy was a major political player in those times.

 

On top of that, there are parts in the Bible that are factually incorrect. The Firmament is one such thing.

 

"Spiritual truths" are left to the reader. My personal feelings on the bible should not matter in context of this discussion.

 

What I had said before is the primary thing that people point at contractions are by the people who say they are Christian but cherry pick the parts of the Bible which they choose to follow.

[M30USA]

The definition of "historical accounts" can vary. Things like the Book of Revelations may be taken as a "historical account" (coming from a religion teacher, not me trying to make a point) by some people, while others would call it an entirely spiritual thing.

 

Another aspect of the Bible that I feel make it a farce is there are practically no biblical manuscripts that can be dated past the 9th century. Much of what is in the bible was passed through oral tradition in the early dark ages, and through old manuscript fragments and writings, many of which varied greatly to the point of being no where close to each other, even in the same language. On top of that, the Clergy choosing what did and didn't go into the bible, and what was canon and non canon, makes the bible less of "holy teaching" and more man made, especially given the fact that the clergy was a major political player in those times.

 

On top of that, there are parts in the Bible that are factually incorrect. The Firmament is one such thing.

 

"Spiritual truths" are left to the reader. My personal feelings on the bible should not matter in context of this discussion.

 

What I had said before is the primary thing that people point at contractions are by the people who say they are Christian but cherry pick the parts of the Bible which they choose to follow.

 

How much research have you done on the subject of the Bible's validity?

 

The Bible is the most accurate historical document from the ancient world-- whether the reader believes its spiritual message or not.

 

The "oral tradition" argument you made doesn't line up with facts. The Gospel of Mark, for example, is proven by secular historians to have been penned around 60 AD. We still have originals to this day. They all match each other. Additionally, they are identical to today's copies. (A minor exceltion is in the Gospel of John, where some manuacripts leave out a few sentences, but all other manuscripts are identical.)

 

Just as some extra info, we currently possess over 2,500 ORIGINAL manuscripts of the New Testament alone. (We only have less than 6 for Plato's writings or documents about Napoleon. Have you ever heard the validity of their history called a farce?)

 

A great book is "Know Why You Believe" by Paul Little. Your socks will get blown off, I promise you.

Edited January 8, 2013 by M30USA

[Mr Scorpio]

The "oral tradition" argument you made doesn't line up with facts. The Gospel of Mark, for example, is proven by secular historians to have been penned around 60 AD. We still have originals to this day.

 

Are you familar with "Misquoting Jesus", by Bart Ehrman?

[M30USA]

Are you familar with "Misquoting Jesus", by Bart Ehrman?

 

Even if we didn't have a single quote of Jesus, or they were all misquotations, we still have the Old Testament which tells of him spiritually, physically, prophetically, and geographically. In fact, even if we didn't have ANY of the New Testament, we could still know enough to be saved.

Edited January 8, 2013 by M30USA

[Mr Scorpio]

Even if we didn't have a single quote of Jesus, or they were all misquotations, we still have the Old Testament which tells of him spiritually, physically, prophetically, and geographically. In fact, even if we didn't have ANY of the New Testament, we could still know enough to be saved.

 

Perhaps. I'm more interested -- assuming you are familar with "Misquoting Jesus" -- is how you reconcile the author's claims regarding the lack of originals of the New Testament with your previous statements?

 

Then again, I suppose I could just google the book and read refutations on my own.

[M30USA]

Perhaps. I'm more interested -- assuming you are familar with "Misquoting Jesus" -- is how you reconcile the author's claims regarding the lack of originals of the New Testament with your previous statements?

 

Then again, I suppose I could just google the book and read refutations on my own.

 

I should clarify that, technically, there can be only one original (whichever was written first). But what is more relevant is the concept of what researchers call "manuscript witnesses": multiple copies of the same document which all are identical. This is what I was referring to.

 

Here is a link from History Channel stating that one manuscript (from Dead Sea Scrolls) was written around 150 BC. People were blown away that they are IDENTICAL to modern copies.

 

http://www.history.com/news/unraveling-the-dead-sea-scrolls-six-fascinating-facts

Edited January 9, 2013 by M30USA