Are there any contradictions in the Bible?

[Pegg]

I'm sorry, but it doesn't make any sense.

Abraham knew God by the name YHWH, as is evident of that Abraham gave a place a name that was called "Lord will provide" (YHWH Yireh). Why would it be YHWH and not El Shaddai Yireh unless Abraham gave the name YHWH based on his knowledge of a name of God that was YHWH.

Abraham perhaps knew God by El Shaddai as well, that's not at question here, but Abraham supposedly didn't even know the name YHWH according to God when he spoke to Moses. Not concept. Not other name. Not different interpretation of the name, but the name YHWH wasn't known to Abraham. Abraham didn't even know the name YHWH, yet he named as place after YHWH.


It doesn't say that Abraham didn't have the knowledge of the interpretation or understanding or concept of YWHW, but it says clearly that Abraham didn't even know the name YHWH, but he obviously did (if he even existed at all).



I heard Microsoft is changing name after 30 years. They're changing it to Microsoft to signify a new beginning. So instead of Microsoft, which is old and dated, the new name Microsoft will have a huge impact on the market. In the light of the name change, they're also changing the stock ticker symbol from MSFT to MSFT. So remember if you trade any stocks or buy any software, buy it from Microsoft, the new name, and not from Microsoft, the old name. Clear as mud...

It simply means he didnt know the meaning behind Gods name.

And the creator is called by many titles...Heavenly Father, Almighty, God, Lord...these are all titles given to Jehovah. It doesnt mean Abraham was worshipping several different Gods.

 

[Ouroboros]

Brother.

That book evolved for hundreds and hundreds of years and went through a monotheistic redaction to Yahweh as a primary deity.

That means later traditions of Abraham had yahweh as a primary deity.

The oldest and original traditions however, had El as Abrahams deity.


Exodus 6:2–3:

I revealed myself to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as Ēl Shaddāi, but was not known to them by my name, Yahweh.

This is the later redactors covering up the polytheistic past of Israelite cultures.

So it's the author(s)' fault there is a contradiction then.

It is a contradiction regardless if it's God's fault, Moses' fault, author(s)' fault, or the translators' fault. The contradiction stands.

Pegg's explanation is that we should blame the translators or authors. You blame the authors. Doesn't matter. I don't mind who you blame for it, the contradiction is still there on the face of it.

The question to this thread is: A) Are there contradictions in the Bible?

The question isn't: B) do we have good excuses to why there are contradictions in the Bible?

The answer to A) is yes, there are contradiction, which this one is. The answer to B) is, yes, of course there are plenty of excuses and explanations to those contradictions, but it doesn't suddenly mean they magically disappeared. They're there, and I think your explanation is the most likely one. But the contradictions are still there...

 

[Ouroboros]

It simply means he didnt know the meaning behind Gods name.

Doesn't matter. It is a contradiction on the face of it. When you read it, it's a contradiction. There might be explanations like blaming the authors or the translators, but it does say what it says in the current translations.

The simple fact is that it doesn't give your explanation in the text. It only makes a contradiction, and leaves it at that.

And the creator is called by many titles...Heavenly Father, Almighty, God, Lord...these are all titles given to Jehovah. It doesnt mean Abraham was worshipping several different Gods.

??? I never said there were several different Gods. I know that there are many names in the Bible for God. But the point is that it uses exactly the name YHWH in both instances. In one it shows that Abraham supposedly knew the literal name YHWH, and in the other God is telling Moses that Abraham didn't know God by the name YHWH. It is a contradiction. Simple as that.

 

[Ouroboros]

Hopefully this clears things up.

Israelite monotheism evolved gradually out of pre-existing beliefs and practices of the ancient world.[76] The religion of the Israelites of Iron Age I, like the Canaanite faith from which it evolved[77] and other ancient Near Eastern religions, was based on a cult of ancestors and worship of family gods (the "gods of the fathers").[78] Its major deities were not numerous – El, Asherah, and Yahweh, with Baal as a fourth god, and perhaps Shamash (the sun) in the early period.[79] By the time of the early Hebrew kings, El and Yahweh had become fused and Asherah did not continue as a separate state cult,[79] although she continued to be popular at a community level until Persian times.[80] Yahweh, later the national god of both Israel and Judah, seems to have originated in Edom and Midian in southern Canaan and may have been brought north to Israel by the Kenites and Midianites at an early stage

So because of this, the contradiction disappeared from the text?

Ok. I'm going back to Bible Gateway... nope... it still says Abraham didn't know the name YHWH and the other verse still says Abraham named a place YHWH sometin' somethin'.

 

[outhouse]

Are there contradictions in the Bible?

Factual ones yes.

do we have good excuses to why there are contradictions in the Bible?

No good excuses for many. Some do, but not all.

 

[Ouroboros]

Factual ones yes.

Exactly.

That's what I'm getting at. It doesn't matter if it's for good or bad, or if the blame is to be put on God, Moses, author(s), or translator(s), ultimately, it's not my fault as a reader that this obvious contradiction is literally there in the text.

No good excuses for many. Some do, but not all.

Agree, but the thread was really asking if there were any contradictions, and there are many, but this one is a blatant one. The explanations might be good, but it doesn't matter why there is a contradiction, because it's still there in the text after all the explanations.

 

[outhouse]

or if the blame is to be put on

I don't blame anyone. They are supposed to be there. The people who canonized the text did not care about them as it was not important.

 

[Ouroboros]

I don't blame anyone. They are supposed to be there. The people who canonized the text did not care about them as it was not important.

Blame, guilty party, or person who is responsible for... doesn't matter what we call it, some people caused it to happen. Either it was God, Moses, author(s), or translator(s), or, as you say, let's add "canonizers." Someone or some people caused it, intentionally or unintentionally, it doesn't matter, the fact is that the text does contain this contradiction. It doesn't change because we have an explanation to why.

This thread is called, "Are there any contradictions in the Bible?" The answer is still yes.

It's a bit like if you went to a party and you see your best friend Bob there. He has a pie on his shirt. You point out to Bob that he has pie on his shirt, and he response, "No, I don't. Brittany pushed me so I dropped my pie on my shirt." At which you point out that, "Well, the you admit that you have pie on your shirt." And he answers, "No, I don't. As I told you, Brittany pushed me so the pie landed on my shirt." Then you realize that Bob's problem isn't the pie but something serious, so you tell him, "Bob, there's something wrong with your brain today. What's wrong?" And Bob answers, "Nothing is wrong with my head. I fell on my bike today and hit my head in the pavement, so nothing is wrong with me." At that point you decide to slowly walk away... (To see if there's any sober doctor in the house to help Bob to the hospital.)

 

[Etritonakin]

If I say "The sky is gray." "The sky is white." "The sky is blue." it does not mean there is a contradiction.

Eze_18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Exo_34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

There is no contradiction there -but you have to be somewhat interested in doing something other than finding contradiction to understand.

 

[JoStories]

Hopefully this clears things up.

Israelite monotheism evolved gradually out of pre-existing beliefs and practices of the ancient world.[76] The religion of the Israelites of Iron Age I, like the Canaanite faith from which it evolved[77] and other ancient Near Eastern religions, was based on a cult of ancestors and worship of family gods (the "gods of the fathers").[78] Its major deities were not numerous – El, Asherah, and Yahweh, with Baal as a fourth god, and perhaps Shamash (the sun) in the early period.[79] By the time of the early Hebrew kings, El and Yahweh had become fused and Asherah did not continue as a separate state cult,[79] although she continued to be popular at a community level until Persian times.[80] Yahweh, later the national god of both Israel and Judah, seems to have originated in Edom and Midian in southern Canaan and may have been brought north to Israel by the Kenites and Midianites at an early stage

Well said and of course, my own studies have led me to similar conclusions. Religions the world over have evolved, just as humans did. Even an undergraduate study would reveal the evolution and commonalities therein. From the Hindu and Buddhist faiths to the epic of Gilgamesh (one of my favorites) to Sumerian and Persian, and let's not forget Egyptian, the similarities are glaring. There is no doubt in my mind that the Tanakh and Talmud were compiled from a host of sources.

 

[JoStories]

If I say "The sky is gray." "The sky is white." "The sky is blue." it does not mean there is a contradiction.

Eze_18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Exo_34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

There is no contradiction there -but you have to be somewhat interested in doing something other than finding contradiction to understand.

May I ask why? I agree that color is absolutely unique and no one's 'blue' is another's but if we accept contradiction at face value and do not challenge it, what then? We become 'sheeple'? What, for you, is this 'something other' we are to do with these contradictions?

 

[JayJayDee]

What people tend to forget is that humans had a common origin. We should see a common thread among all belief systems. The similarities are proof of that. Multiplicities of gods....immortal souls.....fiery hells of torture after death for the wicked...evil spirits.....practicer of divination, etc.
What made Israel different is that they had laws directing their worship away from those common beliefs of other nations.

"When you have entered into the land that Jehovah your God is giving you, you must not learn to imitate the detestable practices of those nations. 10 There should not be found in you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, anyone who employs divination, anyone practicing magic, anyone who looks for omens, a sorcerer, 11 anyone binding others with a spell, anyone who consults a spirit medium or a fortune-teller, or anyone who inquires of the dead. 12 For whoever does these things is detestable to Jehovah, and on account of these detestable practices Jehovah your God is driving them away from before you. 13 You should prove yourself blameless before Jehovah your God." (Deut 18:9-13)

Unfortunately, Israel did not always uphold the laws of their God and incurred his wrath. No other nation was required to do so. Have you ever asked why?

 

[Skwim]

If I say "The sky is gray." "The sky is white." "The sky is blue." it does not mean there is a contradiction.

If one is looking at the same area of the sky at a particular moment it sure does. Gray is not white is not blue. So, what do you have in mind where the three don't pose a contradiction? Without being silly of course.

 

[Pegg]

??? I never said there were several different Gods. I know that there are many names in the Bible for God. But the point is that it uses exactly the name YHWH in both instances. In one it shows that Abraham supposedly knew the literal name YHWH, and in the other God is telling Moses that Abraham didn't know God by the name YHWH. It is a contradiction. Simple as that.

Christians are told to be baptised in the name of the Father and in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy spirit.

This requires that one knows something deeper about them. We know the name of the holy spirit is 'holy spirit'.... but what does it mean to baptised into the 'name' of the holy spirit?

This is the same issue with the text you think is a contradiction. Knowing the meaning of a name is different to knowing the name itself.

Who are you? And by that question, i'm not asking you for your name but rather who are you. If you can answer that question it will help you understand what God is saying to Moses about his name.

 

[Desert Snake]

Christians are told to be baptised in the name of the Father and in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy spirit.

This requires that one knows something deeper about them. We know the name of the holy spirit is 'holy spirit'.... but what does it mean to baptised into the 'name' of the holy spirit?

This is the same issue with the text you think is a contradiction. Knowing the meaning of a name is different to knowing the name itself.

Who are you? And by that question, i'm not asking you for your name but rather who are you. If you can answer that question it will help you understand what God is saying to Moses about his name.

Finally we agree on something. The name part, not the baptism part. However, that being said, we still have ''Lord'', meaning JHVH, even though it is used for both the 'father', and Jesus. Later the title was differentiated in most Bibles, but the title is the same. So we have possible mistranslations of meaning, in our Bibles, because of this 'separation' of lord meaning, according to 'belief', or some type of supposition.

 

[Pegg]

Finally we agree on something. The name part, not the baptism part. However, that being said, we still have ''Lord'', meaning JHVH, even though it is used for both the 'father', and Jesus. Later the title was differentiated in most Bibles, but the title is the same. So we have possible mistranslations of meaning, in our Bibles, because of this 'separation' of lord meaning, according to 'belief', or some type of supposition.

people are called by the same title Lord, ie a king is a Lord, Abraham is called Lord by his wife etc etc. How do you account for that? Its just a title with a general meaning, its not specific to one individual.

 

[Desert Snake]

people are called by the same title Lord, ie a king is a Lord, Abraham is called Lord by his wife etc etc. How do you account for that? Its just a title with a general meaning, its not specific to one individual.

Great. The problem is that later translators ascribed different 'lord' titles arbitrarily to both the father and Jesus, differenciating the same word, according to some set of beliefs, apparently.

 

[JoStories]

Christians are told to be baptised in the name of the Father and in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy spirit.

This requires that one knows something deeper about them. We know the name of the holy spirit is 'holy spirit'.... but what does it mean to baptised into the 'name' of the holy spirit?

This is the same issue with the text you think is a contradiction. Knowing the meaning of a name is different to knowing the name itself.

Who are you? And by that question, i'm not asking you for your name but rather who are you. If you can answer that question it will help you understand what God is saying to Moses about his name.

I see what you are saying, I cannot say I agree however. If the question is does Moses know the essence of the person, or in this case, God, what is the point of having the reader have to make inferences? If I am not is taken, your view of God is typical of most Christians, that is, an older man with white hair, etc. it also infers that God is all knowing, peace loving,and so on. One gleens that information from many of the moral tales and parables. But in one small part, we have two 'names'. I fail to see the necessity of that. If I were to attempt to explain who I am to you, that would not include two very different concepts within the same time frame. Most people of that time could not read, nor write. They depended on the rabbi for that. Why attempt to confuse them? It's illogical, IMO.

 

[JoStories]

people are called by the same title Lord, ie a king is a Lord, Abraham is called Lord by his wife etc etc. How do you account for that? Its just a title with a general meaning, its not specific to one individual.

Again, then why use it in this context? If God is to be revered, why use a term that as you say, is so generalized? Why not one that is unique and imparts the import of the meaning of God to the masses?

 

[rusra02]

Such as?

The Bible, IMO, contains reliable history, often proved or supported by archeological discoveries. I believe it also repeatedly and reliably foretold future events. It does not contain, despite claims made against it, false notions and ideas common when it was written, and indeed, for many centuries after. Think of a book, completed almost 2,000 years past, that despite ceaseless attacks against it, both physical and intellectual, continues to be the worlds all-time best seller. Think of a book that has transformed people's lives for the better on virtually every nation on earth. I could go on but you get my drift.