• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are there any contradictions in the Bible?

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
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.

Jesus is a lord. God is a Lord. Obama is a Lord.

Lord simply means 'master'

Anyone can be called by this title if they are in the position of a master over others. People really need to stop complicating it.
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
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?


the point is that a person requires Gods holy spirit in order to come to the right understanding.

Much of the bible is not always black and white for that reason. The way it is written tests a persons heart condition...it shows the true heart condition of each individual :

Heb4:12 For the word of God is alive and exerts power+ and is sharper than any two-edged sword+ and pierces even to the dividing of soul* and spirit,* and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And there is not a creation that is hidden from his sight,+ but all things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of the one to whom we must give an account.

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.

We are not typical of most christians. We dont see God as a man or a woman or in any physical sense because he is not physical....he is a spirit.

There is not two names of God.... there is only one and it is Jehovah. All the rest are titles just as a man can have many titles. He can be a Son, a brother, a father, a husband and an engineer all at the same time. They each describe the same man with his different titles.
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
To what verse are you referring?

Jehovah is a Lord - Ezekiel 3:11 Go in among the exiles of your people*+ and speak to them. Tell them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says,’ whether they listen or refuse to listen.”+

Jesus is a Lord - Matt 7:21
Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.

King David is a Lord - 1Sam 25;
23 When Ab′i·gail caught sight of David, she hurried down off the donkey and threw herself facedown before David, bowing to the ground. 24 She then fell at his feet and said: “My lord, let the blame be on me; let your servant girl speak to you, and listen to the words of your servant girl.

A husband - Gen 18:12 So Sarah began to laugh to herself, saying: “After I am worn out and my lord is old, will I really have this pleasure?”


The word we translate as 'Lord' is also translated as 'sir' 'master' and 'owner' in other verses.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Jehovah is a Lord - Ezekiel 3:11 Go in among the exiles of your people*+ and speak to them. Tell them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says,’ whether they listen or refuse to listen.”+

Jesus is a Lord - Matt 7:21
Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.

King David is a Lord - 1Sam 25;
23 When Ab′i·gail caught sight of David, she hurried down off the donkey and threw herself facedown before David, bowing to the ground. 24 She then fell at his feet and said: “My lord, let the blame be on me; let your servant girl speak to you, and listen to the words of your servant girl.

A husband - Gen 18:12 So Sarah began to laugh to herself, saying: “After I am worn out and my lord is old, will I really have this pleasure?”


The word we translate as 'Lord' is also translated as 'sir' 'master' and 'owner' in other verses.
Stop babbling. In what verse under discussion was El and/or YHWH referred to as lord?
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
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?

the word we translate as 'lord' is also translated as 'sir' 'master' and 'owner' in the scriptures. The bible wasnt written in english...it was written in hebrew and greek so we must stick to the meaning of the words in that language. And in that language, Lord is a general term which could be applied to anyone who was a 'master' or 'owner'
It can be applied to God because he is both. It can be applied to a king such as King Solomon or King David because they were both masters and owners too.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Again, maybe, maybe not KenS. Let's look at one or two. For example, the father of Joseph, the father of Jesus was alleged to be Jacob in Matthew (Matt 1: 16) whereas in Luke it was Heli (Luke 3:23). So which one is it?

The difference is not as hard as one may think.
Matthew follows the line of Joseph.

According to the book of Juchasin, the rule of the Jews is that "the mother is not called the family". In other words, women were not really recognized and thus in Luke, "as supposed being the son of Joseph" is referring to the lineage of Mary, daughter of Heli but recognizing Joseph as the head of the family. This is seen throughout the Testaments.

Or in John, Christ states the he and the father (God) are one and the same (John 10:30) and then a bit later, he states that God is greater than he is (John 14:28). SO which is it? Cannot be both and in the second example, it is from the same book.
Yes, one can then say I am trying to make it fit, but I really am not trying to do that.

My spirit and soul and body are one. (as in John 10:30) But my spirit is greater (as in John 14:28)


And in Matthew, Luke and John, the last words that Christ allegedly spoke vary to a very great degree. From " I am finished" to "why hast thou forsaken me" to "Unto thy hands I commend my spirit". See my point here? I understand that each writer would have had differing opinions and experiences but if the Bible is divinely inspired, then one would think that God would have gotten things a bit more in line with factual matters.

It seems like one is between a rock and a hard spot here. When one book says exactly the same as another book then it was a robbery of sorts, just copying. But if it doesn't say exactly the same thing, then it is in contradiction and not inspired. What is one to do?

I find that it is four Gospels simply giving us the whole of the picture like the blind men describing an elephant from different angles.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Jehovah is a Lord - Ezekiel 3:11 Go in among the exiles of your people*+ and speak to them. Tell them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says,’ whether they listen or refuse to listen.”+

Jesus is a Lord - Matt 7:21
Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.

14 that you keep the commandment without * stain or reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ,
15 which He will bring about at the proper time -He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords,

Sometimes LORD is referred to Jesus
 

Kolibri

Well-Known Member
14 that you keep the commandment without * stain or reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ,
15 which He will bring about at the proper time -He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords,

Sometimes LORD is referred to Jesus

This is 1 Timothy 6:14,15. I had to look up to see if it was all caps "LORD" or Lord in KJV. I see it isn't all-caps LORD in the translation you are using. You are right, Ken, at times the bible also refers to Jesus as a lord, and in this case he is the preeminent lord of all those humans that have been called lord.
 

Doug Shaver

Member
My point was simply that the poster definitely isn't interested in finding out possibilities.
I agree that it is possible there are no contradictions in the Bible. But I have examined all the possible explanations that apologists have offered, and having done so, I think it is extremely improbable that the Bible has no contradictions.
 

Ouroboros

Coincidentia oppositorum
I agree that it is possible there are no contradictions in the Bible. But I have examined all the possible explanations that apologists have offered, and having done so, I think it is extremely improbable that the Bible has no contradictions.
I had a *derp* moment. At first I thought you said, "I think it's extremely important that ..." And I was firing up on all engines to give you a lecture... LOL!!! I'm glad I stopped myself in time and re-read what you wrote. :D

To add on to what you said, I actually think in a text that's written by humans to describe something indescribable as a "God" beyond our understanding should naturally have contradictions in it. If it doesn't, then this "God" would be something we can understand, which doesn't really sounds good for a God beyond understanding.
 

Ouroboros

Coincidentia oppositorum
My mistake then. Generally, when someone is pointing out the existence of contradictions, they are using it as a means to disprove the Divine authorship of Scriptures. So I naturally assumed that was the point you were getting at here.
Thank you. :)

When it comes to the divinity of the scriptures, that's another question and for another time (at least in my case, it's a bit more complicated than just yes or no, in my opinion).

But I would also add, that I am only talking about superficial contradictions.
Absolutely. Of course. There are always explanations to the contradictions, but they're still on contradictions on the surface. If I was God, I would probably have made a holy book containing contradictions myself (for various reasons).

Meaning, if I told you today that light was a wave and tomorrow that it is a particle, you would say that I am contradicting myself. But learning about the behavior of light will teach that light has both attributes and there is no contradiction. Superficially, the two statements are at odds with each other, but in reality they are not.
Agree. The problem I'm having is when someone is insisting that 1=0 only because they worship the book. The text of the book shouldn't be God. The text kills the spirit.

I'm only pointing this out, because I don't want someone to come back to me later and tell me that I believe Scriptures contains false information (even if for a good purpose).
Sure. The problem of discussion I've learned over the years. It will always be misconstrued and put into extreme. Whatever you say will be used against you. But I get you. And I think you get me too now. :)

When it comes to grammatical errors, there's really no way to deny that. The first word in Genesis is not grammatically correct in relation to the rest of the verse. So how's that for starting off on the wrong foot.
Yup.
 

JoStories

Well-Known Member
The difference is not as hard as one may think.
Matthew follows the line of Joseph.
According to the book of Juchasin, the rule of the Jews is that "the mother is not called the family". In other words, women were not really recognized and thus in Luke, "as supposed being the son of Joseph" is referring to the lineage of Mary, daughter of Heli but recognizing Joseph as the head of the family. This is seen throughout the Testaments.

First, let me say how refreshing it is to have a civil conversation with someone even when we disagree. I am new here but I have also seen many posters who simply wish to either insult or proselytize and that, IMO, is not the purpose of a place like this.
Now, that said, we agree here. However, this point leads to another, more interesting point, IMO. That is that Mary cannot possibly lead to a messiah per Jewish lore. You yourself point out that the woman is devalued in that culture, which I agree with. I don't, however, feel that it is recognizing Joseph as the head of the family.

Yes, one can then say I am trying to make it fit, but I really am not trying to do that.

My spirit and soul and body are one. (as in John 10:30) But my spirit is greater (as in John 14:28)


I would not say that Ken. I see it more as your set of beliefs and there is nothing wrong with that. And I completely agree that the spirit is greater. It is my belief that we are reincarnated, which IMO, the Bible can be argued to have intimated. (Another great dicussion point!). In my belief, we are here with each new life to try to enlighten our spirits on this journey.

It seems like one is between a rock and a hard spot here. When one book says exactly the same as another book then it was a robbery of sorts, just copying. But if it doesn't say exactly the same thing, then it is in contradiction and not inspired. What is one to do?

I find that it is four Gospels simply giving us the whole of the picture like the blind men describing an elephant from different angles.


Interesting take Ken. I looked at this from a differing POV and applied to your thinking to the book by Twain..Huckleberry Finn, a book I loathe. I had this discussion with my sister, who is a English Prof and she loves the book. She and I talked about your take at length and it gave us both a new POV. I concur that it is possible the differing views could be to incite one to think of this from different angles. Very intriquing Ken.
 

JoStories

Well-Known Member
I had a *derp* moment. At first I thought you said, "I think it's extremely important that ..." And I was firing up on all engines to give you a lecture... LOL!!! I'm glad I stopped myself in time and re-read what you wrote. :D

To add on to what you said, I actually think in a text that's written by humans to describe something indescribable as a "God" beyond our understanding should naturally have contradictions in it. If it doesn't, then this "God" would be something we can understand, which doesn't really sounds good for a God beyond understanding.
I would agree and add that this POV could be meant to include other religious books. For example, the POV from the Vedas, the Tanakh, which is different from the OT, the Teachings of the Buddha, etc. Why does God have to be consigned to one POV from only one faith? It is my opinion that God is bigger than that.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
This is 1 Timothy 6:14,15. I had to look up to see if it was all caps "LORD" or Lord in KJV. I see it isn't all-caps LORD in the translation you are using. You are right, Ken, at times the bible also refers to Jesus as a lord, and in this case he is the preeminent lord of all those humans that have been called lord.
The all caps 'lord' occurrences are a later addition to the texts. I've already mentioned this; hence the non-relevance of your argument.
 
Top