Contradictions in the Bible

[Skwim]

Looks like someone - not just you Skwim - didn't pay any attention to the five points... but which of the opposition will. They can't allow anything that would throw they argument out the door, and prove they are grabbing at straws

If you're talking about rrob's

1) To whom is God speaking in any part of the Bible? We commonly say one thing to one person or group, and something totally different to another.

2) To what time period do the two "contradictions" belong? It's nothing new; times change. We all know that in our daily life. Well, God can do that also.

3) What is the context? You tell your kids not to shout in the restaurant, and then tell them shouting is OK when walking in the forest.

4) Are we sure two different accounts are talking about the same event? There are times when recognizing that what seems to be the same event are actually two, albeit similar, events. Lot's of similar events in the Bible.

5) Are we sure the Bible version we use is true to the original Hebrew and Greek texts? It wouldn't be unusual for a scribe to make an honest mistake. It might just be possible that the scribe interjected their own "view" on doctrinal matters. I know of one "contradiction" that vanishes when a comma is removed. The original texts had no punctuation at all. The comma was added by some scribe and is therefore devoid of any diving authority.

Using the contradiction

2 Kings 8:25-27
25 In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign.
26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.


2 Chronicles 22
22 And the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah his youngest son king in his stead: for the band of men that came with the Arabians to the camp had slain all the eldest. So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned. 2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.
​

Let's take a look at them.

1) To whom is God speaking in any part of the Bible? We commonly say one thing to one person or group, and something totally different to another.

A. In both the author is speaking to the Israelites.​

2) To what time period do the two "contradictions" belong? It's nothing new; times change. We all know that in our daily life. Well, God can do that also.

A. The very same. It's the same event.​

3) What is the context? You tell your kids not to shout in the restaurant, and then tell them shouting is OK when walking in the forest.

A. As part of the presentation of an era of ancient Israel and Judah.

​

4) Are we sure two different accounts are talking about the same event? There are times when recognizing that what seems to be the same event are actually two, albeit similar, events. Lot's of similar events in the Bible.

A. Absolutely! The context and events are identical​

5) Are we sure the Bible version we use is true to the original Hebrew and Greek texts? It wouldn't be unusual for a scribe to make an honest mistake. It might just be possible that the scribe interjected their own "view" on doctrinal matters. I know of one "contradiction" that vanishes when a comma is removed. The original texts had no punctuation at all. The comma was added by some scribe and is therefore devoid of any diving authority.

A. If one feels the Biblical scholars who translated their ancient sources made an error in this particular case then one has to question everything they did. And to assume a lay person could do a better job of interpreting the ancient sources is to essentially dismiss the veracity these scholars are imputed to have. One would then be forced to question everything they read in the Bible.​

.


​

 

[nPeace]

@Windwalker I should have added that God allows time for people to have a change of heart, and his love and mercy is great, but since he can read hearts, and know our innermost thoughts and intentions, he knows when one has "pulled the plug out the socket, and chopped it up". Or God can do both.
(1 Corinthians 6:9-11)
9 Or do you not know that unrighteous people will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Do not be misled. Those who are sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, men who submit to homosexual acts, men who practice homosexuality, 10 thieves, greedy people, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners will not inherit God’s Kingdom. 11 And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean; you have been sanctified; you have been declared righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.

(2 Peter 3:9)
Jehovah is not slow concerning his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire anyone to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance.

 

[nPeace]

If you're talking about rrob's

1) To whom is God speaking in any part of the Bible? We commonly say one thing to one person or group, and something totally different to another.

2) To what time period do the two "contradictions" belong? It's nothing new; times change. We all know that in our daily life. Well, God can do that also.

3) What is the context? You tell your kids not to shout in the restaurant, and then tell them shouting is OK when walking in the forest.

4) Are we sure two different accounts are talking about the same event? There are times when recognizing that what seems to be the same event are actually two, albeit similar, events. Lot's of similar events in the Bible.

5) Are we sure the Bible version we use is true to the original Hebrew and Greek texts? It wouldn't be unusual for a scribe to make an honest mistake. It might just be possible that the scribe interjected their own "view" on doctrinal matters. I know of one "contradiction" that vanishes when a comma is removed. The original texts had no punctuation at all. The comma was added by some scribe and is therefore devoid of any diving authority.

Using the contradiction

2 Kings 8:25-27
25 In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign.
26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.


2 Chronicles 22
22 And the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah his youngest son king in his stead: for the band of men that came with the Arabians to the camp had slain all the eldest. So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned. 2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.
​

Let's take a look at them.

1) To whom is God speaking in any part of the Bible? We commonly say one thing to one person or group, and something totally different to another.

A. In both the author is speaking to the Israelites.​

2) To what time period do the two "contradictions" belong? It's nothing new; times change. We all know that in our daily life. Well, God can do that also.

A. The very same. It's the same event.​

3) What is the context? You tell your kids not to shout in the restaurant, and then tell them shouting is OK when walking in the forest.

A. As part of the presentation of an era of ancient Israel and Judah.

​

4) Are we sure two different accounts are talking about the same event? There are times when recognizing that what seems to be the same event are actually two, albeit similar, events. Lot's of similar events in the Bible.

A. Absolutely! The context and events are identical​

5) Are we sure the Bible version we use is true to the original Hebrew and Greek texts? It wouldn't be unusual for a scribe to make an honest mistake. It might just be possible that the scribe interjected their own "view" on doctrinal matters. I know of one "contradiction" that vanishes when a comma is removed. The original texts had no punctuation at all. The comma was added by some scribe and is therefore devoid of any diving authority.

A. If one feels the Biblical scholars who translated their ancient sources made an error in this particular case then one has to question everything they did. And to assume a lay person could do a better job of interpreting the ancient sources is to essentially dismiss the veracity these scholars are imputed to have. One would then be forced to question everything they read in the Bible.​

.

​

You seem to be forgetting that we went through this in the past. See here.
I suppose in that case, we can add a #6.
6) Were the different manuscripts, or differences in manuscripts carefully taken into consideration?

 

[stvdv]

Was @Subduction Zone quoting a verse, or was he saying what he believes?
To my knowledge, there is no verse in the Bible that says "God is a liar", or "God lies". Those are the words that men today, say.

Recently I said "all humans have a choice to believe or not believe something". I was corrected by a few Atheist. Atheists "lack belief" it seems. So it was not what he believes, I guess, rather a misinterpretation.

You are right. I started saying "It is not correct to call God a liar (Ad hominem attack)".

The verse did not say that at all. It not even said that God lies. It only said that humans should believe a lie because God send delusions (see Bible verse below).

Is actually funny. It's humans believing lies, not God lying. We humans have the facts a bit messed up, that's all (and that is what God did create, by sending strong delusions)

2 Thess 2:11
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."

 

[Subduction Zone]

This is an example, imo, of how one can misunderstand a statement. When he says "God sends", does he mean, "God created it, and then gave it", or does he mean, "You believe it, so God let you have it"?
The later appears to be what was meant, as suggested in this post.

I understand that God allows persons to believe the lie, and removes himself, therefore preventing any chance of that person seeing the light. See here for a more detailed explanation, on that.

Actually this is an example of how a literalist cannot be consistent in their beliefs. When one purposefully misleads people, which is what the verse says, then one is lying.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

A common conception of the Bible is that it contradicts itself. It sure does look that way. I can't argue that. And yet it claims to be the truth,

John 17:17,

Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
​

Well, there is something in the Bible that doesn't even need "interpretation." It's a pretty straight forward declaration. While belief in the statement is optional, it would nonetheless be hard to make it say anything other than that God's word, the Bible, is truth. But how can it be truth if it is full of contradictions?

A more fundamental question though might be, is it really full of contradictions, or do many jump to conclusions before doing any exhaustive study for themselves? I find that question particularly relative considering how many already know it is contradictory without having considered alternatives.

What alternatives?

• To whom is God speaking in any part of the Bible? We commonly say one thing to one person or group, and something totally different to another.
• To what time period do the two "contradictions" belong? It's nothing new; times change. We all know that in our daily life. Well, God can do that also.
• What is the context? You tell your kids not to shout in the restaurant, and then tell them shouting is OK when walking in the forest.
  
• Are we sure two different accounts are talking about the same event? There are times when recognizing that what seems to be the same event are actually two, albeit similar, events. Lot's of similar events in the Bible.
  
• Are we sure the Bible version we use is true to the original Hebrew and Greek texts? It wouldn't be unusual for a scribe to make an honest mistake. It might just be possible that the scribe interjected their own "view" on doctrinal matters. I know of one "contradiction" that vanishes when a comma is removed. The original texts had no punctuation at all. The comma was added by some scribe and is therefore devoid of any diving authority.

There are other considerations, but I've found that those 5 clear up 99% of the apparent contradictions in the Bible. So now I have no trouble seeing that God's word is truth. It just takes a little bit of "getting under the hood" to see how the engine runs.

@Phaedrus posts a very long list of real contradictions in the Bible. And it isn't all of them.

Sophistry, which is really what you are describing above, is in my view a pretty poor way of trying to get at the truth. And I find some of your arguments very suspect.

First, for the most part, God isn't speaking to anyone in the Bible. The authors of the books in the Bible are speaking to their readers. Some, like Paul, were writing to specific readers on specific themes. Some were taken from older works (Job), and some were deliberately disingenuous in order to appear prophetic (Daniel).

To argue that two time-periods may resolve an apparent contradiction can work in some instances, but certainly not in what is intended to be revealed and permanent "Truth."

Context has nothing to do at all with some of the clear contradictions. For example, in Matthew 27, Jesus does not answer any of Pilate's questions, and in John 18, he answers all of them. He either answered, or he didn't -- nobody can do both at once.

The business of Bible translation has been going on for a long time, and more and more scholarly effort has been put into making translations that are as accurate in meaning as possible. True, KJV sometimes muddied the meaning by choosing to go with a more poetic and graceful translation, but NIV and others have been making improvements (sometimes at the cost of beauty of language) ever since. (One notable instance is the translation of "caritas" in 1 Corinthians 18 as "charity" in KJV when the translation "love" in NIV is much closer to the real meaning.)

 

[stvdv]

(2 Thess. 2:11). "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."

TV shows where there is lots of intrigue/lies score best, so God did a good job.

Do you realize that that verse calls God a liar?

That is not how I interpret this verse. God sends strong delusion, so that human should believe a lie. The verse is not stating that God is the one lying. It could be as well other humans lying to one another. But you can blame God for making humans lie, I think.

Does the verse say "God is a liar"?

Would be Ad hominem attack

It just says God lies I think

A subtle difference

"God sends strong delusions, that they should believe a lie" ... this can be any lie, does not even claim that God is doing the lying in this verse. Could be though. In a way it is God that created the delusion, making humans lie, so you could claim that indirectly "God is lying" if you see God in all humans (as Christians believe "God is the Father, we are His children"). But I guess that is not your line of thinking. From Hinduism they also have similar view. Advaita teaching "Only God is real", or Bhakti saying that God is the doer. Hence in a way I believe God lies.

I disagree. Calling the poster a liar might be an ad hominem attack pointing out that the poster called God a liar only describes his actions.

I agree with "pointing out that the poster called God a liar only describes his actions". I did not say that you made an "Ad hominem atack".
I was talking about "does the verse say that God is a liar?". I did not talk about "a RF poster calling God a liar".
I was thinking about the "poster in the Bible", the one writing 2 Thess 2:11. If he called God a liar, that would be an Ad hominem attack" IMO (assuming God is reading the Bible once in a while). It would be like me writing on RF that Subduction Zone is a liar.

And no liar lies all of the time. When does a person that tells lies become a liar?

Good question, reminding me of a practice I started in India called "who am I" using "neti neti" ("Not this, not this"). For this practise thinking "I am XXX" is followed by "neti" and discarded. Same way "God is XXX" is discarded. Just my practice. My practice is not the Truth of course. Makes most sense to me though, hence I stick to it for now.

But yes, there are countless contradictions in the Bible. That is why there is such a thing as Christian apologetics in the first place. Their job is to apologize for the contradictions in the Bible, though they do not seem to do a very good job of it.

To apologize seems difficult for many humans anyway. Could be a "coincidental" joke from God to let them call themselves Christian apologetics
Seems to me that this is definitely 1 "strong delusion" as described in the above verse 2 Thess 2:11

 

[sojourner]

While belief in the statement is optional, it would nonetheless be hard to make it say anything other than that God's word, the Bible, is truth. But how can it be truth if it is full of contradictions?

"Word of God" doesn't refer to the Bible.

A more fundamental question though might be, is it really full of contradictions, or do many jump to conclusions before doing any exhaustive study for themselves? I find that question particularly relative considering how many already know it is contradictory without having considered alternatives.

This is what they teach us in Biblical Exegesis 101 in seminary.

There are other considerations, but I've found that those 5 clear up 99% of the apparent contradictions in the Bible. So now I have no trouble seeing that God's word is truth. It just takes a little bit of "getting under the hood" to see how the engine runs.

No. In fact, if the exegesis is undertaken correctly, it will point out glaring contradictions.

 

[sojourner]

The Bible is inspired, true and in fact infallible in the original texts.

No. It's not infallible. One small example: Genesis refers to a flat, disc-shaped earth. The earth is, in fact, a modified orb.

 

[rrobs]

Yes, to help folks prevent wasting any more of their valuable time.
I don't claim anything, not as some "bible believers" do.
I'm just not into fairy tales when it comes to making important decisions about the direction of one's life. But if people prefer to follow such tales, I will let them be.

Well, I'm glad you've found something that works for you. But be ready for change. It'll come. I know from experience. I once thought just like you about the Bible, but as you can tell I've come to accept it. Anything is possible.

 

[stvdv]

Actually this is an example of how a literalist cannot be consistent in their beliefs. When one purposefully misleads people, which is what the verse says, then one is lying.

You just uphold very high morals, higher than God seems to be asking from us in the Scriptures. That is admirable, you just score 100% on this test
I do see a lot of "purposefully misleading" people. Maybe even on RF. But I agree with you, that we better don't do that on RF.

Hindu story to illustrate: A Saint in the forest sees a beautiful "golden" deer disappearing in the woods. The a hunter comes to him asking if He saw the deer. Now the Saint has a dilemma: a)Tell the truth + b)Not get the deer killed
So he says "My eyes can't speak"

Or in WW-2. My grand parents had people in hiding. When the Germans came and would ask "do you hide somewhere here"? What would be the right thing to do? Especially if you know they would be shot and murdered in front of your young children. I would tell others they were wrong to mislead the killer.

Hypothetical: You are free man desperate for sex. A hot girl asks you "do you like my dress?". And you know you "get her" when you say yes and even "undressed", but you won't when you say no. But you really don't like the dress, but you definitely like getting her "undressed". Might you maybe say "I really like what I see". No need you say you see straight through the dress, do you? Do you tell all the beautiful girls you meet exactly what is going on in your mind? Would you call that a lie?

What about lawyers. I guess you just call them liars. Because deceiving is what they get paid for.

But I do agree with you that speaking the truth is best. Not lying also. But I have the right to be silent also, meaning not telling stuff.
I am oke with "mislead to avoid mistreat", but try to be smart enough not to lie. Silence (not saying things) is generally a perfect solution

I do not call Silence a lie, when asked a question I don't want to answer, when it will harm someone.
I would call this a very inappropriate question ... the one asking is wrong, not the one not answering

 

[rrobs]

"Word of God" doesn't refer to the Bible.

To what does it refer? Where do we find it? If I've been fooled all these years, I'd like to find out now.

This is what they teach us in Biblical Exegesis 101 in seminary.

Sorry, but that doesn't impress me. Paul went to the best "seminary" of his day and ended up calling it dung (Phil 3:4-8).

No. In fact, if the exegesis is undertaken correctly, it will point out glaring contradictions.

I've often wondered why someone would spend years of study in something they don't believe. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Just another thing I don't understand.

 

[nPeace]

Recently I said "all humans have a choice to believe or not believe something". I was corrected by a few Atheist. Atheists "lack belief" it seems. So it was not what he believes, I guess, rather a misinterpretation.

You are right. I started saying "It is not correct to call God a liar (Ad hominem attack)".

The verse did not say that at all. It not even said that God lies. It only said that humans should believe a lie because God send delusions (see Bible verse below).

Is actually funny. It's humans believing lies, not God lying. We humans have the facts a bit messed up, that's all (and that is what God did create, by sending strong delusions)

2 Thess 2:11
"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."

Yes, God can withdraw his spirit, which leaves one entirely in darkness - that is, unable to realize that he is believing a lie... so blinded by his pride - his arrogance, and determination to go contrary to reason.
Delusion :
an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

I am sure God is powerful enough to cause one to believe something false, but there is no need for him to do that, since it is already being done by his adversary. (2 Thessalonians 2:9, 10)

So,@Subduction Zone, the lie is being told by Satan, and it is believed because Satan is the one exercising his power over their minds.
This is scripture - not just making claims, as you are.
2 Thessalonians 2:9, 10 9 . . .by the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and wonders 10 and every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing. . .
2 Corinthians 4:4 . . .the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.
Matthew 13:14, 15
14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’

The Bible does not say God lied, nor did it say he sent the lie, nor used anyone to speak the lie.
The lies come from Satan, through Satan's ministers.

 

[rrobs]

No. It's not infallible. One small example: Genesis refers to a flat, disc-shaped earth. The earth is, in fact, a modified orb.

Interesting. I've heard that before. Where does it say unequivocally that the earth is flat, something that couldn't be taken as saying it was a globe?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You seem to be forgetting that we went through this in the past. See here.
I suppose in that case, we can add a #6.
6) Were the different manuscripts, or differences in manuscripts carefully taken into consideration?

The ""We don't have the original documents" argument. That is of course grasping at straws which only invalidates the claim that the Bible is perfect or the "word of God" if you must. The so called originals are long gone if they ever existed since a lot of the Bible is based upon oral tradition.

You cannot have it both ways.

 

[Subduction Zone]

TV shows where there is lots of intrigue/lies score best, so God did a good job.


That is not how I interpret this verse. God sends strong delusion, so that human should believe a lie. The verse is not stating that God is the one lying. It could be as well other humans lying to one another. But you can blame God for making humans lie, I think.

If God sends delusion he is the cause of it. He is perpetuating a lie and he cannot even use the claim of ignorance that some of our creationists do when caught using a lying source. If God is at all omniscient that makes that act spreading falsehoods or ling.

"God sends strong delusions, that they should believe a lie" ... this can be any lie, does not even claim that God is doing the lying in this verse. Could be though. In a way it is God that created the delusion, making humans lie, so you could claim that indirectly "God is lying" if you see God in all humans (as Christians believe "God is the Father, we are His children"). But I guess that is not your line of thinking. From Hinduism they also have similar view. Advaita teaching "Only God is real", or Bhakti saying that God is the doer. Hence in a way I believe God lies.


I agree with "pointing out that the poster called God a liar only describes his actions". I did not say that you made an "Ad hominem atack".
I was talking about "does the verse say that God is a liar?". I did not talk about "a RF poster calling God a liar".
I was thinking about the "poster in the Bible", the one writing 2 Thess 2:11. If he called God a liar, that would be an Ad hominem attack" IMO (assuming God is reading the Bible once in a while). It would be like me writing on RF that Subduction Zone is a liar.


Good question, reminding me of a practice I started in India called "who am I" using "neti neti" ("Not this, not this"). For this practise thinking "I am XXX" is followed by "neti" and discarded. Same way "God is XXX" is discarded. Just my practice. My practice is not the Truth of course. Makes most sense to me though, hence I stick to it for now.



To apologize seems difficult for many humans anyway. Could be a "coincidental" joke from God to let them call themselves Christian apologetics
Seems to me that this is definitely 1 "strong delusion" as described in the above verse 2 Thess 2:11

And yes, I know that "apologetics" has a different meaning, but it is so nice that what they are doing in fact is apologizing for the errors in the Bible and almost always lying for Jesus.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, God can withdraw his spirit, which leaves one entirely in darkness - that is, unable to realize that he is believing a lie... so blinded by his pride - his arrogance, and determination to go contrary to reason.
Delusion :
an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

I am sure God is powerful enough to cause one to believe something false, but there is no need for him to do that, since it is already being done by his adversary. (2 Thessalonians 2:9, 10)

So,@Subduction Zone, the lie is being told by Satan, and it is believed because Satan is the one exercising his power over their minds.
This is scripture - not just making claims, as you are.
2 Thessalonians 2:9, 10 9 . . .by the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and wonders 10 and every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing. . .
2 Corinthians 4:4 . . .the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.
Matthew 13:14, 15
14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’

The Bible does not say God lied, nor did it say he sent the lie, nor used anyone to speak the lie.
The lies come from Satan, through Satan's ministers.

Nope, God sent the delusions, not Satan. I know that your poor God needs a fall guy, but Satan is innocent in this particular case.

By the way, you really cannot rely on sources that make false claims about those that do not believe. The fact is that Satan is extremely mythological. Also, you do not seem to realize that the ultimate blame for his activities, even if he were real, would be upon your version of God.

 

[Skwim]

I suppose in that case, we can add a #6.
6) Were the different manuscripts, or differences in manuscripts carefully taken into consideration?

Good question. How are you going to answer it?

If you don't know that different manuscripts, or differences in manuscripts were taken into consideration then everything in the Bible is in question---perhaps one or more of these manuscripts resolved a very important doctrinal issue---and therefore makes the book unreliable.

If you know for a fact that all of them were taken into consideration then you're going to have to rely on the scholars being correct in their interpretations, including the contradictions they came across, in which case the contradictions quash any kind of veracity.

Because the Bible cannot be correct about both, (either 2 Kings 8:25-27 or 2 Chronicles 22 is wrong) it demonstrates its fallibility and announces: The Bible IS fallible! And if it can be fallible in one place it can be fallible in another, and another, and another, and . . . .

But, of course, knowing how badly Christians need the entire Bible to be true they simply shove such problematic contradictions into the far recesses of their mind to forget about. It's little different than cherry picking the Bible so as to conform to one's theology. Nice, but hardly honest, but don't feel alone, it's a lie a lot of Christians have to tell themselves.

.

 

[Windwalker]

Did you actually read the scripture?
Would you like to read it again?
Two things strike me... 1) because they did not accept the love of the truth in order that they might be saved. 2) in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness.(2 Thessalonians 2:9-12)

I think that is not only loving, but wise, and just.

So this makes God emotionally angry and makes him want to destroy them, so he sends deceptions their way in order to mess with them. That's pretty much what I summarized, wasn't it?

If I didn't want my house filled with rodents, I would block any path I felt would gain them access.

So Christ sees other human beings as rodents? Ironic thing, the Nazi's saw the Jews as rodents. Isn't that something? So very, dehumanizing. So very un-Christ like. Wouldn't you say?

You see, I don't even see my enemies that way. Jesus taught us to love our enemies, not call them rodents. Didn't he?

From what I read, that's all God is doing. He does not want the new world he creates to be infested with "vermin". It's a strong statement, but those who hate righteousness, are disgusting in God's eyes.

It sounds to me like you are the one who sees other as "vermin", and "disgusting". You seem so sure this is how God sees the world. Like you do. But God is Love. And none of what you said fits within the character and nature of that God of Infinite Love. Hatred has no place in God.

There will always be multitudes who love God, his ways, and his righteous standards.

There will always be those who love an image of God that hates their fellow man, like they do. But is that really God, or is it their own hatred and own darkness that they really love? God is about forgiveness, not spiteful hatred and vengeance.

When he brings his new heavens and earth into one, the myriads of angels will be praising him, along with the multitudes who are rewarded with everlasting life, on a an earth filled with righteousness.

The ones who have complained, would have shown that they chose the side of the chief rebel - Satan the Devil.

Sounds to me like there's very little tolerance with this image of God you extol. Sounds like what you might find in the home an abusive father who smacks his children around for "complaining" - your words. My home life was absolutely nothing like that. My parents were genuinely loving, compassionate, and forgiving.

That's how I experience God. Not this God of Fear you present. That's just an image of fear, like a threatening parent figure who will smack you around if you don't sit just right, or obey his every word. He may call that love, but it is not. That child will grow up with a broken image of what love is, and then see God that way.

If God were not loving, and just, then he would not be this way...
(Ezekiel 18:23, 32)
23 “‘Do I take any pleasure at all in the death of a wicked person?’ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘Do I not prefer that he turn away from his ways and keep living?’
32 “‘I do not take any pleasure in the death of anyone,’ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. ‘So turn back and live.’”
(Ezekiel 33:11)
11 Tell them, ‘“As surely as I am alive,” declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, “I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that someone wicked changes his way and keeps living. Turn back, turn back from your bad ways, for why should you die, O house of Israel?”’

I find it interesting that some people only see bad, where scripture is concerned.

There is a difference between someone suffering the human consequences for their human actions, and God deliberating attacking them and killing them because they didn't live up to his expectations. How do you read the above?

 

[rrobs]

Yes, God can withdraw his spirit, which leaves one entirely in darkness - that is, unable to realize that he is believing a lie... so blinded by his pride - his arrogance, and determination to go contrary to reason.
Delusion :
an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.

I am sure God is powerful enough to cause one to believe something false, but there is no need for him to do that, since it is already being done by his adversary. (2 Thessalonians 2:9, 10)

So,@Subduction Zone, the lie is being told by Satan, and it is believed because Satan is the one exercising his power over their minds.
This is scripture - not just making claims, as you are.
2 Thessalonians 2:9, 10 9 . . .by the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and wonders 10 and every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing. . .
2 Corinthians 4:4 . . .the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.
Matthew 13:14, 15
14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’

The Bible does not say God lied, nor did it say he sent the lie, nor used anyone to speak the lie.
The lies come from Satan, through Satan's ministers.

Good post. I've been doing some research on a Hebrew idiom that basically says that God is often spoken of a causing something but it really means He merely allowed it to happen. It's called "Hebrew idiom of permission" if you care to check it out. It sure explains a lot of apparent contradictions. After all, the Bible clearly declares God to be love so when it says He kills someone there has to be some explanation. Love and killing certainly don't go together. The Hebrew idiom clears up things in that regard. The devil is actually responsible for sickness and death. Plus we must remember that Jesus came to declare God. From that we must conclude that before he came, it was simply not available to have a complete picture of God.

People think God is in control of every detail that happens in this world. They fail to realize that God gave dominion to man as it plainly says in Gen 1:26, Ps 8:6, and other places. It never occurs to them that man might be the problem and not God. But then that is the modern approach to problems, blame someone else.