Contradictions in the Bible

[Audie]

Good point, but don't we believe a lot of things based on nothing more than a later told story? George Washington's life comes to mind.

I go with conditional belief based on what
is reasonable or reasonably verifiable.

Jesus-stories are none of that.

The nativity story is not believable.
The daemon-swine story isnt
That someone memorized the sermon
on the mount-if it was ever even sermonized-
and then wrote it verbatim later..

I dont go with reference to these as facts

 

[nPeace]

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.

I do agree that we have to understand what scripture is saying by using the context, and often when we read of God doing something, it really means he allowed it.

However, I disagree that love and killing are at odds.
Aside from that, God balances all his qualities, so they all work in harmony. So love works with justice, and both work with wisdom, and all together they are in harmony with his use of power.
For example, if God was all powerful, but not wise loving and just, he would not use his power in a good way. He would likely be a tyrant.

Examples...
If you love someone - including yourself - you might kill a scorpion about to strike you or your loved one.
One who is a willful murderer may be considered a threat to the lives of others, and be put to death, in the name of justice.
A suicide bomber or a rampant knife slasher, may be stopped dead in their tracks by a bullet, in order to save lives.

For God, it is the loving thing to do, to remove the wicked. It is the just ting, to punish evil doers (I don't mean by torturing them for a moment, or eternally).

Spoiler: 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10

5 This is a proof of the righteous judgment of God, leading to your being counted worthy of the Kingdom of God, for which you are indeed suffering. 6 This takes into account that it is righteous on God’s part to repay tribulation to those who make tribulation for you. 7 But you who suffer tribulation will be given relief along with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels 8 in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance on those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus. 9 These very ones will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength, 10 at the time when he comes to be glorified in connection with his holy ones and to be regarded in that day with wonder among all those who exercised faith, because the witness we gave met with faith among you.

This does not mean, that God is right now killing people.
From what I read and understand in scripture...
He can allow one to be killed, and not intervene, but right now, is not God's time to act against the wicked. He says, he has an appointed time.
(Obadiah 15; Zephaniah 1:14-2:3)

Right now he is patiently allowing time, for people to know him, and have opportunity to choose his way. 2 Peter 3:9
That's the reason for the preaching of the good news of the kingdom. Matthew 24:14

 

[Skwim]

I don't think you understand.
If translators did not carefully consider the different manuscripts, then you are at #5.

Nope, because 5 is talking about a stenographic mistake, not a mistake in translation.

If translators did consider the manuscripts, then there is no problem, because if only one, or two said age 42, then it is easy to see how #5 would apply.

So the only mistakes possible are stenographic mistakes and not those dealing with translation. Hmmmm.

But in either case, stenographic or translation, the end result is a fallible Bible. And, as I said, if it can be fallible in one place it can be fallible in another, and another, and another, and . . . .

For me personally, I see these as distractions, and a complete waste of time. Why? Because no one has shown me how the overall message contradicts.

......."C'mon guys, the argument isn't working as is."
​

All they have done, is nit pick things to complain about... which we can argue into the next generation, and no one changes their mind... imo.

Which is fine with me. Live however you like.

​

But the fact remains the Bible can be, and IS, fallible. In many places what it says is simply wrong. Which means . . . maybe

Mary wasn't a virgin
A&E never ate of the tree of knowledge
God never created evil....................yeah, sure
Jesus never rose from the dead.

If the Bible can be wrong in many places, which it is, it doesn't mean it's only wrong in those places we've uncovered, and that those uncovered places are insignificant. They could well be damn important.

.

​

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

And what does this say about the character of God? Spiteful? Petty? Lacking compassion? Lacking grace?

It says if you want to believe a lie, God will give you one.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[nPeace]

That sounds like what you want, only those you want, those who look like yourself. What if God wants everyone in there? Then what? Will you be hurt that God let "those people" in?

It's what I read in scripture, which I believe is inspired by God.
(1 Corinthians 2:9, 10)
9 But just as it is written: “Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, nor have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him.” 10 For it is to us God has revealed them through his spirit, for the spirit searches into all things, even the deep things of God.

If one does not believe these words are from God, I'm cool with his perspective on seeing things - though different to mine.
I don't mind reasoning if one is open-minded and reasonable.

 

[nPeace]

You may not have, but others try to make that claim. And no, you can't trust a book of myths for an accurate account of itself. Moses after all was mythical. A mythical person cannot write about himself.

And you just made a common mistake. The Bible never claims to be the word of God. At best it only says that undefined "scripture" is "God breathed". That is as close as it comes to making that claim.

...and who are you to decide what I can and cannot do?

 

[sojourner]

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.

The word is the logos. See John 1.

Sorry, but that doesn't impress me

I’m not surprised, given your cavalier attitude toward the study of the texts.

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

It has nothing to do with belief. It has everything to do with seeing the texts for what they, in reality, are, and revering them for what they, in fact, are. They don’t have to be inerrant or lack contradiction in order to be texts worthy of our attention and in order to contain truth.

 

[sojourner]

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?

The word Genesis uses for sky is raqiya. It literally translates “hammered-out bowl.” If you turn a bowl over, it makes a dome. A dome will only cover a disc-shaped object. Further, the bowl is “hammered” into shape, meaning that it’s rigid.

This concept is congruent with how nearby cultures (from whose mythological writings the Genesis accounts were taken) conceptualized the earth and sky.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

Where does God say this? Do you do view using the brain God gave you a sin? Do you call knowledge sin? Do you call education a sin? Do you believe God thinks like you do on these matters?

When critical reading is a rejection of Truth as found in the Bible, then that is a rejection of God. (Is. 55:8-9)

The knowledge of good and evil was obtained by sin. (Gen. 3:22) Knowledge alone doesn't make one right with God. Knowledge obtained from God makes knowledge legitimate.

God doesn't think like I do. I try to think like God does as He has revealed in His Word, the Bible.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[nPeace]

Nope, because 5 is talking about a stenographic mistake, not a mistake in translation.



So the only mistakes possible are stenographic mistakes and not those dealing with translation. Hmmmm.

But in either case, stenographic or translation, the end result is a fallible Bible. And, as I said, if it can be fallible in one place it can be fallible in another, and another, and another, and . . . .

......."C'mon guys, the argument isn't working as is."​

Which is fine with me. Live however you like.

​

But the fact remains the Bible can be, and IS, fallible. In many places what it says is simply wrong. Which means . . . maybe

Mary wasn't a virgin
A&E never ate of the tree of knowledge
God never created evil....................yeah, sure
Jesus never rose from the dead.

If the Bible can be wrong in many places, which it is, it doesn't mean it's only wrong in those places we've uncovered, and that those uncovered places are insignificant. They could well be damn important.

.

​

Perhaps I am not looking at #5 as you are, so let me create my own.
5) It wouldn't be unusual for a scribe to make an honest mistake.

The way we find and correct errors, is by comparing all the manuscripts of the same text. If out of 16, 2 are different, then we can safely say the two are in error. Better still, if the 2 are later copies, even more so.

This is how the work is done.
When we compare what we have today with the DSS, there are hardly any difference. So we know that after many centuries, the copying has not changed the text - especially the overall message.

So no, a few scribal errors do not create problems, as they can be mostly eliminated, and yes the skeptics will stick their head in the sand, because then they have nothing to argue about, and that would mean 'the end of the world'. So they need to keep their cherry picking active, for generations to come, instead of facing up to the fact that the overall Bible message is intact, and they can't disprove it.

Nice funny pictures though.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

So your belief is that God lies.

Now, at last, I understand why the American Religious Right voted for Trump in such large numbers.

My belief, as Scripture says, is that God sends the Truth. Those who reject the Truth, get sent the lie. And they jump at it like a bass under a log.

Well, yes, the Christians are to be found in the religious right. Just like atheists and so many others are found in the atheistic liberal left.

This is why the divisions are so stark, that there is no bridge. No compromise.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

And so many of your fellow-goddies say that "god never lies",
and that it is Satan what is the great deceiver.

What is funny is nominal adults who believe
fairy tales like "Noah's Ark."

Aw...am I a fellow goodie? Just brings a tear to my eye....not.

You reject the Truth. God sends you the lie. And...you bite.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Forgive me for not addressing all of your points, but let's see how this one claim of yours might be handled.

Jesus did in fact answer at least one of Pilate's questions (Matt 27:11). Matthew then says the Jewish elders asked him a question and Jesus didn't answer. Pilate then asked him at least one more question which Jesus did not answer.

To avoid a contradiction we can do this: John simply gave more details than Matthew 27:11. Put John and Matthe 17:11 together to get a clear picture of that phase of Jesus' examination. John, on the other hand, doesn't mention Jesus' silence to the elder's questions, nor his silence to Pilate's further questions after the elder's examination. Isn't it OK for one account of an event to give more or less detail than another? We see that all the time in the news.

Does that work for you? If not, why not?

No, it does not work. It is not that John "gives more detail." Matthew is quite explicit -- he doesn't simply omit recording something Jesus might have said, he states, twice, that Jesus said nothing.

This is why I said your arguments appear to me to be sophistry -- they are attempts to say something that has a chance of being perceived as plausible, in order to establish some truth that is simply not established.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

The Bible basically contains proof that God is a hypocrite:

GE 11:7-9 God sows discord.
PR 6:16-19 God hates anyone who sows discord.

Specifically because so many people are constantly telling me about Him (God) and are constantly saying how great He is, and how wonderful it is to follow Him, I have, in the past, looked FOR reasons to follow God. Basically, looking for the evidence that verifies all these people's claims about Him. However, when I did go to look, investigate and verify for myself, I found a bunch of stuff like the above blatant contradiction, stories about how God has massacred thousands of humans - basically on a whim, and other stories about Him behaving in ways that preclude my "following" Him based on principle alone.

But don't you understand? If God is willing to do these types of things, then I am of the opinion that He does not necessarily have humanity's best interests in mind - which makes relationship with Him pretty much like relationship with anyone else on Earth that doesn't have my best interests in mind. Except for one huge, glaring detail - God is nowhere to be found. So, let me ask you - why in the hell would I seek a relationship with a person who not only doesn't have my best interests in mind, but doesn't even appear to be there at any time?

You shouldn't.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[nPeace]

The word Genesis uses for sky is raqiya. It literally translates “hammered-out bowl.” If you turn a bowl over, it makes a dome. A dome will only cover a disc-shaped object. Further, the bowl is “hammered” into shape, meaning that it’s rigid.

This concept is congruent with how nearby cultures (from whose mythological writings the Genesis accounts were taken) conceptualized the earth and sky.

How is it, I don't see that? Which dictionary are you using?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Aw...am I a fellow goodie? Just brings a tear to my eye....not.

You reject the Truth. God sends you the lie. And...you bite.

Good-Ole-Rebel

To state so explicitly that "God sends you the lie..." (the lie that will cost you an eternity or suffering) makes God complicit in a great evil. And any equivalence of "God" with "good" goes up in a puff of smoke. As I've always known. That "God" is a complete monster. Undoubtedly based on the monstrous natures of those who created him so.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

I think not.

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.​

I might say, "Nice try," but it isn't. It's a stupid try.

The Bible does contain contradictions, and this is but one of them!

.

I just showed you, both were different. What is the problem?

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[InChrist]

Obvious those need a fall guy, as they need to create a lot of "dubious" (to put it mildly) interpretations IN HIS NAME to "defend" Bible, God, Jesus to be infallible.

Without their fall guy they are lost, I can really see that now. All their sin (their words not mine), it must be horror. And then Devil and Hell added to that.

Life on earth seems to be Hell for them, being sinners, hence their focus on the afterlife.

The way I look at it is that the afterlife or eternity is a very long, long time, which makes it so much more important than this short temporal time on earth.

I once heard it said that, "For the saved in Christ this life is all the hell they will ever know, but for the unsaved this life on earth is the only heaven they will know. "

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

To state so explicitly that "God sends you the lie..." (the lie that will cost you an eternity or suffering) makes God complicit in a great evil. And any equivalence of "God" with "good" goes up in a puff of smoke. As I've always known. That "God" is a complete monster. Undoubtedly based on the monstrous natures of those who created him so.

No, God is not complicit in evil. He always does the good. If God saves 3000, it is good. If God slays 3000, it is good. The good is what God does. God doesn't do the good.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Rise]

The biggest contradiction I know is:

How do you stay in good favor with god who -asked- you a yes/no question, you pick no, and he says it's your fault you rejected, then become bad in his favor for choosing the wrong answer to his yes/no question?

Your statement is based on some faulty premises.

It seems to assume that we live in a state of neutrality and God is posing a yes/no question to us about which direction we want to go, and then either takes us to heaven or sends us to hell based on the answer.

But that is not what we see in the Bible.

In reality, the world is already fallen to satan, already in a state of death.
Your eternal destination has already been determined by being born into a fallen world where Adam sold himself and his descendants into the bondage of death and slavery of sin based on the promise of a lie.

The only question is, do you want to grab hold of the life-raft that has been thrown to you and escape from that state of death?

There's nothing contradictory about a question like that. Because God isn't the one sending you to hell or taking away your salvation based on your answer. You're already heading to hell, and you don't currently have salvation. He's offering you salvation if you're willing to receive it. Otherwise you default to where you were already headed.