contradictions in the bible???

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No matter how you twist it: no, he did not.

- "build a boat and I'll give you $7.5 million"
- "build a boat and I'll give you and your family life"

Seems similar enough to me. In fact, depending on the value one places on life, I think that it could be argued that Noah was paid more for the Ark than Harland & Wolff was paid for the Titanic, especially when you consider the net revenue for the Titanic (since a lot of that $7.5 million paid for the materials and equipment that formed the ship itself).

Whatever the origin, Dictionary.com gives us this:

following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain: a professional builder.

The quickest way to ruin something is to pay someone to do it. It's why I like College football (Go Gators!!!) and am ambivalent towards pro-ball.

Ah... that's different. If you mean that Noah was an "amateur" in the sense that college football players are "amateurs", then sure, I agree with you.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Now a threat? My dear man, I will be going to Vegas a second time this October. Rather than ruin me, my trip to Vegas will make me rich and famous. Yet another one of your assumptions that is not simply false, but utterly so. Perhaps you should be the one to avoid Vegas. Your critical thinking seems to be, by and large, rather impaired.

I thank God the world doesn't depend on what things seem to you... because if it did, we'd all be in a lot of trouble.

 

[Scuba Pete]

because if it did, we'd all be in a lot of trouble.

You haven't been paying attention. We ARE in a lot of trouble. Denial is not a viable way to deal with issues. Sure, it's a Republican trait to do so, but that doesn't make it right.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Amidst suffering the indignation of numerous ad hominems hurled in my direction, it occurred to me that the three days and three nights business had run its course.

So how about another....

Did Jesus die before, during, or after Passover?

(For current purposes, we'll say that Passover refers to the night of the feast of unleavened bread, not the whole 7 days.)

Matthew Mark and Luke say after, suggesting that the Last Supper was a Passover Seder (feast of unleavened bread).

John says it was the preparation of the passover. This could either mean only a few hours before passover began, or only a few hours before the sabbath during the week of Passover.

John also calls it a "great sabbath". There is only one "great sabbath"... and that is the sabbath BEFORE Passover...

So what's the deal? When did Jesus die in relation to the passover?

 

[Scuba Pete]

Did Jesus die before, during, or after Passover?

Yes, he did!

 

[Scott1]

So what's the deal? When did Jesus die in relation to the passover?

Hey... I have have good news:

He is Risen.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Hey... I have have good news:

He is Risen.

Heh. I misread that really quickly and it looked like you said He's a raisin.

But this is all dreadfully off topic. This thread is about contradictions in the bible, and I've pointed one out. And all you come up with is a non-sequitur which I wholeheartedly reject.

Maybe you should sit this one out and let someone else have a crack at it.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

A lot of discussions about Bible contradictions (or Quran contradictions, for that matter) neglect a certain fact that is very, VERY important, i.m.o., to consider: that when it comes to the non-physical world of ideas and words on paper, it is possible to make square pegs fit into round holes. In other words, if you allow enough ad-hoc hypotheses, assumptions, and special pleading, it is possible to reconcile virtually ANYTHING. (I did my best to demonstrate this by showing how several creation myths "accurately" describe the actual origins of the universe as understood by modern science: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/59483-one-simple-question-4.html#post1000811 Note that this was a thread on the veracity of the Quran....)

The real question then, to my mind, is not whether a contradiction can be "proved"....it can't really, for ANY text, because with enough imagination we can almost always come up with ways to square seemingly contradictory statements. The real question is whether the "tactics" required to make all the passages of the Bible consistent are the same tactics we would use to judge non-Biblical passages. It seems to me that the tactics employed to make every passage of the Bible seem compatible could very nearly make ANY two passages, from ANY two documents, compatible.

The simple fact that the books of a volume were written decades after the events they describe, by different authors, over thousands of years, should lead any fair-minded person to expect inconsistencies and contradictions. After all, even a SINGLE author can hardly be expected to write thousands of pages and not contradict him/herself, or make errors. If we were discussing any large volume of ancient mythology other than the Bible (and perhaps the Quran), we would not witness the spectacle of so many people going to such great lengths to make square pegs fit into round holes.

 

[Scott1]

After all, even a SINGLE author can hardly be expected to write thousands of pages and not contradict him/herself, or make errors. If we were discussing any large volume of ancient mythology other than the Bible (and perhaps the Quran), we would not witness the spectacle of so many people going to such great lengths to make square pegs fit into round holes.

Well said, as usual. :yes:

 

[Poisonshady313]

If we were discussing any large volume of ancient mythology other than the Bible (and perhaps the Quran), we would not witness the spectacle of so many people going to such great lengths to make square pegs fit into round holes.

Check out IMDB.com (internet movie database) and see what great lengths people go through to find goofs in every movie ever made.

 

[Smoke]

Did Jesus die before, during, or after Passover?

(For current purposes, we'll say that Passover refers to the night of the feast of unleavened bread, not the whole 7 days.)

Matthew Mark and Luke say after, suggesting that the Last Supper was a Passover Seder (feast of unleavened bread).

John says it was the preparation of the passover. This could either mean only a few hours before passover began, or only a few hours before the sabbath during the week of Passover.

John also calls it a "great sabbath". There is only one "great sabbath"... and that is the sabbath BEFORE Passover...

So what's the deal? When did Jesus die in relation to the passover?

People have argued about that for centuries.

In the conflict between the Christian West and the Christian East over whether to use unleavened or leavened bread in the Eucharist, the West pointed out that the Last Supper was, after all, a Passover seder, so Jesus undoubtedly used unleavened bread. The East pointed out that since the Last Supper wasn't a seder but an ordinary meal, Jesus undoubtedly used leavened bread. As you point out, the New Testament says both.

 

[crystalonyx]

Hey... I have have good news:

He is Risen.

I have even better news, he never existed.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

People have argued about that for centuries.

In the conflict between the Christian West and the Christian East over whether to use unleavened or leavened bread in the Eucharist, the West pointed out that the Last Supper was, after all, a Passover seder, so Jesus undoubtedly used unleavened bread. The East pointed out that since the Last Supper wasn't a seder but an ordinary meal, Jesus undoubtedly used leavened bread. As you point out, the New Testament says both.

I just noticed: Scott gave us the answer to this puzzle, but we all missed it:

Hey... I have have good news:

He is Risen.

See? He is risen... i.e. leavened. John was right, and Matthew, Mark and Luke were wrong.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Check out IMDB.com (internet movie database) and see what great lengths people go through to find goofs in every movie ever made.

I'm worried that my previous post wasn't clear....I was sort of siding with you....there are certainly errors and contradictions in the Bible (by any reasonable definition of "error" or "contradiction"), as you have pointed out.

 

[Poisonshady313]

I'm worried that my previous post wasn't clear....I was sort of siding with you....there are certainly errors and contradictions in the Bible (by any reasonable definition of "error" or "contradiction"), as you have pointed out.

I know... I was just adding a little bit for effect.

 

[spiritually inclined]

Okay, so Thou shalt not kill should be translated, Do no murder.

Still, I think 1 Samuel 15:2-3 meets the definition of murder.

15:2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.
15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***.

One could argue that murder is culturally defined. Most fundamentalists tell me that the Amalekite women, men, infants, babies, ox, sheep, camels, and donkeys deserved to die because of what their ancestors did to Isreal on the way up from Egypt hundreds of years ago (v. 2).

Honestly, I don't think that's a good reason to kill people. I would hope that I couldn't be put to death by American law because my grandfather, a man who died before I was born and whom I never met, molested his daughter and abused his wife.

The scripture also mentions God's command to kill infants and babies. I would hope even more that my children wouldn't be put to death for my ancestor's actions.

If that isn't murder, I don't know what is!

James

 

[gnostic]

Okay, so Thou shalt not kill should be translated, Do no murder.

Still, I think 1 Samuel 15:2-3 meets the definition of murder.

I have brought up the quote from 1 Samuel 15, repeatedly, to prove that God is unjust, but always failed to get response from Christians, by side-stepping the issue. Good luck to you.

 

[Mister Emu]

Most fundamentalists tell me that the Amalekite women, men, infants, babies, ox, sheep, camels, and donkeys deserved to die because of what their ancestors did to Isreal on the way up from Egypt hundreds of years ago

That is not what I would argue... I would argue that it isn't murder because God commanded it, not because of what may have occured previously...

 

[spiritually inclined]

That is not what I would argue... I would argue that it isn't murder because God commanded it, not because of what may have occured previously...

Then I'm glad to know that we don't serve the same god! Just warn me if he ever tells you to strap a bomb to your chest.

James

 

[Mister Emu]

Then I'm glad to know that we don't serve the same god!

If your God isn't the triune God of the Bible, then I'm glad we don't serve the same one too!

Just warn me if he ever tells you to strap a bomb to your chest.

Sorry, no promises