Understandable, as a nonbeliever you don't see much of a difference.
But to a believer who studies extensively (like myself), it is different as night and day.
-
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!
Christians, How do You Deal With Troublesome Scriptures?
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
Understandable, as a nonbeliever you don't see much of a difference.
But to a believer who studies extensively (like myself), it is different as night and day.
Huh? Are you saying Jesus and Paul’s fellow Apostles weren’t?
I tend to agree.
Back in 1611, when the King James Version was written, the more ancient manuscripts (which of course would be closer to the originals) hadn’t been discovered yet. The KJV translators relied on manuscripts no older than the 10th century. The Syriac Pe****ta and other ancient ones weren’t available.
Phantasman
Well-Known Member
Jewish linage (Hebrew) and Jewish religion are two different things. Not all Jews were strict to Judaism. Paul is speaking of the "religion" of the Jews (past, by the word fathers) to the idea that there is no Jew or Gentile under the Gospel.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
Are there a lot of theories out there that Adam wasn't the first man? Not sure I have heard this as a very prolific belief/understanding. That is what you're getting at, isn't it?
So when it says "the Lord regretted that He had made man on the earth"... he meant "giants?" Interesting take on the words there. I never would have put that together given the actual words written. Actually... how did you?
The belief that Adam was the first man is a fallacy. God created all ethnicities on the 6th day in Genesis 1. These lived outside of Eden in the land of Nod and beyond. Adam was not created until after God had rested on the 7th day, so technically on the 8th day was Adam created.
That's because I never said that.
Your confused.
Go back and read the source material in context to understand. Here I'll post it for your convenience. Pay close attention to Genesis 6:4-6
Genesis 6
1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
This brought about the Nephilim. Which eventually lead to the flood and the reason for the flood. Which was to get rid of the Nephilim.
Hey Enoch07, hope you’re well.
But I have to disagree, from what Genesis 3:20, Romans 5:12, and especially Acts of the Apostles 17:26.
Take care.
That's cool. I don't pretend to know everything. It's just my interpretation. Jesus tongue cuts like a double edged sword for a reason. And that means even some of us Christians will get some things wrong as well.
Merry Christmas!
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
Making was alone without one 'like himself'
Bringing the animals to him was a way of emphasizing Eve was the one he longed for
The difference between 18 and 8 could be a scribal copyist error and not a difference in the original
His ways and his works are perfect... no problem
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
If God's intent with flood were only to purge the world of these "Nephilim", then why make these statements in connection with the flood?
"God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth"
And:
"it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth"
This seems like it really, really confuses the matter if the true target of the flood's killing/maiming/suffer-causing power was the "Nephilim".
Enoch (the real one not me) preached in Noah's time about the dangers of breeding and producing the Nephilim. They refused to heed the warnings. This is the wickedness spoke of. Not all of mankind was guilty of this though.
The way I see it is like this.
Your a parent (God) and you have 3 children (humans and angels). One of those children intentionally kill the other 2 then commits suicide. Even though I had 2 good ones and 1 bad, I still regret having children at all because of the heartache caused by all 3 being dead at the hands of 1.
Basically that's the way I view the events of the flood, simplified anyways.
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
Did you get your answer?
Believers simply don't let these inconsistencies bother them. Some can be reconciled by calling something allegory or metaphor, some by claiming a translation problem, some by saying that the skeptic doesn't understand and is unqualified to interpret scripture much less call it contradictory or incorrect, some by saying that God works in mysterious ways beyond the grasp of man's puny ken, and in the case of one particularly brave soul, that these things simply don't matter to him.
But you knew this already, right?
Last edited:
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
how do you get inconsistencies ?
Skwim
Veteran Member
My question was:
Christians, How do You Deal With Troublesome Scriptures?
.
I read them in the OP.
Besides internal contradictions such as the three enumerated in the OP, the Bible has many examples of failed prophecies, unkept promises, and errors of science and history.
To the impartial, critical thinker, these constitute evidence that the Bible was cobbled together by a collection of people that didn't know as much as we do today and who gave personal opinions that often were in error or contradicted other opinions - not the thoughts of a deity.
Imagine how spectacular a book authored by a superhuman mind would be.
Instead, we have a book with not one sentence that couldn't have been written by someone from the first century. Just about anyone alive today could easily improve on any of the holy books that people still follow. What does it tell us when anyone can improve on the Bible (and Qur'an), but very few can improve a book by Stephen Hawking?
Put another way, what is the likelihood that the source of the Bible is the same as the source of the universe? Just look at them both for your answer. One is a physical system that is immense, powerful, intricate, internally consistent, and far beyond the ability of man to create, whereas the other is just another erroneous holy book.
Wouldn't that be a bit like asking whether the author of misspelled graffiti sprayed onto the base of a bridge is the same as the designers and creators of the bridge?
Judging by your question, I'm guessing that this is not what you see.
That surprises me. The answers are always one or another of the same handful of possibilities, like the one above - "What inconsistencies?"
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
I just skwim right over those hard verses.
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
That's all according to you, which proves nothing.
Had you any knowledge about what the Bible Support's,
You say the beasts were created before man, but seeing man was here long before the beasts were created.
But like I said, you have no knowledge what the Bible will say or what it confirm's.
The beasts were created, before man became flesh and blood. But before this, man was a spirit being. Having no flesh and blood.
Therefore man was before the beasts ever came to be.
That's your lack of not understanding the Bible, what it will say and Supports.
You say, failed Prophecy's , but failed to list any.
I read them and then separate what Bible actually says and what people claim. And then for example:
1. The order of events:
No contradiction, Genesis 1 speaks about how Elohim created, Genesis 2 tells how God Yahweh formed things from the dust of the earth.
2. Difference in fact
In original Hebrew text the age is the same, and in some translations, it has been translated in same way.
3. Perfect nature of god
No contradiction in the Bible, only in your idea of what should perfect God mean.
4. Conflicting translations
Perhaps we should allow Bible to explain what it means. In the scripture it is first said, light and darkness and then peace and… …what do you think it the opposite… …I would say it is for example troubles.
“Conflict” translations are not a problem, if one stays in truth and wants to understand. If person doesn’t want to remain in truth, and doesn’t want to understand, then all things become problematic. I have no reason to want to see problems that don’t really exist.
Skwim
Veteran Member
Curious, are you saying that Elohim and God Yahweh are different beings?
The "original Hebrew text" you say. This is interesting because
"The original manuscripts and early copies of the Old Testament disappeared over time, because of wars, (especially the destruction of the First and Second Temples), and other intentional destructions. As a result, the lapse of time between the original manuscripts and their surviving copies is much longer than in the case of the New Testament manuscripts."
Source: Wikipedia
Source: Wikipedia
In any case, the Hebrew Interlinear Bible (OT) list both ages as I have: 18 and 8.
Well, my idea of "perfect" coincides with its common definition,
perfect
1 a : being entirely without fault or defect : flawless
1 a : being entirely without fault or defect : flawless
Use whatever standard of legitimacy you wish to bring it in line with your beliefs, but the fact still remains that various translations do conflict. In at least 10 ways in this one verse alone.
1. New Living Translation "Bad Times"
2. New International Version "Disaster"
3. King James Version "Evil"
4. New King James Version "Calamity"
5. Complete Jewish Bible "woe"
6. Common English Bible "Doom"
7. New Century Version "troubles"
8. The Message "Discords"
9. Reina Valera 1960 "Adversity"
10. New International Readers Version "Hard Times"
Nobody should, but then nobody should pretend problems don't exist just to suit their needs, either. Purposeful self deception is nothing to be proud of.
,
Last edited: