Contradictions in the Bible

Subduction Zone · Sep 21, 2019

rrobs said:
Wouldn't 2 Timothy refer to the entire OT? They were certainly extant when God inspired Paul's letter to Timothy.

As far as the NT is concerned, they all make the claim, in some way or another, that they are in fact words from God. For example, In Ephesians 1:1 Paul declares himself to be a delegate of Jesus Christ at God's behest. Is that not enough to establish his credibility as a spokesman for God? In that book he goes on to say that God gave him revelation which he wrote down for anybody else who wanted to know. I mean, that idea is all over the place! You don't have to look very hard to find it.

Not even that necessarily since there are Hebrew writings in it that did not appear to be part of the Torah, and there are parts that are missing. And that brings up the question of how do you treat Genesis and Exodus?

sojourner · Sep 21, 2019

rrobs said:
Of course they told me that, but, as I showed you before, the scriptures themselves are clear in that I am not to devise my own private interpretation. I simply rejected the Candler doctrine in favor of the scriptures themselves.

I’d counter that argument with “that’s why we have teams of people who write the commentaries and teach the courses.”

Can you not concede that, by rejecting the collective teaching of Candler and, by extension, the bulk of the academic endeavor, you are falling into the trap you wish to avoid: that of [your own interpretation] of the scriptures themselves? Because whenever we read anything, we’re applying a certain level of interpretation. IOW, I believe you’re making the mistake of thinking that, as you simply read, you’re not doing interpretation.

You’d probably have made a formidable bible scholar, by academic standards.

rrobs · Sep 21, 2019

Subduction Zone said:
But you do not even know what is "scripture" and what is not.

You claim to have a reliable faith in the Bible. Do you know of any reasonable test for the Bible? Most Christians do not. To be a proper test there has to be a possible way that it can fail if it is wrong. Otherwise all you have is an ad hoc explanation and no evidence for your beliefs. What reasonable test could make your interpretation of the Bible be shown to be wrong?

There is a whole body of writings that in one way or another declare themselves to be God's mind. Those are the ones I consider to be scripture.

The Bible says that there were 500 different people at 12 different times were eye witnesses to Jesus in his resurrected body. That ought to be every bit as good as the accounts we have that Genghis Khan actually existed. Personally, I freely admit I've seen neither.

Subduction Zone · Sep 21, 2019

rrobs said:
There is a whole body of writings that in one way or another declare themselves to be God's mind. Those are the ones I consider to be scripture.

The Bible says that there were 500 different people at 12 different times were eye witnesses to Jesus in his resurrected body. That ought to be every bit as good as the accounts we have that Genghis Khan actually existed. Personally, I freely admit I've seen neither.

Yes, and Harry Potter came back from the dead in front of an entire school many of whose names we actually know. None of the "500 different people" claims were written by eyewitnesses that I know of. In fact the only one that I can recall right now was Paul's claim. And Paul openly claimed not to be an eyewitness. So where are these verses, besides the claims of Paul?

Edit: The only claim of "500 witnesses" that I know of was made by Paul in I Corinthians. Some history of that is needed. He wrote that in Ephesus. The eyewitnesses would have been around Jerusalem. At a time when very few people traveled and it was quite a process. It is highly doubtful that anyone would bother to check out his claims. That would be a journey almost on the order of from where you are to Antarctica in terms of difficulty and expense. Would you go that far to check on someone that you wanted to believe in the first place? Skeptics would laugh at such a claim, rightfully, and believers simply eat it up irrationally.

rrobs · Sep 21, 2019

sojourner said:
Sure we can — with the proviso that we not torture the figure of speech into something concrete, as so many do. The trick in this case is to know what the imagery is.

I gotta run for now, but I just wanted to say that I understand a figure of speech to be anything that can not be taken literally. "The ground is dry" can be taken literally. "The ground is thirsty" can not, since thirst is not in the milieu of the ground. But saying it is thirsty causes the reader to pause and consider what was just said. Figures of speech are a precise tool of grammar. I think for the most part we all understand when one is used and why it is used. Still, as you said, there is probably room for misunderstanding.

rrobs · Sep 21, 2019

Subduction Zone said:
Yes, and Harry Potter came back from the dead in front of an entire school many of whose names we actually know. None of the "500 different people" claims were written by eyewitnesses that I know of. In fact the only one that I can recall right now was Paul's claim. And Paul openly claimed not to be an eyewitness. So where are these verses, besides the claims of Paul?

Instead of reinventing the wheel, I'll just point you here:

The Witnesses — Who and How Many People Saw Jesus Alive After His Crucifixion?

btw, I've not read Harry Potter. I wonder if what's her name (the author) had Jesus in mind. Just musing.

Subduction Zone · Sep 21, 2019

rrobs said:
Instead of reinventing the wheel, I'll just point you here:

The Witnesses — Who and How Many People Saw Jesus Alive After His Crucifixion?

btw, I've not read Harry Potter. I wonder if what's her name (the author) had Jesus in mind. Just musing.

I see your error. They made the mistake of incorporating the one claim of Paul into all of the other verses. Properly you should have said that there are twelve times that witness of Jesus after he died. Only one of them claimed that there were 500 witnesses. By the way, apologist sites are not reliable at all. This is an example of their dishonesty. They misled you and you bought their narrative. And none of the claims of eyewitnesses appear to have been written by eyewitnesses or even those that are eyewitnesses. Lastly they mentioned what is thought to be a an example of a psuedograph as one of their best examples. The other best example, that of a supposed skeptic, Paul, who openly declared that his knowledge came from "visions".

And J.K. Rowling may have been influenced by the Bible. The Bible appears to have adopted quite a few stories from other sources as well so it would only be fitting if she did.

sojourner · Sep 21, 2019

rrobs said:
I gotta run for now, but I just wanted to say that I understand a figure of speech to be anything that can not be taken literally. "The ground is dry" can be taken literally. "The ground is thirsty" can not, since thirst is not in the milieu of the ground. But saying it is thirsty causes the reader to pause and consider what was just said. Figures of speech are a precise tool of grammar. I think for the most part we all understand when one is used and why it is used. Still, as you said, there is probably room for misunderstanding.

Nice!

With regard to the serpent, do you know how the ancients used that figure of speech (metaphor), and why?

Good-Ole-Rebel · Sep 21, 2019

sojourner said:
Ok. If you’re going to take it literalistically, the text does not literally say “The Bible is the word of God.” That just does not appear on the page. That’s an inference YOU have made that the text doesn’t actually say.

Next, (if you’re going to take the texts literalistically, and going by your “logic” that “all scripture” means the whole bible,), “Moses wrote all the words of the Lord” must mean that Moses authored the entire Bible, which we know is not the case.

See how this wishful thinking gets you in trouble?

That is just one verse to show that the Bible is the Word of God.

So, do you believe what Moses wrote was the Word of God?

Good-Ole-Rebel

Good-Ole-Rebel · Sep 21, 2019

sojourner said:
I don’t think you do. I think you’re dismissing what I’m saying.

Looking at your most recent posts, I’m thinking a class in hermeneutics would be helpful for you. You seem to love the Bible; why not educate yourself about it? You’ll find it means so much more when you really know understand what it is.

I do hear what you are saying. And, yes, I do dismiss it.

Good-Ole-Rebel

sojourner · Sep 21, 2019

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
That is just one verse to show that the Bible is the Word of God.

So, do you believe what Moses wrote was the Word of God?

Good-Ole-Rebel

Moses wrote nothing. Moses is a literary character, not a historical figure.

sojourner · Sep 21, 2019

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
I do hear what you are saying. And, yes, I do dismiss it.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Not surprised.

Good-Ole-Rebel · Sep 21, 2019

sojourner said:
Moses wrote nothing. Moses is a literary character, not a historical figure.

See, you first claim that the quote from (Ex. 24:4) doesn't speak to the whole Bible. But now you admit you don't see it as proving that that which Moses wrote was the Word of God.

You don't believe the Bible. That is fine. But I do.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Faithofchristian · Sep 21, 2019

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
Well, today may have the technology, but not the devotion and desire for God as those in 1611 had.

With all the technology today I don't believe they have produced a better Bible then the KJV.

Good-Ole-Rebel

I believe your missing the whole point of what I'm saying.

Back in 1611, those men didn't have the necessary tools to do a good job in their translation of languages.
Which leads some people to think there are contradictions in the Bible.

Like for instance, in 1 Thessalonians 4:17--
---"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord"

Notice the word ( air) you actually think that people will actually meet the Lord in the "Air"
This is a miss translation. If you were to break the word ( Air) down and get to the root of what it is really meaning.

We have to day the necessary tools to in such cases. We have the Strong's Concordance, which has the Greek and Hebrew language translated into the English language.
There is also what is called
The Companion Bible. Which has the Greek and Hebrew language translated into the English language and appendix to the Companion Bible to help to understand each word in Greek and Hebrew language.

As for the word ( Air) this being translated from the Hebrew language, stands to mean ( Ruach) which being interpreted means
( Spirit)
Therefore we shall meet the Lord in the Spirit.
Not air. But in the Spirit.
Therefore back in 1611 those men did the best that they could with what limited tools they had.

sojourner · Sep 21, 2019

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
See, you first claim that the quote from (Ex. 24:4) doesn't speak to the whole Bible. But now you admit you don't see it as proving that that which Moses wrote was the Word of God.

You don't believe the Bible. That is fine. But I do.

Good-Ole-Rebel

I revere the bible; I don't believe everything it says is fact.
There is blind belief and then there is knowing what is fact and what is metaphor. Apparently you don't bother to differentiate between the two. The bible doesn't prove itself.

sooda · Sep 21, 2019

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
See, you first claim that the quote from (Ex. 24:4) doesn't speak to the whole Bible. But now you admit you don't see it as proving that that which Moses wrote was the Word of God.

You don't believe the Bible. That is fine. But I do.

Good-Ole-Rebel

There was no Moses nor any Exodus. The Hebrews were Canaanites. They wrote Genesis and Exodus 800 years after the death of the fictional Moses. The story is a tale of redemption.. but its not history.

At the time of the supposed Exodus Egypt controlled the Sinai and Canaan.

Good-Ole-Rebel · Sep 22, 2019

Faithofchristian said:
I believe your missing the whole point of what I'm saying.

Back in 1611, those men didn't have the necessary tools to do a good job in their translation of languages.
Which leads some people to think there are contradictions in the Bible.

Like for instance, in 1 Thessalonians 4:17--
---"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord"

Notice the word ( air) you actually think that people will actually meet the Lord in the "Air"
This is a miss translation. If you were to break the word ( Air) down and get to the root of what it is really meaning.

We have to day the necessary tools to in such cases. We have the Strong's Concordance, which has the Greek and Hebrew language translated into the English language.
There is also what is called
The Companion Bible. Which has the Greek and Hebrew language translated into the English language and appendix to the Companion Bible to help to understand each word in Greek and Hebrew language.

As for the word ( Air) this being translated from the Hebrew language, stands to mean ( Ruach) which being interpreted means
( Spirit)
Therefore we shall meet the Lord in the Spirit.
Not air. But in the Spirit.
Therefore back in 1611 those men did the best that they could with what limited tools they had.

There are apparent contradictions in the Bible, but that is only because we don't yet have the answers. Some people are always use that as a reason to reject the Bible as the Words of God. They will find something to blame for it.

I believe I understand your point but I do disagree. I think the KJV translators did a great job with their translation. With all the technology we have today, I doubt you will ever see a better translated Bible.

Concerning the word 'air' in (1 Thess. 4:17), you actually fall into the mistake that many do. You allow your theological belief to affect your translation. You don't believe in the rapture so 'air' can't mean 'air'. A translator translates no matter how crazy, wrong, or miraculous, what he is translating sounds. And one of the key rules when there is a dispute among manuscripts to a verse, is to accept the more difficult one.

Plus, the word used for 'air' in (1 Thess. 4:17) is used as 'air' in other places. (Acts 22:23) (1 Cor. 9:26, 14:9) (Rev. 9:2) (Eph. 2:2)

Good-Ole-Rebel

Good-Ole-Rebel · Sep 22, 2019

sojourner said:
I revere the bible; I don't believe everything it says is fact.
There is blind belief and then there is knowing what is fact and what is metaphor. Apparently you don't bother to differentiate between the two. The bible doesn't prove itself.

Well, that is what I said. You don't believe the Bible.

I recognize a metaphor. I don't interpret the Bible metapohrically.

The Bible is the Word of God and does prove and interpret itself.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Good-Ole-Rebel · Sep 22, 2019

sooda said:
There was no Moses nor any Exodus. The Hebrews were Canaanites. They wrote Genesis and Exodus 800 years after the death of the fictional Moses. The story is a tale of redemption.. but its not history.

At the time of the supposed Exodus Egypt controlled the Sinai and Canaan.

The Bible says differently. I believe the Bible.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Subduction Zone · Sep 22, 2019

Good-Ole-Rebel said:
The Bible says differently. I believe the Bible.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Yes, but you do not understand the Bible.

Contradictions in the Bible

Veteran Member

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member