• 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!

Bible Discrepancies

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
Sorry Linwood, I should have researched it.

I still understand Exodus 20:5 to say that the sins of the father can be passed down, but(Ezekial 18:20) you won't be punished for someone else's acts. I believe the Bible to be inerrant not King James.
 

true blood

Active Member
linwood said:
This contradiction shows them at the very least that God didn`t put forth a perfect work in the Bible.
Sure. If this was a contradiction but in its context it's not. Like I said Ezk. is a general statement of the state mankind is in. Exodus was given to Israel. They knew the one true God so their sin carried more consequences. It's very clear.
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
I believe the Bible to be inerrant not King James.
I agree with the problems in King James and if I could find another resource at my disposal with a good concordance and transliteration system as I have found at Blueletterbible I would use it instead.

I do try to avoid the scripture that is contested in the KJV since there is no sense in defending a position that is obviously wrong.

Thanks Emu.
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
true blood said:
Sure. If this was a contradiction but in its context it's not. Like I said Ezk. is a general statement of the state mankind is in. Exodus was given to Israel. They knew the one true God so their sin carried more consequences. It's very clear.
To you perhaps.

I still fail to see the difference.
One says one thing the other says a contrary thing.

The surrounding verses have no alterior effect on the context and ultimate meaning.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
true blood said:
Exodus was given to Israel. They knew the one true God so their sin carried more consequences. It's very clear.
What is very clear is that the Exodus/Conquest narrative is a powerful, yet contrived, folk epic, with very little basis in fact.
 

true blood

Active Member
Deut. 32.8 said:
What is very clear is that the Exodus/Conquest narrative is a powerful, yet contrived, folk epic, with very little basis in fact.
I think there are some interesting facts stated in Old Testament literature that is unexplainable by critics such as yourself. How do you explain that thousands of years ago men understood the "beginning from nothing" concept? The streching out of the universe? Why did prophets describe the modern law of entropy? How did the prophets know that the number of the stars were 10 to the 26th but actually countless? How did the prophets know that the earth circular and suspended in space? How did prophets know that there is an orderly relationship in the sun, moon, stars and earths for the measuring of time in which such arises from the laws of physics? How did the prophets know about the hydrolic cycle and air-currents? And what about all the accurate human events perdicted in detail? And you people waste time searching for errors :biglaugh:
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
As I said, the Exodus/Conquest narrative is a powerful, yet contrived, folk epic, with very little basis in fact.
 

true blood

Active Member
Well you failed to answer any of the previous questions based on facts, scientifically proven in our modern times that men thousands of years ago spoke of informing us that it was by God's revelation they knew so. I found another verse in which modern day science has "caught up" with. Job 38:22: Hast thou [Job] entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war? This verse is still future but in our modern times scientists have come up with a declaration that there are "floating ice cubes" weighing two and three hundred pounds each floating in space. Now how did men many, many thousands of years ago know of this?

Job 38:31: Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? This was written many, many thousands of years ago yet our astronomers have not known anything about them for more than a few hundred years. How did those men of ancient times know of this?

Job 38:32: Canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons? Arcturus, another one of the stars. Always on time, never off a second. How did men many, many thousands of years ago know this? "Job, can you guide Arcturus or does God guide it?"
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
true blood said:
Job 38:22: Hast thou [Job] entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?
In reading the chapter you referenced I don`t see where you can judge the verse in the context you state.
How does this snow & hail correllate to floating ice meteors?

Job 38:31: Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
This was written many, many thousands of years ago yet our astronomers have not known anything about them for more than a few hundred years. How did those men of ancient times know of this?
We`ve only been viewing the stars for a few hundred years?
I don`t know what to say to that, Google [font=verdana,arial,helvetica, sans serif]THE PAPYRUS OF EBERS [/font].
http://www.physics.northwestern.edu/classes/2004Spring/Phyx103/lecture1.html
The fact that these constellations are called by name refutes your assertion that nothing was known of them.
The fact that Pleiades was named for the seven daughters of Atlas in Greek myth shows their discovery was pre-NT.
This constellation has a place in many ancient myths Norse, Australian Aborigines, and the North American Sioux
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleiades_%28star_cluster%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleiades

The Hebrew word for Orion was a generic term for any constellation.

Job 38:32: Canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
Arcturus, another one of the stars. Always on time, never off a second. How did men many, many thousands of years ago know this? "Job, can you guide Arcturus or does God guide it?"
Umm...because they could see it with the naked eye?
Arcturus is the fourth brightest start in our viewable night sky.
This is no great mystery TrueBlood.
The ancient Egyptians and especially the Mayans developed calendars based upon their view of the stars, calendars that amazingly are most accurate.

" Arcturus is believed to be one of the first stars named by ancient observers."
"An Egyptian astronomical calendar of the 15th century BC, associates it with the star Antares in the immense sky figure Menat; and Lockyer claims it as one of the objects of worship in Nile temples, as it was in the temple of Venus at Ancona in Italy."
http://www.crystalinks.com/arcturus.html


These stars and constellations were viewed with the naked eye and named well before the NT was ever concieved of in any form.
This is well documented.

With all due respect Trueblood, you have the power of the internet literally at your fingertips.
You should attempt to falsify your arguments before you post them
I knew virtually nothing about these constellations before your post but it took me all of ten minutes to find the information I posted above.
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
Since you brought this chapter of Job into the spotlight lets take a look at some of the Biblical scientific expertise it spotlights.

Job 38:4
Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened?90 or who laid1 the corner stone

thereof;

Fastened?
Where would one possibly Fasten the foundations of the earth?

Job 38:8
Or [who] shut up55 the sea with doors, when it brake forth,2 [as if] it had issued out4womb? of the womb?

Doors?
The sea is held back by ...Doors?

Job 38:13
That it might take hold2 of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken11
out of it?

The ends of the earth?
Spheres don`t have an End..do they?

Job 38:25-26
Who hath divided14 a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder;
To cause it to rain53 on the earth, [where] no man [is; on] the wilderness, wherein [there is] no man;


Lightening and thunder are the cause of rain?
I think God needs a 4th grade science class
 

true blood

Active Member
I think most of your comments mirror well the entire theme of the 38th chapter. It deals with ignorance and idiocy.

What about Job 36:27-28 says, "He [God] draws up the drops of water which distill into rain from the vapor the clouds pour down their moisture and abundant showers fall on mankind" " The wind blows to the south and turns to the north; round and round it goes, ever returning on its course. All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full. To the place the streams come from, there they return again" Ecclesiastes 1:6-7 It wasn't until data and measurements were taken all over entire hemispheres of the globe in our modern era that such an understanding of the hydrologic cycle and world air-currents was achieved.

"He suspends the earth over nothing" Job 26:7
Tell me how did prophets know this accurate picture confirmed by science today many, many thousands of years ago?

Why is it only ancient text which teaches that time itself had a beginning? But now science teaches that matter, 3 dimensional space, and time itself had a beginning.
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
true blood said:
I think most of your comments mirror well the entire theme of the 38th chapter. It deals with ignorance and idiocy.
I think your implication here would hold more water if you were able to show where I`ve been either ignorant or idiotic.
The reason you don`t show this is simply because you can`t so it`s just more "vapor".

"He suspends the earth over nothing" Job 26:7
Tell me how did prophets know this accurate picture confirmed by science today many, many thousands of years ago?
I don`t know offhand but I thank you once again for pointing out yet another direct Biblical contradiction.

Job 26:7
"He suspends the earth over nothing"

Job 38:4
Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened?90 or who laid1 the corner stone

thereof;

What need is there for foundations if the Earth is suspended over nothing?
I like debating with you Trueblood...thanks.
 

precept

Member
linwood said:
I think your implication here would hold more water if you were able to show where I`ve been either ignorant or idiotic.
The reason you don`t show this is simply because you can`t so it`s just more "vapor".


I don`t know offhand but I thank you once again for pointing out yet another direct Biblical contradiction.

Job 26:7
"He suspends the earth over nothing"

Job 38:4
Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened?90 or who laid1 the corner stone
thereof;

What need is there for foundations if the Earth is suspended over nothing?
I like debating with you Trueblood...thanks.

Linwood your skills at "splitting hairs" are only exceeded by your lack of rationality.

When an architech "lays the foundation for his building" he certainly lays that foundation down on paper; not concrete!
When said architech places the "corner stone" in the building just built; said corner stone is placed in paper and not concrete.

When the foundations of this world were laid; just like the architech; said foundation was laid in such a way that the earth would not drift aimlessly in infinite space;leaving the warm embrace of the gravitational pull of our sun to drift infinitum in the sub-zero temperatures of outer space. Such a foundation has lasted these many thousands of years; and has given us the confident assurance that we on earth need not worry about the possibility of the foundation giving way and we be lost forever to the freezing clutches of outer space. In much the same way as the building designed by the architech will stand on its foundation no matter how hard the wind blows outside.

I'll leave you to figure out the "corner stone" as to whether such a "corner stone" when hewn by a good workman for a well-designed building, can be compared to "the corner stone" of physics that controls all of the universe; a universe held together with nothing visible to the naked eye.


precept
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
precept said:
Linwood your skills at "splitting hairs" are only exceeded by your lack of rationality.
Yes just as your talent at obfuscation is surpassed only by your abilities in verbal gymnastics.

See I can use ad hominum too!!

I did mislabel the verse but if you had bothered to read the content of the chapter you would have seen the meaning of the words regardless.

The verse I quoted was actually Job 38:6 not 38:4.
The two are similar ..my apologies.

Here is the verse properly labelled.

38:6;
Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened?90 or who laid1 the corner stone thereof;
Click the word "foundations" and you`ll be taken to a concordance of the original Hebrew meaning.
It is not figurative as you so clumsily contort it.
It means ...
'eden;
from the same as ''adown' (113) (in the sense of strength); a basis (of a building, a column, etc.):--foundation, socket.

It is spoken of in a literal sense here or the word
yacad would have been used as it was in Job 38: 4, the verse I misnamed.

Yacad can be used figuratively depending upon content eden cannot.

Yacad
a primitive root; to set (literally or figuratively); intensively, to found; reflexively, to sit down together, i.e. settle, consult:--appoint, take counsel, establish, (lay the, lay for a) found(-ation), instruct, lay, ordain, set, X sure.


The verse I posted speaks of a literal foundation.

I'll leave you to figure out the "corner stone" as to whether such a "corner stone" when hewn by a good workman for a well-designed building, can be compared to "the corner stone" of physics that controls all of the universe; a universe held together with nothing visible to the naked eye.
I have no interest in your cornerstone.
Keep rambling.
 

precept

Member
I did mislabel the verse but if you had bothered to read the content of the chapter you would have seen the meaning of the words regardless.

The verse I quoted was actually Job 38:6 not 38:4.
The two are similar ..my apologies.
Linwood it makes no diffference which of the verses you select to support your lack of "foundation" for your "contradiction" charges. They both make the identical argument that: 1/.....'the "literal" foundations of the earth are invisible to the finite human eyes of Job'. Job would have expected; that the earth like any well built building ought to have a "visible foundation"...but the figure of speech used, asks Job a rhetorical question in verse 4. making the point that the Omnipotent God's "literal foundation" for His earth is beyond human comprehension. "Declare if thou hast understanding" makes my point. Job cretainly could Not declare; because no human was as yet, even then created nor was even the earth created.
But created or not, whether human or earth; God needed a base from which to begin: the Foundation for the created earth....and a "foundation" back then, when He conversed with Job, beyond the comprehension of any human, including Job.

Given the finite limitations of the human, Job, and contrasting the Omnipotence of God who made the world out of nothing and hung the world upon nothing; Job was being brought to completely trust such an All-powerful God, no matter how desperate Job's present condition. This was the intent of the discussion between Job and God.

Click the word "foundations" and you`ll be taken to a concordance of the original Hebrew meaning.
It is not figurative as you so clumsily contort it.
It means ...
'eden;
from the same as ''adown' (113) (in the sense of strength); a basis (of a building, a column, etc.):--foundation, socket.

It is spoken of in a literal sense here or the word
yacad would have been used as it was in Job 38: 4, the verse I misnamed.

Yacad can be used figuratively depending upon content eden cannot.
In your above Language Arts 101 course you "gave it" then "took it back".
You gave when you said that the word "Yacad can be used figuratively depending upon content "....But you took it back when you said "It is not figurative as you so clumsily contort it"
You again gave it when you suggest that "eden" was the word used for "foundations" in verse 4....and that "eden" is the word for foundation, when "foundation" is to be interpreted "literally".

Now are you ready to take it back? You are not allowed to have it both ways. If as you say "foundations" in verse 4 is literal... THEN FOR THERE TO BE A CONTRADICTION "foundations" in verse 6 MUST BE FIGURATIVE.

But verse 5 puts the LIE to your assertion because a FIGURATIVE FOUNDATION would not need MEASUREMENT COMPLETE WITH A "STRETCHED LINE". And since your argument already asserts that "foundations" in verse 4 is literal And foundations in verse 6 figurative...You'll have to take it back that "foundations" in verse 6 isn't used in the same context as "foundations" in verse 4.

In case you miss the point; no one would use a literal "tape measure" to measure a "figurative" foundation!


precept
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
Dear Lord we do go on .

Ok I`m going to ignore the first paragraph of your reply simply because..I can`t make sense of it.

The rest of your continued obfuscation is apparent.
You are putting words into my mouth.

You claim I am trying to have my cake and eat it too by saying that 38:4 is figurative while 38:6 is literal and that this cannot be because they describe the same thing.

You are entirely right, I submit they both mean literal foundation because of the fact that the word for foundation in 38:6 can`t be used figuratively that content therefore defines the word for foundation in 38:4...and defines it literally.

The part your twisting is saying that I stated 38:4 was used figuratively.
I never said that.
I said the word used for foundation in 38:4 CAN BE used figuratively but it can also be used literally.
The used of the word is derived from the content and the content defines it`s use as literal.

Follow the translation links I gave.
 

precept

Member
The part your twisting is saying that I stated 38:4 was used figuratively.
I never said that.
I said the word used for foundation in 38:4 CAN BE used figuratively but it can also be used literally.
The used of the word is derived from the content and the content defines it`s use as literal.

Follow the translation links I gave.

___________________________
It`s Dead Freezing Cold!!

So! There is no contradiction!--both verses speak of a Literal God creating a literal earth with a literal foundation; called physics.

And yes! It is "dead freezing" in outer space....because God made it so!


precept
 

roli

Born Again,Spirit Filled
This doctrine of Jesus presuming to be God is not based on human reasoning ,understanding or internal logic, but a biblically divine revealation thru sriptural evidence ,spoken by God himself , Jesus and many of the apostles, just like the entirity of the scriptures, meant to be interpreted by divine revealation only, thru is Holy Spirit. Not thru reasoning , intellect or man's wisdom

Read Hebrews 1,John 1:1 maybe, just maybe He is God ,like God has said and he gave up His heavenly position , attributes and power in heaven to beome like man as a servant , humbled himself unto death for the sins of man.
You and I will never understand this in this Life, but the difference is I believed and then I recieved now, I know the truth, absolute truth

Society continues to overlook the fact that Jesus and the whole christian doctrine,eg: the cross ,sin, heaven ,hell ,punishment etc, is not based upon mankind's understanding or interpretaion with those who refuse to believe.

You have to have child like faith to believe and recieve understanding of the spiritual side of God. He is Spirit. Mere man cannot approach His presence unless you are in the spirit, Born again, renewed, regenerated, saved, forgiven, redeemed, etc

This subject is only open for debate with skeptics and those with an atheistic viewpoint and will never reveal closure of any sort in regard to understanding this subject until they step over in the realm of faith, or stand before God on Judgement,
I know, I was there and simple faith put me in relationship with God.I now see differently the things I was once refuting. But that is my story

I am secure in Christ because of the assurance I have thru His spirit that I am saved and forgiven having inherited heaven and eternal life
That is why you will never hear me debating beyond voicing an initial revalatory viewpoint, I don't need to convince you of where I stand with God because of what I believe, I have all assurance in my spirit and heart, not my will or intellect

Jesus Himself continually said To you (His followers) it has been given to know the mysteriesof the Kigdom of God ,but to those who are outside all things come in parables, so that seeing they may see and not percieve hearing they may hear and not understand,lest they should turn and their sins be forgiven Mark 4: 11
2Cor4:3 says the gospel message is veiled to those who are perishing,whose minds the god of this age has blinded who do not believe lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ who is the image of God would shine on them.
Plese read 1 Cor 1: 18- 28 what God says about the wisdom of the World, Do not take it personally.

I will say it again , those who try to use reasoning ,wisdom and logic to refute ,argue, debate, philosophize, intellectulaize, and rationalize God Heaven Hell,Jesus Christ, Morality, Eternal Judgementfor Sin will continue circularly for your entire existence
It is
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
roli said:
Jesus Himself continually said ...
No. Sectarian apologists, writing decades after the storied events, produced a body of dialogue which you take as real solely as a matter of faith. That is your right.
 
Top