Christians, How do You Deal With Troublesome Scriptures?

[It Aint Necessarily So]

That's all according to you, which proves nothing.

It wasn't intended to be a proof. It was an answer to your question,, "What inconsistencies?" Now you know.

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.

I know what the Bible says.I can read.

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.

Why tell me? I never mentioned the topic

But like I said, I can read. From the OP:

[1] "And God made the beast of the earth ... And God said, Let us make man in our image ... The Lord God used dust from the ground and made every animal in the fields and every bird in the air"

[2] "Then the Lord God took dust from the ground and made a man. He breathed the breath of life into the man’s nose, and the man became a living thing ... The Lord God used dust from the ground and made every animal in the fields and every bird in the air"

That's a contradiction. The second citation contradicts both you and the first one. I wouldn't be at all surprised if you cannot see that. That's typical for those seeing scripture through a faith based confirmation bias.

You say, failed Prophecy's , but failed to list any.

I also didn't list any contradictions, unkept promises, or errors in science or history. As I said, I merely answered the question you made. I was not making an argument.

If you want to explore, you can start here: Failed Biblical Prophecies

I have no burden of proof here for two reasons.The burden of proof is only present when one wants to be believed, and only when dealing with a reason and evidence based thinker. Proof is for the person who is both willing and able to judge an argument and its accompanying evidence dispassionately and with the willingness to be convinced by a compelling argument. That doesn't happen when dealing with a person who after years of reading his Bible asks, "What inconsistencies?"

There is no burden of proof when dealing with a faith based thinker..He didn't come to his present position using reason applied to evidence, and and he can't be budged from it by that route. It's a well known truism that you can't make a man believe what he has a stake in not believing, and certainly not without his cooperation. I have been down this road many, many times, and it has always been fruitless, so let's put this to bed right here.

Thanks for your good cheer, and Happy New Year.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

If you want to explore, you can start here

I get "about: blank".

 

[Faithofchristian]

It wasn't intended to be a proof. It was an answer to your question,, "What inconsistencies?" Now you know.



I know what the Bible says.I can read.



Why tell me? I never mentioned the topic

But like I said, I can read. From the OP

You can't read, all your doing is adding words, which are not there,

So where do you get the word ( used ) from there's no where in those two Verse's that the word ( used ) is there.

[1] "And God made the beast of the earth ... And God said, Let us make man in our image ... The Lord God used dust from the ground and made every animal in the fields and every bird in the air"

[2] "Then the Lord God took dust from the ground and made a man. He breathed the breath of life into the man’s nose, and the man became a living thing ... The Lord God used dust from the ground and made every animal in the fields and every bird in the air"

As to how do you get all of that from
Verse 7, the Verse said nothing about the animals, only God formed man of the dust of the ground,. And that's it, nothing said about animals.

That's a contradiction. The second citation contradicts both you and the first one. I wouldn't be at all surprised if you cannot see that. That's typical for those seeing scripture through a faith based confirmation bias.



I also didn't list any contradictions, unkept promises, or errors in science or history. As I said, I merely answered the question you made. I was not making an argument.

That's only because you have nothing.to base anything on. Only what you say, which doesn't mount to much.

If you want to explore, you can start here: Failed Biblical Prophecies

I have no burden of proof here for two reasons.The burden of proof is only present when one wants to be believed, and only when dealing with a reason and evidence based thinker. Proof is for the person who is both willing and able to judge an argument and its accompanying evidence dispassionately and with the willingness to be convinced by a compelling argument. That doesn't happen when dealing with a person who after years of reading his Bible asks, "What inconsistencies?"

If to what you say, that you don't have any proof, then why are you making such statements, without any proof to support your claim. Are you freaking kidding me.

There is no burden of proof when dealing with a faith based thinker..He didn't come to his present position using reason applied to evidence, and and he can't be budged from it by that route. It's a well known truism that you can't make a man believe what he has a stake in not believing, and certainly not without his cooperation. I have been down this road many, many times, and it has always been fruitless, so let's put this to bed right here.

Thanks for your good cheer, and Happy New Year.

It wasn't intended to be a proof. It was an answer to your question,, "What inconsistencies?" Now you know.

You got that one right, that it wasn't intended to be a proof, Because you don't have anything to back up what you say.



I know what the Bible says.I can read.

Yeah, yeah, you know nothing about the bible, only what you want to add into it.



Why tell me? I never mentioned the topic

But like I said, I can read. From the OP:

[1] "And God made the beast of the earth ... And God said, Let us make man in our image ... The Lord God used dust from the ground and made every animal in the fields and every bird in the air"

[2] "Then the Lord God took dust from the ground and made a man. He breathed the breath of life into the man’s nose, and the man became a living thing ... The Lord God used dust from the ground and made every animal in the fields and every bird in the air"

That's a contradiction. The second citation contradicts both you and the first one. I wouldn't be at all surprised if you cannot see that. That's typical for those seeing scripture through a faith based confirmation bias.



I also didn't list any contradictions, unkept promises, or errors in science or history. As I said, I merely answered the question you made. I was not making an argument.

If you want to explore, you can start here: Failed Biblical Prophecies

I have no burden of proof here for two reasons.The burden of proof is only present when one wants to be believed, and only when dealing with a reason and evidence based thinker. Proof is for the person who is both willing and able to judge an argument and its accompanying evidence dispassionately and with the willingness to be convinced by a compelling argument. That doesn't happen when dealing with a person who after years of reading his Bible asks, "What inconsistencies?"

There is no burden of proof when dealing with a faith based thinker..He didn't come to his present position using reason applied to evidence, and and he can't be budged from it by that route. It's a well known truism that you can't make a man believe what he has a stake in not believing, and certainly not without his cooperation. I have been down this road many, many times, and it has always been fruitless, so let's put this to bed right here.

Thanks for your good cheer, and Happy New Year.

 

[Tumah]

2 Kings 24:8 (ESV Strong's) 8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he became king, and he reigned three months in Jerusalem. His mother's name was Nehushta the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.


2 Chronicles 36:9 (ESV Strong's) 9 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he became king, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem.


h8083. שְׁמֹנֶה šemôneh; or שְׁמֹנָה šemônâ; apparently from 8082 through the idea of plumpness; a cardinal number, eight (as if a surplus above the “perfect” seven)

It's the same word for both verses.

Eighteen in Hebrew is written "eight-ten". Of course you're going to find the word "eight" in both verses. The difference is that one verse also has the word "ten".

 

[Faithofchristian]

It wasn't intended to be a proof. It was an answer to your question,, "What inconsistencies?" Now you know.



I know what the Bible says.I can read.



Why tell me? I never mentioned the topic

But like I said, I can read. From the OP:

[1] "And God made the beast of the earth ... And God said, Let us make man in our image ... The Lord God used dust from the ground and made every animal in the fields and every bird in the air"

[2] "Then the Lord God took dust from the ground and made a man. He breathed the breath of life into the man’s nose, and the man became a living thing ... The Lord God used dust from the ground and made every animal in the fields and every bird in the air"

That's a contradiction. The second citation contradicts both you and the first one. I wouldn't be at all surprised if you cannot see that. That's typical for those seeing scripture through a faith based confirmation bias.

There's no contradiction, if you had of, read Genesis Chapter 2 Verse 4 --"These are the Generations of the heavens and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens"

Therefore you would haved seen that God is giving a replay, What he did back during the 6 days of creation.
But Yet you will say I know the bible and I can read, But yet you can not put the simplest things together in the Bible.
Ok, What Ever.

People like yourself, will go into the Bible and pick and choose, and not read the whole Chapter to see what's being said and done.



I also didn't list any contradictions, unkept promises, or errors in science or history. As I said, I merely answered the question you made. I was not making an argument.

If you want to explore, you can start here: Failed Biblical Prophecies

I have no burden of proof here for two reasons.The burden of proof is only present when one wants to be believed, and only when dealing with a reason and evidence based thinker. Proof is for the person who is both willing and able to judge an argument and its accompanying evidence dispassionately and with the willingness to be convinced by a compelling argument. That doesn't happen when dealing with a person who after years of reading his Bible asks, "What inconsistencies?"

There is no burden of proof when dealing with a faith based thinker..He didn't come to his present position using reason applied to evidence, and and he can't be budged from it by that route. It's a well known truism that you can't make a man believe what he has a stake in not believing, and certainly not without his cooperation. I have been down this road many, many times, and it has always been fruitless, so let's put this to bed right here.

Thanks for your good cheer, and Happy New Year.

 

[1213]

Curious, are you saying that Elohim and God Yahweh are different beings?

They are called with different names, so it is possible that they are different beings. And by what the Bible tells, it may be that Yahweh is actually Jesus, who was the firstborn of creation according to the Bible.


in whom we have our redemption, the forgiveness of our sins; who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him were all things created, in the heavens and on the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and for him.
Colossians 1:14-16

The "original Hebrew text" you say. This is interesting because

Sorry, I meant, the Hebrew text, which has been the source of the translation. That is not necessary the original, first text.

Well, my idea of "perfect" coincides with its common definition,
perfect
1 a : being entirely without fault or defect : flawless

And applied to god it would mean he's entirely without fault or defect. In essence: flawless . However, as the Bible points out by citing his mistakes, he's far from that. So, despite your assertion that there is no contradiction, there is, and unmistakably so.

Ok, we can agree with the definition. I think God is perfect and I have no reason to believe otherwise. Bible doesn’t tell that God taught He made a mistake. Being sorry, is not same as mistaking.

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.

I think the same idea is in them all.

 

[Skwim]

They are called with different names, so it is possible that they are different beings. And by what the Bible tells, it may be that Yahweh is actually Jesus, who was the firstborn of creation according to the Bible.

"They" implies more than one, so when you say "it is possible that they are different beings" the possibility becomes a given. And we weren't talking about Jesus, but "Elohim and God Yahweh." Implying they're different beings.

Ok, we can agree with the definition. I think God is perfect and I have no reason to believe otherwise. Bible doesn’t tell that God taught He made a mistake.

Correct, it doesn't say he taught any such thing, but rather it says he made mistakes.

Being sorry, is not same as mistaking.

You think he's sorry he did the correct thing? C'mon, sell your goofy wares elsewhere.

I think the same idea is in them all.

So you consider disaster to be the equivalent to evil, and hard times to be equivalent to doom? On second thought, you probably do---whatever it takes to save your beliefs.

.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Christians, how do deal with troublesome scriptures. Never gave it any thought.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I like to give it thought. It proves I am truly interested in it.

 

[1213]

Correct, it doesn't say he taught any such thing, but rather it says he made mistakes.

One problem with your claim is that it doesn’t seem to be in the Bible that God made mistake. Seems to be only your interpretation or opinion.

So you consider disaster to be the equivalent to evil, and hard times to be equivalent to doom? On second thought, you probably do---whatever it takes to save your beliefs.

I find it odd, if you don’t think that doom, hard times or disasters are evil. By what I see, they are all basically same thing, not nice events. But I understand that you have to make a problem out of that silly word play so that your atheism doesn’t fail and be just one gigantic nothing burger.

 

[Hawkins]

Genesis 1 is about the chronicle sequence of how the beasts were created before man.

Genesis 2 is rather a sequence of reasoning on why the animals should be created along with "this creation" at all. They are created for man to rule over.


Theologically, KJV and NIV are the two independent sources to reconcile with each other for a consistency of theology. True testimonies won't guarantee nor demand that all the numbers presented must be consistent. It is actually in the contrary that if two history books from two independent sources can have all the same figures/numbers remaining exactly the same, it looks suspicious because it's not a precision demanded by any human history written 2000 years ago.

Humans at best can maintain the accuracy to the description level, not the number level nor the contextual level in terms of keeping history. God doesn't need to always correct this human incapability, especially under the circumstance that both KJV and NIV are not the original documents themselves, and as long as this won't affect the theology to be conveyed. That's why KJV and NIV can be seen as theologically identical but not necessarily contextually identical.


"Regret" is more like how you establish a dialogue with your kids. You use terms they understand. It's not necessary for God to explain in-depth theory behind why the earth shall be destroyed. He only needs to explain the expression of a feeling of regret.

The truth behind however is that destroying the earth is a necessary step to move forward God's plan. It is an expected step but requires a deeper understanding of the theory behind the scene. This concerns what Law is (how it should be defined) and why covenants are needed. This however can only be correctly explained after Jesus' blood shed. God won't bother explaining Jesus to an ancient human like Noah. That's the situation.

 

[Skwim]

One problem with your claim is that it doesn’t seem to be in the Bible that God made mistake. Seems to be only your interpretation or opinion.

I understand that's how it has to seem. You have my sympathy.

I find it odd, if you don’t think that doom, hard times or disasters are evil. By what I see, they are all basically same thing, not nice events. But I understand that you have to make a problem out of that silly word play so that your atheism doesn’t fail and be just one gigantic nothing burger.

This is so pathetic. But what the hey! It takes all kinds to make up the Christian community. Your inability to differentiate between atheism and agnosticism is quite telling, or do you purposely throw them both into the same pot? No need to answer, The question is rhetorical.

rhe·tor·i·cal
rəˈtôrək(ə)l/

adjective
(of a question) asked in order to produce an effect or to make a statement rather than to elicit information.

.​

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

One problem with your claim is that it doesn’t seem to be in the Bible that God made mistake. Seems to be only your interpretation or opinion.

It's my interpretation and opinion as well, and that of just about everybody else able to read the relevant scriptures open-mindedly, which mean most unbelievers.

And it makes all the difference in the world. Why would I trust the words of ancients telling me about a god that is described in mutually exclusive and therefore logically impossible terms? The prefect god that makes errors and regrets them has the same ontological status as the married bachelor and for the same reason.

 

[Faithofchristian]

To answer the Thread, Christians, how do you deal with troublesome scriptures?

Will first to some Christians there is no troublesome of the scriptures.

But as for those Unbelieving, that have no idea or any knowledge of understanding, of the scriptures, it shall be troublesome for them.
Alot of people when venturing into the bible, They look at the bible as something magical is going to happen.
All the bible does is take People back to beginning and bring people up to our time and to the kingdom of God to be established here on earth.

God has already done and tried many times throughout the old testament tried to get people to live without sin,evil, wickedness, But all people did was Rebellion against God.

So now God has left people to themselves and see just how far people will go.

But God has not left totally, that one day, God's is going to bring down the hammer on, sin,evil, wickedness once for all.

 

[Muffled]

I believe I have guidance from the holy spirit. I haven't run into many verses in the Bible that trouble me but I had a hard time with many verses in the Qu'ran. Things in the Qu'ran are not always what they seem to be.

 

[Muffled]

The first one.

I believe that is not so. The creation in Gen 2 is actually a recreation of an extinct race.

 

[Muffled]

The first chapters of Genesis are parable not history.

I believe the text mentions no parable. If you simply attributing one then there has to be reasoning to support it and I can't imagine what that would be.

 

[David1967]

I believe that is not so. The creation in Gen 2 is actually a recreation of an extinct race.

Let me clarify. This is the "first one" I was referring to;

"Do you

1.Concede they're there, shrug your shoulders, and continue on with your faith."

 

[1213]

... The prefect god that makes errors....

I think God has not made errors, you think He has done errors, how can we decide who is correct, you or me?

 

[1213]

I understand that's how it has to seem. You have my sympathy.

Thanks!

This is so pathetic.

Sorry, it was not appropriate and polite from me. I try to give better answers next year. Happy New year for all readers!