Contradictions in the Bible

[S-word]

Not only does John leave out the temptation in the wilderness, but he also makes no mention of the actual time of the baptism of Jesus. The Jewish authorities had sent out their messemgers to put John the Baptist through the third degree, and it was the next day, which could have been some 40 odd days after he had baptised his second cousin Jesus, that he pointed out the man Jesus as the "Lamb of God," and it is then that he recounts the day that he had baptised him, perhaps some 40 odd days or so in the past.

It is here we learn that John not only knew his second cousin Jesus, but he acknowledged that Jesus was far greater than he. John believed that he was not worthy enough to baptise his second cousin, believeing that Jesus should actually baptise him, and this was before he even Knew that he was the promised one, because he goes on to admit that it was not until he rose from the batismal waters and the spirit of our Lord God and saviour descended upon him in the form of a dove, that he realised that Jesus, his second cousin was the promised one. Although, John was later to doubt if Jesus really was the promised Messiah, or if they had to wait for another one. Goodnight mate, it's 10 minutes to midnight, and I'm off to drop the lead in the weeping willow and plow the deep.

I was a little bit tired last night, and didn't complete answering your questions,
Quote: Thief; And if the John is correct, not mentioning the wilderness at all, then did the temptation take place? Apparently not.

Just because John makes no mention of it, that does not mean to say that Matthew, Mark and Luke, who do speak of the temptation in the wilderness, are lying and that the temptation did not happen. Each of the gospels speak of some different event in a different time of the life of Jesus, which is not corroborated by the others, but again, that does not mean that an event such as the 12 year old Jesus being found in the temple confounding the teachers of the law with his knowledge of the scriptures, which is found only in the gospel of Luke, did not occur.


Quote: Thief; And though there is indication that Jesus did approach John the baptist, the report does not specifically state that the Baptist did actually perform the ritual unto the Man.

The fact that Matthew, Mark and Luke, all state that John did baptise Jesus and that it was after he had risen from the waters of the Jordan that he was filled with the Holy Spirit that descended upon him in the form of a dove, then led him off into the wilderness to be tempted: and John then mentions that he came baptising with water and that he saw the spirit of the Lord descend upon Jesus in the form of a dove, I believe that we can veiw this as more than just an indication that John actually baptised His second cousin, Jesus of Nazareth.

Quote: Thief; And how would anyone know the dialog in the wilderness? unless the Carpenter Himself is doing the report?

Yes, I can see Jesus with his disciples, sitting around a fire on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, freshly caught fish sizzling on the flames, with the aroma pervading the evening breeze, while Jesus recounts the events that had occured in his life before he had met them. But do you know, that there are still doubters today, who believe that the pictures taken of Neil Armstrong walking on the moon are fake?

 

[Thief]

I was a little bit tired last night, and didn't complete answering your questions,
Quote: Thief; And if the John is correct, not mentioning the wilderness at all, then did the temptation take place? Apparently not.

Just because John makes no mention of it, that does not mean to say that Matthew, Mark and Luke, who do speak of the temptation in the wilderness, are lying and that the temptation did not happen. Each of the gospels speak of some different event in a different time of the life of Jesus, which is not corroborated by the others, but again, that does not mean that an event such as the 12 year old Jesus being found in the temple confounding the teachers of the law with his knowledge of the scriptures, which is found only in the gospel of Luke, did not occur.


Quote: Thief; And though there is indication that Jesus did approach John the baptist, the report does not specifically state that the Baptist did actually perform the ritual unto the Man.

The fact that Matthew, Mark and Luke, all state that John did baptise Jesus and that it was after he had risen from the waters of the Jordan that he was filled with the Holy Spirit that descended upon him in the form of a dove, then led him off into the wilderness to be tempted: and John then mentions that he came baptising with water and that he saw the spirit of the Lord descend upon Jesus in the form of a dove, I believe that we can veiw this as more than just an indication that John actually baptised His second cousin, Jesus of Nazareth.

Quote: Thief; And how would anyone know the dialog in the wilderness? unless the Carpenter Himself is doing the report?

Yes, I can see Jesus with his disciples, sitting around a fire on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, freshly caught fish sizzling on the flames, with the aroma pervading the evening breeze, while Jesus recounts the events that had occured in his life before he had met them. But do you know, that there are still doubters today, who believe that the pictures taken of Neil Armstrong walking on the moon are fake?

You have opened the door to personal explanations.
Are you sure you want to proceed in this manner?

There is the possibility that more than one man was named Jesus.
The reports given may represent more than one man.

 

[S-word]

You have opened the door to personal explanations.

Are you sure you want to proceed in this manner?

That was the expl;aination given by the scriptures themselves, It was the day after the Jewish authorities had sent their messengers to put John through the first degree, that Jonh then recounts the time that he saw the spirit descsnd upon Jesus in the form of a dove, and John himself, who thought that he was not worthy enough to baptise his second cousin Jesus, didn't realise that his cousin was the promised one until he saw the spirit come down as a dove, which scripture informs us, was as he rose from the baptismal waters. No personal explaination there young fellow.

quote=Thief; There is the possibility that more than one man was named Jesus.


Not a hope in high hell matey, the Gospels speak of one man by the name Jesus, who was born in Bethlehem of Judaea, raised in Galilee, began his mission at about 30 years of age, was crucified , died, buried and risen from death. There ain't two men by the same name, who have experienced the same events as experienced by the Jesus of the gospels.

quote=Thief; The reports given may represent more than one man.


Only some gullible mug would believe that, but keep trying you may get someone to believe you, for there are gullible people out there who might suggest or even believe such an absurdity.

 

[Thief]

That was the expl;aination given by the scriptures themselves, It was the day after the Jewish authorities had sent their messengers to put John through the first degree, that Jonh then recounts the time that he saw the spirit descsnd upon Jesus in the form of a dove, and John himself, who thought that he was not worthy enough to baptise his second cousin Jesus, didn't realise that his cousin was the promised one until he saw the spirit come down as a dove, which scripture informs us, was as he rose from the baptismal waters. No personal explaination there young fellow.

quote=Thief; There is the possibility that more than one man was named Jesus.


Not a hope in high hell matey, the Gospels speak of one man by the name Jesus, who was born in Bethlehem of Judaea, raised in Galilee, began his mission at about 30 years of age, was crucified , died, buried and risen from death. There ain't two men by the same name, who have experienced the same events as experienced by the Jesus of the gospels.

quote=Thief; The reports given may represent more than one man.


Only some gullible mug would believe that, but keep trying you may get someone to believe you, for there are gullible people out there who might suggest or even believe such an absurdity.

Too many assumptions on your part.

I'm an old man, with one foot in the grave.
I've been doing this for along time.

Turns out, the name Jesus was common at the time.
Even more so now.

And your report does not take away the disparity as written in the Book.

Mark, Matthew, and Luke, claim the Carpenter went straight to the wilderness.
John is contrary.

How the difference came about?...probably some argument about which gospels to canonize...which gospels to burn.

Resolve? not likely.
It's going to be one of those many...'typos'....that believers will have to deal with.

No doubt you done your homework.
You tend to prattle at length, as you you have.

So doubt, you do take the time to cross reference you favored quotes?
And you cross reference your favored events?

Is the New Testament filled with discrepancies?...yeah.

Will any of it stop me from believing?...no.

 

[S-word]

Too many assumptions on your part.

No assumptions on my part matey, only Biblical quotes



Quote: Thief; I'm an old man, with one foot in the grave.
I've been doing this for along time.

Not long enough apparently, I’m only a young fellow of 68 years and even I know more than you concerning the Holy Scriptures.

Quote: Thief; Turns out, the name Jesus was common at the time.
Even more so now.


It certainly was and still is a common name, but the gospels aren’t referring to those other men named “Jesus” only to “Jesus of Nazareth” who was born in Bethlehem of Judaea and grew up in the land of Galilee, the home of his mother Mary, who began his ministry at the age of about 30, was crucified some 3 years later, was seen to be dead and buried, and was later risen from death by the Lord God our saviour.

Quote: Thief; And your report does not take away the disparity as written in the Book.

Mark, Matthew, and Luke, claim the Carpenter went straight to the wilderness.
John is contrary.

I realise that an old and feeble mind such as yours would have so much difficulty in understanding the scriptures, so let me explain to you just what has been said. Starting with John 1: 19; “And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who art thou.” The next eight verses are concerned only with the questions put to John and his answers to those questions, then in verse 28, it is said that this inquisition by the Jewish authorities was done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, which is believed to be Bethbarah east of Jordan or rather Bethany which is only 2 kilometres from Jerusalem from where had came the priests and Levites who questioned John, which town is in the Land of Judaea where John was baptising at that particular point in time, but according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus was baptised in the Jordan river, in the land of Galilee. Fancy that? But then an old fellow could not be expected to have noticed that.

Then in verse 29; it is said, The next day (After the inquisition by the Jews, not the next day after Jesus had been baptised when John was baptising up north, in the land of Galilee) John seeth Jesus coming to him, and saith, “Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.” He then goes on to tell about the time he first discovered the fact that Jesus was “The Lamb of God,” because he goes on to admit that he never had a clue as to who that person would be, until he saw the spirit of the Lord God our saviour, descend upon the chosen one in the form of a dove, as told to him by the Lord who sent him to baptise with water, and we know that particular event did not occur until Jesus rose from the baptismal waters of the Jordan, when John had been baptising up in the district of Galilee.

Now how could John, while baptising east of the Jordan in the land of Judaea, on the day after the Jews had questioned him, have known that Jesus, who had been baptised in the land of Galilee, was “The Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world,” If he didn’t know who "The Lamb of God" would be until he rose from the waters of the Jordan in Galilee and was filled with the spirit of the Lord which descended upon him in the form of a dove?

As to the rest of your misinformed and childish endeavour to discredit the holy scriptures, I can only put it down to your old age. But you are correct in your statement that I have done my homework and have cross referenced the scriptures relevant to your false assumption, and find it necessary to go to some lengths in order that the truth of the matter in question, might be able to be absorbed into the old and feeble minds of some people of the world.

You finish up by saying, Quote: Thief; Is the New Testament filled with discrepancies?...yeah. Will any of it stop me from believing?...no.

If you are saying that many apparent discrepancies have crept into the New Testament and it has been corrupted, not only by innocently introduced copyists errors, and misinterpretations of what was being conveyed originally, but also, by the yeast that was deliberately added to the bread that came down from heaven, by the priestly authorities in order to justify their false and misleading concepts, and that even with all these apparent discrepancies it does not stop you from believing in the salvation of our Lord God and saviour, as revealed through his obedient servant Jesus, then wouldn’t it be more advisable for you to attempt to reconcile those apparent discrepancies, rather than screaming out from the rooftops, that the word of God cannot be trusted?

 

[Thief]

Too many assumptions on your part.

No assumptions on my part matey, only Biblical quotes



Quote: Thief; I'm an old man, with one foot in the grave.
I've been doing this for along time.

Not long enough apparently, I’m only a young fellow of 68 years and even I know more than you concerning the Holy Scriptures.

Quote: Thief; Turns out, the name Jesus was common at the time.
Even more so now.


It certainly was and still is a common name, but the gospels aren’t referring to those other men named “Jesus” only to “Jesus of Nazareth” who was born in Bethlehem of Judaea and grew up in the land of Galilee, the home of his mother Mary, who began his ministry at the age of about 30, was crucified some 3 years later, was seen to be dead and buried, and was later risen from death by the Lord God our saviour.

Quote: Thief; And your report does not take away the disparity as written in the Book.

Mark, Matthew, and Luke, claim the Carpenter went straight to the wilderness.
John is contrary.

I realise that an old and feeble mind such as yours would have so much difficulty in understanding the scriptures, so let me explain to you just what has been said. Starting with John 1: 19; “And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who art thou.” The next eight verses are concerned only with the questions put to John and his answers to those questions, then in verse 28, it is said that this inquisition by the Jewish authorities was done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, which is believed to be Bethbarah east of Jordan or rather Bethany which is only 2 kilometres from Jerusalem from where had came the priests and Levites who questioned John, which town is in the Land of Judaea where John was baptising at that particular point in time, but according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus was baptised in the Jordan river, in the land of Galilee. Fancy that? But then an old fellow could not be expected to have noticed that.

Then in verse 29; it is said, The next day (After the inquisition by the Jews, not the next day after Jesus had been baptised when John was baptising up north, in the land of Galilee) John seeth Jesus coming to him, and saith, “Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.” He then goes on to tell about the time he first discovered the fact that Jesus was “The Lamb of God,” because he goes on to admit that he never had a clue as to who that person would be, until he saw the spirit of the Lord God our saviour, descend upon the chosen one in the form of a dove, as told to him by the Lord who sent him to baptise with water, and we know that particular event did not occur until Jesus rose from the baptismal waters of the Jordan, when John had been baptising up in the district of Galilee.

Now how could John, while baptising east of the Jordan in the land of Judaea, on the day after the Jews had questioned him, have known that Jesus, who had been baptised in the land of Galilee, was “The Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world,” If he didn’t know who "The Lamb of God" would be until he rose from the waters of the Jordan in Galilee and was filled with the spirit of the Lord which descended upon him in the form of a dove?

As to the rest of your misinformed and childish endeavour to discredit the holy scriptures, I can only put it down to your old age. But you are correct in your statement that I have done my homework and have cross referenced the scriptures relevant to your false assumption, and find it necessary to go to some lengths in order that the truth of the matter in question, might be able to be absorbed into the old and feeble minds of some people of the world.

You finish up by saying, Quote: Thief; Is the New Testament filled with discrepancies?...yeah. Will any of it stop me from believing?...no.

If you are saying that many apparent discrepancies have crept into the New Testament and it has been corrupted, not only by innocently introduced copyists errors, and misinterpretations of what was being conveyed originally, but also, by the yeast that was deliberately added to the bread that came down from heaven, by the priestly authorities in order to justify their false and misleading concepts, and that even with all these apparent discrepancies it does not stop you from believing in the salvation of our Lord God and saviour, as revealed through his obedient servant Jesus, then wouldn’t it be more advisable for you to attempt to reconcile those apparent discrepancies, rather than screaming out from the rooftops, that the word of God cannot be trusted?

You get carried away with your own words....then you completely misconstrue mine.

Yes...the Scriptures are faulted.
Can they be reconciled one to the other? ...no.
Will people protest and discount the Scriptures for cause of these 'errors'...yes.
Will such practice ever fade away?....no.
Can you fix it?.....never.

But in spite of the faults, people quote Scripture everyday.
Do they seem contrary....to themselves and each other?...of course.

Try reviewing this thread.

 

[S-word]

You get carried away with your own words....then you completely misconstrue mine.

S-word's response;
Quote: Thief; Is the New Testament filled with discrepancies?...yeah. Will any of it stop me from believing?...no.
How was I to know what you meant by saying, “Regardless of the discrepancies, it would not stop you from believing? Stop you from believing WHAT? Matey, all I know about you, is that you call yourself “rogue theologian” and knowing that “Theology,” is the study of the nature of God and religious truth, and that a theologian is one who is versed in theology, I thought that perhaps you might have been a follower of the teachings of our Lord God and saviour as spoken through the mouth of His obedient servant Jesus, who the Lord God chose and sent in His name to speak only that which he was commanded to say.

And regardless of the many apparent discrepancies, which in the main are only discrepancies perceived by those who have no understanding of the truth as revealed in scripture, and those apparent discrepancies can in the majority of cases be reconciled with the truth of scripture, such as the one put forward by yourself, Which "perceived discrepancy," I put down to dementia caused from old age, resulting in the inability to focus on what is actually written in scripture.

But if you are only trying to discredit the word of God, go your hardest matey, you’re only one microbe in a ocean of much bigger critters that have been trying to do that for thousands of years. Do you know of any other Book that has endured the ravages of time and the attacks by Godless and misinformed poor souls?

 

[Thief]

You get carried away with your own words....then you completely misconstrue mine.

S-word's response;
Quote: Thief; Is the New Testament filled with discrepancies?...yeah. Will any of it stop me from believing?...no.
How was I to know what you meant by saying, “Regardless of the discrepancies, it would not stop you from believing? Stop you from believing WHAT? Matey, all I know about you, is that you call yourself “rogue theologian” and knowing that “Theology,” is the study of the nature of God and religious truth, and that a theologian is one who is versed in theology, I thought that perhaps you might have been a follower of the teachings of our Lord God and saviour as spoken through the mouth of His obedient servant Jesus, who the Lord God chose and sent in His name to speak only that which he was commanded to say.

And regardless of the many apparent discrepancies, which in the main are only discrepancies perceived by those who have no understanding of the truth as revealed in scripture, and those apparent discrepancies can in the majority of cases be reconciled with the truth of scripture, such as the one put forward by yourself, Which "perceived discrepancy," I put down to dementia caused from old age, resulting in the inability to focus on what is actually written in scripture.

But if you are only trying to discredit the word of God, go your hardest matey, you’re only one microbe in a ocean of much bigger critters that have been trying to do that for thousands of years. Do you know of any other Book that has endured the ravages of time and the attacks by Godless and misinformed poor souls?

This last post I would class as a typical .....
'I got my book and won't put it down'... response.

And you seem to think I'm on the 'non-believers' side of the fence.

Scripture is faulted.
But that doesn't mean it has no value.

As for putting the book down....yes you will.
We all do.

You came into the world naked.
You will leave the same way.

If any portion of the book goes with you, it will be in mind and heart.

As for Scripture as a saving grace....nay.
The devil knows the scriptures...all of them.
He knows the prophets....all of them.
And it is believed he does not live in heaven.

That you know scripture...is not a saving grace.
If anything, it takes your plea of ignorance away.
Can you say you don't know ant better?...nay.
Of course you do.

 

[S-word]

This last post I would class as a typical .....
'I got my book and won't put it down'... response.

And you seem to think I'm on the 'non-believers' side of the fence.

Scripture is faulted.
But that doesn't mean it has no value.

As for putting the book down....yes you will.
We all do.

You came into the world naked.
You will leave the same way.

If any portion of the book goes with you, it will be in mind and heart.

As for Scripture as a saving grace....nay.
The devil knows the scriptures...all of them.
He knows the prophets....all of them.
And it is believed he does not live in heaven.

That you know scripture...is not a saving grace.
If anything, it takes your plea of ignorance away.
Can you say you don't know ant better?...nay.
Of course you do.

Go blow wind up someone else’s ears, there’s no room in my life for negatively minded people such as yourself. As to the great and glorious angel, “Lucifer the light bearer,” the bright morning star, who existed in heaven with his father even before the creation of this, the seventh period of universal activity, and who was cast down to the earth. Have you not read of our Lord God and saviour, who descends through time, who, through his chosen earthly image, his obedient servant “Jesus,” He has revealed his future perfected nature and the great sacrifice that He makes for the world.

Have you not read, that Jesus the earthly image of our Lord God and saviour had to be lifted up in the same manner that Moses lifted up the image of the serpent in the wilderness, in order that all those who were dying because of the venom of the old serpent that is coursing through their veins, only have to look to His image that has been lifted up upon a stake, to be saved. It was through the mouth of his earthy image, who spoke not one word on his own authority, but only that which he was commanded to say by our Lord God and saviour, that these words were heard, “Father! Give me glory in your presence now, the same glory I had with you before the world was made.”

Does the devil know the scriptures….all of them? You can bet your sweet bippy he does. I will not be responding to any further post of yours in this thread, enjoy the short period left to you on this earth old fellow, as our paths do not intersect, I don’t expect to ever meet you in this life or the next.

 

[Thief]

Go blow wind up someone else’s ears, there’s no room in my life for negatively minded people such as yourself. As to the great and glorious angel, “Lucifer the light bearer,” the bright morning star, who existed in heaven with his father even before the creation of this, the seventh period of universal activity, and who was cast down to the earth. Have you not read of our Lord God and saviour, who descends through time, who, through his chosen earthly image, his obedient servant “Jesus,” He has revealed his future perfected nature and the great sacrifice that He makes for the world.

Have you not read, that Jesus the earthly image of our Lord God and saviour had to be lifted up in the same manner that Moses lifted up the image of the serpent in the wilderness, in order that all those who were dying because of the venom of the old serpent that is coursing through their veins, only have to look to His image that has been lifted up upon a stake, to be saved. It was through the mouth of his earthy image, who spoke not one word on his own authority, but only that which he was commanded to say by our Lord God and saviour, that these words were heard, “Father! Give me glory in your presence now, the same glory I had with you before the world was made.”

Does the devil know the scriptures….all of them? You can bet your sweet bippy he does. I will not be responding to any further post of yours in this thread, enjoy the short period left to you on this earth old fellow, as our paths do not intersect, I don’t expect to ever meet you in this life or the next.

That we will meet again has been assured.

When I die...Someone will ask whatever I may have said.
I will report my sayings.

They will then ask, if I told anyone else
That's when these discussions come up.

They will then, come looking for you.

 

[Thief]

For those trying to follow this thread.....
The appearance of previous quoting boxes has crossed ..who said what.
At first glance the text seems credited to the wrong person.

A closer look may be needed to realize, to whom your responses are poised.

 

[McBell]

If I manage to explain any one of them is not a contradiction, your whole list will lose its credibility, because the contradiction is not a contradiction as you think.

rotflmao

What a load of bull ****.

but thanks a ton for the laugh

 

[McBell]

It may be the same common sense that induces faith. It may be that a book withstands intelligent and educated scrutiny, and faith survives despite that scrutiny.

Well that leaves out both the Koran and the Bible.

Do you by chance know of a book that does hold up to honest intelligent and educated scrutiny?

I mean without having to rely upon faith ...

 

[Godwilling]

How about you say something along the lines of, "I believe in the Bible and I cannot explain the apparent contradictions”? That would be brave and honest of you!

On the other hand you have responded cowardly pretending to know what God means in his writings. Who are you, God’s official translator?

 

[Godwilling]

The above was directed at Hawkins

 

[Godwilling]

According to the Bible's own theologians, the orginal scriptures are all doubtful and is quite hilarious that even the Bible itself admits that it has been tampered with and is a man made work..



Yes i'm a Muslim, but my intension is not to descredit the Bible and other Gospels, just wanted to share the contradictions that the Bible has as it has been pointed out by many Muslim scholars which the same were not being pointed out by Christian missionaries..

Muzu,

Those contradictions are clearly written as such, and I have no explanation for it. Jesus wrote nothing in the Bible. I ask you if you know that Muhammad was illiterate and that he wrote nothing himself either?

 

[Rakhel]

10. How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into the Ark?
Two (Genesis 6:19, 20)
Seven (Genesis 7:2). But despite this last instruction only two pairs went into the ark (Genesis 7:8-9

Gen 6:19. And of all living things of all flesh, two of each you shall bring into the ark to preserve alive with you; they shall be male and female.20. Of the fowl after its kind and of the animals after their kind, of every creeping thing upon the ground after its kind; two of each shall come to you to preserve alive.21. And you, take for yourself of every food that is eaten and gather it in to you, and it shall be for you and for them to eat."

Gen 7:2 Of all the clean animals you shall take for yourself seven pairs, a male and its mate, and of the animals that are not clean, two, a male and its mate.3. Also, of the fowl of the heavens, seven pairs, male and female, to keep seed alive on the face of the earth.

Chabad.org

The only contradiction I see is that you used a translated version of a translated version
chapter 6 says you must have at least this many by the time you finish the journey. chapter 7 says how many of the cleans ones are necessary to start the journey.