Dealing With Biblical Contradictions

[Jainarayan]

There's no need to try and prove the Bible is accurate, factual, inerrant and non-contradictory. It's enough to know that it's true because, for Catholics, we have a supernatural faith and we have the infallible authority of the Church. We KNOW it's true beyond all doubt.

So, telling a colorful story with exaggerations can't indicate truth? How do you think these truths were communicated to people who couldn't read? Wandering storytellers did it. Passion plays, morality plays. How do you explain what was done to Galileo Galilei by the RCC, then it reversed itself when it got on-board with the scientific model of the solar system? The Earth has four corners?

Because if we did as you said we would be accepting a LIE.

I never said that.

 

[Anna Therese]

So, telling a colorful story with exaggerations can't indicate truth? How do you think these truths were communicated to people who couldn't read? Wandering storytellers did it. Passion plays, morality plays. How do you explain what was done to Galileo Galilei by the RCC, then it reversed itself when it got on-board with the scientific model of the solar system? The Earth has four corners?

Exaggeration is not truth. What was done with Galileo and how exactly did the RCC reverse itself or even "get on board with the scientific model of the solar system?" The Catholic Church did not infallibly teach Geocentrism. Just because certain Church officials condemned Galileo Galilei because he contradicted the Heliocentric model means nothing as far as the authority Christ gave to His Church. The Catholic Church is the infallible interpreter of the Holy Scriptures.

 

[2ndpillar]

Exaggeration is not truth. What was done with Galileo and how exactly did the RCC reverse itself or even "get on board with the scientific model of the solar system?" The Catholic Church did not infallibly teach Geocentrism. Just because certain Church officials condemned Galileo Galilei because he contradicted the Heliocentric model means nothing as far as the authority Christ gave to His Church. The Catholic Church is the infallible interpreter of the Holy Scriptures.

The church didn't "condemn" Galileo, they tortured and broke the man, and then kept him imprisoned in his own home. Apparently, the present Pope expressed that the church was wrong in their treatment of Galileo and with Joan of Arc. That would make the church far from being "infallible". It would indicate that their fruit was rotten, and that it must eventually be cut down and burned (Matthew 7:17-19). And according to Isaiah 22:25, anyone hanging onto the pope, when he "falls", will be "cut off".

 

[Jainarayan]

Exaggeration is not truth.

So what is truth? When a 5 year old hears someone say Pop-Pop has cancer and asks, do you explain what cancer is to a 5 year old? Or do you ELI5 it? Doesn’t ELI5ing it entail a measure of exaggeration?

What was done with Galileo and how exactly did the RCC reverse itself or even "get on board with the scientific model of the solar system?" The Catholic Church did not infallibly teach Geocentrism. Just because certain Church officials condemned Galileo Galilei because he contradicted the Heliocentric model means nothing as far as the authority Christ gave to His Church. The Catholic Church is the infallible interpreter of the Holy Scriptures.

You’re serious aren’t you!?

And the Church is not the the infallible interpreter of the Holy Scriptures, the Pope is only when he speaks ex-cathedra. Source: I was raised in an Italian-American Roman Catholic family.

 

[2ndpillar]

And the Church is not the the infallible interpreter of the Holy Scriptures, the Pope is only when he speaks ex-cathedra. Source: I was raised in an Italian-American Roman Catholic family.

The pope is only "infallible" with respect to ex-cathedra, according to the office of the pope. Being as Mary isn't in heaven, but in the grave, kind of deflates that the theory that the pope can be "infallible". The holder of the key of the house of David, whereas what "he opens no one will shut" ends with that person (Peter and his heir the pope) shall "fall" and those hanging onto him will be "cut off" (Isaiah 22:22-25).

 

[Jainarayan]

Being as Mary isn't in heaven, but in the grave, kind of deflates that the theory that the pope can be "infallible".

Please read this and weep. The wailing and gnashing of teeth is optional, but will be a nice touch:

The Assumption of Mary into Heaven (often shortened to the Assumption) is, according to the beliefs of the Catholic Church, Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy,[3]the bodily taking up of the Virgin Mary into Heaven at the end of her earthly life.

The Catholic Church teaches as dogma that the Virgin Mary "having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory".[4]This doctrine was dogmatically defined by Pope Pius XII on 1 November 1950, in the apostolic constitution Munificentissimus Deus by exercising papal infallibility.[5]

Assumption of Mary - Wikipedia

By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.[29]

Assumption of Mary - Wikipedia

 

[Anna Therese]

The church didn't "condemn" Galileo, they tortured and broke the man, and then kept him imprisoned in his own home. Apparently, the present Pope expressed that the church was wrong in their treatment of Galileo and with Joan of Arc. That would make the church far from being "infallible". It would indicate that their fruit was rotten, and that it must eventually be cut down and burned (Matthew 7:17-19). And according to Isaiah 22:25, anyone hanging onto the pope, when he "falls", will be "cut off".

That doesn't prove anything. The condemnation and abjuration of Galileo is irrelevant to the the indefectibility of the Catholic Church. I'm not going to high-jack someone else's thread about the Bible. You are welcome read the actual details concerning Galileo and the Church here: https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Geocentrism.pdf

As far as the Bible verses, they don't say anything about "hanging onto the pope."

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Yeah, it isn't the truth of the numbers that's important, but the contradiction between them.

It's important to me. If a people is willing to lie about how big their crowds are *cough*Trump*cough*, that people cannot be trusted. That they can't keep the lie straight is irrelevant because the lie comes first.

I agree in spades, and can only say that the reason it's taken as any sort of truth is because of an overwhelming need to preserve one's faith.

Which is weird, because I worship the Truth, so if what I believe is discovered to be false, I'm honoring Truth by accepting what is actually true.

For the same reason that we take Aesop's fables as a sort of truth, even if the truth isn't in the literal telling of the story, but in the principles illustrated by them.

Exactly. I'm fine if a religion claims to have Truth, but they don't mean in a factual way but some spiritual/emotional sense. I only care if someone starts arguing that this proves the story is literally true:

The idea that the writer of Genesis was so absent minded that he contradicted himself so blatantly is far fetched.

It's not far fetched because there was no "he", only "they".

So judging those Books with some translations of them is not right.

Does translation error explain how Jesus is sinless and yet commits sins, even breaking commandments from the Top Ten, both of which involved the death penalty? Does translation error explain how God knows everything but loses the dirt to human recipe after the first go? Does translation error explain how only Jesus can forgive sins but God does it all the time in the OT? Does translation error explain how Jesus says he knows his sheep but is constantly in shock that gentiles would have faith in him?

Actually, it goes back 2000 years ago

Wouldn't Jesus be 18, before he even started his ministry per the scriptures? How were they written 2k years ago?

I dont judge a book by its cover but the contents, i cant see any contradictions on the cover, can you?

I do. People say God wrote the bible, but on the cover I see publishers, editors, etc. and none of them are God.

Translations have errors.

So does bad writing.

Because of sectarian control, the West and the East have a huge schism. The Western translations have errors. Especially the Greek Nestle Aland, Wescott and Hort and the Erasmus text. They dont want to use the Greek Text found in the Greek Church. They like money and new versions over the Truth.

All the denominations are like arguing over Maleficient's actual backstory but we're watching Princess and the Frog.

She thought she was being objective but it was objectivity within the context of her reality.

Good for y'all. I believe in the reality that I will never be loved in return. I understand it's my reality, not everyone else's. I'm truly happy you two are still a thing. I'm a sucker for true love.

Judas did not die “by falling down”. Judas was dead already before he fell down “headlong” or head first. How did it happen?

It remains a contradiction as long as each story has different details. For it not to be a contradiction, both would have to agree that both happened.

 

[ChristineM]

I do. People say God wrote the bible, but on the cover I see publishers, editors, etc. and none of them are God.

None of the authors are god either, no gospel according to El or YHWH

 

[2ndpillar]

That doesn't prove anything. The condemnation and abjuration of Galileo is irrelevant to the the indefectibility of the Catholic Church. I'm not going to high-jack someone else's thread about the Bible. You are welcome read the actual details concerning Galileo and the Church here: https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Geocentrism.pdf

As far as the Bible verses, they don't say anything about "hanging onto the pope."

What it refers to is hanging on to the guy with the key for the house of David (Isaiah 22:22), who when he opens no one can shut. It is Peter, and his supposed heir the pope, who is being referred to. Any "hanging" on to that peg will be "cut off" (Isaiah 22:25), "in that day", which would be the "day of the LORD".

As for your "indefectibility" of the Catholic Church based on "details" from that church, I will refer you to one of the early church historians, Eusebius, who said :

"That it will be necessary sometimes to use falsehood as a remedy for the benefit of those who require such a mode of treatment"
{Eusebius. The title for chapter 32 of the twelth book of Evangelical Preparation}

 

[74x12]

It's not far fetched because there was no "he", only "they".

Nice theory, why don't you write a book citing all your "evidence"???

 

[Kenny]

None of the authors are god either, no gospel according to El or YHWH

Actually, it is all over the Tanakh

 

[ChristineM]

Actually, it is all over the Tanakh

What, a gospel according to god?... Why has no one ever heard of this?

 

[74x12]

What, a gospel according to god?... Why has no one ever heard of this?

Just Read Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Count how many times it says "I am the LORD" which LORD is a stand in for the Divine name obviously.

 

[ChristineM]

Just Read Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Count how many times it says "I am the LORD" which LORD is a stand in for the Divine name obviously.

Yes and count how many times you see God 4:4 .or God 9:18

There are no gospels according to god and you know it otherwise you would have provided relevant verses instead of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy

 

[74x12]

you would have provided relevant verses instead of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy

Well, here are pages of references.

BibleGateway.com - Keyword Search

 

[Kenny]

What, a gospel according to god?... Why has no one ever heard of this?

Where do you think Jesus and the Apostles preached from? I hope you don't think it was the NT.

 

[ChristineM]

Well, here are pages of references.

BibleGateway.com - Keyword Search

And not one is in a gospel according to god

None

 

[ChristineM]

Where do you think Jesus and the Apostles preached from? I hope you don't think it was the NT.

Show me a gospel according to god.

 

[Kenny]

Show me a gospel according to god.

I'm not sure... it does sound like it is to me.

Isaiah 8:1"Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen concerning Mahershalalhashbaz.

:5 The Lord spake also unto me again, saying,

It sounds like "according to God" to me.