Does the Bible contradict itsself?

[The Anointed]

I watched about half of the first video. Let's face it... I'm not going to sit through 2 and a half hours of this stuff. And I do have to admit that the speaker did a good job instilling reasonable doubt, or even in some cases, completely alleviating the burden of "contradiction" - like the very first one - "Did Jesus answer his accusers?" - I came through admitting that yes, that one is incredibly weak, actually refuted by the scripture, in which Jesus does speak, just not about the accusations beyond basically, "Yes, I am he that you seek." However, what I saw beyond that were a lot of word games - especially when it came to the days/nights thing.

At any rate - NONE of this answers to the idea that The Bible is supposedly inspired by a God who (with His timeless and infinite wisdom) supposedly would have known EXACTLY the items that people (like atheists) would take issue with, and yet He still inspired the text to be written with these internal issues. If there were no apparent contradiction - "scarlet" vs. "purple" for example - then there would be no talk about it. How easy would it have been for God to inspire wholly corroborating words in the accounts? Supposedly very easy, according to some - and if anyone claims it would have been very difficult, then they also have to admit a limit to their God. And if the answer is, instead, that God left the slightly contradictory points in there in order to test faith, or to "separate the wheat from the chaff" - then an even more glaring contradiction has to be admitted - that being that God is said to love His creations and wants that they return to Him. To make that process more difficult, while at the same time desiring that it be so... that is contradictory.

Can we believe anything that Josephus the historian is supposed to have been written 2,000 years ago, when there are no extant record of his writings, only copies of copies?

 

[shunyadragon]

Can we believe anything that Josephus the historian is supposed to have been written 2,000 years ago, when there are no extant record of his writings, only copies of copies?

Josephus testimony concerning Christianity is third hand with no personal knowledge of Jesus Christ. His works are contradictory and often inconsistent with known history.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Can we believe anything that Josephus the historian is supposed to have been written 2,000 years ago, when there are no extant record of his writings, only copies of copies?

Not to sound like a jerk, and not caring that I will most certainly betray my ignorance on the subject - but may I ask why I should care if we can or can't believe this Josephus?

It seems strangely like you believe my beliefs that The Bible does, indeed, contain inconsistencies and contradiction are somehow hinged on something this Josephus person brought into the world. I don't even know who that is - outside of briefly reading some info on him via a Google search. And even after reading up a bit, I remain unconvinced that your post has much to do with mine.

 

[The Anointed]

Josephus testimony concerning Christianity is third hand with no personal knowledge of Jesus Christ. His works are contradictory and often inconsistent with known history.

EVERYTHING that is thought to have been written by Josephus, is third hand. Copies of copies, If we reject the books of the bible, because they are copies of the original, then must we also reject the works of Josephus?

I trust that those who copied the books of the bible, did so by keeping those copies as accurate as possible to the originals, I believe also that the works of Josephus, after being translated into other languages, have lost little of the original from which they were copied.

I believe that Josephus reinforces the truths as revealed in the scriptures,

both the new and Old testaments.

OT........From the Encyclopedia Britannica, ‘Hyksos’, invaders who were also called the Shepherd Kings, who in the time of “King Tutimaios” entered Egypt and took possession of it without striking a blow and it is said here that Josephus the historian, identifies them with the Israelites and that their reign ended in 1567 B.C.

Kathleen Kenyon, a most respected archaeologist dug at Jericho over the seasons between 1952 to 1958, her results were confirmed in 1995 by radiocarbon tests, which dated the destruction of Jericho to 1562 BC (Plus/minus 38 years) with a certainty of 95%.

The radiocarbon tests which dated the destruction of Jericho to 1562 BC (plus/minus 38 years) with a certainty of 95%, confirm that Josephus's biblical date of 1527 BC for the destruction, agrees with Kathleen Kenyon’s findings.

1562 (minus 38 years) [1562-38=1524 BC.] this would mean that Jericho fell somewhere between 1562 and 1524 BC, close enough to the 40 years after Josephus’ date for the Exodus in 1567. [1567-40=1527 BC]

NT......….James who was an Apostle named in Matthew 10: 1-4; is James the son of Alpheaus/Cleophas, who Paul names as the brother ‘ADELPHOS’ of the Lord Jesus. (ADELPHOS’) The Greek term, meaning "born of the same womb.”

And of James the son of Alpheaus, who was the first to sit on the Episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision in Jerusalem, we learn from Josephus, Eusebius, and Hegesippus, that he was murdered in 62 AD, at the instigation of one of the same Sadducee sect that had his brother Jesus murdered, and that James the righteous was succeeded by Simeon --- of Cleophas/Alpheaus, who was the second husband of Mary.

Even though we only have copies of copies of the works of Josephus, I believe that THEY REFLECT PERFECTLY THE ORIGINAL.

​

 

[Subduction Zone]

EVERYTHING that is thought to have been written by Josephus, is third hand. Copies of copies, If we reject the books of the bible, because they are copies of the original, then must we also reject the works of Josephus?

This is very poor reasoning on your part. Josephus has a much lower burden of proof than the Bible has. A friend that says he is going to the pound to get a rescue dog has a much lower burden of proof than one that claims he is going to buy a Ferrari.

A person that writes history has a lower burden of proof than a person that writes about magic and magical creatures.

I trust that those who copied the books of the bible, did so by keeping those copies as accurate as possible to the originals, I believe also that the works of Josephus, after being translated into other languages, have lost little of the original from which they were copied.

I believe that Josephus reinforces the truths as revealed in the scriptures,

both the new and Old testaments.​

What "revealed truth" ? I only know of biblical failures.

OT........From the Encyclopedia Britannica, ‘Hyksos’, invaders who were also called the Shepherd Kings, who in the time of “King Tutimaios” entered Egypt and took possession of it without striking a blow and it is said here that Josephus the historian, identifies them with the Israelites and that their reign ended in 1567 B.C.

Kathleen Kenyon, a most respected archaeologist dug at Jericho over the seasons between 1952 to 1958, her results were confirmed in 1995 by radiocarbon tests, which dated the destruction of Jericho to 1562 BC (Plus/minus 38 years) with a certainty of 95%.

The radiocarbon tests which dated the destruction of Jericho to 1562 BC (plus/minus 38 years) with a certainty of 95%, confirm that Josephus's biblical date of 1527 BC for the destruction, agrees with Kathleen Kenyon’s findings.

1562 (minus 38 years) [1562-38=1524 BC.] this would mean that Jericho fell somewhere between 1562 and 1524 BC, close enough to the 40 years after Josephus’ date for the Exodus in 1567. [1567-40=1527 BC]

NT......….James who was an Apostle named in Matthew 10: 1-4; is James the son of Alpheaus/Cleophas, who Paul names as the brother ‘ADELPHOS’ of the Lord Jesus. (ADELPHOS’) The Greek term, meaning "born of the same womb.”

And of James the son of Alpheaus, who was the first to sit on the Episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision in Jerusalem, we learn from Josephus, Eusebius, and Hegesippus, that he was murdered in 62 AD, at the instigation of one of the same Sadducee sect that had his brother Jesus murdered, and that James the righteous was succeeded by Simeon --- of Cleophas/Alpheaus, who was the second husband of Mary.

Even though we only have copies of copies of the works of Josephus, I believe that THEY REFLECT PERFECTLY THE ORIGINAL.

​

From my understanding these claims about Jericho were refuted. Links please.

 

[shunyadragon]

EVERYTHING that is thought to have been written by Josephus, is third hand. Copies of copies, If we reject the books of the bible, because they are copies of the original, then must we also reject the works of Josephus?

There is no evidence thhat the current books of the Bible are copies of originals. In fact the objective evidence is contrary to this assertion. The books of the Bible are edited, redacted and compiled by different authors and most have more than one author. Most are not known to have an original author.

I trust that those who copied the books of the bible, did so by keeping those copies as accurate as possible to the originals,

Your belief is based on faith, and not the objective evidence of the history of the Bible

I believe also that the works of Josephus, after being translated into other languages, have lost little of the original from which they were copied.

I believe that Josephus reinforces the truths as revealed in the scriptures,

both the new and Old testaments.

OT........From the Encyclopedia Britannica, ‘Hyksos’, invaders who were also called the Shepherd Kings, who in the time of “King Tutimaios” entered Egypt and took possession of it without striking a blow and it is said here that Josephus the historian, identifies them with the Israelites and that their reign ended in 1567 B.C. ​

Josephus only commented on the believers in Jesus Christ, and not specifically the life of Jesus. As far as ancient history Josephus only recorded the history of knowledge at the time.

Kathleen Kenyon, a most respected archaeologist dug at Jericho over the seasons between 1952 to 1958, her results were confirmed in 1995 by radiocarbon tests, which dated the destruction of Jericho to 1562 BC (Plus/minus 38 years) with a certainty of 95%.

The radiocarbon tests which dated the destruction of Jericho to 1562 BC (plus/minus 38 years) with a certainty of 95%, confirm that Josephus's biblical date of 1527 BC for the destruction, agrees with Kathleen Kenyon’s findings.

1562 (minus 38 years) [1562-38=1524 BC.] this would mean that Jericho fell somewhere between 1562 and 1524 BC, close enough to the 40 years after Josephus’ date for the Exodus in 1567. [1567-40=1527 BC]

NT......….James who was an Apostle named in Matthew 10: 1-4; is James the son of Alpheaus/Cleophas, who Paul names as the brother ‘ADELPHOS’ of the Lord Jesus. (ADELPHOS’) The Greek term, meaning "born of the same womb.”

And of James the son of Alpheaus, who was the first to sit on the Episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision in Jerusalem, we learn from Josephus, Eusebius, and Hegesippus, that he was murdered in 62 AD, at the instigation of one of the same Sadducee sect that had his brother Jesus murdered, and that James the righteous was succeeded by Simeon --- of Cleophas/Alpheaus, who was the second husband of Mary.

Even though we only have copies of copies of the works of Josephus, I believe that THEY REFLECT PERFECTLY THE ORIGINAL.

There is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals, which none exist.

It is known the works of Josephus were edited and only third hand references and no personal witness knowledge of Jesus Christ, nor other events surrounding the the followers of Jesus Christ.

Your references to Jericho are incomplete and flawed. Nonetheless the Bible is set in history, and of course may refer to events in history, but it is not an accurate historical text. The Pentateuch dates only from maybe about ~1000 -700 BCE The Hebrew written language is not known to exist before that, and represents an evolved form Canaanite/Ugarit written text.

As far as Jericho goes you are selectively over stating the archaeological evidence to support the Biblical recoed. Start a thread and I will deal with it, because it is off topic here.

​

[/quote]

 

[The Anointed]

There is no evidence thhat the current books of the Bible are copies of originals. In fact the objective evidence is contrary to this assertion. The books of the Bible are edited, redacted and compiled by different authors and most have more than one author. Most are not known to have an original author.



Your belief is based on faith, and not the objective evidence of the history of the Bible

Josephus only commented on the believers in Jesus Christ, and not specifically the life of Jesus. As far as ancient history Josephus only recorded the history of knowledge at the time.



There is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals, which none exist.

It is known the works of Josephus were edited and only third hand references and no personal witness knowledge of Jesus Christ, nor other events surrounding the the followers of Jesus Christ.

Your references to Jericho are incomplete and flawed. Nonetheless the Bible is set in history, and of course may refer to events in history, but it is not an accurate historical text. The Pentateuch dates only from maybe about ~1000 -700 BCE The Hebrew written language is not known to exist before that, and represents an evolved form Canaanite/Ugarit written text.

As far as Jericho goes you are selectively over stating the archaeological evidence to support the Biblical recoed. Start a thread and I will deal with it, because it is off topic here.

​

[/QUOTE]

First you say’ “There is no evidence that the current books of the Bible are copies of originals.”

The you follow up with; “There is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals.”

Make your mind up young brother, either there is no evidence that the current books of the Bible are copies of originals. Or, there is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals,

We know that the original writings of the bible and those of Josephus the historian no longer exist, But the majority of historians accept that the copies of the writings of Josephus’s original record, although having been translated into many different languages, still reflect the truths as revealed by Josephus, as do the greater majority of theists believe the copies of the original biblical writings, still reflect the truths as reveal by God through his earthly scribes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

First you say’ “There is no evidence that the current books of the Bible are copies of originals.”

The you follow up with; “There is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals.”

Make your mind up young brother, either there is no evidence that the current books of the Bible are copies of originals. Or, there is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals,

We know that the original writings of the bible and those of Josephus the historian no longer exist, But the majority of historians accept that the copies of the writings of Josephus’s original record, although having been translated into many different languages, still reflect the truths as revealed by Josephus, as do the greater majority of theists believe the copies of the original biblical writings, still reflect the truths as reveal by God through his earthly scribes.[/QUOTE]
False dichotomy followed by a special pleading fallacy.

 

[shunyadragon]

First you say’ “There is no evidence that the current books of the Bible are copies of originals.”

The you follow up with; “There is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals.”


Make your mind up young brother, either there is no evidence that the current books of the Bible are copies of originals. Or, there is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals,

Both are true. The originals are not known to exist for the books of the Bible, and we do not have the originals for Josephus's writings.

We know that the original writings of the bible and those of Josephus the historian no longer exist, But the majority of historians accept that the copies of the writings of Josephus’s original record, although having been translated into many different languages, still reflect the truths as revealed by Josephus,

Not true. The majority of the historians DO NOT accept Josephus's writings as unedited from the originals. Nonetheless as far as Josephus's wrings go concerning Jesus Christ is report the testimony that there are followers of Jesus Christ at the time he wrote it,

. . . as do the greater majority of theists believe the copies of the original biblical writings, still reflect the truths as reveal by God through his earthly scribes.

' . . . majority of theists?' This is not comprehendable considering the diverse view of theists as including Jews, Christians, Muslims, Baha'is and many the many divisions of these religions. This actually false.

By far most scholars do not accept the gospels and other parts of the NT as reflecting anything original to within fifty years of the life of Jesus. There are no known texts of any extent that exist before ~150-200 AD.

 

[The Anointed]

Both are true. The originals are not known to exist for the books of the Bible, and we do not have the originals for Josephus's writings.



Not true. The majority of the historians DO NOT accept Josephus's writings as unedited from the originals. Nonetheless as far as Josephus's wrings go concerning Jesus Christ is report the testimony that there are followers of Jesus Christ at the time he wrote it,



' . . . majority of theists?' This is not comprehendable considering the diverse view of theists as including Jews, Christians, Muslims, Baha'is and many the many divisions of these religions. This actually false.

By far most scholars do not accept the gospels and other parts of the NT as reflecting anything original to within fifty years of the life of Jesus. There are no known texts of any extent that exist before ~150-200 AD.

shunyadragon wrote...…...there is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals.

The Anointed responds.........The Originals...plural??? The non extant record of Josephus is a supposedly singular original. But you have said that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals [plural]. In this you have admitted that you believe that there is no evidence that the biblical writings that we have today, do not reflect perfectly, the originals s s s s.

So, like I sad, Make your mind up young brother.

 

[shunyadragon]

shunyadragon wrote...…...there is no evidence that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals.

The Anointed responds.........The Originals...plural??? The non extant record of Josephus is a supposedly singular original. But you have said that the writings of the Bible nor Josephus reflect perfectly the originals [plural]. In this you have admitted that you believe that there is no evidence that the biblical writings that we have today, do not reflect perfectly, the originals s s s s.

So, like I sad, Make your mind up young brother.

Like I said . . .

Both are true. The originals are not known to exist for the books of the Bible, and we do not have the originals for Josephus's writings.

 

[Cacotopia]

Third video is nice. I did not know there were so many contradictions. I mean 40.000 that is a lot.

So I googled and found that the Bible has 30.000 verses. Then 40.000 contradictions is a lot.

Might this maybe also be a contradiction? Or do they count some verses double? Must be !

I like Bible verses, but you must be a Bible lover to search and find 40.000 contradictions

But being a Bible Lover I would look for matches, not contradictions. So might this be a Hoax?

And being a Bible Lover, after 40.000 contradictions it might have turned into Bible Hater

But can Bible Hater be trusted? I do not so easily believe anymore. This seems a little much to me.

Anyway if 1% is true = 400 contradictions then Christians better pray more; we need updates NOW.

Note: Probable it is a group of Bible Haters finding them all 40.000. But maybe they think about
Jesus and the Bible 24/7. They could even become Bible Lovers also. Hate and Love are close

can the believers be trusted? since they make excuses for all of the contradictions.

Believers in one faith are generally over critical of other faiths but generally do not show the same amount of critical thought for their own.

Nothing wrong with our faith everything wrong with theirs sort o types.

 

[The Anointed]

Like I said . . .

Both are true. The originals are not known to exist for the books of the Bible, and we do not have the originals for Josephus's writings.

Like I said . . .

Both are true. The originals are not known to exist for the books of the Bible, and we do not have the originals for Josephus's writings.

True! We do not have the originals of the books of the bible or the writings of Josephus the historian, but we are convinced that the copies of the original books of the bible and the copies of the original writings of Josephus, reflect that which was recorded in the originals.

And I think that you should visit an optometrist before re-reading your response, where you state that there is no evidence that the biblical writings [That we have today,] do not reflect perfectly, the originals, with which I agree: There is no evidence that the biblical writings that we have today, do not reflect perfectly, the originals.

 

[stvdv]

can the believers be trusted? since they make excuses for all of the contradictions.
Believers in one faith are generally over critical of other faiths but generally do not show the same amount of critical thought for their own.
Nothing wrong with our faith everything wrong with theirs sort o types.

Can believers be trusted?

"Truth I Trust"

All believers as per definition "do not KNOW the Truth!"

If you ask: Should we trust "Who do NOT know?"

If we are smart: "NO"

Knowing someone who is not following what he proselytizes to others

Makes it a double "NO"

At least Christians "who judge" know where they end up, if they believe the Bible is true. Jesus has been more than specific on "people who judge"

Note: Should you trust the above I said [Definitely NOT, but if you disagree, please let me know. I like to know my mistakes]

Below is Big Time judgmental(Soul/Feeling/Belief attack=Ad Hominem Attack). Even if God does not exist or if Bible/Jesus is untrue IMHO is:
"Jesus is the only way for all" = implicitly judging all others [even impose this on Jesus]. At least say "IMHO", BUT this most refuse.
"The Bible is the only word of God" = implicitly judging all other Scriptures [again imposing now even onto God, that other Scriptures are not His; what on Earth is NOT His?]
"Proselytizing (unless you accept Jesus you are hellbound)" = emotional blackmail (Quadruple judgmental: God, God's Children, Prophets, Scriptures]

 

[The Anointed]

In Acts 9: 7; we read, "And the men which journeyed with him [Saul] stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man."

Then in Acts 22:9; in reference to the same event, we are told, "And they that were with me saw indeed the light and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me." Is this a contradiction?

2nd Samuel 14: 27; "Absalom had 3 sons and one daughter named Tamar, a very beautiful woman.

2nd Samuel 18: 18; "During his lifetime Absalom had built a monument for himself in Kings Valley, because he had no son to keep his name alive, so he named it after himself and to this day it is known as Absalom’s monument. Is this a contradiction?

And again in 1st Chronicles 2: 13; it is revealed that Jesse had 7 sons, King David being the seventh and youngest son, but in 1st Samuel 17: 12; it is said that Jesse had 8 sons. Is this a contradiction?

The above have been said to be biblical contradictions, by many back sliders, who have abandoned the faith that they once held, what is your opinion?

 

[The Anointed]

In Acts 9: 7; we read, "And the men which journeyed with him [Saul] stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man."

Then in Acts 22:9; in reference to the same event, we are told, "And they that were with me saw indeed the light and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me." Is this a contradiction?

2nd Samuel 14: 27; "Absalom had 3 sons and one daughter named Tamar, a very beautiful woman.

2nd Samuel 18: 18; "During his lifetime Absalom had built a monument for himself in Kings Valley, because he had no son to keep his name alive, so he named it after himself and to this day it is known as Absalom’s monument. Is this a contradiction?

And again in 1st Chronicles 2: 13; it is revealed that Jesse had 7 sons, King David being the seventh and youngest son, but in 1st Samuel 17: 12; it is said that Jesse had 8 sons. Is this a contradiction?

The above have been said to be biblical contradictions, by many back sliders, who have abandoned the faith that they once held, what is your opinion?

No takers yet? Oh well, sigh.

 

[ChristineM]

The bible (ot) is a selective clone of Hebrew scriptures. The nt was compiled by committee some 350 years after events from selected stories and hearsay. Of that original book there are no surviving copies. The closest complete bible is the Vulgate compiled some 80 years later. Since then the book has been edited, modified, translated, copied, miscopied for around 1300 years giving rise to a multitude of different versions before king james said something along the lines of 'woah!!! enough is enough, lets scrap all these versions and create a definitive bible'. So he gathered together a group of learned men and asked them to compile a definitive bible from 6 or 7 of the currently most popular books. This they did to create the KJV. How close this version was to the original will forever be unknown but given its method of compilation and gross differences from the oldest bible still available (Vulgate) i would say not too close at all.

The story doesn't end there, the KJV failed in its attempt to rationalise scripture to the extent there are now over 200 different versions of the bible in english alone, how many in other languages i really don't know. Each are subtly different and between all the versions and all the different interpretations of those versions gives rise to many thousand (i understand 50,000+) branches of christianity, many claiming their interpretation of the particular version of the bible they favour is the only one.

As for contradictions, i find this page worthy of note
https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html

 

[The Anointed]

The bible (ot) is a selective clone of Hebrew scriptures. The nt was compiled by committee some 350 years after events from selected stories and hearsay. Of that original book there are no surviving copies. The closest complete bible is the Vulgate compiled some 80 years later. Since then the book has been edited, modified, translated, copied, miscopied for around 1300 years giving rise to a multitude of different versions before king james said something along the lines of 'woah!!! enough is enough, lets scrap all these versions and create a definitive bible'. So he gathered together a group of learned men and asked them to compile a definitive bible from 6 or 7 of the currently most popular books. This they did to create the KJV. How close this version was to the original will forever be unknown but given its method of compilation and gross differences from the oldest bible still available (Vulgate) i would say not too close at all.

The story doesn't end there, the KJV failed in its attempt to rationalise scripture to the extent there are now over 200 different versions of the bible in english alone, how many in other languages i really don't know. Each are subtly different and between all the versions and all the different interpretations of those versions gives rise to many thousand (i understand 50,000+) branches of christianity, many claiming their interpretation of the particular version of the bible they favour is the only one.

As for contradictions, i find this page worthy of note
https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html

Been there, read it, rejected it.

So what about the three apparent contradictions that I offered? are they contradictions or not, IYO.

 

[ChristineM]

Been there, read it, rejected it.

So what about the three apparent contradictions that I offered? are they contradictions or not, IYO.

Reject all you want, the contradictions exist, they are valid and not explained in any reasonable way

Your contradictions? You have shown your willingness to consider any other poster, perhaps i can show you the same consideration.

 

[The Anointed]

Reject all you want, the contradictions exist, they are valid and not explained in any reasonable way

Your contradictions? You have shown your willingness to consider any other poster, perhaps i can show you the same consideration.

If you had ever attempted to reconcile those apparent Contradictions that you put forward, you would have discovered that most were simply erroneous interpretations, as are the three examples that I put forward. But atheists don't want those apparent contradictions reconciled.

So I will let you remain happy in your ignorance to the truth.