Does the Bible contradict itsself?

[Mark La Buda]

I viewed the first video and found it to be very enlightening. Thank you!

 

[shunyadragon]

As metaphor it can survive. Taken literally they all tend to fail. There are far too many "all or nothing Christians" and they simply can't be honest with themselves and admit that by their standards the answer is "nothing".

Actually any ancient writings can survive(?) as metaphor or spiritual interpretation based on anyone's personal perspective, but that does not extrapolate meaning beyond this.

The Bible and the Torah are edited, redacted and compiled over time ancient writings of narrative descriptive records of second to third hand observations, and beliefs set in history and not historical accurate records. They have very limited to no provenance as first person witnessed records. The historical witness of the Pentateuch has only limited value of what may be confirmed by other sources like archaeology.

The Bible and the Torah also lack the science of the contemporary knowledge of not only the recent history of the Middle East, but most of all the geologic, ancient history of humanity, cosmologic knowledge of our universe.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually any ancient writings can survive(?) as metaphor or spiritual interpretation based on anyone's personal perspective, but that does not extrapolate meaning beyond this.

The Bible and the Torah are edited, redacted and compiled over time ancient writings of descriptive records of second to third hand observations, and beliefs set in history and not historical accurate records. They have very limited to no provenance as first person witnessed records. The historical witness of the Pentateuch has only limited value of what may be confirmed by pther sources like archaeology.

The Bible and the Torah also lack the science of the contemporary knowledge of not only the recent history of the Middle East, but most of all the geologic, ancient history of humanity, cosmologic knowledge of our universe.

I agree one hundred percent. I did not mean to limit this to the Bible. The problem with literalists is that they in effect take away any value from their scripture since they insist that it must be read literally. Since almost all religious books, and this does include the Bible, are easily refuted if one insists upon that such an action makes them worthless.

I recently watch a video where the guest was a Christian. His opinion of Ken Ham and his ilk is that they are spreading heresy by insisting on a literal interpretation.

https://www.amazon.com/Heresy-Ham-Evangelical-Creation-Evolution-Controversy-ebook/dp/B01HYM15RS

 

[shunyadragon]

I agree one hundred percent. I did not mean to limit this to the Bible. The problem with literalists is that they in effect take away any value from their scripture since they insist that it must be read literally. Since almost all religious books, and this does include the Bible, are easily refuted if one insists upon that such an action makes them worthless.

I recently watch a video where the guest was a Christian. His opinion of Ken Ham and his ilk is that they are spreading heresy by insisting on a literal interpretation.

https://www.amazon.com/Heresy-Ham-Evangelical-Creation-Evolution-Controversy-ebook/dp/B01HYM15RS

There is a problem with different ilk of Christianity calling each other heretics. All branches of Christianity make faith claims about the understanding and interpretation of the Bible. The more liberal divisions are actually caught between ancient scripture and trying to make it fit and make sense in a modern world. Fundamentalist consider the Bible as the Bible as is and how it was considered historically, which is in a way more honest, but out of touch with reality All these are subjective and not objectively verifiable belief systems and heresy accusations amounts to just name calling nonsense.,.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is a problem with different ilk of Christianity calling each other heretics. All branches of Christianity make faith claims about the understanding and interpretation of the Bible. The more liberal divisions are actually caught between ancient scripture and trying to make it fit and make sense in a modern world. Fundamentalist consider the Bible as the Bible as is and how it was considered historically, which is in a way more honest, but out of touch with reality All these are subjective and not objectively verifiable belief systems and heresy accusations amounts to just name calling nonsense.,.

I am going to have to disagree with you on that. He appears to be a Christian that genuinely cares about the faith. He sees creationism as harmful to the faith and that is confirmed by tales from creationists themselves. Who has not hear the simplified version of why children of creationists so often leave the faith. The creationists will claim that their children went to school, learned evolutionism, and dropped the faith. I am sure that the theory of evolution is part of what convinces these kids to drop the faith, but when they go out into the big world and find out that so much of what they are taught was wrong and when they go home all they hear is "Believe or be condemned" that can cause many of them to drop the faith permanently.

TLDR: Creationism harms Christianity, that is why it might be correct to call it "heresy".

 

[Wandering Monk]

Which Bible are you talking about? Throughout history different sects of Christianity have considered different collections of New Testament books as their canon. Emperor Constantine's secretary Eusebius did not include 2 and 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation in his list of accepted books.

In terms of Old Testament books, I think it is interesting that fragments of all OT books have been found in the Dead Sea caves EXCEPT for Esther. So should Esther be in our Bible?

 

[Wandering Monk]

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

There is an Arabic version of Josephus in which the Jesus passage is much less obsequious.

 

[Wandering Monk]

New York is a real place, but that doesn't mean Spider Man exists or that it was attacked by aliens and saved by The Avengers.

 

[Muffled]

I believe it does not.

 

[Muffled]

Yes

I believe the way some understand it, it would seem so but not everyone is that foolish.

 

[Muffled]

Haven't watched the first two yet, but the last one was very good!

Thanks for posting!

I don't believe in watching tripe. Just the heading of the post is enough to reveal to me that there isn't anything good that is going to be said.

 

[Subduction Zone]

New York is a real place, but that doesn't mean Spider Man exists or that it was attacked by aliens and saved by The Avengers.

Yes! Definitely yes! Marvel all the way. Stan Lee is God.

 

[Muffled]

Yes! Definitely yes! Marvel all the way. Stan Lee is God.

I have seen no evidence that Stan Lee is God. I am and reveal why I think so in the General Religious Debates post: "I am the best evidence for God."

 

[Triumph]

Many contradictions in the Bible are due to the fact that Paul is not an Apostle , he is a lying Pharisee into religion to make it his monetary profit profession.
Paul constantly contradicts himself and teaches the opposite gospel to what Jesus taught.
Jesus taught water baptism removes sin making a person "whole" with no other need of redemption and said people that want Jesus to die do not love GOD and do not love Jesus and are not the people of God. People that believe in human sacrifice to a God are "lost sheep" and will die in their sins according to the gospel of Jesus.
People that approve of human sacrifice to a God are not serving the God that commands believe in water baptism for sin removal and do not kill innocent people.

 

[Triumph]

Just found and used that site myself in another thread where the OP was something along the lines of "Come at me with your best Bible contradictions and I will tell you why they aren't - unless you're scared." So I found a line I liked on that site and it ended up being God telling the Israelites to go smackdown and rob a group/tribe that had apparently stolen from them previously - which obviously breaks the "Thou shalt not steal" commandment.


Very few people understand that the Lord God the Jews worshiped based on Abraham and human/animal sacrifice to remove sin is NOT the Living God that Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God, worships. Those are 2 entirely different Gods and the people that worship the Lord God of wrath and destruction that approves of a human sacrifice even dashing infants against rocks to appease him are "Lost Sheep". There is only one God but the Hebrew/Jews reject Him as they prefer their animal sacrifice traditions taught by their fathers which is nothing but, as Apostle Peter said, "vain conversation"; man made ideas that are meaningless..
True religion, understanding the Words of God, did not begin with Abraham and Moses, it began with John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth.
Matthew 4:17
From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
The Hebrew/Jews rejected what Jesus taught and threatened his life for not obeying their traditions and laws.
Mark 1:45
But he went out, and began to publish it much, and to blaze abroad the matter, insomuch that Jesus could no more openly enter into the city, but was without in desert places: and they came to him from every quarter.