Seeming contradictions in Scripture

[Vance]

Contrary to the assertion of some YEC’s, there are, indeed, some seeming contradictions in the plain reading of the Scripture. Now, it is possible to use interpretive principles to explain these contradictions, but the point is that based on a plain reading of the texts, the contradiction exists. This does NOT mean that Scripture can’t be trusted. Only that a plain and simple reading of the text is not sufficient to determine the truth in every instance.



MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

AND

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.



GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

AND

GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.



GEN 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

AND

GEN 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, GEN 7:9 There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.



Matt.5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."

AND
Luke6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."



Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

AND

John19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."



II SAMUEL 24:13: So God came to David, and told him, and said unto him, shall SEVEN YEARS OF FAMINE come unto thee in thy land? or will thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee?

AND

I CHRONICLES 21:11: SO God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee. Either THREE YEARS OF FAMINE or three months to be destryed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee;



Exod. 24:9,10; Amos 9:1; Gen. 26:2; and John 14:9
God CAN be seen:
"And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my backparts." (Ex. 33:23)
"And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend." (Ex. 33:11)
"For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." (Gen. 32:30)

God CANNOT be seen:
"No man hath seen God at any time." (John 1:18)
"And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live." (Ex. 33:20)
"Whom no man hath seen nor can see." (1 Tim. 6:16)



"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (Matt. 27:5)

AND

"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18)



"And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." (2 Kings 2:11)

AND

"No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, ... the Son of Man." (John 3:13)



ACT 1:18 Now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
ACT 1:19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.

AND

MAT 27:6 And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood.
MAT 27:7 And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in.
MAT 27:8 Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.



PRO 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

AND

PRO 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

SA2 6:23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.

AND

SA2 21:8 But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite:



KI2 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

AND

CH2 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.



ACT 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

AND

ACT 22:9 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.



MAT 28:2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
MAT 28:3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
MAT 28:4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.
MAT 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.

MAR 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.

AND

LUK 24:4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:

JOH 20:12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.



When did Baasha die?

26th year of the reign of Asa I Kings 16:6-8

OR

36th year of the reign of Asa I 2 Chron 16:1

color of the robe put on Jesus during His trial:

scarlet - Matthew 27:28

purple John 19:2

 

[Raterus]

Pick one you would like us to explain for you.

 

[Bushido216]

Ouchies.

 

[ikester7579]

sounds like you went to an atheist website.

 

[ikester7579]

Why are you so bent on proving the word of God wrong. Do you hate him or us?

 

[Jet Black]

Why are you so bent on proving the word of God wrong. Do you hate him or us?

if it's not literal it's a lie... right?

 

[Bushido216]

Why are you so bent on proving the word of God wrong. Do you hate him or us?

NO! NO! NO!

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Okay...

What he's trying to show is that sometimes you cannot take just the "plain reading" and the "literal interpretation". I had someone tell me not to look past what is written.

His point (again) is that a literal interpretation may not be the best one, as evidenced by these contradictions in the plain reading.

 

[Vance]

I hate neither you or the Word. I love the Word of God. It is the holy and inerrant message from God to Man. I live by it daily. What I do dislike intensely is people (whether atheist or fundamentalist) saying that if Scripture is not literally true based on a plain reading, then it can't be trusted anywhere. This is immensely damaging to the true message of Scripture.

This post is to show that we must often look past the plain reading of the text and accept the true message that is there.

 

[Vance]

Pick one you would like us to explain for you.

As I said, they can all be explained one way or another. That is not the point. The point is that the contradiction is there in the plain reading and we have to use some interpretative methods, just as we must with Genesis 1 and 2 in order to determine what God is telling us.

 

[Mike Flynn]

Why are you so bent on proving the word of God wrong. Do you hate him or us?

Vance is a Christian, he claims to love God.

I believe Vance is pointing out the evidence that has led him to accept a metaphorical interpretation of scriptures. Of course...you believe that the metaphorical interpreation of scriptures amounts to nothing but lies.

And when you say that (time and time again), it seems like you are bent on proving Vance's faith wrong. Do you hate Vance, ikester?

I believe there are several clues in the Bible that indicate that Genesis represtents metaphorical language. This does not falsify it.

Here's another one:

Who did Cain take for a wife? Where did she come from? Who were the people that Cain was afraid of when God sent him out?


BTW Vance...this is more of an apologetics topic.

 

[Vance]

Yes, it is more apologetics, but since the YEC position is tied to the concept that a "plain reading" of Scripture is required, I thought it appropriate. It specifically arose in the Christian forum where a YEC was jumping up and down insisting that there were not even any *seeming* contradictions.

So, I posted them.

I thought it would be useful here as well.

 

[Vance]

Oh, and here is my analysis on the "Cain marrying his sister" approach, pointing out that it is simply NOT based on a plain reading of Scripture:

Here are the gymnastics you have to engage in order to reach that conclusion that Cain married his sister. Now, I am not saying this could *not* be the case, but simply to point out that such a conclusion is NOT based on a plain and simple reading of the text.

1. the evidence from the text is very strong that Seth was the third born child. Look at 4:25. Just after it tells of Cain’s banishment and fate (then takes the time to set out Cain’s line while on that subject), it goes on to say that Adam lay with his wife again, and they had Seth. Eve named him Seth ("granted") because God had granted him to Adam and Eve "in place of Abel". In 5:3, it says that when Adam as 130 years old, he had Seth. In 5:4, it says that "After Seth was born", Adam had other sons and daughters. So, it is absolute that Seth was born *after* Abel’s death and the evidence is very strong from the text itself that the order of birth was Cain, Abel and then Seth, and *then* the "other sons and daughters".

2. Cain was worried about being killed by others immediately after he kills Abel. In 4:14, Cain is distressed at his banishment, saying that if wanders the earth, whoever finds him will kill him. The only plain reading of this is that, at the time of the murder, there *were* other humans around besides Adam and Eve. If Seth was not born yet, and all the other children were born *after* Seth, according to the plainest reading of 5:4, then the others that Cain was worried about could *not* have been Adam and Eve’s children.

3. These others were not in the immediate area, as in a family grouping, but were distant enough that Cain would be fearful of them when he was wandering in his banishment from the land, off in Nod, east of Eden.

4. There were enough other people during Cain’s lifetime to fill his created "city", which he named Enoch after his first born son. Even though this was more likely a small settlement of some kind, it still implies something more than a small family grouping.

So, in order to get a "Cain married his sister" scenario, you have to find come to some very "non-plain" conclusions.

1. You would have to say that, despite the plain reading of 5:4, there were actually children born to Adam and Eve before Seth.

2. You would have to say that the murder of Abel by Cain occurred *after* all these other children were born and spread out far enough for Cain to be afraid of them killing him while he was banished from the land, out of the Lord’s Presence. In short, people living also in these more distant areas. This multiplying and spreading out, moreover, would have to take place before Seth was born, which we know was when Adam was 130.

3. If you believed that other *sons* were born before Seth, this would make for a VERY strained reading of Eve’s statement that Seth was a replacement for Abel. If you believed that only daughters were born, it would be difficult to understand how the family could have multiplied with Adam being the only non-banished male left to impregnate all these girls (which would again raise the incest issue).

So, you can see that whatever scenario you create results in VERY strained readings of the Scripture, much less following the plain reading. My point is *not* that I insist this reading is not the correct reading. It might be. My point is that the "Cain married his sister" reading is not based on the plainest, simplest reading of the text.

 

[roadie432002]

Heli,the father of Mary the mother of Jesus.This belief is founded on the Greek text,which represents Jesus as "being the son(as was supposed of Joseph) of Heli"Luke 3;23.some of the clean animals were used for food.the unclean aminals were brought on board only to keep the specis alive

 

[revolutio]

I believe I found the answer to the one about Michal's children in another thread.

The KJV makes a huge error in how they translate the passage. The children were actually those of Michal's sister.

http://www.christianforums.com/t70002

 

[Vance]

Again, this thread is not meant for going through and showing the analysis of each point to prove the Bible is not in error. The point that the Bible is inerrant in its message is given at the top. The only point of the thread is to show that we must look past the "plain reading" and trust the Message of the Scripture.

But I had not heard that "clean animals used for food" approach. Interesting. But just earlier today a YEC was pointing out that Genesis 9:3 establishes that all prior to the flood were vegetarians, both man and animal alike.

 

[Vance]

I believe I found the answer to the one about Michal's children in another thread.

The KJV makes a huge error in how they translate the passage. The children were actually those of Michal's sister.

http://www.christianforums.com/t70002

Then, that is another good example of how interpreter's errors can make it into our plain and literal text, showing that a plain reading must not be followed blindly.

 

[Michali]

About the Cain's wife thing: (I don't really know, I'm just giving an option)

In the book of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel were born as twins each with a girl. They were supposed to marry their brother's twin (seemingly to avoid as much incest as possible), but Cain lusted after his own twin.

 

[Vance]

That story sounds MUCH more interesting than the one we have!

 

[troodon]

They were supposed to marry their brother's twin (seemingly to avoid as much incest as possible), but Cain lusted after his own twin.

There would be just as much incest no matter which twin they married.

 

[Jack Lewis]

MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

AND

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.

False assumption #1: applying verbs to the wrong nouns.
In Matthew 1:16 "of whom Jesus was born" follows a series of subject -- Jacob, Joseph and Mary. There is no implication that "of whom" must be refering to Joseph since it follows two other nouns. The closest noun is Mary, which we know Jesus was born to.
Conclusion: no contradiction.

GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

AND

GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

False assumption #2: all writing must be in identical form.
Genesis chapter 1 is a chronological summary of the days of Creation. Chapter 2 is an overview of the sixth day, not chronological. Plain reading also requires common sense.
Conclusion: No contradiction.

GEN 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

AND

GEN 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, GEN 7:9 There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.

False assumption #3: "If the King James wuz good enuff for Saint Paul...
Try looking at the Hebrew. It doesn't say "the male and his female" it says "male and female" {ish vuh isha}. It's not implicitly speaking of a matched pair, but the inclusion of both genders. So therefore any suggestion that it had to have been a line of mathced pairs is ovely presumptive. The phrase 'to by two" (literally "two two" in the Hebrew) simply means the animals entered the ark two abreast. While seven isn't an even number, 14 is, and there's no implication that the "two by two" meant it had to be a two of a kind.
Conclusion: no contradiction.

Matt.5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."

AND
Luke6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."

False assumption #4: Chronology of Gospels must include all events
You frogot quite a bit in your quotes. In the end of Matthew chapter four we find Jesus calling the disciples, then beginning his ministry through several towns, ultimately arriving at Mount of oOlives. In Luke we see Jesus choosing the disciples and immediately arriving at the plain below the Mount of Olives. Logic would suggest that Luke left some detials out. Logic would then suggest that a chronology of -- Arriving in the plain -- seeing the multitude -- climbing the mount -- addressing the multitude -- would conform to both passages.
Conclusion: No contradiction.

Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

AND

John19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

False assumption #5: Eyewitness must see the same thing from the same perspective at the same time
John was a witness of these events. Luke got much of his information via Mary. We have separate veiws of what happened. The Gospels tell us what these witnesses saw. If they were identical then they would be suspect. Looking up at someone on a cross is not the best vantage point for determining time of deaht. I'm sure we'd all agree that a person on a cross would be prone to internittent lapses of conciousness, and there wouldn't be that convenient "Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep" that we see on TV to tell us someone has died.
Conclusion: No contradiction.

II SAMUEL 24:13: So God came to David, and told him, and said unto him, shall SEVEN YEARS OF FAMINE come unto thee in thy land? or will thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee?

AND

I CHRONICLES 21:11: SO God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee. Either THREE YEARS OF FAMINE or three months to be destryed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee;

False assumtion #6: people are too stupid to figure things out
Yes these contradict, but there's a problem wiht trying to use this to "prove" that the Bible can't be taken literally. First of all comparing the two verses makes it obvious that there was a minor typo along the line somewhere. Second, the context of the verses makes it clear that the "seven" in 2 Samuel is the typo. Third, this ultimately has no theological bearing on the meaning of these scriptures and fourthly, it has no historical bearing since the accurate text is easy enough to recognize.
Conclusion: Irrelevant to the "proof" that the Bible must be symbolic.

Exod. 24:9,10; Amos 9:1; Gen. 26:2; and John 14:9
God CAN be seen:
"And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my backparts." (Ex. 33:23)
"And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend." (Ex. 33:11)
"For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." (Gen. 32:30)

God CANNOT be seen:
"No man hath seen God at any time." (John 1:18)
"And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live." (Ex. 33:20)
"Whom no man hath seen nor can see." (1 Tim. 6:16)

False assumption #7: people are too stupid to read these passages in context.
The whole scenario in Exodus 33 was that Moses wanted to see God, but wasn't allowed to. He eventually was allowed to see only his back end. Verse 11 obviously was referring to the manner in which God spoke with Moses, not the physical placement or the visibility. In Genesis 32:30 we have an utterance from Jacob. Utterances of infallible people are not to be taken as scripture, only as what that person said. Jacob was not infallible, therefore his utterances, at least in this passage cannot be taken as an affirmation of anything but that he said something.
Conclusion: Atheists rarely check out passages in context, even the ones who pretend to be "old earth creationists"

"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (Matt. 27:5)

AND

"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18)

False assumption #8: All accouns must contain all information.
The Bible refers to Jesus death as a hanging, so therefore the term does not necesarily mean what we understand it to mena these days. Judas did somethign which left his body hanging, whether with a rope or with some other method is not clear. He did this from the top of a cliff and the result was that his entrails burst from his abdomen.
Conclusion: No contradiction

"And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." (2 Kings 2:11)

AND

"No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, ... the Son of Man." (John 3:13)

False assumption #9: Context can be ignored.
The Hebrew word shamayim means literally "sky" but is used also to mean heavens. The Greek word used in John has the same meaning, but the context of the two verses are very different. While Elisha watched Elijah go up, he certainly did see him go all the way into heaven. When Jesus is speaking in John 3 He is definitely speaking of heaven. Context supplies the necessary distinction.
Conclusion: no contradiction.

I could go on and on, but the point is each and everyone of these are the typical Atheist lies that are used to rationalize disbelief in God. Why are you using them without bothering to check themnout first? It seems you have more faith in Atheists than in the Bible.