Does the bible contradict itself?

[Skeptic90]

Does the bible contradict itself? Are those so called contradictions actually both true? Do they supplement each other? or are there no contradictions whatsoever?

 

[hv/2π]

Does the bible contradict itself? Are those so called contradictions actually both true? Do they supplement each other? or are there no contradictions whatsoever?

I am going to say this in pure innocence: just because you do not understand the inticacies of the bible, and the connotations of the "fairy tales" in them does not invalidate it (fairy tales and all.) Even fairy tales, legends and myths have truth in them.

With that said, YES the bible can contradict itself, but that is because English is an abrasive language. Moreover, english speakers have a tendecy to marginalize every word to its radical meaning (stripped of all literary devices) and then try to put the pieces back together. I used to be agnostic mainly because the bible seemed to contradict itself.


Then I sought out God with the mind of a child (not a cynical adult) and I got some powerful revelations.


If you read the old and new testaments in their original languages (with all of the culturally rich literature it brings,) You will see all those contradictions QUICKLY disappear.

 

[Skeptic90]

I am going to say this in pure innocence: just because you do not understand the inticacies of the bible, and the connotations of the "fairy tales" in them does not invalidate it (fairy tales and all.) Even fairy tales, legends and myths have truth in them.

With that said, YES the bible can contradict itself, but that is because English is an abrasive language. Moreover, english speakers have a tendecy to marginalize every word to its radical meaning (stripped of all literary devices) and then try to put the pieces back together. I used to be agnostic mainly because the bible seemed to contradict itself.


Then I sought out God with the mind of a child (not a cynical adult) and I got some powerful revelations.


If you read the old and new testaments in their original languages (with all of the culturally rich literature it brings,) You will see all those contradictions QUICKLY disappear.

Care to give an example?

 

[hv/2π]

Care to give an example?

Sure, but I don't think the bible contradicts itself (read: I don't see any contradictions.)

Why don't you give me a verse or something that you think is contradictory. If you are truly in it to learn we can work together. Maybe you will show me something.

 

[Skeptic90]

Sure, but I don't think the bible contradicts itself (read: I don't see any contradictions.)

Why don't you give me a verse or something that you think is contradictory. If you are truly in it to learn we can work together. Maybe you will show me something.

Even better, I will give you a whole list, and you can choose one from random. I have this one video I found on this topic. So choose one from here and ya:

YouTube - Quiz Show (Bible Contradictions)

If you can't choose one, please tell me, and I will pick one, if you like.

 

[durangodawood]

OF COURSE the Bible contradicts itself.... IF you expect the entire thing to stand as one timeless and uniformly "correct" instruction book.... instead of the chronical of moral evolution that it truly is.
.

 

[Skeptic90]

Oh the video applies only if you are jewish... which clearly you are not. Let me find something on the actual christian bible for you.

Well heres one:

Again the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, "Go and take a census of Israel and Judah." (2 Samuel 24:1)

Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel. (1 Chronicles 21:1)

and an extra one:

They were also the chief officials in charge of Solomon's projects -- 550 officials supervising the men who did the work. (1 Kings 9:23)

They were also King Solomon's chief officials -- two hundred and fifty officials supervising the men. (2 Chronicles 8:10)

 

[Skeptic90]

Also one more question on this topic. Lets say there is an explanation to this contradiction. Who has the authority to interpret the bible? Because anyone can interpret the bible at their own manner, justifying their actions and beliefs, sometimes in radical ways.

 

[SmileAndAHandshake]

Does the bible contradict itself?

Constantly. However, people will see only what they want to see, and interpret from words only what they wish to interpret from words, so there is little point in debating it or even discussing it, not here anyway. If people want to find a way to reconcile contradictions, they will, and they do. Be it an actual resolution to a conflict or just one fabricated by a person's mind / thought-train.

Cheers~<3

 

[Skeptic90]

Constantly. However, people will see only what they want to see, and interpret from words only what they wish to interpret from words, so there is little point in debating it or even discussing it, not here anyway. If people want to find a way to reconcile contradictions, they will, and they do. Be it an actual resolution to a conflict or just one fabricated by a person's mind / thought-train.

Cheers~<3

Yes, that the conclusion I reached 4 min ago. Anyone can interpret a book in a million different ways, and all interpretations can be considered true to some extent. So there is no point of trying to reach to an absolute truth.

But the question is now, like I asked a post before, who or how do we decide for the correct interpretation of the truth. This is the reason I see the church was created, to keep people united, and in the same page, so we don't get some crazy person justifying what most consider evil in our society.

Even if the contradictions were so obvious, and numerous, or even if the bible is proven 100% false, people will still believe in it. That is true faith. Believing something no matter how many 'obstacles' are put forth.

 

[hv/2&#960;]

Even better, I will give you a whole list, and you can choose one from random. I have this one video I found on this topic. So choose one from here and ya:

YouTube - Quiz Show (Bible Contradictions)

If you can't choose one, please tell me, and I will pick one, if you like.

That video is difficult to watch lol, but let us take the example of temptation.

In Gen 22:1, the word for tempt is "nasah" in Hebrew which means "to test." By implication "nasah" is a test that attempts to prove [a point.] The test for Abraham was to see who Abraham loved more: his son, or God. God wanted to see if Abraham would sacrifice EVERYTHING for Him. Once God saw he was sufficiently full of love for God i.e passed the test (nasah,) God told him to sacrifice a ram instead.

This was also a foreshadow/prophecy for God sacrificing His son that He loved so much for us.


On the other hand, in James 1:13 the word for tempt[ed] is "peirazo" in Greek, which means to test also, but to test by enticing or under scrutiny. This definition (peirazo) is more akin to what we think of as temptation, while "nasah" is a test of discipline and reproof. James is talking about [sinful] temptations, as in God does not tempt someone to commit iniquity.

Now, I know this may seem like B.S. because God "tempts" Abraham to kill his son. There are several problems with this: the first would be that anything commanded by God is not a sin, since he is above the law. Moreover, the work "kill" in the 6th commandment is "ratsach" in Hebrew, which means "to murder." There are several occasions when someone can kill someone without murdering that person, and be justified.

The more important point is that Abraham's love for his son was great, and it rivaled Abraham's love for God (it IS a sin to love anything else more than God.) This is why it was a test of discipline and reproof (nasah,) rather than enticing and seductive (peirazo.) If Abraham couldn't sacrifice his son for God, he broke the first commandment. But, it is VERY IMPORTANT to point out GOD DID NOT CAUSE ABRAHAM TO GO THROUGH WITH THE SACRIFICE.


I don't want to go through the whole video and explain every contradiction because that would do a disservice to you. Just to give some perspective, ther are 10 Hebrew definitions alone for the english word "Perfect." The english language does not have enough words to properly translate Hebrew without some sort of literary guide or aid.

 

[izarya]

I don't see any contradictions in the Bible... can you give an example?

 

[Skeptic90]

I don't see any contradictions in the Bible... can you give an example?

Look a few post back.

 

[Skeptic90]

That video is difficult to watch lol, but let us take the example of temptation.

In Gen 22:1, the word for tempt is "nasah" in Hebrew which means "to test." By implication "nasah" is a test that attempts to prove [a point.] The test for Abraham was to see who Abraham loved more: his son, or God. God wanted to see if Abraham would sacrifice EVERYTHING for Him. Once God saw he was sufficiently full of love for God i.e passed the test (nasah,) God told him to sacrifice a ram instead.

This was also a foreshadow/prophecy for God sacrificing His son that He loved so much for us.


On the other hand, in James 1:13 the word for tempt[ed] is "peirazo" in Greek, which means to test also, but to test by enticing or under scrutiny. This definition (peirazo) is more akin to what we think of as temptation, while "nasah" is a test of discipline and reproof. James is talking about [sinful] temptations, as in God does not tempt someone to commit iniquity.

Now, I know this may seem like B.S. because God "tempts" Abraham to kill his son. There are several problems with this: the first would be that anything commanded by God is not a sin, since he is above the law. Moreover, the work "kill" in the 6th commandment is "ratsach" in Hebrew, which means "to murder." There are several occasions when someone can kill someone without murdering that person, and be justified.

The more important point is that Abraham's love for his son was great, and it rivaled Abraham's love for God (it IS a sin to love anything else more than God.) This is why it was a test of discipline and reproof (nasah,) rather than enticing and seductive (peirazo.) If Abraham couldn't sacrifice his son for God, he broke the first commandment. But, it is VERY IMPORTANT to point out GOD DID NOT CAUSE ABRAHAM TO GO THROUGH WITH THE SACRIFICE.


I don't want to go through the whole video and explain every contradiction because that would do a disservice to you. Just to give some perspective, ther are 10 Hebrew definitions alone for the english word "Perfect." The english language does not have enough words to properly translate Hebrew without some sort of literary guide or aid.

Thank you for the thoughtful response. That takes care one contradiction right there.

 

[hv/2&#960;]

Thank you for the thoughtful response. That takes care one contradiction right there.

Well, now that you know that at least one contradiction is embellished, why don't just go ahead and make the conversion?


Seriously though, if you are truly open and genuine, why not see what Christianity is about?

I am a lover of science also (my handle is a quantum mechanics equation for energy of a particle; I am a physicist.) Consequently, I too was and am a skeptic of most things, but I became Christian by asking similar questions as you. Trust me, you will get tired of the hackneyed answers of other people, especially if you are a Truth-seeker.

Not forcing anything on you, but I can speak first hand and say the knowledge God gives is without bounds. That includes spiritual and natural. Check out something called E-Sword. It is the bible with the Hebrew and Greek concordance for every single word in the bible.

Good luck in your search brother.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Does the bible contradict itself? Are those so called contradictions actually both true? Do they supplement each other? or are there no contradictions whatsoever?

Yes, the Bible contradicts itself.

In my opinion there are two types of contradictions: the semantics and the big time contradictions.

Semantics: I'll use an analogy. Lets say you have a major earthquake in Turkey that has killed a certain number of people. You decide to be a well-informed citizen and go read newspaper articles from three different newspapers around the US. One says that 80,000 died with 3 billion in damages, another says 50,000 to 70,000 with 5 billion in damages. Another says 65,000 are dead with 4 billion in damages. One newspaper interviews citizens who lost relatives and are wailing and mourning over the dead. One interviews head political officials who calmly tell them that its under control. Another interviews seismologists who are analyzing the earthquake, and potential aftershocks. One newspaper says the epicenter was "directly underneath" Bursa, another says it was 30 km west, the third says it was 20 km east of Bursa. In the end you end up with three articles with three different spins on the same event. They may contain pieces of information that don't line up, even contradictions that can't possibly all be true. So which one is true? Objective truth exists somewhere right? That epicenter was located precisely in one, and only one, location. But does it matter? I think the message is still conveyed through all three: there was a major earthquake which has killed large numbers of people and caused lots of damage. The message is what matters, details that are left out by some and added by others ARE "contradictions" but they neither falsify the message nor do they make the message any less important.

Big time contradictions: Here we have verses with bigger contradictions like "God will never tempt anyone" vs. "God tempted this dude." Contradiction? Yes. You can't ignore the fact that the ENGLISH TRANSLATION is in DIRECT contradiction. Some of these can be semi-explained away in a similar fashion as hv/2n because of translational differences and the inadequecy of English in portraying certain ideas. Others cannot be explained away so easily. I find one of the biggest problems is the fact that God tells us not to murder but there is endless warring and murder littering the Old Testament, often by heroes, and often in the name of God. I don't get it. The best explanation I can come up with is that God made the rules, so he can break them whenever he wants. Its like your parents having a bed time for you when you were a kid, but they always got to stay up past that bed time; they broke the rule every night, but they were allowed because they MADE the rule FOR YOU. If God wants to "further his divine purpose" (holy religious, batman!) maybe he's gotta busta cap once in awhile...I dunno.


Ultimately I don't see why Biblical contradictions falsify God's existence or falsify the Christian message.

Skeptic90: Do Biblical contradictions bother you? If yes, why?

 

[Skeptic90]

Yes, the Bible contradicts itself.

In my opinion there are two types of contradictions: the semantics and the big time contradictions.

Semantics: I'll use an analogy. Lets say you have a major earthquake in Turkey that has killed a certain number of people. You decide to be a well-informed citizen and go read newspaper articles from three different newspapers around the US. One says that 80,000 died with 3 billion in damages, another says 50,000 to 70,000 with 5 billion in damages. Another says 65,000 are dead with 4 billion in damages. One newspaper interviews citizens who lost relatives and are wailing and mourning over the dead. One interviews head political officials who calmly tell them that its under control. Another interviews seismologists who are analyzing the earthquake, and potential aftershocks. One newspaper says the epicenter was "directly underneath" Bursa, another says it was 30 km west, the third says it was 20 km east of Bursa. In the end you end up with three articles with three different spins on the same event. They may contain pieces of information that don't line up, even contradictions that can't possibly all be true. So which one is true? Objective truth exists somewhere right? That epicenter was located precisely in one, and only one, location. But does it matter? I think the message is still conveyed through all three: there was a major earthquake which has killed large numbers of people and caused lots of damage. The message is what matters, details that are left out by some and added by others ARE "contradictions" but they neither falsify the message nor do they make the message any less important.

Big time contradictions: Here we have verses with bigger contradictions like "God will never tempt anyone" vs. "God tempted this dude." Contradiction? Yes. You can't ignore the fact that the ENGLISH TRANSLATION is in DIRECT contradiction. Some of these can be semi-explained away in a similar fashion as hv/2n because of translational differences and the inadequecy of English in portraying certain ideas. Others cannot be explained away so easily. I find one of the biggest problems is the fact that God tells us not to murder but there is endless warring and murder littering the Old Testament, often by heroes, and often in the name of God. I don't get it. The best explanation I can come up with is that God made the rules, so he can break them whenever he wants. Its like your parents having a bed time for you when you were a kid, but they always got to stay up past that bed time; they broke the rule every night, but they were allowed because they MADE the rule FOR YOU. If God wants to "further his divine purpose" (holy religious, batman!) maybe he's gotta busta cap once in awhile...I dunno.


Ultimately I don't see why Biblical contradictions falsify God's existence or falsify the Christian message.

Skeptic90: Do Biblical contradictions bother you? If yes, why?

No they don't as I explained why at the last post of the first page.

I'm simply a bit weary how can a religious person interpret a passage in their bible to commit things that society may consider as 'evil'. Take holy war and killings in the name of god.

 

[hv/2&#960;]

Well the reason I disbelieve is that I do not believe in unsupported ideas. If I was going on emotion, I would have been a believe a long time ago. Heres a nice pic on another reason why I don't believe:


Also I do not believe of the same reason you don't believe in any of the other gods. I am simply take it one step further and not believe in any.

I do still take the bible for the morals, culture, and teachings like any other Christian, but I simply view them as any other fictional historical book.

I do not believe because I don't see a reason to do so, taking god is real. If god were real, I don't think he would want humans to worship him. He would be like ok i'm going to leave you guys here, do your best, and enjoy the adventure. So, I really doubt god, if he's real, made humans because he was bored one day (after 14 billion years) and wanted minions worshipping him, and see something exciting. I even doubt he would punish those who disbelieve of him, just because he gave us the ability to think logically.

I do not believe in a god because I think its highly improbable there to be one. Take epicurus's riddle:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

I don't believe in him because I think its more logical to say that a human made him up for one of the many reasons. Like:

1) to control others
2)prevent the poor from revolting to the rich
3)to escape the reality that life is
4)To create a perfect human that all can look up to
5)Humans fear that is unknown, so for psychological reasons, god is that 'cure' of fear, and satisfaction of other human desires (love, friendship)
6)To escape the reality of death (watch 'the invention of lying')
7) to save a town from illness by inventing sin
8) prevent the strong from hurting the weak
9)to give meaning to life
10) to be happy

"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly realized I was talking to myself." - Jack Gurney

"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly realized I was talking to myself." - Jack Gurney

"I got nothing against god, its his fan club I can't stand!"

"An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of support."
-- John Buchan

"It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God, but to create him." - Arthur C. Clarke

You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do.

"Men never commit evil so fully and joyfuly as when they do it for religious convictions"
-- Blaise Pascal

"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan



I do not believe because I choose to not to, same way you choose because you want a god, or something to believe in.

In response to your picture: astrophysics is very dangerous. Physicist need to have a way to reproduce experiments in the laboratory. The cosmos is our only laboratory, and it isn't constant. So, the age of the universe, how electrodynamics interact with matter in space, speed, light and the nature of it are all variables in the universe. This is separate from religion: it is accepted in the scientific community. (By the way, the colors you see in those types of pictures are invisible with the naked eye. It is computer-generated color markers to show gamma-rays, x-rays- UV-rays and other non-visible photon radiation.)

The way we get around this is having branches of "theoretical physics and mathematics" to explain/compensate for discrepancies. One example of science formed to make sense of the universe is mathematicians theorizing there must be at least ten (10) dimensions in the universe, and most of them are so compact (in space-time) they cannot be seen. Another example is dark matter and dark energy (something I have extensively researched.)

My specialty is quantum electrodynamics, which studies two of four forces of nature within the fabric of space-time. Science is as political and hierarchical as... well religion. If you don't go with the status quo, you are a scientific blasphemer and you lose scholarly article publishing, tenure, job in extreme cases, etc. Similar to religion (religion is NOT spirituality) and "excommunication."

I respect your position on everything you have brought up because you SHOULD ask these questions. It doesn't sound like you are the regular "Christians are stupid" atheist, but that you have legitimate problems with Christianity today. We live in a world where up is down and right is wrong. With that said, I assure you Christians have similar qualms you have listed. What I would suggest to you is that you talk to a Christian that is patient and understanding. I am open to discussing everything you posed. I understand where you are coming from.

But again brother, I don't want to force anything on you, especially if you have no intention or care. I am just offering my scientific and spiritual insights should you want them.

 

[hikersong]

If you read the old and new testaments in their original languages (with all of the culturally rich literature it brings,) You will see all those contradictions QUICKLY disappear.

Shame God only makes the contradictions disappear (allegedly) for those who speak ancient hebrew, aramaic and greek. Especially for something as important as salvation.

(Blind Post).

 

[hv/2&#960;]

Shame God only makes the contradictions disappear (allegedly) for those who speak ancient hebrew, aramaic and greek. Especially for something as important as salvation.

(Blind Post).

Well, he may reveal himself in many different ways. Ancient Hebrew and Greek study isn't the only way to snub a contradiction. God uses humans to relay messages also, if we choose to see.

Here is an example: For someone who believe the bible contradicts itself (marginally or absolutely,) there has been a way provided to you to prove (to yourself) otherwise (reading original Hebrew and Greek.) Now, whether or not you choose to pursue this doesn't make you any less responsible for the knowledge.

Those persons can never say they weren't helped or informed because they have been given a way. What they can say is they chose to ignore the way.

Always research things for yourself, with childlike innocence.