• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Literalism and Biblical Contradictions

Status
Not open for further replies.

Vance

Contributor
Jul 16, 2003
6,666
264
59
✟30,780.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I see that there has been some discussion recently about the issues of Biblical contradictions and literalism. I agree with those who say that a slavish adherence to literalism can often lead to a destruction of Faith. When you believe that a contradiction in the Bible means that nothing in the Bible can be taken seriously, or even as Truth, then you are setting yourself up for a crisis of Faith.

Below is a list of seeming contradictions in the Bible. Yes, there are "work-arounds" for many of them, if not most of them (so there is no need to walk through and explain each of them, this is not a challenge to the Bible). The point is that on their surface, *without* exegesis and interpretation, they ALL are contradictory. And yet everything in the Bible is still Truth. Thus, the Truth is not always the "obvious", plain reading.

Here it goes . . .
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.

[man first v. animals first]

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.

[seven or two?]



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 destroyed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee;



God CAN be seen:

Exod. 24:9,10; Amos 9:1; Gen. 26:2; and John 14:9
"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)

[Judas’ death]



"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 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.

[the reason for the name "field of blood"]



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.

[was there one angel or two?]

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
 
  • Like
Reactions: Didaskomenos

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
66
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
When I did theology, one of my teachers said that the problem with trying to reconcile all the contradictions in the Bible is that in order to defend your absolutely inerrant Bible, you end up with "the death of a thousand qualifications": that is, that you end up with a whole series of contorted qualifications and justifications for why it isn't really a contradiction or factual inaccuracy, and somewhere at the bottom of that, the actual meaning of the passage gets choked to death.

Whereas if such things don't matter, if in fact you can live with contradiction, if you can accept that the writers of the Bible were not in the least concerned with historical accuracy or consistency, that they were in fact exploring their faith and seeking to express it through various media, including story, poetry and history, then you can actually read the Bible for what it means, not in order to defend its spurious accuracy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gluadys
Upvote 0

Micaiah

Well-Known Member
Dec 29, 2002
2,444
37
62
Western Australia
Visit site
✟2,837.00
Faith
Christian
Artichoke, if you can't (won't) reconcile the different account given in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, then I agree, you may as well give up before you start.

Others of us accept God's word as truth, and are prepared to concede there may be things this side of glory our finite minds won't be able to explain.
 
Upvote 0

Doc Dilly

Active Member
Aug 4, 2004
47
2
60
South Florida
✟22,677.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Wow, we aren't allowed to be a hairs-breath off when it comes to science, but when it comes to theology people (like artblokes teacher) actually teach it's 'okay' to allow contradiction, etc... Wish my math teacher had held to that philosophy. (Well, no I don't. Can you imagine how terribly one can be cheated by not knowing simple math? That's nothing to the number people can do on you if you don't know the Bible. Hate to break it to you arty, but if that's what your teacher told you, then you had a lousy teacher.)

However, if a teacher or society expects every jot and tittle to be answered in science, but basically doesn't care when it comes to theology, then it does seem to say something about our priorities.

(Hey, Micaiah, I've been to Sydney before, great city! You keeping the place up? :wave: )
 
Upvote 0

Vance

Contributor
Jul 16, 2003
6,666
264
59
✟30,780.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Artybloke, I could not have said it better than you did (or your teacher did).

Fortunately, the vast majority of Christians around the world agree with that position. Here in the U.S., though, it is different. I still think "literalists" are in the minority, but not by much.
 
Upvote 0

Vance

Contributor
Jul 16, 2003
6,666
264
59
✟30,780.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"Others of us accept God's word as truth"

You see, this is the type of attitude that is incredibly offensive and mind-boggling presumptuous. To actually assert that those who do not interpret Scripture in the same manner as you do not "accept God's word as truth" is the equivalent of saying that your fellow Christians are not truly Christian (which is a violation of the rules here, BTW).
 
Upvote 0

PotLuck

Active Member
May 5, 2002
253
3
Visit site
✟408.00
Faith
Christian
Forgot another popular one in that list...
"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth"
"Turn the other cheek"

Most will understand why the above isn't a contradiction but from the unbeliever it's the one I hear most. Without going through the one above and every one of them in that list let's just say that if there were any that were really unanswerable then it would be used as the spearhead for those wanting to prove the bible is flawed. The "unanswerable" contradiction would be the "proof" scholars have been looking for ever since God-inspired scripture was penned by men. Not one claim of contradiction has been able to stand up under close scrutiny.

The answers are not a prerequisite in the curriculums of public schools (nor should they be or can they be), or made common knowledge in any way. Therefore those claims in the list and many others keep being brought up, then answered... then brought up again by someone else then answered by someone else. In short, it's never-ending. Nor can anyone expect it to end. It's simply a matter of study or cooperation of study with another to answer the apparent dilemma. Sometimes there may be more study necessary then one is willing to put forth to solve the matter at hand. It happens. Or being shown the answer it's not accepted because there was no intent to find an answer in the first place. That happens too.

Those that believe the bible to be the infallible Word of God must accept the fact that there will be those seeking to destroy that belief. It goes with the territory.

BEFORE attempting to answer any of those one MUST first ask the intent of the one claiming contradiction. Then from there decide if the effort is worth it or not.
 
Upvote 0

herev

CL--you are missed!
Jun 8, 2004
13,619
935
60
✟43,600.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Micaiah said:
Artichoke, if you can't (won't) reconcile the different account given in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, then I agree, you may as well give up before you start.
who's giving up? For TE's we don't have to reconcile the different accounts--only those who are literalists do.


Micaiah said:
Others of us accept God's word as truth,
And yet, we accept God's word as truth, too. Where's the argument in that?


Micaiah said:
and are prepared to concede there may be things this side of glory our finite minds won't be able to explain.
Wow, now that's an admission!!! So you may not be able to reconcile the differences, but can say with certainty (even with finite minds) that it IS literal?
Interesting
 
Upvote 0

herev

CL--you are missed!
Jun 8, 2004
13,619
935
60
✟43,600.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Doc Dilly said:
However, if a teacher or society expects every jot and tittle to be answered in science
they don't--that's not science, that's literalism.

Doc Dilly said:
but basically doesn't care when it comes to theology
It not about not caring--it's about recognizing (to coin a phrase of many creationists) what's plainly there in the scriptures and to acknowledge that we can NEVER know God, creation, ourselves, or even the intended meaning of scripture FULLY--as in--its fullest wisdom--on this side of heaven.
 
Upvote 0

herev

CL--you are missed!
Jun 8, 2004
13,619
935
60
✟43,600.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
PotLuck said:
those that believe the bible to be the infallible Word of God must accept the fact that there will be those seeking to destroy that belief. It goes with the territory.
But here's the rub with that. I haven't tried once to try to destroy your belief in YEC--never. But you constantly try to destroy my belief in TE. I, as you, believe that the word of God is infallible in regards to its intended message, but I interpret it differently than you.
 
Upvote 0

herev

CL--you are missed!
Jun 8, 2004
13,619
935
60
✟43,600.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
PotLuck said:
Oh I see.
This thread is another debate between TEism and a literal understanding of the bible. Aren't there enough of those threads already? None went anywhere before so why would anyone expect this one to be any different?
I don't think it started that way, but it was Micaiah who brought it up, one of your YEC-only friends, sorry--I'll get back on topic if the rest will
 
Upvote 0

Doc Dilly

Active Member
Aug 4, 2004
47
2
60
South Florida
✟22,677.00
Faith
Non-Denom
'It not about not caring--it's about recognizing (to coin a phrase of many creationists) what's plainly there in the scriptures and to acknowledge that we can NEVER know God, creation, ourselves, or even the intended meaning of scripture FULLY--as in--its fullest wisdom--on this side of heaven.'

Stop after, "what's plainly there in the scriptures," and we're in complete agreement.
That being said, I shall concede quite easily that there are very small area's of scripture where we might not understand...but NOT many. Treat Biblical language like LANGUAGE and not an encounter group and I think it will make much more sense.

Scientific accuracy is literalism? Science, to the best of our knowledge needs to be accurate. One can not 'feel' their gene theory is correct. Penecillin is not a parable.

I'm sure there's actually a great deal we all agree on, we've just been taught to treat the Bible like some weird, mystic, 'thing,' and it's just not that unreachable.
 
Upvote 0

PotLuck

Active Member
May 5, 2002
253
3
Visit site
✟408.00
Faith
Christian
The reply I made is what I run into when evangelizing. It's very common. On the other hand I've known christians, I myself included, that point out these same claims with a desire to know the answer. A list can be overwhelming requiring many hours of genuine study/research to answer. Take the so-called contradiction I pointed out.. "eye for an eye...". To answer it depends on where the person stands in knowledge of the bible. If there is little or no background then to answer it may also include going into why Christ had to die in the first place which is really the major part of it. It can get very involved. And nobody says the answer will be accepted anyway.
 
Upvote 0

Vance

Contributor
Jul 16, 2003
6,666
264
59
✟30,780.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Pot Luck:
But don’t you see that the question of literalism is the key to this whole debate. The only, and I do mean ONLY, reason to be a YEC is because you insist upon a literal "plain reading" of Genesis 1 and 2. Without such a starting point, the evidence of God’s Creation itself would never require a belief in a young earth, it does not even point to it.
If you doubt this, find some who believe in YEC’ism, but who do not believe in a literal reading of Genesis 1 and 2. There are none who believe in a young earth solely based on the physical evidence.

So, you can see that it is this insistence on a literal reading of Genesis 1 and 2 that is the primary sticking point.

And the point about the contradictions is exactly as you say: it takes intense research and study and analysis (ie interpretation) to figure some of this stuff out. This proves that we can not simply rely upon the "plain reading" of every text. And, if you accept this point, this then leads us to Genesis . . .
 
Upvote 0

PotLuck

Active Member
May 5, 2002
253
3
Visit site
✟408.00
Faith
Christian
I for one can't understand the bible by simple plain reading. I too had to be given milk then progressively something with more substance. However, the study to answer the questions is the prime teacher. The "apparent" contradiction of the two accounts of Genesis I've already answered somewhere around here and that small study taught me even more.

To just read the bible then say I understand it all won't happen. There's enough in the bible to keep anyone busy for a lifetime. Or even longer :)
 
Upvote 0

Ave Maria

Ave Maria Gratia Plena
May 31, 2004
41,126
2,009
42
Diocese of Evansville, IN
✟121,615.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'm just curious but what does this have to do with Creation and Evolution? Oh and I believe in an inerrant Bible. All "errors" or "contradictions" can be solved. One very important thing to do when reading the Bible is to take it into context. This often makes those "errors" and "contradictions" disappear because it becomes obvious that it is not an error or contradiction at all.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.