Bible contradictions

[mikenostic]

It is not my intention to brow beat you with these things but you asked a question. I felt to tip toe around the issue would have been patronizing. It was an observation of your behavior.

This behavior shows a choice a choice marks you who's value you've adopted. If you don't want to be viewed as hateful then why use the languge you use? Would you speak to a loved one in this manner?

Why would speak hatefully to anyone?

I guess you've never been in the Marines. You're superiors and commanding officers are there for your well being, so I guess you could say your unit and troops are 'loved ones'. Have you ever heard a Marine 'yell' at another Marine? It's much much harsher than this, yet, the comraderie is unmatched.
I wouldn't call it hateful, I'd call it passionate about finding the truth.

I haven't adopted any values. Like Medicine Woman has repeatedly mentioned, I want the truth. And yes, I am a bit upset that the Word of God, that is supposed to tell us how we live our life is full of fallacies and disagreements. Even if God and Jesus do exist, their 'inerrant Word' is still full of errors.
It's kinda like the police questioning a person in a murder investigation. The suspect is a well-known, well-liked individual that is supposed to be morally sound. Now, the police, being trained interrogators will believe this person is telling the truth, UNTIL his story starts changing. When he starts telling different interrogators different (contradicting) stories, his credibility goes down, no matter how much they want to believe him. <--that's the best analogy I could come up with relevant to the topic.

This whole thread is about bible contradictions, which there are plenty. If you don't notice them throughout the bible, then I don't know what else to tell you. So yes, you could say I'm a bit angry/frustrated with this. Faith only goes so far and stops in its tracks when credibility goes down.
"Faith that which does not question, is dead faith" my friend.

 

[Saquist]

If you're in the marines you've made a choice, that choice marks you. The uniform is recongnized and you have a known expectation to qualify upon wearing it. It is yet another mark...whether you were it proudly or with shame wearing it marks you as certain caliber of person.

That mark is observable...since bible values are known and marine values are known to act against thme tarnishes the mark you've placed on your head. The image dimishes.

The contradictions you speak of in this thead are tarnishes by those that have betrayed they're mark to God. They've failed to teach the bible propperly or maintain God's standards.

That's the reason why it's Satan's world in the first place. There should never be a question of whose in control and whos' responsible for those contradictions...wickedness, hate, abuse, slander...they all have one origin, therefore the results from the behavior are the same...disorder, suffering...

You get the idea.
This thread only highlights how bad it's gotten that people don't have enough knowledge to discern these things for themselves but view every set of words and every explanation in contrary to one another instead of seeking the appropriate context.

Seti's problem with the bible's view of justice is a perfect highlight....with out the propper context...of course killing your spouse is murder. The propper context recognizes that these people made a deal to follow and if you don't want to follow then you leave. Anything else is Sedition or treason against God "in those times" And God has the right to preserve his nation and his pure worship.

Now his people are meshed with the world these particular values of the law may not be welcome in the US or Iran or nations that do not recognize your God or his laws. Of course now...the Law has been fulfilled to all Christians the freedom they would need to live among people who's values of human life and worship were vastly different.

This thread isn't an example of reason but of blind litteralism.

 

[Sock puppet path]

You can not poses free will without the ability to make any decision. To creat man with only the ability to make good decision would be not only robotic but predestination.

Free will allows a person to make up his or her own mine.
Selfishness can lead to bad decisions and Loyalty in God can lead to good decisions.

With out the basic ability to tell right from wrong (amonst other things) what exactly was involved in the decision making process?
How could god accuse them of sin when they had NOTHING to base thier decision on.
Even if he told them not to do something they would be unable to grasp the notion that doing that something was wrong.

 

[mikenostic]

If you're in the marines you've made a choice, that choice marks you. The uniform is recongnized and you have a known expectation to qualify upon wearing it. It is yet another mark...whether you were it proudly or with shame wearing it marks you as certain caliber of person.

That mark is observable...since bible values are known and marine values are known to act against thme tarnishes the mark you've placed on your head. The image dimishes.

Are you referring to a mark on MY head or anyone's head?
If you mean me, then I will go right back to saying that that's a bit accusatory and presumptuous; I find it quite disturbing that someone would say that I have been marked by the beast when I'm trying to find the truth. If questioning and doubting and being skeptical, in the search for the truth is wrong, then so be it. And judging by these forums, I'm not the only one here who's 'marked by the beast'.

The contradictions you speak of in this thead are tarnishes by those that have betrayed they're mark to God. They've failed to teach the bible propperly or maintain God's standards.

Now we're getting somewhere. Those people have failed to teach and maintain the bible properly and maintain God's standards. However, that goes right back to; you would think an omnipotent deity would have accounted for this and used his omnipower to ensure that his 'inerrant' Word of God would not get tarnished, but it has.

That's the reason why it's Satan's world in the first place. There should never be a question of whose in control and whos' responsible for those contradictions...wickedness, hate, abuse, slander...they all have one origin, therefore the results from the behavior are the same...disorder, suffering...

So who's world is it? If it's Satan's world, either:
1. God gave it to him. And if so, why? If Satan is so evil, why did God give him a whole fuckin planet instead of just killing him?
2. God does not have the ability to take the world back from him.
That goes right back to being able and willing to stop evil.
Now, you, as an apparent Christian should have this mentality:
All things, created by God, belong to God. If you do not have that mentality, then that would indicate that everything does NOT belong to God, which means he's not omnipotent.
If you do have that mentality, then you would realize that the world belongs to Satan, ONLY by God's grace.
A better example would be that you own a pit bull with a bad attitude. He lives in the back yard of your house. It's his yard but you own the whole lot (and the dog). Now, who's ultimately responsible for that dog's behavior if a kid jumped the fence and the dog mauled and killed the child?
Why WOULDN'T God be ultimately responsible for all the atrocities on this world when he ALLOWS Satan to exist?

You get the idea.
This thread only highlights how bad it's gotten that people don't have enough knowledge to discern these things for themselves but view every set of words and every explanation in contrary to one another instead of seeking the appropriate context.

It's pretty damn difficult to seek appropriate content when the translations of the bible have been mistranslated, misinterpreted throughout the span of 3000+ years of its existence. Do you think Christianity has so many denominations because all you Christians are on the same page; interpreting the so called 'inerrant' word of God in the same exact fashion. Please.

All I ask is that you stifle the 'holier than thou' attitude and maybe respond with some logical and rational answers.
I do not feel that I'm marked by the beast for seeking answers to issues that I find that just don't add up. IF God is the god you say he is, then he will answer my questions, regardless of the level of my committment to Christianity.

 

[geeser]

jesus if you go by the bible knew in advance he would die, thus by doing it he is commiting suicide.

The alleged Jesus knew he was going to be "betrayed." He knew the events that were to unfold and said them to his friends. By staying and letting them play out, he committed suicide.

Spin it however you like. Free will dictates that these events could never be viewed as a suicide. Geeser's credibility went straight down with that statement.

how so, explain.
when a person kills themselves, are they forced to do it by others.
so jesus having knowledge of his own demise, and using his "free will" to continue to his death, is not viewed as suicide.

 

[SetiAlpha6]

Here are just a few of many more simple, straight-forward Bible contradictions:

(1) David took seven hundred (2 Sam. 8:4), seven thousand (1 Chron. 18:4) horsemen from Hadadezer;
(2) Ahaziah was 22 (2 Kings 8:26), 42 (2 Chron. 22:2) years old when he began to reign;
(3) Jehoiachin was 18 (2 Kings 24:8), 8 (2 Chron. 36:9) years old when he began to reign and he reigned 3 months (2 Kings 24:8), 3 months and10 days (2 Chron. 36:9);
(4) There were in Israel 8000,000 (2 Sam. 24:9); 1,1000,000 (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword and there were 500,000 (2 Sam. 24:9), 470,000 (1 Chron. 21:5) men that drew the sword in Judah;
(5) There were 550 (1 Kings 9:23), 250 (2 Chron. 8:10) chiefs of the officers that bare the rule over the people;
(6) Saul's daughter, Michal, had no sons (2 Sam. 6:23), had 5 sons (2 Sam. 21:6) during her lifetime;
(7) Lot was Abraham's nephew (Gen. 14:12), brother (Gen. 14:14);
(8) Joseph was sold into Egypt by Midianites (Gen. 37:36), by Ishmaelites (Gen. 39:1);
(9) Saul was killed by his own hands (1 Sam. 31:4), by a young Amalekite (2 Sam. 1:10), by the Philistines (2 Sam. 21:12);
(10) The workers on the Temple had 3,300 (1 Kings 5:16), 3,600 (2 Chron. 2:18) overseers;
(11) The earth does (Eccle. 1:4), does not (2 Peter 3:10) abideth forever;
(12) If Jesus bears witness of himself his witness is true (John 8:14), is not true (John 5:31);
(13) Josiah died at Megiddo (2 Kings 23:29-30), at Jerusalem (2 Chron. 35:24);
(14) Jesus led Peter, James, and John up a high mountain after six (Matt. 17:1, Mark 9:2), eight (Luke 9:28) days;
(15) Nebuzaradan came unto Jerusalem on the seventh (2 Kings 25:8), tenth (Jer. 52:12) day of the fifth month.

It does not get much clearer than this, but, I know! I am hopelessly misled! All of these actually make sense somehow, right?

Actually, perhaps some of the above are bogus, but I doubt that all of them are! I have not yet had the time to look all of the verses up personally. But then again, all it really takes is just one genuine contradiction to disprove inerrancy.

Can someone please explain just one of these contradictions to me?

I will at least give you my thanks, if you do!

 

[IceAgeCivilizations]

How many of them are bogus?

 

[SetiAlpha6]

How many of them are bogus?

I don't know! What do you think? Only you enlightened folks are supposed to be able to figure all of this out. Why should I even try? You guys are supposed to have the answers!

I may have missed it, but so far, I do not remember anyone giving even one answer to a single contradiction that has been posted in this thread. So are we all agreed that these problems really exist or instead are we perhaps ever going to get some specific answers?

Inquiring minds want to know!

 

[John99]

how so, explain.
when a person kills themselves, are they forced to do it by others.
so jesus having knowledge of his own demise, and using his "free will" to continue to his death, is not viewed as suicide.

I allready explained it, the moderator deletes alot of my post's. I watched part of a movie where Jesus was whipped and stuff and even when a prisoner walks to the gallows he is not going by free will.

I admit that i do not know the bible version, and i am not a real doctor either, unless the movie i saw was similar. I see words in post's like Genesis and John-Luke, are all bibles the same? Would i be able to read the original one?

Then on T.V i saw that the original Christian's were Jew's and this was in Roman tim,es. But uhh in the tv show the Roman's killed them all. Also, on tv why is it that some of them wear Yamulkas and some dont?

I should read the bible so i dont sound so stupid when i post in religious thread.....aaahahaha/...but i hate to read.

Maybe i should'nt have call your post (i forgot what i called it)- are we still buddies ...right then. (your British, do British people say "right then" after every other sentence? Right then/ ahhhhahaha. I'm only fooling around, next someone will say "John you motherF*****, how dare you make fun of Londoners.

Hey, think about it your the only Londoner i know.

geeser,

what song is this? dont read into it now, i want to see if anyone can get it.

bada dada da da da da da da

bada da da -da- da da da da da......

 

[Medicine*Woman]

I allready explained it, the moderator deletes alot of my post's.

*************
M*W: Why is that, do you think?

I watched part of a movie where Jesus was whipped and stuff and even when a prisoner walks to the gallows he is not going by free will.

*************
M*W: John, why do you think Jesus was whipped? That's Hollywood! It was to make you feel guillty! But, please don't! Hollywood is not reality! Mel Gibson is a doofus! Look at his character! He's called policeman "Jews" when he was caught drunk driving! Recently, he was caught denigrating someone else! Mel Gibson is a doofus! He's not any kind of role model or good guy! He's a drunken idiot with money!

I admit that i do not know the bible version, and i am not a real doctor either, unless the movie i saw was similar. I see words in post's like Genesis and John-Luke, are all bibles the same?

*************
M*W: No, not all bibles are the same. None of the bibles in print today are accurate or trut. The Roman Catholic Church changed them according to its own agenda. Nothing that christianity had at first is still true or real.

Would i be able to read the original one?

*************
M*W: None of the bibles available today are authentic, so there is nothing accurate you could read. I wish I had better news for you.

Then on T.V i saw that the original Christian's were Jew's and this was in Roman times. But uhh in the tv show the Roman's killed them all. Also, on tv why is it that some of them wear Yamulkas and some dont?

*************
M*W: I don't really know why they wear yalmulkas. I'll ask my Jewish friends. The original christians were Jews as far as I understand it. No, the Romans didn't kill them all. Infact, the Romans may have played a mightier role in the writing of the new testament than what is understood today.

I should read the bible so i dont sound so stupid when i post in religious thread...

*************
M*W: John, you don't sound stupid. You are a very intelligent man, and I've sort of taken a liking to you. You have a desire to learn the truth, and I have a desire to teach it.

Maybe i should'nt have call your post (i forgot what i called it)- are we still buddies

*************
M*W: Well, of course, I would never reject anyone who is looking for the truth. You and I are still buddies, and I'm sure everyone else here on sciforums wants to be buddies with you. Don't worry about that. We're only here to enlighten you and save you from your misery. You're a smart guy, and you have the willingness to learn. No one here will reject you--ever!

*************
M*W: No, I'm not British. Are you? I was raised by a half-British mother who had many hang-ups.

Take your time, John. You will fit right in. We'll make it easy for you. We're only here to teach you the truth. You won't regret your journey here. You might even learn something that will save your life!

 

[John99]

M*W: Well, of course, I would never reject anyone who is looking for the truth. You and I are still buddies, and I'm sure everyone else here on sciforums wants to be buddies with you. Don't worry about that. We're only here to enlighten you and save you from your misery. You're a smart guy, and you have the willingness to learn. No one here will reject you--ever!

What do you mean we are still buddies? you called me a pig, i never called anyone a pig. - BUT, forget it.

And dont say it is because i act like a pig, you said it because you hate me or hated me at the time. You know it is true.

Are you an Atheist or an Agnostic? I am and Agnostic myself but i feel myself leaning more and more towards the spiritual aspect of life, as though i am being guided by some force...Have you ever felt this way M.W?

Yeah it was the Mel Gibson movie, but i could not watch it as i hate to see people suffer.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

What do you mean we are still buddies? you called me a pig, i never called anyone a pig.-BUT, forget it.

And dont say it is because i act like a pig, you said it because you hate me or hated me at the time. You know it is true.

Are you an Atheist or an Agnostic? I am and Agnostic myself but i feel myself leaning more and more towards the spiritual aspect of life, as though i am being guided by some force...Have you ever felt this way M.W?

Yeah it was the Mel Gibson movie, but i could not watch it as i hate to see people suffer.

I used to fight the truth like you do. I used to fight the truth exactly like you do.

 

[JimHR]

How does an appeal to popularity equate to any sort of evidence for anything other than popularity? Are you suggesting that popularity alone dictates the veracity of a concept? If so, what amount of popularity do we assign to wrong, dangerous, kooky, and generally superstitious ideas before we accept them as truth?

My point is that you can't deny its popularity. There's something going on with the Bible. Its just one of millions of credibilities attributed to the Bible. There are philosophers who spend their whole lives trying to find higher truth, its right in front of them.

No other book on the face of the earth has sold more copies. It does gives the Bible credibility. That's my point, period.

I used to fight the truth like you do. I used to fight the truth exactly like you do.

Unless you never knew the truth.

I don't know! What do you think? Only you enlightened folks are supposed to be able to figure all of this out. Why should I even try? You guys are supposed to have the answers!

I may have missed it, but so far, I do not remember anyone giving even one answer to a single contradiction that has been posted in this thread. So are we all agreed that these problems really exist or instead are we perhaps ever going to get some specific answers?

Inquiring minds want to know!

SetiAlpha6--The Bible has the answers not Christians. Christians can understand the things of God because they have been born again of the Spirit.

I will tell you this--the Bible has many seeming contradictions to confound the proud. I am able to understand seeming contradictions because the more I learn the Bible, the more it makes sense. But again faith is "gift" you have to accept. Its no accident Jesus put His greatest emphasis on faith.

In an earlier post you asked about those who did not have a Bible before it was printed. I am sorry but I get lost in all these posts sometimes I can't keep up with them. But to answer that we look at the Dispensations--how God has revealed Himself in history. He has done this in various forms. Through prophets, spoken word (the Ten Commandments), preachers, etc.

Please remember also that the Bible wasn't written in a day by a man. It is a collection of 66 books written over hundreds of centuries by several different men who validated Jesus' claims. The Bible came collectively together in the First Century by the apostles who were inspired. Who can say that what the apostles intended hasn't been accomplished? It has exactly happened as they have said.

"But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1 Corinthians 2:14

Here are just a few of many more simple, straight-forward Bible contradictions:

(1) David took seven hundred (2 Sam. 8:4), seven thousand (1 Chron. 18:4) horsemen from Hadadezer;

It does not get much clearer than this, but, I know! I am hopelessly misled! All of these actually make sense somehow, right?

Actually, perhaps some of the above are bogus, but I doubt that all of them are! I have not yet had the time to look all of the verses up personally. But then again, all it really takes is just one genuine contradiction to disprove inerrancy.

Can someone please explain just one of these contradictions to me?

I will at least give you my thanks, if you do!

Well if there were contradictions would the early church monks really have tried to make the Bible appeal to the masses? I mean wouldn't they have made the Scriptures say what they wanted it to say and not include contradictions since this would make people doubt? Clearly they translated it accurately and left the readers to decide.

Well I will just explain the first one, and if you really want to know the anwers to the others please ask which one and I can try and help, though it takes time on my part, so I might not answer instantly (I'm not a Bible scholar, btw). There are actually several answers to this contradiction but here are some of the most common:

Matthew Henry likewise agrees with the King James reading and comments: "The horsemen are here said to be 700, but 1 Chronicles 18:4 they are said to be 7000. If they divided their horse by ten in a company, as it is probable they did, the captains and companies were 700, but the horsemen were 7000."

John Wesley also agrees with the KJB reading - "Seven hundred - Or, seven hundred companies of horsemen, that is, in all seven thousand; as it is 1 Chronicles 18:4, there being ten in each company, and each ten having a ruler or captain."

2 Samuel 10:18 says "the Syrians fled before Israel; and David slew the MEN OF 700 chariots of the Syrians, and forty thousand horsemen." Then in 1 Chronicles 19:18 we read: "But the Syrians fled before Israel; and David slew of the Syrians 7000 men WHICH FOUGHT IN chariots, and forty thousand footmen."

I mean he did take 7000 men so he for sure took 700.

 

[IceAgeCivilizations]

SetiAlph even says some of the alleged contradictions may be bogus, but thanks for you attention to this, knowing SetiAlph, he may drag them out one by one, nothing better to do I guess.

 

[Saquist]

Now we're getting somewhere. Those people have failed to teach and maintain the bible properly and maintain God's standards. However, that goes right back to; you would think an omnipotent deity would have accounted for this and used his omnipower to ensure that his 'inerrant' Word of God would not get tarnished, but it has.

Now why do you think that it's a matter of power?
And how would a show of force help?

So who's world is it? If it's Satan's world, either:
1. God gave it to him. And if so, why? If Satan is so evil, why did God give him a whole fuckin planet instead of just killing him?

Again...language, I'm trying to make things more comfortable for both of us. Lend me your assistance.

2. God does not have the ability to take the world back from him.
That goes right back to being able and willing to stop evil.
Now, you, as an apparent Christian should have this mentality:
All things, created by God, belong to God. If you do not have that mentality, then that would indicate that everything does NOT belong to God, which means he's not omnipotent.

If you do have that mentality, then you would realize that the world belongs to Satan, ONLY by God's grace.
A better example would be that you own a pit bull with a bad attitude. He lives in the back yard of your house. It's his yard but you own the whole lot (and the dog). Now, who's ultimately responsible for that dog's behavior if a kid jumped the fence and the dog mauled and killed the child?
Why WOULDN'T God be ultimately responsible for all the atrocities on this world when he ALLOWS Satan to exist?

It's pretty damn difficult to seek appropriate content when the translations of the bible have been mistranslated, misinterpreted throughout the span of 3000+ years of its existence. Do you think Christianity has so many denominations because all you Christians are on the same page; interpreting the so called 'inerrant' word of God in the same exact fashion. Please.

All I ask is that you stifle the 'holier than thou' attitude and maybe respond with some logical and rational answers.
I do not feel that I'm marked by the beast for seeking answers to issues that I find that just don't add up. IF God is the god you say he is, then he will answer my questions, regardless of the level of my committment to Christianity.

I've spoken with you a while now. From what I can decipher. It doesn't seem you're looking for these answers. You appear to be hung up on the failures of your fellow man. As a result you're blalming God for things that you and I are responsible for.

You've been taking me in this circle of question that have been answered quite reasonably. Those questions are no different from the ones everyone on Earth have asked.
It's just a suggestion but perhaps the answers you seek are internal not external, and I'm not a conselor.

 

[NDS]

Nice of Moses to clearly and without a doubt prophesize Jesus like Isaiah pretty much did.

 

[IceAgeCivilizations]

Allah cannot be the God of the Bible because Allah was 1 of 360 pre Islamic Arab gods, among other reasons, but that should suffice, right NDS?

 

[NDS]

IAC, all I'm saying is that out of 800 plus verses, why didn't Moses at the very least write ONE verse which points to Jesus' incarnation. Not ONE.

 

[IceAgeCivilizations]

I guess God didn't tell Moses the name of the Messiah, otherwise, since about 5% of Israel was named Jesus (Jeshua, Joshua), that much of the town would have had a Messiah complex, like if the modern world came to believe that some Steve is the Messiah. Do you understand?

 

[nova900]

Allah cannot be the God of the Bible because Allah was 1 of 360 pre Islamic Arab gods, among other reasons, but that should suffice, right NDS?

And Yahweh was one of several Gods originally worshipped by the ancient hebrews...so the point is??

A excerpt from a study done by Dr.G.Reckart,Pastor (Yahweh is a Pagan Name):

"Yahweh appears to have been originally a sky god - a god of thunder and lightning. He was associated with mountains and was called by the enemies of Israel 'a god of the hills'. His manifestation was often as fire, as at Mount Sinai and in the burning bush." "A shorter form, 'Yah', was also used (Exodus 15:2) and some scholars believe that this is the older form, originating in an exclamation to God - 'Yah!' - which came to be accepted as the divine name. Others claim that it is from the root 'hayah', 'to be' or 'to become', and that it meant 'I am that I am' or I will be that I will be'. According to one tradition of the call of Moses, the divine name Yahweh was revealed to him in Egypt: - Great Events of Bible Times

"Originally, these four consonants [in YHWH] represented the four members of the Heavenly Family: Y represented El the Father; H was Asherah the Mother; W corresponded to He the Son; and H was the Daughter Anath. In accordance with the royal traditions of the time and region, God's mysterious bride, the Matronit, was also reckoned to be his sister. In the Jewish cult of the Cabbala God's dual male-female image was perpetuated. Meanwhile other sects perceived the Shekinah or Matronit as the female presence of God on Earth. The divine marital chamber was the sanctuary of the Jerusalem Temple, but from the moment the Temple was destroyed, the Matronit was destined to roam the Earth while the male aspect of Jehovah was left to rule the heavens alone." - Laurence Gardner, Bloodline of the Holy Grail, p. 18