Does The Bible Contradict It's self?

Originally posted by debbiejo
It's true.....People see what ever their preconceived minds let them see....I think It's to make the next dimension/afterlife easier to assimilate....until you finally get it....I think we are all parts of the Creator...and we create, especially after we shed this skin that's holding us back.....Life is only an experience we've chosen.....It's not what's really real...It's just a short time....people forget that...they think this is real...and the after life is not....

They forget that a seed doesn't become a tree overnight...It's a struggle....they curse the experience of it instead seeing that they are now A MIGHT OAK......This is what life is made of...

Star Trek 😘

Originally posted by markie
Resistence is futile, you will be assimilated. Actually there are some biblicalprinciples in star trek. Live long and prosper. Maybe God is the colective.what is the collective?

Hmmmm.....part of the collective......kinda cool

Contradictions in the bible

The bible is filled with contradictions, here are a few.

War or Peace?
EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

Is Jesus equal to or lesser than?
JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.
JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

Here is the site I got the information from.
http://www.infidels.org/library/mod...radictions.html

Please read and discuss.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Contradictions in the bible

The bible is filled with contradictions, here are a few.

War or Peace?
EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

Is Jesus equal to or lesser than?
JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.
JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

Here is the site I got the information from.
http://www.infidels.org/library/mod...radictions.html

Please read and discuss.

Yes, I found that link a while ago, and pasted a couple of the contradictory quotes....I have a Christian debator blatantly tell me that there was no contradiction, even when there was....

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Yes, I found that link a while ago, and pasted a couple of the contradictory quotes....I have a Christian debator blatantly tell me that there was no contradiction, even when there was....

I found it by accident, and just had to post it.

In a set of texts, written and collected over several thousand years, errors, mistakes, and contradictions are only to be expected.

Originally posted by Storm
In a set of texts, written and collected over several thousand years, errors, mistakes, and contradictions are only to be expected.

The problem is not that the bible has contradictions, but that people claim that the bible is perfect in all ways.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Contradictions in the bible

The bible is filled with contradictions, here are a few.

War or Peace?
EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

What is a man of war? What does that mean? These verses are not in contradiction unless one does not read the context of the verse in Exodus. This verse [Exodus 15:3] is a portion of a song that the Israelites created to praise God immediately following the Red Sea closing over the army of the Pharaoh, it is not God speaking, it is the Israelites speaking. The verse from Exodus is accurate for what is being described by the Israelites, it is not an absolute and probably should not be taken as referring to God in all situations. Also, if God is the God of everything, then he is the God of war when there is war, he is the God of peace in time of peace. Again there is not contradiction.

"War's a game, which, were their subjects wise, Kings would not play at."~William Cowper

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Is Jesus equal to or lesser than?
JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.
JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

If they are one in the sense that they are separate manifestations of the same entity, then these contradict. If, on the other hand, they are one in purpose and intent, then these verses do not contradict. The term one is a problem for Trinitarian doctrine. Here are some other verses that refer to being "one":

John 17:22-23
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

So is man God, in the same sense that Christ is God?

Genesis 11:6
6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.

Were the people of Babel one individual manifested a number of times building the tower?

The use of the term one is the same in all of these verses. The only reason it is interpreted as one in being is due to the fact that Christ says it in description of his relationship to the father, not due to any language or translation rationale. A meaning was created to rationalize a belief with no real support.

Originally posted by Regret
What is a man of war? What does that mean? These verses are not in contradiction unless one does not read the context of the verse in Exodus. This verse [Exodus 15:3] is a portion of a song that the Israelites created to praise God immediately following the Red Sea closing over the army of the Pharaoh, it is not God speaking, it is the Israelites speaking. The verse from Exodus is accurate for what is being described by the Israelites, it is not an absolute and probably should not be taken as referring to God in all situations. Also, if God is the God of everything, then he is the God of war when there is war, he is the God of peace in time of peace. Again there is not contradiction.

"War's a game, which, were their subjects wise, Kings would not play at."~William Cowper

If they are one in the sense that they are separate manifestations of the same entity, then these contradict. If, on the other hand, they are one in purpose and intent, then these verses do not contradict. The term one is a problem for Trinitarian doctrine. Here are some other verses that refer to being "one":

So is man God, in the same sense that Christ is God?

Were the people of Babel one individual manifested a number of times building the tower?

The use of the term one is the same in all of these verses. The only reason it is interpreted as one in being is due to the fact that Christ says it in description of his relationship to the father, not due to any language or translation rationale. A meaning was created to rationalize a belief with no real support.

Most of these contradictions are only contradictions if you take the bible literally without considering problems with translations and what was meant by the original writers.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Most of these contradictions are only contradictions if you take the bible literally without considering problems with translations and what was meant by the original writers.

Agreed. I believe there are editorial errors through translation or other issues. I also believe that most of the contradictions are through interpretation. Just because mainstream Christianity believes something does not mean an intelligent critic should read something and state the existence of a contradiction if interpretation is the only reason for the contradiction, this is interpretational contradiction and not Biblical contradiction. Such statements as to Biblical contradiction show a lack of intelligent study, the previous two examples diminish my opinion of the site that has posted these, and damage their credibility and perceived validity. Intelligent individuals need to argue intelligently regardless of their agreement or disagreement with the position.

I don't really care all that much though 😉 Mormons "believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly", errors in it exist, and we claim such.

Originally posted by Regret
Agreed. I believe there are editorial errors through translation or other issues. I also believe that most of the contradictions are through interpretation. Just because mainstream Christianity believes something does not mean an intelligent critic should read something and state the existence of a contradiction if interpretation is the only reason for the contradiction, this is interpretational contradiction and not Biblical contradiction. Such statements as to Biblical contradiction show a lack of intelligent study, the previous two examples diminish my opinion of the site that has posted these, and damage their credibility and perceived validity. Intelligent individuals need to argue intelligently regardless of their agreement or disagreement with the position.

I don't really care all that much though 😉 Mormons "believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly", errors in it exist, and we claim such.

However, you are standing outside of the argument. This site is a response to people who claim that god held the hand of every translator through out time and that the book we now have is perfect.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
However, you are standing outside of the argument. This site is a response to people who claim that god held the hand of every translator through out time and that the book we now have is perfect.

Yes, but the first of the two contradictions that you used as representative from the site was an error in reading and understanding. It is the one that I referenced mainly. The second is a contradiction that I would use as evidence that Trinitarian doctrine is false. The issue is the claim of the Bible contradicting itself when they are referring to the Bible contradicting an interpretation. The two contradictions have wholly different implications. The two contradictions cited are not necessarily Bible contradicting Bible as the site claims, they are the Bible contradicting an interpretation. The site needs to be more accurate in the presentation of the contradictions in question if it is to be read and taken seriously. Due to the inaccurate manner of presentation I would be skeptical of the content and verify its quotes and claims more thoroughly than had it been accurate.

Originally posted by Regret
Yes, but the first of the two contradictions that you used as representative from the site was an error in reading and understanding. It is the one that I referenced mainly. The second is a contradiction that I would use as evidence that Trinitarian doctrine is false. The issue is the claim of the Bible contradicting itself when they are referring to the Bible contradicting an interpretation. The two contradictions have wholly different implications. The two contradictions cited are not necessarily Bible contradicting Bible as the site claims, they are the Bible contradicting an interpretation. The site needs to be more accurate in the presentation of the contradictions in question if it is to be read and taken seriously. Due to the inaccurate manner of presentation I would be skeptical of the content and verify its quotes and claims more thoroughly than had it been accurate.

I randomly picked a few from the top of the list. I understand your point but don't let my presentation sway you. Look at the site and tell me if there is anything that is valid.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I randomly picked a few from the top of the list. I understand your point but don't let my presentation sway you. Look at the site and tell me if there is anything that is valid.

I think that nearly the entire list may be valid when speaking to a person with a belief in an infallible Bible.

I think though, from a rational reading and considering possible interpretations, and the possibility of language/translation errors, one must assume that the errors listed on the site are petty attacks with no real substance.

The contradictions listed are mainly insignificant facts that do not threaten the concepts taught in, or the validity of, the Bible, imo. The list is similar to those attacking evolution, there are a number of errors that have occurred while studying the concept. These errors exist, and were presented as fact by scientists. Creationists say, "AHA!!! It is wrong!!! There are errors in their reasoning!!!", Anti-Bible proponents say, "AHA!!! It is wrong!!! There are errors in the text!!!" They are the same attacks, those attacking the Bible will attack that argument the creationists use against evolution, but turn around and use the same logic to attack the Bible. A logical argument must be valid in its logic regardless of the subject being attacked. Since the argument is not logical in the case of evolution, why is it logical in the case of the Bible? The answer is that the attack is without substance, in both cases. When the issue arises the problem is that there are more Bible believers unwilling to say "oops 😮 " or "I don't know" compared to the scientists that will say "oops 😮 " or "I don't know." You can't only attack a concept based on the character of a portion of that concepts proponents, it must, at least partially, be an attack at the concept or it is invalid.

The following is an attack at the list, not at any post on the subject.

The introduction to: A List of Biblical Contradictions

The Bible is riddled with repetitions and contradictions, things that the Bible bangers would be quick to point out in anything that they want to criticize. For instance, Genesis 1 and 2 disagree about the order in which things are created, and how satisfied God is about the results of his labors. The flood story is really two interwoven stories that contradict each other on how many of each kind of animal are to be brought into the Ark -- is it one pair each or seven pairs each of the "clean" ones? The Gospel of John disagrees with the other three Gospels on the activities of Jesus Christ (how long had he stayed in Jerusalem -- a couple of days or a whole year?) and all four Gospels contradict each other on the details of Jesus Christ's last moments and resurrection. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke contradict each other on the genealogy of Jesus Christ' father; though both agree that Joseph was not his real father. Repetitions and contradictions are understandable for a hodgepodge collection of documents, but not for some carefully constructed treatise, reflecting a well-thought-out plan.

Of the various methods I've seen to "explain" these:
1. "That is to be taken metaphorically" In other words, what is written is not what is meant. I find this entertaining, especially for those who decide what ISN'T to be taken as other than the absolute WORD OF GOD - which just happens to agree with the particular thing they happen to want...

2. "There was more there than...." This is used when one verse says "there was a" and another says "there was b", so they decide there was "a" AND "b" -which is said nowhere. This makes them happy, since it doesn't say there WASN'T "a+b". But it doesn't say there was "a+b+litle green martians". This is often the same crowd that insists theirs is the ONLY possible interpretation (i.e. only "a"😉 and the only way. I find it entertaining they they don't mind adding to verses.

3. "It has to be understood in context" I find this amusing because it comes from the same crowd that likes to push likewise extracted verses that support their particular view. Often it is just one of the verses in the contradictory set is suppose to be taken as THE TRUTH when if you add more to it it suddenly becomes "out of context". How many of you have goten JUST John 3:16 (taken out of all context) thrown up at you?

4. "there was just a copying/writing error" This is sometimes called a "transcription error", as in where one number was meant and an incorrect one was copied down. Or that what was "quoted" wasn't really what was said, but just what the author thought was said when he thought it was said. And that's right - I'm not disagreeing with events, I'm disagreeing with what is WRITTEN. Which is apparently agreed that it is incorrect. This is an amusing misdirection to the problem that the bible itself is wrong.

5. "That is a miracle". Naturally. That is why it is stated as fact.

6. "God works in mysterious ways" A useful dodge when the speaker doesn't understand the conflict between what the bible SAYS and what they WISH it said.

The argument is that the Bible is wrong.

"Repetitions and contradictions are understandable for a hodgepodge collection of documents, but not for some carefully constructed treatise, reflecting a well-thought-out plan." Is the Bible a "carefully constructed treatise"? My personal view is that it is not, the Bible is akin to a number of journals. It is a history, a record of events and interaction in the nation of Israel focusing on interaction with God. How many historical texts contradict one another? His argument is good if he is attacking the idea of an "infallible Bible", not if he is attacking the Bible. The author is attacking a belief, and not the object he states he is attacking.

I don't like the Bible anymore......sadangel

*god, I smell something burning in my house".........What the hell is THAT!!! Gods honest truth............pleasse Mithra forgive me......I'm sorry...

Of course it contradicts itself. Show me a religious book which doesnt

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Of course it contradicts itself. Show me a religious book which doesnt

Show me any text that keeps the writings of the earlier experts where the earlier experts didn't make mistakes. Science texts are mainly the scholarly journals published. If one goes to the early experts in any journal and compare their information to the current experts information, the contradictions are much higher than most if not all religious texts. The problem is when someone claims that the experts were infallible, which occurs in religion much more frequently than it does in science. Although science often comes across as believing that the current view is infallible even if it doesn't outright say it 😉

The problem is that a typical Christian can't have error in the Bible. They don't believe that God speaks to man any more. If there is error in the Bible how can they know what is or is not true, what is or is not error. The only way error in the Bible can be acceptable is if God still speaks to man through prophets.

* of course, there are contradictions in the Bible... the statement of Satan obviously will contradict the statement of God and Christ... the statement of an evil person will surely contradict the statement of a righteous one... and considering the time element of laws, the laws of Christ obviously differ from the laws of Moses... 😉