The Triple Threat Of Our Holy Bible

[Yozavan]

I have three questions for consideration: 1) Did our Holy Bible intend to have inconsistencies? whether through providence or human agency.

2) Did our Holy Bible intend to be confusing? whether through providence or human agency.

3 ) Did our Holy Bible intend to be offensive? whether through providence or human agency.

I look forward to reading your responses.

Quick prayer: Holy Jesus, help us to understand thy mysterious will, and thy esoteric ways. Amen! Hallelujah, froosh la ha Zapata!

[Purple Knight]

Let me pose a counter-question: Does God actively prevent people from lying?

I mean, I'm lying right now. The sky is maroon. Cats only eat cabbages. Jesus says strip naked and giveth your clothes to the indolent, so they may use them to blow their noses.

[Yozavan]

Let me pose a counter-question: Does God actively prevent people from lying?

I mean, I'm lying right now. The sky is maroon. Cats only eat cabbages. Jesus says strip naked and giveth your clothes to the indolent, so they may use them to blow their noses.

No,God does not prevent people from lying;" but the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, " Revelation 21:8. The choice is yours; " choose you this day, whom ye shall serve, " Joshua 24:15. Hope that helps you. Amen! Praise Jesus! ! Frootus hala zafoo!

[1213]

1) Did our Holy Bible intend to have inconsistencies? whether through providence or human agency.

2) Did our Holy Bible intend to be confusing? whether through providence or human agency.

3 ) Did our Holy Bible intend to be offensive? whether through providence or human agency.

1) I don't think there are any inconsistencies, therefore I don't think there was any intention to have inconsistencies.
2) I don't think Bible is confusing.
3) I don't think Bible is offensive.

[Yozavan]

1) Did our Holy Bible intend to have inconsistencies? whether through providence or human agency.

2) Did our Holy Bible intend to be confusing? whether through providence or human agency.

3 ) Did our Holy Bible intend to be offensive? whether through providence or human agency.

1) I don't think there are any inconsistencies, therefore I don't think there was any intention to have inconsistencies.
2) I don't think Bible is confusing.
3) I don't think Bible is offensive.

Then you must be a child of God! To unbelievers Jesus is a " stone of stumbling ", 1 Peter 2:8. They trip and fall into their own nonsense; when they get back up they wander off in chaos. Psalm 35:4b " let them be turned back and brought to confusion ." Praise Jesus!

[theophile]

I have three questions for consideration: 1) Did our Holy Bible intend to have inconsistencies? whether through providence or human agency.

2) Did our Holy Bible intend to be confusing? whether through providence or human agency.

3 ) Did our Holy Bible intend to be offensive? whether through providence or human agency.

I look forward to reading your responses.

I would say yes on all counts.

On inconsistencies, I would generally agree with 1213 that it is not inconsistent, but there are surface details that are, like two different creation accounts for instance. I just don't think these surface level inconsistencies matter. They don't cause conflict in core messages. Also, on inconsistencies, I would adjust your statement to say that the authors intended the bible to APPEAR inconsistent, with those seeming inconsistencies being a device to push us to look harder at what is REALLY going on. (If the stories / teachings don't make absolute sense to us, then we have yet to understand them.)

The same is true for the offensive parts. Those parts in the bible that shock our sensibilities, like events of murder or rape, or condoning of slavery, are intentional and meant to challenge our moral discernment. Ultimately causing us to look harder at what is really going on, and to call out the offenders. Like David for instance, when he rapes Bathsheba.

On the confusing nature, the bible employs wordplays, parables, and other intentionally confusing devices, again, for the same reason as above. The bible is a didactic tool. It is designed to challenge us, to grow in wisdom and discernment. It is not designed to spoon-feed us the truth.

[Yozavan]

I have three questions for consideration: 1) Did our Holy Bible intend to have inconsistencies? whether through providence or human agency.

2) Did our Holy Bible intend to be confusing? whether through providence or human agency.

3 ) Did our Holy Bible intend to be offensive? whether through providence or human agency.

I look forward to reading your responses.

I would say yes on all counts.

On inconsistencies, I would generally agree with 1213 that it is not inconsistent, but there are surface details that are, like two different creation accounts for instance. I just don't think these surface level inconsistencies matter. They don't cause conflict in core messages. Also, on inconsistencies, I would adjust your statement to say that the authors intended the bible to APPEAR inconsistent, with those seeming inconsistencies being a device to push us to look harder at what is REALLY going on. (If the stories / teachings don't make absolute sense to us, then we have yet to understand them.)

The same is true for the offensive parts. Those parts in the bible that shock our sensibilities, like events of murder or rape, or condoning of slavery, are intentional and meant to challenge our moral discernment. Ultimately causing us to look harder at what is really going on, and to call out the offenders. Like David for instance, when he rapes Bathsheba.

On the confusing nature, the bible employs wordplays, parables, and other intentionally confusing devices, again, for the same reason as above. The bible is a didactic tool. It is designed to challenge us, to grow in wisdom and discernment. It is not designed to spoon-feed us the truth.

Amen! The appearance of inconsistencies, and the stimulative effect that offensive provocation has on modern scruples, coupled with the intentional didactic purpose, whereupon the intellect is challenged through the preliminary initiation of confusion, whereby wisdom is the fruits thereof! " Oh, the depths of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgements, and His ways past finding out! ", Romans 11:33. As for those who can't understand, " let them alone; they be blind ...", Matthew 15:14. Glory to Christ! Jarata lasha vava!

[placebofactor]

I have three questions for consideration: 1) Did our Holy Bible intend to have inconsistencies? whether through providence or human agency.

2) Did our Holy Bible intend to be confusing? whether through providence or human agency.

3 ) Did our Holy Bible intend to be offensive? whether through providence or human agency.

I look forward to reading your responses.

Quick prayer: Holy Jesus, help us to understand thy mysterious will, and thy esoteric ways. Amen! Hallelujah, froosh la ha Zapata!

Question 1, I've been studying the Bible for almost 40 years. I've run across things I could not understand, but over the years the answer came to me as my knowledge and understanding of God's will came into focus. As of this moment, I have never found an inconsistency, only lazy people, narrow-minded people, and those with an ax to grind claim the "Bible has inconsistencies."

As to question 2, Emphatic NO!
1 Corinthians 14:33, "For God is not the author of confusion," With,

Hebrews 5:9, "And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him."

Hebrews 12:2, "Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher (originator) and finisher (perfector of our faith." 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11, "And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause, God shall send them strong delusions, that they should believe (the) lie."

Question 3: Yes, the Bible is intended to be offensive to those who will not repent and willingly continue in their sins. In today's world and the world of the past, homosexuals, abortionists, thieves, and the like are offended by the word of God.

[onewithhim]

I have three questions for consideration: 1) Did our Holy Bible intend to have inconsistencies? whether through providence or human agency.

2) Did our Holy Bible intend to be confusing? whether through providence or human agency.

3 ) Did our Holy Bible intend to be offensive? whether through providence or human agency.

I look forward to reading your responses.

Quick prayer: Holy Jesus, help us to understand thy mysterious will, and thy esoteric ways. Amen! Hallelujah, froosh la ha Zapata!

First of all, we are not to pray to Jesus, as he said that we are to pray to the Father. ("Our Father who art in heaven...") And Jehovah's will was different than Jesus' will, as he said more than once to the Father "Let your will be done," not his own will. (Matthew 6:9)

"He went on to say: 'Abba, Father, all things are possible to you; remove this cup from me. Yet not what I want, but what you want.'" (Mark 14:36; see also Luke 22:42)

"I cannot do a single thing of my own initiative; just as I hear, I judge; and the judgment I render is righteous because I seek, not my own will but the will of him that sent me." (John 5:30)

"I have come down from heaven to do, not my will, but the will of him who sent me." (John 6:38)

So ask the Father what His "mysterious will" is. You might find that it is not so "mysterious."

Our Bible did not intend to be inconsistent, confusing or offensive. If it is confusing, you have religious leaders to thank, and the people who took God's own name out of His own Book. When we see the LORD in the Old Testament, probably most people think that means Jesus. It becomes confusing. And religious leaders don't teach the Bible's true message.

What inconsistencies and offensive things do you find in the Bible?

[onewithhim]

I have three questions for consideration: 1) Did our Holy Bible intend to have inconsistencies? whether through providence or human agency.

2) Did our Holy Bible intend to be confusing? whether through providence or human agency.

3 ) Did our Holy Bible intend to be offensive? whether through providence or human agency.

I look forward to reading your responses.

I would say yes on all counts.

On inconsistencies, I would generally agree with 1213 that it is not inconsistent, but there are surface details that are, like two different creation accounts for instance. I just don't think these surface level inconsistencies matter. They don't cause conflict in core messages. Also, on inconsistencies, I would adjust your statement to say that the authors intended the bible to APPEAR inconsistent, with those seeming inconsistencies being a device to push us to look harder at what is REALLY going on. (If the stories / teachings don't make absolute sense to us, then we have yet to understand them.)

The same is true for the offensive parts. Those parts in the bible that shock our sensibilities, like events of murder or rape, or condoning of slavery, are intentional and meant to challenge our moral discernment. Ultimately causing us to look harder at what is really going on, and to call out the offenders. Like David for instance, when he rapes Bathsheba.

On the confusing nature, the bible employs wordplays, parables, and other intentionally confusing devices, again, for the same reason as above. The bible is a didactic tool. It is designed to challenge us, to grow in wisdom and discernment. It is not designed to spoon-feed us the truth.

There are not two different creation accounts. Chapter one of Genesis gives us the outline of God's creation. Chapter 2 just fills in some details. The Author of the Bible didn't want it to appear inconsistent, either. God wanted to make it as clear as humanly possible to understand. I do agree that "if the teachings don't make sense to us, then we have yet to understand them." We must keep digging, but we will find the answers.

The Bible does not condone slavery.

David did not "rape" Bathsheba, but he was guilty of adultery and having her husband murdered.

The "wordplays and parables" are not intentionally confusing. Jesus usually explained his parables to his disciples, and once explained they made sense. He used illustrations to help the people to get the point of what he was saying, like comparing faith to a mustard seed.

God does spoon-feed us the truth. We start out like a baby drinking milk, and then we gradually grow to spiritual maturity. (See Hebrews 5:12-6:1.) He wants us to get it.