Bible Contradictions?

[Allie]

Hello, everyone!

I've recharged my batteries (for those who have seen my other threads) and I'm ready for another chat.

So I've heard from many people about the Bible contradicting itself, and I was wondering if I may ask where those contradictions are? This is something I've always wondered about, always, and I would be very happy if you would tell me the contradictions you see. I may know something about the passage(as to why it seems contradicting), but I probably won't. I come to you all in the most humble of circumstances, I am still very young.

Please don't disrespect me, I won't disrespect you; I've already had to take a break from this place and I just joined. I'd love it if everyone could be kind to everyone else, no matter what comes up.

I look forward to seeing your replies.

[McCulloch]

So I've heard from many people about the Bible contradicting itself, and I was wondering if I may ask where those contradictions are? This is something I've always wondered about, always, and I would be very happy if you would tell me the contradictions you see. I may know something about the passage(as to why it seems contradicting), but I probably won't.

How did Judas die? Also who was Joseph's father? There are two different answers in the New Testament. Look them up. If you work really hard, and many have, you can find an explanation, somewhat forced, that reconciles them. The point is, that no one reading the passages would come to this conclusion. But, if you truly want to believe strongly enough, you can find a way to force all of the Biblical contradictions together.

[OnceConvinced]

I think this is a problem with those sites. They tend to look too hard and point out the silliest little things. They do it in a way that is insulting and demeaning. It's one of the reasons I scoffed at sites like those when I was a Christian. I just couldn't take them seriously because of the silly so-called contradictions they included, making me not even willing to look at the ones that were valid. These sites tend to automatically turn Christians against them and make them think they are disgruntled or stirring or deliberately trying to ridicule. These site owners need to show a bit of discernment and list only the ones that make a valid point. Otherwise they are wasting their time when it comes to Christians.

Why would that be relevant? If someone claims inerrancy than any inaccuracy should be accepted as valid. One cant claim inerrancy and dismiss the claims simply because they dont like them.

What would your criteria be otherwise to prove validity?

But there are many things that aren't contradictions. Some of the things on those lists can be explained easily, even without a lot of shucking, jiving and mental gymnastics. If you're trying to create a reputable source, at least filter out the ones that are easily refuted.

Actually I visited Skeptics Anonated to try to jog my memory of some of the stuff I thought was laughable. It's more the running comments alongside scripture. Deliberate misinterpretations. Taking everything literally. It's things like that, which lower their integrity in my books. Even though they often raise very valid points, it's those things which take away the impact their message could have when it comes to theists. It's like a really intelligent person in a classroom who fools around and makes and idiot of himself all day. Even though he's actually really smart and knows a lot of stuff, nobody really takes him seriously.

[nygreenguy]

But there are many things that aren't contradictions. Some of the things on those lists can be explained easily, even without a lot of shucking, jiving and mental gymnastics. If you're trying to create a reputable source, at least filter out the ones that are easily refuted.

I have yet to see any and I only get rhetoric from you.

Taking everything literally.

Like many christians do, thats the point. A contradiction is a contradiction is a contradiction.

[OnceConvinced]

Taking everything literally.

Like many christians do, thats the point.

Right and who takes them seriously? Should we?

A contradiction is a contradiction is a contradiction.

Come on Nygreenguy, you're a former Christian, surely you know your scripture a bit better than that. Surely even you are aware some aren't contradictions, but misunderstandings.

[Zzyzx]

.

Come on Nygreenguy, you're a former Christian, surely you know your scripture a bit better than that. Surely even you are aware some aren't contradictions, but misunderstandings.

Since I am not a former Christian perhaps I should add my two cents worth.

No matter how one reads a book, if it contains contradictions its validity is reduced or destroyed. Some of the perceived biblical contradictions may be misunderstandings or mistranslations or whatever, BUT others cannot be explained or excused away. Something said in one place is directly contradicted elsewhere (in the supposed " word of god").

To me that indicates that the bible is NOT “the word of god�. If it is not, then what is it? How many of its stories and “miracles� are literally true and how many are myths or parables? And, most important, how can literal truth be distinguished from myth or parable in bible stories?

How many contradictions would we accept in the legal description or other paperwork regarding a piece of property we were about to purchase?

"Absolutely none" is the only appropriate answer.

If we don't accept contradictions in a simple real estate transaction, why would we accept any in a "guide to life" (and supposedly afterlife) -- which should be an infinitely more important matter -- IF we believe the bible is the route to "salvation".

My personal opinion is that the bible is one of many thousands of religious books promoting one (or three) of the thousands of available gods – none of which can be supported by anything other than circular “reasoning� and emotion.

[Allie]

Here you go, nygreenguy, I've found you the answers to your contradictions.

So first off, did Moses or Bezalel make the ark?
Moses was going up Mt. Sinai for the second time, to get the ten commandments re-written on new stone tablets. While I was reading, I had the impression that the ark that he made was temporary and only for carrying the tablets(probably to protect them). In Deuteronomy 9:24, the Lord describes it as "a wooden chest", not saying it was of any particular importance.

The Ark of the Covenant was described in deatail in Exodus, being made by Bezalel, who was the cheif architect of the tabernacle. Moses was a shepard, not likely to be the one making the ark. So that's my answer to that apparent contradiction, even if I am not completely in the right, it is still possible that those two verses in the Bible could co-exist peacefully.

As for the verses relating to God killing only good or bad people, I'll tell you this:
Firstly, you have to read in context. The books of Job and Ecclesiates were wisdom literature, while Ezekiel was prophetic literature. Wisdom literature is looking at every day life and making observations. Would you read a poem like you would a textbook? In the same way, you shouldn't read Job and Ecclesiates like you would Ezekiel. Wisdom literature is like a mother telling her child things to make her child wise. She may say, "If you lie about your friend, they wil be upset." Now, that is true in general, but there may be an exception, of coarse. It is just a general observation.

Now, apart from that, you should know that there are two types of 'death' in the Bible. There is the physical death, and then spiritual death(going to hell). These verses talk of both kinds.
I won't pick apart each of the six verses you gave me, but now you know why they aren't contradicting each other, I hope.

[Allie]

How did Judas die? Also who was Joseph's father? There are two different answers in the New Testament. Look them up. If you work really hard, and many have, you can find an explanation, somewhat forced, that reconciles them. The point is, that no one reading the passages would come to this conclusion. But, if you truly want to believe strongly enough, you can find a way to force all of the Biblical contradictions together.

Those were very good. You already seem to know how these aren't contradictions, so I'll post my research for the benefit of others.

Judas seemingly died in two places. In Matthew 27:5, Judas hanged himself. In Acts 1:18, he fell, and his innards spilled on the ground.
This does seem to be a contradiction, but I researched, and found otherwise. This is not a certainty, but it proves that these verses could exist together. What if Judas was hanging, and he fell? That would make more sense to me, because usually when normal, alive humans fall, their innards don't spill out. If he had been rotting for a while, and then fell, it would make much more sense that his innards would spill, would it not?

And here we go again, another good one. Who was Joseph's father? In Luke he has a different father than in Matthew. Now, this was a very patriarchal society, and everyone traced their lineage through their father. So in Matthew, they traced Jesus' lineage through his father. However, because it was a virgin birth, people realized that Jesus wasn't really related to Joseph. In Luke, therefore, it is Mary's lineage. Why did he say Joseph was the son of Mary's father? Well, as I said, it was normal to trace through the father, so that might have been more acceptable. Also, Luke might have meant something familiar, like Joseph was the "son-in-law". He was the son-in-law, so that would have made sense.

Thank you for the challenge! I love learning about the Bible in new ways.
Any more good challenges, anyone?

[Zzyzx]

.

Judas seemingly died in two places. In Matthew 27:5, Judas hanged himself. In Acts 1:18, he fell, and his innards spilled on the ground.
This does seem to be a contradiction, but I researched, and found otherwise. This is not a certainty, but it proves that these verses could exist together. What if Judas was hanging, and he fell? That would make more sense to me, because usually when normal, alive humans fall, their innards don't spill out. If he had been rotting for a while, and then fell, it would make much more sense that his innards would spill, would it not?

This makes as much sense as most Christian “interpretations� to excuse obvious flaws in their favorite book.

Sure, one writer notices that a man hangs but does not notice that his innards spill. Another notices that his innards spill but does not notice that he hanged. These are the same people who bring you “the word of god� and write an “infallible� or “inerrant� book.

Fancy footwork is required to “explain� an obvious contradiction. It seems quite contrived, convoluted and incredible. Would you believe that “explanation� for modern events?

Thank you for the challenge! I love learning about the Bible in new ways.
Any more good challenges, anyone?

I have a challenge. Demonstrate, using evidence (not conjecture, opinion, hearsay or unverified tales) that

1. The Earth was flooded “to the tops of mountains�
2. A dead body came back to life

[nygreenguy]

And who was the babies daddy?

(Luke 3:23) "Jesus himself was about 30 years old when he began his ministry. He was (so it was thought) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli"

(Matthew 1:16) "Jacob fathered Joseph, the husband of Mary, who was the mother of Jesus, who is called the Messiah"

The milkman maybe?

[nygreenguy]

On the same note, how was the exodus even physically/logistically possible.

Especially if you factor in the livestock!

And what about the fact there isnt even any evidence to support this mass exodus? The historical contradictions are also prevalent in the bible as well.