Show Sarah Malley Some Contradictions In The Bible

[debrand]

Yeah, I’ve wondered that before,†he said, “Like about the contradictions in Scripture.â€

“What’s the biggest contradiction that concerns you?†I asked.

He couldn’t think of one. “But I know there are some,†he said.

I mentioned how it’s true that people claim there are contradictions, but I’ve never been shown a contradiction that was a true contradiction. They always have answers and explanations.

I had a pastor tell me that there were no contradictions in the bible too. Do these people not read their own holy text?

One contradiction that stands out to me is that the all knowing god who made humankind's reproduction system seemed confused that Adam wouldn't be satisfied with animals as companions.

19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.

But for Adam[f] no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs[g] and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

So, god had enough sense to create a female for each male animal but somehow didn't know to make a female hunan until Adam looked through all the animals? That seems a huge contradiction from how god is presented as all knowing and what is written

I'm not trying to be disrespectful to Christianity but the reason that there are so many denominations is that the bible does contradict itself.

[debrand]

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... tions.html

Here is a site that lists some contradiction.

[debrand]

Who did god make first, man or animals?

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.

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

Here is the site for the comment about no contradictions in the bible.

tomorrowsforefathers.com/gracenotes/

Note: I'm not certain if Sarah or her sister wrote the article

[tanksmom]

The fact that there are 2 stories of the creation in Genesis has always baffled me. Why is it that when people are touting the Bible as a perfect written account of God's word do they not question that???? It's right at the beginning!

[mirele]

The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) don't agree with John, particularly in the timing of when Jesus' death occurred, nor between each other in various details. People have gotten around the problem by conflating the four gospels together, which does violence to the text.

[Constance Vigilance]

Yes, even our very religious Catholic school pointed out to us that John is writing a completely different story than Matthew, Mark and Luke.

ETA: If I remember right, Matthew is trying to prove Jesus is the Jewish messiah, Luke is writing to convince Gentiles to follow Jesus...Does anyone remember what Mark and John were up to?

[debrand]

Yes, even our very religious Catholic school pointed out to us that John is writing a completely different story than Matthew, Mark and Luke.

ETA: If I remember right, Matthew is trying to prove Jesus is the Jewish messiah, Luke is writing to convince Gentiles to follow Jesus...Does anyone remember what Mark and John were up to?

I thought that Mark was written for the Romans?

[Turtle]

The mental gymnastics necessary to take the entire bible literally must be exhausting. You would think the first two chapters or so of Genesis would be a good indicator that everything shouldn't/couldn't be literally true and never contradict.

How is a obvious contradiction not a truuuuue contradiction?

[theologygeek]

The fact that there are 2 stories of the creation in Genesis has always baffled me. Why is it that when people are touting the Bible as a perfect written account of God's word do they not question that???? It's right at the beginning!

The animals came first. It's the translation. It should say something like "that already existed" or "had already made." Yâtsar was translated into "formed" for that verse. A better translation would have been that God brought Adam the animals that He had already made, or that He had already formed. Example: You made a baby blanket yesterday and you brought it to the hospital today because the baby was just born. You can say "I brought the baby a blanket that I had already made." Or you can say "I sewed a beautiful blanket and I brought it to the baby." In the second one, we don't know if you made the blanket before or after the baby was born. The bible is full of translations like this. What looks like a contradiction is actually a poor translation. That's why it isn't a good practice to read the bible and take it at what it says. Because many times, it really doesn't mean what it's translated into.

[keen23]

How Judas died- two different accounts

"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (MAT 27:5)

"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (ACT 1:18)

The death of Judas is argued away by the geniuses at Answers in Genesis with arguments like "well, Matthew never said Judas was successful in hanging himself to death"

Also, the Rabbit does not chew cud.

[theologygeek]

Before God made Eve, He knew that you and I would be conversing right now. It wasn't that He didn't know to make a female human being before Adam looked at the animals. It simply says that no suitable helper was found. Nowhere does it imply that God didn't know what He should do next, or that He didn't know how to make a woman. He knew exactly what He was doing. As a matter of fact, there is some very powerful symbolism here. Adam was put into a deep sleep when God made Eve. Adam had no say in how she was created, just as he had no say in how the animals were created. Just because he picked out names doesn't mean he created them. When God presented Eve to Adam, Adam said that she was a part of him. They were one in flesh. Since the beginning of time, man and woman were supposed to be one in flesh. One was never supposed to be dominant over the other. God knew what Adam was going to say, as God is all knowing. But Adam had to say it, as he was on earth and he would be the one setting the tone for future generations to come. Although it didn't quite work out that way, as man has free will and royally screwed up the concept that men and women were one in flesh, and partners to each other.

[slickcat79]

RB3g6mXLEKk

The gospels are about as reliable as any series of witness testimonies, which is to say...not very. That's kind of to be expected when you're reading the writings of 4 different dudes who may or may not have seen the same things at the same time, but you'd think something written/inspired by an omnipotent god would be more precise.

[AnnoDomini]

How Judas died- two different accounts

"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (MAT 27:5)

"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (ACT 1:18)

The death of Judas is argued away by the geniuses at Answers in Genesis with arguments like "well, Matthew never said Judas was successful in hanging himself to death"

Also, the Rabbit does not chew cud.

My parents firmly believe in the historical accuracy and all-around inerrancy of the Bible, unless of course, they're supporting a supercomplicated, 'Biblical' idea that doesn't jibe with a verse, at which time they occasionally say 'oh, that word/verse was slightly mistranslated by the original translators, and the original Greek says [Greek word] which means [the meaning they want]'.

My father says that Judas hanged himself, hanging involves falling, and so his guts came out.

[Constance Vigilance]

My father says that Judas hanged himself, hanging involves falling, and so his guts came out.

... :confusion-scratchheadyellow:

No, hanging involves hanging. You drop fast enough to break your neck instantly (kind version), or you strangle (slower). You hang by a rope. You don't keep falling.

As far as I know, at no point during hanging will your intestines come out of you.

Does he mean that you hit the ground, and the impact causes your intestines to come out? Because if you hit the ground, you aren't hanging. So you won't die of being hanged because there isn't enough tension in the rope/pressure on your neck.

Man, the mental gymnastics people have to do to believe a book full of errors is the inerrant word of god.

Edited to clarify, and because I apparently can't write English today.

[theologygeek]

My parents firmly believe in the historical accuracy and all-around inerrancy of the Bible, unless of course, they're supporting a supercomplicated, 'Biblical' idea that doesn't jibe with a verse, at which time they occasionally say 'oh, that word/verse was slightly mistranslated by the original translators, and the original Greek says [Greek word] which means [the meaning they want]'.

My father says that Judas hanged himself, hanging involves falling, and so his guts came out.

The bible wasn't just slightly mistranslated. Some translations are nothing like what they are supposed to mean. Also, many verses don't give a clear picture of the history behind the verses. The verses on Lydia are a good example.

[FJismyheadship]

How Judas died- two different accounts

"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (MAT 27:5)

"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (ACT 1:18)

The death of Judas is argued away by the geniuses at Answers in Genesis with arguments like "well, Matthew never said Judas was successful in hanging himself to death"

Also, the Rabbit does not chew cud.

Yes he did! It says he "gave up the ghost"

This is what my study Bible says about the Gospel's purposes.

Matthew's main purpose was to prove to his Jewish readers that Jesus is their Messiah.He does this promarily by showing how Jesus in his life and ministry fulfilled the OT Scriptures. Although all the Gospel writers quote the OT, Matthew includes nine additional proof texts to drive home his basic theme: Jesus is the fulfillment of the OT predictions of the Messiah. Matthew even finds the history of God's people in the OT recapitulated in some aspects of Jesus' life. To accomplish his purpose, Matthew also emphasizes Jesus' Davidic lineage.

The evidence points to the church at Rome, or at least to Gentile readers. Mark explains Jewish customs, translates Aramaic words, and seems to have a special interest in persecution and martydom; subjects of special concern to Roman believers. A Roman destination would explain the almost immediate acceptance of this Gospel and its rapid dissemination.

Since Mark's Gospel is traditionally associated with Rome, it may have been occasioned by the persecutions of the Roman church in the period AD 64-67. The famous fire of Rome in 64 - probably set by Nero himself but blamed on Christians - resulted in widsespread persecution. Even martyrdom was not unknown among Roman believers. Mark may be writing to prepare his readers for this sufferent by placing before them the life of our Lord. There are many references, both explicit and veiled, to suffering and discipleship through his Gospel.

The Gospel of Luke is specifically directed to Theopolis, whose name means "one who loves God" and almost cerainly refers to a particular person rather than to lovers of God in general. The use of "most excellant" with the name further indicates an individual land supports the idea he was a Roman official or at least of a high position and wealth. He was possibly Luke's patron, responsible for seeing that the writings were copied and distributed. Such a dedication to the publisher was common at that time.

Theopolis, however, was more than a publisher. The message of this Gospel was intended for his own instruction as well as the instruction of those among who the book would be circulated. The fact that the Gospel was initially directed to Theoplois does not narrow or limit its purpose. It was written to strengthen the fath of all believers and to answer the attascks of unbelievers. It was presented to displace disconnected and ill founded reports about Jesus. Luke wanted to show that the place of the Gentile Christian in God's kingdom is based on the teaching of Jesus. He wanted to commend the preaching of the Gospel to the whole world.

Some inter[reters and felt that John's aim was to set forth a version of the Christian message that would appeal to Greek thinkers. Others have seen a desire to supplement (or correct) the Synoptic Gospels, to combat some form of heresy, to oppose the coninuing followers of John the Baptist or to achieve a similar goal. But the writer himself states his purpose very clearly. "These are writtern that yu may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." He may have had Freek readers mainly in mind, some of whom were being exposed to heretical influence, but his primary intention was evangelistic. It is possible to understand "may believe" in the sense of "may continue to believe" in which case the purpose qwould be to build up believers as well as to win new converts.

[debrand]

Before God made Eve, He knew that you and I would be conversing right now. It wasn't that He didn't know to make a female human being before Adam looked at the animals. It simply says that no suitable helper was found. Nowhere does it imply that God didn't know what He should do next, or that He didn't know how to make a woman. He knew exactly what He was doing. As a matter of fact, there is some very powerful symbolism here. Adam was put into a deep sleep when God made Eve. Adam had no say in how she was created, just as he had no say in how the animals were created. Just because he picked out names doesn't mean he created them. When God presented Eve to Adam, Adam said that she was a part of him. They were one in flesh. Since the beginning of time, man and woman were supposed to be one in flesh. One was never supposed to be dominant over the other. God knew what Adam was going to say, as God is all knowing. But Adam had to say it, as he was on earth and he would be the one setting the tone for future generations to come. Although it didn't quite work out that way, as man has free will and royally screwed up the concept that men and women were one in flesh, and partners to each other.

I don't know what you mean by just because he picked out the names he didn't create them. Do you mean that Adam didn't create the animals? I knew that. I get that god created the animals or are you trying to tell me something else (insert confused smilie here)

Imagine for a moment that this was another religion's creation story. Can you honestly say that the being this depicts doesn't sound a little confused as to what Adam needs?

I agree that there is powerful symbolism in most mythology. The bible is no different. :) Taking it too literally almost seems insulting to the original writers and what they were trying to say.

[debrand]

... :confusion-scratchheadyellow:

No, hanging involves hanging. You drop fast enough to break your neck instantly (kind version), or you strangle (slower). You hang by a rope. You don't keep falling.

As far as I know, at no point during hanging will your intestines come out of you.

Does he mean that you hit the ground, and the impact causes your intestines to come out? Because if you hit the ground, you aren't hanging. So you won't die of being hanged because there isn't enough tension in the rope/pressure on your neck.

Man, the mental gymnastics people have to do to believe a book full of errors is the inerrant word of god.

Edited to clarify, and because I apparently can't write English today.

I was always taught that he hung himself, the rope broke after he was dead and that when he hit the ground, his intestines came out.

[FJismyheadship]

Ok maybe I was wrong. It does just say he hung himself.

Matthew 27:3 When Judas who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, jhe was seized with remorse and retired the thiry silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. 4"I have sinned" he said "for I have betrayed innocent blood?

"What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility."

5 So Judas threw the money down in the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.

Thats the only thing I can find. FOr some reason It hought it said somewhere that he gave up the ghost, but I guess I was wrong! Anyways, it doesnt say anything about the rope breaking and his intestines falling out...

[Daenerys]

... :confusion-scratchheadyellow:

No, hanging involves hanging. You drop fast enough to break your neck instantly (kind version), or you strangle (slower). You hang by a rope. You don't keep falling.

As far as I know, at no point during hanging will your intestines come out of you.

Does he mean that you hit the ground, and the impact causes your intestines to come out? Because if you hit the ground, you aren't hanging. So you won't die of being hanged because there isn't enough tension in the rope/pressure on your neck.

Man, the mental gymnastics people have to do to believe a book full of errors is the inerrant word of god.

Edited to clarify, and because I apparently can't write English today.

Unless you were hanged after death, and the force of the drop was enough to cause explosion from the build up of gases inside you... CADAVER SHOWER :lol:

[keen23]

@FMJ- the "he gave up the ghost" is part of the contradictory "last words" of Jesus... John 19:30 and Luke 23:46

[Austin]

Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus seriously opened my eyes to this issue. Too many serious contradictions to even list.

[Swamptribe]

"14 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Write this as a memorial in a book and recite it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.†15 And Moses built an altar and called the name of it, The Lord is my banner, 16 saying, “A hand upon the throne of the Lord Jacob! The Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation." (Exodus 17)

The above is one of my favorites. 'utterly blot out the memory of ' while permanently preserving it in ther high holy text.

[tankgirl]

I say it must be death by an overly long bungy cord. I mean that fulfills both requirements, though not sure where they got the bungy :lol:

[nolongerIFBx]

I was always taught that he hung himself, the rope broke after he was dead and that when he hit the ground, his intestines came out.

Ditto.