Bible Contradictions... Anyone?

Both of these ARE in the New Testament! And both are even supposed to be written by the very same author.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sorry, M*W I appreciate your comments, but I am still not convinced of this whole theory.

There may actually be some elements in the Bible that would point towards Astrotheology, if that is the right term. But still, why would anyone, especially Josephus who was a Jewish historian, make up a story that is so apparently not about astrology that it even speaks out clearly and most directly against it?

Here is one example...

Deuteronomy 17:2-5 says, "If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of His covenant, and contrary to my command has worshipped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars of the sky, and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, take the man or woman who has done this evil to your city gate and stone that person to death."

Here is another...

Deuteronomy 4:19: "Be careful that you don't worship the sun, moon, and stars."

And one more...

Isaiah 47:13-14: All the counsel you have received has only worn you out! Let your astrologers come forward, those stargazers who make predictions month by month, let them save you from what is coming upon you. Surely they are like stubble; the fire will burn them up. They cannot even save themselves from the power of the flame. Here are no coals to warm anyone; here is no fire to sit by.

Thank You

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I assume you're talking about the original authors and not the people who later copied out the books of the Bible.

The view that I encounter often from Christians is that the authors of the Bible were divinely inspired. The contradictions in the texts would dispute that claim.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Could it be that the first text signifies what Paul sees as the correct thing to say, and the second merely being an account of how he personally feels?
And as such is not a contradiction.

Jan.

 

Jan,

The problem then, perhaps, becomes how many of the other things that Paul wrote and taught were the correct thing to say, and how many of them were just accounts of how he personally feels or thinks about a thing? Peter and others did actually disagree with some of his teachings, after all.

Any thoughts on this, or do you have any way to tell the difference? Because as far as I can tell there is none.

There still remains, to me, a contradiction, between what Paul is telling others to do and what he is doing himself. That is all too often the case with deceitful authority figures, is it not? Remember Ted Haggard?

If this were to occur in the Koran, which it probably does, Christians would use it as a clear indicator of the deceptive nature of the entire book, and even use it as a reason to reject the entire Muslim faith, but when it occurs in their own Holy Book they cover it up and invent lies about it. For what reason, except to deceive others?

Thanks!

 

Paul was writing as a man and as a man he had man's frailties among them the ability to contradict himself. While the Pauline Epistles have some very beautiful words and some deep thoughts on how Christians should behave with and toward one another and others there are parts that are difficult to reconcile with the rest of the New Testament. Take for example, "It is better to marry than to burn." Did St. Paul really mean that marriage was just one step above burning to death or did he mean something else? I figure he meant something else, something that was lost in the later coopying of the Good Book. I think he was actually saying it is better to marry than to burn with desire, but there is no way for me to know this for sure because of what the words we have say.

Despite all the little contradictions nitpickers can find in The Bible the central message is still the same. For Christians The Bible boils down to, John III. XVI: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life." That is the core of the New Testament. All the rest is commentary.

 

SetiAlpha6,

What bible are you reading, galations 5;12 reads,
"I would they were even cut off which trouble you".

Jan.

 

*************
M*W: Well, theory it is, but it really makes sense to me. I've only researched the surface of this iceberg, but I believe it goes much deeper.

*************
M*W: The term "astro-theology" actually means to believe the heavens to be the study of god. (My interpretation). I noticed your quotes were from the OT. I am familiar with those same citations. Interestingly, the authors/scribes who wrote in the ancient Hebrew must have had an ulterior motive for writing that which was directly against what they practiced. Ancient Hebrew priests were star gazers. They were responsible for reading the stars and foretelling the future for the peasants. As the ancient Abiru (Hebrews) wandered out of Egypt, they were basically pagan and believed in many gods, especially the moon, but they were encouraged by their leader Moses (whoever he really was) to worship the monotheistic god Aten. That is why I maintain the solar deity to be the male god. In the matrilineal society, they were moon worshippers.

*************
M*W: What if the NT was totally about astrology as a religion (i.e. astro-theology)? Astrology by itself is somewhat of a science, although I believe it to be purely myth (as are all religions). BTW, did you receive the data that I sent you on Romans 16? I believe that to be an extensive list of astro-theological information.

Josephus was a priest; astrologers were priests. He was also a man who had a vivid imagination and lucid dreams and was greatly skilled in Hebrew and Greek and, of course, was a Jewish historian and author (and ancient creative writer).

Atwill studied the Dead Sea Scrolls for more than ten years, then formulated his opinion that the NT was written at the commission of the Roman emperor. Although Josephus was a Jew, he was more so a Roman citizen. Essentially, Josephus abandoned the Jews and sided with the Romans. He lived in the emperor's quarters when he wrote War of the Jews.He was criticized by his peers for fictionalyzing history with the use of riddles. Being a Jew by birth, Josephus had always known that the Jewish people were waiting for their messiah to come. Josephuss' purpose of writing the War of the Jews, and possibly the NT as well, was to paint a picture of a peaceful Messiah who would serve his people.

I haven't read the War of the Jews in its entirety, but I find it to be an intriguing and somewhat enigmatic work. Josephus dedicated this work to Titus, who was the commissioner of the book. In his day, Titus himself was called the "son of god." There are many parallels between the lives of one or more Roman emperors and the story of Jesus Christ.

It is believed by historians and scholars that in Josephus's The Antiquities of the Jews, that Book 18, Chapter 3, Verse 3, "Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man...," was a later forgery, but I'm inclined to think it was Josephus himself who edited his Antiquities and inserted that verse in later. Many texts of the OT parallel to Josephus' histories. I am confident in saying that I wouldn't be surprised if Josephus didn't have something to do with the OT!

*************
M*W: Remember, these were the folks who were originally worshipping the moon and the sun. Not surprisingly, they were pagans. Likely, in fact, and surely one of the five suspected authors of Deuteronomy was aware of their ancient history of lunar/solar worship. When the ancient Hebrews became monotheist, their god, their father in heaven, was still the sun but with a more paternal i.e. patriarchal) facade. Astrology was the norm of the day. The writers of the OT, for whatever their reasons, wanted to progress from their old ways.

*************
M*W: I have to question this as not having been literally written in the original texts of the OT. The KJV was rewritten about the start of the "burning times" of the Inquisition in Europe, so I have a very strong feeling that the KJV was slanted to make all things of this nature to be evil. Of course, we will never know what those original manuscripts were to have said. I am sure the bible we know of today has been conveniently altered. In other words, we really don't know the truth at all.

*************
M*W: If I had read this comment before writing an answer, I would say that my last comment would apply here as well.

I understand your skepticism. More research needs to be done on this theory. What actually occured historically in the lives of the ancients is one thing. The stories written to control them is entirely another.

I appreciate your questions.

 

It was the following version:

Galatians 5:12 (New American Standard Bible)
12I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate themselves.

Here are a few more…

Galatians 5:12 (New International Version)
12As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

Galatians 5:12 (New Century Version)
12 I wish the people who are bothering you would castrate themselves!

Galatians 5:12 (Today's New International Version)
12 As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

Galatians 5:12 (New Living Translation)
12 I just wish that those troublemakers who want to mutilate you by circumcision would mutilate themselves.

I do not see, in any case, how Paul can be blessing them here. Is he not cursing these people instead?

Thanks

 

Thanks!

Yes, I did read the information that you sent to me, and thank you for sending it, but I simply do not have enough knowledge in this area myself to know what to think about this whole mess. I will have to review it again.

As far as the original text being altered, who knows? How much? Who knows? When? No one knows that either. Do the Dead Sea Scrolls help here? All we can do is make a guess that may be right or may be wrong. IMO there is just no real way to know what the "truth" actually is regarding the Bible. One of the only things that I do have as an indicator are the many contradictions that exist in the Bible.

This brings up yet another very big problem for Christianity. Why should anyone be required to believe in something, especially in a plot involving the damnation of the vast majority of mankind, that cannot be verified as "truth" by anyone, even by one single person on this earth? Why should this then ever be a requirement for "salvation"? What kind of cruel warped justice is this? I know you already understand all of this.

Anyway, thanks for trying to help!

 

I always thought it meant that if you had sex before or outside of marriage you would burn in hell. Just my impression.

Even John 3:16 is difficult to reconcile with some other scriptures. Other scriptures require more than just faith.

 

not necessarily - why would the act of being divinely inspired necessitate that one not present information that is only applicable to time, place and circumstance?

 

Why was my post removed from this thread?


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

The question is what was the context.
The next question is, is the verse translated propperly for modern English.

These are the first priorities with understanding a percieved contradiction.

 

I understand these things and I am all for them. But how do these aspects, in this specific instance, make any real difference?

 

Sorry, Medicine Woman but you are wrong. We have manuscripts that go back much farther than the King James version of The Bible so we do know what was said.

Below is a listing of just a few of the ancient manuscripts.

Greek Septuagint
Latin Vulgate
Dead Sea Scrolls
Codex Sartavianus
Koridethi Gospels
Papyrus Fragment P52
Codex Bezae
Sahidie Codex of the Book of Acts

The King James version of The Bible was merely an attempt by scholars to reword The Bible into the language of that day's English speakers.

 

for everything there is an answer. It could be that these two scriptures are exactly as you presented them...I won't know untill I read them and look up the refrences in the concordance.

But I was merely stating that normally this is a perceptual problem and not a litteral contradiction.


Listen to the gentleman above Medicine Woman. I thought you would have know that as outspoken as you are against Jesus and the Bible.

 

Perhaps the simple answer is that Paul was a man and his words are merely the words of a man. And perhaps, just perhaps, even he never intended or expected that his own words would ever be deified. Since when have the words of any man ever equaled the words of God?

That is the most realistic, likely, and obvious conclusion for me.

 

Yep. This thread, by almost the same name, is full of them:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=64553&highlight=bible contradictions

Here's a couple more websites chocked full of them, with explanations and possible responses/apologies that a Christian might say:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html#introduction

This site also includes failed prophecies and out right errors:
http://www.wordwiz72.com/bible.html

And of course this site:
http://www.godisimaginary.com

 

Thank you!

So far, they don't seem to be able to deal with even one little contradiction.