The Biblical Contradiction Thread

[Leonard James]

No he hasn't actually read the Bible. What he does is use atheist sites and brings up all the same old crap that we've gone over. Late to the rodeo is what he is. He does seem obsessed with God. That's good.

And the credulous who believe in "God" just keep parroting the same old crap that we've refuted over and over as nothing more than wishful thinking. 

[Sassy]

Don't add lying to your talents, Sass! Anybody can see that your post was condescending and insulting, and you should be ashamed of yourself  for not apologising.

Referring to Khatru as "a poor thing" and "stupid" is the height of bitchiness, when it is clear that his intelligence and knowledge are vastly superior to yours.

Can't add anything as my original reply wasn't to you and was in line with the person I was answering.
Sh*t stirring is definitely one of your talents and deliberately twisting the  reply to another... Guess sometimes the truth is greater and you really are in line of fire.

Quote from: Khatru on February 28, 2016, 10:28:07 AM
You just gave me another one for my list of Christian responses:

Don't even try to refute what's been said... just hurl abuse instead.

Why get so mad?

Must be because those scriptures from the Quran made perfect sense to you.

Hardly a surprise given that Christians and Muslims are brothers in delusion.

Again epic fail... the original post shows that you have moved from the original discussion. Poor thing looking so stupid.

As you can see my post to K explains why he looks so stupid...

You must try not to spread your evil venom and retaliation of false accusations when I have clearly shown the reason for the person I believe to look stupid.  EPIC fail on your part. Now stop it. It can be boring when a person believes a personality contest will somehow win over the truth. You are changing and I believe from now on they will attribute it to old age.
From now on may God show you and others the truth behind your posts and your real intent and purpose behind them.
Please do not reply to my posts. I personally don't want to reply to you at all...

[Sassy]

The Bible is self-contradictory; it doesn't need other books to contradict it.

As for Islam - you're much closer to being a Muslim than you think......

You believe in a sky pixie having his revenge on his own creation.  You believe in grovelling and muttering to your sky pixie and you believe in paradise and hell. You also happen to believe in djinns (you call them angels and demons) and you're obsessed with homosexuality and nudity.

You're just a prayer mat and camel away from Islam.

Your ignorance speaks volumes... You have to make good of your time now to insult and hurl abuse... Seems Leonard has double standards where is he now apologising and telling you off for doing what he falsely accused me of doing.

Seems you can dream and imagine what you say carries any weight. But in the great scheme of things... greater is he who is in me than he who is in the world. The truth is that my God is real and your bull crap which is really not worth writing is as futile as weeing in the wind. It comes back to it's source, you.

Your original source is SATAN and it dwells in the lowest part of humanity. But the truth about Christ and God cannot be attacked or prevailed against by such writing and behaviour. When we know the truth the attacks from the enemy like yours are to be expected. It cannot harm and changes nothing about the truth. What you need to ask yourself, is why you did not know that.

[Bubbles]

The problem is in approaching reading it.

For some reason a lot of people think something can only have one meaning, or only one interpretation to be right.

You need to stop having that sort of mindset.

Let me explain what I mean.

The Jews follow the Torah, but unlike Christianity they don't always have only one interpretation of something, they have multiple ones.

This is because the Torah is supposed to contain wisdom on many levels and they set out to explore them.

In Judaism it doesn't mean there is a contradiction, it means there is another lesson to be learnt from that passage.

Life is not black and white but shades of grey, so a Rabbi will consult the Torah and other books to see which apply. ( because more often that not someone wants to apply it to their life situation)

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/819698/jewish/How-Is-the-Torah-Interpreted.htm

Christianity at its beginnings was a lot more Jewish but somewhere along the line the idea came about that there was only one correct answer and interpretation and if something else came along that appeared to contradict it, then the bible was wrong. ( well according to atheists). On the whole Christians ignored it.

The Christians in st Pauls day weren't so hung up about the one and only way of interpreting something because I would suggest they were closer to Judaism.

It's an idea that has grown later, that you can only interpret something one way and everything else is a contradiction and proves the bible is in error.

It doesn't.

You have to leave that mindset behind and look at the Jewish roots, where they have many different lessons to be learnt in every passage of their books.

Jews don't even agree on some interpretations and they have books full of conflicting ideas.

If you are looking for the one true interpretation, then IMO you are looking in the wrong direction.

[Sassy]

And the credulous who believe in "God" just keep parroting the same old crap that we've refuted over and over as nothing more than wishful thinking. 

Tell me why, if you are so honest, did you proclaim to be a believer and then turn your back.
Were you lying when you originally said you knew God and Jesus Christ?

Instead of making accusations against others... I suggest you tend to your own broken windows before hurling stones at others.

[Sassy]

The problem is in approaching reading it.

For some reason a lot of people think something can only have one meaning, or only one interpretation to be right.

You need to stop having that sort of mindset.

Let me explain what I mean.

The Jews follow the Torah, but unlike Christianity they don't always have only one interpretation of something, they have multiple ones.

This is because the Torah is supposed to contain wisdom on many levels and they set out to explore them.

In Judaism it doesn't mean there is a contradiction, it means there is another lesson to be learnt from that passage.

Life is not black and white but shades of grey, so a Rabbi will consult the Torah and other books to see which apply. ( because more often that not someone wants to apply it to their life situation)

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/819698/jewish/How-Is-the-Torah-Interpreted.htm

Christianity at its beginnings was a lot more Jewish but somewhere along the line the idea came about that there was only one correct answer and interpretation and if something else came along that appeared to contradict it, then the bible was wrong.

The Christians in st Pauls day weren't so hung up about the one and only way of interpreting something because I would suggest they were closer to Judaism.

It's an idea that has grown later, that you can only interpret something one way and everything else is a contradiction and proves the bible is in error.

It doesn't.

You have to leave that mindset behind and look at the Jewish roots, where they have many different lessons to be learnt in every passage of their books.

Jews don't even agree on some interpretations and they have books full of conflicting ideas.

If you are looking for the one true interpretation, then IMO you are looking in the wrong direction.

Hi Rose,

I guess you are confusing the fact that different sects of Judaism like Pharisee and Sadducee held different beliefs outside that of the Torah. But the Torah itself, was not different in the belief of the law and the Prophets.

It was allowed because they upheld the integral parts of the Torah such as feasts and the laws together.
But the other beliefs were to be answered by Christ as to whom was right.

The Sadducees did not believe in resurrection of the dead or angels. As Christ and the Pharisees did.
So Christ showing that the Pharisees were right about angels etc and Sadducees wrong.
However they all upheld the law of the Torah but the Pharisees held the belief of angels and resurrection.

So there is no different beliefs to the Torah but the acceptance of outside beliefs.

[Bubbles]

Hi Rose,

I guess you are confusing the fact that different sects of Judaism like Pharisee and Sadducee held different beliefs outside that of the Torah. But the Torah itself, was not different in the belief of the law and the Prophets.

It was allowed because they upheld the integral parts of the Torah such as feasts and the laws together.
But the other beliefs were to be answered by Christ as to whom was right.

The Sadducees did not believe in resurrection of the dead or angels. As Christ and the Pharisees did.
So Christ showing that the Pharisees were right about angels etc and Sadducees wrong.
However they all upheld the law of the Torah but the Pharisees held the belief of angels and resurrection.

So there is no different beliefs to the Torah but the acceptance of outside beliefs.

No it's nothing to do with that, I did enclose a link to show what I meant about their attitude to different meanings and interpretations.

This next one is from Reform Judaism and also shows the many meanings approach.

Studying Torah

For the Jewish people, the study of Torah never ends. Each year, as we read the sacred text again, it can be as if we are reading it for the first time. Each encounter with sacred text offers the possibility of new meanings. The Reform Movement has published a number of editions of the Torah, with contemporary commentary.  Many Reform synagogues have ongoing Torah study groups. Some meet during the week over lunch, while others convene on Shabbat morning. Some rabbis lead Torah study in business offices and others in coffee shops. A Reform synagogue near you may have a Torah study group. No experience is necessary and newcomers are always welcome.

A first-century CE teacher, Ben Bag Bag, taught his students, “Turn the Torah, and turn it again, for everything you want to know is found within it.” (Avot 5:25) The study of Torah can be both an intellectual adventure and a spiritual journey. The many meanings of Torah offer the potential to add greatly to one’s life.

- See more at: http://www.reformjudaism.org/torah-tree-life#sthash.4Xg35Mp7.dpuf

Its more about the different approachs Jews have to extract meaning. The atheists here are stuck in that they can only read something one way.

They have not taken into account that there are many ways to interpret something.

[Sassy]

No it's nothing to do with that, I did enclose a link to show what I meant about their attitude to different meanings and interpretations.

This next one is from Reform Judaism and also shows the many meanings approach.

Its more about the different approachs Jews have to extract meaning. The atheists here are stuck in that they can only read something one way.

They have not taken into account that there are many ways to interpret something.

Rose,

Don't give the atheist any more ideas... you trying to give them a steady pattern of thought...

[Bubbles]

In my original link it explains four ways of understanding.

Within these four methods of understanding Torah, there exist countless possible avenues of understanding. For example: There are many different ways to understand the Torah according to Peshat. That's why there are many Torah commentators who concentrate on Peshat -- Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Rashbam and many more – and they will very often (it seems, more often than not...) disagree on the literal meaning of a verse. In fact, according to Kabbalastic teachings there are 600,000 ways to understand Peshat, 600,000 ways to understand Remez, 600,000 ways to understand Drush, and 600,000 ways to understand Sod!

Any insight in Torah is acceptable as long as it (makes sense and) does not contradict any of our fundamental beliefs.

Our sages tell us that "any chiddush (novel idea) which a reputable disciple will ever come up with was already given to Moses by Sinai." Moses might not have heard this specific idea which the rabbi living thousands of years later has just thought of, but the basis of this idea was already given by Sinai.

G‑d gave us the tools to delve into the words of Torah and reveal the divine wisdom hidden therein.

When it comes to the halachah, however, there is only one truth. For whereas Torah is G‑d's wisdom which, as abovementioned, allows for different opinions, halachah is (not intellect, but rather) G‑d's will. And will is absolute, and does not allow for two ways to look at things.

They are two different Jewish groups ( opposite ends -one being reform the other Chabad)  who see things differently, but both have elements of flexibility of interpretation.

[Bubbles]

Rose,

Don't give the atheist any more ideas... you trying to give them a steady pattern of thought...

 

[Sassy]

In my original link it explains four ways of understanding.

They are two different Jewish groups ( opposite ends -one being reform the other Chabad)  who see things differently, but both have elements of flexibility of interpretation.

I think the problem with people writing about the Jewish groups is that they forget Judaism does not leave anything to chance or even interpretation. God clearly commanded that the scriptures/laws has to be learned by heart.
That they were to adhere to these at all times.

The NEW Covenant after the one God told them to learn his words off by heart and not depart from it, is one where God writes the laws on their hearts.


King James Bible
But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

There are Jews today who believe Jesus is the Messiah. They have no confusion or doubt about true interpretation because as the Prophets of old they are given the words by the Spirit.

I know that you have taken that from a site. But who is to say the site is correct if you believe there are really beliefs poles apart in Judaism. There may be different beliefs held outside the law of Moses but there are no different beliefs held within the laws of Moses.

[Nearly Sane]

No it's nothing to do with that, I did enclose a link to show what I meant about their attitude to different meanings and interpretations.

This next one is from Reform Judaism and also shows the many meanings approach.

Its more about the different approachs Jews have to extract meaning. The atheists here are stuck in that they can only read something one way.

They have not taken into account that there are many ways to interpret something.

As one of the many atheists on here who have posted to some theists that you cannot argue that there is one true way of interpretation, I find your post bizarre.

[Bubbles]

Sassy

In the OP it says. ( just as an example)

Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective."

James 5:16

vs

"As it is written, there is none righteous, no, not one"

Romans 3:10

A clear contradiction.  James talks about the prayers of righteous men while Paul tells us that no one is righteous.

What I mean is, this isn't really a contradiction.

It's possible for people to do the right thing and be rightious, but at the same time for none of us to be perfect.

So both can be true, depending on the context it's put into.

If you read it as the OP does, it doesn't make much sense because he only understands one literal meaning.

I was just trying to show how I see Judaism as doing it, and apply the subtly of meaning 

I'm not going to comment on your beliefs, as they are yours.

This is more about passages in the bible, and possible subtle meanings   

[Aruntraveller]

With regards to Sass's witterings on this subject I can think of nothing more appropriate than this:

PROVERBS 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

PROVERBS 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.


The choice (as they say) is yours.

[Khatru]

Your original source is SATAN.

Ho-hum...here we go again........

Ah, OK...so you believe that we non-believers are under Satan's control?   

Here's a heads-up for you - that just happens to be your religion - it's certainly not mine.

Why is it that believers like you, people who accept faith, dogma and religion think it's an argument to use those words like "Satan is your father" against somebody else?

What if I called you a "stupid forum poster" simply because I considered that you didn't consider yourself a stupid forum poster?  Isn't that your approach here?

I'll tell you what - let's be sensible about this. What do you say I call you the religite who clings to faith and dogma. Ok?  Then you can insult me right back with the opposite; you know,  something that you actually disrespect.

You see what I'm getting at?

Call me a damned rational sceptic. Call me a filthy logician or reasonista.   Hey!  You can even call me a godless evidencist.

Come on, Sass - hit me where I really live!

[jeremyp]

Random biblical contradiction:

Did Jesus curse the fig tree before casting the money changers out of the temple (Mark 11) or after (Matthew 21)?

[Sassy]

With regards to Sass's witterings on this subject I can think of nothing more appropriate than this:

PROVERBS 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

PROVERBS 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.


The choice (as they say) is yours.

Answer not a fool according to the way of his foolishness so looking foolish like him.
Answer the fool by showing him his folly and he will realise what he asked was foolish.
So answer not what was making him look foolish.
But answer by showing him what his folly is so he will not think himself wise.

[Sassy]

Random biblical contradiction:

Did Jesus curse the fig tree before casting the money changers out of the temple (Mark 11) or after (Matthew 21)?

King James Bible
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Do you think the disciples wrote all the same things in the same order as they were remembered?
Matthew, Mark and Luke are sypnoptic gospels because they basically say the same things Christ did. None were written in any particular order because as we see Christ did many things so many they do not believe the world could hold the books.

It isn't important about order it is simply telling us what Christ did.

[floo]

King James Bible
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Do you think the disciples wrote all the same things in the same order as they were remembered?
Matthew, Mark and Luke are sypnoptic gospels because they basically say the same things Christ did. None were written in any particular order because as we see Christ did many things so many they do not believe the world could hold the books.

It isn't important about order it is simply telling us what Christ did.

There is absolutely no evidence the guy did any of the things claimed for him!

[OH MY WORLD!]

Floo,
No need for the exclamations against God. They work for you at home, and they don't work here. You convince nobody.

Leo,
Wishing had nothing to do with my decision to believe. I get that you had a fake Christianity and relationship with God, so no wonder it all shattered for you.

[Shaker]

Leo,
Wishing had nothing to do with my decision to believe. I get that you had a fake Christianity and relationship with God, so no wonder it all shattered for you.

No True Scotsman fallacy - 250 points.

Not that you're in any position to pass judgement on the sincerity of Len's former belief anyway, of course, but I suppose it's psychologically easier to erect the aforementioned fallacy and to dismiss somebody's quondam faith as shallow or deficient in some way rather than admit that it was as strong as your own but simply evaporated, since that opens the door to the possibility that it could happen to you too. Alan Burns operates in the very same manner.

[Leonard James]

Leo,
Wishing had nothing to do with my decision to believe.

Probably not in a way that you would recognise it as wishful, but nevertheless that's what it is.

BTW, you didn't decide to believe, you were simply convinced by the so-called evidence.

I get that you had a fake Christianity and relationship with God, so no wonder it all shattered for you.

My relationship with "God" was just as genuine as yours. 

[Dicky Underpants]

Its more about the different approachs Jews have to extract meaning. The atheists here are stuck in that they can only read something one way.

They have not taken into account that there are many ways to interpret something.

I typed a post to NS a while back on this very subject. I certainly don't think all texts have a singularity of meaning, though I think you'd agree that all the meanings Jews derive from the Tanakh (however multifarious) have all previously been imbedded there by God? This is somewhat different from deriving differing meanings from texts by great writers, whose words may evoke pertinent resonances beyond what the author originally had in mind (there is a thriving industry of lit. crit., after all, which thrives on this sort of thing).

However, I often find that Christians, having started with the premiss that "Jesus cannot have been mistaken, since he was divine" - are forced to twist certain biblical texts in a multiplicity of ways to deliberately avoid the NT appearing to be contradictory. Thus the impulse is not "no text has a singularity of meaning", but "there is an obvious contradiction here, so let us see if we can work out some convoluted exegesis to explain away the contradiction". Fundamentalists are extremely prone to this kind of disingenuousness - they will read the text straightforwardly, often literally, until the stumbling block of the contradiction comes along, and then the whole apparatus of contrived exegesis (or is it eisegesis in this case?) is brought into play.

[Khatru]

The atheists here are stuck in that they can only read something one way.

They have not taken into account that there are many ways to interpret something.

Yes, I'm sure the believers will agree that there are indeed many ways to interpret the Bible and thus the word of their Jesus/God fellow.

No wonder there are thousands of different Christian denominations, sects and cults.

[Shaker]

The atheists here are stuck in that they can only read something one way.

They have not taken into account that there are many ways to interpret something.

I've asked this of some theists here (such as Hope) but have never received an answer.

Do you not think that the necessity of interpretation - which is by definition a subjective matter - and the existence of an omnimax god of the traditional attributes contradict each other? If we take the existence of said god as read for the sake of the argument, there would be no need for interpretation - if it has a message to get across to its creation it would (a) want to, (b) know how to and (c) be able to put it over with absolutely sparkling and unambiguous clarity to every living person, without any need for interpretation or translation from one language to another (or within the same language over historical time) with all the problems that that can give rise to. We know that purely human documents can be ambiguous, and only a text which is ambiguous to start off with requires interpretation. I submit that this is inconsistent with a god of the traditional attributes.