Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Contradictions in the bible


  • Please log in to reply
591 replies to this topic

#331    scowl

scowl

    Government Agent

  • Closed
  • 4,111 posts
  • Joined:17 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 30 January 2013 - 06:23 PM

View PostBeckys_Mom, on 29 January 2013 - 01:21 AM, said:

Science is not something a human invented, it is a collection of discoveries, study and how things work and evolve  It also provides us with many facts.....  Science cannot ever be put in the same boat as religion.

I would say the scientific method really is an invention. Humans don't have wings so we invented airplanes so get places faster.

Likewise humans are fallible, easily fooled or confused by what they think they see, and sometimes they're even intentionally deceptive about what they see. To avoid this we invented the scientific method so anyone can test a theory in an objective way and everyone can be as sure as possible that something is true. If we humans were naturally objective and were always able to know what's true or false we probably wouldn't have needed to create or use this method.

We humans were kind of going in circles trying to understand chemistry and biology because everyone had their own opinions. Once the "experiment" was invented and accepted as a practice to gain objective knowledge, mankind suddenly made incredible leaps in understanding the world.

Science does require faith but not blind faith. You have faith in your car to take you places. You have faith that the food you eat won't make you sick. In the same way, a scientist has faith that if they conduct an experiment repeatedly in the same way, they'll get the same results.


#332    Beckys_Mom

Beckys_Mom

    Sarcastic Muppet..!

  • Member
  • 51,196 posts
  • Joined:01 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ireland

  • "I hate pretentious people. I mean, what is the point in applying exorbitantly extensive vocabulary, it is just straightforwardly unnecessary".

Posted 31 January 2013 - 06:35 PM

View Postscowl, on 30 January 2013 - 06:23 PM, said:

I would say the scientific method really is an invention. Humans don't have wings so we invented airplanes so get places faster.

Likewise humans are fallible, easily fooled or confused by what they think they see, and sometimes they're even intentionally deceptive about what they see. To avoid this we invented the scientific method so anyone can test a theory in an objective way and everyone can be as sure as possible that something is true. If we humans were naturally objective and were always able to know what's true or false we probably wouldn't have needed to create or use this method.

We humans were kind of going in circles trying to understand chemistry and biology because everyone had their own opinions. Once the "experiment" was invented and accepted as a practice to gain objective knowledge, mankind suddenly made incredible leaps in understanding the world.

Science does require faith but not blind faith. You have faith in your car to take you places. You have faith that the food you eat won't make you sick. In the same way, a scientist has faith that if they conduct an experiment repeatedly in the same way, they'll get the same results.

Science was not invented, but the processes of how we make those discoveries was indeed invented as you point out...  But these are two separate things, lets not get those mixed up

Posted ImageRAW Berris... Dare you enter?

If there's a heaven...I hope to hell I get there !

#333    scowl

scowl

    Government Agent

  • Closed
  • 4,111 posts
  • Joined:17 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 31 January 2013 - 09:44 PM

View PostBeckys_Mom, on 31 January 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

Science was not invented, but the processes of how we make those discoveries was indeed invented as you point out...  But these are two separate things, lets not get those mixed up

Those processes are the definition of science at least according to my dictionary.


#334    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,614 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 05 February 2013 - 04:41 AM

View Postscowl, on 30 January 2013 - 06:23 PM, said:

Science does require faith but not blind faith. You have faith in your car to take you places. You have faith that the food you eat won't make you sick. In the same way, a scientist has faith that if they conduct an experiment repeatedly in the same way, they'll get the same results.

Oh boy, that is the weirdest misdefinition of the scientific method I have ever seen.
I really suggest you look up some basic definitions before opining.

Edited by Zaphod222, 05 February 2013 - 04:41 AM.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#335    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 141 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 05 February 2013 - 05:44 AM

Who has seen God and what does it mean to see God 'face to face.?'

Did Abraham? Genesis 18:1-3 Note that Jehovah god is mistaken for one of the three men. Was God a man or an angel in the form of a man who represented God?

Did Moses? Numbers 12:8 - Note that it is an apperance of God that represents God to Moses.

Did Jacob? Genesis 32:30 - Note Hosea 12:2-4 points out that it was an angel who represented God that grappled with Jacob.

Did Manoah and his wife? Judges 13:2-22 - Note that the angel of Jehovah God is called Jehovah God.

Did Gideon? Judges 6:11-23 - Later Jehovah's angel came and sat under the big tree that was in Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while Gideon his son was beating out wheat in the winepress so as to get it quickly out of the sight of Midian. Then Jehovah's angel appeared to him and said to him: "Jehovah is with you, you valiant, mighty one." At this Gideon said to him: "Excuse me, my lord, but if Jehovah is with us, then why has all this come upon us, and where are all his wonderful acts that our fathers related to us, saying, 'Was it not out of Egypt that Jehovah brought us up?' And now Jehovah has deserted us, and he gives us into the palm of Midian." Upon that Jehovah faced him and said: "Go in this power of yours, and you will certainly save Israel out of Midian's palm. Do I not send you?" In turn he said to him: "Excuse me, Jehovah. With what shall I save Israel? Look! My thousand is the least in Manasseh, and I am the smallest in my father's house." But Jehovah said to him: "Because I shall prove to be with you, and you will certainly strike down Midian as if one man."

At this he said to him: "If, now, I have found favor in your eyes, you must also perform a sign for me that you are the one speaking with me. Do not, please, move away from here until I come to you and I have brought out my gift and set it before you." Accordingly he said: "I, for my part, shall keep sitting here until you return." And Gideon went in and proceeded to make ready a kid of the goats and an ephah of flour as unfermented cakes. The meat he put in the basket, and the broth he put in the cooking pot, after which he brought it out to him under the big tree and served it.

The angel of the [true] God now said to him: "Take the meat and the unfermented cakes and set them on the big rock there, and pour out the broth." At that he did so. Then Jehovah's angel thrust out the tip of the staff that was in his hand and touched the meat and the unfermented cakes, and fire began to ascend out of the rock and to consume the meat and the unfermented cakes. As for Jehovah's angel, he vanished from his sight. Consequently Gideon realized that it was Jehovah's angel.

At once Gideon said: "Alas, Sovereign Lord Jehovah, for the reason that I have seen Jehovah's angel face to face!" But Jehovah said to him: "Peace be yours. Do not fear. You will not die." So Gideon built an altar there to Jehovah, and it continues to be called Jehovah-shalom down to this day. It is yet in Ophrah of the Abiezrites.

No man has seen God but a few have seen representations of him. The angels are, in a sense, at least to the people they deal with, the same as God.

Posted Image

#336    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 141 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 05 February 2013 - 03:17 PM

View PostJackofalltrades, on 12 October 2012 - 06:38 PM, said:

The Bible has been manipulated by man at the council of Nicea, and possibly by various others also

It would explain why there is contradiction's in the Bible, as there are certain Gospel's that was left out due to the council not wanting it in there

The council of Nicaea didn’t manipulate the Bible, they only gathered all of the acceptable books together for the first time. The books that were left out didn’t belong there.

Posted Image

#337    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 141 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 05 February 2013 - 03:23 PM

View PostBling, on 12 October 2012 - 07:32 PM, said:

Do these contradictions bother christians? Does it make them question the bible's authenticity? Just wondering....

As a Bible student I enjoy examining the alleged contradictions, it teaches me in a different perspective than the one I'm accustomed to. I have never seen a contradiction that I couldn't correct as a misunderstanding or translation anomaly. The word of God is inspired and without error, but translation isn't. There are no perfect Bibles, they all have mistakes, some more than others, but there is such a vast quantity of manuscripts now we can easily ascertain whether there has been a error in translation (usually having to do with numbers rather than words) as well as spurious scripture.

Posted Image

#338    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 141 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 05 February 2013 - 03:27 PM

View PostBling, on 12 October 2012 - 10:13 PM, said:

If the bible was inspired by the holy spirit of God, why then does God allow those errors to occur? If it really is his chance to communicate with mankind then why would he allow things to be less than perfect?
And questioning a book that major religions are based on, and these religions then go on to kill and destroy people's lives based on this book, is not demeaning it - it's asking for some kind of validation. If you or anyone else is offended by an atheist bringing up this subject then don't get involved with it, believe what you want and let atheists express themselves as they wish. I am merely stating facts about the bible. I haven't placed the 'darkening cave with pits' in the world, God has done this to the world....so the bible says.

Not exactly. God didn't bring about the destructive nature of the world, mankind did by rejecting his guidance and protection.

Posted Image

#339    srd44

srd44

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Joined:26 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:US

Posted 05 February 2013 - 08:31 PM

View PostDavid Henson, on 05 February 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

As a Bible student I enjoy examining the alleged contradictions, it teaches me in a different perspective than the one I'm accustomed to. I have never seen a contradiction that I couldn't correct as a misunderstanding or translation anomaly. The word of God is inspired and without error, but translation isn't. There are no perfect Bibles, they all have mistakes, some more than others, but there is such a vast quantity of manuscripts now we can easily ascertain whether there has been a error in translation (usually having to do with numbers rather than words) as well as spurious scripture.

As a student of the Bible OR as a student of how these ancient texts were viewed by subsequent readers? It seems that you're imposing your own set of values, beliefs, prejudices, and presuppositions onto these texts rather than listening to the texts, to their manifold authors, to their vastly divergent audiences and the reasons for writing what they did in the first place, and to the literary and historical contexts within which they wrote. Instead, you "read" the Bible to have it conform to your own beliefs, views, values. If anything I would call this disingenuous to the biblical texts. Objective fact is, irregardles of one's bellief or non-belief, the Bible is composed of 70+ different AND variant textual traditions, authoral agendas, belief systems, etc. The Bible's 1000s of contraditions are the points of convergence between these textual traditions and the views of those who wrote them. To ignore this over and against one's own belief system is to value one's beliefs above the biblical texts --- which I cretainly understand. But this is not studying the Bible, it's "study" oneself. Reading them through a later created interpretive grid that see this as "the word of god" is again placing more validity and authority in a later generation's interpretive agenda than the actual texts and their authors.

1 Bible Contradiction a day -- identified & explained !! http://contradictionsinthebible.com

#340    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 141 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 05 February 2013 - 08:37 PM

View PostNoodly Savior, on 13 October 2012 - 01:30 AM, said:

Here's a contradiction I enjoy: compare Genesis 6:19 and Genesis 7:1.

Can you help me with this? I don't see how these two verses could possibly be taken as contradictory.

Posted Image

#341    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 141 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 05 February 2013 - 08:42 PM

View PostArbitran, on 13 October 2012 - 01:56 AM, said:

Hell, try to reconcile Genesis chapters 1 and 2. Some of the biggest contradictions in the book are between the first two chapters.

There is no real contradiction there. There are two different creation accounts. The first is chronological and the second is topical. They being in a different order doesn't imply contradiction. For example, if I say to one person that I'm going to the mall to buy a coat and to another person I bought a coat at the mall those two accounts are not contradictory they are simply in a different order.

Posted Image

#342    srd44

srd44

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 29 posts
  • Joined:26 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:US

Posted 05 February 2013 - 09:23 PM

View PostDavid Henson, on 05 February 2013 - 08:42 PM, said:

There is no real contradiction there. There are two different creation accounts. The first is chronological and the second is topical. They being in a different order doesn't imply contradiction. For example, if I say to one person that I'm going to the mall to buy a coat and to another person I bought a coat at the mall those two accounts are not contradictory they are simply in a different order.

Sorry David, you're just wrong. You're guilty of placing yout own (the reader's) concerns and beliefs and interpretive framework over these ancient texts. They were clearly written by two different authors, writing to two different communities, and to address two completely different historical concerns or needs, Until you can answer those questions, you have not tackled with the text and its authors head on, but have iinstead imposed your own interpretmive agenda. Frankly, I'm tired of the disrespect and neglect that these texts actually recieve by people, perhaps like yourself, who'd rather view them throught their own modernist agendas. I've written extensively on this contradiction AND MORE IMPORTANTLY the braoder differentce between these two authors and their unique theologies on my site. If you're really interested in a good academic read, the best scholarly book out there on the compositional history of the book of Genesis --- because talking about contradictions is talking about the texts many and conflicting layers --- is David Carr's Reading the Fractures of Genesis --- a bit pricey but damn good textual analysis.

1 Bible Contradiction a day -- identified & explained !! http://contradictionsinthebible.com

#343    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 141 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:20 AM

View Postsrd44, on 05 February 2013 - 08:31 PM, said:

As a student of the Bible OR as a student of how these ancient texts were viewed by subsequent readers? It seems that you're imposing your own set of values, beliefs, prejudices, and presuppositions onto these texts rather than listening to the texts, to their manifold authors, to their vastly divergent audiences and the reasons for writing what they did in the first place, and to the literary and historical contexts within which they wrote. Instead, you "read" the Bible to have it conform to your own beliefs, views, values. If anything I would call this disingenuous to the biblical texts. Objective fact is, irregardles of one's bellief or non-belief, the Bible is composed of 70+ different AND variant textual traditions, authoral agendas, belief systems, etc. The Bible's 1000s of contraditions are the points of convergence between these textual traditions and the views of those who wrote them. To ignore this over and against one's own belief system is to value one's beliefs above the biblical texts --- which I cretainly understand. But this is not studying the Bible, it's "study" oneself. Reading them through a later created interpretive grid that see this as "the word of god" is again placing more validity and authority in a later generation's interpretive agenda than the actual texts and their authors.

Okay, then give me an example either of my doing so, in your opinion or where it is likely that I would do so. I think it is most likely that you are doing what you are accusing me of doing. My interpretation doesn't jive with yours so I must be reading into it.

The first account is chronological, the second topical. So the order comes out different. The second account being topical, in which Adam and his family are the subject, after a brief prologue, relates events in accordance to that.  Adam is to live in the Garden so then the planting of the garden is given, Adam is to name the creatures so their creation is given. Its all relative to Adam.

Posted Image

#344    IamsSon

IamsSon

    Unobservable Matter

  • Member
  • 11,937 posts
  • Joined:01 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX

  • ďIf you canít explain it simply, you donít understand it well enough.Ē ~ Albert Einstein

Posted 06 February 2013 - 06:55 PM

View Postsrd44, on 05 February 2013 - 09:23 PM, said:

Sorry David, you're just wrong. You're guilty of placing yout own (the reader's) concerns and beliefs and interpretive framework over these ancient texts. They were clearly written by two different authors, writing to two different communities, and to address two completely different historical concerns or needs, Until you can answer those questions, you have not tackled with the text and its authors head on, but have iinstead imposed your own interpretmive agenda. Frankly, I'm tired of the disrespect and neglect that these texts actually recieve by people, perhaps like yourself, who'd rather view them throught their own modernist agendas. I've written extensively on this contradiction AND MORE IMPORTANTLY the braoder differentce between these two authors and their unique theologies on my site. If you're really interested in a good academic read, the best scholarly book out there on the compositional history of the book of Genesis --- because talking about contradictions is talking about the texts many and conflicting layers --- is David Carr's Reading the Fractures of Genesis --- a bit pricey but damn good textual analysis.
Actually, it is not at all clear that there were two authors.  You seem to be doing what you're accusing David of doing.  One has to remember the original texts did not have chapter, much less verse divisions.  The account is one continuous account, first dealing with a synopsis of the period of creation of life on earth and then going into detail regarding God's interaction with the humans He created.  Article, Article

"But then with me that horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?" - Charles Darwin, in a letter to William Graham on July 3, 1881

#345    Beckys_Mom

Beckys_Mom

    Sarcastic Muppet..!

  • Member
  • 51,196 posts
  • Joined:01 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ireland

  • "I hate pretentious people. I mean, what is the point in applying exorbitantly extensive vocabulary, it is just straightforwardly unnecessary".

Posted 06 February 2013 - 07:10 PM

View Postscowl, on 31 January 2013 - 09:44 PM, said:

Those processes are the definition of science at least according to my dictionary.

What lucky dip did you get that dictionary from?

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 06 February 2013 - 07:10 PM.

Posted ImageRAW Berris... Dare you enter?

If there's a heaven...I hope to hell I get there !




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users