Contradictions in the bible

[Viviana98]

Actually, in the culture of that time/location they were his guests because he welcomed them into his house, and it mattered not one whit whether they were family, friends, or strangers. If you study the Middle Eastern cultures, even today disrespecting or endangering a guest is an incredibly shameful dishonorable thing. I'm sorry you do not understand these cultural differences.

As to why God chose to destroy the people of Sodom and Gomorrah and not Lot and his family, if you read the story, the answer is there.

Nope the answer isn't there....scholars have argued what the answer is or may possible be but the bible never really tells why. So why don't you offer up an opinion like everyone else does when it comes to scriptures in the bible.

[+Sherapy]

I don't think the issue is with him defending his guests. Indeed, I think pretty much anyone would try and defend their guests from harm even today. The issue people have is the manner in which he does it. Disrespecting and endangering someone's guest is wrong but you know what else is? Offering your daughters to be raped. I fail to see how that's considered a better alternative in any culture.

For me, there is little to deny, or deflect, or excuse. Lot had serious issues by any cultures standards! For me, this is what I glean from the story.. A moral lesson if you will, that as a parent, one instinctively seeks protect a child from harm, not offer them up for it!

[Viviana98]

For me, there is little to deny, or deflect, or excuse. Lot had serious issues by any cultures standards! For me, this is what I glean from the story.. A moral lesson if you will, that as a parent, one instinctively seeks protect a child from harm, not offer them up for it!

Thank you Sherapy!!! I don't know why anyone would want to make this story "okay" or rationalize it in there minds. I'm glad someone gets it.

[Beckys_Mom]

It's good to see that nothing's changed around here.

And it's good to see you back................... WELCOME BACK PA ..Hope your journey served you well.... Glad to hear you are busy

And now I am off to watch Dr House.( Hugh Laurie cracks me up ) ..Kids are tucked in, cats are turfed outside... peace and quiet... you couldn't beat it with a big stick..

Edited October 16, 2012 by Beckys_Mom

[+Link of Hyrule]

Can someone help me out here? What exactly IS the point of the Bible?

The Bible is about many things, but ultimately I would say it is about the glory of God - how God is glorified through its creation, and how we can glorify God through our actions. Underlying this is the theme of sin and redemption, how mankind has consistently dismissed God and how God has remained faithful throughout.

The Bible is about far more than this, of course, but I would start here as an overriding theme of the text/s.

Its so full of contradictory statements

And that would be your opinion; an opinion I happen to disagree with.

Why didn't someone a long time ago go through the book and at least fix the contradictions? Did they not realize how ridiculous it makes the whole thing look?

And if someone did, the sceptics would be complaining that the Bible has been edited. As it is, some zealous scribes have endeavoured to add or take away from the text in the past. Luckily for us today, we have enough ancient texts available that we can tell with a fair degree of certainty what was actually written in the original of the text, which is good for us I guess.

~ Regards,

Edited October 16, 2012 by Paranoid Android

[+Link of Hyrule]

And it's good to see you back................... WELCOME BACK PA ..Hope your journey served you well.... Glad to hear you are busy

And now I am off to watch Dr House.( Hugh Laurie cracks me up ) ..Kids are tucked in, cats are turfed outside... peace and quiet... you couldn't beat it with a big stick..

Unfortunately, I'm not back. Not for good, at least. I'm just passing through for a few days. I might get back around Christmas time as well, but then I'll be gone again and be away for at least a few more months Ah well, it's good to get back for at least a bit of a chat around the place

[Beckys_Mom]

Unfortunately, I'm not back. Not for good, at least. I'm just passing through for a few days. I might get back around Christmas time as well, but then I'll be gone again and be away for at least a few more months Ah well, it's good to get back for at least a bit of a chat around the place

Main thing is you are doing good.. I am glad you are busy.. Just popping in now and again is better than nothing...Hope you are doing well..

[+Sherapy]

Thank you Sherapy!!! I don't know why anyone would want to make this story "okay" or rationalize it in there minds. I'm glad someone gets it.

I share in your perspective; I personally have boundaries, of course not everything has to be about the rules, but for me I am clear on mine and once they are in place they are there to stay. I do not align, avoid, or exempt myself from the 'do no harm guiding principle' by spinning it to be insignificant. Some things are just not okay and they are in the bible. It is what it is.Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post.

[orangepeaceful79]

The Bible is about many things, but ultimately I would say it is about the glory of God - how God is glorified through its creation, and how we can glorify God through our actions. Underlying this is the theme of sin and redemption, how mankind has consistently dismissed God and how God has remained faithful throughout.

The Bible is about far more than this, of course, but I would start here as an overriding theme of the text/s.

And that would be your opinion; an opinion I happen to disagree with.

And if someone did, the sceptics would be complaining that the Bible has been edited. As it is, some zealous scribes have endeavoured to add or take away from the text in the past. Luckily for us today, we have enough ancient texts available that we can tell with a fair degree of certainty what was actually written in the original of the text, which is good for us I guess.

~ Regards,

I actually totally get what you are saying, PA. Please let me offer a statement saying that I have no desire to try and convert anyone away from their beliefs. I am very much a person that feels strongly that if a mindset, or religion, or faith, or whatever does genuine good for the person in their life and doesn't harm others in the process then its a good thing. I don't wish to take away that which comforts so many.

Faith in general is something that I have struggled with for a very long time. I think it has mostly to do with my personality. I am a very empirical person and will generally seek objective verification of the things I feel are truth. I realize that this is the very opposite of faith.

I can and do hold a certain personal belief in God or some benevolent power. I have made it that far. The bible however has nothing whatsoever to do with that, at least for me. The Bible, in my own humble opinion is a collection of eyewitness accounts made by humans who were just as imperfect as I am, had biases, fears, hopes, and dreams which filter every word. I feel that if there was any sort of divine inspiration for the text of the bible, then it is far overshadowed by the incredibly flawed human nature of its authorship.

I can't trust most of the humans I know these days, how on Earth am I supposed to trust the word of a bunch of Iron Age goatherders, pundits, politicians, and revolutionaries just because the book says its God's word? They were just as effed up then as we are now.

It just won't work for me. I have read the whole bible, I've noted where its strong (because it is in some places) and where its quite weak. I'm not here to take away from anyone else's experience of it - like I said before if its a positive in your life then that should be good enough for anyone.

[Viviana98]

I actually totally get what you are saying, PA. Please let me offer a statement saying that I have no desire to try and convert anyone away from their beliefs. I am very much a person that feels strongly that if a mindset, or religion, or faith, or whatever does genuine good for the person in their life and doesn't harm others in the process then its a good thing. I don't wish to take away that which comforts so many.

Faith in general is something that I have struggled with for a very long time. I think it has mostly to do with my personality. I am a very empirical person and will generally seek objective verification of the things I feel are truth. I realize that this is the very opposite of faith.

I can and do hold a certain personal belief in God or some benevolent power. I have made it that far. The bible however has nothing whatsoever to do with that, at least for me. The Bible, in my own humble opinion is a collection of eyewitness accounts made by humans who were just as imperfect as I am, had biases, fears, hopes, and dreams which filter every word. I feel that if there was any sort of divine inspiration for the text of the bible, then it is far overshadowed by the incredibly flawed human nature of its authorship.

I can't trust most of the humans I know these days, how on Earth am I supposed to trust the word of a bunch of Iron Age goatherders, pundits, politicians, and revolutionaries just because the book says its God's word? They were just as effed up then as we are now.

It just won't work for me. I have read the whole bible, I've noted where its strong (because it is in some places) and where its quite weak. I'm not here to take away from anyone else's experience of it - like I said before if its a positive in your life then that should be good enough for anyone.

Very nicely put!

[Knight Of Shadows]

Actually, in the culture of that time/location they were his guests because he welcomed them into his house, and it mattered not one whit whether they were family, friends, or strangers. If you study the Middle Eastern cultures, even today disrespecting or endangering a guest is an incredibly shameful dishonorable thing. I'm sorry you do not understand these cultural differences.

As to why God chose to destroy the people of Sodom and Gomorrah and not Lot and his family, if you read the story, the answer is there.

ah huh .. carefull there .. we may treat guests very very well

but a girl " daughter or wife " is considered the " honor " of a family in middle eastern culture

so to say if some one harassed some one's sister , wife , mother in street .. you can go on hurting them really bad

without actually having trouble with the law .. coz it was based on our culture that women are considered honor of family

to suggest that a middle eastern would give his own honor .. to protect strangers is ridiculus .. they may give their life before they give that

Edited October 17, 2012 by Knight Of Shadows

[scowl]

The men who wrote the Bible did not have have the appreciation of continuity that we modern people have. When people read these stories, they didn't bat an eye at factual inconsistencies that make modern people wonder if there is any truth to them.

So many examples, but Exodus has several. God unloads a plague which kills all the animals owned by Egyptians. So at this point the ruling Egyptians have no cattle and no horses. The Bible is clear that they're all dead.

God then unleashes several more disasters on the Egyptians which He later admits to doing this just to show what a badass he is (He says He messed with the Pharaoh's good judgement so he wouldn't do the smart thing and let the Jews go immediately).

Moses and Aaron later warn the Pharaoh that God will be unleashing a huge storm so he should warn everyone to bring in their livestock. Those who were left in the fields were killed. But the Egyptians shouldn't have had any. They were killed in the plague, right?

Then when the Jews make their famous escape through the Red Sea and God drowns the Egyptians, the Bible clearly says that their horses were also drowned. But their horses had been killed in the plague so they shouldn't have had any.

And why did Zipporah's father's name suddenly change from Reuel to Jethro in just one chapter? Later on his name changes to Hobab. I'm pretty sure it's the same guy.

[orangepeaceful79]

The men who wrote the Bible did not have have the appreciation of continuity that we modern people have. When people read these stories, they didn't bat an eye at factual inconsistencies that make modern people wonder if there is any truth to them.

So many examples, but Exodus has several. God unloads a plague which kills all the animals owned by Egyptians. So at this point the ruling Egyptians have no cattle and no horses. The Bible is clear that they're all dead.

God then unleashes several more disasters on the Egyptians which He later admits to doing this just to show what a badass he is (He says He messed with the Pharaoh's good judgement so he wouldn't do the smart thing and let the Jews go immediately).

Moses and Aaron later warn the Pharaoh that God will be unleashing a huge storm so he should warn everyone to bring in their livestock. Those who were left in the fields were killed. But the Egyptians shouldn't have had any. They were killed in the plague, right?

Then when the Jews make their famous escape through the Red Sea and God drowns the Egyptians, the Bible clearly says that their horses were also drowned. But their horses had been killed in the plague so they shouldn't have had any.

And why did Zipporah's father's name suddenly change from Reuel to Jethro in just one chapter? Later on his name changes to Hobab. I'm pretty sure it's the same guy.

You know, Hobab is a pretty awesome name. I might start going by that.

[GoldenWolf]

God then unleashes several more disasters on the Egyptians which He later admits to doing this just to show what a badass he is (He says He messed with the Pharaoh's good judgement so he wouldn't do the smart thing and let the Jews go immediately).

Lmao!

I know the religious are tired of hearing about me saying how much of a narcissist "god" is, but I think this is funny, using jewish gematria, 603, some of the things you get:

http://www.gematrix.org/?word=603

Narcissus

Look at me I'm mr badass

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Michelangelo_Caravaggio_065.jpg/250px-Michelangelo_Caravaggio_065.jpg

Edited October 17, 2012 by HavocWing

[scowl]

You know, Hobab is a pretty awesome name. I might start going by that.

Interesting that Jethro was the only name that passed into Christian use. I think Reuel is exclusively a Jewish name unless there's a variation of it.

[scowl]

Lmao!

I know the religious are tired of hearing about me saying how much of a narcissist "god" is, but I think this is funny, using jewish gematria, 603, some of the things you get:

http://www.gematrix.org/?word=603

Narcissus

Look at me I'm mr badass

http://upload.wikime...avaggio_065.jpg

God makes it crystal clear that he doesn't want the Pharaoh to back down right after the first plague which any sane leader would have done, so God "hardens his [the Pharaoh's] heart" so he will choose to have God unleash disaster after unspeakable disaster on Egypt. When the Jews finally escape, the world will know they have a powerful ruthless god backing them. Even then God wants to show off one more time so he messes with the Pharaoh's head one last time to have his army die in the Red Sea.

This sounds like a teenage boy who want to show off some tricks he learned. God found out He could cause plagues, generate tremendous storms, create waves of locusts and flies and frogs, create horrible skin diseases and even part a sea and He just doesn't want those gnarly powers to go unseen. I can't find any other interpretation of it. It's funny that the Bible has God responsible for the Pharaoh's poor decision-making even though the Bible is full of bad leaders making even worse decisions.

[GoldenWolf]

God makes it crystal clear that he doesn't want the Pharaoh to back down right after the first plague which any sane leader would have done, so God "hardens his [the Pharaoh's] heart" so he will choose to have God unleash disaster after unspeakable disaster on Egypt. When the Jews finally escape, the world will know they have a powerful ruthless god backing them. Even then God wants to show off one more time so he messes with the Pharaoh's head one last time to have his army die in the Red Sea.

This sounds like a teenage boy who want to show off some tricks he learned. God found out He could cause plagues, generate tremendous storms, create waves of locusts and flies and frogs, create horrible skin diseases and even part a sea and He just doesn't want those gnarly powers to go unseen. I can't find any other interpretation of it. It's funny that the Bible has God responsible for the Pharaoh's poor decision-making even though the Bible is full of bad leaders making even worse decisions.

I've always thought the same thing, you aren't the only one.

[ranrod]

Well said and then. I couldnt agree more. People dont come to threads like this to learn anything. They come to spread pre conceived notions that are extremly uninformed. I also support peoples right to believe what ever they want. Its just sad to see people so willing to spread misinformation sitting on the shoulders of smarter people then themselfs, and thinking they understand what they are talking about.

Hey preacherman. The bible was a scattered collection of little stories people told in the ancient world, so when the council of Nicaea tried to compile them all into one text, a lot of editing had to happen to make it all mesh. I can see little problems, inconsistencies and contradictions arising from that. All this assumes the text is not God-inspired and recognizes human error in the process (including translation errors). For me personally, the biggest contradictions in the religion are at a meta-level:

Day 1 create Earth - Day 4 create the sun (light)

Knows the future, but gets angry when stuff happens

Gives man free will, but sends him to hell if he doesn't do exactly as he's told

Says he loves unconditionally, but states conditions and sends you to hell if you break them

All knowing and omnipresent, but Adam and Eve successfully sneak around to the apple tree, then are tricked by a talking snake to God's surprise

Humans work together to build impressive tower, then God destroys it and punishes humans for millenia

Creates man in his image, but man is full of defects

God is perfection, but he gets angry, commits harsh acts he later regrets, bans things then takes it back, makes decisions but humans talking to him change his mind.

God, Jesus, Holy Ghost, Mary, Michael, large host of angels - the most polytheistic religion ever made (using a non-Christian definition of deity)

God creates holy text, but it's full of human error.

This god answers no fundamental questions about life. It just replaces old questions with new ones. It goes from: "Why are we here?", "I don't know", to: Why are we here? "Because God is testing you" Why? "I don't know"

[ranrod]

Here's an interesting take on it:

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc2gu2q4vP1rqsn03o1_1280.jpg

[scowl]

I've always thought the same thing, you aren't the only one.

In my liberal Hebrew school, we were encouraged to make our judgments about God's behavior (utter blasphemy to most Christians who don't read the Bible). A lot of us really liked the idea that God was a young and immature god in the early books. His behavior is very much like kid watching a movie full of devious characters and cheering whenever they do something nasty. When the characters didn't do what He wanted, He screamed at them or blasted them or massacred them for His entertainment. After the Flood, God realized that His tantrums were useless and He grew up a little.

As the chronology of the Bible proceeds, you see God is much less interested in the day-to-day activities of his chosen people, kind of like a child becoming less interested in a new toy. You really don't see the "fatherly" side of God until much later as if He were a human growing up and becoming wiser and using what He had learned about his creations. I don't see how anyone could possibly think that the God in the Bible was always perfect, never changing.

[Bling]

Here's another good example:

Is God good or evil?

• Psalm 145:9 "The Lord is good to all."
  
• Deuteronomy 32:4 "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he."
  

vs

• Isaiah 45:7 "I make peace and create evil. I the Lord do all these things." See "Out of Context" for more on Isaiah 45:7.
  
• Lamentations 3:38 "Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good?"
  
• Jeremiah 18:11 "Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you."
  
• Ezekiel 20:25,26 "I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live. And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the Lord."
  

Most probable Source of the above

Sounds like the kinda guy you'd want to spend eternity with?

Edited October 19, 2012 by Karlis
Added source.

[Bling]

Here's another good example:

Is God good or evil?

• Psalm 145:9 "The Lord is good to all."
  
• Deuteronomy 32:4 "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he."
  

vs

• Isaiah 45:7 "I make peace and create evil. I the Lord do all these things." See "Out of Context" for more on Isaiah 45:7.
  
• Lamentations 3:38 "Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good?"
  
• Jeremiah 18:11 "Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you."
  
• Ezekiel 20:25,26 "I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live. And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the Lord."
  

Most probable Source of the above

Sounds like the kinda guy you'd want to spend eternity with?

Not the source actually. The reason I didn't add it Karlis is because it contains a swear word and I didn't want to offend anyone thank you.

http://www.religioni...tradictions.php

Maybe ask me next time

Edited October 19, 2012 by Bling

[Bling]

Edited October 19, 2012 by Bling

[Urisk]

For several years I was a participant in CBED (Christian Biblical Errancy Debate) forum. What I observed was that the forum was directed at underminining only the fundemantalist position of a perfect Bible. It was thought by the host that proving contradictions was somehow going to disporove God. The host didn't realize that his atheist position was also premised on the unconscious need for the fundementalist position to be valid so that he could prove God doesn't exist if he finds contradictions.

The end result was that neither the fundamentalist were correct about a perfect Bible, nor was he correct about errors disproving God.

The Bible is NOT perfect, nor a complete canon, nor the final word of authority. But it IS a very valuable resource of knowledge about God that should be understood as deeply as possible.

I also observed that the antagonist of the Bible were very good at data mining the Bible for extremely obscure referances. Their main problem was that they had a blindness to the actual Biblical narrative, which meant they often had things so rediculously out of context, that their examples of supposed contradictions were often just utter ignorance of mind. This is why the "talking snake"thing threw them so badly. They didn't have actual insight into the Garden of Eden account because they, like the fundies, confined themselves to the Bible to a large degree, and never drew upon the source materials the bible itself is drawing upon.

It is manifest in reality that even though the Bible isn't perfect, apparently it isn't of extreme concern to God. Indeed since mankind has the capacity to percieve problems in the text, he also has the capacity to read through them without derailing. Unless of course he has fundementlist conditioning, in which case his capacity to see errors, understand the Bible, and correct in his mind any problems, is severely diminished.

Before you allow yourself to be overwhelmed by an energetic antagonist of the Bible with outrageous amounts of contradictions they find, just realize that their knowledge of the Scriptures is superficial, and they tend to see contradiction where they aren't, see them in every verse, and most of it is based upon ignorance.

Before you allow yourself to be convinced of a perfect authoritative Bible by a dazzling fundemantalist, remember they are also very superficial in their understanding of the Bible, and see perfection where it doesn't exist. This also is based in ignorance.

What is the situation then concerning the two camps at either side of the battle ground? The situation is that the discussion is a dynamic example of the fallacy of "Excluding the Middle" or the "False Dichotomy". Either side would say if there is an error, "God is phoney", which is an extreme, unrealistic and unreasonable position for either the proponants or the antagonist camps to be suggesting. In reality, God is not dependant upon a perfect Bible. God existed long before anyone ever thought about selecting their collection of approved official text into a single canon.

Beware of this lopsided thinking. Have no illusions of a perfect Bible. But have no illusions that the Bible is somehow invalid either. Have no illusions that it disproves God by being imperfect, or that truth is not in the Bible. Profound truths and even secret knowledge is all through the Bible if you know what you are looking at. It is NOT to be utterly dismissed as this is an irrational response to the question of Biblical errors.

Your arguement of fundamentalists is where the problem lies, and it's what you're touching on. It's not about rational Christians who take the Bible as a book of fables designed to teach you how to live pretty well, it's about people who take it all as face value- which is why all the contradictions is an issue here.

I remember, and this will probably never leave me, at Primary School we had a pretty level-headed minister visit quite regularly to teach us about religion- not just Christianity. Anyway one session we're all at our desks listening intently when he walked over to me, picked up my dictionary and asked "what's this"? I said "well... it's a book?". Then he said "Exactly! And that's all the Bible is!" What he was getting at is that the Bible does not have the answers- the answers lie within whether you feel a fellowship or belonging with the religion you subscribe to. I am in no way religious (quite the opposite) but I can really appreciate that sentiment.

[ranrod]

Your arguement of fundamentalists is where the problem lies, and it's what you're touching on. It's not about rational Christians who take the Bible as a book of fables designed to teach you how to live pretty well, it's about people who take it all as face value- which is why all the contradictions is an issue here.

I remember, and this will probably never leave me, at Primary School we had a pretty level-headed minister visit quite regularly to teach us about religion- not just Christianity. Anyway one session we're all at our desks listening intently when he walked over to me, picked up my dictionary and asked "what's this"? I said "well... it's a book?". Then he said "Exactly! And that's all the Bible is!" What he was getting at is that the Bible does not have the answers- the answers lie within whether you feel a fellowship or belonging with the religion you subscribe to. I am in no way religious (quite the opposite) but I can really appreciate that sentiment.

I agree. If you take the bible literally, you're going to have a very sad life.