Prove that the Bible is full of contradictions-- I double dare you!

[Marsh]

Here's a topic that was raised in the "Can the Bible be taken literally" thread. One member said that we cannot take the Bible literally because it is full of contradictions. However, this member didn't give a single example to prove their point-- nor do most people who claim that the Bible is a contradictory book.

The issue: Does the Bible contradict itself?

I'm not one to impose rules on others, but for the purpose of this discussion I would like to propose that people post one of two kinds of responses: either a supported argument proving a contradiction, or a rebuttal of a stated argument.

And by all means, take the gloves off...

[I, Brian]

My intended purpose of the individual faith boards is that they may represent a safe place for people of said Faith to explore and explain it: to discuss issues between members of the same Faith, and answer questions from those interesting in discussing specific issues of that Faith. The preferred intention is for the Comparative Studies board to house critical examination of religious texts. My apologies that this has not been clearer thus far - I intend to update the Code of Conduct over the next couple of weeks.

I am also a little wary of the actual title of this thread - it seems to be inviting confrontation.

At the end of the day, on the issue of Biblical Inerrancy and contradictions, there are only interpretations and there are often divisive arguments about which actual interpretation should have ascendency. This is true even within the Christian sphere, let alone before Atheism starts ripping in.

So I'll move this to the Comparative Studies board, and see if we can't have a wider disucssion about the actual underlying issues, translations, and interpretations, rather than see this thread artificially polarised into a Dennis McKinsey vs Jerry Falwell thread - as I fear it would on the Christianity board itself.

[Susma Rio Sep]

Originally Posted by Marsh

Here's a topic that was raised in the "Can the Bible be taken literally" thread. One member said that we cannot take the Bible literally because it is full of contradictions. However, this member didn't give a single example to prove their point-- nor do most people who claim that the Bible is a contradictory book.

The issue: Does the Bible contradict itself?

I'm not one to impose rules on others, but for the purpose of this discussion I would like to propose that people post one of two kinds of responses: either a supported argument proving a contradiction, or a rebuttal of a stated argument.

And by all means, take the gloves off...

Actually for myself, I am not troubled by contradictions in the Bible.

I know the message of the Bible, very simple: God made mankind. He chose one people to be His own, from which the Savior of Mankind would arise. Jesus the Savior came and died as an atonement to God to reconcile mankind with God. Now we are saved in Jesus. So, there you are. No amount of contradictions or errors is going to emasculate that simple message, not for me.

Susma Rio Sep

[julienhr]

As, I believe, the last person in the other thread to write "the Bible is full of contradictions", I feel compelled to respond.

First, I feel it is important to restate that I do not think that finding "errancy" in the bible is CAUSE for non-believing. The last post, below, is an example:

Originally Posted by Susma Rio Sep

Actually for myself, I am not troubled by contradictions in the Bible.

I know the message of the Bible, very simple: God made mankind. He chose one people to be His own, from which the Savior of Mankind would arise. Jesus the Savior came and died as an atonement to God to reconcile mankind with God. Now we are saved in Jesus. So, there you are. No amount of contradictions or errors is going to emasculate that simple message, not for me.

Susma Rio Sep

Interestingly, this is not my interpretation of the Bible's message. And that does not trouble me, either.

The problem, I believe, is the continuing schism between those who adhere to Biblical inerrancy and those who do not, and both groups using those views as ways of making a doctrinal point, or using those views to undermine each other. Therein lies the "danger" of the question. So, with trepidation, I will point out a few discrepancies in the Bible, if only for discussion. I am not harboring any desire to undermine anyones' faith. True faith lays in the heart, not the word (in my opinion).

Compare Gen. 1:1-2:4 and Gen.2.5ff

Gen. 37:25 The nationality of the people to whom Joseph's brothers sold Joseph is the Ishmaelites.

Gen.37.28 The nationality of the people is now stated as the Midianites.

Three separate and distinct versions of the Ten Commandments: Exodus 20, Exodus 34 and Deuteronomy 5.

So, with hesitancy, as I said, I leave you those in particular, as was asked. I do not find it a problem for I read the Bible essentially as metaphor and see its' "flaws" as the work of men writing from an oral tradition. Of course there would be contradictions.

I do not think it neccessary to reconcile and fight over these and any other problems of inerrancy. This tends to be an excercise in divisiveness and personally, I'd rather find our common bonds. Please take this in that spirit, if you can.

[achnai]

My question is a bit off topic:

Originally Posted by I, Brian

My intended purpose of the individual faith boards is that they may represent a safe place for people of said Faith to explore and explain it: to discuss issues between members of the same Faith, and answer questions from those interesting in discussing specific issues of that Faith.

Brian,
Is that to say that as a jew I canot attend the christian borad for a purpose of pure study?

[Vajradhara]

Namaste achnai,

what brian is trying to communiate is that these forums that are for specific religions are areas where those postings are of the "positive" kind. generally, argumentative discussions are reserved for the "Comparative" type forms wherein the textual validity of scpriture and so forth can be brought into play.

actually, i think that a discussion of that type could be had on the religion specific forum in a respectful manner. that's not hard for this group of posters, but it's best to set a clear policy early.

as always, brian has the final say on these matters

[achnai]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste achnai,

what brian is trying to communiate is that these forums that are for specific religions are areas where those postings are of the "positive" kind. generally, argumentative discussions are reserved for the "Comparative" type forms wherein the textual validity of scpriture and so forth can be brought into play.

actually, i think that a discussion of that type could be had on the religion specific forum in a respectful manner. that's not hard for this group of posters, but it's best to set a clear policy early.

as always, brian has the final say on these matters

Namaste Vajradhara.

in that case we'll have to see what Brian has to say.

[achnai]

The problem, I believe, is the continuing schism between those who adhere to Biblical inerrancy and those who do not, and both groups using those views as ways of making a doctrinal point, or using those views to undermine each other. Therein lies the "danger" of the question. So, with trepidation, I will point out a few discrepancies in the Bible, if only for discussion. I am not harboring any desire to undermine anyones' faith. True faith lays in the heart, not the word (in my opinion).

I could not say it any better.
the examples for contradictions in the Bible are various.
and if i may add, there are numerous contradictions and in consistancies in the jewish oral tradition, namely rhe Talmud.

The factuality of judeo-christianity in general and of religion in particular is based on the fact that religious people will always be part of man's society due to the fact that belief is one of the basics of human existence, and is independent of empirical criticism.

[Marsh]

It seems as if I've hit a nerve of sorts with at least two of you. I'm sorry if my phrasing seems a little controversial, but please be assured that my intended tone was actually light-hearted.

By using phrases like "I double-dare you," and "take the gloves off," I was only trying to reflect the ferocity with which people have debated this issue throughout history. Now, I've only been a member here for about a week, but it seems to me that about 99% of the posts I've read so far are reasonable and logical, which leads me to believe that the people who posted them are, too. Certainly, then, we can discuss such a topic reasonably.

As for the purposes of the different boards: like I said, I'm new here so I didn't know there was such a protocol. (By the way, Brian, maybe you should make a "confrontation" board for people like me-- with firewalls all around it so that I stay out of trouble

Nevertheless, my query stands: Is the Bible a book of contradictions and, if so, what are those contradictions?

[Nogodnomasters]

http://www.infidelguy.com If you want to debate Bible contradictions. Atheists have grown weary of debating Bible contradictions. The apologists pile one absurdity upon another to explain contrdictions. A classic example is who is Joseph's father? The genealogies in Matthew and Luke are different. The apologist claims the one in Luke is that of Mary's even though it clearly states Joseph. So now there is no contradiction, except for the absurd fact the Bible claims the geneaolgy is that of Joseph and not Mary.

"Copiest errors" is another classic excuse for the differences in the numbers of items between Kings and Chronicles. Fine- Again claim the Bible is wrong to avoid a contradiction.

It is that kind of absurdity which Bible believers try to pass off as sane logic which makes debate weary.

The book has a talking snake in it. That in itself should ring the logic and sanity alarm so loud to make one question the truthfulness of the doctrine.

From where I sit "contradictions" is the least of the Bible's problems.

[JJM]

Originally Posted by julienhr

As, I believe, the last person in the other thread to write "the Bible is full of contradictions", I feel compelled to respond.

First, I feel it is important to restate that I do not think that finding "errancy" in the bible is CAUSE for non-believing. The last post, below, is an example:



Interestingly, this is not my interpretation of the Bible's message. And that does not trouble me, either.

The problem, I believe, is the continuing schism between those who adhere to Biblical inerrancy and those who do not, and both groups using those views as ways of making a doctrinal point, or using those views to undermine each other. Therein lies the "danger" of the question. So, with trepidation, I will point out a few discrepancies in the Bible, if only for discussion. I am not harboring any desire to undermine anyones' faith. True faith lays in the heart, not the word (in my opinion).

Compare Gen. 1:1-2:4 and Gen.2.5ff

Are you referring to the two differing creation stories. To me, and remember this is only an interpretation, one describes the creation of humans while the other describes the creation of Earth.

Originally Posted by julienhr

Gen. 37:25 The nationality of the people to whom Joseph's brothers sold Joseph is the Ishmaelites.

Gen.37.28 The nationality of the people is now stated as the Midianites.

I'm sorry to say that you are mistaken in this "contradiction." Well actually I'm not sorry because it simply confirms my faith more but regardless of that this is not what the verses say. If you read the story you see that Josephs brothers threw him in a cistern and left him there. Judah upon seeing the Ishmaelites say to his brother "what is to be gained by killing our brother and concealing his blood? Rather let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, instead of doing away with ourselves. After all he is our brother” (Gn 37:26-27 NAB) while his brothers where returning to the cistern to pull him out some Midianites pulled him out of the cistern. and took him to Egypt. When Reuben Returns to sell Joseph and Joseph isn't there he is upset. SO you see if you read these verses you find that Joseph wasn't sold at all but rather rescued before he could be sold.

Originally Posted by julienhr

Three separate and distinct versions of the Ten Commandments: Exodus 20, Exodus 34 and Deuteronomy 5.

I don't see the ten commandments stated in Exodus 34 I see some rules given but it doesn't say they where on the tablets. As for Exodus 20 And Deuteronomy 5 I have counted 7 Differences between the two. 6 of these are simply Little things such as "Remember" instead of "take care" or "Your ox or ass or any of your beasts" instead of just "or any of your beasts" there is one big difference and that is the reason God gave for the Sabbath. One say it was because the earth was created in six days and God rested on the 7th and the other was because they where brought out of the land of Egypt. But that is irrelevant because the reason for this was simply that the human body needs a break. Where week and we aren't meant to work without rest.

Originally Posted by julienhr

So, with hesitancy, as I said, I leave you those in particular, as was asked. I do not find it a problem for I read the Bible essentially as metaphor and see its' "flaws" as the work of men writing from an oral tradition. Of course there would be contradictions.

I do not think it neccessary to reconcile and fight over these and any other problems of inerrancy. This tends to be an excercise in divisiveness and personally, I'd rather find our common bonds. Please take this in that spirit, if you can.

I realize you don't wish to Speak about these things in the chance it may cause some sort of resentment but I'd truly like to see some of these "contradictions" so that I may better understand the book. I’ll start you out In Jeremiah Babylon is always portrayed as doing God's will Nebuchadnezzar is described as God's servant many times. But then in the last two chapters it says that Babylon would be punished for doing God's will. The reason for this is because The last two chapters of Jeremiah weren’t actually written by him. ( or should I say dictated for he didn't actually write any of it.) regardless He didn't get those last two prophesies. He did get Prophecies about the destruction of Babylon but the reasons stated where most likely put in there by some disgruntled Jews who where mad because the temple had been destroy. I'll help you again. In Dt 24 God say to not Punish A child for his father or vise verse but God does all the time. I don't know how to explain that one anyone want to help.

[julienhr]

In response to JJM: I will be honest here, and say that I culled those passages from Spong's "Rescusing the Bible from Fundamentalism". I wanted to see what peoples' responses might be and from this, I thought, we could have some discussion. I'd haven't had the time to check what you've written above, JJM, but I believe you are sincere. And I am not out to invalidate anyones' interpretations.

I am not arguing for or against anything or any one. I also want to stress again, that I think errancy shouldn't have the power to shake anyones' faith.

I am troubled, however, with what I see as a general contradiction in scripture which I can only pose as a question: is God a God of love and compassion or is "he" a jealous, wrathful God?

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by achnai

My question is a bit off topic:
Brian,
Is that to say that as a jew I canot attend the christian borad for a purpose of pure study?

Not at all - it is for the promotion of dialogue.

However, if anyone sought to post in a particular Faith board simply to attack the people and beliefs of that Faith, then I should not be pleased.

Comparative Study, on the other hand, requires some detachment and even insensitivity to Faith in order to make critical comments and evaluations. It doesn't mean to say any such hypotheses or conclusions may be correct - but by separating the purpose of the different boards, it does give breathing room for those who wish to explore issues of Faith, and those who wish to deconstruct issues of Faith.

Hope that helps - but as I said, I'll try and write it up more officially soon. No changes in behaviour are required by members either - the vast majority of people here are very well behaved anyway.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

but it's best to set a clear policy early.

That's very much a part of it, to avoid uncomfortable problems later.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by Marsh

It seems as if I've hit a nerve of sorts with at least two of you. I'm sorry if my phrasing seems a little controversial, but please be assured that my intended tone was actually light-hearted.

Tone can be very difficult to gauge by the written word alone - in real-life we have facial expression, behavioural cues, and the context of the tone itself within the words - all of which convey intended meaning.

Here we need other cues - such as as "smilie faces" to help indicate to others our tone.

Besides - in all honesty, I really wanted to open up the scope of this discussion: I would really like to get some feedback from Jewish members on issues of seeming criticism and contention regarding the "Old Testament".