Bible Contradictions Refuted

[marymol]

Thank you both for the kind and enlightening words - (as much as I feel like the little puppy , under the table , who is happy with the crumbs )

May be one day, even the diffrent editions of the bibles would carry the words of these saintly authorities , as an aid and guide for many !

Blessings !

 

[Angelos]

In the Acts of the Apostles Peter relates Judas’ death through a striking prophecy in Jeremiah. Interestingly, the way Peter recounts Judas’ evil deeds and the type and place of his death bears remarkable similarities to the curse imposed on Judah by God in the book of prophet Jeremiah. To compare:

Acts 1:18-19 And he (Judas) indeed hath possessed a field of the reward of iniquity, and being hanged, burst asunder in the midst: and all his bowels gushed out. And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem: so that the same field was called in their tongue, Haceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.

Jeremiah 19: 3-4 Hear the word of the Lord, O ye kings of Juda, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem: Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold I will bring an affliction upon this place: so that whosoever shall hear it, his ears shall tingle: Because they have forsaken me, and have profaned this place: and have sacrificed therein to strange gods, whom neither they nor their fathers knew, nor the kings of Juda: and they have filled this place with the blood of innocents.

(Judas Iscariot is presented by Peter as the inhabitants of Judah punished by God because of shedding innocent blood)

Jeremiah 19: 6 Therefore behold the days come, saith the Lord, that this place shall no more be called Topheth, nor the valley of the son of Ennom, but the valley of slaughter.
(The land belonging to Judas Iscariot is called the field of blood because his death takes place there and is known by many).

Jeremiah 19: 10 Thus saith the Lord of hosts: Even so will I break this people, and this city, as the potter’s vessel is broken, which cannot be made whole again: and they shall be buried in Topheth, because there is no other place to bury in.
(Judas Iscariot is symbolically dropped and broken like a vessel. The detail that “his intestines gushed out” reminds one of the vessel broken beyond repair).

In short, Judas Iscariot in the Acts represents the inhabitants of Judah in Jeremiah’s time. This is most likely because Judas is one of the twelve apostles, the number standing for the twelve tribes of Israel.

No such symbolization in Matthew. Judas’ death is related by Matthew through another prophecy in Jeremiah. The priests buying a burial place for the strangers on behalf of dead Judas actually do what Jeremiah did when people went to him with some money and asked him to buy a field that would be used for strangers because of the invasion (Jeremiah 32: 1-44).

Peace to all,
Angelos N.B.

 

[Pete_Holter]

as for the hebrew reference, one says God does not desire the death of the wicked and the other says God wills the death. is that the word you are saying is the same? so, if that is true, everything that God wills to happen is also His desire. I would disagree with that. God does not desire for any to perish but for all to come to eternal life (as it says in the NT), but His will causes some to end up in hell. it is not His desire but His will. this is still consistent. parents never desire to punish their children but their will as parents forces them to do it.

This solution works in English, once the translation has removed the difficulty. However, the word is the same in the original text. You can read John Piper’s article which mentions this here. Translating the Hebrew consistently, we could render the verses like this:

Ezekiel 33:11: “As I live, declares the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live.”

1 Sam. 2:25: “[the sons of Eli] would not listen to the voice of their father, for it was the pleasure of the LORD to put them to death.”

or like this:

Ezekiel 33:11: “As I live, declares the Lord GOD, I do not will the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live.”

1 Sam. 2:25: “[the sons of Eli] would not listen to the voice of their father, for it was the will of the LORD to put them to death.”

etc.

Consequently, “I am speaking as a fool,” we have just as much of a theological contradiction as we do any kind of historical or scientific contradiction. Of course, I believe that this example is only an apparent contradiction. I believe that a satisfying explanation exists for this apparent contradiction.

Repeating what I wrote above about our approach to the Word of God: “To be consistent with ourselves, it seems to me that we either have to admit that there are contradictions on every level, or else we humble ourselves and come to an interpretation that submits to the notion - and I would say reality - that the Holy Spirit was able to and actually did preserve the Holy Authors from every error.”

 

[COPLAND_3]

litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Answers+to+the+so-called+%22Bible+contradictions%22

 

[Shlomey]

So we have two possibilities:

1. The Bible is free of anyapparent evidence.
   And it renders the Bible as not very helpful as the problem does indeed lead many people not only to question, but also to depart from the faith. Furthermore, our inability to explain these contradictions and inconsistencies make our sacred scripture an easy target for ridicule.
2. The Bible is only inerrant in terms of faith and morality.

Then the problem regarding God willing and not willing death arises, since this is a case about God’s very own character.



Reading so many different and opposing views gets me more confused than it actually helps. lol

Now I want to know:

What is the official teaching of the Catholic Church?

 

[davidv]

{snip}

What is the official teaching of the Catholic Church?
Most of the official teaching on Holy Scripture is contained in Dei Verbum. Have you read it?

 

[Ruthie]

Shlomey,

[."72

[107](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/107.htm’)

the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/107.htm’)

The Catechism is quoting from Dei Verbum 11.

Hope this helps,

Ruthie

 

[Shlomey]

Most of the official teaching on Holy Scripture is contained in Dei Verbum. Have you read it?

. For holy mother Church, relying on the belief of the Apostles (see John 20:31; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:19-20, 3:15-16), holds that the books of both the Old and New Testaments in their entirety, with all their parts, are sacred and canonical because written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.(1) In composing the sacred books, God chose men and while employed by Him (2) they made use of their powers and abilities, so that with Him acting in them and through them, (3) they, as true authors, consigned to writing everything and** only those things which He wanted.** (4)

I would interpret this in terms of: everything has to be right.

 

[davidv]

I would interpret this in terms of: everything has to be right.

I would add “…if properly understood.”

 

[Shlomey]

I would add “…if properly understood.”

Ezekiel 33:11 says, “As I live, declares the Lord GOD,** I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked**, but that the wicked turn from his way and live.” On the other hand, 1 Sam. 2:25 says that the sons of Eli “would not listen to the voice of their father, for it was the will of the LORD to put them to death.” I take this example from Still Sovereign, edited by Schreiner & Ware. The **same Hebrew word, haphez, is used **in both verses to describe God’s disposition toward these people. In one case He does not desire the death of anyone. In the other, he desires the death of Eli’s sons. On the face of it, this is a sheer contradiction concerning the character of God. To be consistent with ourselves, it seems to me that we either have to admit that there are contradictions on every level, or else we humble ourselves and come to an interpretation that submits to the notion - and I would say reality - that the Holy Spirit was able to and actually did preserve the Holy Authors from every error.

How are things like these properly understood?

I could actually find a way round this one using the English translation, but that kinda falls flat considering the same Hebrew word is used…

Anyone explain this?

 

[rabbitdonkey]

This website offers some responses to the Skeptic’s Annotated Bible:

berenddeboer.net/sab/

I haven’t looked at it myself. I hope it’s helpful!

Its written from a Protestant persepctive and sometimes attacks Catholic doctrine