Blibical contradictions?

[basil_88]

Hi,

The bible as we know is inspired. How can we explain the issue of contradictions that are present in it, as other religion asserts it to be?

Thanks you in advance.

basil_88

 

[Juliebug108]

What specific contradictions are you referring to? Old covenant vs. New covenant, or something else?

Peace and blessings,
Julie

 

[Rightlydivide]

Hi,

The bible as we know is inspired. How can we explain the issue of contradictions that are present in it, as other religion asserts it to be?

Thanks you in advance.

basil_88

There are hundreds of websites dealing with how to answer what people perceive to be bible contradictions. For nonbelievers, and I was one, those will not be especially persuasive because they require people to understand the nuances of theology, history, and so forth. That is your best approach though. Prepare for the most popular ones, atheist and skeptic websites have them as well as Muslim websites, by keeping a list and the response handy. That is what I do.
In witnessing to nonbelievers, I usually ask them to name a contradicition. Most times they cannot but when they do we can go from there.

 

[uxordepp]

Be confident that “contradictions” in Scripture are nearly all (if not all?) errors in our understanding, not in actual meaning.

Something that the websites do not seem to understand is that context is very important to what a phrase means. Phrases alone can certainly appear to contradict, where if one actually reads the surrounding passages, the sense becomes clearer.

 

[Scoobyshme]

Actually, the easy answer is that there are no contradictions in the Bible, when it is properly interpreted.

The Bible is not a do-it-yourself book anymore than a manual on brain surgery would qualify one to operate. Like everything else in life, there needs to be a particular methodology applied to properly interpreting the Bible. Without that, you are sure to err.

 

[valentino]

Hi,

The bible as we know is inspired. How can we explain the issue of contradictions that are present in it, as other religion asserts it to be?

Thanks you in advance.

basil_88

that one of the biggest problems which result from self interpretation.verses must be put in context with other verses oftentimes to understand what is being said.One mustnt take out a passage and give it a litteral translation.To a new bible reader the apparent contradictions can be very frustrating.If one has no desire to read the bible for truth he’s just trying to justify his own feelings that the bible makes no sense or it folklore writen for people in ages gone by then he has ampble reasons to justify his claims.

 

[z0wb13]

Actually, the easy answer is that there are no contradictions in the Bible, when it is properly interpreted.

of course there are contradictions. who cares? there are 4 gospels, and they all have minor contradictions, but think about the story of the 5 blind men and the elephant. one says an elephant is like a rope, another like a tree, another like a fan, etc.

are any of them wrong? no, but they are incomplete pieces of the whole animal. wouldn’t you expect that people might not have a whole picture of god?

MAT 27:46 & MAR 15:34: “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?” that is to say, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” …Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.”

LUK 23:46: “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, “Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:” and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.”

JOH 19:30: “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished:” and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

of course there are contradictions. who cares? there are 4 gospels, and they all have minor contradictions

What contradictions? We can answer anything you have misinterpreted, so point it out. With the rest of your post, here’s the definition of contrary, what you listed is multiple eyewitness accounts being complied about the particular situation, in this account it is the read of the Crucifixion of Christ Jesus.

Please keep in mind; it is strict doctrine with any Christian, Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant, that the Bible has absolute zero contradictions. So this is not an attack on you but when dropping a bomb like “of course there are contradictions” is like, to the same degree but not analogous, saying “of course Buddhism and Taoism are the same thing.”

 

[z0wb13]

@Trevor: maybe i should have said it is full of inconsistencies? jesus could only have said 1 thing before he died. soooooo… i guess explain that to me, because i’m interested.

but my point is that christians and others shouldn’t get bogged down by the details. the larger message is pretty consistent. also, i think “gave up the ghost” is a pretty cool turn of phrase.

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

Matt 27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour. 46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, la’ma sabach-tha’ni?” that is, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” 47 And some of the bystanders hearing it said, “This man is calling Eli’jah.” 48 And one of them at once ran and took a sponge, filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave it to him to drink. 49 But the others said, “Wait, let us see whether Eli’jah will come to save him.” 50 And Jesus cried again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit

Mark 15: 33 And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour. 34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “E’lo-i, E’lo-i, la’ma sabach-tha’ni?” which means, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” 35 And some of the bystanders hearing it said, “Behold, he is calling Eli’jah.” 36 And one ran and, filling a sponge full of vinegar, put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink, saying, “Wait, let us see whether Eli’jah will come to take him down.” 37 And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed his last. 38 And the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.

Luke 23:44 It was now about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour, 45 while the sun’s light failed; and the curtain of the temple was torn in two. 46 Then Jesus, crying with a loud voice, said, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!” And having said this he breathed his last.

John 19:28 After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfil the scripture), “I thirst.” 29 A bowl full of vinegar stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth. 30 When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished”; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

The seven last words of Jesus on the Cross have been chronologically organized by theologians long before our birth. Here’s a good read from Archbishop Fulton Sheen not just the order of what was said and when but the theological meaning in the timing and internal depth of each word. And if we’re going to bring the temple veil argument in here, read.

No contradictions or inconsistencies.

 

[z0wb13]

indeed, much effort has been expended trying to reconcile the different accounts. if you look back at my first post, you’ll see that i don’t really have a problem with trying to explain the gospels as different, although incomplete, attempts at explaining everything. maybe not everything, but if god is everything, i would expect it to take a few books. so while i agree that there are ways to interpret the stories as though they were one unbroken narrative, they certainly weren’t written that way. early christians would not have had access to all 4 stories (or rather, they likely had access to 1 of 2 or 3 accounts), but i’m sure they would have argued, as you do, there was nothing inconsistent in what they were hearing, although obviously it must have been as they didn’t have all 4 gospels or movable type.

but even giving some wiggle room with mark and matthew, luke and john still seem literally irreconcilable. both accounts say (i’m paraphrasing) “jesus said one last thing, and then promptly died.” so 1 of those accounts must be wrong. not very wrong, not a good enough reason to doubt everything else, but you can’t say 2 last things before you die. so he must have said 1 then the other, and some of the people witnessing it must have been wrapped up in the moment and missed it.

the link you posted, while interesting commentary, does not address this. it puts jesus’s final 7 words in order, but i don’t see any reasoning to it except that it helps to support the writer’s narrative.

regardless, i don’t see the point in beating the dead horse. i think that one gets a better understanding of the christian message when the gospels are taken together, so i think we would be in agreement there.

here’s something else that is irreconcilable: is god nice, or a meany? the bible says both. i’m not sure it is a contradiction. if i’m nice 1 day and mean on another, my behavior would be better described as inconsistent.

the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy. (James 5:11)

saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them. (Jeremiah 13:14)

so is this just an example of god being of different temperaments during different situations? and also, why does OT god seem so much more uptight that NT god? i mean really, he seems so much more into vengeance in the OT, but more like a pacifist in the NT. thanks for your time.

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

indeed, much effort has been expended trying to reconcile the different accounts. if you look back at my first post, you’ll see that i don’t really have a problem with trying to explain the gospels as different, although incomplete, attempts at explaining everything. maybe not everything, but if god is everything, i would expect it to take a few books. so while i agree that there are ways to interpret the stories as though they were one unbroken narrative, they certainly weren’t written that way. early christians would not have had access to all 4 stories (or rather, they likely had access to 1 of 2 or 3 accounts), but i’m sure they would have argued, as you do, there was nothing inconsistent in what they were hearing, although obviously it must have been as they didn’t have all 4 gospels or movable type.

Well, Luke fulfills the last word said “Then Jesus, crying with a loud voice, said, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!” And having said this he breathed his last.” The “loud voice” account is found in Matthew and Mark, so that takes care of any concerns. What about John? He said “30 When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished”; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” If we observe the other gospels, we see he drank the vinegar, or The Fourth Cup, before the “loud voice” account. Does this invalidate John’s observation of when Jesus died on the cross? No, it fulfills the account. We also have to observe that the John’s gospel is a highly theological book, miles more then the others. Which is why John held the honorary title of the “theologian” of the Evangelists. His gospel was directed at a Jewish reader or listener since his observations fulfill prophecy and scripture throughout his book, made it easier for Jews to convert (rather, they were fulfilling their religion and not so much converting) as they would see that Jesus fulfilled the Messianic Prophecy.

2 Tim 3:16 " All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,"

If we see that Sacred Scripture was inspired by God through each epistle, it is to be read as a whole to make full sense of what God intended Scared Scripture to say and mean. We do this and everything is fluid and consistent.

To address “early christians would not have had access to all 4 stories”, Read the writings of Early Church Fathers. The priests in liturgy constantly quoted from the entire New Testament, so early Christians did have access to all four. The writings were either memorized or orally taught from the Magisterium or both.

here’s something else that is irreconcilable: is god nice, or a meany? the bible says both. i’m not sure it is a contradiction. if i’m nice 1 day and mean on another, my behavior would be better described as inconsistent.

the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy. (James 5:11)

saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them. (Jeremiah 13:14)

so is this just an example of god being of different temperaments during different situations? and also, why does OT god seem so much more uptight that NT god? i mean really, he seems so much more into vengeance in the OT, but more like a pacifist in the NT. thanks for your time.

Not to be offensive, but please include the entire context of a verse when using it.

biblestudytools.com/rsv/james/5.html - read 9 - 12

James 5 was teaching people what not to be and what to do to gain favor and to earn that mercy. The very verse you cited was proceeded by a warning that you’ll be condemned for such actions read in verse 12.

And Jeremiah 13:14? Easily answered just by observing the former verses…

biblestudytools.com/rsv/jeremiah/13.html

Why is God a big ol’ meanie here? I don’t know why are the people of Judah, in this instance, (verse 10) “This evil people, who refuse to hear my words, who stubbornly follow their own heart and have gone after other gods to serve them and worship them, shall be like this waistcloth, which is good for nothing. (verse 27) I have seen your abominations, your adulteries and neighings, your lewd harlotries, on the hills in the field. Woe to you, O Jerusalem! How long will it be before you are made clean?”

the context makes sense, these people will be punished for going against the will of God.

Observe each account of “vengeance in the OT” and you’ll see the reason, why. And Jesus was by no means a pacifist. Where do you get that?

Matt 10:34 "Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; (read the rest)

He came to fulfill the promise, give the new covenant and save those who want to be saved and can be saved. This is why a Catholic life is an ever work-in progress for salvation and why we continue to do the works and will of the Father everyday.