How would you handle this bible contradiction?

[Big_Dummy]

2 Peter 1:21 (King James Version)
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Holy men of God vs Balaam?

 

[Verbum]

Hi Big.

Where does Balaam come in?

The sense of the passage is that the scriptures came from God and not from men.

Verbum

 

[Philthy]

2 Peter 1:21 (King James Version)
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Holy men of God vs Balaam?

Please try and articulate what you perceive as a contradiction. What you have done is presented verse and then you wrote an incomplete sentence in the form of a question. The verse does not necessarily appear to have anything to do with the question since Balaam is not part of the verse.
As it stands, I would simply say that there is no contradiction and if someone disagrees, for them to please articulate the two ideas which conflict.

 

[Ichthys4121517]

Besides, the King James Version is a Protestant “Bible” anyway. That might not necessarily be relevant, but any Bible with seven books missing is bound to have translation errors as well. I suppose that is the reason you didn’t capitalize the word “Bible”?

 

[Crumpy]

There’s irony in the Balaam incident. I don’t recall the details off the top of my head, but Balaam comes off strangely.

Somehow Balaam comes off saying something rather truthful. It’s irony, not contradiction. The LORD uses people in scripture. The appear and disappear just as fast. While they are on “stage” they may act or speak unexpectedly or out of character etc. to do the LORD’s bidding.

In the gospels, a boy shows up with two fish and five loaves of bread, just when Jesus has a need for them.

 

[SunshineZA]

2 Peter 1:21 (King James Version)
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Holy men of God vs Balaam?

Hi not sure what you mean. Herewith text re Balaam in relation to Christian living.

Referring to Balaam being a prophet and Lover of unrighteousness

15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;

Anger of – rebuked by his donkey.

16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb *** speaking with man’s voice forbade the madness of the prophet.
2 Peter 2:15-16 (KJV)

Referring to Christians who, after they have shared in baptism and the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, forsake Him, their Saviour.

For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
2 Peter 2:21-22 (KJV)

 

[SunshineZA]

Besides, the King James Version is a Protestant “Bible” anyway. That might not necessarily be relevant, but any Bible with seven books missing is bound to have translation errors as well. I suppose that is the reason you didn’t capitalize the word “Bible”?

**THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH CONTENTS OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE **

 

[DaveBj]

You do need to learn how to articulate your questions better, but I can figure out what you mean.

The answer is that the fact that God used “holy men of old” to speak his message does not preclude His occasional use of someone who wasn’t so holy to get His point across. The high priest in Jerusalem, while plotting Jesus’ death, was also used to make a prophetic point.

DaveBj

 

[Big_Dummy]

I personally don’t see it as a contradiction. Someone told me that Balaam was a wicked man and Peter says God only used holy men to prophesy. But, if you read Balaam’s story he repented and based on EZe 18, he was considered to be holy at the time of his prophecy, blessing on Israel, but later returned to apostasy. As for the the high priest, there is no evidence that he was not a holy man. Even good people make poor decisions.

 

[dressale]

What you have done is presented verse and then you wrote an incomplete sentence in the form of a question. The verse does not necessarily appear to have anything to do with the question since Balaam is not part of the verse.

---

Best Links:Formal Dresses Prom Dresses Evening Dresses

 

[KShaft]

NOOOOOOO!!!

[Jumps off a bridge]

Now what happens?

Try to make sense of that rabble! Remember, my post is somewhat more coherent than yours. Did you leave out a paragraph or two, or do you suppose we are imagists?

“Pedals on a long black bough…” OOOOOO! so deep! pht! whatever…[most wont get this, some will, wow that kind of makes me like an imagist… ewwwww!]

 

[Big_Dummy]

Yawn

 

[Ichthys4121517]

**THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH CONTENTS OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE **

Woah, there; no need to use such a bright font and all-caps. It’s the truth; the KJV only has 66 books. Look it up for yourself. I’m not saying the entire book is wrong, but it’s not a Bible, as it lacks seven books. That’s a fairly significant chunk to leave out.

But I digress. “BigDummy” (gee, don’t you have a positive attitude toward your dignity!), if you yourself see no contradiction, and you insist on writing posts with one word in them, then what was the point of this thread? You don’t seem to be searching for a serious apologetics debate.

 

[DominionKing]

He doesn’t think a guy like Balaam was worthy. Neither was Caiphas the high priest but nevertheless…

 

[Big_Dummy]

He doesn’t think a guy like Balaam was worthy. Neither was Caiphas the high priest but nevertheless…

Yes, that is the whole point of the contradiction. As for the yawn it was to the last two off topic posts just before it.

 

[PJM]

=Big Dummy;7405680]2 Peter 1:21 (King James Version)
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Holy men of God vs Balaam?

***Hey BD? ***

It’s MUCH more clear when you include verse 20 with verse 21

New King James Version (NKJ) 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

Here it is:** 2 Pet.1: 20-21 ** “Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.”

And Here it is from the RSV 2 Pet.1 Verses 20 to 21"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

***It means just what it says. Untrained and those NOT specifically appointed BY God [including those who choose to be self- appoined translators] are NOT gifted by the Holy Spirit to CORRECTLY understand what the Bible is actually Teaching…

That by friend explains why the CC is Still ONE; while the Protestants have evolved rather quickly to MANY THOUSANDS of different understandings?

So a queston for you… Being that there can be ONLYone Truth on any specific issue; how can there be MANY THOUSANDS of personal understandings?

Seems lik a LOGICAL QUESTION… ***

God Bless my friend and thanks for asking,

2 Pet.3: 16 “peaking of this as he [PAUL] in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. “

2 Cor.3 Vs.15 to 16 “ Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their minds; but when a man [IF] turns to the Lord the veil is removed

** 2nd. Tim. 3:16 **All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work

**1Tim.3: 15 **“if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth“. All SINGULAR] The CC.

Love and prayers,
Pat****

 

[Ignatius]

Yawn

???

 

[Big_Dummy]

Hi Big.

Where does Balaam come in?

The sense of the passage is that the scriptures came from God and not from men.

Verbum

I suggest you read the story, at the time he propheciesed he was in a state of repentance, grace. Also, read Eze 18.

 

[Big_Dummy]

Besides, the King James Version is a Protestant “Bible” anyway. That might not necessarily be relevant, but any Bible with seven books missing is bound to have translation errors as well. I suppose that is the reason you didn’t capitalize the word “Bible”?

Boring, one could also say any bible that adds books, is equally boring.

 

[Big_Dummy]

You do need to learn how to articulate your questions better, but I can figure out what you mean.

The answer is that the fact that God used “holy men of old” to speak his message does not preclude His occasional use of someone who wasn’t so holy to get His point across. The high priest in Jerusalem, while plotting Jesus’ death, was also used to make a prophetic point.

DaveBj

if you can “figure” out what I said, then it was said clealy enough.