Self-Contradictions of the Bible

[Ovedya]

You know, as a former atheist I realize just how arrogant I sometimes sounded when I told other people what they believed and why, and I made no apologies for the condescending way in which I expressed it. I remember once telling a Christian how arrogant he sounded when he said that he was going to heaven for believing in Jesus Christ. Then I realized how just as arrogant it is telling someone that there is no heaven and that Jesus Christ was just a myth someone made up.

If I made an apple pie and claimed that it was the "best in the world." A few people would agree with me. Then others would eventually come around and say that they've had better. The truth is a matter of perspective a lot of times, and we should all recognize it.

Personally speaking no atheist is ever going to convince me that the Bible is errant. I don't have to answer a long list of supposed contradictions to prove that my faith true. I know it's true because Jesus lives in me. In my experience, people that write books like the one you quoted from, and people that quote from those books, aren't interested in understanding the truth. They believe in the truth of their own words and convictions. They are just as stubborn as the Christians whom you accuse of refusing to answer because it challenges their faith. In the end there's no changing of minds on either side, and everyone's just wasted their time.

Now answer honestly: Are you more interested in arguing against Christianity than you are honestly seeking answers? My initial assumption of your answer is that you are not honestly seeking answers. Because someone whose come to a Christian board seeking answers asks sincere and honest questions about the faith. He does not place as his second post a long list of supposed "contradictions," saying, "Here, have at this. Let's see if you Christians can disprove this." It's just posturing, in my opinion.

[Arjuous]

You know, as a former atheist I realize just how arrogant I sometimes sounded when I told other people what they believed and why, and I made no apologies for the condescending way in which I expressed it. I remember once telling a Christian how arrogant he sounded when he said that he was going to heaven for believing in Jesus Christ. Then I realized how just as arrogant it is telling someone that there is no heaven and that Jesus Christ was just a myth someone made up.

Point taken, but it isn't arrogant at all to ask for evidence when someone makes an extraordinary claim.

If I made an apple pie and claimed that it was the "best in the world." A few people would agree with me. Then others would eventually come around and say that they've had better. The truth is a matter of perspective a lot of times, and we should all recognize it.

Agreed. But if you were to assert that there was an invisible spacecraft in your backyard, evidence would be required to make the claim. I'm just asking for evidence, nothing more.

Personally speaking no atheist is ever going to convince me that the Bible is errant. I don't have to answer a long list of supposed contradictions to prove that my faith true. I know it's true because Jesus lives in me.

Again, you're invoking spirituality as evidence that the Christian God exists, when the same spiritual feelings have been felt by Native Americans, Hindus, Muslims, and the like. "Feeling Jesus" is not evidence that he exists, because its purely a subjective and interprative response to spiritual experience.

In my experience, people that write books like the one you quoted from, and people that quote from those books, aren't interested in understanding the truth. They believe in the truth of their own words and convictions. They are just as stubborn as the Christians whom you accuse of refusing to answer because it challenges their faith. In the end there's no changing of minds on either side, and everyone's just wasted their time.

If you really want to keep throwing stones at their character, I guess that's fine, but you do nothing to dispell their arguments. People do this a lot with Darwin. "Darwin was a racists," etc etc. But people do not pray to Darwin, they study his ideas and compare that with other evidence and studies by other scientists. You make it sound like every atheist text is just done because atheists are evil and want to trick people, which is, as I've said, PURELY PROPAGHANDA.

Now answer honestly: Are you more interested in arguing against Christianity than you are honestly seeking answers? My initial assumption of your answer is that you are not honestly seeking answers. Because someone whose come to a Christian board seeking answers asks sincere and honest questions about the faith. He does not place as his second post a long list of supposed "contradictions," saying, "Here, have at this. Let's see if you Christians can disprove this." It's just posturing, in my opinion.

So since I came to the board with a question that was once posed to me by atheists (biblical contradictions) then somehow I'm just here to beat the drum and not listen? Interesting. False, but interesting. I'm actually hoping to hear why I'm wrong, if you can believe that. Debate is the only way we can arrive at truth.

[Giaour]

Pick 1 so called contradiction at a time and we'll answer them one by one.

[Arjuous]

Pick 1 so called contradiction at a time and we'll answer them one by one.

First of all GO GATORS!

Secondly, and more to the point...

John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time."

Written before John by the way, Exodus 33:11 "And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend."

[Ovedya]

Point taken, but it isn't arrogant at all to ask for evidence when someone makes an extraordinary claim.

Belief in the existence of God is not by any means extraordinary. Humans have always believed in the existence of God. So then it must be that belief in the existence of God is very ordinary, very common. You may find it hard to believe there is a God, but that makes you the exception not the rule.

Belief in Jesus Christ specifically goes back roughly 2,000 years. The Christian faith has covered the globe since the death of Christ, and those who believe in Jesus Christ comprise the majority in terms of world religions. So again, it seems that faith in Jesus is not extraordinary.

According to a 2000 survey atheists accounted for only 2.5% of religious adherants in the world (And yes I see the contradiction in that statement). I'm a generous man, so I'll grant that this number has increased by another 1.5% over the course of 6 years. Nevertheless, even if this number were increased 10% it would still make atheism the exception.

Agreed. But if you were to assert that there was an invisible spacecraft in your backyard, evidence would be required to make the claim. I'm just asking for evidence, nothing more.

And as the one making the claim I would tell you to come over and see for yourself. Walk around in my backyard for a while and see if you bump into anything that you can't see. Evidence is gained through exploration, not through explaination, and certainly not thrrough confrontation.

Again, you're invoking spirituality as evidence that the Christian God exists, when the same spiritual feelings have been felt by Native Americans, Hindus, Muslims, and the like. "Feeling Jesus" is not evidence that he exists, because its purely a subjective and interprative response to spiritual experience.

Your claim is not true. As one who has done comparitive studies on these religions I can tell you that not one of them has anything resembling the spiritual experience of being indwelt by the creator of the universe. Native American religions as well as most Hindu sects use drugs and various physical stresses and exercizes to experience spiritual "travelling." Having any such experiences as these are completely foreign to Islam. In many, if not, most, Christians' experience a simple realization of sin and a confession of Jesus' Lordship was all it took to experince the reality of Christ's salvation.

If you really want to keep throwing stones at their character, I guess that's fine, but you do nothing to dispell their arguments. People do this a lot with Darwin. "Darwin was a racists," etc etc. But people do not pray to Darwin, they study his ideas and compare that with other evidence and studies by other scientists. You make it sound like every atheist text is just done because atheists are evil and want to trick people, which is, as I've said, PURELY PROPAGHANDA.

Not so. I only testified to my experience with persons such as the one who wrote the book which you quoted from. Why are such books written in the first place? Is the author interested in learning anything about Christianity? Is he writing in order to illicit an answer from Christian apologists, in the hope that his problems with the apparent contradictions can be resolved? No. People who write books like this write them because they are convinced that their version of the truth is the right one. They are writing to inform others of their conclusions. Therefore, they are not open to debate or to discussion. Their minds are closed.

So since I came to the board with a question that was once posed to me by atheists (biblical contradictions) then somehow I'm just here to beat the drum and not listen? Interesting. False, but interesting. I'm actually hoping to hear why I'm wrong, if you can believe that. Debate is the only way we can arrive at truth.

Actually, he best way to arrive at the truth is to research the claims for yourself and not take them as valid evidence against the Bible. Skepticism is the atheist's best friend, remember?

I'll leave you for now with a quote I found from a former atheist who discovered the truth through reason:

"My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course, I could have given up my idea of justice by saying that it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too--for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist--in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless--I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality--namely my idea of justice--was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning."

--C.S. Lewis

[Ovedya]

Pick 1 so called contradiction at a time and we'll answer them one by one.

First of all GO GATORS!

Secondly, and more to the point...

John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time."

Written before John by the way, Exodus 33:11 "And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend."

Language: Hebrew, Panyim meaning, "in the presence of." The claim assumes the English interpretation of being face to face - as in, "gazing into the face of..." The Hebrew language makes no such assumption.

Context: Verse 10, "And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the tabernacle door: and all the people rose up and worshipped, every man in his tent door." Every man worshipped God at his tent door, but Moses went and stood int he presence of God. So "face to face" is in contrast to "at his tent door." Moses simply was in God's presence, with God in the same place, speaking with him person to Person.

[redeemed098]

When the day that the "scare tactic" actually arrives, what are you going to do about all that you have written and said about Christianity?

First, I am being honest with myself. I know what I see. I can say to you that if you are being honest with yourself and you believe the Bible, I respect that. Can you say that you respect my viewpoints?

As for your above comment, you have no objective, independent evidence that this day will come. It is a belief of yours. Why is it that in everyday life you would reject claims by people that you claimed had no evidence? For example, if you saw a product on TV that said it cured baldness, you would want to see hard evidence that it was true. If the manufacturer said, "just trust me", you would reject that, rightfully so. Why would it be different for religion? The evidence isn't there--it is based on faith. That might be fine for you--it's not for me.

Actually it is written that God knows us so intimately, to the point that every hair on our head is numbered.

I dont think its Gods intention for any man to be bald.

God isnt into curing baldness. Hes into curing sin. He does this through repentance. I know you believe you are being honest with yourSELF, but in doing so you are not being honest with GOD. You can reject whatever claims you like. It matters not...The one thing you need to know is that "without holiness no one will see the Lord." You do not have the power or the ability to make yourself holy. So you need to submit to the only one who can.

Trying to make YourSELF holy, is religion. An attempt to demonstrate Your own righteousness is tantamount to denying the righteousness of God by shining light on your OWN. "For your most righteous act is but filthy rags in the sight of God." The blood of Jesus is trampled by your attempt to show your own goodness.

Jesus came for the "Sinner". The one who will humble himself before God and admit that he is a sinner and has fallen short of God Holy standard of righteousness.

Regards,

Ben.

[redeemed098]

Point taken, but it isn't arrogant at all to ask for evidence when someone makes an extraordinary claim.

Belief in the existence of God is not by any means extraordinary. Humans have always believed in the existence of God. So then it must be that belief in the existence of God is very ordinary, very common. You may find it hard to believe there is a God, but that makes you the exception not the rule.

Belief in Jesus Christ specifically goes back roughly 2,000 years. The Christian faith has covered the globe since the death of Christ, and those who believe in Jesus Christ comprise the majority in terms of world religions. So again, it seems that faith in Jesus is not extraordinary.

According to a 2000 survey atheists accounted for only 2.5% of religious adherants in the world (And yes I see the contradiction in that statement). I'm a generous man, so I'll grant that this number has increased by another 1.5% over the course of 6 years. Nevertheless, even if this number were increased 10% it would still make atheism the exception.

Agreed. But if you were to assert that there was an invisible spacecraft in your backyard, evidence would be required to make the claim. I'm just asking for evidence, nothing more.

And as the one making the claim I would tell you to come over and see for yourself. Walk around in my backyard for a while and see if you bump into anything that you can't see. Evidence is gained through exploration, not through explaination, and certainly not thrrough confrontation.

Again, you're invoking spirituality as evidence that the Christian God exists, when the same spiritual feelings have been felt by Native Americans, Hindus, Muslims, and the like. "Feeling Jesus" is not evidence that he exists, because its purely a subjective and interprative response to spiritual experience.

Your claim is not true. As one who has done comparitive studies on these religions I can tell you that not one of them has anything resembling the spiritual experience of being indwelt by the creator of the universe. Native American religions as well as most Hindu sects use drugs and various physical stresses and exercizes to experience spiritual "travelling." Having any such experiences as these are completely foreign to Islam. In many, if not, most, Christians' experience a simple realization of sin and a confession of Jesus' Lordship was all it took to experince the reality of Christ's salvation.

If you really want to keep throwing stones at their character, I guess that's fine, but you do nothing to dispell their arguments. People do this a lot with Darwin. "Darwin was a racists," etc etc. But people do not pray to Darwin, they study his ideas and compare that with other evidence and studies by other scientists. You make it sound like every atheist text is just done because atheists are evil and want to trick people, which is, as I've said, PURELY PROPAGHANDA.

Not so. I only testified to my experience with persons such as the one who wrote the book which you quoted from. Why are such books written in the first place? Is the author interested in learning anything about Christianity? Is he writing in order to illicit an answer from Christian apologists, in the hope that his problems with the apparent contradictions can be resolved? No. People who write books like this write them because they are convinced that their version of the truth is the right one. They are writing to inform others of their conclusions. Therefore, they are not open to debate or to discussion. Their minds are closed.

So since I came to the board with a question that was once posed to me by atheists (biblical contradictions) then somehow I'm just here to beat the drum and not listen? Interesting. False, but interesting. I'm actually hoping to hear why I'm wrong, if you can believe that. Debate is the only way we can arrive at truth.

Actually, he best way to arrive at the truth is to research the claims for yourself and not take them as valid evidence against the Bible. Skepticism is the atheist's best friend, remember?

I'll leave you for now with a quote I found from a former atheist who discovered the truth through reason:

"My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course, I could have given up my idea of justice by saying that it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too--for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist--in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless--I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality--namely my idea of justice--was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning."

--C.S. Lewis

Absolutely faaaaaaaaaantastic......I cannot add a single word.....I am speechless....!!!

What a brilliant quote.

[sylvan3]

Your claim is not true. As one who has done comparitive studies on these religions I can tell you that not one of them has anything resembling the spiritual experience of being indwelt by the creator of the universe. Native American religions as well as most Hindu sects use drugs and various physical stresses and exercizes to experience spiritual "travelling." Having any such experiences as these are completely foreign to Islam. In many, if not, most, Christians' experience a simple realization of sin and a confession of Jesus' Lordship was all it took to experince the reality of Christ's salvation.

In regard to your last sentence, many people experience the "reality" of healing bracelets sold on TV. It is called the "placebo effect". In other words. people can convince themselves that something is real when it isn't. You might say the opposite, that people can convince themselves that something that is real isn't real, is true. Certainly, that can be the case. However, that is where good, strong evidence needs to be used. Skeptics are looking for good evidence, not baseless claims.

Not so. I only testified to my experience with persons such as the one who wrote the book which you quoted from. Why are such books written in the first place? Is the author interested in learning anything about Christianity? Is he writing in order to illicit an answer from Christian apologists, in the hope that his problems with the apparent contradictions can be resolved? No. People who write books like this write them because they are convinced that their version of the truth is the right one. They are writing to inform others of their conclusions. Therefore, they are not open to debate or to discussion. Their minds are closed.

I disagree completely. I would be happy to change my mind if I were presented with evidence that had meaning to me. Extraordinary claims (such as Adam living to be 950 years old, snakes that talk, a perfect deity "repenting" and being unhappy because he created man) require extraordinary evidence. Answers such as, "Because the Bible said so", or "God can do this", don't cut it. It is not irrational to question these answers. When you throw in the biblical contradictions, it is that much more easy to question. A person is not being close-minded just because they don't agree with you. Evidence like an amputated limb regenerating after people's prayers for that person would be quite a start. Why don't we see this? Besides, people who defend the Bible start with the thought that it CAN'T be contradictory and go through all sorts of contortions claiming it isn't. To me, that is not being open-minded.

Actually, he best way to arrive at the truth is to research the claims for yourself and not take them as valid evidence against the Bible. Skepticism is the atheist's best friend, remember?

I have done this. It still comes across as contradictory.

"I'll leave you for now with a quote I found from a former atheist who discovered the truth through reason:

My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course, I could have given up my idea of justice by saying that it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too--for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist--in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless--I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality--namely my idea of justice--was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning."

--C.S. Lewis

An argument for God, but not necessarily the Christian God.

[Jorge S]

Your argument here is flawed, in that it takes belief in the Bible before reading it to accept it as true. The Bible indeed is a 'very special book,' if only for the history that has occurred under it's flag, yet I also think it is a good piece of literature containing some very good points about how we should live our lives (in a non-religious sense). The problem is that, and I truly don't mean to offend you, but God didn't write it. And I know he didn't write it, because of all the problems with it. Not only the contradictions, but because of BLATENT HATEFUL IGNORANT things contained within it, such as an absolute disgust with homosexuals. Before you start beating the pulpit, No, I am not Gay, but discriminating against any human being for any sort of biological trait is IGNORANCE.

Also, this claim that 'the Bible explains itself' is logically bankrupt. You're completely trusting one source for your information about the world, and then saying that the world is wrong when the source turns out to have made FALSE assumptions.

The only argumentative flaw is to disregard the Bible because one does not agree with what it says. In my passage you quoted I'm simply stating that God is the best guide into His Word. And I'm also saying that the Bible is a completed revelation, never intended to change or being annulled or contradicted by external evidence or human testimony. It is the Word of an eternal God with the attributes and qualities you already mentioned in an earlier post. He did use human writers but He decided what was to be written and who was to write it. You need to have a relationship with God in order to grasp a fuller meaning of the Bible. This requirement not only changes your state of mind when approaching the text but also allows God to lead you into understanding. I