http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html pretty cool site, i had no idea there were so many contradictions in the holy book... then again the bible is a fairly large novel, written by dozens of people and edited and re-edited hundreds of times... lol i especially find this one about incest interesting. Incestuous marriage condemned. Leviticus 18:9 The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, ... thou shalt not uncover. Leviticus 18:12 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's sister. Leviticus 20:17 And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing. Leviticus 20:19 And thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister, nor of thy father's sister: for he uncovereth his near kin:they shall bear their iniquity. Deuteronomy 27:22 Cursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother. Incest Approved Genesis 20:12 And yet indeed, she [Sarah] is my [Abraham's] sister; she is the daughter of my father. Genesis 17:16 And I will bless her [Sarah], and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her. Exodus 6:20 And Amram took him Jochebed his father's sister to wife; and she bare him Aaron and Moses. (makes me suspect genesis and exodus were edited for those those living in the southern US states lol)
Abraham did not marry his sister. Here is the lineage of Abraham (Genesis 11:27-30) Terah had 3 sons: Abram, Nahor, and Haran. Haran became the father of Lot (an important character in Genesis; but not so much here.) Haran died early; during his father's (Terah) life. Abram marries Sarai (the daughter of Haran, Genesis 11:29) = therefore concluding that he married his brother's daughter, which is not condemned in the laws of Leviticus or in the op. However, please do keep in mind that during this time period of early human civilization; the practices of incestuous marriage were common. __________________________________________ again, this is another example of failure to understand the contextual bases of the verse. Leviticus 21:8 it is written (NIV) it is written in Leviticus 18:12-13 so in other words. father's sister = father's close relative (Lev. 18:12) mother's sister = mother's close relative (Lev. 18:13) so ... "Do not have sexual relations with the sister of either your mother or your father, for that would dishonor a close relative ..." Fitting it together -- having a sexual relationship with your "unmarried" sister of either your mother or father would dishonor them. thus, tying correctly with … "Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the LORD your God is giving you." (Exodus 20:12, The Ten Commandments) Therefore, there is no contradiction in the scripture. All the laws given by God coincided with one another. You have only pointed out that Moses' father and mother has committed a sin, which only demonstrates a humbling background of Moses.
actually, incest happened a lot in olden times, even in China's Warring States period, oh, about 2000+ odd years ago, there brother and sister incest in one kingdom( king and sis..., the king's wife, the queen was so jealous, she created a song to make fun of her hubby, the king. And you can guess what happended to her head...hehehe) in ancient Egypt, the kings married their sisters.( Cleopetra married her brother the king.) mid-east people still marries there cousins, today. I mean first cousins....ewwwwk actually one of the USA president married his first cousin. [ first cousins means cousin on your father side... your father's brother's decendant.] of course, 2nd cousins marriages are legal in ALL countries/nations on Planet Earth. except some states in USA. [ 2nd being cousins on your mother's side of the family.] they have a lot of this the Chinese TV series. so I am not surprised to say the least. And the Bible was written by probably by some sick homo-gay-guys anyways.
The bible has many seeming contradictions within its pages. For example, the four Gospels give four different accounts as to what was written on the sign that hung on the cross. Matthew said, "This is Jesus the King of the Jews" (27:37). However, Mark contradicts that with "The King of the Jews" (15:26). Luke says something different: "This is the King of the Jews" (22:38), and John maintains that the sign said "Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews" (19:19). Those who are looking for contradictions may therefore say, “see--- the bible is full of mistakes!” and choose to reject it entirely as being untrustworthy. However, those who trust God have no problem harmonizing the Gospels. There is no contradiction if the sign simply said, “This is Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews.” The Godly base their confidence on two truths: 1) “all scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16); and 2) an elementary rule of Scripture is that God has deliberately included seeming contradictions in His word to “snare” the proud. He has “hidden” things from the “wise and prudent” and “revealed them to babes” (Luke 10:21), purposely choosing foolish things to confound the wise (1 Corinthians 1:27). If an ungodly man refuses to humble himself and obey the gospel, and instead desires to build a case against the bible, God gives him enough material to build his own gallows. This incredible principle is clearly illustrated in the account of the capture of Zedekiah, king of Judah. Jeremiah the prophet told Zedekiah that God would judge him. He was informed that he would be “delivered into the hand of the kind of Babylon” (Jeremiah 32:4) this is confirmed in Jeremiah 39:5-7 where we are told that he was captured and brought to king Nebuchadnezzar, then they “bound him with chains, to carry him to Babylon.” However, in Ezekiel 12:13, God himself warned, “I will bring him to Babylon…. Yet he shall not see it, though he shall die there”. Here is material is material to build a case against the bible! It is an obvious mistake. Three bible verses say that the king will would go to Babylon and yet the Bible in another place says that he would not see Babylon. How can someone be taken somewhere and not see it? It makes no sense at all unless Zedekiah was blinded. And that is precisely what happened. Zedekiah saw Nebuchadnezzar face to face, saw his sons killed before his eyes, then “the king of Babylon… put out Zedekiah’s eyes” before taking him to Babylon (Jeremiah 39:6, 7). This is the underlying principle behind the many “contradictions” of Holy Scripture (such as “how many horses king David had, who was the first to arrive at the tomb after the resurrection of Jesus etc.) God has turned the tables on proud, arrogant, self-righteous man. When he proudly stands outside of the Kingdom of God, and seeks to justify his sinfulness through evidence he thinks discredits the Bible, he doesn’t realize that God has simply lowered the door of life, so that only those who are prepared to exercise faith, and bow in humility man enter. It is interesting to note that the seeming contradictions in the four Gospels attest to the fact that there was no corroboration between the writers. (but im sure some can think up a counter excuse to put their conscience at ease ) Would you accept a blind taxi driver? Why on earth would you allow a worldly person (blind to scripture) to tell you what the bible says? Excuse any spelling mistakes, this is not a copy and paste job.
It would be a bit silly to think there would be no contradictions in a book that was after all written by man.
i couldn't agree more. i do find it funny that most of the people that tries to find contradictions and flaws in the Bible are those who haven't even read it completely and fully before. and ironically, these are the people that point fingers at us for being ignorant and hypocritical on our views regarding other secular issues. (no one personal, just a general view i've come to notice when talking to people.) silly? how so? please do explain? most textual references and schoolbooks do not have "contradictions" in their pages -- do you find those to be silly, since in fact, those books are also written by man.
The "Holey" Bible http://www.greenwych.ca/bible-a.htm There's a couple of contradictions and the below link is another "101 Clear Contradictions in the Bible". http://www.islamway.com/english/images/library/contradictions.htm Give that a go. Just trying.
So when Christianity stop misquoting evolution and science, non-believers may return the favour. It's just an eye for an eye. And let us not forget how Christianity has this very strict idea of what is the "right interpretation", so even if someone DID read and comprehend the Bible in its entirety, Christianity can still call it the "mistaken interpretation". Why is it hilarious? What is the Bible, if not a work of fiction composed by man/men?
I couldn't agree more. -whistle For starters, we have to deal with the authenticity of the Bible having in mind it is a book put together by more than 40 different authors over a period of 1400 to 1800 years. And then, who's to determine whether you have got the 'rightful' interpretation? God or the Church or your ownself? I could just easily say my interpretation is right as opposed to yours. Also, some Christians love to apply the literal or figurative interpretation whenever to their convenience and according to their own taste and fancy, so you can never argue with them.
I saw the thread title and it wasn't what I had expected. I've done a bit of reading on Christianity and all I know is that the history of Christianity was a pretty dark one.
For most secularists, their form of interpretation is primarily used to prove the existence of contradictions. Since, the Bible has no contradictions -- there is a need for the secularists to misinterpret and alter the meaning of the context in the Bible to suit their claims of falsehood. interesting point. can you give an example to this? when the Bible states there was a flood -- there was a flood. the Bible states that Jesus Christ died and rosed again in three days -- Jesus Christ died and rosed again in three days. There is no open interpretation to the governing FOUNDATIONS in Christianity. however, if there is an mistaken understanding of the uses of Christianity with the world around us -- I have no problem changing. Galileo could not have said it better:
Well, it was written by man but God inspired. Contradictions comes when you read half the scripture and make assumption of the whole text. It's like reading bits of the novel and assuming that you know the whole book. The bible is comprise of 66 books (old and new testament) It was written more than 2000 years before. Without understanding the lifestyle and context of that era, it's easy to be confused. Therefore, you cannot the take the word of the bible in a gist. It is a living word (John 1:1). It could certainly mean a different thing to you at different times but it doesn't lose its essence.
Couldn't say it better myself on how believers tries to undermine science and namely, evolution. While it is not to say evolution is not without its faults since its infancy, many of such faults and "contradictions" are addressed by modern science, yet those who are against evolution never leave these past mistakes alone even when they are amended. If the accusation are based on misinterpretation, why wouldn't Christianity leave evolution alone? Secularists dish out as well as they get from "religious representatives". So to cry victim is as laughable as denying all the killing in the name of religion. CBA to dig up old threads where contradictions and "mistaken interpretations" are addressed, but even if the Bible has no contradictions, it is still possible that it is a work of fiction. History is long, to predict an event is meaningless because certain things happen on a regular basis. Moreover, we all see what we want to see, either confirmation or otherwise. And again, historic fiction is all the rage lately. Coinciding with history at various points doesn't make the story overall any less fictional. As for the passage(s) regarding Christ, I have not seen him personally, nor have I seen actual evidence of his divine existence (complete with resurrection, walking on water and all that jazz), his existence is but a rumour, a fable to me.
