Contradictions within the Bible?

[rameumptom]

One contradiction regarding creation, is that fowl is created in Gen.1 from WATER, and in Gen.2 from the EARTH. An interesting twist on it, is that the Pearl of Great Price reproduces this tension, and that includes even another: in the two books that comprise the PoGP, one posits Adam naming the animals ALONE, and Eve created later, and the other posits Adam and Eve created, and naming the animals.

Chicken or egg?....

There are many tensions that are reproduced or reinterpreted by posterior writers or prophets precisely because originally they (such tensions) respond to a mythological consciousness and not a historical consciousness, and reflect the borrowing from other traditions and the heterogeneity of such sources (Gen.1 = egyptian, Gen.2 =babylonian, and so on). Posterior writers of more refined and 'historical' mentalities took the myths at the core of judaism to mean either allegorically or factually, historical events that took place.

I agree with this as one possible analysis. The other is that they were written by two authors (J and E) that disagreed on the creation story. The point is, some claim the Bible to be God Breathed, perfect, and without error. Can a writing, which is supposed to be historically perfect, have historical discrepancies?

[rameumptom]

I think it is a fair thing to say that what one conceives to be a contradiction may be based upon one's understanding of the work. My understanding of the Book of Mormon is far less than my understanding of the Bible, so the seeming contradictions thereof may in fact be perfectly valid. However, if an atheist thinks that something in the Bible is contradictory to itself, it is up to the Christian to explain the resolution, because the atheist doesn't know enough about the Bible to do so.

I disagree. If the atheist wishes to have a discussion, it is up to the atheist to obtain the knowledge to have the discussion first, and THEN attempt to dispute it from knowledge, not hearsay.

What good is it for atheists to go to an anti-Bible website, glean all the poorly researched issues on it, and then go to Christian sites to dispute them? It shows that there is no desire to discuss, but only to find error and proof that he was right all along.

We can easily show imperfections in the Bible. We've done so already. And there are many non-LDS scholarly books out there that show the problems with the Bible (Margaret Barker, Bart Ehrman, Richard Friedman, et al).

But that doesn't show the importance of the Bible. Nor does it help an atheist to believe in God. C.S. Lewis became a Christian because he actually studied the Bible and the philosophies of the world, and came to the conclusion that we needed a Savior. Mormons quote him all the time, but some of his conclusions are disturbing for other Christians. The same goes with Margaret Barker's writings. And the Dead Sea Scrolls, as most Christians hate the idea of pre-Christian Jews acting like Christians (communion, baptism, awaiting the Messiah, sharing their wealth as Peter had the Christians do, etc.).

While I gained my testimony through the Holy Ghost, I have strengthened that testimony through my almost 30 years of indepth study on these subjects.

When I see that the early Judaeo-Christian writing, the Ascension of Isaiah, complements Lehi's visions (1 Nephi 1, 1 Nephi 8-11), it is a testimony to me that the Book of Mormon is true. Same with the Book of Enoch.

When Joseph Smith's Book of Moses includes the name of a man, Mahijah, who questions Enoch in a land called Mahujah; only to find that in the Dead Sea Scroll fragments of Enoch, we find a man Mahujah interviewing Enoch; how can we say that is coincidence? Was Joseph Smith the ONLY person in the world with access to the original Dead Sea Scrolls, and other early texts? How else could he have guessed so many things?

[rameumptom]

Ram, your error comes from the concept of this being a contradiction-which it is not. It is fully possible to both see a light and not be able to hear or understand what was said. Those two things are not mutually exclusive sir. It in not way violates the law of noncontradiction. That is easily understood.

Let's see:

Acts 9

7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

Acts 22

9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

Here we see that they heard a voice in one, but no man (no light). The other, they saw the light, but heard no voice.

Except we start fidgeting on what the meaning of the word "is" is, we have an apparent contradiction.

[rameumptom]

In Acts 26, I am not sure what you see here that disagrees. Paul says that the light shone all around him, and on the men with him. It never says in this chapter what the men saw or didn't see.

EDIT: Also, that you for your comment about the Comma Johanneum. I found an article about it here. Bible.org: The Comma Johanneum and Cyprian

The article deals with Cyprian and how early the comma appeared in the manuscripts.

Note the other 2 times Paul's conversion are mentioned, as I show above.

I am fully aware of the Comma Johanneum's history, as I've researched and discussed this over the last 20 years. The point is, most Bible versions no longer use it, as they accept it is a later addition. If that is the case, then those versions, including the KJV, have a major error in them. If that is not the case, then the newer Bible translations that omit it have a major error in them. Which one is it? Which is the correct translation? And if God Breathed and kept totally perfect by God, why the such a big discrepancy on whether to keep it or not in today's Bibles?

[Dr T]

Let's see:

Acts 9

Acts 22

Here we see that they heard a voice in one, but no man (no light). The other, they saw the light, but heard no voice.

Except we start fidgeting on what the meaning of the word "is" is, we have an apparent contradiction.

Thanks Ram :) I'd agree "apparent contradictions" are the issue for "most of them" and there are some that are very hard to reconcile. For the most part I'd say they have been justified approrpiately so that they are not really contradictory.

[Misshalfway]

I am not worried about there being what we sometimes think are contradictions. The Bible is a compiled document .... something that evolved over time and which was handled by a lot of people. That all by itself invites one to look deeper before drawing conclusions. Heck...I don't like anyone else folding my laundry!!

I think that this also puts the Bible in its proper place. It is the word of God. No doubt. It was inspired and thanks to so many, has been preserved for me and mine. BUT it is not the sum total of God's words. I know that and am reminded of that every time God answers one of my prayers. He has more to say...and will continue to say it! And He, thru the SPirit of God, will enlighten our understandings as we study the scriptures and pray. You see? Revelation is the key to all of this!!! The fact that the Bible contains a contradiction or two is part of the beautiful imperfection in which God does miraculous things.

[Sergg]

Thanks Sergg. Ok, I've looked into it and here is were the importance of the original Greek is very important for understanding. U asked for semantic support so here it is. In the original Greek there is no real contradiction between the two statements. Greek makes a distinction between hearing a sound as a noise (in which case the verb "to hear" takes the genitive case) and hearing a voice as a thought-conveying message (in which case it takes the accusative). Therefore, as we put the two statemetns together, we find that Paul's companions heard the Voice as a sound (somewhat like the crowd who heard the sound of the Father talking to the SOn in John 12:28, put perceived it only as thunder); but they did not (like Paul) hear the message that it articulated. Paul alone heard it intelligibly (Acts 9:4 says Paul Ekousen phonen-accusative case); though he, of course, perceived it also as a startling sound at first (Acts 22:7: "I fell to the ground and heard a voice [ekousa phones] saying to me," NASB). But in neither account is it stated that his companions ever heard that Voice in the accusative case. It's exactly what I was suspecting in my post above and now there is evidence that it's a sound understanding of the words so imo there is no contradiction there.

Wow, that is a great and responsible point. And I have looked it up in my Greek Version of the New Testment. Indeed, the word used for 'listened' or 'heard' is in both cases different (not only in its 'case' but alltogether another word, which might* strongly suggest T's point). But we ought to remember that this contradictions consists of TWO parts, P and Q and their respective negations. While now we have 'saved' the ambiguous 'heard' from contradiction in both cases, the fact is, that after ALSO looking for the words employed in the use of 'SAW' and 'SEE' (regarding the LIGHT in one instance, and a 'MAN'-Christ in the other) are the SAME word. Thus, while one verb (the action of hearing the epiphany) is saved from contradiction for they indeed HEARD but did'nt UNDERSTAND (and each version only ALLUDES to one or the other), still, whatever was it that they SAW, they SAW and didnt SEE at the same circumstances. And I regard the use of "light" in one instance to be a direct(if different) allusion to the epiphany itself of the 'Man(Christ)'. For even if we were to say that exactly the SAME as before occurs regarding the SIGHT of the seen(say, that one instance refers to they SEEING a blur or manifestation, the other saying that they although having seen this did not get to see CLEARLY the 'man' in it) we would have to draw the weird conclusion based on no difference in verbs.

So, the thing remains, now even more clearly, that some forced use is at play. That something escapes us in our reading of these accounts, or(and?) that a partly-contradictory tension resides within it.

[Sergg]

I mean, looking at it from your angle T, it could reasonably (now that I look at it) be that 'light' and 'no man' refer to different aspects of the same epiphany and not essentially the whole* of the epiphany(which I hold it to be, and in which case a real contradiction arises), but that one instance -again- says that the men SAW a* light in the scene(as well as an indiscernible 'noise')but not the individual within the such light('no man', this is, the FIGURE of the Christ that appeared ONLY to Paul).

Sure, now thinking of it, -even if I dont think the whole of the issue is resolved, and I want it to be a contradiction there, I accept it, lol- it could reasonably be acknowleged the strong(now stronger) possibility that it is just different aspects of the same epiphany and not negations of the assertions.

[Dr T]

Thanks for your thoughts Sergg. I am not a Theologian or biblical scholar or anything but I’d guess people that do this sort of thing can easily answer these apparent contradictions for the most part but we must be willing to look into it and consider what the apparent contradiction actually is.

[Justice]

There are more than *just* contradictions in the Bible. There are flat out errors in translation that have led to passages being misunderstood.

Is there anyone who thinks there aren't any and wants to see a couple?

[rameumptom]

Justice,

I've mentioned a few already. Hebrews 6:1 begins by telling us to leave the doctrine of Christ so we can move on to perfection. How can that be? Isn't it the doctrine of Christ that leads us to perfection?

[Hemidakota]

Correct....

[Justice]

Ex. 32: 4

4 And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.

Isa. 8: 1

1 Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man’s pen concerning Maher-shalal-hash-baz.

The bold "graving tool" and "man's pen" are both taken from the same Hebrew word "heret." A heret was a carving or scribing tool they used to carve or engrave.

When the Bible was translated it was assumed that the people in ancient Mesopotamia used papyrus to write on. It had not been discovered yet that in this same time period they used wax writing boards, which you would need a carving tool.

Not only does that lead to a false translation of man's pen, but "great roll" as well.

Oddly enough, if you think in terms of wax writing boards, and not scrolls of paper, the prophecy of the "sticks" in Isaiah comes alive. The entire meaning of the prophecy is lost because of the mistranslation.

I can explain it if anyone is interested, but would probably use a different thread.

[Dr T]

That is why I like to read multiple versions of the Bible and do some study to see which appears to be translated correctly. I usually use the NASB cause I've found it to be closest to the original meaning most times or the NIV for it's simplicity and not the KJ usually but it sounds pretty when read. I kinda like the new king james though.

[ShootingStar]

If the word of God is said to be contradicted, this is loosing touch with the equilibrium of reverence to God Almighty, we must be careful, and put our insights like very delicate things, for it is possible that an insight claiming Holy property may become a thing of differencing people instead of making this same people unite closer, I am speaking of the messages that contradict each other for the sake of the just, this should just be lowered in significance and the influence of God does not lie.

It has been said that the Bible has contradictions, I say about thus that, the Bible although we understand it is potent, that, the Bible has many a versions come to haught, this is like making different versions of water, one water may be purer then many.

Read my lips, no body who dares say that the Bible errs is complimenting God, or even God's angels of light. With all this said upon, no one has mentioned that the Bible was made for one thing and one thing alone, and that is to have hearkens from people to become self sufficient with wholesome embrace of word that edifies. If you say the Bible makes mistakes then you also are saying that Godliness is nonfundamental.

[Dr T]

Just going to bite my tongue on that one. But I will welcome u to this site :) Welcome ShootingStar

[Justice]

Shooting Star, I can say with complete confidence that man made errors exist in the Bible, and in the same breath say that it is the word of God.

I know with your background you can't see how it is so.

The fact that man messed the Bible up for himself isn't reason to blame God for the errors. Nor do I believe that if the Bible did not contain errors that it would make a big difference to very many people. What we need to see is there.

If you believe the Bible is a perfect rendition of God's word then you haven't really studied how we got the Bible or where it came from. We have a modern day prophet who has used revelation to show us some of the errors it contains. He even gave us a more correct version of the Bible through revelation.

[ShootingStar]

As I said before, I did it because I would have been frightened that God would be made without proof from our conclusions.

No need to bite your tongue sir, I do like how you express yourself and you did impress me with your tone. I need to hear that God can do what God wants before man and man to not question God for anything God did, otherwise, it is hopeful to yearn the Prophets of God because they are fulfilled due their devotion, and we are just trying to surpass this present tension called life when we adore and uphold the ways of God.

[rameumptom]

If the word of God is said to be contradicted, this is loosing touch with the equilibrium of reverence to God Almighty, we must be careful, and put our insights like very delicate things, for it is possible that an insight claiming Holy property may become a thing of differencing people instead of making this same people unite closer, I am speaking of the messages that contradict each other for the sake of the just, this should just be lowered in significance and the influence of God does not lie.

It has been said that the Bible has contradictions, I say about thus that, the Bible although we understand it is potent, that, the Bible has many a versions come to haught, this is like making different versions of water, one water may be purer then many.

Read my lips, no body who dares say that the Bible errs is complimenting God, or even God's angels of light. With all this said upon, no one has mentioned that the Bible was made for one thing and one thing alone, and that is to have hearkens from people to become self sufficient with wholesome embrace of word that edifies. If you say the Bible makes mistakes then you also are saying that Godliness is nonfundamental.

It has nothing to do with showing God irreverence, if I'm reading you correctly. Your writing is somewhat incoherent at times.

If you can show me how establishing the errors in the Bible or any teaching is uncomplimentary to God, I would be impressed. We seek truth. Truth comes from God. Errors are from man or Satan. Why would God be upset if we seek toward truth and light, and reject the errors that creep into such things?

Even Peter warned us that Paul's words were difficult to understand and could cause people to wrestle with them for their condemnation. Jesus and the apostles had to correct the misconceptions of the Jews, meaning they had to correct the scriptures for them. Some Jews (Sadduccees) did not believe in angels or resurrection, even though they had the same Old Testament writings as everyone else. Jesus corrected them by insisting on a resurrection. Do you feel he was being irreverent toward God for insisting on the truth?

I think God is interested in us finding and sharing His Truth, regardless of where it is found; and to correct the lies and errors, even if they are found in the Bible.

[ShootingStar]

When you point out that the scrutinizing of the Bible is must because of it's lack of interpretation, then what are you made of that you call yourself a friend of God's word sir? I like to think that when we talk about this stuff likewise, it is either going to draw people closer or off of God, please let it be for the best.

[Elgama]

If the word of God is said to be contradicted, this is loosing touch with the equilibrium of reverence to God Almighty, we must be careful, and put our insights like very delicate things, for it is possible that an insight claiming Holy property may become a thing of differencing people instead of making this same people unite closer, I am speaking of the messages that contradict each other for the sake of the just, this should just be lowered in significance and the influence of God does not lie.

It has been said that the Bible has contradictions, I say about thus that, the Bible although we understand it is potent, that, the Bible has many a versions come to haught, this is like making different versions of water, one water may be purer then many.

Read my lips, no body who dares say that the Bible errs is complimenting God, or even God's angels of light. With all this said upon, no one has mentioned that the Bible was made for one thing and one thing alone, and that is to have hearkens from people to become self sufficient with wholesome embrace of word that edifies. If you say the Bible makes mistakes then you also are saying that Godliness is nonfundamental.

Your God maybe a book, mine can answer for Himself

_Charley

[Hemidakota]

Or, mine does talk and walk we with me vice printed pages made from a tree. :)

[ShootingStar]

What my God decrees for me is love, much more personalized then the book of Mormon to me. If my God is a book, then I am a person in the book paying homage to God.

Jesse-

[Hemidakota]

We are not talking about a book here but rather does our GOD speak to us or not? Yes! I know HE loves us unconditionally but do we show the same to others in this mortality?

[Elgama]

For me God is infallible but even the Book of Mormon is only the most correct book not a perfect book. Thats why we have ongoing revelation both through the Holy Ghost and through the current prophet

-Charley