Does the Bible contradict itself? - Reader Poll (and discussion)

[Aunty Jane]

Wrangler said:
Great question! @Aunty Jane is big on denying the claim A&E were ever immortal. (Perhaps a slight difference from not dying once one comes into existence.) Perhaps A&E were in a state of Grace, not dying, where God's intention is that we would live forever.

New topic:

What sort of death did A&E die in the day they ate thereof?

I posit that they died spiritually that day. They were not immortal/eternal beings that became mortal in that day. On the other hand, we are immortal beings. An afterlife awaits us all. Many aspects to explore on this. Genesis 3:22 NIV And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of...

www.christianityboard.com

[

Have to attend my weekly Christian meeting so am eager to address this topic when I come back......
I love me a good question.....

 

[Jack]

The Bible contradicts itself quite a bit.

I'm sure Satan would agree with you.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Great question! @Aunty Janeis big on denying the claim A&E were ever immortal. (Perhaps a slight difference from not dying once one comes into existence.) Perhaps A&E were in a state of Grace, not dying, where God's intention is that we would live forever.

OK….my claim that Adam and Eve were never immortal is because to suggest otherwise, meant that the penalty for eating the forbidden fruit was a lie. Immortals cannot die....so, can God lie? NO! But the devil did. He is the one who told the humans they would not die.

So mortals are creatures who can die….not that they have to…..but that they need external means to stay alive....the tree of life extended the scope of that to everlasting life, which is not immortality. These are two different words with two different meanings......humans and animals…..all that breathe are “souls”.
Souls are “mortal” which is the very opposite of “immortal”….”souls” die. (Ezekiel 18:4) Animals die the same death as we do. (Eccl 3:19-20) They stop breathing.

Going to the creation account in Genesis we find that the only mention of death to Adam and his wife was in relation to disobedience regarding the only negative command that God gave to them. They could eat from all the trees of the garden except one.....so no deprivation was ever experienced.

There were two trees mentioned specifically in the garden….one was “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” and the other was “the tree of life”. Access to one was forbidden under penalty of death, but access to the other was initially unlimited.…..UNTIL they took the fruit of the tree that God had claimed as his own personal property….stealing what did not belong to them…..ONLY THEN were they denied access to “the tree of life”.
Gen 3:22-24 tells us what this meant….

”Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.”(NASB)

What do you see there?......Partaking of the fruit of “the tree of life” would give mortal humans the ability to “live forever”….but since access to this tree could be denied, it did not give them “immortality” …..because without being able to partake of this tree, death would eventually overtake them. Sin brought about death. Without sin, there would have been no death.

Stealing the fruit of one tree, meant that access to the other was taken away from them…..and angels were to stand guard to make sure that no sinful human ever got to eating this fruit.

“Everlasting life” was conditional, not something that was automatic…..they had to choose to obey their Sovereign in order to keep living. God gave his children free will, but without being able to test out their obedience and loyalty, it was a risk, so he covered himself by creating only mortal beings….a free willed rogue that was indestructible would have been a disaster, especially when one rogue (a powerful angel) influenced the majority of humans, and it says a ‘third of the angels’ to rebel against the rightful authority of their Creator. If they were all immortal, then even God could not destroy them….imagine the outcome?!

It seems very obvious to me that the wisdom of the Creator often escapes other intelligent creatures who don’t seem to understand how far reaching the effects of disobedience truly are. We are living in the finality of it…..a time when God will remove all disobedient ones from his presence and only leave those who can humbly and willingly do as they are told, by the one who made them…not for trouble in a complicated and often painful existence, but in a peaceful worry-free life of enjoying all that God has made for us here.

So many think that this earth is just a place to get tested for heaven….it never was. It was designed to be our permanent home.

 

[Jay Ross]

The poll at the start of this thread is really a poll of opinions.

It asks the question "Does the Bible contradict itself?

The problem is that it is the opinions of the commentators that contradict the scriptures. Just posting on this forum and presenting our opinions on what the scriptures states is often not in league with the scriptures.

The question that should be asked is, Does the promotor of this tread have a clear understanding of what the scriptures present.

If you polled that question, then I believe that the outcome would be that many members of this forum would vote yes, that the promotor of this thread does not understand the scriptures and often presents ideas that are contrary to the scriptures.

 

[Jack]

OK….my claim that Adam and Eve were never immortal is because to suggest otherwise, meant that the penalty for eating the forbidden fruit was a lie. Immortals cannot die....so, can God lie? NO! But the devil did. He is the one who told the humans they would not die.

So mortals are creatures who can die….not that they have to…..but that they need external means to stay alive....the tree of life extended the scope of that to everlasting life, which is not immortality. These are two different words with two different meanings......humans and animals…..all that breathe are “souls”.
Souls are “mortal” which is the very opposite of “immortal”….”souls” die. (Ezekiel 18:4) Animals die the same death as we do. (Eccl 3:19-20) They stop breathing.

Going to the creation account in Genesis we find that the only mention of death to Adam and his wife was in relation to disobedience regarding the only negative command that God gave to them. They could eat from all the trees of the garden except one.....so no deprivation was ever experienced.

There were two trees mentioned specifically in the garden….one was “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” and the other was “the tree of life”. Access to one was forbidden under penalty of death, but access to the other was initially unlimited.…..UNTIL they took the fruit of the tree that God had claimed as his own personal property….stealing what did not belong to them…..ONLY THEN were they denied access to “the tree of life”.
Gen 3:22-24 tells us what this meant….

”Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.”(NASB)

What do you see there?......Partaking of the fruit of “the tree of life” would give mortal humans the ability to “live forever”….but since access to this tree could be denied, it did not give them “immortality” …..because without being able to partake of this tree, death would eventually overtake them. Sin brought about death. Without sin, there would have been no death.

Stealing the fruit of one tree, meant that access to the other was taken away from them…..and angels were to stand guard to make sure that no sinful human ever got to eating this fruit.

“Everlasting life” was conditional, not something that was automatic…..they had to choose to obey their Sovereign in order to keep living. God gave his children free will, but without being able to test out their obedience and loyalty, it was a risk, so he covered himself by creating only mortal beings….a free willed rogue that was indestructible would have been a disaster, especially when one rogue (a powerful angel) influenced the majority of humans, and it says a ‘third of the angels’ to rebel against the rightful authority of their Creator. If they were all immortal, then even God could not destroy them….imagine the outcome?!

It seems very obvious to me that the wisdom of the Creator often escapes other intelligent creatures who don’t seem to understand how far reaching the effects of disobedience truly are. We are living in the finality of it…..a time when God will remove all disobedient ones from his presence and only leave those who can humbly and willingly do as they are told, by the one who made them…not for trouble in a complicated and often painful existence, but in a peaceful worry-free life of enjoying all that God has made for us here.

So many think that this earth is just a place to get tested for heaven….it never was. It was designed to be our permanent home.

Do you still believe Jesus is Satanic?

 

[RedFan]

There were two trees mentioned specifically in the garden….one was “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” and the other was “the tree of life”. Access to one was forbidden under penalty of death, but access to the other was initially unlimited.…..UNTIL they took the fruit of the tree that God had claimed as his own personal property….stealing what did not belong to them…..ONLY THEN were they denied access to “the tree of life”.
Gen 3:22-24 tells us what this meant….

”Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.”(NASB)

What do you see there?......Partaking of the fruit of “the tree of life” would give mortal humans the ability to “live forever”….but since access to this tree could be denied, it did not give them “immortality” …..because without being able to partake of this tree, death would eventually overtake them. Sin brought about death. Without sin, there would have been no death.

This casts the fruit of the tree of life as an antidote to cell deterioration, one which became a second forbidden fruit only after A&E partook of the first. We aren't told whether A&E ate from it prior to the Fall. If they did, its effects weren't permanent -- meaning it would have to be ingested regularly in order to keep the ingester's cells going indefinitely.

Do you see a Two Paths analogy lurking here?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Not necessarily false. The Bible is infallible in one sense... principle and morality. Those who wrote the various books were God's penmen, not God's pen. God did not dictate every word. He gave visions, thoughts, inspiration, and the various authors wrote those thoughts down, described those visions and dreams, in their own words according to their own perceptions. Ultimately, the goal and purpose of the scriptures were fulfilled. Jesus was exalted.

All scripture is God breathed Or inspired by God

seems kind of odd for God to claim this, then say he did not prety much dictate to, or tell the ones what to write.

All we need is the first good it was written by Moses after the flood. Yet much of it occured before the flood. Of which Moses was not a witness.

God gave us the creation narrative.. Now if we think Moses justwrote some words down. This narratve can not really be trusted can it?

Or how about prophecy. God told the prophets what to say and write down. And much, so much of it occured literally just the way God said it would.

again, If God did not write these words down. We can not really have confidence in the rest of prophecy to yet be fulfilled to be true can we?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Biblical inconsistencies come in two basic types. Some passages are literally consistent, i.e., they do not contradict each other – but they present contradictory pictures of God or of His commands. (Let’s call these theologically inconsistent passages.) Others are literally inconsistent, giving differing factual accounts of the same event. I see a lot more instances of the latter than of the former.

Or better yet. Let’s look at context and look at what is being said and to who it is said. And resolve the appearant contradictions, which are really not contradictions at all.

or lets do as yu are proposing. And just read a flawed bible wh9ch can not even agree with itself. The whole word according to God inspired by him

shame on us for even thinking such a thing.

 

[RedFan]

All scripture is God breathed Or inspired by God

seems kind of odd for God to claim this, then say he did not prety much dictate to, or tell the ones what to write.

The issue here is what it means for scripture to be "God breathed Or inspired by God." You say it is odd "for God to claim this." Do you see what you've just done? You have ASSUMED the thing to be proven!!! You have ASSUMED that in some fashion God, not Paul, wrote this to Timothy!!!

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Ummm... did you read the chapter? Psalm 40? It's not about David repenting of sin.

This subforum is marked out as a place where people can discuss unorthodox theology. If they ignore the warning sign on the door, they don't get to complain about what's in the room.

You want to cause doubt in the word of God feel free

This is an open and free chatroom where we can discuss what we think. I have just as much right to defend Gods word. As you do to defend whatever it is you believe.

it does not matter where it is.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The issue here is what it means for scripture to be "God breathed Or inspired by God." You say it is odd "for God to claim this." Do you see what you've just done? You have ASSUMED the thing to be proven!!! You have ASSUMED that in some fashion God, not Paul, wrote this to Timothy!!!

I did not ASSUME anything

Paule wrote as he was inspired to write.

God breathed or inspired means that God had a hand in writting what was in the word.

The word of God is powerful. It is his love letter to us. Do you think he left it to us to write the words he wants us to write. Or do you have confidence that God had a hand in what went into his word?

Again, Why do you wish to put doubt on the word?

The word is all we have from God. It is what we use to as paul also said, make the man of God complete and given all knowledge

without the word. We have the words of men who teach us. How can we test if what they say is right or not. If I have a flawed word. i have no hope that I can test anyone, I better pick right..

 

[RedFan]

God breathed or inspired means that God had a hand in writting what was in the word.

I agree that He had a hand in it. But the hand that held the pen was man's, not God's. And it is that human element which is responsible for the contradictions we see in the Bible. Why downplay that human element?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I agree that He had a hand in it. But the hand that held the pen was man's, not God's. And it is that human element which is responsible for the contradictions we see in the Bible. Why downplay that human element?

THERE ARE NO CONTRADICTIONS..

the only contradictions are man made, because they do not get context to resolve the contradictions.

or some scribal errors in our interpretations of copies of the word.

STOP PUTTING DOUBT IN GODS WORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[RedFan]

THERE ARE NO CONTRADICTIONS..

the only contradictions are man made, because they do not get context to resolve the contradictions.

Seriously? What context explains whether the Last Supper was a Passover meal (Mark 14:12, Mark 14:16-17, Matthew 26:17, Matthew 26:19-20, Luke 22:7–9, Luke 22:13-14), or was eaten the day before Passover (John 13:1, John 18:28, John 19:14)? What context explains whether Judas hanged himself (Matt. 27:5) or fell into a field where his bowels gushed out (Acts 1:18)? What context explains whether the centurion who wanted Jesus to heal his servant approached Jesus in person (Matthew 8:5-13) or sent an intermediary (Luke 7:2-10)? What context explains whether there were two demoniacs whose demons were sent into a herd of swine (Matt 8:28) or only one (Mark 5:2, Luke 8:27)? What context explains whether the transfiguration was six days after the promise of Jesus that “some standing here will not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come with power” (Mark 9:1-2), or eight days later (Luke 9:28)? What context explains whether “Saul took his own sword and fell upon it” (1 Samuel 31:4) or whether “the Philistines killed Saul on Gilboa” (2 Samuel 21:12)? What context explains whether Jesse had seven sons (1 Chronicles 2:13-15) or eight (1 Samuel 16:10-11)? What context explains whether Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he began to reign (2 Kings 8:26) or forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2)? What context explains whether Solomon had 4,000 horse stalls (2 Chronicles 9:25) or 40,000 (1 Kings 4:26)? What context explains whether Moses’ sending spies into Canaan was suggested by God (Numbers 13:1-2,) or by the people (Deuteronomy 1:22)? What context explains whether Joseph’s lineage is traced from David through Solomon (Matt. 1:6) or through Nathan (Luke 3:31)? What context explains whether Jesus allowed Mary Magdalene to touch him after his resurrection (Matt. 28:9), or told her not to (John 20:17)?

 

[Brakelite]

I did not ASSUME anything

Paule wrote as he was inspired to write.

God breathed or inspired means that God had a hand in writting what was in the word.

The word of God is powerful. It is his love letter to us. Do you think he left it to us to write the words he wants us to write. Or do you have confidence that God had a hand in what went into his word?

Again, Why do you wish to put doubt on the word?

The word is all we have from God. It is what we use to as paul also said, make the man of God complete and given all knowledge

without the word. We have the words of men who teach us. How can we test if what they say is right or not. If I have a flawed word. i have no hope that I can test anyone, I better pick right..

If God was dictating the words as you seem to be suggesting, then please explain the very different styles of literary expression between the various writers, such as Paul and John. Or Peter and Matthew. Perhaps you could explain why Paul actually dictated the words in several of his letters, but signed them in person.
Imagine how you would describe the vision of Daniel depicting the 4 beasts rising out of the sea. The 4th one was actually so terrifying, it defied description. It couldn't be compared to any known creature, even without the 11 horns.
Daniel, Ezekiel, John, Paul, Matthew, were all describing what God showed them, or what they witnessed. All of them had different testimonies, but were inspired to tell the truth as to what they saw, heard, and touched. This they did. But in each one's own language, style, understanding, literary skill, and temperament. If they were all dictated, they would read the same, say everything in the same manner, use the same wording and expressions, and be completely devoid of the nuances of poetry, chiasm, artistry, and personality.
Ask an expert in Greek or Hebrew languages. Ask that expert if there is a difference between literary styles of the Bible writers.

 

[RedFan]

Perhaps @Eternally Grateful should chew on this syllogism for a while:

Major Premise: God is not the author of confusion. (1 Cor. 14:33)
Minor Premise: The Bible is confusing.
Conclusion: God is not the author of the Bible.

Anyone want to wager on which premise gets rejected?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Seriously? What context explains whether the Last Supper was a Passover meal (Mark 14:12, Mark 14:16-17, Matthew 26:17, Matthew 26:19-20, Luke 22:7–9, Luke 22:13-14), or was eaten the day before Passover (John 13:1, John 18:28, John 19:14)? What context explains whether Judas hanged himself (Matt. 27:5) or fell into a field where his bowels gushed out (Acts 1:18)? What context explains whether the centurion who wanted Jesus to heal his servant approached Jesus in person (Matthew 8:5-13) or sent an intermediary (Luke 7:2-10)? What context explains whether there were two demoniacs whose demons were sent into a herd of swine (Matt 8:28) or only one (Mark 5:2, Luke 8:27)? What context explains whether the transfiguration was six days after the promise of Jesus that “some standing here will not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come with power” (Mark 9:1-2), or eight days later (Luke 9:28)? What context explains whether “Saul took his own sword and fell upon it” (1 Samuel 31:4) or whether “the Philistines killed Saul on Gilboa” (2 Samuel 21:12)? What context explains whether Jesse had seven sons (1 Chronicles 2:13-15) or eight (1 Samuel 16:10-11)? What context explains whether Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he began to reign (2 Kings 8:26) or forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2)? What context explains whether Solomon had 4,000 horse stalls (2 Chronicles 9:25) or 40,000 (1 Kings 4:26)? What context explains whether Moses’ sending spies into Canaan was suggested by God (Numbers 13:1-2,) or by the people (Deuteronomy 1:22)? What context explains whether Joseph’s lineage is traced from David through Solomon (Matt. 1:6) or through Nathan (Luke 3:31)? What context explains whether Jesus allowed Mary Magdalene to touch him after his resurrection (Matt. 28:9), or told her not to (John 20:17)?

Lol

See what I mean. You make the Bible unreliable. I mean who can have faith or hope with your bible?

Judas hung himself eventually he rotted so his guts fell out. So you have two people speak of events which happened on different days. No contradiction

As for the last supper. What the context? It was eaten the day before the sabbath (saterday) and y was the sabbath mean eaten every year in the feast of unleavened bread

But hey you have a tainted bi or. I am done playing your games

If you want to study and really see what’s up you can adequately explain everything perceived contradiction.

Or you can believe the bi or is flawed and not study and share that flawed bible

 

[Lambano]

Judas hung himself eventually he rotted so his guts fell out.

Notice you had to ADD SOMETHING TO THE BIBLE to resolve the contradiction?

Why is it necessary to add to the Bible?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You might have a case if all four verses were from the same gospel.
Are you of the mind that there are zero contradictions in the Bible?

Mark 11:12-14 NIV
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry.
13 Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit.
When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs.
14 Then he said to the tree, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.”
And his disciples heard him say it.

Mark 11:20-21 NIV
In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots.
21 Peter remembered and said to Jesus, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!”

--- COMPARE---

Matthew 21:18-22 NIV
Early in the morning, as Jesus was on his way back to the city, he was hungry.
19 Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves.
Then he said to it, “May you never bear fruit again!” Immediately the tree withered.
20 When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. “How did the fig tree wither so quickly?” they asked.
21 Jesus replied, “Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt,
not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain,
‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done.
22 If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.”

[

Yes I am of the moind that there are 0 contradictions in the Bible.

I also stand by what I wrote to youearlier concerning the language

 

[St. SteVen]

Yes I am of the moind that there are 0 contradictions in the Bible.

I also stand by what I wrote to youearlier concerning the language

You failed to prove your point about the fig tree.

[