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

[BarneyFife]

I don't think that verse is limited to the TCs. I think it refers to the WHOLE law, the 613.
And saying that it is spiritual does not mean it is desirable. IMHO
Paul says the opposite about himself. He is unspiritual. In what way is he unspiritual?

Romans 7:14 NIV
We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin.

[

Sometimes it's hard for me to remember that opinions are king except when it comes to "contradictions." Then it seems that words are important.

I don't have anything against modern translations, in general, but digging only slightly into the Greek of Romans 7:14 renders it useless for your theory, not to mention the myriad of other texts in the Bible that support Paul's post-Damascus Road condition as being definitely Spirit-filled (early Romans 8, etc.)—not the least of which have been posted by you, My Friend

Sorry, but I really don't know a nice way to say this stuff. But this is what happens when folks quote whatever seems to refute the opposing view at hand.

The converted Paul was either spiritual or carnal, or some mysterious combination of both. But he wasn't whatever we want him to be at the time of a debate.

:)

 

[BarneyFife]

My point is that the term "the spirit of the law" is not to be found in the Bible.
Correct me if I am wrong.

[

I don't know right offhand if the exact idea expressed in the English phrase "the spirit of the law" is found in the best manuscript copies of Scripture we have available or not.

And I don't think the true and accurate answer to that question is of any more import than a hill of navy beans, do you?

:)

 

[ThePuffyBlob]

Discussion questions:
- Is it even possible that the Bible could contradict itself?

No

- Why would that be impossible?

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

- If it did contradict itself, would that be bad for the Bible?

Yes, definitely. If the Bible contradicts itself, you would then question the authenticity of the whole Bible. You would start to doubt your faith and eventually lose it. So, never doubt the word of God, but doubt your interpretation of His words.

- Does the Bible promise not to contradict itself?

- Would it be harmful to your faith if the Bible was found to be contradictory?

Yes

- Have you found some contradictions to discuss?

a lot, but i hate debate. it is pointless

 

[St. SteVen]

Sometimes it's hard for me to remember that opinions are king except when it comes to "contradictions." Then it seems that words are important.

I don't have anything against modern translations, in general, but digging only slightly into the Greek of Romans 7:14 renders it useless for your theory, not to mention the myriad of other texts in the Bible that support Paul's post-Damascus Road condition as being definitely Spirit-filled (early Romans 8, etc.)—not the least of which have been posted by you, My Friend

Sorry, but I really don't know a nice way to say this stuff. But this is what happens when folks quote whatever seems to refute the opposing view at hand.

The converted Paul was either spiritual or carnal, or some mysterious combination of both. But he wasn't whatever we want him to be at the time of a debate.

Let's return to your question which I found to be unanswerable due to the assumption that Paul was referring to the TCs in Romans 7:14.

In what way then, in your opinion, is the ten commandment law spiritual?

I don't understand why you would limit it to the TCs.
I suppose you will say that he named two or three of the Ten in the preceding verses.
But that is not conclusive to me.

To me, "the law" is the law.

Observations about the law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law - four different things

- What's the difference between the law and the Law? (capital L) - What's the difference between the law and God's law? - What's the difference between the law, God's law, and Christ's law? The law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law; four different things. Agree, or disagree? Points...

www.christianityboard.com

[

 

[St. SteVen]

I don't know right offhand if the exact idea expressed in the English phrase "the spirit of the law" is found in the best manuscript copies of Scripture we have available or not.

And I don't think the true and accurate answer to that question is of any more import than a hill of navy beans, do you?

Actually it is important to me. And so are navy beans. - LOL

The unbiblical term "the spirit of the law" is used to defend the law we are not under.
Saying, we are not under the letter of the law, but we are under the spirit of the law.
What's the difference?

[

 

[Wick Stick]

My point is that the term "the spirit of the law" is not to be found in the Bible.
Correct me if I am wrong.

[

Not with that exact phrase, but...

Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

Also, the concept is definitely in there, if not using that phrase precisely.

 

[St. SteVen]

The unbiblical term "the spirit of the law" is used to defend the law we are not under.
Saying, we are not under the letter of the law, but we are under the spirit of the law.
What's the difference?

@BarneyFife
Have you ever compared your view of the law with the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5:22-23. (see below)
I wonder how many of the listed fruit align with the law.

Galatians 5:22-23 NIV
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

Not with that exact phrase, but...

Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

Also, the concept is definitely in there, if not using that phrase precisely.

I would argue that "the Spirit" and "the law" are being contrasted here.
Wouldn't "the oldness of the law" be the law of the letter?

[

 

[Wick Stick]

I would argue that "the Spirit" and "the law" are being contrasted here.
Wouldn't "the oldness of the law" be the law of the letter?

[

"Should" and "not" make a contrast between "letter" and "spirit," by my reckoning. Both are ways of using the law.

"Letter" means we use the law as a standard of accountability, holding each other to the letter of what is written.

"Spirit" means we use the law according to God's intention in giving the rule, which is most often as a standard for our own conduct.

Or... that's how I understand it, anyway.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I think the erroneous (imho) "the spirit of the law" is taken from this scripture below.
But it is comparing the letter of the law to the Spirit, not to "the spirit of the law".

2 Corinthians 3:6 NIV
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—
not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

[

Why does the letter kill?

and why does the spirit give life?

anyone can answer

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The Romans 3 conundrum is this: Romans (big picture) is about forming a community of Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ. Although Torah prescribes sacrifices for sin, Paul states that Torah doesn't give Jews an advantage over Goyim:

What then? Are we better than they? Not at for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin... (Romans 3:9)

19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under Torah so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of Torah no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through Torah comes the knowledge of sin. (Romans 3:19-20)

So, what good did wasting all those bulls and sheep (a work of Torah) do? God's people are still subject to the power of Sin, they are still accountable to God for the works done in the body, and they are still not right before God.

And for that matter, why does Paul metaphorically relate Christ's sacrifice to an "hilasterion" (either a propitiatory sacrifice or that fancy cover on the Ark of the Covenant) in verse 25 if the Yom Kippur sacrifice on which it’s modeled had no real meaning? Forms and Shadows...

Well, this thread is about contradictions...

Paul answered this in Galations 3

The law was a tutor to bring us to christ.

The animals being sacrificed is all through the OT not just the law. God himself sacrificed one or two to cover Adam and Eve (a precurser in my view)

It is part of the schooling, to show mankind. This is what God thinks of your sins. Take this innocent lamb with no blemish and spill its blood.

te sad part is, men looked to deeply at the symbology and thought it was real. So when John the Baptist said here is the lamb of God which takes the sin of the world. The people should have woken up and said, yes, I get it, Sadly. They cut johns head off and crucified christ.

because the same law that curses the world. Jew or gentile. Was foolish to them, they did not understand. And in the end. Cut their own heads off (symbolically) many of which will spend eternity apart from God because they missed the big picture

No contradiction. Please stop..

 

[Lambano]

Why does the letter kill?

It had an unhappy childhood.

 

[St. SteVen]

"Should" and "not" make a contrast between "letter" and "spirit," by my reckoning. Both are ways of using the law.

"Letter" means we use the law as a standard of accountability, holding each other to the letter of what is written.

"Spirit" means we use the law according to God's intention in giving the rule, which is most often as a standard for our own conduct.

Or... that's how I understand it, anyway.

I think it is significant that "Spirit" is capitalized. (in the NIV) Meaning THE Spirit, not "the spirit of".

Romans 7:6 NIV
But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law
so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Galatians 5:18 NIV
But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

[

 

[Eternally Grateful]

There would have been be no plucking grain on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:1-2) if that were true.

Can you show me where plucking grain on the sabbath is forbidden?

Jesus made it a habit of breaking mans laws, to piss of the pharisees. Which were not Gods laws.

I asked, because I looked in the KJV, the NKJV, the NASB, and the ESV and I could not find any command that forbid plucking of grain on the sabbath

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It had an unhappy childhood.

How am I supposed to take you seriously when you make a rude comment like this.

can you answer the question? Or was the question too hard?

 

[Lambano]

Paul answered this in Galations 3

The law was a tutor to bring us to christ.

The problem with Paul's explanation is then you have to ask: Okay, if Torah is only a shadow of what was to come, were the sins of God's people REALLY washed away? Or were they deceived and thus still in their sins? And did God lie when He said the covenant was eternal?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No... I don't know how you got that out of what I said.

You said the law remains for the jew

if this is true. They are all condemned to hell. Because no one, (including a jew) could be justified by the law. So they are all cursed by the law.

 

[St. SteVen]

Why does the letter kill?

and why does the spirit give life?

anyone can answer

Context helps.

Assuming the TCs were "engraved in letters on stone", they are described as
the transitory ministry of condemnation and death that has no glory now.
The ministry of the Spirit is more glorious. It brings righteousness and life.

2 Corinthians 3:6-11 NIV
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—
not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone,
came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses
because of its glory, transitory though it was,
8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious?
9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious,
how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness!
10 For what was glorious has no glory now
in comparison with the surpassing glory.
11 And if what was transitory came with glory,
how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

[

 

[Eternally Grateful]

That's what we do here.

We interpret and then equivocate, ascribe motive and values.

It's all in good fun.

Well, except that it makes people mad and divided.

:)

While true

I did not ascribe anything, I asked him a question based on what he said, and asked for him to answer.

Sadly. he could not. So he just blew it off instead of tryign to figure out what I asked the question i did.

that happens far to often here also

 

[St. SteVen]

The problem with Paul's explanation is then you have to ask: Okay, if Torah is only a shadow of what was to come, were the sins of God's people REALLY washed away? Or were they deceived and thus still in their sins?

Perhaps we need to consider the role of the priesthood.

[