101 Contradictions in the Bible

[dianalee4jc]

Well, you said,

"My point was there are plausible explanations for these things.

These people believe that the objection (supposed contradiction) is in and of itself sufficient to discredit the Bible -- they even extend it out to discredit the whole Bilble."

I take that as a position indicating there is no such thing as a contradiction in the Bible,

But that's not what I said at all. I have discussed these things with many people who believe that what they see as "contradictions" are sufficient to discredit the entire Bible. They don't bother to examine the evidence, they don't want to hear a counter-argument... they're comfortable with their objections and that's that. I said nothing about inerrancy.

And when you infuse these contradictions with plausibility it suggests that everything in the Bible is plausible, EVEN the Flood. Hence my reference.

You're jumping to a conclusion here. But for the record, I believe that the original writers of Scripture were under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and what they wrote was inerrant. I don't believe that modern translations are inerrant. I don't believe that modern interpretations are inerrant. I have many questions about what actually happened (i.e., six-day creation, the flood, etc.), but I don't think we're going to be able to resolve those things with certainty in a discussion forum like this. I wasn't there... so my answer to many things is, "I don't know." But I'm willing to look at plausible explanations, and I trust that my God is faithful.

I am just troubled when I encounter people who aren't willing to look at plausible explanations for "contradictions." In my experience, they seem to have an agenda all their own. I'm not saying you do -- I don't know you -- I'm only remarking on my own past experience with these things.

Absolutely not; however, as I explained, you've made remarks that very strongly suggest you believe the Bible has no true contradictions and that everything in it is plausible. If this is not the case, then I stand corrected. Do I?

I hope I've clarified myself. The Bible has seeming contradictions that we can discuss. I am willing to accept plausible explanations, based upon historical and Biblical evidence.

That wasn't what prompted my remark. I don't believe the two writers were coming from different perspectives, one simply recounting a later event than the other. As I read them, the accounts indicate that two very separate events were being described (at least one being bogus), neither having any cause/effect relationship with the other. And what reinforces this is the contradictory accounts of what Judas did with the money and who bought the land.

Luke wrote his account of the Gospel based upon personal interviews. This is why I raised the "car accident" scenario. Based upon who Luke interviewed, and where their information came from, it is possible that both accounts are accurate, but are based upon different perspectives.

So, in view of all this, my remark arose because I regard the two accounts as fitting the definition of "contradiction"--if one is true the other must be false--and I believe that in order to overcome this fact one would have to suppress common sense and, in fact, lie to oneself --the mind game, and the only reason to do so would be to keep one's beliefs intact.

I'll be honest with you... even if you were to prove that this was a contradiction, and I accepted that you were right, it would not affect my faith, because my faith is based on more than just my own reading of Scripture. (That said, I have to point out that you have yet to prove to me that there is a contradiction.) However, in addition to "heart" knowledge and "faith" knowledge, I also have "head" knowledge. I've studied these things... perhaps not nearly as much as some folks here... but I've yet to find anything that caused me so much doubt that I had to question my faith. I have questions about stuff... but that's okay. God can handle my questions.

And I apologize. Too frequently I get embroiled in discussions with people who are quite confrontational, and I often respond in kind, and even let it carry over into other threads. From here on I will regard you as a civil Christian who is actually looking to discuss issues.

Thank you. I appeciate that, very much. I know how it is.

Cheers,
Diana

[Sparko]

Ah yes, recounting what happened when a dead body fell down a hill is far more important than recounting how it wound up dead. Think the writer of Acts believed the former was the more significant of the two? Give me a break.

so who said he was dead when the rope broke in my graphic novel?

He could have used crappy rope, and it snapped when he hung himself, at which point he fell headlong down a cliff (much like you are doing in this thread) and hit a rock and burst open.

Or he could have been dead a while and burst from decay.

the piont is, the two accounts don't contradict each other. If one said "Judas did not hang himself as commonly said..." then you would have a contradiction.

Of course if both accounts agreed, we would have you in here complaining that one author must have stolen from the other. No matter what, I am sure someone like you can find fault with the bible.

[Pitchforkpat]

the piont is, the two accounts don't contradict each other. If one said "Judas did not hang himself as commonly said..." then you would have a contradiction.

Oh but they do contradict each other. One account says that Judas gave the money back. The other says that Judas bought a field with the money. If you CLAIM that a field was bought “in his name” that is your CREATIVE interpretation of scripture. As I’ve mentioned before Sparko, if we only had the one account that said Judas went and hanged himself, you would never have even considered a “cliff”. It’s only because you’re afraid of a contradiction that you hold on tight to your cliff idea.

And besides, I don’t know why people put so much effort into holding fast to the idea that the Bible contains no contradictions. It’s inescapable. Let’s here your rationalization for the following:

There is a clear contradiction that appears between Mark and Luke’s account of the demon possessed man/men that met Jesus after he calmed the storm in the boat on the way to the land of the Gadarenes. Mark agrees with Luke that there was only one demon possessed man:

“And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit. Who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no man could bind him, no, not with chains…And always, night and day, he was in the mountains, and in the tombs, crying, and cutting himself with stones…But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him. And cried with a loud voice… (Mark 5:2-7)”,

Matthew saw things differently:

“When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes, two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way. "What do you want with us, Son of God?" they shouted. "Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?" (Matthew 8:28-29 NIV).”

So was there one demoniac or two? I’ll enjoy hearing your views on this. Feel free to be just as ‘creative’ with your excuse.


Another lovely contradiction appears just before Jesus’ arrest. Jesus makes his prediction about how and when Peter will deny knowing him. In John 13:38 Jesus tells Peter,

“Verily, verily I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou has denied me thrice.”

Whenever Jesus says “verily, verily” he is very serious and chooses his words carefully. Later in John 18:17-27 events unfold just as Jesus had predicted.

Remember Jesus said the cock shall not crow till after three denials, and in John’s version it didn’t. However, Mark tells a different story. In Mark’s version a maid asks Peter if she had seen him with Jesus earlier and he denies it. Then he goes out on to the porch and the cock crows. She then points him out to onlookers and Peter denies knowing Jesus twice more and the cock crows a second time.

“And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them. And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto. But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak. And the second time the cock crew. (Mark 14:66-71

Good luck Sparko et al

[Minnesota]

so who said he was dead when the rope broke in my graphic novel?

Well I suppose it is YOUR "graphic novel," so I guess you can claim anything you want in it. Got any buxom furry forest creatures--ala JPH-- scampering about in your story? In any event, is it your claim that Matthew is in error? We should not suppose that when it says Judas "went away and hanged himself" the hanging didn't kill him? Think we should draw the same conclusion from other hangings recounted in the Bible? Think the two officials hanged on a gallows in Esther 2:23 died of something else? Think the chief baker hanged in Genesis 40:22 didn't die from it? Think Haman's ten sons hanged in Esther 9:14 didn't die from the execution? Seem to me that when the Bible, or anyone for that matter, says someone was hanged it is meant to convey the fact that hanging killed them. Enough said.

She's not the one I'm belittling

Not consciously perhaps, which is typical of those too wrapped in their self righteousness to see otherwise. But may I suggest that you see a good endocrinologist to help you with your problem, or is it simply a matter of compensation that you feel the need to cast others like dianalee4jc in the role of inferior? No need to answer. Either way it's a bit sad, Tea. And I hope that your attempt to belittle me has been cathartic, otherwise this rather amusing venting of yours has been pretty much just that.


You have a good night now, sweetie.

[lilpixieofterror]

Of course. As usual the excuses involve “problems” with the translation. It always amazes me that Christians say the Bible is the perfect and infallible word of God but keep saying it’s mistranslated when it comes to these contradictions. It’s just laughable to say God basically dictated it but didn’t bother to make sure anyone got the translation anything close to right. If you add up all these “mistranslations” the book just can’t be trusted.

This is a strawmen... because most Christians I know claim the orgionals were without error (not the copies). Come back when are not totally clueless.

Did you stop to think that the field being bought “in his name” is not in the Bible and you just made that up?

Of course I made it up, because it answers your objection and shows that you are creating little more than a false Dilemma. You can buy or donate in people's name to this very day. If Bob's friend Roy died and Bob donates to Roy's favorate charity in his name, wouldn't it be approtate to say 'Roy donated X amount of money to Y charity.' I'm sorry that you lack common sense and reason... Keep trying to pull that card of yours like it's a 'Get out of Jail Free Card'... I know it's all you have to keep your argument from falling down under it's own weight.

Once again YOU are making things up that aren’t in the Bible just because you can’t face that there can be contradictions.

Once again you use the excuse that, 'it's not in the Bible, so you made it up.' This is little more than a False Dilemma (thus a begged question) since no where do I recall hearing that something needs to be in the Bible to be true.

And btw, let me know when Holding’s ‘correct’ version of the Bible comes out so that we no longer have any contradictions.

Let me know when you stop using your favorate Begged Question 'It's not in the Bible, so you made it up.' After all, I don't recall hearing that something needs to be in the Bible to be the truth.

I’ll assume that since Holding will be the first person to come out with an error free Bible that is finally translated correctly, there will be no more debate over what the Bible says and no scholar will disagree with Holding’s translation. Think that’s going to happen?

You're a moron, are you? Do you ever read books written by adults or do you just blurt out the first thing that comes to your mind without looking something up? I'm sorry, but nobody here is claiming that modren day translations or the manuscript copies we have are perfect. Thus you have created a strawmen and have shown us your true colors... you are not intrested in the truth... you just want an excuse to cry 'contradiction' like a child crying for his ball, but never knowing what it looks like. Can you give an argument that isn't full of strawmen, false dilemmas, and begged questions?

You just get more and more stupid with each post. I haven’t made ANYTHING up about how Judas died. I quoted from the Bible and did not interpret, add, or imply ANYTHING other than what the Bible says. YOU and you alone are adding things like hanging himself from a cliff.

Just ignore that we are 2,000 years removed from the situation and don't have witnesses or word of mouth that would of existed 2,000 years ago. Did you know that Jerusalem and the area outside of it is full of hills and has quite a number of steep drops? Sparko has already shown a picture of the field we believe this took place on. Notice the steep drops and tall trees? Ever see pictures of the mout of olives? Perahaps pictures of the caves people were burred on at that time? Did you notice it wasn't flat? Yet you are telling me I'm stupid... Thanks for showing us you just put your fingers in your ears and go, 'lalalalalala this is a contradiction'... Can you say, 'strawmen'?

How could I possibly prove he didn’t fall from a high place? Just how out of it are you? I don’t have to prove anything. The only person that even cares about a “high place” is you because you don’t like having a contradiction in the bible. I have no problem with these kinds of contradictions because I do not pin my hopes on fairytales and flawed books.

Look at the picture Sparko posted, what do you see stupid? Hills, trees, and steep drops? Did you ever think if somebody wanted to hang themselves all they had to do with tie a rope to a tree branch, tie it around their neck, and jump? Yet you are accusing me of plaing m hope of fairytales and flawed books when you can't even look at a picture?

There you go again. I’ve already warned you about how stupid you are making yourself appear by countering things I’ve never said. I haven’t “assumed” that he could not have fallen from a high place. I simply said it’s not in the Bible. It’s not.

I'm still waiting for a reason why the Bible needs to mention it All it says is that he hung himself... last I checked... hanging yourself requires you to be dangling... you know like off a tree branch over a cliff... (you know a likely theory you ignore because it sinks your argument ).

Are you capable of understanding the difference or are you really as astoundingly stupid as you have been making out lately?

Just as stupid as you are to ignore that Jerusalem has quite a bit of hills, trees, and steep drops that would make your theory very possible. It's you who's the stupid one who has his hopes pined on a false theory (That somehow Judas could not of fallen down a hill or a steep drop when Jerusalem has quite a number of sites...)
I haven’t added ANYTHING to the text you utter moron.

I’ve already told you in an earlier post that a contradiction such as this does not prove Jesus didn’t rise from the dead. How many times do I have to tell you things before it actually sinks in to that tiny little thing you call a brain? Read the first sentence a couple of times more and see if you can grasp it.

Just ignoring you like you ignore me...

Now I’m beginning to understand why these little things are so difficult for you. Just what is an “assuration”? Is English a second language for you?

Picking on spelling errors eh? Is this all you have?

It’s not because you disagree with me, it’s because you keep making assertions about things I’ve said that I haven’t said and that you keep thinking that because I can’t prove that Judas didn’t hang himself on a cliff, that the two versions are in harmony. That would get you thrown out of any logic class. I actually suggest you take one so that you understand how basic logic works.

Taken a look at the picture sparko posted yet? Have you taken a look at some pictures of Jerusalem and noticed that it's full of hills and cliffs? It seems to me you are ignoring the bulk of the evidence and pretending that Jerusalem is somehow flat as Kansas... when the reality shows... our theory has merit. Of course, you ignore this and pretend that anything that explains away your contradiction is just 'adding onto' or that 'you quoted the Bible' yet, just like the idiot you are... you seem to ignore that my problem lies not in that you quoted the Bible... it lies that you seem to want to ignore that it is very well possible that Judas fell from a high spot (the photographic evidence proves it) when will you look at pictures and evidence that proves you wrong... the world may never know...

Blah blah blah

The rest of your post was like above, ignore the photographic evidence, cry that 'it's not in the Bible so you're making things up, throw in a few ad hominems, mix it up with some strawmen, with a dash of a begged question... and we have the rest of your post. Come back when you can make a post that isn't full of your wonderful stupidity...

Crystal

[zorathruster]

Of course. As usual the excuses involve “problems” with the translation. It always amazes me that Christians say the Bible is the perfect and infallible word of God but keep saying it’s mistranslated when it comes to these contradictions. It’s just laughable to say God basically dictated it but didn’t bother to make sure anyone got the translation anything close to right. If you add up all these “mistranslations” the book just can’t be trusted. .

You hit the nail on the head here. This is very common for theists to assert. Regretfully they just haven't studied enough of the history of the cannon to speak competently about it.

Did you stop to think that the field being bought “in his name” is not in the Bible and you just made that up? Once again YOU are making things up that aren’t in the Bible just because you can’t face that there can be contradictions..

You are exactly right here. They will make up all sorts of rationalizations for commonly understood phrases that conflict or are obviously erroneous.

And btw, let me know when Holding’s ‘correct’ version of the Bible comes out so that we no longer have any contradictions. I’ll assume that since Holding will be the first person to come out with an error free Bible that is finally translated correctly, there will be no more debate over what the Bible says and no scholar will disagree with Holding’s translation. Think that’s going to happen?.

Even if Holding comes out with a newer version of the bible, there would be some erroneous stuff in there. You are right about this but theists will never be able to see through their bible colored glasses.

You just get more and more stupid with each post. I haven’t made ANYTHING up about how Judas died. I quoted from the Bible and did not interpret, add, or imply ANYTHING other than what the Bible says. YOU and you alone are adding things like hanging himself from a cliff. .

You are right here too. I realize that using logic with theists is frustrating, however, it is essential to plainly and impassionately as you have done lay out exactly why they are wrong. You are doing a good job, not that they will notice or even acknowledge. They will respond with fluff and hundreds of emocons to try and berate you, just understand you are right and their ignorance is showing to anyone who reads their posts.

There you go again. I’ve already warned you about how stupid you are making yourself appear by countering things I’ve never said. I haven’t “assumed” that he could not have fallen from a high place. I simply said it’s not in the Bible. It’s not. Are you capable of understanding the difference or are you really as astoundingly stupid as you have been making out lately?.

Yes they do. Right you are. However they will continue to make frivolous excuses for why they want to keep their grand PooBah in the sky, and especially this time of year keeping a list of who's naughty and who's nice. For them to admit that you are rational would necessitate them reexamining their base premises, something they are loath to do. Just keep pointing out, very well as you have in this exchange, and eventually those with a mind will pick up on reality.

I haven’t added ANYTHING to the text you utter moron. .

Yes they are a bit thick, however, consistent, well thought out points presented in non-emotional formats is the best tool.

I’ve already told you in an earlier post that a contradiction such as this does not prove Jesus didn’t rise from the dead. How many times do I have to tell you things before it actually sinks in to that tiny little thing you call a brain? Read the first sentence a couple of times more and see if you can grasp it. .

They don't want to believe no matter how much proof you put before them. They have a world view that necessitates such silliness.

Now I’m beginning to understand why these little things are so difficult for you. Just what is an “assuration”? Is English a second language for you?.

Remember they will twist words and meanings to fit their world view. They lack the ability to understand or critically evaluate their position. English once proven to mean a specific interpretation will then be assaulted from the "Well it means something different in Greek, or Aramaic, or Dutch. They will wiggle until they can redefine the issue.

It’s not because you disagree with me, it’s because you keep making assertions about things I’ve said that I haven’t said and that you keep thinking that because I can’t prove that Judas didn’t hang himself on a cliff, that the two versions are in harmony. That would get you thrown out of any logic class. I actually suggest you take one so that you understand how basic logic works. .

Logic is not something theists are good at. They fail because obviously supernaturalism is illogical. By inserting illogic they can then assert their world view without having to make it rational. "Yes God killed innocent women and children but because we are irrational that can be a good thing."

Once again, it’s starkly clear that you’re so afraid of your own infallibility belief that you have for a second time just ignored my offer to give you a couple of my favorite contradictions that are harder to find excuses for than this one. Would you like to make another post and ignore this again? .

You keep pointing out the obvious contradictions in her arguments but that won't sway her. She is set on defending to the point of stupidity that her illogic applies. You are doing a very good job, she has been revealed exactly as you describe. Don't get upset with her continued blather.

Oh and since you bring up reading books written by intelligent people, next time you read a book see if you notice how intelligent people write ‘could have’ instead of ‘could of’, a little malapropism you committed in your post.

Although it is doubtful they can actually read criticism or something north of a children's book, it is essential to keep showing where they are making their logical and reality errors. Grammar errors are irrelevant to the huge errors in logic these theists make. Keep to the logical contradictions, as you have shown, and those who can see and think will be able to decipher the dream world they paint and the reality you paint.

Z

[lilpixieofterror]

Nice avoidance zorathruster thanks for showing your true colors: I really enjoyed this one:

Although it is doubtful they can actually read criticism or something north of a children's book, it is essential to keep showing where they are making their logical and reality errors. Grammar errors are irrelevant to the huge errors in logic these theists make. Keep to the logical contradictions, as you have shown, and those who can see and think will be able to decipher the dream world they paint and the reality you paint.

Please tell me why it is impossible that Judas hung himself by a tree branch off a cliff (which we see pictures of in photos online and the link Sparko gave) and the rope broke and he fell. Athiest like you are what strengthen my faith.

Crystal

Edited to add: Here's a picture you can see how many hills and cliffs Jerusalem has!

Here is this one:
http://www.jerusalemshots.com/Jerusalem_en0-6114.html
And this:
http://www.jerusalemshots.com/Jerusalem_en0-2478.html

Hope you enjoy them!

[Sparko]

And besides, I don’t know why people put so much effort into holding fast to the idea that the Bible contains no contradictions. It’s inescapable. Let’s here your rationalization for the following:

There is a clear contradiction that appears between Mark and Luke’s account of the demon possessed man/men that met Jesus after he calmed the storm in the boat on the way to the land of the Gadarenes. Mark agrees with Luke that there was only one demon possessed man:

“And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit. Who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no man could bind him, no, not with chains…And always, night and day, he was in the mountains, and in the tombs, crying, and cutting himself with stones…But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him. And cried with a loud voice… (Mark 5:2-7)”,

Matthew saw things differently:

“When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes, two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way. "What do you want with us, Son of God?" they shouted. "Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?" (Matthew 8:28-29 NIV).”

So was there one demoniac or two? I’ll enjoy hearing your views on this. Feel free to be just as ‘creative’ with your excuse.

So if one author focuses on one man and ignores the other and the other author focuses on both men, how is that a contradiction?

Another lovely contradiction appears just before Jesus’ arrest. Jesus makes his prediction about how and when Peter will deny knowing him. In John 13:38 Jesus tells Peter,

“Verily, verily I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou has denied me thrice.”

Whenever Jesus says “verily, verily” he is very serious and chooses his words carefully. Later in John 18:17-27 events unfold just as Jesus had predicted.

Remember Jesus said the cock shall not crow till after three denials, and in John’s version it didn’t. However, Mark tells a different story. In Mark’s version a maid asks Peter if she had seen him with Jesus earlier and he denies it. Then he goes out on to the porch and the cock crows. She then points him out to onlookers and Peter denies knowing Jesus twice more and the cock crows a second time.

“And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them. And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto. But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak. And the second time the cock crew. (Mark 14:66-71

Good luck Sparko et al

did you get that from some bible contradiction website? Did you go to your bible and read the verses? There are footnotes in Mark where it says

1. Mark 14:30 Some early manuscripts do not have twice.
2. Mark 14:72 Some early manuscripts do not have the second time.
3. Mark 14:72 Some early manuscripts do not have twice.

We don't claim the manuscript copies are innerrant. We have two different versions one that has twice and second time and others that do not.

sheesh.

[lilpixieofterror]

did you get that from some bible contradiction website? Did you go to your bible and read the verses?

You want him to read Sparko? He's too busy reading 'evilbible.com' to spend any real time reading articles written by grown ups.

Crystal

[Pitchforkpat]

This is a strawmen... because most Christians I know claim the orgionals were without error (not the copies). Come back when are not totally clueless

Thanks so much. I just love it when Christians unwittingly make my case for me.

You have worded it very nicely. They don’t claim the copies we have are without error. Obviously they’re not without error. Now you may want to retreat back to the “originals are without error” ploy but since no originals exist anywhere then it’s all too convenient. What you say then is that you BELIEVE that the originals were without error because there’s no way to check. You believe in something that doesn’t exist. Meanwhile the Bible that we have is NOT made up of originals but copies, and these copies that make up the Bible contain errors. So glad you see it my way.

Of course I made it up, because it answers your objection and shows that you are creating little more than a false Dilemma.

Right, and that’s basically all I’ve been saying. You made it up. Great. Enjoy your little made up beliefs that let you cling to the concept of inerrancy (which may or may not be true of the originals).

Once again you use the excuse that, 'it's not in the Bible, so you made it up.'

Once again, I don’t need excuses. Obviously you do. That’s why you say things like he hung himself on a cliff and toppled down so that he landed on his head. There is only one reason why you would come up with this fantasy death and that’s because you have to reconcile the discrepancies.

Let me know when you stop using your favorate Begged Question 'It's not in the Bible, so you made it up.'

Well since you’ve already admitted it above I won’t need to bother any more.

I'm sorry, but nobody here is claiming that modren day translations or the manuscript copies we have are perfect

Great, so we are in agreement then that the Bible that I can pick up at my local Christian Book and Music Store contains copies that have errors, right? I’m cool with that. Glad we can agree.

you just want an excuse to cry 'contradiction' like a child crying for his ball

Pointing out contradictions isn’t anything to cry over. It’s kind of a fun sport. Having you agree that the Bible contains flawed copies which contain errors is just great.

Just ignore that we are 2,000 years removed from the situation and don't have witnesses or word of mouth that would of existed 2,000 years ago.

Oh I wouldn’t ignore that. That’s one of the reasons why there are contradictions in this flawed book.

Did you know that Jerusalem and the area outside of it is full of hills and has quite a number of steep drops?

Sure, because Jerusalem has hills that means Judas hanged himself on the side of one? Try one of those logic classes. I can assure you it’ll help.

And of course we have for a third time you ignoring my favorite contradictions. Do you realize you have no credibility left?

[Pitchforkpat]

did you get that from some bible contradiction website? Did you go to your bible and read the verses?

I’ve looked at these two contradictions extensively. That’s why they are two of my favorites.

There are footnotes in Mark where it says

You’re missed the point. My illustration of the contradiction was quite clear. It’s irrelevant that some manuscripts of Mark don’t have “twice” or “a second time”. In John Jesus says the cock shall not crow until after three denials. In Mark the cock crows after the first denial. Case closed.

And what about the demon possessed man/men? Was there one or two?

We don't claim the manuscript copies are innerrant

Fine, so you are not saying that the Bible that I have in my hand and that I can buy at the book store is inerrant. That’s great. Now since there’s no possible way of checking the originals, you actually have no way of knowing if they contained errors or not. It’s just something you want to believe. That’s fine with me. Enjoy.

[Red Wine]

Great scott look at the time! I'm off to bed.

Mallista, little dove, I hope you haven't piously flown the coop and started a bar-brawl. But speaking of bars, there was a publican once who woke up to find he was being robbed (the IRA I'm told, would cross the border once a week to pick up their welfare and commit crimes). Not being one to back down to a shotgun, the old man was hit a few times on the head. Two weeks later, the old man, feeling unwell, was admitted and died of a 'cerebral edaema' (bleeding of the brain). His family, and city, maintain to this day even in writing, that it was at the very least manslaughter. So who is correct?

Being behind the 8-ball I'll throw out a few teasers for any 'guests'. Matthew it seems was a Jew. Luke was Greek. Matthew was a Jewish 'non-national' whose writing was specifically for Jews and contained ubiquitous reference to OT prophecy, more than the other Gospels combined (but not referencing here concerning Judas, Zechariah or Jeremiah, which is baffling IMO); Luke a trained physician, whose Gospel was for the Greeks, with an emphasis on a wholly different facet of thought that appealed to 1st Century Greek minds, and a total body of literature saturated with medical and forensic terms. Basic stuff, and this is very shallow.

On logic, what exactly is a 'contradiction'? There are astute logicians on here, so perhaps before we even get off the mark, could we see a symbolic formula outlining the contradictory 'terms' of these examples? I would expect something, say in regards to the Judas thing, containing conjunction, strong disjunction, material equivalence (most definitely) and a little implication. For instance it is obvious to me neither of those citations logically exclude the other. Just on the face of it that is.

Perhaps there is a better way for such ardent truth-seekers as Mallista and others to scrutinise Biblical reliability, and it would be to undermine first, perceived prophecies, before moving on to 'contradictions'. Let's start:

1. A virgin will get pregnant and call her boy 'Immanuel' (God with us) Isaiah 7 & Matt 1
2. He said to me 'You're My Son' Psalm 2 & Matt 3
3. Bethlehem, one of you guys are gonna be ruler, and, further, you've always existed Micah 5 and Matt 2
4. A voice is calling out loudly "make sure the path is clear because the 'Master' is coming" Isaiah 40 & Matt 3.

This small sampling refers just to Matthew but I'm clearly too tired to string together anything coherent, so check 'em out to some.

[Sparko]

I’ve looked at these two contradictions extensively. That’s why they are two of my favorites.


You’re missed the point. My illustration of the contradiction was quite clear. It’s irrelevant that some manuscripts of Mark don’t have “twice” or “a second time”. In John Jesus says the cock shall not crow until after three denials. In Mark the cock crows after the first denial. Case closed.

And what about the demon possessed man/men? Was there one or two?


Fine, so you are not saying that the Bible that I have in my hand and that I can buy at the book store is inerrant. That’s great. Now since there’s no possible way of checking the originals, you actually have no way of knowing if they contained errors or not. It’s just something you want to believe. That’s fine with me. Enjoy.

dude, you need to do some study on textual criticism. The fact that there are some errors in our copies does not mean we have an innacurate bible. We know where the errors are (hence the footnotes) - We literally have tens of thousands of copies of bible manuscripts, so we can compare them and find out what the originals said with a very high degree of accuracy. Moreso today than we could a few hundred years ago. We have more earlier manuscripts now then we had then. But the passages that are in the bibles we have were written before we had those earlier manuscripts, so instead of rewriting them, they put in the footnotes.

What I find hilarious is that if the bible is so chock full of errors why are all the ones you atheists bring up just stupid grammar errors or errors in the number of people, angels, demons or animals in a given situation? Can't you find any significant errors that actually effect salvation or Christian doctrine? You are bringing up 'typos' and claiming they are major contradictions. It's hilarious.

[Zeluvia]

Okay, what about the way the two creation myths were haberdashered together...

One saying he created men and women and everything in six days...

Then the other silly mess of Adam and Eve....

Sure sure, one just "explains" the other in more detail, even if the time lines don't match, and the story doesn't match, the writing style doesn't match....

One has no concept of original sin, on which the whole christian house of cards is built..

[Pitchforkpat]

The fact that there are some errors in our copies does not mean we have an innacurate bible.

There are a couple of points on this. First, since you admit there are errors, why do you spend so much time trying to make them sound like they’re NOT errors? If one writer says Judas gave the money back and another said he bought a field with it, why not just accept that one version is incorrect?

Second, you’re right that these kinds of errors do not mean that the Bible is “inaccurate” as you say but they do mean it is not perfect. As soon as Christians stop claiming the book is the perfect word of God I won’t bring up the errors anymore. And don’t try to tell me that I’m out of touch and that Christians don’t really claim this any more. They do. That’s why you and others spent so much time on here trying to give answers to these problems.

We know where the errors are (hence the footnotes)

I’ve already explained to you why the footnotes don’t work. In John Jesus said no crowing till after three denials. In Mark’s version it crows after the first denial. Some one is wrong about what happened.

We literally have tens of thousands of copies of bible manuscripts, so we can compare them and find out what the originals said with a very high degree of accuracy.

So when did the cock crow then? How many demoniacs were there? I just want to know which gospel writer got it wrong.

What I find hilarious is that if the bible is so chock full of errors why are all the ones you atheists bring up just stupid grammar errors or errors in the number of people, angels, demons or animals in a given situation?

It’s not a grammatical error as to when the cock crowed. It’s a mistake one of the writers has made. It’s only a big deal when Christians keep telling everyone the Bible is the perfect word of God when it’s not. If God personally gave the gospel writers the information through the Holy Spirit, then he should have gotten it right.

Can't you find any significant errors that actually effect salvation or Christian doctrine?

Why do you think there are so many denominations? There’s all kinds of disagreement about what the Bible says concerning salvation and doctrine.

You are bringing up 'typos'

It’s not a typo. There’s disagreement about what happened.