The Bible contradicts it self?

But if it were written years later, and it can be proven that the story is accurate, then what would that suggest?

 

All i meant was that it explains how MAtthew Mark Luke and John can write about the same things , but have slightly different stories as far as tiny details.
And that might explaine the contradictions , people arent perfect , and it shows in their writing sometimes.

 

You're right Sweetart_Katie, there is no description of Jesus in the Bible but seeing as Judas had to point out who Jesus was to the guards, He must have looked pretty much like every other Jew of his day and no halo either, ‘cause I think that would have been pretty easy to spot. I can see it now; Judas points and says yeah, it’s the guy with the long blond hair, blue eyes and that glowing circular thing over his head, I don’t know how you could have missed him all this time.

 

It does explain why Matthew Mark Luke and John can write about the same things , but have slightly different stories as far as tiny details go but the stories mesh together to make a comprehensive whole without contradictions.

To me this might explain scribal and translation errors but the writers themselves, although not being perfect, were guided by God to the point where such imperfections would not affect Bible content.

Not to say you are erzebet, but I just think that if we take this “people aren’t perfect” too far, it can become a big problem, then people begin to disregard large portions of the Bible. I think that when we start to divide the Bible into sections like the “Old and New Testaments” and say things like God changes from one to the other or we say the letters of Paul are just his personal opinion, it just seems like that’s what Satan would want, kind of divide and conquer. Whereas to me it would seem that God, if he is truly behind the Bible, would want the Bible to be seamless and if two ideas or concepts in the Bible seem contradictory, then I would say we need to change what we believe so they aren’t and that they harmonize.

 

Hi Sweetart_Katie I haven’t forgotten your contradictions, just taken a while to get around to them.
First up:

Other than being just being another “scribal error” I found this:
The statement at 2 Chronicles 16:1 that Baasha came up against Judah “in the thirty-sixth year of the reign of Asa” has caused some question, since Baasha’s rule, beginning in the third year of Asa and lasting only 24 years, had terminated about 10 years prior to Asa’s 36th year of rule. (1Ki 15:33) While some suggest a scribal error and believe the reference is to the 16th or the 26th year of Asa’s reign, the assumption of such error is not required to harmonize the accounts. Jewish commentators quote the Seder Olam, which suggests that the 36th year was reckoned from the existence of the separate kingdom of Judah (997 B.C.E.) and corresponded to the 16th year of Asa (Rehoboam ruling 17 years, Abijah 3 years, and Asa now in his 16th year). (Soncino Books of the Bible, London, 1952, ftn on 2Ch 16:1) This was also the view of Archbishop Ussher. So, too, the apparent difference between the statement at 2 Chronicles 15:19 to the effect that, as for “war, it did not occur down to the thirty-fifth [actually, the fifteenth] year of Asa’s reign,” and the statement at 1 Kings 15:16 to the effect that “warfare itself took place between Asa and Baasha the king of Israel all their days,” may be explained in that once conflicts began between the two kings they were thereafter continuous, even as Hanani had foretold.—2Ch 16:9.

 

Rite but thwe point of my post disapered. I know Jesus wasnt a blond whit guy. Thats a given. He prolly did, just as sugested look just like anybody elce. I dont think He cut His hair, thats what Im sayin. I dont know if He did or not but I just dont think He was a hair kuttin kinda Guy. -I m puttin this together with what I think I remember bout hair somwheres bein simbolic of bein covered by Christ. Bein covered. I dont know whewe I got it from but I know its familiar to me from the Bible. This along with the fact that NOWHERES in nature dose having long hair on a male sugest "shame". This leads me to the conclusion that for reasons missed by many, this verse was dileberatly changed. Not necesasaraly to hide wether or not Christ had long hair, but just to sugest that long hair on a man is shamefull. It was propaganda. Thats what Im talkin bout. The purposfull changes made by the guilty. These li'l contradictions ainshitt. Just OWB says. Easily explainable. Il post just one more of these evils before I stop postenem on your thread OWB. To dig to the bottom of THESE lies would bring the devil straight into view. Sorry for the slight left turn but the OP kinda reminded me of these things. These thing are even worse tho. Heres another one to ponder bout along with the changed line in the Bible bout long hair on a man bein shamefull. --How come Kaneh Bosom's been re rwitten from just bout EVERY place it appears in the kjv?

 

In translating the Bible there are many ancient manuscripts to use but all slightly differ, meaning that some have minor scribal errors. On this one the LXXA,LSy manuscript says “Eighteen” whereas the MVg, says “eight” so since as you bought out 2 Kings 24:8 says "eighteen", the "eight" in the MVg manuscript can be assumed to be a scribal error. (There are other manuscripts that say "eight" and "eighteen", I just used these two as examples.)

There is another reasoning on the matter and that is co-regency, that he began his reign at eight years old, and reigned ten years along with his father while his father was still alive, and after his father's death, which was in his eighteenth year, he reigned alone three months and ten days. This would be similar to Solomon being anointed as King while his father David was still alive and King.

When you say the Bible was “always written in Latin”, you realize that the Bible was originally written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic don’t you? Also even though the Catholic Church did for many years try to suppress the Bible and try to keep it out of the hands of the people by forbidding the possession of a Bible in any other language than Latin; there were many Christian scholars that risked their lives translating the Bible into the common languages of the people.

May the discussion of the Bible always be enjoyable,
OWB

 

The bible states that God impregnated Mary. If this was without her consent, is it rape? If it was, isn't it adultery?

 

Well seeing as she was not married at the time, it can't be adultery. Also according to the Bible, rape involves sexual relations and seeing as this "impregnation" did not involve sexual relations it was not rape.

 

Yes I did know the Bible was originally written in those 3. Wasn't the OT written in Hebrew while the NT was mostly in Greek and Aramaic? I was more talking like you said here, that the church tried to suppress it by making it into Latin. And to this day there still are people who risk so much to translate and distribute the Bible.

 

And its in these Hebrew texts that God clearly states that He wants incence made of Kenah Bosm and frankensence and cinamin and oils like a perfumer or an apothacarry makes. Herbs been re written outta the Bible. When they marched in a great colom of smoke they really marched in a great callom of smoke! They wer swingin stenchers all over the place! Jehova LOVES Herb! Jehova NEVER probated Kenah Bosom. Arron sewed the tent TIGHT! They were burnin Kenah Bosom. The older texts replaced the Kenah Bosom that the Hebrews wrote bout, with "sweet smellin cane" and "sweet callamus. Replace this in your heart with Kenah Bosom every time yous read the lies. They tried to re write the Bible and disclude Herb from it!

 

And I'm so glad they do 'cause I'm really bad at languages.

 

Perhaps so but it's really not a contradiction, so maybe you should start a thread about it.

 

Some time ago, I promised to take up the various "contradictions" on HushBull's two laundry lists, starting with the second. The first item on that list turned out not really to be a contradiction. The second is:
25. Lying approved and sanctioned
Josh 2:4-6/ James 2:25/ Ex 1:18-20/ 1 Kings 22:21,22
Lying forbidden
Ex 20:16/ Prov 12:22/ Rev 21:8
Josh 2:4-6 tells the story of Rahah sheltering spies, and she does lie to the king of Jericho. James 2:25 says was not Rahab justified in sending them out another way?
Exodus 1:18-20 begins the story of Moses and the daughters of the priest of Midian, and has nothing I can see in it about lying at all. In 1 Kings 22:21,22 Micah reports that God allowed a deceiving spirit into the mouths of prophets of the King of Israel.

 

If he died on Friday at 3:00 pm and rose before sunrise in Sunday that is not 3 days.
In the Hebrew culture a day is from sun down till sun down.
You only get one day from Friday afternoon till saturday night.

 

Which become contradictions when the Bible is referred to as a set of all encompassing laws and passed off as "the word of God". Unless the Bible is taken honestly as a flawed, man made work as you have, it is contradictory. That is the importance of this argument which some people don't seem to get. While I think the argument is important, I also think it is a waste of time unless you enjoy trying to drill the above facts into hard headed fools who won't move an inch from their initial supposition that God's word is perfect.

 

a quick link, no i didn't read it. i dont care. howver, i can sum the whole bible up in two words "be nice"



http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html

 

Okay, great, the Bible is just filled to the brim with contradictions. Now if you would be so kind as to give an example, which is the point of this thread.

 

I can't be bothered, I haven't picked up a bible in years and if I do waste my time looking for a contradiction you won't be swayed from your original position. I understand where your coming from and that I have no case here, but I solidly believe that the only people that see God are the people that want to see God and they will stubbornly and divisively stick to the same perspectives in order to cast off their doubt. Nobody is going to win here.