Contradictions

Thanks for the links guys. I've been reading up on them in my free time. :)

The answer I had provided for the people at Jesus' tomb was along the lines of: If one guy says that there is A but another says that there is B and another says that there is A + C, then perhaps there is A + B + C. I just never thought of that answer as a legitimate one. I suppose I was right in my reasoning though. Because if the writer of A agrees in part with the writer of A + C, then it is reasonable to assume that maybe A & C were both parties at the tomb. And if another writer, closely related to the other writers, says that there were A + B + C at the tomb, then it would also be reasonable to assume that he just failed to mention the others because they were not the most prominent individuals in his mind.

For instance: I could mention my best friend at the tomb, but leave out my other friends or acquaintances that are not as important to me. Another writer, though, - perhaps one of my friends - could mention someone different at the tomb who is really there but is their best friend and only an acquaintance of mine. If you believe that we must mention everyone at the tomb, then we must mention everyone single individual at the tomb (even if there were a crowd of them and we know hardly any of them other than the ones we would have conventionally mentioned). The reason why these gospel accounts differ on such seemingly trivial information is because they were written by different people that agree on what generally happened - not on all the specifics like: There were 3 birds at the tomb. One was a robin. Another was a finch. The other was a crow. Jesus stayed in the tomb for one day and 2 minutes or 23 hours and 56 minutes.

The gospel accounts largely agree. I think the only reason why we would attack it so willingly is because of our biases from the false doctrine of mythology or toward the extraordinary or supernatural which rarely happens (thus its name).
 
<bump>
Don't mind me. Just for my own convenience. Don't want to scroll through pages of threads to find this. Plus it raises my post count. :-D
 
Packrat said:
Anyone care to take a stab at these in my absence? 8-)

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... tions.html

Just so you know, I was able to answer about 4 or so of those I looked into (which wasn't many - maybe 6-7). I'm just wondering if any of you can answer any of them for me or provide answers for anyone else.
Click to expand...

If you believe there are contradictions in scriptrue, then you are not interpreting it correctly. We are to "interpret" the bible through Christ's words which do not lie. And only true Christians believe that Christ does not lie. Since i cannot have access to your link while I'm replying, then I can't remember the list. So when keeping in mind that Christ (who is the Word of God according to John 1:1-3) does not lie, then:

The differing accounts of Joseph's father; Luke says, "so it was thought" that father of Joseph was Heli. That is true that Heli was thought to be Jospeph's father. So Luke isn't lying here.

And that's why we need all 4 gospels because each has a different perspective on Christ's words and life. That's no different than 4 people witnessing a car accident from 4 sides of the car. They will differ but that doesn't amke any of the accounts untrue. The gospels are simply different perspectives that God wants us to see. and he does this through the apostles and the prophets.

As for the other contradictions, is there a way to have access to the lin while we re replying? If so, I would be glad to address them for you. :-)
 
If you believe there are contradictions in scriptrue, then you are not interpreting it correctly.

Or someone has not interpreted it correctly for us. For example:

Scroll down to The Horned Moses and read it through. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses

Imagine what the skeptics would be saying if we had not found out this error in translation and had kept it as tradition. :wink: Anyway, when I bring up contradictions I wish for them to be answered because I currently believe that there are few or no passages in original Scripture that are in error. I just want to understand them and find the truth of the matter so my faith may remain intact in the face of opposition.

A while back I had read the explanation that Heli was Joseph's father in law or some such thing. Depending on your cultural background and marital status, you may be viewed as having one or more fathers. In America we view one as a father and the other as a father in law. As Christians we know that we have one Father and all others might play the part a father in law may play comparitively. We still may love them all, but there is only one true Father for us.

Anyway, here's another concern I'd like to get out there. In Exodus, when all of the Egyptian's livestock died (Exodus 9:6/KJV) or rather all of the Egyptian's livestock began to die (Exodus9:6/NLT), then later on it says how Pharoah took a bunch of chariots (assuming horses or livestock drove them - depending on the definition of livestock) and pursued the Israelites. How can Pharoah drive his chariots without livestock? What are they defining as livestock in this translation? Why in one translation does it say 'began to die' and in the next it says 'died'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

zeland
The Jewish Passover, the Last Supper, and the New Testament Sacrifice, How are they connected?
Replies
0
Views
247
zeland
zeland
D
Is the NIV dishonest?
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
2K
reddogs
reddogs
Hidden In Him
Beer: Evil Crutch, Or Godsend?
Replies
14
Views
554
Hidden In Him
Hidden In Him
netchaplain
Test Run
Replies
0
Views
141
netchaplain
netchaplain
Alfred Persson
Does God enable the faithful to endure torture?
Replies
1
Views
79
Alfred Persson
Alfred Persson
Back
Top