Biblical Contradictions

[TheAlmightyFeaz]

So sorry about this...I know this has been covered in just about every topic around here but I need them fast.

I need Biblical Contradictions. Good ones. I had a set from Joseph C. Sommer, but they were refuted and I don't feel like responding to the refutes. Thanks!

[Magus55]

Originally posted by TheAlmightyFeaz
So sorry about this...I know this has been covered in just about every topic around here but I need them fast.

I need Biblical Contradictions. Good ones. I had a set from Joseph C. Sommer, but they were refuted and I don't feel like responding to the refutes. Thanks! There are none, move along. I'm sure some atheist will toss you SAB though, as if that can be considered a valid source.

[Godless Wonder]

Mark 9:1 is my fave.

Mark 9:1 "And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power."
and

Matthew 16:28 "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."They will tell you that "the kingdom of God come with power" refers to the transfiguration of Christ.

But, there are other references to the kingdom of God:Mark 9:47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:Here, the kingdom of god is the alternative to hell. (which doesn't seem to be "the transfiguration")
Mark 14:25 Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God. Hmm, but this is after after the transfiguration has already occurred.
And
Mark 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
So it seems "kingdom of god" means whatever interpretation can be mustered such as to avoid contradiction. Eventually, they'll say something like, "the kingdom god is both present reality and future hope", or otherwise define it in such a way that no contradictions arise.

Among all of the above, defining "the kingdom of god come with power" to mean "the transfiguration" seems to me to be the interpretation which is stretched the thinnest. (Well, for me, it is stretched well past the breaking point. Some folks have absolutely no problem with that interpretation though, somehow.)

[Magus55]

Actually, those passages aren't a contradiction. We can see for example, that John, who was present at the Transfiguration, saw the kingdom of God before his death, in a vision. This account is in Revelation.

Rev 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.


Rev 22:8 And I John saw these things, and heard [them]. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.

See, the kingdom of God coming down from Heaven to Earth. John saw it happen. Jesus never said they would see it physically happen, He just said they would see it, which they did.

[leftfist]

I'm assuming you want Bible contradictions in order to argue with someone over whether the Bible is legitimate.

I mean this in the kindest possible way... if you have to ask on an Internet discussion board for a list of Bible contradictions, you are not qualified to have such an argument. There most definitely are numerous Bible contradictions, ranging from major issues of theology (is salvation through faith alone or are works necessary also?), to simple factual discrepancies (did Judas hang himself immediately after Jesus was arrested, or did he explode later after buying a plot of land?). In addition to contradictions, many major tenants of modern Christianity are completely unsupported or barely supported by the Bible (and I'm not only talking about Catholics!). But if you are just reading these things from a list you will be completely unable to back yourself up or have any sort of context for what you are saying.

Read the Bible. I actually enjoy the Bible quite a bit. A simple and open-minded reading of the Bible will reveal contradictions easily. But I would advise you not to only read to find contradictions; you can really learn a lot from the Bible.

One last thing... I know you'll do it anyway, but arguing about this stuff with a Christian is hopeless. You can point to the simplest and most blatant contradictory statements and a Christian will either find some ridiculous way to twist the words into a meaning the author obviously did not intend, or else say something like "Well I can't explain that, but I know the Bible is the word of God so I know that's not really a contradiction."

[Godless Wonder]

See, the kingdom of God coming down from Heaven to Earth. John saw it happen. Jesus never said they would see it physically happen, He just said they would see it, which they did. [/B] Clever. Somebody's been doing their homework. But "some" is plural. Got another witness? Just yanking your chain. Maybe I have to find another fave now.

[EGGO]

There's a lot of Bible contradictions, none that aren't that good on Skeptics Annointed Bible. Make sure not to use that, they're pretty sloppy.

[Mullibok]

I definitely agree that reading the material for yourself is a good idea, but I don't see anything wrong with looking for pointers on where to look. Just be sure to read the whole story that contains the line that looks contradictory, so you can defend against accusations of taking it out of context. Just go to the Infidels site and search for Biblical Contradictions, you'll find something.

[Unbeliever]

Most of the contradiction lists I've seen are extremely haphazard, making it very hard to find a particular one when you need it. So I've typed my whole list (413) of them, arranged by category, over at The Ethical Atheist forum. The list can be found here (www.ethicalatheist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=104&sid=4443299c3584bd58bd21439bd46acb1d0).

I hope you can find what you're looking for, just keep in mind the good advice given above. Let me know, if you would, whether this helps.

[Grumpy]

Originally posted by EGGO
There's a lot of Bible contradictions, none that aren't that good on Skeptics Annointed Bible. Make sure not to use that, they're pretty sloppy.

SAB has a lot of ingredients in its stew, but a lot of them are genuine contradictions. SAB also highlights Biblical cruelty, injustice, and ignorance, but I prefer internal contradictions because they're harder to argue against (using logic, anyway).

And when it comes to the standard list of contradictions (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra.html), SAB has them all. In fact, the list is so long - 1073 items - it's hard to load the page.

Me, I stick with a meta-contradiction. 2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is God-breathed..." versus 1 Corinthians 14:33 "God is not the author of confusion...". Since the Bible is indisputably confusing, God cannot be its author, which contradicts 2Tim, which is even more confusing! :D

[Unbeliever]

Originally posted by Grumpy


And when it comes to the standard list of contradictions (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra.html), SAB has them all. In fact, the list is so long - 1073 items - it's hard to load the page.

Just for the record - there are not really 1073 separate contradictions in that list; each one is listed at least twice - once for each relevant bible verse that pertains. There actually are only 322 contradictions, listed haphazardly (all the ones in the "alphabetical list", sorted by book).

[Magus55]

Unbeliever, just skimming through your list of contradictions, you are way off base on quite a few, and some are completely irrelevant to the question.

[Sauron]

Originally posted by Magus55
Unbeliever, just skimming through your list of contradictions, you are way off base on quite a few, and some are completely irrelevant to the question.

But mysteriously, Magus55, you can't seem to refute any of them.

Maybe not so mysterious after all, come to think of it....
:rolleyes:

[Roland]

Luke says that Thomas was present at Jesus' first post-resurrection appearance to the disciples. Luke 24:33-53

John says he was absent. John 20:24

********************************************

Matthew says that Mary Magdalene encountered an angel in the tomb when she first visited on Easter morning. Matt. 28: 1-8

John says she found it empty. John 20: 1-2

[unregistered_user_1]

Originally posted by Magus55
Actually, those passages aren't a contradiction. We can see for example, that John, who was present at the Transfiguration, saw the kingdom of God before his death, in a vision. This account is in Revelation.

Rev 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.


Rev 22:8 And I John saw these things, and heard [them]. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.

See, the kingdom of God coming down from Heaven to Earth. John saw it happen. Jesus never said they would see it physically happen, He just said they would see it, which they did.
Well, Magus, you've changed a tune since you said this here (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?postid=1074559#post1074559).
Here is Jesus' actual transfiguration. The Kingdom of God did come in Jesus. This event on the mountain was when God the Father spoke out of the clouds to the disciples and Jesus transformed from a mortal human, back to immortality. At this point, He is no longer a mere human, below the angels - He is back at His rightful place, at the right hand of God the Father. This event ushered in the new Kingdom of Christ, or the Age of Grace. At this point, Jesus fulfilled His purpose on Earth, and God the Father spoke to the disciples, telling them to spread the message that Jesus taught.
Interesting to see that you've backed down from that idea; it sounds like you're starting to think about this...

Anyway, what does it matter if John was at the "transfiguration"? Was he there when Jesus gave that speech?

Also, the man did say "some of you" not "one" of you.

"If I choose that he [John] remain until I come [again], what is that to you?" (John 21:22). ~~That's an implication to the people there that the second coming could be within their lifetimes. It's statements like that that made people like Paul tell others to preach the gospel until the second coming, NOT until they got too old for it, as would be expected if he knew that the second coming was NOT going to be in his time!

Paul had also said, in First Corinthians:
7:29
But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;

7:30
And they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not;

7:31
And they that use this world, as not abusing it: for the fashion of this world passeth away. that the time is so short that you shouldn't really even have relations with your wife, among other things. Does that sound as if he believed that the second coming was ~2000 years away?

The reason he thought that was because of the statements by jesus that clearly implied a "soon" second coming. ("some standing here", "this generation"<~~discussed elswhere on this site, etc)

Face it, in context of all this, it's pretty obvious that christ was saying that the second coming would be "soon" and that time has showed him to be wrong.

[Godless Wonder]

Originally posted by unregistered_user_1
Well, Magus, you've changed a tune since you said this here (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?postid=1074559#post1074559).

Interesting to see that you've backed down from that idea; it sounds like you're starting to think about this...

That's what I meant about "doing homework" Last time I brought up Mk 9:1 (not very long ago), Magus did not have this counter argument at the ready.
[...]Also, the man did say "some of you" not "one" of you.
True enough, as I already pointed this out, but even so, Magus' argument does seem to bring the thing down from a major contradiction to a rather minor quibble, doesn't it? I mean now if we're admitting hallucinations as a possible way out for "see"ing the "kingdom of god come with power", then it's possible others who were present saw similar hallucinations, but kept it to themselves. (Can't believe I'm defending Magus. OTOH don't imagine for a second that I'm switching sides here.) I still think it's a contradiction, I just think that Magus' (or whoever's it is) clever rationalization takes out most of the sting out of it. Before, it was just absolutely killer: such a succinct one-liner, clearly contradicting reality, with only the weak-sounding "he was refering to the transfiguration" defense. Now, this new defense seems stronger. I have to say, nice job defending on that one, Magus.

[...]Face it, in context of all this, it's pretty obvious that christ was saying that the second coming would be "soon" and that time has showed him to be wrong.
I agree, overall, it seems this way. And if it were not so, why should it seem so? Why not speak plainly that the end-times were some 2000 years (at least) hence? <Christian-emulator-mode=ON>
Because, if you tell them that, they won't care. You have to scare the bejesus into them.<christian-emulator-mode=off>

[Unbeliever]

Originally posted by Magus55
Unbeliever, just skimming through your list of contradictions, you are way off base on quite a few, and some are completely irrelevant to the question. Thanks for that info Magus55. If you will let me know to which ones you are refering, and can show me why they are "way off base", or "irrelevant to the question", I will gladly remove them from my list, as I don't want any sloppy contradictions to mar the list. I realize that some of them can be apologetically refuted, but most of the refutations that I've seen can in turn themselves be refuted. But I'm only an aspiring Biblical scholar (a wannabe), so I'm always willing to learn, and will admit when I'm wrong if it can be shown that I am wrong.