Bible Contradictions

[mwtech]

I used to be a Christian and only recently become an atheist after studying the Bible enough to notice the flaws. I believe the Bible in itself to be contradictory enough to prove itself wrong, and I enjoy discussing it with other people, especially Christians who disagree. I would really like to have a one on one debate with any Christian who thinks that they have a logical answer for the contradictions in the Bible. The one rule I have is that you can't make a claim without evidence, whether from the Bible or any other source. I am interested in logical conversation, and I don't believe that any Christian can refute the contradictions I have found without making up some rationalization that has no evidence or logical base.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 10 by mwtech]

Not quite as simple as you make it. Seems to me it is not an all or nothing proposition.

Either written by God, or not.

How bout this, could it have been written by Divinley inspired, but fallible men?
A Divine-human partnership? And if so, isn't it possible that the human vessels got some things wrong, based on their own personal and cultural biases?

Something else to consider..Just because the Bible has contradictions, and some absurdities and atrocities within it's pages, does not in and of itself disprove the very existence of God.

Isn't it possible that God is bigger (and in many cases, better) than the Bible?

[Elijah John]

Also, relating to a previous post on this thread, the Bible is not a math book, or a science text, where innerancy is more important for clinical truth and purity. It is a work of sacred literature, and really cannot be compared to a scientific text.

Literature is subject to interpretation, scientific facts are not.

But the bible is not claimed to be simple literature - it is proclaimed to be the absolutely correct instructional guide for determining the answers to the most important existential questions of mankind. If anything, it should be held to a more stringent standard of clarity, readability, purity and preciseness than a mere textbook. The LAST thing such a text should be is subject to interpretation.

In my book, those that make such claims are mistaken. Not all religious people do. And does the Bible make those claims for itself? I think that is an open question at best.

But for the sake of argument, even if it is an "instruction guide" (as parts of it can be) and needs to be held to high standards, it is STILL not a book of science, and need not pass a clinical, test-tube scientific method test to have value as a Spiritual guidebook.

[mwtech]

[Replying to post 10 by mwtech]

How bout this, could it have been written by Divinley inspired, but fallible men?
A Divine-human partnership? And if so, isn't it possible that the human vessels got some things wrong, based on their own personal and cultural biases?

Something else to consider..Just because the Bible has contradictions, and some absurdities and atrocities within it's pages, does not in and of itself disprove the very existence of God.

Isn't it possible that God is bigger (and in many cases, better) than the Bible?

It is possible that there is a God, but I have seen no evidence of it. My point about the bible is that if there are flaws with some parts, you cannot know which parts to trust. If there is a god who inspired these men to write the bible, and they messed it up, we still have nothing to base a belief in god off of. The contradictions and absurdities in the bible disprove the god of the bible because the bible is the only reason anybody believes in him in the first place. As much as we can explain scientifically today, nobody goes out and thinks "the sunset is so beautiful, it must have been created by a divine being."

Yes there are questions we have about the universe and how it works, but we can assume based on past experience that there is an explanation available and no need for God in the equation. Without the bible as an infallible basis for your religion, there is no basis for your religion.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 10 by mwtech]

How bout this, could it have been written by Divinley inspired, but fallible men?
A Divine-human partnership? And if so, isn't it possible that the human vessels got some things wrong, based on their own personal and cultural biases?

Something else to consider..Just because the Bible has contradictions, and some absurdities and atrocities within it's pages, does not in and of itself disprove the very existence of God.

Isn't it possible that God is bigger (and in many cases, better) than the Bible?

It is possible that there is a God, but I have seen no evidence of it. My point about the bible is that if there are flaws with some parts, you cannot know which parts to trust. If there is a god who inspired these men to write the bible, and they messed it up, we still have nothing to base a belief in god off of. The contradictions and absurdities in the bible disprove the god of the bible because the bible is the only reason anybody believes in him in the first place. As much as we can explain scientifically today, nobody goes out and thinks "the sunset is so beautiful, it must have been created by a divine being."

Yes there are questions we have about the universe and how it works, but we can assume based on past experience that there is an explanation available and no need for God in the equation. Without the bible as an infallible basis for your religion, there is no basis for your religion.

Are you familiar with Deism?

Deism is a theistic religion INDEPENDENT of the Bible , and posits a God based on Nature and Reason. Islam too, with the Qur'an, though built on the Bible, is not reliant on the Bible for their belief in God.

In fact, the Qur'an states that nature is full of "signs for thinking men" that point to the existence and attributes of God.

As far as not knowing which parts to trust, I think common sense takes care of that, in MOST (but not all) cases.

For the Spiritually inclined, the basic belief in God make common sense. (granted not provable though)

But for everyone, treating others as one would wish to be treated (the Golden Rule) makes sense to most, if not all people. (except of course, to psychopaths)

And Jesus characterizes the Golden Rule and the two great laws of love (love of God and Neighbor) as the "Law and the Prophets" therefore the core of Bible teaching, and that is the yard stick I use to judge all other verses and passages of the Bible, as to their truth and relevance.

And it ain't just me, any one can apply their own gift of Reason to Bible interpretation. And in some traditions, one is EXPECTED to. (like Judaism and some elements of Protestantism.)

[Strider324]

Also, relating to a previous post on this thread, the Bible is not a math book, or a science text, where innerancy is more important for clinical truth and purity. It is a work of sacred literature, and really cannot be compared to a scientific text.

Literature is subject to interpretation, scientific facts are not.

But the bible is not claimed to be simple literature - it is proclaimed to be the absolutely correct instructional guide for determining the answers to the most important existential questions of mankind. If anything, it should be held to a more stringent standard of clarity, readability, purity and preciseness than a mere textbook. The LAST thing such a text should be is subject to interpretation.

In my book, those that make such claims are mistaken. Not all religious people do. And does the Bible make those claims for itself? I think that is an open question at best.

But for the sake of argument, even if it is an "instruction guide" (as parts of it can be) and needs to be held to high standards, it is STILL not a book of science, and need not pass a clinical, test-tube scientific method test to have value as a Spiritual guidebook.

And as a spiritual guidebook, it then carries no more weight than the Bhagavad Gita, the Tao De Ching, the Dhammapadda or even the Seven Spiritual Laws of Success.

[Elijah John]

Also, relating to a previous post on this thread, the Bible is not a math book, or a science text, where innerancy is more important for clinical truth and purity. It is a work of sacred literature, and really cannot be compared to a scientific text.

Literature is subject to interpretation, scientific facts are not.

But the bible is not claimed to be simple literature - it is proclaimed to be the absolutely correct instructional guide for determining the answers to the most important existential questions of mankind. If anything, it should be held to a more stringent standard of clarity, readability, purity and preciseness than a mere textbook. The LAST thing such a text should be is subject to interpretation.

In my book, those that make such claims are mistaken. Not all religious people do. And does the Bible make those claims for itself? I think that is an open question at best.

But for the sake of argument, even if it is an "instruction guide" (as parts of it can be) and needs to be held to high standards, it is STILL not a book of science, and need not pass a clinical, test-tube scientific method test to have value as a Spiritual guidebook.

And as a spiritual guidebook, it then carries no more weight than the Bhagavad Gita, the Tao De Ching, the Dhammapadda or even the Seven Spiritual Laws of Success.

Perhaps, especially the Tao Te Ching, I like that one. But the reason I choose the Bible is admitedly because of my own cultural bias, the Bible feels like home to me, the others somewhat like I'm visiting a foreign land. That's the thing with us (theologically) liberal Christians, we do not ALWAYS disagree with you on every matter.

[mwtech]

I can't argue with deism. I can't argue that it is possible for there to be a god. I personally feel like even if there is, I can't know who or what it is or wants, so why think about it. I feel like there probably isn't. But the human mind is only capable of imagining something it has already experienced or a variation of that experience. If there is a god who does things differently than I can comprehend, so be it.

What I argue against is that the God that Jews, Christians, and Muslims is not real, and the bible and Koran are false and full of problems. If you believe that, we're on the same page.

[1213]

I used to be a Christian and only recently become an atheist after studying the Bible enough to notice the flaws. I believe the Bible in itself to be contradictory enough to prove itself wrong, and I enjoy discussing it with other people, especially Christians who disagree. I would really like to have a one on one debate with any Christian who thinks that they have a logical answer for the contradictions in the Bible. The one rule I have is that you can't make a claim without evidence, whether from the Bible or any other source. I am interested in logical conversation, and I don't believe that any Christian can refute the contradictions I have found without making up some rationalization that has no evidence or logical base.

I think Bible is without contradictions, if understood correctly. Therefore I would like to hear what you think is the greatest contradictory in the Bible. Please notice, contradictory in the Bible, not in the interpretation of yours or in how you understanding differ from how Bible tells things.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 17 by mwtech]

Well, I don't agree that the Abrahamic religion's God is not "real" I would only go so far as to say that He is not done full justice in his portrayal in the Bible and the Qur'an.

But it seems to me this has turned out to be a debate with someone who agrees with your premise and challenge as stated in your OP, and I will not try to defend Bible contradictions per se.

So, I leave you to your challenge, and if you can find a Bible literalist here who wishes to defend the Bible as NON-contradictory in every detail, I wish you well.

[Overcomer]

I think a good place to start is with the definition of the Law of Contradiction (or Non-contradiction as some prefer). Put simply, the law states that something cannot be both true and untrue at the same time. Put another way, something cannot be one thing and its opposite at the same time. Therefore, it is illogical to say that Rover is a dog and Rover is not a dog. The animal can be one or the other, but it can't be both at the same time -- at least, not according to the laws of logic.

Given that definition, can you point out some specific examples from the Bible that you consider contradictory, that is, examples that break that law?