The most significant contradiction or inconcistency?

[shnarkle]

There are no shortage of online sites providing numerous examples of contradictions and inconsistencies from the biblical texts. While some of these are quite simply the result of poor reading comprehension skills or an unfamiliarity with the texts, others seem legitimate. Many of those that are legitimate are inconsequential, but some could be quite controversial and may have significant ramifications.

Of all the contradictions found in scripture, which ones could prove to be most disturbing, or have the most serious ramifications for "believers"?


One that I think fits this bill is Paul's view on eating food sacrificed to false gods. He doesn't seem to have a problem with it if it doesn't have a negative effect over a fellow believer's faith. While I can see his point, and also agree that none of those pagan deities are real, I do wonder how he is able to disregard the law which he upholds; a law that forbids eating anything that is sacrificed to idols.

The reason this could be looked at as disturbing is because it indicates to me that Paul has attributed capriciousness to Paul's God.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 104 by alexxcJRO]

contradictions disturbs believers. It disturbed me when I was a believer.

Again, this isn't about you. You were never a believer.

How is it you are able to claim knowledge of another person's past beliefs and call him a liar when he says he believed something in the past.

I'm not calling him a liar. The "how" is quite simple, and I provided the proof text jsut below my comment.

Sure you are. Quoting a Bible verse does not cover the fact you claimed he was not being accurate when you claimed to have superior knowledge about his own claim of personal belief. That 1 John 2:19 is dead wrong does not absolve you from being equally wrong. This is the trouble with 'proof texting,' using the Bible. What you've actually accomplished just discredits the Bible or your interpretation of it.

1 John 2:19 is a transparent attempt at bootstrapping.

Are you also claiming that 1 John 2:19 is 'proof' I was also not a believer when I went to Japan as a missionary? Are you seriously claiming that all Christians who discover they were wrong never believed in the first place?

I'm simply providing two proof texts that point out that those who leave were never believers. Again, this isn't even about you or that other guy. The topic is about contradictions in the texts, not contradictions from you. He says he was a believer, but the texts state that he couldn't have been. It doesn't matter if the texts are completely wrong.

But it DOES matter if the text is "completely wrong." That is the essence of the thing and of the reason we debate on this forum. Christianity is a scripture based religion, with the claim that the text of the Bible is from God. Without that claim, Christianity is nothing but tradition, the opinion of our ancestors. Without 'sacred scriptures' coming from God, Christianity has no authority.

So, if the Bible says something that is contrary to our experience, contrary to reason, contrary to fact, that is powerful evidence 'the text' is not from an omniscient, perfect God.

So to be clear, you are now just saying the texts are in conflict. Are you willing then to concede that those of us who claim to have 'believed' and acted consistently with those beliefs, were indeed believers?

I may suspect the sincerity, understanding, and basis a person had for being an atheist, when he tells me he "used to be an atheist," but now is a Christian. I am in my rights to question him about the particulars of his claimed atheism, but in the end i have to accept him at his word that once was an atheist.

I, and I assume others situated like me, welcome questions about the 'quality' of my belief. I can literally give chapter and verse on the subject. I was sincere enough to forgo financial reward and cross the ocean to preach the gospel and actually 'lead people to Christ.'

I am now embarrassed by all of that, but I was following the beliefs I had when I was in my teens and twenties, before I ever read much on the subject outside of the Bible itself.

On a related matter, many well known Christians have struggled with their faith. Famous examples include Martin Luther, Mother Teresa, C.S. Lewis, John Calvin, et al.
https://relevantmagazine.com/god/7-prom ... tled-doubt

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 117 by shnarkle]


I'm aware of what the thread is about. The implication is that contradictions or inconsistencies matter, though.

Not at all. The implication is that most of them aren't within the texts themselves but are the product of our own false assumptions. This has turned out to be the case with most of the people posting so far. Everyone is injecting their own personal experieinces into the texts. People are redefining words to create contradictions in their own minds. It's silly really.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 117 by shnarkle]


I'm aware of what the thread is about. The implication is that contradictions or inconsistencies matter, though.

Not at all. The implication is that most of them aren't within the texts themselves but are the product of our own false assumptions. This has turned out to be the case with most of the people posting so far. Everyone is injecting their own personal experieinces into the texts. People are redefining words to create contradictions in their own minds. It's silly really.

This is an unfounded generalization and so vague as to be nearly meaningless. YOU claimed a text meant that anyone who claimed to be a believer and then stopped believing must have never believed in the first place. IOW you claimed to know what the text meant. Now you say "most people" (meaning those who disagree with you) are making false assumptions. If you want to make a claim, please be specific about WHO made the 'false assumption' and how they did so.

As for bringing our "own personal experieinces [sic] into the texts," what else would you have us do? NOT relate the text to our own experiences?
There was a reason Jesus taught in parables. He knew people could relate them to their "own experiences."

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 110 by Overcomer]

I appreciate your comments, but it doesn't matter even if he were currently a genuine biblical Christian. What matters is where is the contradiction. What he was doing was claiming that who he is (or was) determines if there is a contradiction or not. I was simply pointing out that it makes no difference who he is or was. It isn't about him. It's about the texts themselves, and if any internal contradictions exist. Jesus himself could come back and say, Oh I goofed, later. Unless that is part of the text itself, it doesn't matter. There is no contradiction.

For some unknown reason people insist on introducing Christians, Popes etc. into the discussion as if they have anything to do with the topic.

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 123 by Danmark]

YOU claimed a text meant that anyone who claimed to be a believer and then stopped believing must have never believed in the first place. IOW you claimed to know what the text meant.

I claimed that this isn't about anyone other than the characters within the texts. I claimed that it wasn't about the person who was introducing themselves as a former Christian. He could be a current Christian and I would have said the same thing, i.e. it isn't about them.

I then posted two passages which point out that any one who leaves was "NEVER" one of them, and that Jesus, who most would agree is the founder of his movement; "NEVER" knew them.

I claim to know what "NEVER" means.

Again, this has nothing to do with anyone outside the texts themselves, but you're free to believe whatever you please and inject as much external information as you wish. None of it supports a significant contradiction within the texts.

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 121 by Danmark]

But it DOES matter if the text is "completely wrong."

No, it doesn't. The texts could say that the earth is flat throughout the entire bible, and no one would legitimately be able to prove that there are any contradictions within the texts. The texts could say that the Israelites settled at the southern tip of the Sinai peninsula and remain there to this very day. There is no contradiction. It doesn't matter that Israel is nowhere near the southern tip of the Sinai peninsula unless the texts contradict themselves.

People think I'm defending the texts; I'm not. I'm just looking for significant contradictions. I'm looking at the assumptions that underlie these contradictions as well, but that's beside the point. Then again, maybe it isn't. People can't help but look at this from some faith based perspective. I'm not anywhere near there so I can't relate to so many people getting so bent out of shape over something they don't even believe in in the first place. It's preposterous.

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 121 by Danmark]

So, if the Bible says something that is contrary to our experience, contrary to reason, contrary to fact, that is powerful evidence 'the text' is not from an omniscient, perfect God.

So what? I couldn't care less. It could be from some maniacal tyrant from a corporate sin galaxy who isn't interested in anything other than manipulating everyone here for his own nefarious purposes. The fact that it is contrary to your experience, reason, or factoids makes no difference to whether the texts are contradicting themselves. That's the topic.

So to be clear, you are now just saying the texts are in conflict.

Not necessarily.

Are you willing then to concede that those of us who claim to have 'believed' and acted consistently with those beliefs, were indeed believers?

I couldn't care less what you claimed to have believed. It has nothing to do with this topic. This topic isn't about you or your beliefs. It's about internal contradictions within the texts themselves.

I may suspect the sincerity, understanding, and basis a person had for being an atheist, when he tells me he "used to be an atheist," but now is a Christian. I am in my rights to question him about the particulars of his claimed atheism, but in the end i have to accept him at his word that once was an atheist.

Sure, but again; so what? I'm not denying what they're saying. I'm simply pointing out that their beliefs have nothing to do with this topic. Their ability to comprehend the topic has something to do with this topic though and most don't seem to be able to do that.

I, and I assume others situated like me, welcome questions about the 'quality' of my belief. I can literally give chapter and verse on the subject. I was sincere enough to forgo financial reward and cross the ocean to preach the gospel and actually 'lead people to Christ.'

Sounds like a great question, and one that would generate plenty of interest in another thread.

I am now embarrassed by all of that, but I was following the beliefs I had when I was in my teens and twenties, before I ever read much on the subject outside of the Bible itself.

And I know that getting all that off of one's chest can be quite cathartic, and move one towards healing and forgiveness, yet as great as that all may be, it has nothing to do with the internal contradictions within the texts themselves, if there are any at all. I'm beginning to wonder.

On a related matter, many well known Christians have struggled with their faith. Famous examples include Martin Luther, Mother Teresa, C.S. Lewis, John Calvin, et al.

Technically it isn't related to this topic at all.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 121 by Danmark]

But it DOES matter if the text is "completely wrong."

No, it doesn't. The texts could say that the earth is flat throughout the entire bible, and no one would legitimately be able to prove that there are any contradictions within the texts.

There is a confusion here. Let's distinguish between a contradiction within the text (or between two different passages of text) and a contradiction between a text and reality as it can be observed directly and objectively. BOTH matter, but I agree there is no intra-textual contradiction if all the texts agree that the Earth is flat; however, there is a contradiction between the text and reality. In either case we have reason to the authority of the text.

[Elijah John]

1 John 2.19 is refuted by real world experience, as alexx, Danmark, myself and others could attest.

Could you elaborate on this? What are you talking about, and how does it relate to this topic? In other words, where is the contradiction?

The contradiction is between the epistle writer John, and reality. Observable, experiential reality.

But OK, you are looking only for the most significant internal Bible contradiction? If that was clear in the OP, I missed it. Seems many of us missed it as well.

[JehovahsWitness]

Are you also claiming that 1 John 2:19 is 'proof' I was also not a believer when I went to Japan as a missionary? Are you seriously claiming that all Christians who discover they were wrong never believed in the first place?

1 JOHN 2:19
They went out from us, but they were not of our sort; for if they had been of our sort, they would have remained with us. But they went out so that it might be shown that not all are of our sort.

I think that John is simply saying that true believers are those that stick to the truth to the end and that those that for whatever reason abandon the truth are not by definition part of the group that "endure to the end" because they didn't.

But the one who has endured to the end will be saved - JESUS CHRIST