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.
The most significant contradiction or inconcistency?
Moderator: Moderators
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: The most significant contradiction or inconcistency?
Post #202[Replying to post 201 by Goose]
You know, in simplistic logic, they both can't be correct, but in practical reality, we often observe things seemingly contradictory, yet quite consistent.
These are called paradoxes, and so far they all have had logical, if mentally challenging answers.
So if one side of the logic is a undiscovered lie, and the other is reality, you would observe a paradox.
So the question you may really be debating is:
What side don't you understand, or have the most reason to challenge?
Stories about the adventures of creatures that can't be shown to exist, or humble reality?
Or could it be that both observations are equally misguided?
What can be shown?
Or like the Twins Paradox, is there a demonstrable reality based explanation?
You know, in simplistic logic, they both can't be correct, but in practical reality, we often observe things seemingly contradictory, yet quite consistent.
These are called paradoxes, and so far they all have had logical, if mentally challenging answers.
So if one side of the logic is a undiscovered lie, and the other is reality, you would observe a paradox.
So the question you may really be debating is:
What side don't you understand, or have the most reason to challenge?
Stories about the adventures of creatures that can't be shown to exist, or humble reality?
Or could it be that both observations are equally misguided?
What can be shown?
Or like the Twins Paradox, is there a demonstrable reality based explanation?
-
Danmark
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 12697
- Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
- Location: Seattle
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: The most significant contradiction or inconcistency?
Post #209[Replying to post 208 by Goose]
Altho' I believe we are getting away from the subject of this subtopic and getting into 'Holy Huddle' territory, I am in general agreement with you Goose. I have never understood the necessity for the reams of material devoted to the 'faith' v. 'works' arguments. It should be intuitively obvious that where there is true faith in the message of Jesus, that will be displayed in a person's conduct. Not everyone who cries "Lord! Lord!" will be 'saved.'
There is a reason I often put "Christian" in quotes. Some of the most vile, unethical, and even criminal people have claimed to be Christian. I am not a theist, and frequently as in this very post, am judgmental, but I can say I love Jesus and his message of love and of recognizing there are ideals beyond the self that give life meaning and that we should have 'faith' in. I've always liked the book of James and long ago memorized the 4th Chapter. James sets a tough standard, but like other ideals, that standard presents a goal rather than an absolute expectation.
Despite the fact our 'works' should demonstrate our 'faith,' we should not deny that a person has faith in his ideals, even if his conduct too frequently betrays that faith. Even tho' I am no longer a believer in the supernatural, one of the passages that still resonates with me... can still evoke an emotional response is "Lord, be merciful to me a sinner."
Altho' I believe we are getting away from the subject of this subtopic and getting into 'Holy Huddle' territory, I am in general agreement with you Goose. I have never understood the necessity for the reams of material devoted to the 'faith' v. 'works' arguments. It should be intuitively obvious that where there is true faith in the message of Jesus, that will be displayed in a person's conduct. Not everyone who cries "Lord! Lord!" will be 'saved.'
There is a reason I often put "Christian" in quotes. Some of the most vile, unethical, and even criminal people have claimed to be Christian. I am not a theist, and frequently as in this very post, am judgmental, but I can say I love Jesus and his message of love and of recognizing there are ideals beyond the self that give life meaning and that we should have 'faith' in. I've always liked the book of James and long ago memorized the 4th Chapter. James sets a tough standard, but like other ideals, that standard presents a goal rather than an absolute expectation.
Despite the fact our 'works' should demonstrate our 'faith,' we should not deny that a person has faith in his ideals, even if his conduct too frequently betrays that faith. Even tho' I am no longer a believer in the supernatural, one of the passages that still resonates with me... can still evoke an emotional response is "Lord, be merciful to me a sinner."
