Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

[TRANSPONDER]

Well, I seem to have run out of correspondents, so let's start a thread - and on my Pet Subject:- the Contradictions.

I already set out some major contradictions in the Resurrection -accounts, hinted at them in the Nativity accounts (and those are the two touchstone cases). I referred to Luke's version of the 'Rejection at Nazareth' and I think I mentioned the 'death of Judas' as a contradiction as well as being a fudged 'prophecy'.

But I think the point is made: minor contradictions aren't too important. Who said what and in what order isn't too serious. But really bad ones discredit the reliability of the gospels. It is serious when John has no angel at the tomb explaining where Jesus had gone, and Mary running back and gasping that she doesn't know where 'they' have taken him is a total refutation of the claim of a message given at the empty tomb. I also argued that Cleophas, having heard the Marys' account of this while relating that they had seen angels, specifically says that they did not see Jesus. Somebody is telling whoppers and John sides with Luke - there is no appearance of Jesus before the Marys report back to the disciples. Matthew made that one up.

But one I really like is the transfiguration. We can disentangle the added material, such as the Other feeding of 4,000 ir that improbable trip to Caesarea Philippi; it pretty much occurred over 2 days:-

Jesus and the disciples sail across lake Galilee to Bethsaida.
He feeds the crowd (of men sitting on the grass in groups of 50) with bread and fish.
He is recognised as the messiah, by his own followers at least.
He sends the disciples back to Capernaum in the boat and catches up with them, walking on the water.

And we know where the transfiguration should occur - after the recognition by Peter that Jesus is the Messiah and before the disciples return to Capernaum by boat.

So, why isn't it in John? There's no question of where it should be, but we get Jesus apparently escaping the crowd, who want to make him a king 'By force', going into the hills. Is anyone going to argue that John didn't know about the Transfiguration, or thought it not worth mentioning? He is describing what happened; why does he tell a totally different story?

[Miles]

Hence, I see Biblical contradictions as a red flag to tread very cautiously and not to believe everything you read in the Bible. . . . . . . . if anything all

I do not believe it's an either/or situation. It's not either everything in the Bible is factually correct or nothing is factually correct. Unfortunately though, many people hold to this position, including both Christians and non-Christians.

Neither do I, although I believe the prudent approach is wide ranging skepticism that embraces all of the Bible. Other than self-referential corroboration there is simply no confirming anything it says, which, I believe, is why faith is invoked so often---an exceedingly poor basis of trust that lacks any foundation for confidence.

What can't be taken on faith? Nothing. Every position can be taken on faith.

I think the first thing that has to be addressed is the doctrine of inerrancy. Don't want to hash it out all again, but it is discussed in Is it necessary for the Bible to be inerrant?. Bottom line, it's possible to believe the Bible is authoritative without the need to be an inerrantist.

Absolutely. All it takes to grant authority is a need to do so, in which case all kinds of nonsense may be admitted.

Another issue is the Greek/western way of thinking. The western mind typically puts things in an either/or box. Something is either in box A or in box B. Things need to be logical. In the eastern mind, things can exist which seem contrary to each other. Things do not have to be logical.

An example of this is light. A western mindset would have more difficulty accepting light is both a wave and a particle. An eastern mindset would more easily accept it. Pioneers of quantum mechanics such as Heisenberg were influenced by eastern philosophy, even though he was a devout Christian:

Heisenberg admired Eastern philosophy and saw parallels between it and quantum mechanics, describing himself as in "complete agreement" with the book The Tao of Physics. Heisenberg even went as far to state that after conversations with Rabindranath Tagore about Indian philosophy "some of the ideas that seemed so crazy suddenly made much more sense."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_He ... _worldview

Yeah, as I recall, Heisenberg was predisposed to Eastern thinking. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but I don't see it as improving our picture of reality.

Another example is something I was discussing with someone I met at church. A western mindset would have more difficulty accepting it's possible for people in the church to accept different political, racial, ideological positions and still be one unified church body. In the eastern mindset, it would be easier to accept the fact that a Democrat and a Republican can sit in the same pew.

Really! Just what is the significant difference between the two in this case?


.

[otseng]

But has the word contradictionchanged its meaning? Since when is it a synonym of "different"?

I think we can all agree there are differences in the Bible, so there's not much to debate about that. But, can these differences also be considered contradictions and are they relevant to the authority of the Bible?

One viewpoint of a contradiction would be, "a difference that invalidates the authority of the Bible". I believe this viewpoint is how most people would define a Biblical contradiction.

"For many believers, the internal consistency of the Jewish and Christian scriptures is important because they feel that any inconsistencies or contradictions could challenge belief in truth of their contents and the view that they are of divine origin."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_ ... _the_Bible

But, in this definition lies several assumptions. And if these assumptions are false, then this viewpoint of a contradiction is meaningless.

I've pointed out two of these assumptions, and there could even be more. One assumption is the doctrine of inerrancy and the second is the only way to approach the Bible is through western thinking. And I argue both of these assumptions are not valid.

[JoeyKnothead]

But has the word contradictionchanged its meaning? Since when is it a synonym of "different"?

I think we can all agree there are differences in the Bible, so there's not much to debate about that. But, can these differences also be considered contradictions and are they relevant to the authority of the Bible?

One viewpoint of a contradiction would be, "a difference that invalidates the authority of the Bible". I believe this viewpoint is how most people would define a Biblical contradiction.

"For many believers, the internal consistency of the Jewish and Christian scriptures is important because they feel that any inconsistencies or contradictions could challenge belief in truth of their contents and the view that they are of divine origin."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_ ... _the_Bible

But, in this definition lies several assumptions. And if these assumptions are false, then this viewpoint of a contradiction is meaningless.

I've pointed out two of these assumptions, and there could even be more. One assumption is the doctrine of inerrancy and the second is the only way to approach the Bible is through western thinking. And I argue both of these assumptions are not valid.

It's kinda sad about otseng. Poor thing hasta tie him an ace bandage around his head, to keep that big brain of his from busting out its cage. Must make for awkward conversation at work.

I've come to learn that errancy in the bible doesn't spoil the deal - it reaffirms the fallibilty of man. It guides us to study, to think, and to act according to our best understandings - that we may weed out the evildoers who do their evil under the guise of scripture.

Did Jesus write it? No. Cause then all we'd hafta do is all just follow along, leaving our free will with that sketchy dude who smells all the worms before he puts em in the bait box.

Did God write it? No, he'd just get Spielberg to tell it. Everyone knows if ya really need to tell something, get Spielberg to do it, so that everyone'll hush up and pay attention.


Of course I don't believe in the bible as some be all and end all, but surely the fact it must be produced and interpreted by the very folks it calls fallible is some sound indication it might not get the details perfect. As it expects us to do us our best thinking - and acting - about it.

[JehovahsWitness]

One viewpoint of a contradiction would be, "a difference that invalidates the authority of the Bible".

Really? I wasn't really asking about a "view" of a contradiction, I was simply asking about the definition of the word contradiction as could be used in a court of law.

The fact of something being the complete opposite of something else or very different from something else, so that one of them must be wrong

source: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictio ... tradiction

If two statements are different but both can be equally true (or if there is only one statement and another source is silent on the matter), how can that be defined as a contradiction?

In and case I see that people are actually arguing about something else entirely, and I will have to clearly define my terms when next I engage. Even if I am the only person to do so.




JW

To read more please go to other posts related to...

CONTRADICTIONS , SEQUENCING and ...EASTER CHALLENGES*

* harmonizing the resurrection narratives

[otseng]

Looking at it as otseng has, allows us to think for ourselves, to act as ourselves, opposed to just following along mindlessly*. It allows us to consider our thoughts and actions as they relate to today's world, not some ancient time of less knowledge and education.

*Sorry, offensive term but I can't think of one more apt - it's the only word I have here, and exposes me to folks thinking how lessly it is, is mine.

I can't think of a better term either. Yes, most people read the Bible mindlessly, both Christians as well as non-Christians. But, it's not just with the Bible, most people are living mindlessly.

Yes, it's possible to read the Bible at a superficial level and be content, but there is so much more. It's like using a gym. We know it's ridiculous saying, "Hey, I signed up for a gym membership, I'm good, I don't need to actually go and do any exercise." Likewise, some "Christians" believe "Hey I walked down the aisle to get saved, I'm good. I don't need to do anything else, including reading the Bible." At least reading the Bible, or starting to actually do something in the gym, is a good start.

Simply just reading the Bible at a basic level is just walking on the treadmill. Better than nothing, but there are higher levels to start jogging and then running. And you can also add incline levels. And then there's the weights section of the gym. There is so much more to it. For those that think they know it all about the Bible, here's a 4 hour message that will reassess your Biblical knowledge.

Just think about how many people have been studying the Bible for all this time. And we're still learning new things from it. And it'll be this way until the end of human civilization. So, it's quite arrogant for anything to think they truly know the Bible.

Let me put in here a plug for the Unique Bible App. Difflugia mentioned this last year. And since then, I've joined Eliran to help improve it. In my humble opinion, it is the most bang for the buck Bible software program out there. You want to study in the original languages? Check. You want access to most all of the free English translations? Check. You want access to tons of dictionaries, lexicons, commentaries, encylopedias, books, hymns, PDF, and ePUB files? Check. You don't want to pay a single penny for it? Check.

[JoeyKnothead]

Looking at it as otseng has, allows us to think for ourselves, to act as ourselves, opposed to just following along mindlessly*. It allows us to consider our thoughts and actions as they relate to today's world, not some ancient time of less knowledge and education.

*Sorry, offensive term but I can't think of one more apt - it's the only word I have here, and exposes me to folks thinking how lessly it is, is mine.

I can't think of a better term either. Yes, most people read the Bible mindlessly, both Christians as well as non-Christians. But, it's not just with the Bible, most people are living mindlessly.

Yes, it's possible to read the Bible at a superficial level and be content, but there is so much more. It's like using a gym. We know it's ridiculous saying, "Hey, I signed up for a gym membership, I'm good, I don't need to actually go and do any exercise."

Why'd you look at me when you mentioned the gym

Likewise, some "Christians" believe "Hey I walked down the aisle to get saved, I'm good. I don't need to do anything else, including reading the Bible." At least reading the Bible, or starting to actually do something in the gym, is a good start.

Simply just reading the Bible at a basic level is just walking on the treadmill. Better than nothing, but there are higher levels to start jogging and then running. And you can also add incline levels. And then there's the weights section of the gym. There is so much more to it. For those that think they know it all about the Bible, here's a 4 hour message that will reassess your Biblical knowledge.

Ya know, I gotta fess to mindlessly accepting the 'chatter' I had heard about religious (fundamentalist / hardcore evangelical) biblical interpretation. Then I came here and discovered a rich, engaging, intellectual debate about all I thought I knew. Would that the voices of nuance and deliberation could sing as loud.

Just think about how many people have been studying the Bible for all this time. And we're still learning new things from it. And it'll be this way until the end of human civilization. So, it's quite arrogant for any[one] to say they truly know the Bible.

If God is all knowing, what man is so proud to declare they know all about him?

Let me put in here a plug for the Unique Bible App. Difflugia mentioned this last year. And since then, I've joined Eliran to help improve it. In my humble opinion, it is the most bang for the buck Bible software program out there. You want to study in the original languages? Check. You want access to most all of the free English translations? Check. You want access to tons of dictionaries, lexicons, commentaries, encylopedias, books, hymns, PDF, and ePUB files? Check. You don't want to pay a single penny for it? Check.

On my way...

[otseng]

This argument is often used in inerrancy apologetics, but the courtroom analogy doesn't actually work for inerrancy. Court witnesses give different accounts specifically because they're human beings and human beings have fallible memories.

I agree.

I believe we don't need to elevate the Biblical writers to more than what they were. Clearly from reading the Bible, they were not perfect. Unless they went into some sort of trance while writing their works, they were still subject to their own weaknesses and limitations.

The purpose of the scriptures is not to idolize the authors. It's not even to idolize the Bible. It's to idolize the subject of the Bible - God. The scriptures are a testimony and witness to what God has done and what he's like.

Now, before anyone start accusing me of being a liberal or a heretic or a pagan, I believe in the full authority of the Bible. In some ways, I'm even more conservative than others (I'm a young earth creationist, I believe in a literal worldwide flood, I believe the earth is at the center of the universe). I believe the Bible should be diligently studied and put into practice. I believe it is the rule and standard for the Christian life.

So, as for if contradictions in the NT (as well as the OT) matter, it does not affect the authority of the Bible and it does not affect its truthfulness. But, where the differences do exist, it's fascinating to research why they are there - the entire topic of Biblical criticism I think is quite interesting. And learning about the differences and why they came about has actually given me greater appreciation for the OT and the NT.