mahdino:

I have given u refrences of so many verses where one person say's that and the other say's this e.g.


Pls tell us who made David to count Isreal? In II samuel 24 and I chronicles 21. God or Satan and u know in any religion God and Satan are 2 different and opposite, pls also explain to us, what did the lord decree 3 years famine or 7 years famine? In II Samuel 24:13 and I Chronicles 21:11, you might also like to explain to us how old was Jehoiachin? 8 or 18 in II Chronicles 36 and II kings 24, pls also tell us how it came about that we know Jesus was created without father just like Adam was created without father and mother, but ur bible gave him different genealogy from Davivd to Joseph and no two names are identical, also in Genesi the bible said that the vegetation comes before sunlight, there so many scientific and logical error in the bible if u don't know christian scholars in Awake magazine have estemated that there are over 50, 000 errors in the bible, but pls clarify the above so u can check.

You need to come up with your own discoveries and not parrot whatever you see on the internet. Below are 101 cleared contradictions in the Bible from where you got your questions:

http://web.comhem.se/~u18208324/min/contrad.htm

http://www.debate.org.uk/debate-topics/apologetic/contrads/

And don't come back until you have done your homework.

OLAADEGBU:

"The Bible has many seeming contradictions within its pages."

For example, the four Gospels give four differing accounts as to what was written on the sign that hung on the cross.

"And above His head they put up the charge against Him which read, 'THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS'." —Matthew 27:37

"The inscription of the charge against Him read, 'THE KING OF THE JEWS'." —Mark 15:26

"Now there was also an inscription above Him, 'THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS'." —Luke 23:38

"Pilate also wrote an inscription and put it on the cross. It was written, 'JESUS THE NAZARENE, THE KING OF THE JEWS'." —John 19:19

Those who are looking for contradictions may therefore say, "See—the Bible is full of mistakes!" and choose to reject it entirely as being untrustworthy.

However, those who trust God have no problem harmonizing the Gospels. There is no contradiction if the sign simply said, "This is Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews." The godly base their confidence on two truths: 1) "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16); and 2) an elementary rule of Scripture is that God has deliberately included seeming contradictions in His Word to "snare" the proud. He has "hidden" things from the "wise and prudent" and "revealed them to babes" (Luke 10:21), purposely choosing foolish things to confound the wise (1 Corinthians 1:27).

If an ungodly man refuses to humble himself and obey the gospel, and instead desires to build a case against the Bible, God gives him enough material to build his own gallows. This incredible principle is clearly illustrated in the account of the capture of Zedekiah, king of Judah. Jeremiah the prophet told Zedekiah that God would judge him. He was informed that he would be "delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon" (Jeremiah 32:4). This is confirmed in Jeremiah 39:5-7 where we are told that he was captured and brought to King Nebuchadnezzar, then they "bound him with chains, to carry him to Babylon."

However, in Ezekiel 12:13, God Himself warned, "I will bring him to Babylon...yet he shall not see it, though he shall die there" (emphasis added). Here is material to build a case against the Bible! It is an obvious mistake. Three Bible verses say that the king would go to Babylon, and yet the Bible in another place says that he would not see Babylon. How can someone be taken somewhere and not see it? It makes no sense at all—unless Zedekiah was blinded. And that is precisely what happened. Zedekiah saw Nebuchadnezzar face to face, saw his sons killed before his eyes, then "the king of Babylon… put out Zedekiah's eyes" before taking him to Babylon (Jeremiah 39:6,7). This is the underlying principle behind the many "contradictions" of Holy Scripture (such as how many horses David had, who was the first to arrive at the tomb after the resurrection of Jesus, etc.).

God has turned the tables on proud, arrogant, self-righteous man. When he proudly stands outside of the kingdom of God, and seeks to justify his sinfulness through evidence he thinks discredits the Bible, he doesn't realize that God has simply lowered the door of life, so that only those who are prepared to exercise faith, and bow in humility may enter. It is interesting to note that the seeming contradictions in the four Gospels attest to the fact that there was no corroboration between the writers.

Seeming contradictions, no?

@OP I have a question for you regarding the ascension of Jesus, in what to my mind seems a contradiction. Perhaps you or anyone else could help clarify ?

In the Gospel of Luke, concerning the resurrection and ascension of Jesus (24:51-52) we read the following;

“ And it happened that while he was blessing them, he was removed from them and they returned to Jerusalem with great joy”, this being on the same day of the resurrection. (Luke 24 makes it very clear Jesus had not been alive 40 days prior)

It is accepted that Luke is also the author of the book of Acts, the same author, Luke in his second narrative in Acts (1:1-11) with particular attention to verse 3 states “Jesus showed himself alive……being seen of them forty days….”

Why would the same author in one volume state Jesus ascended to heaven on the day of his resurrection, and in another volume state he ascended after forty days ? Do you actually believe there is a contradiction there ?

OLAADEGBU:

You need to come up with your own discoveries and not parrot whatever you see on the internet. Below are 101 cleared contradictions in the Bible from where you got your questions:

http://web.comhem.se/~u18208324/min/contrad.htm

http://www.debate.org.uk/debate-topics/apologetic/contrads/

And don't come back until you have done your homework.

In no way is any of the contrdictions explained and above I have given u some verse to explain which u have failed, infact u are not even ashame saying all these filt dirt is from God. Lot had sex with his daughters Genesis 19:33-35, mother had sex with her son Genesis 35:22, father-in-law had sex with daughter-in-law Genesis 38:15-18 (don't tell me that obasanjo has been reading that verse), rape between brother and sister 2 Samuels 13:10-14 indeed these contradicts the teaching of God. They are not the words of God.

Sarassin:

@OP I have a question for you regarding the ascension of Jesus, in what to my mind seems a contradiction.

Perhaps you or anyone else could help clarify ?

In the Gospel of Luke, concerning the resurrection and ascension of Jesus (24:51-52) we read the following;
“ And it happened that while he was blessing them, he was removed from them and they returned to Jerusalem with great joy”, this being on the same day of the resurrection. (Luke 24 makes it very clear Jesus had not been alive 40 days prior)

It is accepted that Luke is also the author of the book of Acts, the same author, Luke in his second narrative in Acts (1:1-11) with particular attention to verse 3 states “Jesus showed himself alive……being seen of them forty days….”

Why would the same author in one volume state Jesus ascended to heaven on the day of his resurrection,

and in another volume state he ascended after forty days ?

Do you actually believe there is a contradiction there ?

There seemingly is a contradiction, Yep and so.

What's the story morning glory? No offense

Don't the two verses, both agree that Jesus resurrected and later ascended? Huh?

In the same vein, isn't there a consistency(ies) here?

What do expect from from passed down translations, eh?

Not insinuating you are one but this is one of those typical "Rookie errors"

because the last clause, "was carried up into heaven" or “and began to be borne up to heaven” appearing in that verse,

is actually absent from some, albeit not from the majority of the older/ancient manuscripts

and as a result is also omitted in some modern translations too.

Give brother Luke a break, remember he didn't know Jesus directly and was not an eye-witness of Jesus' ministry

He gathered his information from other eye-witness' and did his best

Now, let's amuse or stimulate ourselves; throw a cat among pigeons - You never know, maybe He ascended twice!

Don't the two verses, both agree that Jesus resurrected and later ascended? Huh?

In the same vein, isn't there a consistency(ies) here?

What do expect from from passed down translations, eh?

Of course both verses agree on the ascension, and there is a consistency in that regards, the devil however is in the detail. Either Jesus ascended on the day of the resurrection or forty days after, it can't be both, of course the possibility exists that both verses could be wrong !

Not insinuating you are one but this is one of those typical "Rookie errors"

because the last clause, "was carried up into heaven" or “and began to be borne up to heaven” appearing in that verse,

is actually absent from some, albeit not from the majority of the older/ancient manuscripts

and as a result is also omitted in some modern translations too.

rookie error I don't think so. You may insinuate of course, but the verse appears in some of our oldest and best manuscripts, i.e the codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and of course P75. Out of curiosity, I would be interested to learn what manuscripts it is missing from.

Give brother Luke a break, remember he didn't know Jesus directly and was not an eye-witness of Jesus' ministry

He gathered his information from other eye-witness' and did his best

You took the words right out of my mouth. He never knew Jesus and yet he wrote a gospel.

Now, let's amuse or stimulate ourselves; throw a cat among pigeons - You never know, maybe He ascended twice! smiley

Now that would have been a better story than the error strewn contradictory verses we currently have, from the author of Luke.

Do you want to know my expectations for 2014? Click here: www.nairaland.com/1575864/expectations-2014

Sarassin:

@OP I have a question for you regarding the ascension of Jesus, in what to my mind seems a contradiction. Perhaps you or anyone else could help clarify ?

In the Gospel of Luke, concerning the resurrection and ascension of Jesus (24:51-52) we read the following;

“ And it happened that while he was blessing them, he was removed from them and they returned to Jerusalem with great joy”, this being on the same day of the resurrection. (Luke 24 makes it very clear Jesus had not been alive 40 days prior)

It is accepted that Luke is also the author of the book of Acts, the same author, Luke in his second narrative in Acts (1:1-11) with particular attention to verse 3 states “Jesus showed himself alive……being seen of them forty days….”

Why would the same author in one volume state Jesus ascended to heaven on the day of his resurrection, and in another volume state he ascended after forty days ? Do you actually believe there is a contradiction there ?

"And it came to pass, while He blessed them, He was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. And they worshipped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy" (Luke 24:51-52).

Where did Dr. Luke state that Jesus ascended to heaven on the day of His resurrection in the verses quoted above? Do you know what "And it came to pass" means?

OLAADEGBU:

"And it came to pass, while He blessed them, He was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.
And they worshipped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy" (Luke 24:51-52).

Where did Dr. Luke state that Jesus ascended to heaven on the day of His resurrection in the verses quoted above?

Do you know what "And it came to pass" means?

Ouch! Ghen-ghen!!

You've been openly declaring in the presence of many, confessed and professed a good profession before many witnesses too,

protecting the faith of those whom the false teachers seek to hoodwink or influence

and, if possible, win back those who have strayed.

You're fighting a good fight. You surely will finish the race or course, at the rate you're keeping the faith.

You will enjoy the fruit of your labor. How joyful and prosperous you will be!

For God is not unjust; He will not forget your work

and the love you have shown Him as you have helped His people and continue to help them

OLAADEGBU:

"And it came to pass, while He blessed them, He was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. And they worshipped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy" (Luke 24:51-52).

Where did Dr. Luke state that Jesus ascended to heaven on the day of His resurrection in the verses quoted above? Do you know what "And it came to pass" means?

This is a fudge, and you know it.

Read Luke 24 (KJV) in its entirety, it is a contiguous narrative. In verse 4, Dr. Luke uses the same terms "and it came to pass" to describe an on-going event i.e the perplexity of those who sought out Jesus body, the usage of the term in that context is not one of days later, unless you choose to argue otherwise. In verse 15, the same mechanism obtains.

In verse 36 Jesus appears in the midst of the disciples and it is one continuous narrative from that point till verse 50 where he leads them as far as Bethany and blesses his disciples, we then see the use of the term you have highlighted, are you suggesting Jesus blessed his disciples, went home came back forty days later as Dr. Luke implies in Acts, blessed his disciples again and then got taken away ? or what exactly ?

It is a clear contradiction even by the same author, but it happens and does not detract from the substantive message of Jesus which is greater than the sum of all the contradictions in the scriptures.

Sarassin:

This is a fudge, and you know it.

Read Luke 24 (KJV) in its entirety, it is a contiguous narrative. In verse 4, Dr. Luke uses the same terms "and it came to pass" to describe an on-going event i.e the perplexity of those who sought out Jesus body, the usage of the term in that context is not one of days later, unless you choose to argue otherwise. In verse 15, the same mechanism obtains.
In verse 36 Jesus appears in the midst of the disciples and it is one continuous narrative from that point till verse 50 where he leads them as far as Bethany and blesses his disciples, we then see the use of the term you have highlighted, are you suggesting Jesus blessed his disciples, went home came back forty days later as Dr. Luke implies in Acts, blessed his disciples again and then got taken away ? or what exactly ?

It is a clear contradiction even by the same author, but it happens and does not detract from the substantive message of Jesus which is greater than the sum of all the contradictions in the scriptures.

Bunkum!. Pulpit Commentary does not have hangs up with Luke 24:4 but does rather with Luke 24:51 and you know it

BabaGnoni:

Bunkum!. Pulpit Commentary does not have hangs up with Luke 24:4 but does rather with Luke 24:51 and you know it

No Bunkum here

The OP queried if i understood the meaning of the term "and it came to pass". I have used Luke 24:4 to illustrate that Luke used the term to describe an ongoing event severally not an event that took place some time in the future as the OP was trying to imply.

You have raised a separate issue (incidentally I do agree) however the rendering obtains in our earliest and best manuscripts, per my previous post, in the codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and the papyrus Bodmer (P75). I will wager you that the revised renderings you mention will occur mainly in later manuscripts.

Sarassin:

This is a fudge, and you know it.

Read Luke 24 (KJV) in its entirety, it is a contiguous narrative. In verse 4, Dr. Luke uses the same terms "and it came to pass" to describe an on-going event i.e the perplexity of those who sought out Jesus body, the usage of the term in that context is not one of days later, unless you choose to argue otherwise. In verse 15, the same mechanism obtains.

In verse 36 Jesus appears in the midst of the disciples and it is one continuous narrative from that point till verse 50 where he leads them as far as Bethany and blesses his disciples, we then see the use of the term you have highlighted, are you suggesting Jesus blessed his disciples, went home came back forty days later as Dr. Luke implies in Acts, blessed his disciples again and then got taken away ? or what exactly ?

It is a clear contradiction even by the same author, but it happens and does not detract from the substantive message of Jesus which is greater than the sum of all the contradictions in the scriptures.

Let me give you another instance in the Scriptures since it appears it has not been given to you to understand the narrations in the Bible:

"And in the process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering to the LORD" (Genesis 4:3).

Do you now the duration of time that transpired here? If you don't know it will be wise for you to ask questions instead of saying what don't know.

OLAADEGBU:

Let me give you another instance in the Scriptures since it appears it has not been given to you to understand the narrations in the Bible:

"And in the process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering to the LORD" (Genesis 4:3).

Do you now the duration of time that transpired here? If you don't know it will be wise for you to ask questions instead of saying what don't know.

The authors of the Book of Genesis and Luke are clearly different, why the comparison ?

Since you claim it has not been "given" to me to understand the scriptures, why don't you enlighten me by answering the questions i posed earlier, I made a reference to verse 4 in the same chapter of Luke to establish a time-line, any comments ? or do you simply wish to try leading us down the garden path ?

Sarassin:

The authors of the Book of Genesis and Luke are clearly different, why the comparison ?

Since you claim it has not been "given" to me to understand the scriptures, why don't you enlighten me by answering the questions i posed earlier, I made a reference to verse 4 in the same chapter of Luke to establish a time-line, any comments ? or do you simply wish to try leading us down the garden path ?

I'll advise you to peruse the thread below as this may put you in a better stance in understanding and comprehending the Scriptures.

https://www.nairaland.com/1525455/isnt-bible-full-errors

*yawns* I dey one corner here dey watch.

OLAADEGBU:

I'll advise you to peruse the thread below as this may put you in a better stance in understanding and comprehending the Scriptures.

https://www.nairaland.com/1525455/isnt-bible-full-errors

So, for those who still maintain 100% there are no errors or contradictions in the Bible, I leave you with the words of a very famous early church leader, no lesser a fellow than Origen, in his book Against Celsus had the following to say;

“the differences amongst the manuscripts have become great, either through the negligence of some copyists or through the perverse audacity of others, they either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions as they please.”

There you have it.

Sarassin:

So, for those who still maintain 100% there are no errors or contradictions in the Bible,

I leave you with the words of a very famous early church leader, no lesser a fellow than Origen, in his book Against Celsus had the following to say;
“the differences amongst the manuscripts have become great, either through the negligence of some copyists or through the perverse audacity of others, they either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions as they please.”

There you have it.

@Sarassin

Haba! Sarassin!! Come back right in here. Dont made a hasty exit!!!

Don't think you'll get off that lightly or get away with that

No one is alluding that the Bible translation is 100% error or contradictions free.

Of course, it is riddled with contradictions

Bible translation(s) isn't God inspired - bet you know that much

Just need to know that eating the chicken, chewing the meat and spitting out the bones is the sensible plan for reading Bible(s)

If unable to chew meat and spit bones out at the same time,

then get someone to remove the bones whilst eating or munching, is all what's suggested, said and/or alluded

@BabaGnoni

No one is alluding that the Bible translation is 100% error or contradictions free.
Of course, it is riddled with contradictions
Bible translation(s) isn't God inspired - bet you know that much

I believe @OP will disagree with you vehemently, with his 101 cleared contradictions e.t.c, OP seems to be on a singular mission to "harmonize" the good book even where contradictions are staring him bang in the face.

Just need to know that eating the chicken, chewing the meat and spitting out the bones is the sensible plan for reading Bible(s)
If unable to chew meat and spit bones out at the same time, then get someone to remove the bones whilst eating or munching, is all what's suggested, said and/or alluded

Love the analogy, will keep that in mind.

This op is a good apologist.

Seeming Contradictions.


*Modified*

Sarassin:

I believe @OP will disagree with you vehemently, with his 101 cleared contradictions e.t.c,

OP seems to be on a singular mission to "harmonize" the good book even where contradictions are staring him bang in the face.

Love the analogy, will keep that in mind.

OP was merely aiming to explain contradictions seemingly here or there or now & then seen in Bible or the various translation(s)

Statements, narratives such as the ones you highlighted which look like they oppose one another was an example.

Readers weren't delighted and wouldn't have none of OP's "crunching bones" spree,

so some were all out baiting and baying for blood.

Others were watching & following keenly from the sidewalks holding tyre tubes, gasoline filled jerry cans and match boxes in hands ready to pounce . .

harbiola1:

This op is a good apologist.

Seeming Contradictions.

*Modified*

OP will take that as a compliment

harbiola1: This op is a good apologist.

Seeming Contradictions.


*Modified*

Lol

God has turned the tables on proud, arrogant, self-righteous man. When he proudly stands outside of the kingdom of God, and seeks to justify his sinfulness through evidence he thinks discredits the Bible, he doesn't realise that God has simply lowered the door of life, so that only those who are prepared to exercise faith, and bow in humility may enter. It is interesting to note that the seeming contradictions in the four Gospels attest to the fact that there was no corroboration between the writers.

OLAADEGBU: God has turned the tables on proud, arrogant, self-righteous man. When he proudly stands outside of the kingdom of God, and seeks to justify his sinfulness through evidence he thinks discredits the Bible, he doesn't realise that God has simply lowered the door of life, so that only those who are prepared to exercise faith, and bow in humility may enter. It is interesting to note that the seeming contradictions in the four Gospels attest to the fact that there was no corroboration between the writers.

Ok, a case of everyone writing what he feels is correct right? and as such not from the direct source right?

khattab02:

Ok, a case of everyone writing what he feels is correct right? and as such not from the direct source right?

The fact that there was no corroboration and yet we have perfect harmony only shows that there is one source.

OLAADEGBU: God has turned the tables on proud, arrogant, self-righteous man. When he proudly stands outside of the kingdom of God, and seeks to justify his sinfulness through evidence he thinks discredits the Bible, he doesn't realise that God has simply lowered the door of life, so that only those who are prepared to exercise faith, and bow in humility may enter.

This is your presumptive opinion and amounts to no more than a howl at the moon.

The fact that there was no corroboration and yet we have perfect harmony only shows that there is one source.

One source my foot ! more pious rubbish from you. The author of Mark is the earliest gospel writer, the author of Matthew clearly drew on Mark as a source. Your Dr. Luke drew on Matthew as a source. Both authors of Matthew and Luke also drew on the common source "Q". Where is this perfect harmony ? The gospels of Matthew and Luke do not agree on the circumstances around the birth/death of Jesus, they agree on little else in between, and don't even get me started on the gospel of John.

Sarassin:

This is your presumptive opinion and amounts to no more than a howl at the moon.



One source my foot ! more pious rubbish from you. The author of Mark is the earliest gospel writer, the author of Matthew clearly drew on Mark as a source. Your Dr. Luke drew on Matthew as a source. Both authors of Matthew and Luke also drew on the common source "Q". Where is this perfect harmony ? The gospels of Matthew and Luke do not agree on the circumstances around the birth/death of Jesus, they agree on little else in between, and don't even get me started on the gospel of John.

If an ungodly man refuses to humble himself and obey the gospel, and instead desires to build a case against the Bible, God gives him enough material to build his own gallows.

OLAADEGBU:

If an ungodly man refuses

to humble himself and obey the gospel, and instead desires to build a case against the Bible,

God gives him enough material to build his own gallows

Shoot!

OLAADEGBU:

The fact that there was no corroboration and yet we have perfect harmony only shows that there is one source.

No no. You sure know most of their accounts are not the same. If there is one source, then what this person writes shouldn't be different from what the other writes.

Sarassin:

This is your presumptive opinion and amounts to no more than a howl at the moon.



One source my foot ! more pious rubbish from you. The author of Mark is the earliest gospel writer, the author of Matthew clearly drew on Mark as a source. Your Dr. Luke drew on Matthew as a source. Both authors of Matthew and Luke also drew on the common source "Q". Where is this perfect harmony ? The gospels of Matthew and Luke do not agree on the circumstances around the birth/death of Jesus, they agree on little else in between, and don't even get me started on the gospel of John.

Gbaam!!! Straight on point!

OLAADEGBU:

If an ungodly man refuses to humble himself and obey the gospel, and instead desires to build a case against the Bible, God gives him enough material to build his own gallows.

Typical of a reply from christians when cornered.