bible is full of contradictions

God bless you JesusDiedForU

 

Sounds fair enough

Ok, you claim that; "the Bible has been translated but it the message is the same, it has not been changed."

I proved through my recent reply that the bible indeed has been changed by quoting just one verse.

"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."1 John 5:7

The scripture translator Benjamin Wilson gives the following explanation for this action in his "Emphatic Diaglott." Mr. Wilson says:

"This text concerning the heavenly witness is not contained in any Greek manuscript which was written earlier than the fifteenth century. It is not cited by any of the ecclesiastical writers; not by any of early Latin fathers even when the subjects upon which they treated would naturally have lead them to appeal to it's authority. It is therefore evidently spurious." (Look in the notes of NIV of this verse and you
would find the same except that it says the sixteenth century)

This is counter to what you wrote; "it has not been changed."
I have by just quoting this one verse proved that men have had their hand in the writing of the bible.

Furthermore, you claim by writing: "the Bible has been translated but it the message is the same"

Interesting, but reality does not really correspond with this, lets view the same verse discussed above in the light of 3 famous translations of the Bible(Do me the favour and tell me which one is Gods word, would you?)

New american standard version and New internationel version(NIV):

7. For there are three that testify:
8. the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement

King James version:

7. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

This is just one of indeed many examples, alot of different versions have omitted some verses in the Bible while others let them remain, now answer the question, which one is Gods word?

[Tips! Do not respond to this by saying that these are just different interpretation of their meaning when the title of the book says The bible, by saying this you admit the fact that people have through out the ages changed it with their hands and tounges(mixing their views with the words of God) . And try not to give me examples of quran verses and pretend that the situation is the same, there is no such thing as an english Quran! Its all interpretation except the true and unchanged arabic one.]

The bible as been changed but I haven't claimed that it had all of its meaning altered to such a level where every thing is false, there are still verses that speak about the true message and possibly unaltered.

"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. (From the NIV Bible, Mark 12:29)"


I have answered yours, now answer both by posts.

 

I am waiting and my wait has longed.

 

The fact that you had to use the likes of Benjamin Wilson speaks volumes. He is the man that Jehovah's Witenesses use to support their totally twisted and erroneous translation of the Bible. You could not of gone any deeper than to try and pull this completely discredited, so called Bible scholar from the bottom of the barrel to support your position. He was the very cornerstone of the Jehovah's Witeness Bible, which is a text that has been rejected by almost every other scholar on the planet. This is the person that you use to support your view of the Bible. The scriptural translation by Benjamin Wilson was not a translation at all, it was considered by most to be a deliberate mistranslation and was rejected by scholars long ago.

 

Then what about the NIV, do you trust it, it says in the note for this verse , note that the NIV doesnt even contain this verse!!!!!)

"Late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century)"(http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=1%20john%205:7-8&version=31)

Now would you mind answering my latest posts?
I am awaiting answers for two of my statements a) contradiction - Mary b) My evidence of mankinds tampering with the bible(such as this verse discussed and the quotes from the NIV, explain these quotes! [And lets not forgets the SERIOUS FORGERY IN MARK ABOUT THE SNAKES!].

 

Do I trust the NIV? No I don't, and I never did. That is why I keep my King James close by my side. And the verse in question, 1 John 5,7 was quoted by Tertullian who was around from 160-220 A.D., and Cyprian 200-258 A.D. So apparently the verse was around long before the 1600s. As far as man's tampering with the Bible, I believe the finding of the 2000 year old Dead Sea Scrolls, have gone a long way to put that myth to rest. That is if you have done your homework. I'm running short on time, but I will try and respond to your other question's soon.

 

Of coarse Mark, Luke, John, and Matthew are written from four perspectives. And with any story details will be left out. This does not constitute a countradiction. A contradiction are facts that oppose. The Bible gives an overview. Facts left out are not contradictions. The Bible is also the only Book that accurately predicts the future. The Bible states that Jerusalems East Gate would be sealed until Jesus Christ returns, and He alone would enter that Gate. Your Moslem brothers tried twice to break the prophecy. Once in 1916 and once in 1967. Guess what, they failed to open it. The Gate is still sealed, just like the Bible said. I believe the Bible is a Book you can depend on. The Bible also states that just before Christ returns the Jews will retake the land of Israel, and will be in control of Jerusalem. Outside of trying to dig up dirt on the Bible, what has your faith revealed about the future?Remember, the Book that knows the future, is the Book that was authored by the real God.

 

Cambell34- I thought everything was authored by God, even writers of fiction books (if you catch my drift). I gotta get a copy of the quran to look over.

 

Cabdirrazaq- I have read that Muhammed is the last messenger sent from Allah (God) to humanity, therefore the quran is the last message Allah has sent to us.

Do you believe that God does not send messages to humanity anymore?

A more important question (to me, for I have not read the quran) is this: Does the Quran claim that it is the last message from God to humanity?

 

The Bible is the only book that predicts the future....

Oh yeah notice how everytime Campbell writes, the post tend to stop.....

It hard to refute the truth

 

I think that people put way too much thought into religion. its all supposed to be about spiritualty and kindness to one another. why do we have to pick everything apart. so what if some people want to blindly follow some scripture. jesus's teachings were very good ones, yet how does anyone know that what they have written down, and then translated, and handed down is really what happened, no one does, and they should say so, and say its all just spiritual. why cant any human compare to what jesus taught? just being kind isnt all holy.

 

"so what if some people want to blindly follow some scripture. jesus's teachings were very good ones, yet how does anyone know that what they have written down, and then translated, and handed down is really what happened, no one does, and they should say so, and say its all just spiritual."


THAT'S WHAT WE BEEN TRYING TO EXPLAIN..... look to the dead sea scrolls, look to the prophecies and you will see the truth..... The Bible is inspired by God and yes it has been translated but we have the original text which has not been tampered with.

 

This is all from the KJAV. I would like to know why these points are not valid, and why the most obvious meaning they convey is not the correct one.


When I read that the wedding at Canaa was suggested to be Jesus and Mary Magdalene's union, I very meticulously reread the account.
It is hard to refute that the most sensible and literal conclusion, requiring the least mental gymnastics, is that the wedding is His.
Of course many will point to John 2:3, which states Jesus and his disciples had also been invited.
So, if that is all you need to hear to discount the notion of it being His wedding, there is no use reading further........note that it is John who shares this.
To summarize my reasons for thinking Jesus and Mary Magdalene were betrothed:
1. Mother Mary takes charge of supplying the wine when it ran out, an odd thing for a guest to do, when tradition is that the groom's family does so.
2. The couple who are married at Canaa, are curiously anonymous. Why?
3. Jesus supplies the wine, and the mc praises the groom, thereby supporting the traditional responsibility is the groom's family.
John 2:11 states that this is the 1st miracle, reveals Jesus' glory, and the disciples believed in Him.
4. Nowhere in the NT does it mention Jesus' marital status, one way or the other..........why? A valid question, I feel.
5. Three, not one or two, three times He is called Rabbi, a title which has as a firm prerequisite that the man be wedded.
6. So.....if He is not wedded, why does no one notice the obvious and comment on the contradiction?
7. Jesus preached that marriage is good, and divorce is bad. In this case, we are asked to believe that He did not take His own advice,
on top of the half dozen previous suggestive points. I look at Him as a do as I do, not do as I say kind of teacher, how do you see Him?
8. At the empty tomb, who would you predict would arrive at the tomb first that morning? Those who were closest to Him would.
Luke 24:10 "It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James........."
John 1:29 "Behold the lamb of God" This is John the Baptist being quoted, and the lamb of God he is referring to is Jesus.
Revelations 21:9, (note the similar verse numbers, considering both chapters are by John). "Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the lamb's wife."

It is clear that Mary is very close to Him, and that John, the sole recorder of the Canaa wedding is also very close to Him.
Did you know that Giovanna is the feminine form of Giovanni? Iohannas is the feminine for Iohannes, and Joanna is the feminine form of John, all three are examples of the same name, John. Interestingly, Joan is not from John. Just the name Joanna.
John writes Revelations, John describes the crucifixion quite differently than the other 3 'synoptic?' gospels, (synoptic, of one eye....lol)
In the KJAV, Luke 3:27 which is Jesus' dad's lineage, (else why put it in there?), it reads...." Which was the son of Joanna, which was the SON of Rhesa."

 

So for some reason, the NIV and the RSV decided to fool the christians? Why are you specially linked to the KJV even though most translators see it to have grave defects?

7. And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth.
8. There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree[The Revised Stnd]

Which one is gods word here cambell? The same applies for the following verses(It appears as if the KJV is quite different from the rest);

KJV Mt 25:13 Ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.
NAS You do not know the day or the hour.
NIV You do not know the day nor the hour.
RSV Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour

KJV Mt 18:11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost . NIV:OMITTED
NAS:footnote casts doubt
NWT: OMITTED
RSV: OMITTED

1Pe 1:22 KVJ Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit…
NAS you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth…
NIV Since you have in obedience to the truth purified your souls…
NWT Now that you have purified your souls by your obedience to the truth
RSV: Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth
(There are lots more of such verses)

Further more in the bible we find something which some christians scholars call heretic and syntopic gospels. They call the 3 gospels excluding Johns gospel for the Syntopic gospels sense they are pretty much alike and Johns Gospel for the heretic one. For instance, In John, Jesus(may peace be upon him) speaks much about him self andd he speak in long dialouges while in the Syntopic he speaks short and not so much of him self, in the syntopic gospel, throwing out the money changers was the last part of his mission while John state that it was the first. In (S) he speaks much of the oppressed and their rights and he does a lot of exorcism while (H) he does not nor does he talk much about the oppressed and the poor. (H) claims that he was crucified on the 14 nisan while the other 15, (S) claims that his public ministry lasted 1 year while John claims 3 years. There are alot more difference between these two which show that this cannot be the complete word of Allah(may he be exalted) sense it´s obvious that this is different styles from different people.

Now lets study these verses below which the NIV wrote:
"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"

And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.[Mark 16 KJV]

Prove to me that the bible is true by drinking acid or healing a cancer patient by putting your hand over him(are you not a believer?), or are there not 1 christian believer in the whole world? Every person, wether learned or not can see that these verses are not metaphors of some sort but it really says that they will not be hurt by acid.

WHO ARE YOU KIDDING HERE?
This is a clear contradiction and not just less detail in one and more in the other.

"while it was still dark" is not the same as "just after sunrise"
This is not all, one of the versions claim that an angel came down and rolled away the stone for them while the others say that she arrived while it already had been removed. This is a contradiction, does God commit mistakes, certaintly not!

I don't really have much more time now, Il see if I have time to answer the rest of your claims later, If Allah wills so.

 

Just an aside (I don't have time to write more), but right now, where I am, the sun has barely risen and it is still dark. Make sure that you do not impose your own meaning on what is meant by "dark". "Dark", "dawn", and "just after sunrise" are not contradictory. In order to be contradictory one would have to say "the sun had not yet risen" and the other would have to say "the sun had risen". You assume that "dark" means "the sun had not yet risen" but that is not necessarily the case. On an overcast or misty morning, the sun may rise, but it will still be dark for some time.

 

I have five things to say:


1. Contradictions are easy to manufacture
You can find contradictions in any large text — simply juxtapose two statements that seem contradictory when taken out of context. It's not that difficult to do.

There are contradictions in your own text, juggla. For example:

Literacy
Your first paragraph is badly punctuated. The rest is well punctuated. Are these the coherent, unfailable words of one man? It seems more likely that you are a fictional character and never existed.

What is the list of?
You start out by quite clearly stating that it will be a list of contradictions, yet by the end of the list you're just stating scientific inaccuracies. Scientific inaccuracies are not contradictions. Again, this all seems a bit suspicious to me.

2. Contradictions are to be expected
Contradictions are inevitable with a text as vast as The Bible, which was written over a span of centuries (if not millennia) by authors of different cultures, different languages, and let's not forget different species (God supposedly wrote the first 5 books himself)! It would be quite surprising if there were no slight contradictions. It would actually probably be quite suspicious if there were no slight contradictions.


3. Contradictions in Genesis are deliberate
I think the contradictions in Genesis are strong evidence of the Bible's authenticity. If it had been made up by a human in order to fool people (for whatever purpose) then the human would not have written very blatant contradictions into one chapter, the very first chapter.

The contradictions in Genesis seem to be deliberate. Perhaps God's way of sticking his finger up at the debunkers? Only a crazy person could make up Genesis and include the contradictions that were included. No one would try to pass that off as the truth unless it WAS true.

4. Creation is a complicated matter!
As for the two accounts of creation being contradictory, you have to remember that when you're describing the creation of a universe, it's going to be extremely difficult (if not impossible) to explain it to us in any way that makes sense. When you consider that our civilisation is unlikely to be the first on Earth; and the chances of Earth being the first planet to house sentient life is a statistical impossibility; and the fact that parallel dimensions are a real possibility; and the fact that our time and God's time are two completely different and independent things; then you perhaps start to see why tales of 'Adam' may be difficult to explain, or to comprehend. Remember that Biblical people had extremely limited scientific knowledge compared to ours, so trying to explain things scientifically would be a waste of time.

5. Who is The Bible written for anyway?
If you believe The Bible is written by God for us, you have to ask the question 'who is us'? Is God writing it specifically for people living right now?

The Bible was only written a couple of millenia ago. It's still early days. The past 2000 years are a blink of an eye in human history, and certainly in cosmological history. There are things about The Bible that may not make any sense to us yet, but may have a lot more significance in the future. Various technological or historical discoveries could shed new light on The Bible which could completely change the way we interpret it. Contact could be established with aliens who know more about biblical times than we do and could teach us a lot, or we may even develop the technology to see into the past and watch Jesus for ourselves, making the words of The Bible less relevant than ever.

Humans could die out and robots inherit the earth. Maybe The Bible is intended for them, and humans are just here to pass it on to them? Maybe the robots will understand all the things we don't about The Bible? A pretty far-fetched theory, I know, but the point I'm trying to make is: consider the big picture, and don't place so much importance on yourself.

 

well said.

if you were with a group of friends and you all experienced an event together would each of your wordings, details and perspectives in the retelling be EXACTLY the same? uh, no. (and this has been proven in accident reports and trials time and time again.)

also bear in mind this wasn't written the moment the experience occured. when you recall a story that happend years ago do you use the EXACT same wording you used originally? uh, no. (and this has been proven in accident reports and trials time and time again)

 

that has to be the most intellectually dishonest thing ive ever read in my life, congrats. why would god try and confuse people and sow seeds of doubt. i thought he was the way the truth and light, why would he lie.

not if you truely believe in literal interpretations of the bible, humans according to the geneologys in the bible have only been around for like 6000 years.

 

"Prove to me that the bible is true by drinking acid or healing a cancer patient by putting your hand over him(are you not a believer?), or are there not 1 christian believer in the whole world? Every person, wether learned or not can see that these verses are not metaphors of some sort but it really says that they will not be hurt by acid."

actually these kinds of things have happened to people in the world today. these people don't do stupid things like drink battery acid on purpose to prove a point to silly disbelieving kiddies, but there are instances. i have met christians whom 'miracles' have happend to. i believe i and certain members of my family are included amongst such individuals because of an incident we experienced.

 

blackguard, with the exception of a few of your points, which dunce that i am, i am not quite clear on, why could the wedding not have been of one of jesus' brothers? could you explain clearer?